tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post7214556434283877959..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: ADMIXTURE in Siberia, Greenland, and AlaskaDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-35049754919157695392010-11-08T05:54:58.982+02:002010-11-08T05:54:58.982+02:00"This may mean that the linguistic connection..."This may mean that the linguistic connection is very old and its genetic counterpart got washed out in a series of waves of gene flow between Ket and its neighbors". <br /><br />Very likely. <br /><br />"Buryats are indeed suggested to represent 'pure mongols'". <br /><br />Interesting. I've long assumed that the Mongolian phenotype developed in the far north. Buryats fit perfectly.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-37833217238871568082010-11-07T03:34:23.257+02:002010-11-07T03:34:23.257+02:00Great work!Great work!Marniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10850856778953207810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-51774029049627067702010-11-07T02:14:05.923+02:002010-11-07T02:14:05.923+02:00Interestingly, no special relationship between Ath...Interestingly, no special relationship between Athabascan and Ket, despite the fact that linguistically Vajda proved that Na-Dene and Ket are related. This may mean that the linguistic connection is very old and its genetic counterpart got washed out in a series of waves of gene flow between Ket and its neighbors.German Dziebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10703679732205862495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-23234679098946082592010-11-07T00:07:44.000+02:002010-11-07T00:07:44.000+02:00Great work!
Your results seems pretty consistent w...Great work!<br />Your results seems pretty consistent with known anthropological and linguistic data.<br />Buryats are indeed suggested to represent "pure mongols".<br />Kets, Selkups, Nganasans are relicts of indigeneous Sibireans, while Selkups and Nganasan are linguistically related. Selkups are thought to have common roots with Kets, but went through "uralization". Your analysis suggest it was rather cultural than by interbreeding.<br />It would be interesting to check "Nganasan" component in North-Eastern Europe, namely Saami, Komi and other Uralic groups.Janhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10315735319835750768noreply@blogger.com