a couple of studies:

[www.uni-bayreuth.de]

Alain Froment. 1993 “Biologie et Histoire” in D. Barreteau and C. van Graffenried, eds. Datation et chronologie dans le basin du lac Tchad, pp. 35-49. np:ORSTOM-IRD


ABSTRACT
Human biology is able to bring valuable and unique information on
cultural and historical aspects of past societies. Skeletal studies address to demographic structure, nutritional status, food choices and diseases. Genetic markers, like blood groups and DNA, determined among living populations, can trace previous migrations. Quantitative multivariate analysis of anthropometric traits, as skull shape or body proportions, either on living peoples or skeletons, lead to a measure of morphologic affinities, which can be compared to linguistic and/or cultural resemblances. The method is applied to Anciet Egyptians, and shows that they were an heterogeneous population located according to head form, in an exactly intermediate position between Europe and sub-saharan African. No major changes happened since antiquity. Biological anthropology is then an important, though often neglected research tool in historical studies. Archaeologists have to pay attention to a careful recovery of human bones encountered in their excavations.

Berry. A. C., R. J. Berry. P. J. Ucko. 1967 “Genetical Change in Ancient Egypt.” Man, New Series, 2(4): 551-568.
[BOM this is a study of skeletal forms]

However, the most striking fact that emerges from a study of table 3 is the remarkable degree of homogeneity in the population of Egypt over a period of about 5,000 years, effectively the same conclusion as from metrical analysis (see below). Our samples did not include material from either the delta proper or the Edfu-Aswan area which are the most likely to have contained foreign settlers. Moreover we do not know the degree of admixture which took place between Egyptians and foreigners at any period of Egyptian history (see above). Nevertheless the genetical constancy shown by our results is not as surprising as it might at first seem, if one takes into account the extent of the historically attested incursions into Egypt throughout its history.
This does not mean that there are no heterogeneities or changes in our results clearly there are-but at no time are there major discontinuities which might imply replacement of the population on a large scale by a genetically different people.
. . . .

To sum up, the analyses of both metrical and non-metrical data based on skeletal remains show a similarity between samples which is at variance with an assumption of great racial intermingling during any period of Egypt's historical development.
This can mean:

I. that the techniques used are not sensitive enough to reveal any intermingling;

2. more likely, that the incomers were few in number relative to the existing population, and did not influence the gene-pool of future generations to any marked degree;

3. that the incomers did not differ genetically from the Egyptian population.

Bernard