PDA

View Full Version : K36 from Eurogenes



Pages : 1 [2]

Lukas
20-09-17, 13:46
@lukas,

Where is it said or implied by the authors that those ethnic groups are in the same genetic cluster? That isn't what they're saying. You have to understand the terms that geneticists use or else you won't understand the papers.

Ok. I have discussion about it on anthrogenica. Here the opinions.


http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/misc/quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by lukaszM http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?p=288871#post288871)
How do you explain very atypical Polish, Welsh, Tuscan and South Italian affinity on above maphttp://www.anthrogenica.com/images/smilies1/smile.gif I mean red color in those places. There is no way Poles and Welshmen, or Polish and Tuscan, or Polish and Basilicate could be in one, autosomal cluster.
Michał
I need to agree with Tomenable on this. Depending on which specific kind of Y-DNA analysis you are applying, the results may point to different populations. Let's imagine that you have one relatively old ancestral population, for example the Urnfield culture or the Danubian Tumulus culture, and a younger culture that descended from that older culture, for example the Lusatian/Kyjatice culture. Let's then imagine that this younger Lusatian/Kyjatice culture got practically extinct, with only a very small part of its original population contributing to modern populations (mostly in Poland, but occasionally elsewhere, including for example Italy). On the other hand, that older ancestral population (Urnfield or Tumulus) contributed very significantly to many different populations in Europe, mostly in the Upper Danubian (or North Alpine) region but also in the Balkans and in Western Europe. Since BR2 descended from Urnfield/Tumulus but its own descending population got nearly extinct, every test that looks for just an overall similarity (ie. for a proportion of similar ancestry) will point to those modern countries that descend in largest part from Urnfield/Tumulus, and this will include Austria, all of Germany, large part of France, Northern Italy, Western Balkans, and even a part of Britain. On the other hand, when applying the haplotype affinity-based assay based on the BR2 sample from the Lusatian/Kyjatice culture, you will preferentially identify those modern populations that descend "directly" from this younger ancient population, so the time distance from the direct ancestral population was smaller and the haplotypes (ie. the groups of neighboring markers/mutations/SNPs) were more likely to survive intact, instead of being separated by the random recombination events, even though the overall contribution of the BR2-like DNA was relatively small.
This is similar to a situation with the descendants of Thomas Jefferson. When placing all Americans on an autosomal PCA plot, all white people who don't descend from Jefferson will land up much closer to Jefferson than his direct black descendants, while when using the FTDNA Family Finder test (which is a kind of a haplotype-based affinity test) you will preferentially identify those who are his direct descendants (or descendants of his very close relatives).


http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/misc/quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Michał http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?p=288900#post288900)

This is similar to a situation with the descendants of Thomas Jefferson. When placing all Americans on an autosomal PCA plot, all white people who don't descend from Jefferson will land up much closer to Jefferson than his direct black descendants, while when using the FTDNA Family Finder test (which is a kind of a haplotype-based affinity test) you will preferentially identify those who are his direct descendants (or descendants of his very close relatives).

lukaszM
But autosomally (in the sense of autosomal components, even those basic like WHG, EEF, SSA, EAst-Asian etc.) those white Americans are really more close to Jefferson than his mulatto descendants. It's true.
I'm really doubt BR2 direct descendants are really so numerous to be present in such large quantity to be substantial portion of Polish ancestry. It was some Kyatice harem where BR2 sultan had 500 wives?
I have much simpler explanation. BR2 was chosen by ancient oracle because mediated by RISE598 gives more or less something comparable to present Poles. Simply becasue of lack of directly similar sample to Polish population.
Austria + Lithuania /2 = south-central Poland.



http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/misc/quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by lukaszM http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?p=288911#post288911)
But autosomally (in the sense of autosomal components, even those basic like WHG, EEF, SSA, EAst-Asian etc.) those white Americans are really more close to Jefferson than his mulatto descendants. It's true.

Michał
This is correct, and also the modern Austrians, Germans and French people are "autosomally" much closer to BR2 than modern Poles, in case you discuss this question from this very perspective. However, there is also no doubt that those black descendants of Jefferson are his "much closer relatives" (in the genealogical sense) than the vast majority of modern white Americans, and the same might apply to modern Poles and BR2.


http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/misc/quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by lukaszM http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?p=288911#post288911)
I'm really doubt BR2 direct descendants are really so numerous to be present in such large quantity to be substantial portion of Polish ancestry.


Michał
You might be right about it, as there is a substantial risk that those results for the haplotype affinity-based analysis show only some kind of statistical noise (just like it frequently happens with the Family Finder results for some putative "remote cousins"). However, the relatively good quality of BR2 suggests its affinity to modern Poles might be real, and we won't be able to definitely verify it until some good quality Polish samples for the Lusatian culture are available (although the incoming results for Przeworsk and Wielbark should also be helpful in this respect).

http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/misc/quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by lukaszM http://www.anthrogenica.com/images/BittenFruit_fluid/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?p=288911#post288911)
I have much simpler explanation. BR2 was chosen by ancient oracle becasue mediated by RISE598 gives more or less something comaprable to present Poles. Simply becasue of lack of directly similar sample to Polsih population.
Austria + Lithuania /2 = south-central Poland.


Michał
This might be true, although I suspect that what affects those oracle results most strongly is rather a lack of an ancient sample from a yet unknown BR2-like Iron Age (or Roman times) population that significantly contributed to the Early Slavs. Anyway, I'm afraid that all this has nothing to do with those haplotype-based affinity analysis results, as these two tests investigate two very different aspects of the BR2-related ancestry.

Lukas
20-09-17, 13:54
Also Michał's opinion about BR2


Could it be that BR2 admixture in Poland represents the Lugians?

But what about BR2 admixture in the rest of Eastern Europe?


It seems that there were at least two or three ways in which the ancient BR2-like populations could have contributed to the Slavic ethnogenesis:

1) A relatively small BR2-like population that probably resembled modern Austrians (these could have been the Bastarnians who are suspected of being a Germanic-Celtic-Dacian-Sarmatian mixture) has merged with a RISE598-like Pre-Proto-Slavic population that resembled ancient/modern Balts, so this particular kind of BR2-related ancestry is seen in all Slavs, although on a relatively low (or at best moderate) level.

2) Another group of BR2-like populations lived in the Carpathian-Balkan region, so these people became a major part of the substratum for the incoming Southern Slavs. This signal is relatively strong (because the local population was quite large) but it probably derives mostly from a relatively old non-Lusatian Danubian population that somehow contributed to Kyjatice/BR2 (so it is not as easily detected in the haplotype affinity analysis).

3) Yet another BR2-like population could have lived in ancient Poland and was likely associated with the Lusatian culture (thus resembling the Kyjatice variant most strongly). This population could have contributed first to the East Germanic populations of Przeworsk and Wielbark, and then to the incoming Western Slavs (mostly Poles). This particular BR2-like signal is relatively low when compared to the two signals mentioned above (due to the two-step dilution associated with significant "population replacements" in Poland), which is very well seen on the lukaszM's map, but this kind of ancestry is best detected using the haplotype affinity analysis, and this is because the Lusatians were more closely related to Kyjatice than the ancestors of Bastarnians or the ancestors of the pre-Slavic Balkan people.

Angela
20-09-17, 16:40
@Lukas,
I hope it's all clear now as he went to a great deal of trouble to provide a very nuanced and learned explanation in terms of Polish genetics.

Generally, the explanation is the following, as has been stated:

" Anyway, I'm afraid that all this has nothing to do with those haplotype-based affinity analysis results, as these two tests investigate two very different aspects of the BR2-related ancestry."

From a personal perspective, what interests me most is how and why we have hotspots in Italy in eastern Liguria/northwest Tuscany, western Sicily, Basilicata, and what looks like a tiny bit of Calabria, but that's another discussion.

Northener
20-09-17, 18:58
East Central Euro peaks in RISE598, an Early Iron / Late Bronze sample from Sudovia (Lithuania-Poland border). Central Euro component peaks in ancient Wielbark culture samples (Iron Age Poland), in Early Medieval samples from Bohemia and Poland, as well as in modern Poles (but modern Poles score a lower % than ancient samples). Eastern Euro peaks close to the Ural Mountains (which happens to be the eastern border of Europe based on geographical and genetic common sense - Ural is the main barrier to gene flow in this region).


Tomenable how do you see the relationship between Rise98, Wielbark and my "North Sea Germanic" result? Just puzzling.

My K36 Ancient as figured out by you :)

"1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCES" (rounded results)
1. CWC_Sweden_RISE98 10,8
2. EMA_Northumbria_NO3423 11,7
3. IA_Sweden_RISE174 12,1
4. CWC_Sweden_RISE94 12,1
5. BA_Unetice_Czechia_RISE577 12,8
6. IA_Celto-German_6DRIF3 13,4
7. IA_Celto-German_3DRIF16 14,2
8. BB_Germany_RISE563 14,3

davef
28-09-17, 01:24
Siberian component
https://fusiontables.google.com/embe...mplt=5&hml=KML (https://fusiontables.google.com/embedviz?q=select+col39+from+103q97hVH1o1gPOz1xWJk-Fp4ivlM3ERqCRSpctL9&viz=MAP&h=false&lat=52.609746157787086&lng=79.55163192500004&t=1&z=3&l=col39&y=4&tmplt=5&hml=KML)

http://k36.physical-anthropology.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/siberian-eurogenes-k36.jpg

East Central Asian component frequency
https://fusiontables.google.com/embe...mplt=5&hml=KML (https://fusiontables.google.com/embedviz?q=select+col39+from+1m9gDEcytmL54PHlDxcLw XU3Uya4Iif847S9WLC6h&viz=MAP&h=false&lat=48.15878670790628&lng=70.01549911250005&t=1&z=4&l=col39&y=4&tmplt=5&hml=KML)

http://k36.physical-anthropology.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/eca.jpg

East_Asian component frequency

https://fusiontables.google.com/embe...mplt=5&hml=KML (https://fusiontables.google.com/embedviz?q=select+col39+from+1qtvoq4VNGGiaagXWm-Djyv3P7ryGTrcLfNPR_jJk&viz=MAP&h=false&lat=39.58032424707222&lng=73.61901473750004&t=1&z=4&l=col39&y=4&tmplt=5&hml=KML)

http://k36.physical-anthropology.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/east-asian.jpg

South_Chinese component frequency

https://fusiontables.google.com/embe...hml=GEOCODABLE (https://fusiontables.google.com/embedviz?q=select+col39+from+1HPgo_9vwoDJ0Lpwqcf4Y WIIx76eyE4_deTQWecKo&viz=MAP&h=false&lat=40.052881341698864&lng=72.30065536250004&t=1&z=4&l=col39&y=4&tmplt=5&hml=GEOCODABLE)

http://k36.physical-anthropology.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/south_chinese.jpg


Amerindian component frequency

https://fusiontables.google.com/embe...hml=GEOCODABLE (https://fusiontables.google.com/embedviz?q=select+col39+from+1RfIhTaoETaFtPLUTqLTQ b25bBvPYap9HnqFfwPQl&viz=MAP&h=false&lat=54.57845524447243&lng=68.16979598750004&t=1&z=4&l=col39&y=4&tmplt=5&hml=GEOCODABLE)

http://k36.physical-anthropology.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/ame.jpg

Why is East Asian highest in that small area west of Kazakhstan?
And why is South Chinese highest in the northwest region of China?

Aha
30-09-17, 13:01
Why is East Asian highest in that small area west of Kazakhstan?

Those are Kalmykians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmykia

The Kalmyks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmyks), who form the majority of the republic and for whom the region is named, descend from the Oirat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oirats) Mongols (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongols) that migrated from Dzungaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzungaria) in 1607 and established the Kalmyk Khanate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmyk_Khanate) (1630–1724) before they were eventually incorporated into the Russian Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Empire) in the context of the Russian conquest of the Caucasus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_the_Caucasus).


And why is South Chinese highest in the northwest region of China?

Because he doesn't have any samples south/east of that point. Northwest China is the easternmost sample he has mapped

davef
01-10-17, 03:20
Thanks! But I don't quite get why he calls it "South Chinese"...yes there may be overlap, but I don't get why he chose that label.

Aha
01-10-17, 12:15
Thanks! But I don't quite get why he calls it "South Chinese"...yes there may be overlap, but I don't get why he chose that label.

Because the reference samples are from South of China and the component peaks in Southern China (those maps you see do not show distributions of that region)

ABC123
20-12-17, 21:39
Can anyone give me a link to population references? For example what does "Near Eastern" mean and in what populations is found at a higher %?

zagortenay
24-12-17, 23:01
Born in Turkey. Father's ancestry is Bosnian from Mostar, Bosnia & Herzegovina. (emigrated to Turkey about 120 years ago):



Italian
14.87


North_Caucasian
11.31


Near_Eastern
9.24


East_Med
9.13


Central_Euro
8.13


Armenian
5.87


East_Central_Euro
5.22


West_Med
5.05


South_Central_Asian
4.99


West_Caucasian
3.93


Eastern_Euro
3.25


Arabian
2.86


East_Balkan
2.53


South_Chinese
2.04


Basque
1.96


Fennoscandian
1.91


Siberian
1.66


French
1.65


North_Sea
1.39


Volga-Ural
1.37


Amerindian
0.66


Iberian
0.45


Malayan
0.23


Oceanian
0.15


East_Asian
0.13

zanipolo
27-02-18, 06:56
[1] "1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCE%"

[1] "distance%=8.1296"

IT_Veneto,58.8
FR_Central,14
IT_Piedmont,5.8
Portugal,3
Andalusia,1.2
Sephardi_Portugal_Belmonte,1.2
Thüringen,1.2
Comunidad_Valenciana,1
FR_West,1
FR_North-East,0.8
FR_North-West,0.8
Northern_Ireland,0.8

Tomoe
08-03-18, 05:19
Iberian
12.96





East_Central_Euro
10.98




Italian
10.84





East_Balkan
10.19




North_Caucasian
9.26




Eastern_Euro
8.64




North_Atlantic
7.23




Central_Euro
5.45




West_Med
5.00




East_Med
4.19




French
4.07




North_Sea
3.41




Armenian
3.21




Fennoscandian
1.37




Near_Eastern
1.11




Basque
1.05




West_Caucasian
0.99



From where is North Atlantic comming?

zanipolo
08-03-18, 22:58
[1] "1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCE%"

[1] "distance%=8.1296"

IT_Veneto,58.8
FR_Central,14
IT_Piedmont,5.8
Portugal,3
Andalusia,1.2
Sephardi_Portugal_Belmonte,1.2
Thüringen,1.2
Comunidad_Valenciana,1
FR_West,1
FR_North-East,0.8
FR_North-West,0.8
Northern_Ireland,0.8

my grandfather results below
[1] "distance%=7.9998"

IT_Veneto,72.8
Tirol,13.2
FR_Corsica,2.2
IT_Marche,2
IT_Tuscany,1.6
Timau_Udine,1

Jmichalak
11-04-18, 22:07
When did this calculator come out?

Ar Moal
08-10-18, 20:29
Hello I'm french with polish origins 50% dutch 25% belge 12.5 % French breton 12.5 %

basque : 1.79%
central euro : 8.56%
east balkan : 2.37
east central euro : 11.19
eastern euro : 7.75
fennoscandian : 13.19
french : 4.46
iberian : 15.66
italian : 8.16
north atlantic :11.22
north sea : 14.82
west med : 0.81

Joey37
08-10-18, 22:23
10451I am an American. 37% English, 20% Irish, 16% German, 12% Sicilian, 8% Dutch, 6% French, trace amounts Native American

Xisco
07-12-18, 21:24
I am Spanish from the island of Mallorca. These are my K36 results.

10551

pinovski
07-12-18, 22:38
https://i.imgur.com/UsHUV7O.png



I am spanish from Asturias :)) In my family we are not aware of having relatives outside of Spain, we know even our great grandparents.

I'm really a bit confused, because afterwards I have haplogroup G in the morleydna web ...

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37485-I-m-a-bit-confused-with-my-Haplogroup-G-and-my-irish-and-irish-blood-(Spanish-on)?p=560640#post560640

Ruderico
11-12-18, 14:00
I'm really a bit confused, because afterwards I have haplogroup G in the morleydna web ...

Haplogroups and autosomal profiles don't need to relate at all. Mine is very rare, yet all my known ancestors are from northern Portugal :)

I checked your results on K13 and K15 and they are pretty interesting, your eastern components are really small. I mean, I thought my EastMed+WestAsian+RedSea=14,10% was small, but yours is just under 11%. For comparison the Portuguese average has 16,41% and Galicia 15,83%


Saludos

Lenab
11-12-18, 16:24
Haplogroups and autosomal profiles don't need to relate at all. Mine is very rare, yet all my known ancestors are from northern Portugal :)

I checked your results on K13 and K15 and they are pretty interesting, your eastern components are really small. I mean, I thought my EastMed+WestAsian+RedSea=14,10% was small, but yours is just under 11%. For comparison the Portuguese average has 16,41% and Galicia 15,83%


Saludos
Funny, because my autosomal matched my haplogroups perfectly in fact, the haplogroup test I did was much more accurate instead of the nonsense generic plotting that autosomal and even GED match given me, apart from the 36k cal was too spontaneous. Your G is most likely Gracile, but who knows

Ruderico
11-12-18, 17:11
I'm not sure I follow, why do you call GEDmatch PCAs "nonsense"? They might be dated, but the ones from Eurogenes are robust enough to provide predictable and stable components (assuming you know your background)

Lenab
12-12-18, 01:48
I'm not sure I follow, why do you call GEDmatch PCAs "nonsense"? They might be dated, but the ones from Eurogenes are robust enough to provide predictable and stable components (assuming you know your background)
Because their plots are too generic it's like saying ''your dna is like this person but you're probably not this person anyway.'' I didn't say their results were in accurate I said it's genetic and plots are based on ''samples who have the same genetics as you'' that's a simplistic way of looking at.

My haplogroup tests given me literally the genetic and migration roots from both sides for almost 40,000 years including the type of people that they were like for example bell beaker, hunter gatherer, First Farmer etc and ok they aren't races of people but it's easily concluded that's what they are.

Lenab
12-12-18, 01:49
I'm not sure I follow, why do you call GEDmatch PCAs "nonsense"? They might be dated, but the ones from Eurogenes are robust enough to provide predictable and stable components (assuming you know your background)
I did somewhat know, but my haplogroup test with Britainsdna really narrowed it down, it also given me plotting maps as to where my Y haplogroup and MT haplogroup is founded which is pretty cool.

Ruderico
12-12-18, 17:21
Because their plots are too generic it's like saying ''your dna is like this person but you're probably not this person anyway.'' I didn't say their results were in accurate I said it's genetic and plots are based on ''samples who have the same genetics as you'' that's a simplistic way of looking at.

My haplogroup tests given me literally the genetic and migration roots from both sides for almost 40,000 years including the type of people that they were like for example bell beaker, hunter gatherer, First Farmer etc and ok they aren't races of people but it's easily concluded that's what they are.

That's not how a PCA works, just because you are right next to a certain sample on a given plot doesn't mean he/she is the closest sample to you. PCA plots change as you change the dataset aswell because its task is to pick up relations between the samples and its components, besides all you are seeing is 2 out of n dimensions, not all the data included in the PCA.


A haplogroup just gives you an idea of where your paternal/maternal lines were originally from, but it doesn't matter at all as far as your actual ethnicity and genetic profile are concerned because they are a very small amount of your actual ancestry. You could have yDNA A and still be as British as the bloke next to you, and no genetic test, calculator or model would say otherwise.

Here's what Razib khan posted a good while ago about it


This is a public service announcement. If you are a user of direct-to-consumer personal genomics services, please do not pay any attention to your mtDNA and Y chromosomal haplogroups. Why? Because they hardly tell you anything about your individual ancestry. What do I mean by this? Your mtDNA comes down from your mother’s-mother’s-mother’s-mother… and similarly for your Y chromosomal lineage if you are a male. These few individuals are not any more likely to contribute to your ancestry than all those multitudes and multitudes who do not contribute to your mtDNA or Y lineages; also known as almost all your ancestors! What you should pay attention to are your autosomal results. Inferences made from most of your genome. These results may be more difficult to parse, but difficulty is no sin, and elegant ease is no virtue, in this case. That’s because you are interested in your ancestry, not a convenient interpretable story. Of course I am not saying that mtDNA and Y chromosomal haplogroups are useless. They are useful for population scale phylogeography. But please don’t make inferences about yourself from one data point.

gotouu21
24-07-19, 16:45
Central_Euro

10.90 Pct


East_Balkan

8.00 Pct


East_Central_Euro
29.60 Pct


Eastern_Euro
18.86 Pct


Fennoscandian
11.87 Pct


Iberian
1.84 Pct



North_Atlantic
5.76 Pct



North_Sea
13.16 Pct

PT Tagus
07-08-19, 16:38
These are my K36 results


Arabian 3.91
Basque 5.05
Central_Euro 3.95
East_Balkan 1.34
East_Central_Euro 0.10
East_Med 6.25
Fennoscandian 2.56
French 13.43
Iberian 18.07
Italian 16.71
Near_Eastern 2.30
North_African 5.99
North_Atlantic 8.78
North_Caucasian 0.17
North_Sea 5.97
West_African 1.73
West_Med 3.69

snkves
24-08-19, 15:32
Eurogenes K36 Admixture Proportions

Population
Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Basque -
Central_African -
Central_Euro 5.46
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 5.47
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 9.91
East_Med -
Eastern_Euro 4.99
Fennoscandian 18.55
French 9.61
Iberian 10.27
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 4.12
Malayan -
Near_Eastern -
North_African -
North_Atlantic 14.34
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea 15.96
Northeast_African -
Oceanian 0.85
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural 0.47
West_African -
West_Caucasian -
West_Med -

ntindeo
02-11-19, 14:10
Hi,

It is a great tool, i think it is very accurate:

Italian 12.21%
East Med 11.64%
Iberian 10.45%
North Sea 8.22%
East Central Euro 7.87%
North Atlantic 7.68%
East Balkan 7.28%
Eastern Euro 6.59%
North Caucasian 5.27%
Near Eastern 4.37%
French 3.98%
Central Euro 3.52%
Central Euro 3.52%
You seem to have a multi-ethnic mix from Greece to Germany, centered on the Balkans.

11522But 11% are missing from the mix.

tuț
17-11-19, 18:58
I'm curious what 1,16% Indo-Chinese can mean for K36? I find it kind of weird.

Norditaliano
21-12-19, 15:11
I'm from northern Italy:

Component %
Italian 20,22%
Iberian 15,67%
North_Sea 11,57%
East_Med 10,24%
West_Med 9,35%
Near_Eastern 6,88%
Central_Euro 6,35%
North_Atlantic 4,44%
East_Balkan 4,25%
North_Caucasian 2,90%
French 2,24%
East_Central_Euro 2,05%
West_Caucasian 1,99%
Basque 1,17%
Fennoscandian 0,69%

TardisBlue
22-12-19, 12:24
My family all are originally from Sicily, and perhaps my fathers family originally from Puglia given my family name and what the people in Sicilia told me.

Component %
Italian 21.96%
East_Med 18.86%
Iberian 11.49%
West_Med 8.74%
Near East 6.02%
Arabian 5.41%
Armenian 4.73%
French 4.58%
Central Europe 3.83%
East Balkans 3.73%
West_Caucasian 2.97%
North Atlantic 2.89%
East Central Europe 2.10%
North African 1.37%
North Caucasian 1.15%
Oceanian 0.17%

Your results (calculator here: https://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm) seem consistent with your family's origins:

11680

TardisBlue
22-12-19, 12:45
I don't think I've ever posted my K36 results here, so here they are:

Iberian 18.09 Pct
North_Sea 11.54 Pct
Italian 10.47 Pct
North_Atlantic 8.80 Pct
East_Balkan 8.79 Pct
East_Med 8.24 Pct
Arabian 7.96 Pct
West_Med 6.30 Pc
French 5.50 Pct
North_Caucasian 4.18 Pct
East_Central_Euro 3.54 Pct
Eastern_Euro 2.13 Pct
Fennoscandian 1.86 Pct
Near_Eastern 1.21 Pct
Central_Euro 1.23 Pct
Basque 0.09 Pct
North_African 0.05 Pct

TardisBlue
22-12-19, 22:42
The 3 Source approximation is obviously just that, an approximation so it for me at least has some error as I have no Jewish ancestry, and no known ancestors from the North of Italy.

Yes, I've noticed that many Italians get Jewish, either Sefardi or Ashkenazi, with the 2, 3 or 4 populations' Oracles in various calculators - and even with some companies like MyHeritage (I know, some people call their ethnicity reports an abomination… and it kind of is ;-))


Do your results match you French ancestry using the Eurogenes K36 calculator? What about the Eurogenes K13 calculator?

I'm part NE French (with a bit of Savoie thrown into the mix), part Campanian. With Eurogenes K36, the map is accurate as far as France is concerned, but rather approximate as far as Italy is concerned. I have to use the "function B" of the calculator (designed for people coming from 2 different pops). So that's what I get:

Removing the Campanian part:
https://i.ibb.co/3fPcczS/Capture-d-cran-2019-12-22-21-21-37.png

Removing the NE French part:
https://i.ibb.co/61wZwnF/Capture-d-cran-2019-12-22-21-21-11.png

And with Eurogenes K13, I get this:
Single pop:


#
Population (source)
Distance


1
North_Italian
5.78


2
Tuscan
8.22




Mixed mode (no Jewish ancestry either):



#

Primary Population (source)
Secondary Population (source)
Distance


1

62%
French
+
38%
Ashkenazi
@
1.85


2

67.1%
French
+
32.9%
Algerian_Jewish
@
1.88


3

66.4%
French
+
33.6%
Italian_Jewish
@
2.2


4

76.1%
Tuscan
+
23.9%
Danish
@
2.2


5

77.8%
Tuscan
+
22.2%
Norwegian
@
2.23



I invariably come up as Northern Italian in almost all calculators when only using the "1 population" oracle.

TardisBlue
22-12-19, 23:44
TardisBlue: Have you run through the various calculators on GEDMATCH that have Italian populations from various reasons. Campania can be run with a South_Italian reference sample.

I've checked for Eurogenes K13 and they have "South_Italian" listed in their reference samples. Trying the other calculators with South Italian in their reference samples, I get various results. The Dodecad K12B brings up French, which does fit very well, but South Italian only comes in the 4th position:



#

Primary Population (source)
Secondary Population (source)
Distance


1

56.6%
French (HGDP)
+
43.4%
Ashkenazi (Dodecad)
@
1.25


2

56.9%
French (HGDP)
+
43.1%
Ashkenazy_Jews (Behar)
@
1.5


3

53.7%
French (HGDP)
+
46.3%
Sicilian (Dodecad)
@
2.29


4

53.8%
French (HGDP)
+
46.2%
S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad)
@
2.43



With DodecadK7B, I get smaller genetic distances:

Single Population Sharing:



#
Population (source)
Distance


1
N_Italian (Dodecad)
1.74





#

Primary Population (source)
Secondary Population (source)
Distance


1

74.4%
Romanians (Behar)
+
25.6%
Sardinian (HGDP)
@
0.41


2

76.4%
Cataluna (1000Genomes)
+
23.6%
Turkish (Dodecad)
@
0.78


3

80.8%
Cataluna (1000Genomes)
+
19.2%
Armenians_15 (Yunusbayev)
@
0.9


puntDNAL K10 Ancient



1

65.1%
Tuscan
+
34.9%
German_South
@
1.3


2

78.7%
Tuscan
+
21.3%
Icelandic
@
1.38


3

76.1%
Tuscan
+
23.9%
Scottish_West
@
1.38



Gedrosia K6:


#

Primary Population (source)
Secondary Population (source)
Distance


1

74.4%
Spanish
+
25.6%
Adygei
@
0.45


2

92%
Romanian
+
8%
BedouinA
@
0.5


3

88.2%
Romanian
+
11.8%
Jew_Libyan
@
0.52



What do you get with those calculators?

Farstar
10-01-20, 10:36
These are my K36 results (mother from the south east in Spain, with all known ancestors from the same place; father, Catalan, with all known ancestors from Catalonia, but in this case, with a phenotype that one could say central European or even close to Scandinavian; some rumours from the family, unconfirmed, that there is some French ancestry in the past):





Population



Amerindian
0.11 Pct


Arabian
1.47 Pct


Armenian
-


Basque
6.31 Pct


Central_African
-


Central_Euro
3.96 Pct


East_African
-


East_Asian
-


East_Balkan
-


East_Central_Asian
-


East_Central_Euro
7.53 Pct


East_Med
3.77 Pct


Eastern_Euro
-


Fennoscandian
3.93 Pct


French
6.03 Pct


Iberian
33.59 Pct


Indo-Chinese
-


Italian
13.54 Pct


Malayan
-


Near_Eastern
-


North_African
1.61 Pct


North_Atlantic
9.07 Pct


North_Caucasian
2.15 Pct


North_Sea
1.78 Pct


Northeast_African
-


Oceanian
-


Omotic
-


Pygmy
-


Siberian
-


South_Asian
-


South_Central_Asian
-


South_Chinese
-


Volga-Ural
-


West_African
-


West_Caucasian
-


West_Med
5.10 Pct






Is this one a reasonable admixture for my origins?

bigsnake49
20-08-20, 23:23
12294
Here is my K36 similarity map.

It kinda agrees with the 70% Greek and 30% Balkan mixture from both Ancestry.com and LivingDNA. There are some surprises though. For example 76% similarity to Northeastern Italy (Friuli, Veneto), 79% to Albania and Montenegro and 81% to Northern Bulgaria and 78% to Northeastern Thrace. But I am surprised by the 82% score in Peloponnese and 81% in Attica/Evoea. I was expecting a higher score in Thessaly and lower in Southern Greece.

Angela
21-08-20, 14:41
12294
Here is my K36 similarity map.

It kinda agrees with the 70% Greek and 30% Balkan mixture from both Ancestry.com and LivingDNA. There are some surprises though. For example 76% similarity to Northeastern Italy (Friuli, Veneto), 79% to Albania and Montenegro and 81% to Northern Bulgaria and 78% to Northeastern Thrace. But I am surprised by the 82% score in Peloponnese and 81% in Attica/Evoea. I was expecting a higher score in Thessaly and lower in Southern Greece.

Perhaps it's something to do with being midpoint between the Peloponnese and Bulgaria?

bigsnake49
21-08-20, 21:08
Perhaps it's something to do with being midpoint between the Peloponnese and Bulgaria?

Maybe we are thinking the same thing but it could be a forced migration event from South Greece to Bulgaria during the Roman or Byzantine Empire. Emperors for some reason hate empty land that they can not tax :grin:. I know that one of the Bulgarian Tsars went down to Thessaly and forcibly moved some Thessalians to Bulgaria.

Pax Augusta
22-08-20, 16:07
12294
Here is my K36 similarity map.

It kinda agrees with the 70% Greek and 30% Balkan mixture from both Ancestry.com and LivingDNA. There are some surprises though. For example 76% similarity to Northeastern Italy (Friuli, Veneto), 79% to Albania and Montenegro and 81% to Northern Bulgaria and 78% to Northeastern Thrace. But I am surprised by the 82% score in Peloponnese and 81% in Attica/Evoea. I was expecting a higher score in Thessaly and lower in Southern Greece.

I've been told that Northeastern Italy is based on Friuli only, while Venetians are in the average of northern Italians (69%) along with modern people from Lombardy.