PDA

View Full Version : Results through K15



Carlos
07-03-19, 15:24
Obtuvo estos resultados a través de Eurogenes K15. Nmontes. No hay oráculo.



Population



North_Sea
20.35 Pct


Atlantic
31.76 Pct


Baltic
4.75 Pct


Eastern_Euro
2.31 Pct


West_Med
23.82 Pct


West_Asian
6.42 Pct


East_Med
3.13 Pct


Red_Sea
3.37 Pct


South_Asian
-


Southeast_Asian
-


Siberian
0.99 Pct


Amerindian
-


Oceanian
0.16 Pct


Northeast_African
2.55 Pct


Sub-Saharan
0.41 Pct

Carlos
07-03-19, 15:25
Nmontes

pen0-
[1] "distancia% = 0.4171"

X

French_Basque, 44.6
Orcadian, 25.8
Sardinian, 18.4
Ossetian, 7.4
Somali, 3.6
Evens, 0.2

pen0.001-
[1] "distance% = 0.5924"

X

Spanish_Cantabria, 86.4
French_Basque, 7.6
Francés, 1.8
orcadian, 1
Southwest_English, 1
Afghan_Uzbeki, 0.2
Chechen, 0.2
Ethiopian_Anuak, 0.2
Ethiopian_Oromo, 0.2
Hadjar, 0.2
Kanjar, 0.2
North_Dutch, 0.2
North_Osetia, 0.2
San, 0.2
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha, 0.2
Sudanese, 0.2

pen0.01
1 0.5738 "

X

Spanish_Cantabria, 89,8
French_Basque, 5,8
Balkar, 0,6
francés, 0,6
checheno, 0,4
Southwest_English, 0,4
Afghan_Pashtun, 0,2
Ethiopian_Ari_cultivator, 0,2
Evenki, 0,2
Hadza, 0,2
irlandés, 0,2
North_Ossetian, 0,2
South_Dutch, 0,2
Southeast_English, 0,2
Spanish_Cataluna, 0,2
tabassaran, 0,2
West_Norwegian , 0.2
West_Scottish, 0.2

Ruderico
14-03-19, 20:28
That's K13, not K15 :)

Carlos
14-03-19, 21:27
^^
The first post is now fixed. It's with K15

Farstar
10-01-20, 10:47
My Eurogenes EUtest V2 K15 Oracle results:


Admix Results (sorted):



#
Population
Percent


1
Atlantic
27.8


2
North_Sea
22.55


3
West_Med
21.84


4
East_Med
9.23


5
Baltic
7.97


6
Red_Sea
5.04


7
West_Asian
3.79


8
Amerindian
0.82


9
Southeast_Asian
0.46


10
Eastern_Euro
0.46


11
Siberian
0.03


12
Sub-Saharan
0.02



Single Population Sharing:



#
Population (source)
Distance


1
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon
4.31


2
Portuguese
4.88


3
Spanish_Galicia
4.88


4
Spanish_Cataluna
5.02


5
Spanish_Extremadura
5.24


6
Spanish_Murcia
5.86


7
Spanish_Cantabria
7.01


8
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha
7.61


9
Spanish_Valencia
7.71


10
Spanish_Andalucia
8.2


11
Spanish_Aragon
8.52


12
Southwest_French
8.83


13
North_Italian
9.22


14
French
9.68


15
South_Dutch
14.71


16
Tuscan
15.05


17
West_German
16.84


18
Southwest_English
17.66


19
French_Basque
17.99


20
Serbian
18.74




These results are really odd, since my mother comes from Murcia-Andalusia (and all known ancestors from the same place) and my father, from Catalonia (all known ancestors also from Catalonia). Instead, the minimum distance is from Castilla y León, Portugal and Galicia, which are the places in Iberia farthest away from the family locations of my parents. I have no known relationship to these places. There was the Reconquista, but a paper I saw a few months ago showed the movement was north-south, so if any, I would expect aragonese or something like this.

Any idea?

Farstar
10-01-20, 12:31
OK, a friend has told me, off-Forum, that Eurogenes is way off for Eastern Iberians like myself, since the Spanish samples in Eurogenes are biased towards Galicians, so every Catalan or Valencian gets a huge proportion of Galician, Portuguese, Castilian, Cantabric, Extremadura ... But this is fake.

This is also consistent with my 23andme results, which show first Catalonia, then Andalusia, Murcia and Valencia, so I am purely "Mediterranean Iberian", according to 23andme, which is reasonable given my knowledge of my family.

Of course, it is true that it seems 23andme focuses on the last 2 or 3 centuries, and Eurogenes targets older events. But even though, I do not see a massive movement of population of Western to Eastern Iberia a thousand years ago.

Carlos
10-01-20, 13:34
Using 1 population approximation:
1 Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.280735
2 Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha @ 7.761991
3 Southwest_French @ 8.481945
4 Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon @ 8.488644
5 Spanish_Aragon @ 8.692999
6 Spanish_Cataluna @ 9.260433
7 Spanish_Extremadura @ 9.559198
8 Spanish_Andalucia @ 9.937961
9 Spanish_Valencia @ 9.954538
10 Portuguese @ 10.074296
11 Spanish_Murcia @ 10.178892
12 Spanish_Galicia @ 10.916896
13 French @ 14.676711
14 French_Basque @ 15.663252
15 North_Italian @ 16.065012
16 South_Dutch @ 19.052065
17 Southwest_English @ 21.704960
18 Tuscan @ 22.904907
19 West_German @ 23.140503
20 Southeast_English @ 23.450478

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Spanish_Cantabria +50% Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.280735


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Spanish_Cantabria +25% Spanish_Cantabria +25% Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.280735


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++
1 Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.280735
2 French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Galicia + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.395476
3 Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha @ 6.399209
4 French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.403708
5 French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.476579
6 French_Basque + Portuguese + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.479626
7 Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon @ 6.483661
8 French_Basque + Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha + Spanish_Galicia + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.517900
9 French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Extremadura + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.533604
10 French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.567818
11 French + French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.567858
12 French_Basque + Portuguese + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.642263
13 French + French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha @ 6.642465
14 French_Basque + Portuguese + Portuguese + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.651925
15 French + French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Extremadura @ 6.658022
16 Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Extremadura @ 6.664260
17 French_Basque + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cataluna + Spanish_Galicia @ 6.667257
18 French + French_Basque + Spanish_Andalucia + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.669136
19 Spanish_Aragon + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.670503
20 Southwest_French + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria + Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.678367

Done.

Elapsed time 1.7156 seconds.


In MTA I have seen how the vettones get El Argar and vice versa, El Argar gets vascones and vicevers, Tartessos gets ilergetes and vice versa, e.t.c. so I have seen correspondences well before the reconquest and repopulation in which perhaps those correspondences between the different territories of Iberia were reinforced And all the ancient samples of Iberians and Basques are also obtained in considerable proportions.. I know a woman from Murcia who knows for sure that she descends from Cantabria, even has a manor house in Murcia, for the majority that memory is lost considering that in addition the majority of the old censuses were burned in the preambles of the war Spanish civilian


I only ask that all this of genetics be left out and not influenced by modern regionalist nationalisms because what I believe could have happened with Ibero-Basque and each region of Spain have their own piece of nationalist Iberian. If you make the effort you can get it. ha

Farstar
10-01-20, 16:23
I do not understand what you mean, Carlos.

Carlos
10-01-20, 18:02
I do not understand what you mean, Carlos.

I see that you have understood perfectly. LOL

Ruderico
11-01-20, 19:59
OK, a friend has told me, off-Forum, that Eurogenes is way off for Eastern Iberians like myself, since the Spanish samples in Eurogenes are biased towards Galicians, so every Catalan or Valencian gets a huge proportion of Galician, Portuguese, Castilian, Cantabric, Extremadura ... But this is fake.

This is also consistent with my 23andme results, which show first Catalonia, then Andalusia, Murcia and Valencia, so I am purely "Mediterranean Iberian", according to 23andme, which is reasonable given my knowledge of my family.

Of course, it is true that it seems 23andme focuses on the last 2 or 3 centuries, and Eurogenes targets older events. But even though, I do not see a massive movement of population of Western to Eastern Iberia a thousand years ago.

You (and your friend) are misunderstanding how both things work, 23andme looks at segments shared with their references and assigns you to them. A K15 just calculates different components from your raw data and calculates a distance with each vector (from your components). There's a lot of variation and overlapping in Iberia, you don't have to be closest to your regional reference in K15 or in a PCA like G25. Also, different references in K15 would produce different results, that's just simple statistics. I'm Portuguese, my closest reference in K15 is Aragón. Portugal is 11th.




4.68309727
Spanish_Aragon


5.15799380
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha


5.90200813
Spanish_Valencia


6.07518724
Spanish_Andalucia


7.09243964
Spanish_Cantabria


7.10820652
Southwest_French


7.87328394
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon


8.02836845
Spanish_Murcia


8.71643276
Spanish_Extremadura


9.74420341
Spanish_Cataluna


10.75186030
Portuguese


12.70977183
France-South


12.93304682
Spanish_Galicia


13.72554188
French_Basque




My list is kind of similar to Carlos'...where are you from?

Farstar
12-01-20, 09:22
I am Catalan. My father is Catalan, and my mother from south east Spain. 23andme gives me ancestry results consistent with this. Other calculators do not. This suggests that, at least for me, 23andme technology is superior to the others, right? Are there other people with reverse experience? Granted, 23andme and eurogenes target different time stamps.

Carlos
12-01-20, 11:33
You (and your friend) are misunderstanding how both things work, 23andme looks at segments shared with their references and assigns you to them. A K15 just calculates different components from your raw data and calculates a distance with each vector (from your components). There's a lot of variation and overlapping in Iberia, you don't have to be closest to your regional reference in K15 or in a PCA like G25. Also, different references in K15 would produce different results, that's just simple statistics. I'm Portuguese, my closest reference in K15 is Aragón. Portugal is 11th.




4.68309727
Spanish_Aragon


5.15799380
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha


5.90200813
Spanish_Valencia


6.07518724
Spanish_Andalucia


7.09243964
Spanish_Cantabria


7.10820652
Southwest_French


7.87328394
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon


8.02836845
Spanish_Murcia


8.71643276
Spanish_Extremadura


9.74420341
Spanish_Cataluna


10.75186030
Portuguese


12.70977183
France-South


12.93304682
Spanish_Galicia


13.72554188
French_Basque




My list is kind of similar to Carlos'...where are you from?

I`m Andalusian
I almost always get Cantabria as the closest modern population, but in these new results I get Aragón and Huelva; although the Spanish regions are really close.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lGlkBGh5kac/Xhr1a_0F7yI/AAAAAAAACKo/f2Wvk5T0fxcSbHT3RoaXs0vzOXw3-kuDgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/arag%25C3%25B3n.jpeg

Ruderico
12-01-20, 19:48
I am Catalan. My father is Catalan, and my mother from south east Spain. 23andme gives me ancestry results consistent with this. Other calculators do not. This suggests that, at least for me, 23andme technology is superior to the others, right? Are there other people with reverse experience? Granted, 23andme and eurogenes target different time stamps.

That's the issue, you're comparing different things. 23andme also assigns me Portugal because I match segments with Portuguese individuals, but my results are unlike most Portuguese (~86% Iberian, 0% Italian, 0% West Asian, 0% SSA, etc)

Angela
12-01-20, 20:27
The purpose of the commercial tests, other than to sell your data for research, create drugs etc., is to tell people, most of whom may not know their ethnic identity, to which modern populations they are closest.

These "amateur" tools are for people who want to know "ancient" ancestry, the population genetics of various groups, which is fine, but they are created by amateurs themselves who can be biased, may have massaged data or strategically included or not included certain samples, may have an imperfect understanding of the groups, or the programs, which they did NOT create, as is the case with many of the academics, and who in almost all cases have far more confidence in their understanding than is warranted.

Take it all with a truck load of salt, but the latter more salt than the former.

Farstar
13-01-20, 08:21
The purpose of the commercial tests, other than to sell your data for research, create drugs etc., is to tell people, most of whom may not know their ethnic identity, to which modern populations they are closest.

These "amateur" tools are for people who want to know "ancient" ancestry, the population genetics of various groups, which is fine, but they are created by amateurs themselves who can be biased, may have massaged data or strategically included or not included certain samples, may have an imperfect understanding of the groups, or the programs, which they did NOT create, as is the case with many of the academics, and who in almost all cases have far more confidence in their understanding than is warranted.

Take it all with a truck load of salt, but the latter more salt than the former.

Yes, Angela, what you explain makes sense to me.

I hope some day, some tool will appear to show the ancestry composition, expliciting timing. In the end, all "pure" ancestry is in fact a previous admixture, just older. But I guess that to do that, one needs not only PCA or distances, but some kind of diffusion models for the populations. I am sure the next years and decades will be quite interesting on this regard.

Carlos
13-01-20, 11:31
I am Catalan. My father is Catalan, and my mother from south east Spain. 23andme gives me ancestry results consistent with this. Other calculators do not. This suggests that, at least for me, 23andme technology is superior to the others, right? Are there other people with reverse experience? Granted, 23andme and eurogenes target different time stamps.

I did it in FTDNA of course. I know of people with some of their Spanish parents who in 23 do not get Iberian.

Duarte
13-01-20, 12:41
GedMatch - Eurogenes EUtest V2 K15



#
Population (source)
Distance


1
Portuguese
6.49


2
Spanish_Extremadura
7.07


3
Spanish_Galicia
7.38


4
Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon
7.57


5
Spanish_Murcia
7.58


6
Spanish_Cantabria
7.68


7
Spanish_Cataluna
8.03


8
Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha
8.78


9
Spanish_Andalucia
8.8


10
Spanish_Valencia
9.13


11
Spanish_Aragon
9.86


12
Southwest_French
10.37


13
North_Italian
11.67


14
French
13.72




It's fun, but I agree with Angela:


The purpose of the commercial tests, other than to sell your data for research, create drugs etc., is to tell people, most of whom may not know their ethnic identity, to which modern populations they are closest.

These "amateur" tools are for people who want to know "ancient" ancestry, the population genetics of various groups, which is fine, but they are created by amateurs themselves who can be biased, may have massaged data or strategically included or not included certain samples, may have an imperfect understanding of the groups, or the programs, which they did NOT create, as is the case with many of the academics, and who in almost all cases have far more confidence in their understanding than is warranted.

Take it all with a truck load of salt, but the latter more salt than the former.

Ruderico
14-01-20, 13:39
You are potentially accusing them of being fraudulent, which is pretty serious (or would be, should any of this be official, but it isn't). The effects you mention can be problematic in supervised tests like K13/K15, etc, but in an unsupervised test like G25 that's not as much of an issue since the algorithm is left to create its structure. Here the biggest issue might be dimensionality, G25 might have been created with too many dimensions for the sample size used in its input and some minor issues occasionally pop up when using the data in certain ways (like nMonte3 models, eventhough it can me mitigated with a penalty), but even then the tool appears to be pretty good and relatively coherent with published data, at least for West Eurasia, I am not familiar with the rest of the world in this PCA data


Edit: On Iberians not matching their regional reference, it's unimportant. A reference changes once you change the samples used to calculate it, when there's a large overlap within different regions, and noticeable variation within that region, "matching" a different region in this K15 or K13 shouldn't be surprising. Iberia had a lot of population movements in the last millennia, some areas were left more isolated than others. This variation can see seen in studies of modern Iberian population, for example this K7 ADMIXTURE graph https://i.postimg.cc/446W4B58/k7admix.png

Farstar
14-01-20, 15:04
You are potentially accusing them of being fraudulent, which is pretty serious (or would be, should any of this be official, but it isn't). The effects you mention can be problematic in supervised tests like K13/K15, etc, but in an unsupervised test like G25 that's not as much of an issue since the algorithm is left to create its structure. Here the biggest issue might be dimensionality, G25 might have been created with too many dimensions for the sample size used in its input and some minor issues occasionally pop up when using the data in certain ways (like nMonte3 models, eventhough it can me mitigated with a penalty), but even then the tool appears to be pretty good and relatively coherent with published data, at least for West Eurasia, I am not familiar with the rest of the world in this PCA data


Edit: On Iberians not matching their regional reference, it's unimportant. A reference changes once you change the samples used to calculate it, when there's a large overlap within different regions, and noticeable variation within that region, "matching" a different region in this K15 or K13 shouldn't be surprising. Iberia had a lot of population movements in the last millennia, some areas were left more isolated than others. This variation can see seen in studies of modern Iberian population, for example this K7 ADMIXTURE graph https://i.postimg.cc/446W4B58/k7admix.png

I am sure Angela knows how to defend herself, but it is obvious she is not accusing of fraud to anybody. Have you felt called in?

The issue of supervised or non-supervised is not the relevant point, if samples have been "massaged" ex-ante. For sure, misclassification is a serious issue, but if some samples that should be in, are not there, or viceversa, the unsupervised algorithm may fail to find the right structure. In fact, unsupervised algorithms tend to be "worse" than supervised ones (of course, lots of caveats here), so I am surprised that an unsupervised algorithm is seen as an evolution of supervised ones.

About Iberian regions: if there is so much overlap, maybe it would be interesting to have not only a measure of the distance, but also a measure of the error. For example, if all the first 5 estimated regions were within the error bands, one could not say that the first region is more important than the fifth. Now, most people believe that the first one is the most important one, and anything above the 2nd or 3rd is discounted. But the ranking could be purely due to noise, if the distance among regions is so overlapping.

Ruderico
14-01-20, 15:24
Why should I be felt called in? That'd be ridiculous, I didn't even make any tool.


I don't know if the samples have been "massaged" or not and neither does anyone here. If there's evidence for that, I'd very much like to learn it. Edit: I'm referring to the tools us amateurs-at-best use, namely Eurogenes and Dodecad
We only know the samples used for the input in K13/15 (and probably G25, although I'm not certain whether ancient samples were used or not) were from HGDP. What we can see is that, as a tool used used to visualise data, G25 seems more than decent. My argument on supervised is that they are easier to mess up when it comes to what we do here, since these were done back in 2013 and our knowledge of population genetics has changed since then. I'm pretty sure that if people were to remake these tools probably new components would be used, for example the NEAfr and SSA are poor to represent north African ancestry in Europe.


As for Iberian regions, its study is best left for scientific studies in population genomics which is why I mentioned it. If what you want is to know a broad degree of similarity you can make statistical analysis yourself, there's plenty of public data in G25. People have been doing that since it was made available. If not, because you don't trust the tool, just read what we currently have, or wait for new studies.

Angela
14-01-20, 16:34
I am sure Angela knows how to defend herself, but it is obvious she is not accusing of fraud to anybody. Have you felt called in?

The issue of supervised or non-supervised is not the relevant point, if samples have been "massaged" ex-ante. For sure, misclassification is a serious issue, but if some samples that should be in, are not there, or viceversa, the unsupervised algorithm may fail to find the right structure. In fact, unsupervised algorithms tend to be "worse" than supervised ones (of course, lots of caveats here), so I am surprised that an unsupervised algorithm is seen as an evolution of supervised ones.

About Iberian regions: if there is so much overlap, maybe it would be interesting to have not only a measure of the distance, but also a measure of the error. For example, if all the first 5 estimated regions were within the error bands, one could not say that the first region is more important than the fifth. Now, most people believe that the first one is the most important one, and anything above the 2nd or 3rd is discounted. But the ranking could be purely due to noise, if the distance among regions is so overlapping.

Couldn't have put it better. :)

Carlos
14-01-20, 18:24
If, for example, I had been a child robbed during the Franco regime and taken to another country and had all these tests, calculations, MTA e.t.c. where Andalusia usually leaves in the 9th place and Cantabria is almost always in the first place in these last results, Aragón comes out in the first place if more information would have been thinking in those regions as my possible origin or that of my parents and of course everything is a lot more complicated because considering that my native population is just over 200 years old and although the population was with neighbors of older nearby populations but who have lived the reconquest and repopulation I can understand that in my hometown it is as if they had mixed Spaniards from other regions reinforced perhaps because since ancient times there is correspondence between the Spanish regions as I have seen in the results of La Cueva de la paloma, El sotilo, El Argar, Cógotas, etc.


But I know all that, but in the case of someone looking for their origins as in the supposed case of a child robbed in Spain the first regions in the results would not have given the answer in its closest origin because there are many other factors .

-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------

Now that I am trying to trace the origin of my DNA, I already know that all this is autosomal and it is only one of my ancestors but somewhere it has to go out somehow.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0MYrhnbAcP8/XhpcenZ1N7I/AAAAAAAACKQ/paGUt7A0i2wl7ilv2_PYXK_2Nseenm65ACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/nMontes3Oracle.jpeg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Z3WsHOmpqcY/XhpcblQtGwI/AAAAAAAACKM/ZZDWSUDdoukyRUQGLauNEaaL00nwiVWiACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/mape2.jpeg

On Aragon, yes, in FTDNA it had a match with modern people that go from the Basque country to Aragon, but with Huelva it had not obtained results anywhere, some connection must have been perhaps an older time like Tartessos.


https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NiLkbDddDWA/XhpcYmB-5eI/AAAAAAAACKI/zhlVxDIN4W0TOHWfE1L-oYsovPFeTx3XwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/maparojo.jpeg

I know that you can do with different algorithms remove or add populations but also to extract the gold you have to make a sieve.

If someone has something better to expose it.

Ruderico
14-01-20, 18:49
I think if a person doesn't know their origins their best bet would be to look at DNA matches following a test. That's what, for example, people with unknown AJ ancestry do, they will always have a bunch of AJ matches that will tell them that, even if in one of these "calculators" that AJ gets 'mistaken' for some generic East Mediterranean component

Jovialis
15-01-20, 15:01
Why should I be felt called in? That'd be ridiculous, I didn't even make any tool.


I don't know if the samples have been "massaged" or not and neither does anyone here. If there's evidence for that, I'd very much like to learn it. Edit: I'm referring to the tools us amateurs-at-best use, namely Eurogenes and Dodecad
We only know the samples used for the input in K13/15 (and probably G25, although I'm not certain whether ancient samples were used or not) were from HGDP. What we can see is that, as a tool used used to visualise data, G25 seems more than decent. My argument on supervised is that they are easier to mess up when it comes to what we do here, since these were done back in 2013 and our knowledge of population genetics has changed since then. I'm pretty sure that if people were to remake these tools probably new components would be used, for example the NEAfr and SSA are poor to represent north African ancestry in Europe.


As for Iberian regions, its study is best left for scientific studies in population genomics which is why I mentioned it. If what you want is to know a broad degree of similarity you can make statistical analysis yourself, there's plenty of public data in G25. People have been doing that since it was made available. If not, because you don't trust the tool, just read what we currently have, or wait for new studies.

I follow the rules where ever I go. Which is part of the reason why I have the acumen to be a moderator on a population genetics forum.

Pertinent to the discussion:

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?18871-Ancient-Rome-A-genetic-crossroads-of-Europe-and-the-Mediterranean&p=637864&viewfull=1#post637864

Oddly, you seem to fall on the side of Davidski, even when he insults forum users on Anthrogenica.

Jovialis
15-01-20, 20:35
I follow the rules where ever I go. Which is part of the reason why I have the acumen to be a moderator on a population genetics forum.
Pertinent to the discussion:
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?18871-Ancient-Rome-A-genetic-crossroads-of-Europe-and-the-Mediterranean&p=637864&viewfull=1#post637864
Oddly, you seem to fall on the side of Davidski, even when he insults forum users on Anthrogenica.
Tell me RUDERICO, do you actually believe the Sardinians are east of Anatolian_N? I saw you upvoted Davidski's post. Why don't you elaborate on this for us, because apparently the PCAs are wrong.

Angela
15-01-20, 21:34
I just saw this. Sorry if I'm intruding, but despite some additional "east med" in Sardinians, they have a lot of WHG compared to the Anatolian farmers. I thought everyone knew that.

Of course, it may vary depending on which Sardinians you're considering. I don't think the academics use the Sardinian samples which include people from all over the island, including coastal areas of the southwest where you had Phoenician settlements. I may be wrong, but I thought they still use the highland settlement samples taken originally by Luca Cavalli/Sforza, which are the most "isolated" and have the most WHG.

If that's the case, why would anyone expect them to be "east" of Anatolian farmers?

Progon
15-01-20, 22:11
There is a lot of flaws in this calculators, that's for sure. Autosomal DNA estimations are quite tricky but i think we are going in the right direction. Perhaps, upcoming calculators will be more stable.

Ruderico
16-01-20, 08:50
Sorry but I couldn't care less about "being east or west", it's irrelevant, a PCA is a data visualisation tool that depends a lot on its input..and yes, shrinkage can be an issue when projecting samples onto a PCA, there was a paper on that topic just a few months ago. What is clear is that Sardinians have BA EastMed-like ancestry, of that there's no question, that's why I upvoted his post, if you care so much about internet points.

No idea why you bolded and caps my name, that was very odd. As is you making these sort of questions on an unrelated topic in a whole different forum.

Jovialis
16-01-20, 14:36
Sorry but I couldn't care less about "being east or west", it's irrelevant, a PCA is a data visualisation tool that depends a lot on its input..and yes, shrinkage can be an issue when projecting samples onto a PCA, there was a paper on that topic just a few months ago. What is clear is that Sardinians have BA EastMed-like ancestry, of that there's no question, that's why I upvoted his post, if you care so much about internet points.
No idea why you bolded and caps my name, that was very odd. As is you making these sort of questions on an unrelated topic in a whole different forum.
I don't care if you care. It was a weak diversion to undermine the credibility of the points I was making. That is what you people do on Anthrogenica. I don't think moderators should be sycophantic shills for individual users. I think it matters when it is used to try to refute the credibility of academic papers. That is complete sophistry, and conspiratorial. The facts I presented are iron-clad. You people promote pseudoscience, in contradiction to what the papers say. It is a FACT that sardinians are west of Anatolian_N, it has nothing to do with opinion. They plot west of them despite the existence of iran-like ancestry in them.
The main point is the eurogenes is an inferior calculator for analyzing southern europeans, because of projection bias towards eastern europeans. You might as well use ethiohelix k10 on gedmatch...

Whenever I press you people to substantiate your claims, you dodge it. I asked Davidski to present an academic PCA which shows modern sardinians, east of Anatolian_N, I am met with silence. Perhaps you can show us one, Ruderico.

Ruderico
16-01-20, 15:02
I don't even know you and you're all aggressively attacking, this is all very puerile. You're even undermining your a topic on your own forum because of some personal vendetta/agenda. I have no desire nor patience to discuss anything with in these contidions. You may just delete my account. Goodbye

Jovialis
16-01-20, 15:04
Whenever I press you people to substantiate your claims, you dodge it. I asked Davidski to present an academic PCA which shows modern sardinians, east of Anatolian_N, I am met with silence. Perhaps you can show us one, Ruderico.

See what I mean?

Ruderico
16-01-20, 15:06
Maybe if you didn't behave like a spoiled child I'd bother discussing anything, but that is clearly not the case, attacks are the norm, I see. I won't post here again.

Jovialis
16-01-20, 16:23
Maybe if you didn't behave like a spoiled child I'd bother discussing anything, but that is clearly not the case, attacks are the norm, I see. I won't post here again.

You might as well evade the request, because the PCA does not exist.

Angela
16-01-20, 16:55
Well, I certainly wasn't attacking him, so why didn't he up vote MY post pointing out all the western Hunter gatherer in Sardinians, I mean considering that he apparently up voted a Davidski post pointing out a fact about Sardinian genetics?

Btw, since it seems it wasn't a pleasant exchange, did they let him insult you? I've been told before that the rules enforced against everyone else there don't apply to him.

Jovialis
16-01-20, 17:54
Well, I certainly wasn't attacking him, so why didn't he up vote MY post pointing out all the western Hunter gatherer in Sardinians, I mean considering that he apparently up voted a Davidski post pointing out a fact about Sardinian genetics?
Btw, since it seems it wasn't a pleasant exchange, did they let him insult you? I've been told before that the rules enforced against everyone else there don't apply to him.
Yeah, I am allowed to be insulted by Davidski with no repercussion to him. As soon as I press him to back up his claims, the conversation is shut down. Now that I ask Ruderico to produce the PCA, he wants to leave.

Everyone knows the type, people that play "victim", in order to evade having to do something they can't, or don't want to do.

Jovialis
16-01-20, 18:16
@Ruderico, don't blame me, because Davidski created this situation. You wanted to back him up, you have the opportunity to prove me wrong. I am a reasonable and fair person, that always defers to the studies. If one can point to an academic PCA that shows sardinians east of Anatolian_N, I will except it. Until then, I maintain my position. That is not an "attack".