Who were and are the Albanians and their DNA

ok ,
i am not going to argue i realy thought it was a good effort
by alban :unsure:
but if albanian members here themselfs think otherwise i respect your opinions

They will fall in the pit they digged for us.
 
They will fall in the pit they digged for us.

Vlla, what are you talking about?

Gjenetika has samples n=50 for Macedonia, while Rrenjet has n=39... How do you expect it to reflect the numbers accurately? Macedonia Albanians are very under represented in both projects. When one sample is worth =2-3%, you shouldn't be surprised that official studies with n=300(1 sample =.33%) paint a better picture.

fm2DsIy.png

Gjenetika^
WMbuwy9.png

Rrenjet^

Anyways, what is this pit digging talk anyways?! :embarassed::LOL:
 
What is going on here?

I think i was clear enough, we will not allow shady people cherry-picking samples all over around to be constituted as reference for Albanian population.

We will accept only peer reviewed scientific papers.
 
I think i was clear enough, we will not allow shady people cherry-picking samples all over around to be constituted as reference for Albanian population.

We will accept only peer reviewed scientific papers.

Who are we?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
I think i was clear enough, we will not allow shady people cherry-picking samples all over around to be constituted as reference for Albanian population.

We will accept only peer reviewed scientific papers.

Disagreement is fine, but please do not use profanity.
 
Regarding Albanian Y-DNA only peer reviewed scientific papers should be considered as canonical.
This freelance Albanian projects have lost their meaning anymore with their cherrypicking.
For instance 2019 Macedonian paper which has very consistent samples has Albanians from Macedonia with Y-DNA E-V13 at ~35% while the Albanian projects have ~15%. That's strikingly ~20% difference and extremelly weird considering that some other paper has the percentage more closely to the ~35% of E-V13.

I really don't think it's wise to disregard the sample database of project efforts. At least for Rrenjet which has surpasses a thousand samples at this point. Which typically dwarfs the sample size of most peer reviewed studies.
I am also curious on how they are cherry picked exactly?

They literally have no idea what results will be until the samples are processed at the lab. The whole point of this endeavor is to dibe deep into the Y-Chromosomes of the Albanian peoples.
I don't see how small sample sizes with weak resolution, no names or at least regions/tribes, is beneficial to deciphering Y-Chromosome composition on a large scale.

I do think we need to continue to compile more and more samples to bolster the size and this needs to be done region to region.

I will agree certain places are over tested compared to others. However, you have to also remember contributors have preferences for where their sponsorship goes.

With regards to Albanians of Macedonia, do not fret. The sample size will grow by at least another 30+ samples eventually, sponsored by myself at Rrenjet.

Im sure they will collect unsponsored kits that can be sponsored over time as well.
You have to remember people are combining their own personal finances/resources to decipher our origins. I wouldn't disregard their efforts. If you want to see more tests in Macedonia, reach out to the admins with your intentions to sponsor. If I could contribute more than I already have I would.

Until then sponsors who actually contribute will have a say to where those tests are directed, as the money is coming out of their/our pockets.

No one bothered sponsoring kits for Okshtun and Golloborde until I slowly gathered funds to test the region more deeply.

We need more nember sponsorship/contributions. Even if it's a couple samples a month. If everyone chipped in the project would swell with samples from all over.
 
I think i was clear enough, we will not allow shady people cherry-picking samples all over around to be constituted as reference for Albanian population.
We will accept only peer reviewed scientific papers.

For the record, I support only accepting peer-reviewed sources as legitimate. Imo


The population of Albania is only 2.8 million people. I trust the academics to accurately capture the scale of these haplogroup distributions.
 
Anyone with fit reason can spot that something is wrong with the data.

Personally I have helped test Laberia since my family comes from there. Other people can help to get tests from other regions that are undertested. If this is called cherry [emoji523] picking than we are cherry picking based on the interest that everyone has for the genealogy of their family/region.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Dibran made a very good point. You can't cherry pick DNA. Its like a lottery, you test people and you get what you get.
For one the testing is done by foreign companies.
For two there is the cost factor per test, which combined with the limited funding of private projects through donations creates an incentive not to test more than one member of a fis/family/tribe(due to how Y-dna works).
For three you have the databases, with the kit numbers, which can not be fa*ked.

So all in all, I do not see what is not to trust here. Hence why I failed to grasp Hawk's concerns.

Eventually, as Jovialis said, given there is probably around 6 million Albanians in/from the Balkans (just my guess, could be more), eventually you need to test only so many for the sample size to be statistically appropriate. I just do not agree with Jovialis point, that only academic papers should be considered, since ~1500 samples from both these projects are much better than the studies that use 50 - 100 samples to draw conclusions. The only concern left is proper sampling by region, but given that these data is publicly available on the websites of both project I do not see this as a big concern.
 
I really don't think it's wise to disregard the sample database of project efforts. At least for Rrenjet which has surpasses a thousand samples at this point. Which typically dwarfs the sample size of most peer reviewed studies.
I am also curious on how they are cherry picked exactly?
They literally have no idea what results will be until the samples are processed at the lab. The whole point of this endeavor is to dibe deep into the Y-Chromosomes of the Albanian peoples.
I don't see how small sample sizes with weak resolution, no names or at least regions/tribes, is beneficial to deciphering Y-Chromosome composition on a large scale.
I do think we need to continue to compile more and more samples to bolster the size and this needs to be done region to region.
I will agree certain places are over tested compared to others. However, you have to also remember contributors have preferences for where their sponsorship goes.
With regards to Albanians of Macedonia, do not fret. The sample size will grow by at least another 30+ samples eventually, sponsored by myself at Rrenjet.
Im sure they will collect unsponsored kits that can be sponsored over time as well.
You have to remember people are combining their own personal finances/resources to decipher our origins. I wouldn't disregard their efforts. If you want to see more tests in Macedonia, reach out to the admins with your intentions to sponsor. If I could contribute more than I already have I would.
Until then sponsors who actually contribute will have a say to where those tests are directed, as the money is coming out of their/our pockets.
No one bothered sponsoring kits for Okshtun and Golloborde until I slowly gathered funds to test the region more deeply.
We need more nember sponsorship/contributions. Even if it's a couple samples a month. If everyone chipped in the project would swell with samples from all over.

Either you have no idea how this works or you pretend so, there is room to do it in so many ways. The points raised by you are not valid, they don't encompass everything, they can target and test specific people ignoring the rest or the median. It takes couple of bias to change percentage. It's not dramatic or General Admiral Aladdin-like.
 
For the record, I support only accepting peer-reviewed sources as legitimate. Imo


The population of Albania is only 2.8 million people. I trust the academics to accurately capture the scale of these haplogroup distributions.

Exactly. They know their job. :)
 
For some more specific conclusion we must use peer-reviewed sources, while for some approximate conclusion we can use and some private(portal) statistics.

Private statistics are not made according to the rules of the profession, that is, that there must be no relatives, a lot of people from one area, etc. If some DNA research is being done for the population of some country or an area, each part of the country must be evenly represented.
 
Otherwise in recent time there is also and artificial lifting of individual haplotypes and through peer-reviewed sources, so we have to think about that too.

An example is the genetics of the Serbian population and last paper "Y chromosome genetic data defined by 23 short tandem repeats in a Serbian population on the Balkan Peninsula" where one of the authors is a man who is not a geneticist. He is Jovica Krtinić from Serbian private portal "Poreklo" (Milutin Bojić Library, Belgrade, Serbia and Society of Serbian Genealogists).

https://www.researchgate.net/public..._a_Serbian_population_on_the_Balkan_Peninsula

And anomalies in scientific paper are immediately seen. Information from paper, page 2.

We divided the analysed population on the basis of place of origin (not the current settlement, but theplace of birth/settlement of father and grandfather). Our examined population then consisted of: 108 (37.64%) male originating from Serbia (Vojvodina, Central Serbia, Kosovo and Metohia); 121 males originating from two geographical parts of B&H: 30 (9.90%) from Bosnia (West, Central and East Bosnia) and 91 (30.03%) from Herzegovina (Ljubinje, Trebinje, Nevesinje, Gacko, Stolac, Bileca); 43 (14.52%) males originating from Montenegro (Old Herzegovina, Podgorica, Andrijevica, Berane, Kolasin, Bijelo Polje); and 31 (10.23%)males originating from Croatia (Dalmacia, Lika, Kordun,Banija, Slavonia

So from the area of Herzegovina where about 30 thousand people live we have 91 person while from Serbia and place where 7 million people live we have 108 persons. It is an artificial raising of the I2a haplotype and a reduction of the E1b haplotype, which is strong among Bosnian Serbs(less in the area of Herzegovina where I2a is strongest) and which probably has mostly to do with the territory of Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, southern Serbia and is not related to the original Slavs.
 
For some more specific conclusion we must use peer-reviewed sources, while for some approximate conclusion we can use and some private(portal) statistics.

Private statistics are not made according to the rules of the profession, that is, that there must be no relatives, a lot of people from one area, etc. If some DNA research is being done for the population of some country or an area, each part of the country must be evenly represented.

I don't accept projects where no E-V13 member is high admin of. It's simple as that.
 
I don't accept projects where no E-V13 member is high admin of. It's simple as that.

Like I said, it’s better to use peer-reviewed sources because we are still in the balkans but that balkan is visible and in peer-reviewed source which I have exposed, so in the future we have to be very careful with DNA balkan "chemistry".
 
Either you have no idea how this works or you pretend so, there is room to do it in so many ways. The points raised by you are not valid, they don't encompass everything, they can target and test specific people ignoring the rest or the median. It takes couple of bias to change percentage. It's not dramatic or General Admiral Aladdin-like.

No one's pretending anything. Get that chip off your shoulder.

It's obvious you're just upset that your own haplogroup percentage is not as high in the project as it is in these studies. You basically elucidated that in your post, complaining about why it's not as high as the study.

I don't see how 50-100 low resolution study samples could be a stand in for accurate statistical breakdown of haplogroup resolution compared to well over a thousand samples and growing that have a minimum resolution higher than the average study.

Whatever floats your boat though.
 
I don't accept projects where no E-V13 member is high admin of. It's simple as that.

In otherwords you just admitted your gripe with the project data has nothing to do with actual evidence but instead because "my haplogroup doesn't have representation among high level administration".
 
For some more specific conclusion we must use peer-reviewed sources, while for some approximate conclusion we can use and some private(portal) statistics.
Private statistics are not made according to the rules of the profession, that is, that there must be no relatives, a lot of people from one area, etc. If some DNA research is being done for the population of some country or an area, each part of the country must be evenly represented.

Literally none of the samples I have sponsored for the project have been relatives or duplicates. Would be an obvious waste of money.

I target a whole spread with tests I have sponsored, and only test one representative of a family and even avoid duplicates of surnames to avoid over inflating one result over another.
As far as I know this is pretty much followed throughout.

Again though, sponsors in private projects are going out of their own pockets and have a right to direct testing where they see fit.

Hawk just obviously made himself clear that it has nothing to do with actual data and everything to do with: 1. Why his haplogroup percentage is lower in the project than in studies, and ,

2. He doesn't accept any project that doesn't have a high level administrator who is E-V13.

Using this childish chain of thought, maybe Albanian projects need an admin for I2a-Din and R1a-M417?

Why not every other haplogroup while we're at it?
 

This thread has been viewed 693612 times.

Back
Top