Dodecad project : highest percentage for each admixture

You are mixing haplogroups with autosomal. Please, get your facts straight. People of Caucasus are much closer to middle-easterns than to East-Europeans. In fact, Georgians cluster with Irianians and Turks, as you can see in many autosomal plots.
Where is this plot from?

Well as you can see on this map Spain and Italy are further away from Russia than Georgia from Russia !!!

Georgia is CLOSER to Russia than Spain to Russia!
 
Where is Greece???

Cyptriot DNA is as close to Africa as Georgian DNA to Africa.


I suppose that Greece is the same as Cyprus????
 
In next days, I'll search for Georgian people at 23andme and post the African numbers of the global similarity if they accept me. I'll also show Iberian numbers for comparison. On the other side, I'll check the similarities of a Chinese person for comparison with Southern Europeans.

In the last exercise, you must keep in mind that a 100% Mediterranean person does not exist (chinese are 99% Asia aprox), and that this cluster does not make any distintion between Southwest and Southeast Europe. I say this because I'll use the numbers of the top scorer at Mediterranean between others. He is Iberian, what means essentially Southwest (54%) and the rest is Northern European (42%), with very little non European. As you can imagine, the similarities with African regions (specially black africa) are very low in this case. For the moment it's enough, just tell you to give an idea and consider all time the peculiarities of concrete populations.
 
BTW this whole map s*cks big time. How can Georgia be closer to Russia, than Spain or Italy to Russia, BUT at the same time also closer to Africa, than Spain to Africa. While Spain is next to Africa.

Maybe because Africans have Georgian genes otherwise this whole graph doesn't make ANY sense!!!!

Also they deliberately excluded Greece. Which scientist made this graph ???
 
University professor Dr. Doug McDonald.

Georgians have too much West Asian to be specially closer to Russians. Keep in mind that Russians have very high Northern European...I personally don't see nothing rare.
 
And Jews are closer to the Italians than the Basque to the Italians??
 
University professor Dr. Doug McDonald.

Georgians have too much West Asian to be specially closer to Russians. Keep in mind that Russians have very high Northern European...I personally don't see nothing rare.
No, Turks are even closer to Russians than Georgians. Turks have much less West Asian component in them than Georgians. Maybe the CENTRAL Asian component (mongoloid) connects Turks with Russians ???

I smell some fraud or he made big mistakes, but it's ok with me...
 
Jews are characterized to have high West Asian and Southwest Asian, and Italians have quite of it too. It's perfectly possible.

If you see the Basques extremely removed it's because they represent a genetic isolate, and the same for Sardinians. In these two cases does not mean they are extremly different from Iberians or Italians, I think it's just a reperesentation of isolation. I don't take this two cases literaly, since one of my highest genome matches is Basque, and Doug McDonald told me that I was 100% Spanish.
 
BTW this whole map s*cks big time. How can Georgia be closer to Russia, than Spain or Italy to Russia, BUT at the same time also closer to Africa, than Spain to Africa. While Spain is next to Africa.

Maybe because Africans have Georgian genes otherwise this whole graph doesn't make ANY sense!!!!

Also they deliberately excluded Greece. Which scientist made this graph ???
Please, calm down. It's from PhD Dr. Doug McDonald, a university professor. But if you don't like it, there are others from Dodecad or Eurogenes :

[FONT=&quot]http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1747/fwesteurasia12.gif[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o21/Kadu_album/West_Central_Eurasia.png[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_6XAIk6ygtg/Tcqj7WCS_jI/AAAAAAAADsU/WJDG6R2XnH0/s1600/waeu.png[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
 
And Jews are closer to the Italians than the Basque to the Italians??
Yes, of course. Jews are genetically very similiar to South-Italians and Greeks. While Basques are very different, they are almost 100% european,
 
Please, calm down. It's from PhD Dr. Doug McDonald, a university professor. But if you don't like it, there are others from Dodecad or Eurogenes :

[FONT=&quot]http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1747/fwesteurasia12.gif[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o21/Kadu_album/West_Central_Eurasia.png[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_6XAIk6ygtg/Tcqj7WCS_jI/AAAAAAAADsU/WJDG6R2XnH0/s1600/waeu.png[/FONT]
Thank you. But can you give me some sources, please. Where do you have this charts from?? They say nothing about Africans...
 
No, Turks are even closer to Russians than Georgians. Turks have much less West Asian component in them than Georgians. Maybe the CENTRAL Asian component (mongoloid) connects Turks with Russians ???

I smell some fraud or he made big mistakes, but it's ok with me...
Good point. Russians carry some Mongoloid genes, and if you put this together with the European and Mongoloid genes of the Turks, the similarity can be higher than the one showed by Georgians.
 
Btw on this map you can clearly see that the distance between Mozabite and GE (I suppose Georgia) and between Mozabite and ES (I suppose Spain) is - almost - the same.

West Asian (Georgian) Adygei and Lezgin are even further away from Mozabite (Berbers) than Spain from Mozabite (Berbers) ...

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1747/fwesteurasia12.gif


Some charts are even contradicting each other, lol...

Notice that some charts also say the West Asians are closer to East Europeans, than West Europeans to East Europeans.
 
As more samples I can collect from 23andme, more clarified will be this question.

It's party time now. See you guys ;)
 
We have some Mongol shamans in South Siberia, they are relatives of the Turks. Turks in comments to video totally recognise it.
And Georgians have nothing in common with Africa, they have a lot in common with Turks, Armenians, Azeris. Their distinctive feature is a big sharp nose. In Russia only minority of Northern Ossetians have a lot in common with Georgians because they live on the Caucasus.
Do not forget that there are many natural obstacles for DNA distribution: Black Sea, Bosporus Strait, hardly penetrable Caucasus Mountains, scorching deserts of Central Asia etc...

 
Matching phenotypes and genetic admixtures

I am really interested to see what people with a high percentage of one admixture look like.

The highest national average of "West European" is 68.5%, which is the average for Irish Dodecad members. But a handful of people listed in the spreadsheet exceed 70%, and one even reaches 75.1% (DOD298). This makes me wonder what is the highest percentage that a single individual could have (without resorting to intentional cross-breeding to recreate a 100% West European individual). If there was someone with over 90% of West European admixture, I infer that he or she would look quite close to the archetypal ancestral population of "West European" (read North-West European, or maybe R1b Proto-Indo-European).

The pure East European type is even more elusive. Lithuanians score the highest (61.5%). Only 4 project members exceed 60%, with a maximum of 67.8% (DOD468).

The Mediterranean admixture doesn't reach more than 55% of any individual's genes, and usually in the isolated Sardinians.

It's not the case of all admixtures. The 'Northeast Asian' reaches 98.5% in the Koryaks, the 'Southeast Asian" approaches 92% in the Dai and Lahu, the Mbuti Pygmies are 98.3% 'Paleo African', North Kannadi are 81.6% 'South Asian'. In all these populations it should be possible to find individuals with 100% of a single admixture element. In others, I expect to find individuals with over 90% of one component (e.g. the Mozabites who are 76.3% 'Northwest African', Georgians who are 72.3% 'West Asian', and Saudis who are 71.5% 'Southwest Asian'). So we can have a good idea of what phenotypes match these genetic components.

It's ironic that it is for the three European components that the maximum percentages are the lowest.

Looking for the origins of the three European populations

So how comes that Europeans are mixed, and who were the three original populations from whom we inherited most of our genome ?

Mediterranean

It's easy to see why no population has kept a high level of Mediterranean genes with all the migrations that took place from all sides the Mediterranean since the Mesolithic. One might wonder if this "Mediterranean" component is even a coherent genetic element, as it is found in such disparate populations as Moroccans, Sardinians, Scandinavians or Iraqi, and pretty much everywhere in between. If it is, it could be the remnant of an aboriginal Paleolithic European population, men carrying Y-haplogroup I lineages, or even an older population whose Y-DNA has all but disappeared (hg F or IJ ?) because their genes were passed only by women. It actually would make sense if the Mediterranean element represented the IJ branch of the Y-chromosomal tree, as it is as common in the Middle East as in Europe. In other words, it would be a very ancient population, perhaps encompassing all the mtDNA subclades of H and V (and perhaps other haplogroups too).

This would explain why the Mediterranean element is so widespread geographically, but also why it reaches such high levels in northern Europe: nearly 25% in the Dutch and Orcadians, 20-22% in the Irish, British and Germans, and around 15% among Scandinavians. If Neolithic farmers reached northern Europe, they were probably more West Asian, and the West Asian element ranges from 4 to 7% in Scandinavia and the British Isles, which fits better with the percentage of haplogroups G2a and J2.

Let's take a concrete example. Belarusians and Poles have considerably more Mediterranean admixture than Lithuanians (14% and 17% against 6.5%, respectively). They also have a bit more West Asian and Southwest Asian (total 2.3% for Belarusians, 3.8% for Poles and 0.5% for Lithuanians). All three have a lot of R1a and some R1b. The main difference is that Belarusians and Poles have considerably more haplogroup I2 and J (20.5% and 13.5% against 7% for Lithuanians) as well as Neolithic haplogroups G2a and E1b1b (total 10.5% and 7.5% against 1.5% for Lithuania). It doesn't match exactly, but there is a trend. Haplogroups G2a and E1b1b are higher than the autosomal DNA from the Middle-East, but that's probably because they were diluted on the way by mixing with other European populations in the Balkans, since it was typically hunter-gatherers who sent their women to marry male farmers rather than the other way round (therefore the Y-DNA remained Middle Eastern, but the mtDNA became European).

North-West European

The West European component of the Dodecad Project being really a North-West European (NWE) one, I will use this denomination here.

Based on my analysis, the NWE component correlates best with haplogroups R1b1b2a1 and I1.

Haplogroup I1 is a special case within haplogroup IJ because it experienced a dramatic bottleneck in the late Neolithic/early Bronze Age that surely had a serious impact on its autosomes. If the re-expansion of I1 with the flourishing of the early Germanic culture happened after the last I1 lineages blended with an R1b1b2a1 dominated population (such as in the Netherlands or Denmark, cradles of the Germanic civilisation), then it makes sense that we should see a correlation between the percentage of I1+R1b and the North-West European component.

In almost every case, we notice an imbalance towards a higher percentage of R1b than actual autosomes (except in Scandinavia and in Romania, where it is matches fairly well).

Ireland has 86% but 68.5% of NWE.
Britain has 81% of R1b+I1 but 66% of NWE.
Germany has 60% of R1b+I1 but 53% of NWE.
France has 70% of R1b+I1 but 52% of NWE.
Spain has 70% of R1b+I1 but 42% of NWE.
Portugal has 58% of R1b+I1 but 40% of NWE.

Why is that so ? I believe it has to do with the quick replacement of native lineages by R1b during the Bronze Age and the genetic predisposition of R1b to father more sons than other haplogroups.

This imbalance is particularly obvious in South Italy and Turkey, where the percentage of R1b is about twice higher than the NWE component. This is simply because a lot of R1b isn't R1b1b2a1, but older Middle Eastern subclades, that are not associated with the the spread of the same people (namely the Proto-Indo-Europeans).

The percentage of mtDNA lineages should balance the difference between autosomal and Y-DNA ratios.

Eastern Europe is the only region where the NWE autosomes exceed R1b+I1, and sometimes to a 3:1 ratio.

Belarus has 13% of R1b+I1 but 28% of NWE
Russia has 11% of R1b+I1 but 32% of NWE
Poland has 23% of R1b+I1 but 35% of NWE
Hungary has 25% of R1b+I1 but 37% of NWE

I believe this is because R1b1b2a1 originated in Eastern Europe, in the Pontic steppes north of the Black Sea, expanded to Central, Northern, Western and Southern Europe, but was ultimately replaced by R1a tribes from northern Russia (the Balto-Slavs) and Central Asia (Scythians, Bulgars, etc.), who killed many of the R1b men left in Eastern Europe, and took their women (the same process as R1b people did when they invaded Europe). This is why the percentage of R1b has diminished in Eastern Europe, but NWE autosomes survived through maternal lineages.


East European

The percentage of East European component matches almost exactly the frequencies for haplogroup R1a. It's truly amazing : 2-3% in Ireland, 5-6% in the Netherlands, 6-7% in Turkey, 12% in Greece, 17% in Germany, 22% in Romania, around 30% in Hungary, around 50% in Poland, Belarus and Russia... Only Scandinavia has a bit more R1a (28% in Norway, 19% in Sweden) than East European autosomes (9.5% and 13%), perhaps due to a founder effect.

The case of Finland

One major exception is Finland, which is a very peculiar case indeed. Finnish people are overwhelmingly European autosomally (93%, against 6% Siberian), and do look Northern European, but their Y-DNA is in great part the Siberian N1c1 (nearly 60%). The best explanation is that these N1c1 lineages were actually for the biggest part autosomally European when they arrived in Finland. As both R1a and R1b are low in Finland (7.5% and 3.5%) but the East European autosomes reach 33% and the North-West European 53%, it means that N1c1 lineages are hiding both East and North-West European autosomes.


It is usually assumed that N1c1 came to Finland from Siberia, but what if it first reach Fennoscandia, then recolonised Finland from northern Sweden, bringing I1, R1a, R1b and Swedish N1c1 in the operation ? The whole group would have been autosomally close to the Swedes, and a founder effect among the ruling class would have spread N1c1 with European autosomes. Sweden itself has only 0.5% of Northeast Asian/Siberian autosomes but 9% of N1c1, mostly concentrated in the north of the country, where an expansion towards Finland would have been most likely. The 6% of Siberian autosomes in Finland would represent the N1c1 that was already in Finland before the recolonisation from northern Sweden.

I agree somewhat but I think "mediterranean" equates to haplogroup I and all it's subclades, pure I. I1 is going to be genetically closer to other I's then R's, so I'm saying even I1 will be included in mediterranean, you can see a slight amount of mediterranean in scandinavian autosomal which could easily be their I1.
what dodecad referred to as "north european" was pure hap R and its subclades, then that was split into "east european" and "west european" which to me are just R1a and R1b
"west asian" is obviously a caucasus (and perhaps they were in mesopotamia/iran before that, explaining it in every middle eastern population) is hap G and all it's subclades. G has very low percentages most places but very high autosomal, I believe these people must have sold large amounts of their women into slavery or were peaceful and as a result conquered many times.
"southwest asian" is obviously middle eastern and I would say it represents Hap J and it's subclades, I am sure "southwest asian" could be further split into northern and southern components (just like they split north european into east and west) which would correlate to J2 and J1. this would not be easy though as all J1 populations seem to be mixed with J2 and vice versa, they did do it with "north european" though so it is possible.
I think the "northwest african", obviously berber equates to certain haplogroups of E but not all subclades of E

why do I lump subclades of other haplogroups together but separate E?
E is older then all the other haplogroups mentioned here, has older mutations and perhaps many more mutations to the point I think some subclades of E should be treated as if they were separate haplogroups altogether
the only thing I can't figure out with my theory of the autosomal is, where are the older non berber hap E's of europe and where is E-v13? is it lumped into mediterranean with hap I or is it just not coming up in the tests? you only detect things you are testing for
maybe the E's were a founder effect and didn't make much of a dent in the gene pool. or lumped into "northwest african"

as far as N1c1 areas of europe, I'd say it was a founder effect. a warlike tribe of N1c1 conquering and taking female slaves of aryan groups from the region and absorbing them. over time (hundreds of years), there is hardly any siberian blood left in them. just look at finns, balts, russians etc they are obviously european. the autosomal is just revealing what your eyes already knew to be true.

what do you guys think of my theory so far?
 
We have some Mongol shamans in South Siberia, they are relatives of the Turks. Turks in comments to video totally recognise it.
And Georgians have nothing in common with Africa, they have a lot in common with Turks, Armenians, Azeris. Their distinctive feature is a big sharp nose. In Russia only minority of Northern Ossetians have a lot in common with Georgians because they live on the Caucasus.
Do not forget that there are many natural obstacles for DNA distribution: Black Sea, Bosporus Strait, hardly penetrable Caucasus Mountains, scorching deserts of Central Asia etc...

Exactly. I tried to explain that to them. But to support their wild claims they came with some obscure contradicting charts.

The thing is that the REAL West Asians (Caucasians and Iranic folks with high I2a & R1a) are very close to East Europeans. They're even much closer to the East Europeans than the West Europeans to the East Europeans. Also there is a linguistically connection between Iranic West Asians and East Europeans. Both groups belong to IE Satem group!

I don't mean Arabs, they're absolutely not West Asian!


Very nice video, btw.
 
May I ask whats wrong with the Africans, that some people here try to stress their genetic distance to them? They are same people like you and me. Besides I´d like to make some considerations concerning the East European anthropological type – a region that concerns me more - and its possible components.
The Corded Ware ( R1a ) expansion in the second half of the 3rd millenium BC reached at least Elbe. Before it, one of the important anthropological components in that part of Europe was the Comb Ceramic culture, associated with finno-ugric population.
In the beginning of the Bronze Age the expansion of the middle- european Urnfield culture from south-west and south gave rise to the Lusatian culture, which assimilated the Corded Ware population living in that area ( roughly speaking from Elbe till Bug ).
To these genetically and archeologically undoubted facts I´d like to add some observations of more obvious nature. There are some common anthropological characteristics of the populations, say, Belarus, Poland and East Germany ( it should be noted that eastern Germany was previously settled by Slavs and their predecessors ) that distinguish them from the formations in North Germany and Balticum - two of the most archaic ones in Europe.
This is most likely due to the expansion of the Urnfields that cut the previous Corded Ware territorial continuity.
[FONT=&quot]In slavic tradition, the legends from early slav chronicles, there are reports that their ancestors came from the Danube lands – this suits well with the Urnfield culture invasion.[/FONT]
 
Nothing wrong with Africans. But some confused fellas involve other races (Caucasian - from the Caucasus - and Iranic - maybe from the Central Asia -) that have absolutely nothing do to with this debate or Africans in general!
 
May I ask whats wrong with the Africans, that some people here try to stress their genetic distance to them?[/FONT]

It is the same racial superiority crap that has been around since colonial times, any open minded person would think that with the supposed high educational standards in Europe that this rubbish would be a thing of the past. Not so, unfortunately some are still clinging to the old delusions.
 

This thread has been viewed 131938 times.

Back
Top