K12a admixture calculator

Interesting :)

Yes, the Caucasus component seems to be exaggerated even in my case :) I've never got such a high percentage before and my Mediterranean is practically gone...
After doing some observations, I think this Caucasus now incorporates an apreciable amount of the previous Mediterranean admixture in the v3 run. That would explain why you get almost no Mediterranean now (increasing your Caucasus), and why I get more than 6% Caucasus being 0% West Asian before.

The Sardinian average is quite ilustrative considering their high Caucasus. A well known population for the huge Mediterranean/Southern Euro percents. I personally see the fit clearly.

Look at the map of component, one can see that mediterranean is the most European component, while Northern-European in reality is more like a Northaest Euro or Balto-Slavic (peaks in Lithuanians-Finns)
This is probably right as attested by the Fst distances, and also would explain with the previous comment how Southern Europeans look, generally, much less European than their Northern neighbours in the spreadsheet.
 
As usual some people make false statements by taking some component names too literally. Before crying around some people should read Dienekes statements and I myself made a comment about it on Dodecad blog.

Here the comment to read
if you look at "fst" you will see that Gedrosia and Caucasus/North European are very similar (probably the same ancestor) I believe that "Gedrosia" represents a Caucasian Gene flow into South-Central Asia. I would generally not take "components" too "literally". The names tell you were this component reaches its highest but this doesnt mean that they actually "developed" there. Take Ukrainians_Y as example, on dodecad v3 they had more of the "West European" component than "East European".

And here is what Dienekes writes about it.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/12/womb-of-nations-how-west-eurasians-came.html

The components are as always named after the Region where it is found at its highest but
doesnt mean it actually originated there. BMAC is probably a much better place of origin.

What I think and am sure about. Gedrosia is an Aryan(Iranian) component, composed of North European (25%)-West Asian(60%) and the ANI (15%). Gedrosia in Northwest and Central Europe can quite well be explained with Alanic or similar influence imo.

And the "Mediterranean" of K12a is not the same as "Mediterranean" of v3.

K12a "Mediterranean is actually South(west) European.
 
Obviously it is not the same, and also the North European I'm sure it is less North European than ever. And no, it can't be only Southwest European, just go and check the British-Irish averages and you'll probably see this one is a strange mix of Western allele frequencies. What it comes out very clear is that it focusses strongly in Europe, a bit more in Southern Europe (¡and not always!) nothing else.

It's not crying, just noticing several things make little coherence in comparison with numerous previous runs, which of course worth to mention as clear fact. Somebody noted above for example that it's not normal that in Northern Europe we find often more Gedrosia than Caucasus, also in Iberia where de West Asian/Caucasus was very low now it is substantially increased, Sardinians who only showed a maximum of 2% in the same admixture (Eurasia7) now show 15%...etc. These are not false statements, I can assure you, is what the results reflect and the discrepancy is enough huge to say it. No need to say, we shouldn't be interpreting the components, they should come as much clear as possible to avoid problems like this. At least, that's what I think.

However, I appreciate your point of view, several things you said make sense.
 
As usual some people make false statements by taking some component names too literally. Before crying around some people should read Dienekes statements and I myself made a comment about it on Dodecad blog.

Here the comment to read


And here is what Dienekes writes about it.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/12/womb-of-nations-how-west-eurasians-came.html

The components are as always named after the Region where it is found at its highest but
doesnt mean it actually originated there. BMAC is probably a much better place of origin.

What I think and am sure about. Gedrosia is an Aryan(Iranian) component, composed of North European (25%)-West Asian(60%) and the ANI (15%). Gedrosia in Northwest and Central Europe can quite well be explained with Alanic or similar influence imo.

And the "Mediterranean" of K12a is not the same as "Mediterranean" of v3.

K12a "Mediterranean is actually South(west) European.
About the mediterranean component, this is what I said already, it's not really mediterranean, it's southwestern euro, it is actually higher in Germanic people than in Greeks or Sicilians, so the mediterranean label is completely wrong.
 
It's not only Southwest, just a general European cluster with substantial Western affinities. The figure for Sardinians it's too high to be only Southwest, and what the British, Irish, and some Central European get, does not make sense if it's pure Southwestern. The Euro7 Calculator show Sardinians are far from being the most Southwestern, so specially their percent does not match the estimation.
 
It's not only Southwest, just a general European cluster with substantial Western affinities. The figure for Sardinians it's too high to be only Southwest, and what the British, Irish, and some Central European get, does not make sense if it's pure Southwestern. The Euro7 Calculator show Sardinians are far from being the most Southwestern, so specially their percent does not match the estimation.
Interestingly Sardinians are the farthest population for me, according to K12a calculator.
 
Yes that's what it seems. To be sure, it's very easy: just do the Dodecad Oracle with their average and see what they get in the top 10. Possibly the second population will appear unusually far, and none of the other ethnic groups could recieve such report.
 
Here is:

DodecadOracle("Sardinian")
[,1] [,2]
[1,] "Sardinian" "0"
[2,] "French_Basque" "28.1787"
[3,] "IBS" "34.1048"
[4,] "Spanish_D" "34.5345"
[5,] "Spaniards" "34.5571"
[6,] "Portuguese_D" "38.0122"
[7,] "North_Italian" "38.161"
[8,] "TSI25" "41.2697"
[9,] "N_Italian_D" "42.2777"
[10,] "Tuscan" "42.5162"

- 28 the second and 34 the third is a very huge distance as expected.
 
Here is:

DodecadOracle("Sardinian")
[,1] [,2]
[1,] "Sardinian" "0"
[2,] "French_Basque" "28.1787"
[3,] "IBS" "34.1048"
[4,] "Spanish_D" "34.5345"
[5,] "Spaniards" "34.5571"
[6,] "Portuguese_D" "38.0122"
[7,] "North_Italian" "38.161"
[8,] "TSI25" "41.2697"
[9,] "N_Italian_D" "42.2777"
[10,] "Tuscan" "42.5162"

- 28 the second and 34 the third is a very huge distance as expected.

Compare it with the original DodecadOraclev1 version.

DodecadOracle("Sardinian")
[,1] [,2]
[1,] "Sardinian" "0"
[2,] "North_Italian" "11.4617"
[3,] "IBS" "13.0847"
[4,] "Spanish_D" "13.7445"
[5,] "Spaniards" "15.2315"
[6,] "N_Italian_D" "15.8146"
[7,] "Portuguese_D" "16.0297"
[8,] "Tuscan" "16.3536"
[9,] "O_Italian_D" "20.2754"
[10,] "C_Italian_D" "22.7405"

The Sardinian component seems to have undergone a substantial shift from it being closer to North Italian in the standard version to French Basque being the closest pop (not close though @ 28) in the current OracleK12a version.
 
Correct Dorian, for this reason I don't think this Mediterranean means Southwestern or even plain Southern, it's too general: unusually high in several Northern areas and it's also the main component in both Sardinians and Basques. Dienekes' seems to be happy with this run for what I read, but several things look very strange.

I really wonder what kind of changes will be made on the Dodecad v4 if it's based on the same.
 
Correct Dorian, for this reason I don't think this Mediterranean means Southwestern or even plain Southern, it's too general: unusually high in several Northern areas and it's also the main component in both Sardinians and Basques. Dienekes' seems to be happy with this run for what I read, but several things look very strange.I really wonder what kind of changes will be made on the Dodecad v4 if it's based on the same.
Actually considering this Mediterranean component of K12a South European is very correct. There is not much more of the Mediterranean element in North Europe as there is North European component among South Europeans. So why assume that North Europeans should have less South European influence as South Europeans had North European influence? Didnt South Europe had more influence on North Europe than other way around? In my opinion K12a makes more sense than v3. Here I made a Near Eastern map were I placed some popuulations based on their admixture.Note that the Kurds_Y and Kurd_D samples are almost all from Northeast Iraq and (North)west Iran.
 
It's still too high in Northern Europe, just check what Scandinavians get: Sweden (33.5%), Norway (36%)...and too bad there are no Danish averages. Without considering English, Germans, Dutch and so on, who get very high figures.

Of course there's Southern European influence in Northern Europe, but not that high (specially in the Northernmost). If we don't assume it's just a general European cluster it doesn't fit, because for the same reason we could see more Northern European influence in Southern Europe, but it's not the same high. And curiously, in largely Mongoloid populations (Selkup, Ket), the Northern European appears higher than in Southern European countries reporting 25% or more, which in my opinion makes no sense. Southern Europeans should get more almost all times and it's rather the opposite, so I personally can't agree with your analysis.
 
Actually there is more "mediterranean" in Scandinavia than in Greece or Italy, so no, it's clearly not mediterranean. The label is wrong. It's more like a Southwestern component, since it peak in Basques/Sardinians, and is very high in germanics.
 
It's still too high in Northern Europe, just check what Scandinavians get: Sweden (33.5%), Norway (36%)...and too bad there are no Danish averages. Without considering English, Germans, Dutch and so on, who get very high figures.

Of course there's Southern European influence in Northern Europe, but not that high (specially in the Northernmost). If we don't assume it's just a general European cluster it doesn't fit, because for the same reason we could see more Northern European influence in Southern Europe, but it's not the same high. And curiously, in largely Mongoloid populations (Selkup, Ket), the Northern European appears higher than in Southern European countries reporting 25% or more, which in my opinion makes no sense. Southern Europeans should get more almost all times and it's rather the opposite, so I personally can't agree with your analysis.


The same could be said about the North European component. You got 34% Mediterraean in Germans vs 25% North European in Spaniards. You got 36% Mediterranean in Norwegians vs 34% North European in Bulgarians. There is hardly a difference. If we consider Mediterranean(South European) as generel European we would have to consider North European as the same too. Historical it even would make more sense when North Europeans have more South European Genes as the other way around. Just think about Roman or the Neolthic expansion. Or the general Caucasoid expansion from a Southern Region. So it would generally make more sense if North Europeans have a chunk more southern Genes as the other way around.
 
Actually there is more "mediterranean" in Scandinavia than in Greece or Italy, so no, it's clearly not mediterranean. The label is wrong. It's more like a Southwestern component, since it peak in Basques/Sardinians, and is very high in germanics.
Its tendency is more towards Southwest Europe I agree but calling it South European would even come clother to reality than "general" European. The best name for this element is Southwest European imo.
 
This is beginning to resemble an earlier discussion elsewhere (Dna forums? Can't quite remember) as to the appropriateness of "Western" versus "Eastern" European, who had more or less etc.. (with Poles dissatisfied at Ukrainian high scores). Perhaps Dienekes should change his nomenclature entirely and call his categories "A", "B" "C" etc.. or some other combinations (like "aa" "bb" so as not to confuse with haplogroups). Because it's really a question of genetic material, not of geography, politics, or ethnicity. A more neutral set of categories would be less conducive to (perhaps) needless debates.
 
Last edited:
This is beginning to resemble an earlier discussion elsewhere (Dna forums? Can't quite remember) as to the appropriateness of "Western" versus "Eastern" European, who had more or less etc.. (with Poles dissatisfied at Ukrainian high scores). Perhaps Dienekes should change his nomenclature entirely and call his categories "A", "B" "C" etc.. or some other combinations (like "aa" "bb" so as not to confuse with haplogroups). Because it's really a question of genetic material, not of geography, politics, or ethnicity. A more neutral set of categories would be less conducive to (perhaps) needless debates.

:LOL: I agree fully. Some people take the terms of components too literally and some use these terms, to bash other.
 
At some level of resolution I personally prefer clear definitions for the components to avoid confusions. I think that's the logic way to proceed.

And no, the present North European is not general since it's much more focussed in Northern Europe than the Mediterranean is in Southern Europe (as I said, it's just focussed in Europe as whole), but it's also obvious there is an Asian overlap as atested by some of the mentioned results. That's the main reason why the Caucasus + Gedrosian is that low among Northern Europeans in comparison with Southern Europeans.

Basically, you can't expect populations that are open to Asia being less Asian than other's who aren't. As I said, finding more Sothwest Asian and Northwest African in the Southwest side makes more sense than finding more Gedrosia + Caucasus. I think it's easy to understand, so the problem is not taking the components too literally, the problem is they should come clear as day at this level...and they don't. That's all.
 
North European
Greek_D 18%
O_Italian_D 20%
Portuguese 25%
Spaniards 25%
Romanians 33%
Bulgarian 35%


Mediterranean (South European)
Polish_D 24%
Belorussians 18%
Finnish_D 15%
German_D 35%
British_Isles 40%

Are you really sure that their is any reason why we should assume that Mediterranean/South European is more general than North European? K12a in compare to v3 shows South Europeans as what they are, namely Mediterraneans with strong North European input while on v3 some South European populations appeared like a cross between Mediterraneans and North Europeans.
 
North European
Greek_D 18%
O_Italian_D 20%
Portuguese 25%
Spaniards 25%
Romanians 33%
Bulgarian 35%


Mediterranean (South European)
Polish_D 24%
Belorussians 18%
Finnish_D 15%
German_D 35%
British_Isles 40%

Are you really sure that their is any reason why we should assume that Mediterranean/South European is more general than North European? K12a in compare to v3 shows South Europeans as what they are, namely Mediterraneans with strong North European input while on v3 some South European populations appeared like a cross between Mediterraneans and North Europeans.
Your comparison is not true for the reasons that the Northern component (which in reality is Balto-Finnic) is not higher in any Southern country than a northern country, while the reverse is true, there are Northern countries with higher Med than mediterranean countries, for example Scandianvia has more med than Greece, Italy or Cyprus. Simply, the genetics of Southern Europe are too diverse and complex, to just call it "mediterranean". Iberia or Sardinia are not your typical southern countries. What is high in Basques has nothing to do with Greece or Italy
 

This thread has been viewed 44254 times.

Back
Top