Genetically, what does the Balkans mean? (for MyHeritage)

G

gidai

Banned
Messages
376
Reaction score
48
Points
0
Balcanik ethnicity is common in the following countries, according to MyHeritage DNA users' data: https://www.myheritage.ro/ethnicities/balkan/ethnicity-worldwide-distribution

Serbia
95.9%
Croaţia
89.4%
Slovenia
87.1%
România
86.1%
Bulgaria
81.3%
Slovacia
78.6%
Ungaria
74.1%
Republica Cehă
67.2%
Ucraina
65.9%
Belarus
56.6%
Austria
54.8%
Polonia
47.6%
Rusia
43.4%
Kazahstan
41.1%
Germania
30.6%
Lituania
30.2%
Grecia
29.2%
Letonia
23.7%
Elveţia
21.6%
Turcia
20%
Estonia
19.8%
Luxemburg
18.5%
Italia
13.1%
Canada
12.6%
Panama
12.5%
Thailanda
11.4%
Brazilia
11.1%
Cipru
10.7%
Franţa
10.6%
Statele Unite ale Americii
10.4%
Belgia
9.9%
Chile
8.6%
Malta
8.2%
Islanda
7.9%
Argentina
7.8%
Australia
7.6%
Emiratele Arabe Unite
7.6%
Japonia
7.1%
Suedia
6.7%
Portugalia
6.5%
Africa de Sud
6.3%
Spania
5.9%
Singapore
5.4%
Danemarca
5.4%
Marea Britanie
5.3%
Olanda
5.1%
Israel
5.1%
Irlanda
4.6%
Peru
4.3%
Mexic
4.1%
Noua Zeelandă
4%
Norvegia
3.9%
Columbia
3.5%
Hong Kong
3.2%
Puerto Rico
2.9%
Costa Rica
2.9%
Bahrain
2.6%
Finlanda
2.5%
China
2.5%
Arabia Saudită
2.4%
Bermuda
2.4%
Malaysia
2.1%
Filipine
1.4%
India
0.7%

I see that the MyHeritage's Balkan "ethnicity" is very widespread, although the Balkan populations are not known as invaders or conquerors of other far remote ethnicities, as the former colonial powers of Western Europe. It is strange that the frequency of Balkan genes in countries such as Thailand or Japan is similar to or exceeds that from countries closer to Balkans like: Denmark, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Israel, France, Belgium, Cyprus ... Italy barely exceeds Thailand. That's weird. Between the Balkans and the eastern boundaries of Asia there are great geographical and populational barriers.
 
It is ancient possible associated with that haplogroup. Not the haplogroup itself. Like saying Atlantic and R1b for example.

Their were 2 kinds of Farmers in Europe, the Anatolian and the other kind, I think EEF or Balkan farmers? Could the Golden Horde have picked up mixture in Europe and actually back migrated some of it to East Asia?
 
It's a non-sensical cluster. A Western Balkanic cluster should have Albanians come out on top. A secondary Aegean cluster defined by higher Neolithic ancestry should be modal in Crete or thereabouts. Finally there's an Eastern Balkanic cluster with inflated ancestry from Iran.

Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian populations came about through mass migration and subsequent intermingling in the early Middle Ages. If the clusters do not reflect this the methodology is bad.
 
gidai said:
I see that the MyHeritage's Balkan "ethnicity" is very widespread, although the Balkan populations are not known as invaders or conquerors of other far remote ethnicities, as the former colonial powers of Western Europe. It is strange that the frequency of Balkan genes in countries such as Thailand or Japan is similar to or exceeds that from countries closer to Balkans like: Denmark, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Israel, France, Belgium, Cyprus ... Italy barely exceeds Thailand. That's weird. Between the Balkans and the eastern boundaries of Asia there are great geographical and populational barriers.
Click to expand...

It's meant to be interpreted as a North Balkan component, as opposed to the South Balkan Greek one.
 
markod said:
It's a non-sensical cluster. A Western Balkanic cluster should have Albanians come out on top. A secondary Aegean cluster defined by higher Neolithic ancestry should be modal in Crete or thereabouts. Finally there's an Eastern Balkanic cluster with inflated ancestry from Iran.
Click to expand...

Iran Neolithic/CHG ancestry peaks in Albanians and Greeks on the mainland. For Greeks and Bulgarians, the extra is probably typical of the region, considering that the Pennopolese Neolithic and Krepost Neolithic samples already had Iran Neolithic/CHG ancestry compared to other Balkan samples.

For Albanians though, I think that goes to show that they are more shifted to the Southwest geographically than they were in the past, when they likely lived around the lower Carpathians.

You are welcome to create a model and test yourself.

sJrA6SK.png
 
JajarBingan said:
Iran Neolithic/CHG ancestry peaks in Albanians and Greeks on the mainland. For Greeks and Bulgarians, the extra is probably typical of the region, considering that the Pennopolese Neolithic and Krepost Neolithic samples already had Iran Neolithic/CHG ancestry compared to other Balkan samples.

For Albanians though, I think that goes to show that they are more shifted to the Southwest geographically than they were in the past, when they likely lived around the lower Carpathians.

You are welcome to create a model and test yourself.

sJrA6SK.png
Click to expand...

Thats because the Eastern Balkans has significant Slavic ancestry. Mainland Greece seems to be the locus of the Aegean cluster though.

By the way, do you have a source? There's something very wrong with those results.
 
Whoever understands anything at all of MyHeritage percentages will have to explain them to me.

Their beakdown of "main ethnic origins" for France displays only 7.2% Sardinian (when Sardinians must be very close to the main genetic substratum the French ethnicity was built on), and 4.2%, guess what: Nigerian!

Even supposing their figures give not origins proper, but a ratio of genetic proximity, I doubt the long-diluted migration of R-V88 to west central Africa could explain 4.2% level of shared dna.
 
markod said:
Thats because the Eastern Balkans has significant Slavic ancestry. Mainland Greece seems to be the locus of the Aegean cluster though.

By the way, do you have a source? There's something very wrong with those results.
Click to expand...

Slavic ancestry doesn't come with additional Iran_N/CHG. If anything it will decrease it. There is a higher rate across Greece and Eastern Balkans because people there consistently received more of such ancestry since the Neolithic and all the way into the Iron Age.

The source is my own model with Global 25, but you can replicate it for yourself or experiment with something different here.
 
hrvclv said:
Whoever understands anything at all of MyHeritage percentages will have to explain them to me.

Their beakdown of "main ethnic origins" for France displays only 7.2% Sardinian (when Sardinians must be very close to the main genetic substratum the French ethnicity was built on), and 4.2%, guess what: Nigerian!

Even supposing their figures give not origins proper, but a ratio of genetic proximity, I doubt the long-diluted migration of R-V88 to west central Africa could explain 4.2% level of shared dna.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean that a French will receive 7.2% Sardinian or 4.2% Nigerian.
Rather, it signifies that within those people who tested and who come from France, 7.2% and 4.2% scored some kind of Sardinian and Nigerian ancestry. Those could range anywhere from 0.1% to 100%.
 
JajarBingan said:
That doesn't mean that a French will receive 7.2% Sardinian or 4.2% Nigerian.
Rather, it signifies that within those people who tested and who come from France, 7.2% and 4.2% scored some kind of Sardinian and Nigerian ancestry. Those could range anywhere from 0.1% to 100%.
Click to expand...

OK... get it. Thanks for bothering to explain.
 
JajarBingan said:
Slavic ancestry doesn't come with additional Iran_N/CHG. If anything it will decrease it. There is a higher rate across Greece and Eastern Balkans because people there consistently received more of such ancestry since the Neolithic and all the way into the Iron Age.

The source is my own model with Global 25, but you can replicate it for yourself or experiment with something different here.
Click to expand...
I came to the similar conclusion checking HarappaWorld numbers of ancient samples. I think the movement of Iranian/Caucasian admixture started in Early Bronze Age and probably lasted till Early Iron Age. Shows strongest effect in Greece but it goes through all the Mediterranean to Spain. I could even see some effect in Central Europe.
 
LeBrok said:
I came to the similar conclusion checking HarappaWorld numbers of ancient samples. I think the movement of Iranian/Caucasian admixture started in Early Bronze Age and probably lasted till Early Iron Age. Shows strongest effect in Greece but it goes through all the Mediterranean to Spain. I could even see some effect in Central Europe.
Click to expand...

Check my other thread in this subforum. This is especially nice to visualise on a map.
 
JajarBingan said:
Slavic ancestry doesn't come with additional Iran_N/CHG. If anything it will decrease it. There is a higher rate across Greece and Eastern Balkans because people there consistently received more of such ancestry since the Neolithic and all the way into the Iron Age.

The source is my own model with Global 25, but you can replicate it for yourself or experiment with something different here.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's my point. Sorry for not making it clear. I was attempting to infer pre-Slavic Paleo-Balkanic clusters.

Some of the Iron Age nomads in Moldova had so much CHG ancestry they fell completely outside modern European variation. They looked like, say, a mix of Croats and Georgians in the PCA.
 
markod said:
Yes, that's my point. Sorry for not making it clear. I was attempting to infer pre-Slavic Paleo-Balkanic clusters.

Some of the Iron Age nomads in Moldova had so much CHG ancestry they fell completely outside modern European variation. They looked like, say, a mix of Croats and Georgians in the PCA.
Click to expand...

Some of those weren't native, but scy192, 197, 300 and 305 are supposedly local Getae.
 
Thanks for the interesting discussion.
It remains a problem. The genetic Balkan signature considered by MyHeritage also has a significant spread in Thailand and Japan (if not just MyHeritage errors).
I understand that the South-East Asian branch of mankind has separated away from the European one, about 40,000 years ago or so. On the other hand, this genetic signature is that of the present population, which may differ from 1000 years ago or more. How did it spread in quite large populations like those in Japan and Thailand at significant frequencies today ? (The one in Thailand rivaling that in Italy... seems illogical.)
In the absence of any evidence that it was transported there somehow from the Balkans, I wonder if there are (new) mutations in Japan and Thailand that coincide with those that now make up the Balkan genetic signature?
 
gidai said:
Thanks for the interesting discussion.
It remains a problem. The genetic Balkan signature considered by MyHeritage also has a significant spread in Thailand and Japan (if not just MyHeritage errors).
I understand that the South-East Asian branch of mankind has separated away from the European one, about 40,000 years ago or so. On the other hand, this genetic signature is that of the present population, which may differ from 1000 years ago or more. How did it spread in quite large populations like those in Japan and Thailand at significant frequencies today ? (The one in Thailand rivaling that in Italy... seems illogical.)
In the absence of any evidence that it was transported there somehow from the Balkans, I wonder if there are (new) mutations in Japan and Thailand that coincide with those that now make up the Balkan genetic signature?
Click to expand...

You shouldn't read too much into this. They are showing that 11% of Thai and 4% of Japanese users get some Balkan (could be any percentage, but it's likely less than 1%). This tells me that their East Asian components are calibrated poorly.
 
JajarBingan said:
They are showing that 11% of Thai and 4% of Japanese users get some Balkan (could be any percentage, but it's likely less than 1%).
Click to expand...

Of course I understand. I have referred to the population, not every individual.
I say "it spread in quite large populations like those in Japan and Thailand at significant frequencies".

If you look at the list, there are 16 (14 European + 2 Middle East) countries that are under Thailand (11.4%), and 11 that are under Japan (7.1%)! Italy (13.1%), being on the Balkans border, exceeds only with 1.7% the frequency in Thailand population!
Indeed can be great errors in these data, but where do the errors come from?
 
gidai said:
Of course I understand.
I say "it spread in quite large populations like those in Japan and Thailand at significant frequencies".
If you look at the list, there are 16 (14 European + 2 Middle East) countries that are under Thailand (11.4%), and 11 that are under Japan (7.1%)! Italy (13.1%), being on the Balkans border, exceeds only with 1.7% the frequency in Thailand population!
Indeed can be great errors in these data, but where do the errors come from?
Click to expand...

They come from poorly calibrated components.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 11272 times.

Back
Top