Results through K15

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. :)
 
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.

nMontes3Oracle.jpeg


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.


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.
 
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
 
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...-Mediterranean&p=637864&viewfull=1#post637864

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

This thread has been viewed 15928 times.

Back
Top