Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: The Arrival of Steppe & Iranian Related Ancestry in Islands of West Mediterranean

  1. #51
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,979
    Points
    258,348
    Level
    100
    Points: 258,348, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 out of 4 members found this post helpful.
    Astonishingly, some people in this "hobby", particularly on other sites, seem to lack a real understanding of how these programs work. Not for the first time, something I have proposed has been completely misused because some people can only think linearly, although some neurotic agendas also, I think, come into play.

    I proposed, somewhere above, that PERHAPS at least some, if not most, of the "Levantine" which people find in Sicilians might not actually be Levantine. Some of it might be North African since North Africans have always had a lot of ANCIENT "Levantine" ancestry.

    This doesn't mean a LOT of actual LEVANTINE people entered, say, Sicily, with the Saracens. All the documentation we have indicates most of the Saracens or Moors or whatever you want to call them, were from North Africa, not the Levant or Arabia. Since the invasion wasn't long after the arrival of Islam, I'm not sure there was even much Arabian ancestry from the tribes which arrived around that time and whose ancestry would indeed be mixed in modern North Africans with that of the "Berbers".

    When people are willy nilly throwing populations into the various programs, especially Levant Neolithic or something like that, the algorithm may find "Levant" in a sample, when it's only there in a very ancient sense.

    It would be like looking at an Italian admixed person and saying there's a lot of Anatolian Neolithic and some Iranian related ancestry and some Beaker. Yeah, ok, but what does that tell you about the historical processes? Isn't that what we're supposed to be studying?

    I want to understand the history of my country. I want to know how much change there was at certain pivotal moments of our history. I'm not trying to make some "racial" or ethnic point about my country or anyone elses. Obviously, some people are engaged in precisely that.

    Plus, all of this is PROVISIONAL. Nothing should be concluded in such dogmatic terms when the North African sample used was from the Neolithic and is half Spanish farmer (with some WHG) and has Anatolian Neolithic from the "Levantine" ancestry too. There's too much overlap. That's why earlier papers saw an EEF signal heading out of the Levant with farmers.

    Just look, for example, what happens when you take a "Punic" (i.e. Levantine of a certain era plus North African of a certain era) and put in 20% more Anatolian Neolithic. You get a Mycenaean. So, if you want to apply the same logic, the Myceaneans would have a very large proportion of Levantine ancestry.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  2. #52
    Banned Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    15-07-18
    Posts
    630
    Points
    2,608
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,608, Level: 14
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 142
    Overall activity: 70.0%


    Country: UK - England



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    When people are willy nilly throwing populations into the various programs, especially Levant Neolithic or something like that, the algorithm may find "Levant" in a sample, when it's only there in a very ancient sense.
    This is highly unlikely, as there will be other more closely-related less-ancient populations that the algorithm will pick up mixed into better fits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Plus, all of this is PROVISIONAL. Nothing should be concluded in such dogmatic terms when the North African sample used was from the Neolithic and is half Spanish farmer (with some WHG) and has Anatolian Neolithic from the "Levantine" ancestry too. There's too much overlap. That's why earlier papers saw an EEF signal heading out of the Levant with farmers.

    Just look, for example, what happens when you take a "Punic" (i.e. Levantine of a certain era plus North African of a certain era) and put in 20% more Anatolian Neolithic. You get a Mycenaean. So, if you want to apply the same logic, the Myceaneans would have a very large proportion of Levantine ancestry.
    If, as you suggested, you take Punic of the relevant era, mixed with North African and with Anatolian Neolithic, it comes out as nothing like Mycaenean. The best fit for Mycaenean is Neolithic Greek, mixed with some Southern Steppe Yamnayan, some CA/EBA Armenian and some CA/EBA Balkan; and I don't see any particular reason to question this best fit as unlikely.

    I agree that such results are always provisional. The data doesn't prove anything - it only provides most likely explanations, given the limited data that we have available.

  3. #53
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,979
    Points
    258,348
    Level
    100
    Points: 258,348, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pip View Post
    This is highly unlikely, as there will be other more closely-related less-ancient populations that the algorithm will pick up mixed into better fits.



    If, as you suggested, you take Punic of the relevant era, mixed with North African and with Anatolian Neolithic, it comes out as nothing like Mycaenean. The best fit for Mycaenean is Neolithic Greek, mixed with some Southern Steppe Yamnayan, some CA/EBA Armenian and some CA/EBA Balkan; and I don't see any particular reason to question this best fit as unlikely.

    I agree that such results are always provisional. The data doesn't prove anything - it only provides most likely explanations, given the limited data that we have available.
    It all depends on which populations are chosen. Among the amateur ones I see being passed around I can tell that most of them are just plain WRONG, mixing populations from different eras etc, and, by the way, the goodness of fit is often not provided. Many of them are also clearly OVERFIT.

    Like I said: linear thinking. The "Punic" individual lands right on top of Mycenaeans in a PCA, which is one measure of genetic relatedness, and one which is often used to draw conclusions about Sicilians. None of these tools can be interpreted in isolation from one another. Each has its pluses or minuses.

    Forget it. Believe what you want. Obviously, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

  4. #54
    Moderator Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,647
    Points
    73,827
    Level
    84
    Points: 73,827, Level: 84
    Level completed: 40%, Points required for next Level: 1,023
    Overall activity: 87.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    4 out of 4 members found this post helpful.


    In this admixture chart on line 550, it shows that the Ibiza_Phoenician sample's autosomal components looks very close to that of the Mycenaean. Let us see how things pan out in the final peer-reviewed version of the paper.

    Here's another aspect of the paper I found to be intriguing:



    The Reich paper states that it is plausible that the Caucasus-related ancestry reported in Ravenae et al is likely to have been there since the early or middle Bronze-Age. Thus it stands to reason that this makes Southern Italian mainlanders; especially SItaly3 (see figure G, below) are indeed different from Sicilians. But who knows how Reich would model them. This is just my observations and speculation. At any rate, here are examples of the difference, below. If the plausibility is indeed correct, than the mainland south owes a lot of it's ancestry to the early to middle bronze age. While Sicily took a different route to get where it is today (Perhaps with Messina being an exception).



    Furthermore, I noticed that Anatolian_BA is also very similar to the Minoan and Mycenaean samples; More than it is to Levant_BA, as observed in the ADMIXTURE analysis below. One of the samples even overlaps with SItaly1




  5. #55
    Moderator Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger First Class1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    Jovialis's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-05-17
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,647
    Points
    73,827
    Level
    84
    Points: 73,827, Level: 84
    Level completed: 40%, Points required for next Level: 1,023
    Overall activity: 87.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a1a2b1 (R-F1794)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H6a1b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: United States



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post


    In this admixture chart on line 550, it shows that the Ibiza_Phoenician sample's autosomal components looks very close to that of the Mycenaean. Let us see how things pan out in the final peer-reviewed version of the paper.

    Here's another aspect of the paper I found to be intriguing:



    The Reich paper states that it is plausible that the Caucasus-related ancestry reported in Ravenae et al is likely to have been there since the early or middle Bronze-Age. Thus it stands to reason that this makes Southern Italian mainlanders; especially SItaly3 (see figure G, below) are indeed different from Sicilians. But who knows how Reich would model them. This is just my observations and speculation. At any rate, here are examples of the difference, below. If the plausibility is indeed correct, than the mainland south owes a lot of it's ancestry to the early to middle bronze age. While Sicily took a different route to get where it is today (Perhaps with Messina being an exception).



    Furthermore, I noticed that Anatolian_BA is also very similar to the Minoan and Mycenaean samples; More than it is to Levant_BA, as observed in the ADMIXTURE analysis below. One of the samples even overlaps with SItaly1



    I noticed that SItaly3 gets a small amount of SBA, but a relatively large amount of WHG. Now these results seem to make more sense to me:
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post


    My results are in:

    Ancient Farmers: 77.0%
    • Western European Farmers: 31.1%
    • Levant: 2.4%
    • Neolithic-Chalcolithic Iran-CHG: 6.3%
    • Eastern European Farmers: 37.1%


    Steppe Cultures: 16.8%
    • Karasuk-E Scythian 8.7%
    • Andronovo-Srubanaya: 8.1%


    Western European & Scandinavian Hunter Gatherers: 6.2%

  6. #56
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,374
    Points
    5,955
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,955, Level: 22
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 95
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by Jovialis View Post
    I noticed that SItaly3 gets a small amount of SBA, but a relatively large amount of WHG. Now these results seem to make more sense to me:
    Ancestry a part, i still dont really understand the concept of Baltic and Ukraine Neolithic without admixture, what were their cultural characteristics for being considered Neolithic groups but Pottery?

    And what does Eastern European Farmers means in terms of ancestral component, only EHG? and Steppe Cultures is EHG+CHG?

  7. #57
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,979
    Points
    258,348
    Level
    100
    Points: 258,348, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    Ancestry a part, i still dont really understand the concept of Baltic and Ukraine Neolithic without admixture, what were their cultural characteristics for being considered Neolithic groups but Pottery?

    And what does Eastern European Farmers means in terms of ancestral component, only EHG? and Steppe Cultures is EHG+CHG?
    Eastern European farmers are EEF. There's no EHG involved. WHG if anything.

  8. #58
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,374
    Points
    5,955
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,955, Level: 22
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 95
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Eastern European farmers are EEF. There's no EHG involved. WHG if anything.
    What's the difference between WEEF and EEEF in his results then?

  9. #59
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,979
    Points
    258,348
    Level
    100
    Points: 258,348, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    What's the difference between WEEF and EEEF in his results then?
    Probably a lot of drift, but also the minor admixture might have been different as well as at different percentages. We now know, for example, that there was bit more El Miron in the Iberian farmers, most KO1 in the eastern ones.

  10. #60
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class1000 Experience Points1 year registeredThree Friends
    Dema's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-10-17
    Posts
    361
    Points
    3,025
    Level
    15
    Points: 3,025, Level: 15
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 25
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2-M205*

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Bump, do we know all Y haplogroups of males, there is four J haplogroups, one is confirmed J2b-L283, another one says J2a, what about other two? Also three males have mtDNA inserted instead of Ydna.

    Does anyone knows more about this?


    M G2a2b2b1a1
    M G2a2b2b1a1
    U n/a (sex undetermined)
    U n/a (sex undetermined)
    F n/a (female)
    M H
    M U5a2b3
    M U5a2a1
    M U5a2a1
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    M C1a2
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    M J
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    M J
    M J2a1
    U n/a (sex undetermined)
    M J
    U n/a (sex undetermined)
    F n/a (female)
    U n/a (sex undetermined)
    M R1b1a1a2a1a2a1
    M R1b1a1a2a1a2 (xR1b1a1a2a1a2c)
    M R1b1a1a2a1a2a1
    M R1b1a1a2a1a2 (xR1b1a1a2a1a2c)
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    M R1b1a1a2a1a2 (xR1b1a1a2a1a2c)
    F n/a (female)
    M G2a2b2a1a1c1a
    M G2a2b2a1a1c1a2
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    F n/a (female)
    M G2a2b2a1a1c1a

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •