Mytrueancestry.com

Gedrosia K3 has some East/West Europe samples switched or reversed.

... the results we posted show that.

The Legacy of Atlantis :)

It is still Western Europe but perhaps it is like a meridian where a certain fusion between Western Europe and Eastern Europe can already be felt.

When they show me a document from the Roman Empire of the Middle Ages e.t.c. in which Northern Europe and Southern Europe are discussed, then I will mention them, in the meantime it will continue to be Western Europe and Eastern Europe in the same way that my ancestors did.

It would be interesting to see the K3 of someone from Eastern Europe but who was close to the border with Western Europe.
 
Bedouins are a beautiful people and proud of their origins. It is a pity that, in my case, the result of Bedouin ancestry pointed by GEDmatch Gedrosia K3 has to be seen with a grain of salt.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin
 
I'm your neighbor. :)
Using 1 population approximation:
1 French_South @ 0.000000
2 Bergamo @ 0.501055
3 English @ 0.749153
4 French @ 1.084623
5 Albanian @ 1.218233
6 LBK_EN @ 1.276386
7 Greek @ 1.287931
8 Sardinian @ 1.291654
9 Croatian @ 1.932827
10 Spanish @ 2.004524
11 Czech @ 2.034308
12 Stuttgart @ 2.045782
13 Norwegian @ 2.371137
14 Bulgarian @ 2.793209
15 Hungarian @ 3.257035
16 Lithuanian @ 3.402356
17 Sicilian @ 3.799302
18 Georgian @ 3.836918
19 Cypriot @ 3.845514
20 Ukrainian @ 4.203940


One thing of note, I think. This PUNT K12 seems to give much higher levels of steppe for Southern Europeans than do the academic studies. I think steppe here may include what in other analyses might be Iran Neo.

I agree, neighbour ;)
 
As expected, mine is even stranger ...:)



Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 W_Eurasian 81.64
2 E_Eurasian 13.87
3 SSA 4.48


Finished reading population data. 129 populations found.
3 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Makrani @ 3.845373
2 Brahui @ 5.616451
3 Balochi @ 6.043459
4 Turkish @ 6.472414
5 Iranian @ 6.713186
6 Balkar @ 7.069849
7 Tajik_Pomiri @ 7.360632
8 Russian @ 8.797531
9 Finnish @ 9.190976
10 Mordovian @ 9.387078
11 Kurd_C @ 10.008834
12 Adygei @ 10.765131
13 Kalash @ 11.384012
14 Pashtun_Afghan @ 12.396035
15 Chechen @ 12.421478
16 Syrian @ 12.939278
17 Kurd_N @ 13.023369
18 Jordanian @ 13.613901
19 Pathan @ 13.629040
20 Lebanese @ 14.013447

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Lebanese +50% Pathan @ 0.000000
2 50% Lebanese +50% Tajik @ 0.430700
3 50% Iraqi_Jew +50% Kurd_SE @ 0.618767
4 50% Pashtun_Afghan +50% Syrian @ 0.668052
5 50% Kalash +50% Syrian @ 0.751131
6 50% Saudi +50% Tajik @ 0.758178
7 50% Lebanese +50% Pashtun_Afghan @ 0.888850
8 50% Pathan +50% Syrian @ 0.954499
9 50% Ashkenazi_Jew +50% Kurd_SE @ 1.092636
10 50% Tajik +50% Yemenite_Jew @ 1.092764
11 50% Jordanian +50% Kalash @ 1.278205
12 50% Pathan +50% Saudi @ 1.286666
13 50% Assyrian +50% Kurd_SE @ 1.324127
14 50% Makrani +50% Turkish @ 1.356296
15 50% Cypriot +50% Kurd_SE @ 1.395195
16 50% Kurd_SE +50% Sicilian @ 1.412685
17 50% Syrian +50% Tajik @ 1.427017
18 50% Iranian_Jew +50% Kurd_SE @ 1.431610
19 50% Palestinian +50% Tajik @ 1.500215
20 50% Iranian +50% Makrani @ 1.503110


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Abkhasian +25% BedouinA +25% UP_Kol @ 0.000000
 
DISTANCES:

I see people posting 5, 10 or below GD,

... at MTA, R1548 (165 AD) @ 9.741 is my Top and only sample below 10. (LivingDNA r-data in this case, I get also SZ40 below 10 in some other too, more or less)

just sayin’

1. Hellenic Roman Monterotondo (165 AD) ..... 9.741 - R1548

2. Hellenic Roman (590 AD) ..... 10.1 - SZ40


—————

1. Hellenic Roman Monterotondo (165 AD) ..... 10.07 - R1548

2. Tuscan Medieval Cancelleria Basilica (1350 AD) ..... 10.91 - R1290

3. Hellenic Roman (590 AD) ..... 11.03 - SZ40

4. Hellenic Roman Marcellino (400 AD) ..... 11.29 - R136

5. Imperial Rome Empire Via Paisiello (100 AD) ..... 11.58 - R114

6. Central Roman (590 AD) ..... 11.7 - SZ36





 
DISTANCES:

I see people posting 10 or below GD,

... at MTA, R1548 (165 AD) @ 9.741 is my Top and only sample below 10. (LivingDNA r-data in this case, I get also SZ40 below 10 in some other too, more or less)

just sayin’

1. Hellenic Roman Monterotondo (165 AD) ..... 9.741 - R1548

2. Hellenic Roman (590 AD) ..... 10.1 - SZ40


—————

1. Hellenic Roman Monterotondo (165 AD) ..... 10.07 - R1548

2. Tuscan Medieval Cancelleria Basilica (1350 AD) ..... 10.91 - R1290

3. Hellenic Roman (590 AD) ..... 11.03 - SZ40

4. Hellenic Roman Marcellino (400 AD) ..... 11.29 - R136

5. Imperial Rome Empire Via Paisiello (100 AD) ..... 11.58 - R114

6. Central Roman (590 AD) ..... 11.7 - SZ36

They haven't found your ideal corpse yet
 
They haven't found your ideal corpse yet

Maybe it’s because they’re using a EU K15 type of calculator, and I get big distances with that one (many other Italians too).
 
my Rs Sample results on Various Calculators (coordinates by Jovialis) :)

iX1IVgh.gif
 
my Rs Sample results on Various Calculators (coordinates by Jovialis) :)

iX1IVgh.gif

The dodecad calculators seem more consistent with the others and accurate, than Eurogenes K15, or MTA, which is a derivative of Eurogenes K15. According to Davidiski himself, MDLP also apparently adjusts for the "calculator effect". Which is a non-issue regardless.
 
The dodecad calculators seem more consistent with the others and accurate, than Eurogenes K15, or MTA, which is a derivative of Eurogenes K15. According to Davidiski himself, MDLP also apparently adjusts for the "calculator effect". Which is a non-issue regardless.

If you look at the Calculator results above, R1548 (MTA Top Match) shows-up only in Eurogenes K15, in a different position, but with a distance of 9.70 vs MTA 9.74 :)
 
Maybe it’s because they’re using a EU K15 type of calculator, and I get big distances with that one (many other Italians too).

I'm more or less the same. Only short distances are seen in Germanic users. They blame it on the cold that their corpses are better preserved. I do not know but perhaps the tests and the gold standard that they used to say it somehow revolved around the Germanic ones and when they obtained short distances they gave it as good for everyone; Even if we did get longer distances, to say the least, I really don't know what's going on.
 
The main issue with these older calculators is that they were made with modern populations as broad regional components. We now know the intricacies of certain areas, rendering certain labels, like "Eastern Mediterranean" as absoultely useless. The only way we can accurately identify our ancestral origins, are to utilize samples of source populations, that no longer exist in unmixed form.
 
In fact, the distances obtained in EU K15 are higher than others calculators as I can see in Vahaduo EU K15 modern, whose distances are quite similar to MTA's modern populations:

d6N73hs.png


vIWmyyr.png


qVcGBJt.png


There are no samples of medieval Iberians in the vahaduo EU K15 ancient data. The inclusion of "antonio et all" samples makes me capture only Roman samples from the Iron Age together with samples of BA and IA of other regions, non italics. I only capture a sample of the medieval era when I introduce the coordinates of the European man lost at Zanzibar in 800 AD, which were produced by @tomanable in Gedmatch, which seems quite reasonable to me:

owKV8wq.png


A69dqdG.png


i9JswT5.png


In the Vahaduo EU K15 ancient , these are the samples that I match, below the distance 10:

evCh0ny.png
 
@Duarte last night you were Zorro, now you are John Clayton II, Viscount of Greystoke, aka Tarzan :grin:
 
I'm more or less the same. Only short distances are seen in Germanic users. They blame it on the cold that their corpses are better preserved. I do not know but perhaps the tests and the gold standard that they used to say it somehow revolved around the Germanic ones and when they obtained short distances they gave it as good for everyone; Even if we did get longer distances, to say the least, I really don't know what's going on.

Perhaps this is indeed a part of it.
 
Fwiw, I've seen Davidiski refer to MTA, as a "garbage" calculator on Anthrogenica. He's probably just upset that someone took his calculator, tweaked it a bit, and made a ton of money on it. Hey, that's capitalism baby. Pepsi did it to Coca-Cola.
 
In fact, the distances obtained in EU K15 are higher than others calculators as I can see in Vahaduo EU K15 modern, whose distances are quite similar to MTA's modern populations:

d6N73hs.png


vIWmyyr.png


qVcGBJt.png


There are no samples of medieval Iberians in the vahaduo EU K15 ancient data. The inclusion of "antonio et all" samples makes me capture only Roman samples from the Iron Age together with samples of BA and IA of other regions, non italics. I only capture a sample of the medieval era when I introduce the coordinates of the European man lost at Zanzibar in 800 AD, which were produced by @tomanable in Gedmatch, which seems quite reasonable to me:

owKV8wq.png


A69dqdG.png


i9JswT5.png


In the Vahaduo EU K15 ancient , these are the samples that I match, below the distance 10:

evCh0ny.png

I think that eventually MTA will change its matching samples calculator, maybe :)
 
I think that eventually MTA will change its matching samples calculator, maybe :)

Here is the PCA with the first match of the various samples from Antonio et. al 2019, circled in red:

QejVBiQ.png


MTA gives me R1548, as my first as well. I think the main issue with having R1548 as a first match, even at 9+ distance, is that it is too way out there to make sense; there are should be closer samples. It falls outside of the range of Southern Italy. I believe R1548 clusters with Cretan Greeks, if I recall. All of the other calculators, even Eurogenes K15 (mistakenly put as K16 here) put me in the range of Southern Italians. For some reason MTA isn't assigning what should be closer matches before R1548.
 
Last edited:
Here is the PCA with the first match of the various samples from Antonio et. al 2019, circled in red:

QejVBiQ.png


MTA gives me R1548, as my first as well. I think the main issue with having R1548 as a first match, even at 9+ distance, is that it is too way out there to make sense; there are should be closer samples. It falls outside of the range of Southern Italy. I believe R1548 clusters with Cretan Greeks, if I recall. All of the other calculators, even Eurogenes K15 (mistakenly put as K16 here) put it in the range of Southern Italians. For some reason MTA isn't assigning what should be closer matches before R1548.

I assume that the reason we both get R1548 as Top Match, is because MTA is associating the sample with the Pugliesi, even though we’re not that close to R1548, I guess ...
 

This thread has been viewed 1253392 times.

Back
Top