K12b Analyzing the Mediterranean Cluster C6 from Antonio M et al. 2019

Not only is it citing a forum poster (me), it is even misrepresenting me, because the content is monstrously inaccurate. Antonio et al. 2019 was a paper about Rome, not southern Italy. Also, that bit about C6 in South Africa, is just a visual-cacophony of nonsense.

I get the impression that such programs work like google browser, that is they give as an output what they most often encounter about a topic in the web, thus, given that we already know the fetishist obsession about southern Italians, papers that are NOT about southern Italy and southern Italians get described as about them because so they are treated on the internet.
 
I get the impression that such programs work like google browser, that is they give as an output what they most often encounter about a topic in the web, thus, given that we already know the fetishist obsession about southern Italians, papers that are NOT about southern Italy and southern Italians get described as about them because so they are treated on the internet.

I feel like asking for a software program that strictly cites academic sources shouldn't be such a tall order. I am rather disappointed with all this hype behind these programs. Its all hype.
 

Just a quick note on the C6 cluster throghout the iron age to the imperial age: note how imperial samples outside Rome, from Picenum, are somewhat pretty similar to the Iron Age C6 samples from Latium (expecially the one from Praeneste).
One of the most important center of Picenum was (and still is) the city of Ancona, wich was infact a greek colony founded by Syracuse. Of course it is just few samples analyzed with g25, so take it for what is worth (not much), but one could interpret it as a signal of some kind of continuity between the Iron age and the Imperial Era.
 
Last edited:
I can model it again down the line, after I finished processing my own DNA. But R437, the C6 sample from the Iron Age, using a slightly modified version of the Sarno et. al 2022 Calabrian paper (because the Reich Lab data set they used is no longer available) comes out almost similar to modern South Italians, except R437 is about 10% higher in Anatolian_N, and 10% lower in CHG/Iran_N:

6ABNkO8.png
 
I can model it again down the line, after I finished processing my own DNA. But R437, the C6 sample from the Iron Age, using a slightly modified version of the Sarno et. al 2022 Calabrian paper (because the Reich Lab data set they used is no longer available) comes out almost similar to modern South Italians, except R437 is about 10% higher in Anatolian_N, and 10% lower in CHG/Iran_N:

6ABNkO8.png
Yes, exactly so. BTW from what I've seen (but this could have been a wrong impression of mine), G25 tends to underestimate the CHG component, so the CHG admixture in the Praenestini sample could actually be higher, and much closer to contemporary Southern Italy.
 
Yes, exactly so. BTW from what I've seen (but this could have been a wrong impression of mine), G25 tends to underestimate the CHG component, so the CHG admixture in the Praenestini sample could actually be higher, and much closer to contemporary Southern Italy.
It is impossible to tell how G25 works, because there aren't any white papers. Moreover, it is illegitimate compared to modeling used by professional academic tools.
 
What would you recommend instead of G25?

I have it as well and I was told it's the best.
Admixtools, eupator has a good guide for it here:

As for your own DNA, I would recommend checking out my thread here:


I'm currently in the QC phase of my sorted BAM file.

Ultimately, I want to lead people away from amateur tools, to free and sophisticated academic tools.
 

This thread has been viewed 32754 times.

Back
Top