"Ancient DNA reveals the origins of the Albanians" paper

[PaleoRevenge]

That the models of this "study" are major fails was already pointed out, so why insist on it being right?

As for the potential Imperial era MENA-related patrilineage, not sure how you get to the 15 percentile as that's definitely not the case for Albanians anywhere. Funny enough, I just checked the modern Serbian samples (n=37) of that "study" and 24,324 % (n=9) carry Imperial era MENA lineages that first appear in the Balkans during the CE and are acompanied by a stark MENA auDNA profile. These include E1b-M81, J-M205, J1a-Z2215+, T1a-11151, Q-L245 etc.

Autosomal wise it has been reduced by their high Slavic admixture, but I would agree, their paleo-Balkan substrate had higher levels of MENA than the Albanian ancestral population. Overtime they were able to digest it so to speak.

 

[mount123]

Autosomal wise it has been reduced by their high Slavic admixture, but I would agree, their paleo-Balkan substrate had higher levels of MENA than the Albanian ancestral population. Overtime they were able to digest it so to speak.

It also shows, IMO, that they acquired more Paleo-Balkan ancestry from Albanians and "Vlachs" later on. Which one, again, has to point out is very evident when looking at what clades some of them are placed under. That's what their phylogeny suggests.

 

[TetaEglantina]

That the models of this "study" are major fails was already pointed out, so why insist on it being right?

As for the potential Imperial era MENA-related patrilineage, not sure how you get to the 15 percentile as that's definitely not the case for Albanians anywhere. Funny enough, I just checked the modern Serbian samples (n=37) of that "study" and 24,324 % (n=9) carry Imperial era MENA lineages that first appear in the Balkans during the CE and are acompanied by a stark MENA auDNA profile. These include E1b-M81, J-M205, J1a-Z2215+, T1a-11151, Q-L245 etc.

I listed above which ydna I didn't include in my calculations, the rest was about 15%. It is slightly skewed by Vlore samples which seem to have the most potential MENA

 

[TetaEglantina]

Ottoman Serbia samples from Sirmium. I don't think around 1500 AD Sirmium was Serbian, the area I think was Croatian. They model almost the same as Croatians but with more Slavic.

Or it just means that the region was more Slavic in 1500AD but then later on a few more southern people moved in possibly fleeing from ottoman conquest (Albanians, Macedonians etc) or a bit of janissary input. Croats are slightly more Slavic than serbs and these samples are even more slavic than croats

 

[TetaEglantina]

I listed above which ydna I didn't include in my calculations, the rest was about 15%. It is slightly skewed by Vlore samples which seem to have the most potential MENA

You may say that j2a shouldn't be included however the MENA shift in south and central Italy must be somewhat linked to J2a as there isn't much J1 there. I am pretty sure that some of J2a in Albanians is Roman anatolian, not native. Maybe we could remove G2 (19 samples) which brings it down to 13.6% but again some of this G2 could be Roman anatolian. If we had less Vlore samples the percentage would be lower

 

[Bosnian Boss]

Or it just means that the region was more Slavic in 1500AD but then later on a few more southern people moved in possibly fleeing from ottoman conquest (Albanians, Macedonians etc) or a bit of janissary input. Croats are slightly more Slavic than serbs and these samples are even more slavic than croats

Is there a way to use these ancient samples to compare against modern populations? How can I use it for myself, for example?