K12 Autosomal map : European admixture (from Dodecad)

[alais]

Is it serious this map?

 

[MOESAN]

Is it serious this map?

1- surname FERRER is not more french than catalan: the occtian language is close enough to the catalan one, so FERRER is AND a french name AND a cataln name (maybe too north italian name!!!) castillan HERRERO, leonese or aragonese FERRERO
see names as PUJOLS, CAMPS, BLANCH, MAS, TIMONER, MAYOL, CASTELLS...
2- yes, Catalunia has been part of the "french" territories for some times, in the Middle Ages! More under the Comte of Tulouse/Tolosa than ynder the french crown, perhaps. Historians could help us there

 

[Knovas]

These questions are very outlandish, looking at this map of Europe in 1235 Catalonia simply does not exist.

¿Since when this has something to do with the fact that Catalan speakers exist in the same territories since a very long time? The blindness derived from your anti-Catalan agenda does not allow you to get the main idea. Please, stop mixing up things, there's no room here for nationalistic crusades.

 

[alais]

I was asking about first map.

Ferrero is an Italian surname too. Nutella.

 

[zanipolo]

These questions are very outlandish, looking at this map of Europe in 1235 Catalonia simply does not exist.

Are you serious?
This is a map indicating heriditary lands of Kings only and since Aragon had a king it was named, Barcelona and the catalans where initially a dukedom which is ignored on this BIAS map. History tells us that the last aragon king gave his kingdom and crown to the duke of barcelona.

This same map also has the HRE as dominating all of Italy even though they had no hold on certain parts, had no rule on these parts and these parts ignored this HRE

It plainly a dreamers map for kings and a similar map was presented in 1815 at the congress of Vienna to eliminate all republics and non regal governments from Europe

 

[MOESAN]

Could there possibly be another motive besides an obvious racist one for wanting to prove to everyone that you are 'pure' Europeans? Your infatuation is beginning to concern me Wilhelm.

this map has just to be taken as it is: a map about distribution of the more common geographically European genes according to a restricted meaning given to the name 'Europe': it is just an approach to genetic distirbution not trying to determine the most important and distinctive traits of far previous origin - so there are 'caucasian' types very close to most of the Europeans that bear some geographically different genes according to selection -
the panneling of the chosen genes is partially arbitrary and doesn't determine which are the more important genes for a "racial" discrimination - nobody has to be offensed and everybody on this thread holds a part of truth

 

[zanipolo]

This is my mixture and have some questions for ............

Population [TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]East_Eurasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #D7D7FF, align: right"]30.52%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]West_Eurasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]1.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #D4D4FF, align: right"]33.01%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #EDEDFF, align: right"]13.50%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Paleo_mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E4E4FF, align: right"]21.07%[/TD]

[/TD]

q1 - what is Paleo_mediterranean

q2 - my markers of my Y-dna indicate matches in majority british isles, norway, sweden or central europe ( swiss, Nitalian, austria and southern german ), with this mix, can I conclude my matching people all migrated to northern europe

q3 - 1 am 100% T1b when using all 37 markers, but a memeber excluded my fast moving markers and I am 92% T1b, would this effect my mixture

Above is using #5

and

Below is using #11

Population

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"][/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Paleo_Balkanic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Celto_Germanic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FAFAFF, align: right"]3.30%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E0E0FF, align: right"]23.44%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Volga_Uralic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FBFBFF, align: right"]2.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Iberian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]2.26%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Altaic_Turkic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #DBDBFF, align: right"]28.12%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Paleo_North_European[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FDFDFF, align: right"]1.13%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]South_Central_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #EEEEFF, align: right"]12.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]East_European[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Uralic_Permic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]1.74%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E0E0FF, align: right"]24.21%[/TD]

what number am I supposed to use

 

[julia90]

everywhere in all anthropology forums is findable at least an italian from mainland italy affected from complex of inferiority that can't bear that sardinians are genetically the most europeans among italians

are you tuscans? well look about your 100% true european looking tuscans, like
Carlo Conti, Denis Verdini and Cecchi Gori...etc!
a Sardinian who doesn't look completely european is the Senator Beppe Pisanu, that have ancient ancestors from Tuscany!

LOL

I'm not racist against swarthy italians, since in my family i have swarthy types.
and sardinianas are however more dark haired and have more pigmented skin than authentic tuscans since we tuscans live at about 43,20 of latitude and sardineans at about 40,20...

 

[Vallicanus]

everywhere in all anthropology forums is findable at least an italian from mainland italy affected from complex of inferiority that can't bear that sardinians are genetically the most europeans among italians

are you tuscans? well look about your 100% true european looking tuscans, like
Carlo Conti, Denis Verdini and Cecchi Gori...etc!
a Sardinian who doesn't look completely european is the Senator Beppe Pisanu, that have ancient ancestors from Tuscany!

LOL

This recent map of Italian skin tones shows that while Sardinia is often lighter-skinned than mainland southern Italy or Sicily, at least 2 Tuscan provinces, Florence and Prato, are among the lightest in Italy.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Italien.jpg

 

[julia90]

yep, that skin tone map is correct.. that goes with the map of annual solar radiance
people who live in places with more solar radiance are naturally selected for having dark hair and more pigmented skin, we tuscan are mostly in the yellow zone with florence and nortehrn tuscany in the green zone

 

[MOESAN]

the cousins people (from a steady shared admixture in same old ethny) living for long centuries in the same region don't have the same colours everyone of them: so skin colour is not a gentle graduation paint as a 'thermostat heating system' - it is the result of some different mutations plus some natural ANCIENT SELECTION - and this selection is no more at work, a long time ago yet on Mankind - genuine Saami have dark skins compared to southernmost people! look at Inuit too!
there are different brunet skins and different light skins, from different genetic histories-You can draw a line with a pencil from West to East at a certain lattitude and observe human populations, you could not find the same repartitions of elements and colours
some maps are nonsense as the maps about human skin colour - and "means" are not always a reflect of reality:
(I think in "facial means" produced with computers for the European countries: without any genetic NOR phenotypic signification)- to answer Julia here: Castillans of Mancha has approximatively the same kinds of skin colours as Valencians from the same Lattitude, but present more light skins and less dark skins: to go further on, skin colours, eyes colours and hairs colours are not always so tightly linked in certain populatyions (look at the N-W Celts)
&: pigmentation is only an element of indentification of genetic roots

buona notte - nos vad

 

[LeBrok]

Generally speaking it works for Europe. The frequent human migrations of last couple of thousands of years, or so, messed up it somewhat. Especially Germanics and Slavs moving south.
Inuit and probably Saami, circumvented low sun radiation with their diet. They consume (used to even more) raw liver which contains lots of vitamin D. Plus, even if they are not blond, their skin tone is rather light.
You can see reverse in Bedouin communities of Arabian Peninsula. They, theoretically, should be darker, but they always wear whole body clothes/tunics for protection against intensive sun.

 

[MOESAN]

Generally speaking it works for Europe. The frequent human migrations of last couple of thousands of years, or so, messed up it somewhat. Especially Germanics and Slavs moving south.
Inuit and probably Saami, circumvented low sun radiation with their diet. They consume (used to even more) raw liver which contains lots of vitamin D. Plus, even if they are not blond, their skin tone is rather light.
You can see reverse in Bedouin communities of Arabian Peninsula. They, theoretically, should be darker, but they always wear whole body clothes/tunics for protection against intensive sun.

No contradiction, and I agree with you -
it is true that the Inuit and Saami are not so dark as negroid Africans! (true Saami skin colour(s) as a whole is:are lighter than the Inuit one(s) and the darker ones are on the model of "dark"-light skins of Caucasians, it is evident, but among TRUE Saami (before crossings) they are darker than the most of Scandinavians skins (or Irishmen or ...) -
what I was thinking is that "mean" colour is somewhat putting people to believe in a kind of gradual adaptation of pigmentation When it WAS an individual unlevel adaptation not by changing the genes in men but by changing the proportions of bearers of genes in a population; and that histories of seamingly close populations deduced from close enough skin colours can be very distinct because there have been more than ONE or TWO mutations giving way to the present colours...
Sun radiations played a big role firstable and selected surely close enough skins for colours even if the genes concerned to give some close results was not the same ones everytime (no unique event here!)but as you seam thinking, the last evolutions of Mankind suffered very less natural selection for that as for others traits
have a good midday

 

[julia90]

the cousins people (from a steady shared admixture in same old ethny) living for long centuries in the same region don't have the same colours everyone of them: so skin colour is not a gentle graduation paint as a 'thermostat heating system' - it is the result of some different mutations plus some natural ANCIENT SELECTION - and this selection is no more at work, a long time ago yet on Mankind - genuine Saami have dark skins compared to southernmost people! look at Inuit too!
there are different brunet skins and different light skins, from different genetic histories-You can draw a line with a pencil from West to East at a certain lattitude and observe human populations, you could not find the same repartitions of elements and colours
some maps are nonsense as the maps about human skin colour - and "means" are not always a reflect of reality:
(I think in "facial means" produced with computers for the European countries: without any genetic NOR phenotypic signification)- to answer Julia here: Castillans of Mancha has approximatively the same kinds of skin colours as Valencians from the same Lattitude, but present more light skins and less dark skins: to go further on, skin colours, eyes colours and hairs colours are not always so tightly linked in certain populatyions (look at the N-W Celts)
&: pigmentation is only an element of indentification of genetic roots

buona notte - nos vad

thought, in many places of europe there were a large bulge of pre-historic and more ancient people, whose skin tone was adapted to the solar radiance kind of place they lives.. that explains why southern italians are more likely to tan well (well every people can, also the blonde ones, but the reds not) and quickly

 

[MOESAN]

thought, in many places of europe there were a large bulge of pre-historic and more ancient people, whose skin tone was adapted to the solar radiance kind of place they lives.. that explains why southern italians are more likely to tan well (well every people can, also the blonde ones, but the reds not) and quickly

not so mechanically as you believe: the 'olive' dark "white" skins of south Europeans are for me recent (maybe mesolithic and after too, sure) enough re-introduction of Near-Eastern people and cousins of them maybe from arabian peninsula or North Africa - and prehistoric has no precise meaning because climate changed very much from 30000 BC to nowaday - the present day climate difference DOES NOT EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCES OF SKIN COLOUR AMONG EUROPEANS - we have to imagine other times and other places to explain it, with stronger climatic pressure and hazard too, perhaps(?), for I think.
it appears that a long time ago, in Eurasia, human beings dressed themselves against heat as against cold when they was submitted to weather pressure -

 

[Dorianfinder]

This is my mixture and have some questions for ............

Population [TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]East_Eurasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #D7D7FF, align: right"]30.52%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]West_Eurasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]1.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #D4D4FF, align: right"]33.01%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #EDEDFF, align: right"]13.50%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Paleo_mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E4E4FF, align: right"]21.07%[/TD]

[/TD]

q1 - what is Paleo_mediterranean

q2 - my markers of my Y-dna indicate matches in majority british isles, norway, sweden or central europe ( swiss, Nitalian, austria and southern german ), with this mix, can I conclude my matching people all migrated to northern europe

q3 - 1 am 100% T1b when using all 37 markers, but a memeber excluded my fast moving markers and I am 92% T1b, would this effect my mixture

Above is using #5

and

Below is using #11

Population

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"][/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Paleo_Balkanic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Celto_Germanic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FAFAFF, align: right"]3.30%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E0E0FF, align: right"]23.44%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Volga_Uralic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FBFBFF, align: right"]2.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Iberian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]2.26%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Altaic_Turkic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #DBDBFF, align: right"]28.12%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Paleo_North_European[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FDFDFF, align: right"]1.13%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]South_Central_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #EEEEFF, align: right"]12.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]East_European[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Uralic_Permic[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]1.74%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E0E0FF, align: right"]24.21%[/TD]

what number am I supposed to use

Paleo Mediterranean differs from one calculator to another. It is generally not a good idea to compare similar groupings between various calculators as their components differ quite substantially.

Concerning your 2nd question, it is important to remember that the majority of commercial DNA participants are from the regions you mention and therefore not a representative sample of your haplogroup's frequency distribution. Inferring from modern frequency distribution is fraught with all soughts of limitations.

Qu 3: Your ydna designation and STR-values do not effect admixture because they are found on different chromosomes. Admixture is on autosomal chromosomes whereas ydna and it's relevant STR-values are found on the sex chromosome (Y).

Your admixture shows a significant amount of Altaic Turkic (28%) suggesting mixed ancestry somewhere in your genealogy. I would have expected a Venetian to have negligable Altaic admixture.

 

[zanipolo]

Paleo Mediterranean differs from one calculator to another. It is generally not a good idea to compare similar groupings between various calculators as their components differ quite substantially.

Concerning your 2nd question, it is important to remember that the majority of commercial DNA participants are from the regions you mention and therefore not a representative sample of your haplogroup's frequency distribution. Inferring from modern frequency distribution is fraught with all soughts of limitations.

Qu 3: Your ydna designation and STR-values do not effect admixture because they are found on different chromosomes. Admixture is on autosomal chromosomes whereas ydna and it's relevant STR-values are found on the sex chromosome (Y).

Your admixture shows a significant amount of Altaic Turkic (28%) suggesting mixed ancestry somewhere in your genealogy. I would have expected a Venetian to have negligable Altaic admixture.

Then its all very much a complete fantasy

In regards to venetian , there is a difference between venetian and veneti, historical and the present even though 95% of the language is the same. The Venetians would represent the migrating Illyrian people and also the sole government body of the 1100 years venetian nation , while the Veneti would be the mainland people, originally ligurian , then subjected to various migrations.

below is where the ligurians where before the venetians arrived

and below is what the italian historian say is history

and this below is the only DNA done for venetians in which only 60000 are left ( although there are over 5M veneti)
http://venice2point0.blogspot.com.au/2010/07/venetian-dna.html

note the path, via turkic lands

My question to you is what is the best test to do if you are european ( i.e. for admixtures)

thanks

 

[Dorianfinder]

My question to you is what is the best test to do if you are european ( i.e. for admixtures)

thanks

I suggest you have a look at gedmatch. There are many calculators with interesting tools available. Download your data file onto gedmatch and refrain from limiting access so that you may use the full array of admixture tools available.

Gedmatch includes a large database of data files and will compare your autosomal SNPs with other data files.

Altaic admixture of 28% is a strong indicator of recent admixture, you have approximately 20x more Altaic than any Balkan participants I've seen. Most Turks range in the region of between 30% & 50%.

The Ligurian population has a significant Celto-Germanic component. At least 15%. In addition to this there is a significant West Eurasian component as well. At least 15%. These components have a weak showing on your results suggesting a more interesting story with perhaps some recent Levantine admixture.

 

[zanipolo]

I suggest you have a look at gedmatch. There are many calculators with interesting tools available. Download your data file onto gedmatch and refrain from limiting access so that you may use the full array of admixture tools available.

Gedmatch includes a large database of data files and will compare your autosomal SNPs with other data files.

Altaic admixture of 28% is a strong indicator of recent admixture, you have approximately 20x more Altaic than any Balkan participants I've seen. Most Turks range in the region of between 30% & 50%.

The Ligurian population has a significant Celto-Germanic component. At least 15%. In addition to this there is a significant West Eurasian component as well. At least 15%. These components have a weak showing on your results suggesting a more interesting story with perhaps some recent Levantine admixture.

Ok, here you go

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]East_Eurasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #D7D7FF, align: right"]30.52%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]West_Eurasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FCFCFF, align: right"]1.90%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #D4D4FF, align: right"]33.01%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #EDEDFF, align: right"]13.50%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Paleo_mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #E4E4FF, align: right"]21.07%[/TD]

a deeper test

Altaic_Turkic

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]

[TD="align: right"]18.27[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Paleo_Mediterranean[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]24.07[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Caucasian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]33.17[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]South_Central_Asian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]12.89[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Celto_Germanic[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]3.44[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Volga_Uralic[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]2.95[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Iberian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]2.33[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Uralic_Permic[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]1.8[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Balto_Finnic[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.7[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]10[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Paleo_North_European[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.39[/TD]

above also had this

NOG (Nogai)

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]

[TD="align: right"]27.7[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]UZ (Uzbek)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]27.73[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]TRK (Turk)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]32.33[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]NITAL (North-Italian)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]35.43[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]BSHK (Bashkir)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]36.27[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]CITAL (Central-Italian)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]36.54[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]SIC (Sicilian)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]36.93[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]GRK (Greek)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]37.06[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]TTR (Tatar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]37.72[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]10[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]RMN (Romanian)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]39.08[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]11[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]CRS (Corsican)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]39.21[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]12[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]GGZ (Gagauz)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]39.78[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]13[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]BLG (Bulgarian)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]39.88[/TD]

but as I stated before in another thread
I have advice from some managers on this topic and they stated:

your T haplogroup Y chromosome has been inherited virtually intact for generations. That's why the Y chromosome is so useful for genealogy.
However, the rest of our chromosomes are subject to recombination every generation. After 5 generations or so, we don't inherit any detectable DNA from some of our ancestors. Wherever your T ancestors came from, it's likely so far back your Y chromosome is probably the only genetic inheritance you got from them.
Genetic analyses like "farmer vs. hunter gatherer," comparing to neanderthal, etc. are for novelty purposes only.
Since T is only 6000 years old your marker was K and F before T, so farmer and hunter gatherers are useless.
Autosomal DNA tests have nothing to do with haplogroups. The tests from 23andMe, FTDNA, and Ancestry all use essentially the same chip, with a few differences between their product offerings: 23andMe added several thousand custom SNPs, which actually do test a few Y-DNA and mtDNA SNPs, plus they specifically display medically relevant SNPs. On the other hand, FTDNA actually strips the data of some medically relevant SNPs in an effort to preemptively avoid FDA scrutiny.
Both companies give you data about segments shared with matches, and allow you to download your raw data. That's what you can use for the 3rd party bio-geographical ancestry (BGA) analyses. FTDNA also allows importing the data from others into their database (only from 23andMe presently).
So far, Ancestry neither gives any information on shared segments, nor how much DNA you share with matches; they won't even let you download your own raw data.

Then more information , with a note to check the Heruli people who settled in Concordia Friuli in around 460CE, they have the T markers, but more R1a1 markers

with test indicating my HG line was in the baltic as a hunter, and my HG is only 6000 years old, then either I entered the baltic as another HG ( maybe K ) and mutated to T while in the baltic
or these tests are completely a waste of time and as stated above...only a novelty

I am looking at this in a logical point of view....and not on fantasy.

I now have to check myself , these Heruli because if my final test is positive, then I have only matches with 3 norwegians, if its negative then my closest matches are with the Irish and English

so, there it is , doing any admixture tests others than a european one ( if your european ) . I just want a calculator to use which is pure european only

BTW ..what do you mean by a recent admixture , what number of years are we talking about......I have a continous family line trail to northeast Italy until the 18th century, then a broken trail to northeast italy from the 15th century.


Thanks for your advice........always helpful

 

[zanipolo]

here is dodecad.

Again I state , that these admixtures are fantasy based on known markers in there database ( pity there is no world wide union of this data)

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]W_Africa[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]45.39[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Europe[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]19.89[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]S_Africa[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]10.92[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]E_Africa[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]8.14[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Biaka[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.72[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]SW_Asia[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]3.68[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Mbuti[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]2.41[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]NW_Africa[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]1.85[/TD]

note....no or little central or SW asian

and the population below , and ........I cannot find any negroid in my ancestors or myself, father etc etc

+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@
+	@

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]72.8%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Kongo[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]27.2%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] North_Italian[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]6.37[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]74%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Fang[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]26%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] North_Italian[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]6.95[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]72%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Bamoun[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]28%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] North_Italian[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.19[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]72.6%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Kongo[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]27.4%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Tuscan[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.42[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]73.8%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Fang[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]26.2%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Tuscan[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.91[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]78.6%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Fang[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]21.4%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] French_Basque[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.98[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]71.8%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Bamoun[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]28.2%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Tuscan[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]8.07[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]77.7%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Kongo[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]22.3%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] French_Basque[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]8.17[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]77.1%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Bamoun[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]22.9%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] French_Basque[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]9.46[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]10[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]70.8%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Kaba[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]29.2%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] North_Italian[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]9.66[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]11[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]70.5%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Kaba[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]29.5%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Tuscan[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]10.29[/TD]

[TD="width: 20, align: center"]12[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="width: 30, align: right"]69.3%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] Hausa[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: right"]30.7%[/TD]
[TD="width: 200"] North_Italian[/TD]

[TD="width: 50, align: right"]11.14[/TD]

so, to conclude, it seems we as individuals can satisfy our needs or phobias by hunting for a company that gives you the results you want............tell me what value is this?