Armoricain
Regular Member
- Messages
- 13
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Northern european
I'm aware of the figure to which you referred. Haak et al did exhaustive modeling. With each successive model they tried to reduce the residuals (or improve the fit) more and more. The model to which you referred only used EN and WHG. In the subsequent model (page 121), they added the Yamnaya, and the result for EN in the French was 51.2, with lower residuals. In the next model, the figure was 64.3. In the figure to which I linked but which did not post, Figure S9.27 on page 124 of the Haak et al 2015 supplement, the figure for EN is indeed 69%. I'm going to try to post it again.
View attachment 7148
Whatever the figure you want to use, whether it's the one on page 121 of 51.2 percent, or even the 43% EN from a model with high residuals (i.e. not a good fit), it doesn't change the fact that based on Dodecad K12b, the total of S.W.Asian and Caucasus in the French is 11%. Obviously, there is EN in "Atlantic Med" as well, and as Dienekes pointed out about his own calculator, in North European.
As to your last statement, I personally don't think it is very helpful to rely on the once useful but obviously flawed admixture calculators based on modern populations and relatively modern geographical groupings or components, when the formal stats based on actual ancient genomes give far more accurate results. (I concede you don't get the tightest possible fit using only ancient genomes, as the authors realized, which is why they added the Nganasan and the Bedouin to the graphic I posted.)
In so far as I can tell, PCA's and formal stats and sophisticated Admixture programs indicate that the early EEF samples are all pretty much alike, which is exactly what this Lab has said numerous times. They certainly cluser closely together on PCA's, and there is no marked "eastward" shift in LBK samples:
See Gamba et al:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141021/ncomms6257/full/ncomms6257.html
It's true that the LBK did not at first mix very much. As time passed, there was more admixture, but in terms of the initial farmers, whether they were "Cardial" or "LBK", I haven't seen anything which would indicate major differences. If you have data to that effect which is persuasive, i.e. formal stats from academics, not Blogger calculators, I would of course change my opinion. It's true, of course that the EN which fed into Europe through Yamnaya is more "Caucasus" like.
You might also want to take a look at Paschou et al and the thread here discussing it.
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/25/9211.abstract
http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2014/06/04/1320811111.DCSupplemental/pnas.1320811111.sapp.pdf
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Europe-(Paschou-et-al-2014)?highlight=Paschou
Thank you for all your explanations , I will consult your links with great interest.