MyTrueAncestry Mytrueancestry.com

[torzio]

my father


1. North_Italian (5.158)
2. Spanish_Galicia (9.284)
3. Spanish_Cataluna (10.23)
4. Spanish_Extremadura (12.24)
5. Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon (12.65)
6. Spanish_Murcia (13.89)
7. Tuscan (14.05)


only thing my father and I have similar is the #1 north italian .......after that we seperate .................does it have to do with Mtdna line ?

 

[Salento]

Can you confirm that R1 ( a female ) that her father was a T ydna and that SZ32 is a later link with R1 via CHr
R1 born in liburnia ( croatia ) died in Picene land Italy

Also , has R33 been renamed as an Illyrian

... totally, but ... I can’t confirm nor deny ...

I don’t get all 3 deep dives,

if you do ... investigate ‘continuity / shared SNPs’ on your ‘chrome analysis’ feature.

 

[Salento]

Can you confirm that R1 ( a female ) that her father was a T ydna and that SZ32 is a later link with R1 via CHr
R1 born in liburnia ( croatia ) died in Picene land Italy


Also , has R33 been renamed as an Illyrian

... upload ... R1 combined Kit

Chrome Analysis:

R1 relation to SZ32

R1 ... to mt H12 S. Lake I3404

... some others

R1 y T normal matching samples:

 

[torzio]

... totally, but ... I can’t confirm nor deny ...

I don’t get all 3 deep dives,

if you do ... investigate ‘continuity / shared SNPs’ on your ‘chrome analysis’ feature.

If i go only min length of 230 on CHr map
I get only these samples

R33 ......245 shared snps
R1 ........1663 shared
R36 ......281 shared


I think the site needs an overhaul and minimize what we link with

 

[Salento]

If i go only min length of 230 on CHr map
I get only these samples

R33 ......245 shared snps
R1 ........1663 shared
R36 ......281 shared


I think the site needs an overhaul and minimize what we link with

we should keep in mind, ... the raw-data quality of the majority of the samples is imperfect (not MTA fault) though SZ1 is 100%, and the algorithm tries to match our Perfect kits against many Flawed kits,

... educated guess, ... but still a guess, is filling in the gaps by way of imputation and algorithm tweaks.

... they can easily change the nomenclature of the samples if they want to.

 

[Carlos]

[h=3]

Iron Age[/h]3. Carthaginian Roman-Era Empuries
200 BC - Genetic Distance: 9.119 - I8204
8. Phoenician/Punic Sardinia Mount Sirai
675 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.07 - MSR002
14. Greco-Era Empuries
290 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.45 - I8208
17. Scythian Southern Moldova
290 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.82 - scy300
19. Phoenician Cas Moli Ibiza
270 BC - Genetic Distance: 12.98 - MS10614
29. Phoenician/Punic Sardinia Mount Sirai
675 BC - Genetic Distance: 14.71 - MSR003
31. Carthaginian/Punic Sardinia Villamar
250 BC - Genetic Distance: 14.87 - VIL007
33. Western Scythian Outlier Hungary
550 BC - Genetic Distance: 15.29 - DA198
38. Iron Age Phoenician Settler Sardinia
300 BC - Genetic Distance: 15.78 - I10366
54. Scythian Southern Moldova
290 BC - Genetic Distance: 16.75 - scy305

[h=3]Roman Age[/h]
1. Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP
100 AD - Genetic Distance: 7.052 - R111
2. Carthago-Roman San Ercolano
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 7.5 - R120
5. Carthago Outlier San Ercolano
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 10.99 - R121
18. Imperial Rome Via Paisiello
100 AD - Genetic Distance: 12.93 - R131
20. Late-Roman Era Montefrio Granada
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.39 - I3581
22. Roman Villa Granada Spain
300 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.72 - I3982
24. Imperial Rome San Ercolano
500 AD - Genetic Distance: 13.95 - R122
25. Roman Graveyard Emporion
150 AD - Genetic Distance: 14.4 - I8338
26. Imperial Rome Cluana Ancona
165 AD - Genetic Distance: 14.61 - R836
27. Roman-Carthago Mix Empuries
150 AD - Genetic Distance: 14.67 - I8475


[h=3]Dark Ages[/h]
9. Roman Outlier Lombard Grave
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 12.15 - SZ31
32. North Roman Warrior
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 15.09 - NS3c
46. Central Roman / Mixed
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 16.3 - SZ19
61. Early Medieval Andalusia
760 AD - Genetic Distance: 17.09 - I3585
64. Early Medieval Iberia Granada
515 AD - Genetic Distance: 17.31 - I3980
80. Justinian Plague Victim
760 AD - Genetic Distance: 17.99 - LSD021
83. Gallo-Roman
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 18.16 - SZ28
89. Central Roman
630 AD - Genetic Distance: 18.54 - CL36
92. Roman Outlier Lombard Grave
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 18.59 - SZ37
96. Central Roman
590 AD - Genetic Distance: 18.65 - SZ43


[h=2]Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP (R113) (White point) versus My Kit (Grey point)[/h]

 

[Salento]

edit
forget about it, ... too many samples above are mislabeled!

 

[Carlos]

Roman + Phoenician (7.366)
Roman Hispania + Phoenician (9.506)
Roman + Carthaginian (10.4)
Roman Hispania + Roman (11.05)
Gallo-Roman + Carthaginian (11.11)
Phoenician (12.98)
Roman Hispania (13.39)
Carthaginian (14.87)
Roman (16.3)
Gallo-Roman (18.16)

 

[Salento]

I’ve been wandering about R113 lack of presence on my MTA results, ... now I know why, ... weird!

edit... wondering, not wandering :innocent:

 

[Carlos]

I’ve been wandering about R113 lack of presence on my MTA results, ... now I know why, ... weird!

Because I have it :grin:

483. Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP
100 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.93 - R113

 

[Salento]

Because I have it :grin:

483. Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP
100 AD - Genetic Distance: 23.93 - R113

Oh no Carlos, ... (R PCA)

I expected it to be Abruzzese slightly Pugliese, or maybe Center Italian or something like that

 

[Carlos]

Oh no Carlos, ... (R PCA)

I expected it to be Abruzzese slightly Pugliese, or maybe Center Italian or something like that

We look for what there is and we can corroborate it, but we also find what has been lost

Man I have a 3% with the Italian peninsula a value so I imagine it means an ancient origin and 10% with Sardinia but I see too much haste in mixing the old with the modern

 

[Salento]

Edit ... delete ... I’m skeptical of some results.

 

[Carlos]

[h=2]Medieval La Palma Sardinia (I12221)[/h][h=2]
Roman Hispania + Thracian (8.125)
Gaul + Thracian (8.971)
Roman Hispania + Illyrian (9.324)
Gaul + Roman Hispania (9.543)
Gaul + Roman (9.748)
Illyrian (11.66)
Roman (11.81)
Roman Hispania (12.95)
Thracian (12.98)
Gaul (15.56)


Medieval La Palma Sardinia (I12221)(grey point) vs Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP (R113)[/h]

[h=2]Medieval La Palma Sardinia (I12221) (grey point) vs Kit: Carlos[/h]

 

[Carlos]

[h=2]Germanic Medieval Duomo San Nicola Sardinia (SNN001)[/h]Phoenician + Balari (13.79)
Etruscan + Iolaes (13.91)
Etruscan + Balari (14.08)
Phoenician + Iolaes (14.16)
Carthaginian + Balari (14.68)
Balari (17.71)

[h=2]Germanic Medieval Duomo San Nicola Sardinia (SNN001) (grey point) vs Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP (R113)[/h]

[h=2]Germanic Medieval Duomo San Nicola Sardinia (SNN001) (grey point) vs Kit: Carlos[/h]

[h=2]Germanic Medieval Duomo San Nicola Sardinia (SNN001) (grey point) vs Medieval La Palma Sardinia (I12221)[/h]

 

[Salento]

below is from the paper



this kndred also appears in the bar chart .............does SZ19 make any sense ?

SZ1 and SZ19 share SNPs, ...
(make sense, ... on my results too):

 

[Salento]

... Central Roman SZ32 - Central Roman R125 - Latin Praeneste Tribe R437 - Foggia VK534 - Foggia VK537

 

[Bogomir]

HI, to everybody, great discussion here!
I checked with MyThrueAncestry regarding the change from “Bronze Age Szolad Hungary 1000 BC" to "Avar Szolad Hungary 700 AD". They directed me to page "indo-european.eu/2020/10/longobards-from-scandinavia-and-the-ural-altaic-arpad-lineage". There Carlos Quiles referenced a new classification in the Reich Lab dataset "reich.hms.harvard.edu/datasets". I am not able to read those data. Is anybody that can read this and provide information on what basis the classification and age are changed.
Thanks in advance!

p.s: I am not allowed to post links yet.

 

[Carlos]

[h=2]Kit: Copper Age Szigetszentmiklos Hungary (I7043) (grey point) compared Kit: Carthago Outlier San Ercolano (R121)[/h]

[h=2]Kit: Copper Age Szigetszentmiklos Hungary (I7043) (grey point) comparared Kit: Carthago Outlier Roman Empire VP (R113)[/h]

[h=2]Kit: Copper Age Szigetszentmiklos Hungary (I7043) (grey point) compared Kit Carlos[/h]

 

[torzio]

we should keep in mind, ... the raw-data quality of the majority of the samples is imperfect (not MTA fault) though SZ1 is 100%, and the algorithm tries to match our Perfect kits against many Flawed kits,

... educated guess, ... but still a guess, is filling in the gaps by way of imputation and algorithm tweaks.

... they can easily change the nomenclature of the samples if they want to.

I have 1663 shared snaps with R1 sample

what do you have

I would like to "think/hope" her father ( R1 ) was a T1a ydna ................