K12 New map of Caucasian autosomal admixtures in Europe and the Middle East

[Knovas]

This Caucasus component overlaps with Med. Sometimes what is shown as Caucasus here is most likely Med. It is really confusing since it is pretty much like a West Asian component when one checks the distribution, but definitely there's something strange:

This was the only experiment I got high Caucasus/West Asian figures. Most times I came out very low or even 0%, so for me that's enough reason to take this run with more caution.

Dienekes' argued this wasn't West Asian, but Caucasus, hence the results were different. However, the Euro7 test also included the Caucasus element with very similar distribution, and my result was 0% (overwhelmingly Southwestern, which is most similar to Med).

So that's the story, hope it helps.

 

[Knovas]

The Caucasus admixture is from the K12b admixture, while the Mediterranean is from the K12. They are therefore not mutually exclusive. I don't really like the K12's Mediterranean admixture because it encompass too many different ethnic elements and consequently is not a very coherent marker.

Rather the opposite: it is this Caucasus element what is not very coherent.

 

[Noman]

This Caucasus component overlaps with Med. Sometimes what is shown as Caucasus here is most likely Med. It is really confusing since it is pretty much like a West Asian component when one checks the distribution, but definitely there's something strange:

This was the only experiment I got high Caucasus/West Asian figures. Most times I came out very low or even 0%, so for me that's enough reason to take this run with more caution.

Dienekes' argued this wasn't West Asian, but Caucasus, hence the results were different. However, the Euro7 test also included the Caucasus element with very similar distribution, and my result was 0% (overwhelmingly Southwestern, which is most similar to Med).

So that's the story, hope it helps.

The thing is, if you check every kind of marker you are probably going to get a similar spread but it doesn't mean that the people involved literally up and move to those locations, which will become clear when you realize some will be moving east and in general everything will simply spread out. Depending on what the "marker" is you might be spreading nothing at all but the marker, lots of genes are under selection pressure.

So all it means is there's contact and some exchange between these peoples. If it were really a wholesale migration then the whole map would be black because unlike y-dna it won't wash out very easily. Which is a good quality about y-dna, you don't get massive false positives, whereas the autosomals are like painting with fire. You can't miss them but they don't necessarily mean anything.

 

[Knovas]

I know what you mean Noman. And because of this, I give more credit to the regular results.

 

[MOESAN]

After the map of Gedrosian admixture I found it would be interesting to compare the distribution of the 'Caucasus' admixture in the same K12b. Although both peak around West Asia and South Asia, the frequency inside Europe is completely different. The Caucasian admixture looks more Neolithic (matching particularly well G2a + J1xP58 + J2) and is high among Slavs, but nearly absent in Northwest Europe as well as among the Basques. In contrast, the Gedrosian is virtually absent in Slavs but is the highest in Northwest Europe among Europeans and appears linked to the diffusion of R1b lineages.

It's also interesting how the Caucasian admixture is so unevenly spread within Spain (unlike any other country).

Maciamo, I'm a bit surprised by the 'spot' of 'caucasian' in Guipuzcoa (I believe), lost among a region where 'caucasian' is poor enough - in Iberia, 'caucasian' seems linked to 1) late neolithical movements - 2) to bronze ages colonizations from East - the less dense Portugal could be explained by a first wave of neolithical people, more on the side of Y-G2a and 'western mediterranean' ('basque' + 'sardinian'), and maybe by a light Lusitani impact (I-Eans) - in Spain, the central less dense 'caucasian can be due to Celtiberes' and others from central and western Europe? Germanics could have played too -
for northern Italy, I'm surprised too by the very high level of 'caucasian': a more precise sampling could break down this unity?

 

[Angela]

Maciamo, I'm a bit surprised by the 'spot' of 'caucasian' in Guipuzcoa (I believe), lost among a region where 'caucasian' is poor enough - in Iberia, 'caucasian' seems linked to 1) late neolithical movements - 2) to bronze ages colonizations from East - the less dense Portugal could be explained by a first wave of neolithical people, more on the side of Y-G2a and 'western mediterranean' ('basque' + 'sardinian'), and maybe by a light Lusitani impact (I-Eans) - in Spain, the central less dense 'caucasian can be due to Celtiberes' and others from central and western Europe? Germanics could have played too -
for northern Italy, I'm surprised too by the very high level of 'caucasian': a more precise sampling could break down this unity?

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by breaking down this unity of the "caucasian" element in northern Italy. That element is clinal in Italy, like virtually everything else; caucasus is 22.8 in northern Italy, about 28 in Tuscany and 36 or so in the south on this calculator.

Within the north, the academic sample from Bergamo and the more general north Italian dodecad population have virtually the same amount of 'caucasus' component.

The interesting thing, as I've mentioned before, is that Oetzi's caucasus component on the same calculator was also 22%, but Gok 4, also a Neolithic farmer, only had about 5%. So, does the caucasus component in Europe represent a later and slightly different Neolithic migration, and/or is this a sign of the beginning of the metal age migrations. After all, not only did Oetzi possess copper tools, but he had high arsenic levels in his blood, which indicate he probably was a copper worker, and let's not forget that metal working first moved from the east into the Balkans, and then later came east again with other migrations.

As to the relationship between the Gedrosia and West Asian components, this is what Dienekes has to say about it:

"Similarly, the West_Asian component (from K=7) is intermediate between the Caucasus and Gedrosia components; the Gedrosia component diverges in the direction of the Asian groups (not shown in this figure), and in particular of South Asians.

Caucasus/West_Asian components are definitely not comparable across calculators, since 'dv3' used a "West European" category that the other calculators do not, and which was shifted toward West Asia relative to the other "East_European" component."

As to the K=12 versus K=12b calculators, this is what he has to say: "The additional step of distant relative filtering may also have influenced overall component levels in some cases. Its overall effect is to preclude the creation of population-specific components. Such filtering did take place during 'dv3' for populations with known sets of apparently distantly related individuals (such as the HGDP Arab groups), but it was done with a uniform procedure across all populations in K12a/b."

Different calculators were done at different times, and the later ones are going to both include more populations and be more refined that the earlier ones. Also, some calculators were created for specific purposes, such as the Globe 13, which was meant to clarify the issue of the SSA component in West Eurasians.

His best explanation of the relationship between the Caucasus and West Asian components is here in his discussion discussion of K=7b versus K=12b:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09/inter-relationships-between-dodecad-k7b.html

Gedrosia is just Caucasus with a slice of South Asian. Perhaps a population from further south toward South Asia that picked up a lot of Caucasus during their stay in that area. When the Gedrosia component is not included, I think this is where the South Asian that people get comes from...

 

[Sile]

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by breaking down this unity of the "caucasian" element in northern Italy. That element is clinal in Italy, like virtually everything else; caucasus is 22.8 in northern Italy, about 28 in Tuscany and 36 or so in the south on this calculator.

Within the north, the academic sample from Bergamo and the more general north Italian dodecad population have virtually the same amount of 'caucasus' component.

The interesting thing, as I've mentioned before, is that Oetzi's caucasus component on the same calculator was also 22%, but Gok 4, also a Neolithic farmer, only had about 5%. So, does the caucasus component in Europe represent a later and slightly different Neolithic migration, and/or is this a sign of the beginning of the metal age migrations. After all, not only did Oetzi possess copper tools, but he had high arsenic levels in his blood, which indicate he probably was a copper worker, and let's not forget that metal working first moved from the east into the Balkans, and then later came east again with other migrations.

As to the relationship between the Gedrosia and West Asian components, this is what Dienekes has to say about it:

"Similarly, the West_Asian component (from K=7) is intermediate between the Caucasus and Gedrosia components; the Gedrosia component diverges in the direction of the Asian groups (not shown in this figure), and in particular of South Asians.

Caucasus/West_Asian components are definitely not comparable across calculators, since 'dv3' used a "West European" category that the other calculators do not, and which was shifted toward West Asia relative to the other "East_European" component."

As to the K=12 versus K=12b calculators, this is what he has to say: "The additional step of distant relative filtering may also have influenced overall component levels in some cases. Its overall effect is to preclude the creation of population-specific components. Such filtering did take place during 'dv3' for populations with known sets of apparently distantly related individuals (such as the HGDP Arab groups), but it was done with a uniform procedure across all populations in K12a/b."

Different calculators were done at different times, and the later ones are going to both include more populations and be more refined that the earlier ones. Also, some calculators were created for specific purposes, such as the Globe 13, which was meant to clarify the issue of the SSA component in West Eurasians.

His best explanation of the relationship between the Caucasus and West Asian components is here in his discussion discussion of K=7b versus K=12b:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09/inter-relationships-between-dodecad-k7b.html

Gedrosia is just Caucasus with a slice of South Asian. Perhaps a population from further south toward South Asia that picked up a lot of Caucasus during their stay in that area. When the Gedrosia component is not included, I think this is where the South Asian that people get comes from...

wasn't the final outcome that gedrosian was a subset of west-asian and formed in western iran and moved eastward, while west-asian "birthplace" is more an area covering mesopotamia and northern iranian areas?

 

[Sile]

wasn't the final outcome that gedrosian was a subset of west-asian and formed in western iran and moved eastward, while west-asian "birthplace" is more an area covering mesopotamia and northern iranian areas?

Edit: looking at dodecad K7b, K12 and K12b , I find the K7b more clearer and less cluttered than the others.
For me, it fits with verbal info from some genetic companies, ie, ftdna, dnatribes and others.
K12b seems to want to find the precise area for each individual, which seems a tall order.

K7b for me

Population

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

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

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.44 [/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]West_Asian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]17.43[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.00[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]African[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.20[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Southern[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]26.21[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Atlantic_Baltic[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]55.72[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]East_Asian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.00[/TD]

Pct. Calc. Option 2

1	N_Italian	90.69%
2	Mordovians	3.06%
3	Bulgarian	2.93%
4	Burusho	2.39%
5	TSI30	0.49%
6	Lezgins	0.31%
7	Tajiks	0.11%
8	Canarias	0.00%
9	O_Italian	0.00%
10	Murcia	0.00%

Mordovians are central russian people......not to be confused with Moldovians.
Burusho are border people between tajikstan and pakistan
TSI30 are tuscan
Lezkins and a mix of azeri and Azerbaijan

 

[Angela]

Edit: looking at dodecad K7b, K12 and K12b , I find the K7b more clearer and less cluttered than the others.
For me, it fits with verbal info from some genetic companies, ie, ftdna, dnatribes and others.
K12b seems to want to find the precise area for each individual, which seems a tall order.

K7b for me

Population

South_Asian

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

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

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

[TD="align: right"]0.44[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]West_Asian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]17.43[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.00[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]African[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.20[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Southern[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]26.21[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]Atlantic_Baltic[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]55.72[/TD]

[TD="width: 30, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 120"]East_Asian[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]0.00[/TD]

Pct. Calc. Option 2

1	N_Italian	90.69%
2	Mordovians	3.06%
3	Bulgarian	2.93%
4	Burusho	2.39%
5	TSI30	0.49%
6	Lezgins	0.31%
7	Tajiks	0.11%
8	Canarias	0.00%
9	O_Italian	0.00%
10	Murcia	0.00%

Mordovians are central russian people......not to be confused with Moldovians.
Burusho are border people between tajikstan and pakistan
TSI30 are tuscan
Lezkins and a mix of azeri and Azerbaijan

It always amazes me how accurate his calculators can be, at least for people of Italian ancestry, which are the results with which I'm most familiar, in how individual results so clearly fit the overall patterns.

These are are mine for 7b:
S.Asian .2
W.Asian 17.2 ( virtually identical)
Siberian 0
African 0
Southern 32.1
Atlantic/Baltic 50.6
E.Asian 0

Given that I'm half Tuscan, and that Parma is south of you, (Friuli and Vicenza?) the about six percent swing in Southern vs. Atlantic Baltic makes sense to me. And, as I suspected, there's almost no difference in the West Asian.

I think there does tend to be more clarity at the lower "K". Not using North Africa as a cluster is also very helpful, I think. North Africa, as Dienekes showed in the link above, is neatly about 60% Southern, it looks like, with the rest divided between SSA and Atlantic/Batlic. (on average of course.) As for K=12, as I posted above, I think it's got some issues.

With reference to your question about Gedrosian and West Asian, I thought that northern Iran was part of the discussions about possible locations, or at least way stations, for the origin of R1b, and/or the Indo-European languages. I certainly could be wrong about that, though. Do you have any blogs in particular where he discussed the West Asian and Gedrosian relationship in more detail than in the one I linked to above? I'd love to read it...the whole topic is indeed a little murky.

From what I can see in that analysis above, West Asian in the K=7b run, as expressed in k= 12b components, shows that West Asian as a combination of Caucasus and Gedrosian. (The modal for "West Asian" is variably either Georgia or the Adyghei. )

K=12b Caucasus as expressed in K=7b components is what looks to be about 50-60% or so West Asian, about 30% Southern and about 10% Atlantic-Baltic.

 

[Sile]

It always amazes me how accurate his calculators can be, at least for people of Italian ancestry, which are the results with which I'm most familiar, in how individual results so clearly fit the overall patterns.

These are are mine for 7b:
S.Asian .2
W.Asian 17.2 ( virtually identical)
Siberian 0
African 0
Southern 32.1
Atlantic/Baltic 50.6
E.Asian 0

Given that I'm half Tuscan, and that Parma is south of you, (Friuli and Vicenza?) the about six percent swing in Southern vs. Atlantic Baltic makes sense to me. And, as I suspected, there's almost no difference in the West Asian.

my line is Trevisan and Trentin , you parma Line indicates an Emilian and northern Tuscan, maybe even Lucchese. The lombard and piedmontese would also fit to a degree.
I agree the six % makes sense especially for you, deducting from atlantic to give to your southern

With reference to your question about Gedrosian and West Asian, I thought that northern Iran was part of the discussions about possible locations, or at least way stations, for the origin of R1b, and/or the Indo-European languages. I certainly could be wrong about that, though. Do you have any blogs in particular where he discussed the West Asian and Gedrosian relationship in more detail than in the one I linked to above? I'd love to read it...the whole topic is indeed a little murky.

From what I can see in that analysis above, West Asian in the K=7b run, as expressed in k= 12b components, shows that West Asian as a combination of Caucasus and Gedrosian. (The modal for "West Asian" is variably either Georgia or the Adyghei. )

K=12b Caucasus as expressed in K=7b components is what looks to be about 50-60% or so West Asian, about 30% Southern and about 10% Atlantic-Baltic.

I will check my data for you.

in regards to placing these names,
West-asian is mesopotamia, and most of irak, western iran, going east from there is Gedroasian which is eastern iran, and then the last piece of eastern iran with southern pakistan is Baloucki. Some companies say the levant and anatolia are wes-asian as well......I am unsure.

Is west-asian to you the caucasus as well or only for K7b?........i see as separate ( but not for K7b, they are the same, included)

Soth-west asian is the arabian peninsula.

 

[Angela]

my line is Trevisan and Trentin , you parma Line indicates an Emilian and northern Tuscan, maybe even Lucchese. The lombard and piedmontese would also fit to a degree.
I agree the six % makes sense especially for you, deducting from atlantic to give to your southern




I will check my data for you.

in regards to placing these names,
West-asian is mesopotamia, and most of irak, western iran, going east from there is Gedroasian which is eastern iran, and then the last piece of eastern iran with southern pakistan is Baloucki. Some companies say the levant and anatolia are wes-asian as well......I am unsure.

Is west-asian to you the caucasus as well or only for K7b?........i see as separate ( but not for K7b, they are the same, included)

Soth-west asian is the arabian peninsula.

I'm sorry, I thought you said your mother's family was from Vicenza. I don't go into all the details when speaking with non-Italians, as I'm sure it generates total boredom and incomprehension, but to be precise, my father's lineages are all from Parma for at least the last 500 or so years. My mother's line is half from La Spezia, and half from the Lunigiana, (part of Massa Carrara) which has been "Tuscan" since the Medici got it, but which is more a blend of eastern Liguria and Emilia in terms of language, food, culture etc. The dialect is basically emiliano un po ligurizzato.

Lucca (and Pisa), is quite different...and not only in terms of language etc., from the Lunigiana (especially the central and northern Lunigiana), more so from western Emilia, but even from the Fiorentini. If you look at the old anthropology maps of Italy, you can see it clearly. They're more "southern" than they should be, given their location. I think it may have something to do with their isolation behind the Apennines. You can sometimes track the north to south migrations by looking at where the major passes (and today the major roads) are located, and where they empty out onto the plain from the mountains. Of course, these distinctions hardly exist in today's Italy, given the massive emigration from south to north, but also within the north.

Well, there's a difference between where these populations may have been during the Neolithic and where these components can be found, and in what percentage, in modern populations. There's been some good papers recently on the Levant, particularly on Christian versus Moslem populations there. You may have seen it. Anyway, the "West Asian" component declines as you go south from the Caucasus. (West Asian today, as I said, is modal in Georgians usually.) The Southwest Asian (which is modal in the Bedouin) declines as you go north. The Levant is a mix. I think the percentages would have varied depending on the period under discussion. That recent paper showed that Christian Levantines, who have not intermarried with the new influx of people from the south because of the Muslim incursions, are proportionately more West Asian than the Moslem Levantines. (They also don't have as much SSA, because they did not participate in the Arab slave trade.) It's not a one to one correspondence, but you could broadly see it as J2a versus J1e, although both probably originated around the Taurus mountains, but with J1e moving south early and then that founder event and drift expanding the J1e. Iraq is even *more* different today than what it was like in the Neolithic. A lot of southern Iraq was settled by Arabian tribes after the Muslim period started, so I don't think you're not going to find the original agriculturalists of the Neolithic in that area. Iran has changed too.

This is why I keep harping on the fact that modern populations are only a poor approximation of ancient ones, although some are better than others.

 

[Angela]

Apropos of this discussion:
http://www.dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/08/multiple-sources-of-european-barley.html

We must have ESP...

 

[Sile]

I'm sorry, I thought you said your mother's family was from Vicenza. I don't go into all the details when speaking with non-Italians, as I'm sure it generates total boredom and incomprehension, but to be precise, my father's lineages are all from Parma for at least the last 500 or so years. My mother's line is half from La Spezia, and half from the Lunigiana, (part of Massa Carrara) which has been "Tuscan" since the Medici got it, but which is more a blend of eastern Liguria and Emilia in terms of language, food, culture etc. The dialect is basically emiliano un po ligurizzato.

Lucca (and Pisa), is quite different...and not only in terms of language etc., from the Lunigiana (especially the central and northern Lunigiana), more so from western Emilia, but even from the Fiorentini. If you look at the old anthropology maps of Italy, you can see it clearly. They're more "southern" than they should be, given their location. I think it may have something to do with their isolation behind the Apennines. You can sometimes track the north to south migrations by looking at where the major passes (and today the major roads) are located, and where they empty out onto the plain from the mountains. Of course, these distinctions hardly exist in today's Italy, given the massive emigration from south to north, but also within the north.

to clarify, my mother was born in San Zenone dei Ezzelini, which is inside treviso region, but is the last town before crossing into Vicenza Region. San Zenone is 6k from Bassano di Grappa ( which is th efirst town in Vicenza region)

Well, there's a difference between where these populations may have been during the Neolithic and where these components can be found, and in what percentage, in modern populations. There's been some good papers recently on the Levant, particularly on Christian versus Moslem populations there. You may have seen it. Anyway, the "West Asian" component declines as you go south from the Caucasus. (West Asian today, as I said, is modal in Georgians usually.) The Southwest Asian (which is modal in the Bedouin) declines as you go north. The Levant is a mix. I think the percentages would have varied depending on the period under discussion. That recent paper showed that Christian Levantines, who have not intermarried with the new influx of people from the south because of the Muslim incursions, are proportionately more West Asian than the Moslem Levantines. (They also don't have as much SSA, because they did not participate in the Arab slave trade.) It's not a one to one correspondence, but you could broadly see it as J2a versus J1e, although both probably originated around the Taurus mountains, but with J1e moving south early and then that founder event and drift expanding the J1e. Iraq is even *more* different today than what it was like in the Neolithic. A lot of southern Iraq was settled by Arabian tribes after the Muslim period started, so I don't think you're not going to find the original agriculturalists of the Neolithic in that area. Iran has changed too.

This is why I keep harping on the fact that modern populations are only a poor approximation of ancient ones, although some are better than others.

Since I am 100% European which makes me 2200 years in Europe, my goal is to find out for me where my line was before. So, if the Caucasus is west-asian admixture and to me the caucasus represents Europe ( of advise me if I am wrong ), then I am searching in the wrong place.
Are the ossetians , west-asian admixture, what about Jordanians? .......i would really like to find out the borders of these admixtures.

 

[Kardu]

Here are my (as one of the real representative of the Caucasus) data for K12b and K7b for comparison:

Gedrosia 18.27%

North_European 8.78%

Southwest_Asian 6.82%

East_Asian 1.14%

Caucasus 64.96%

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Abhkasians (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]8.32[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Georgians (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]10.41[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Armenians (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]11.61[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Armenians_15 (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]14.24[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]North_Ossetians (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]14.58[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Adygei (HGDP)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]14.74[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Balkars (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]14.81[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Armenian (Dodecad)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]15.33[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Georgia_Jews (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]18.2[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]10[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Azerbaijan_Jews (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]19.11[/TD]

West_Asian 60.16%

Southern 28.92%

Atlantic_Baltic 9.55%

East_Asian 1.37%

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Georgians (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]3.06[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Abhkasians (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]5.05[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Kurds (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.17[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Kurd (Dodecad)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]7.56[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Armenians (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]8.9[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]6[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Armenians_15 (Yunusbayev)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]9.05[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Iranian (Dodecad)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]9.8[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]8[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Iranians (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]10.52[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]9[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Armenian (Dodecad)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]11.21
[/TD]

[TD="width: 40, align: center"]10[/TD]
[TD="width: 220"]Uzbekistan_Jews (Behar)[/TD]
[TD="width: 50, align: right"]11.8[/TD]

 

[Knovas]

K7b is a much reliable than K12b, and fits with the vast majority of experiments done so far.


Mine:

Atlantic Baltic 64.6 %

Southern 30.1 %

West Asian 3.3 %

South Asian 1.9%

Siberian 0.0 %

East Asian 0.0 %

African 0.0 %


It is courious how South Asian shows up many times among Europeans, specially in the Globe13 analysis where I got a very similar figure. Dienekes' blogged time ago some of the West Asian segments are sometimes interpreted by the software as South Asian, since the later is quite similar to West Asian for obvious reasons. Anyways, that goes pretty much in line with other results and shows me incredibly close to the Aragonese samples. I guess other Catalans from little towns would get more or less the same.

By the way, K12b shows 10% Caucasus, 3% Gedrosia, 2% South Asian...so I think it is very likely that at least this Caucasus component does not always reflect reality. Just remove it and then makes perfect sense with K7b.

 

[Alan]

K7b is a much reliable than K12b, and fits with the vast majority of experiments done so far.


Mine:

Atlantic Baltic 64.6 %

Southern 30.1 %

West Asian 3.3 %

South Asian 1.9%

Siberian 0.0 %

East Asian 0.0 %

African 0.0 %


It is courious how South Asian shows up many times among Europeans, specially in the Globe13 analysis where I got a very similar figure. Dienekes' blogged time ago some of the West Asian segments are sometimes interpreted by the software as South Asian, since the later is quite similar to West Asian for obvious reasons. Anyways, that goes pretty much in line with other results and shows me incredibly close to the Aragonese samples. I guess other Catalans from little towns would get more or less the same.

By the way, K12b shows 10% Caucasus, 3% Gedrosia, 2% South Asian...so I think it is very likely that at least this Caucasus component does not always reflect reality. Just remove it and then makes perfect sense with K7b.

Globe 13 or K12b are of better use for population genetics of the modern because it does differentiate between SW Asian and Mediterranean genes, though both components are close there is still a difference.

 

[Alan]

However, Maciamo I do not agree that Caucasus is the Neolithic farmer signal since it's absent in the much more Neolithic influenced West Europe.

The Mediterranean or Southern component of the lower Ks from K7b is a much better candidate for Neolithic farmer signal.

 

[Alan]

..................

 

[MOESAN]

K7b is a much reliable than K12b, and fits with the vast majority of experiments done so far.


Mine:

Atlantic Baltic 64.6 %

Southern 30.1 %

West Asian 3.3 %

South Asian 1.9%

Siberian 0.0 %

East Asian 0.0 %

African 0.0 %


It is courious how South Asian shows up many times among Europeans, specially in the Globe13 analysis where I got a very similar figure. Dienekes' blogged time ago some of the West Asian segments are sometimes interpreted by the software as South Asian, since the later is quite similar to West Asian for obvious reasons. Anyways, that goes pretty much in line with other results and shows me incredibly close to the Aragonese samples. I guess other Catalans from little towns would get more or less the same.

By the way, K12b shows 10% Caucasus, 3% Gedrosia, 2% South Asian...so I think it is very likely that at least this Caucasus component does not always reflect reality. Just remove it and then makes perfect sense with K7b.

I 'm afraid none of the Dodecad poolings is good enough in itself and I think a 'Atlantic-Baltic' component is a nonsense according to my (modest) knowledge of anthropology, ancient as well as current - so we are obliged, waitning better, to combinne more or less the different poolings, trying to see were some names can abuse us about their genetical contents

 

[Knovas]

Alan

Maybe what is useless is a Southwest Asian component then. I've seen it many times in the Erogenes project: at lower resolution I have 5% aprox (the same as globe13), while increasing it I get 0% (identical to Dv3). So to my understanding, that is telling indeed Southwest Asian isn't particularly informative in terms of admixture, not even for Saudis for instance, who would get more East African instead of Southwest Asian.