Smartpca: Bronze Age Greeks, Bronze Age Italians, Iron Age Italians, & Modern Italians

Jovialis

Jovialis

Advisor
Messages
9,555
Reaction score
6,286
Points
113
Location
New York Metropolitan Area
Ethnic group
Italian
Y-DNA haplogroup
R-PF7566 (R-Y227216)
mtDNA haplogroup
H6a1b7
TAZd3l4.png


If you have been following the Admixtools2 Tutorial page, I have learned how to use smartpca. Which is what is used for academic studies.
 
Last edited:
iron-age italians sit with north italians..
do you have sample R1 ?

or any western coastal samples added ??
 
i mean western coastal balkan samples
 
all the daunians samples sit with northern italians.......considering they came from either north of liburnian zadar town or brac island seems to still be in contention
 
torzio said:
iron-age italians sit with north italians..
do you have sample R1 ?

or any western coastal samples added ??
Click to expand...
I omitted her during qpadm analysis, since they listed her as a "Republican era Roman" when she actually wasn't IRL. When I sub-setted the database, I neglected to re-employ the sample.
 
Last edited:
Jovialis said:
TAZd3l4.png


If you have been following the Admixtools2 Tutorial page, I have learned how to use smartpca. Which is what is used for academic studies.
Click to expand...


Very interisting, Jovialis. This is the academic dataset from the previous PCA, I guess. Modern north Italians who also include Tuscans, central Italians who are individuals from Umbria, Marche and Lazio, and then southern Italians and Sicilians.

In the Iron Age samples I recognize samples from Etruscans, Latins and Daunians. Are there other Iron Age ethnic groups for Italy in the PCA?

Please, try to make a new PCA including modern Sardinians and Nuragics, if they are not there. I don't see them in this one.
 
Very cool. By the way, do you know the difference between ITTQ and ITTQ_d? I've been wondering since AADR v62 came out. It seems like they're not exactly the same in this PCA.

화면 캡처 2024-12-01 193703.png
 
Pax Augusta said:
Very interisting, Jovialis. This is the academic dataset from the previous PCA, I guess. Modern north Italians who also include Tuscans, central Italians who are individuals from Umbria, Marche and Lazio, and then southern Italians and Sicilians.

In the Iron Age samples I recognize samples from Etruscans, Latins and Daunians. Are there other Iron Age ethnic groups for Italy in the PCA?

Please, try to make a new PCA including modern Sardinians and Nuragics, if they are not there. I don't see them in this one.
Click to expand...
Thanks, this is a early draft, I will make a more comprehensive set sometime soon.

This is really a subset of the big pca I made prior.

Indeed, Tuscan is included with North Italian in the native AADR set. As per the finding in Raveane et al. 2019

Though they should also do the same for the other "central Italians" (Lazio, Marche, Umbria) to be included with the South Italian cluster, to be consistent imho.
 
Poxy said:
Very cool. By the way, do you know the difference between ITTQ and ITTQ_d? I've been wondering since AADR v62 came out. It seems like they're not exactly the same in this PCA.

View attachment 17121
Click to expand...
not sure to be honest, I think they are just processed differently.

I know the AG samples are new, the are more comprehensive coverage.
 
I should also take out SGR001, the AADR erroneously calls it an IA sample, when in fact it is a MA sample.
 
Did some quick research with AI, but I'm not totally confident. But _d may indicate diploid, which is considered more comprehensive than samples without it (pseudodiploid). But I would like to confirm that, if someone could find a specific source.
 
Poxy said:
Very cool. By the way, do you know the difference between ITTQ and ITTQ_d? I've been wondering since AADR v62 came out. It seems like they're not exactly the same in this PCA.
Click to expand...

We need to see what that _d means (d stands for double?), it looks like two different versions (genotyped differently?) of the same sample and therefore with (slightly) different positions in a PCA.

All the ITTQs come from this 2024 study (but there are also other samples from other geographic areas, ethnicities, and periods in the dataset that are labeled _d)

www.nature.com

Bioarchaeology aids the cultural understanding of six characters in search of their agency (Tarquinia, ninth–seventh century BC, central Italy) - Scientific Reports

Etruria contained one of the great early urban civilisations in the Italian peninsula during the first millennium BC, much studied from a cultural, humanities-based, perspective, but relatively little with scientific data, and rarely in combination. We have addressed the unusual location of...
www.nature.com www.nature.com

Jovialis said:
Though they should also do the same for the other "central Italians" (Lazio, Marche, Umbria) to be included with the South Italian cluster, to be consistent imho.
Click to expand...

There is likely not complete agreement on this among geneticists. But I'm not sure honestly.

Raveane also in 2021 included the Tuscans with northern Italians, but in this 2021 study there doesn't really seem to be any central Italians (Marche, Umbria, Lazio) but only northern Italians and southern Italians.

 
Jovialis said:
TAZd3l4.png


If you have been following the Admixtools2 Tutorial page, I have learned how to use smartpca. Which is what is used for academic studies.
Click to expand...

Like Torzio mentioned it's interesting how much closer/overlapping IA Italians cluster to modern northern Italians on this PCA. Can you try including Picenes as well if you haven't already?
 
Vitruvius said:
Like Torzio mentioned it's interesting how much closer/overlapping IA Italians cluster to modern northern Italians on this PCA. Can you try including Picenes as well if you haven't already?
Click to expand...
As soon as they post them on the Reich lab, i can try to merge them into the data set
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top