Latin American users PCA maps

[Kriptc06]

I wouldnt go as far as to say this map is wrong, what you need to take into consideration is that, it is meant for non mixed people, so you have to have a bit of imagination to interpret this, for example my SSA pulls my red square down, while amerindian pulls it to the right, If I, Kriptc wanst admixed id be somewhere where Mat123 is.

[Petalpusher]

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9o3...YyYXd0akk/edit

FST distance between Amerindian and Eastern Euro: 0.128

FST distance between Baltic and Eastern Euro: 0.024

0.024/0.128 = 0.1875.

Eastern Euro should be a bit over 5 times closer to Baltic in comparison to Amerindian. In the PCA, they are at the same distance. How is this right exactly? Funnily enough, even the Siberian component is closer to Eastern Euro (0.1 distance) than Amerindian. Amerindians have been isolated for a long time, they've drifted into their own people genetically speaking.

Yes that's because you still don't understand it's not a distance, (a distance to what...) I ve explained it about ten times. Each components have several relationships, one to all the other components. Look at the relationship of Amerindian to the others and you ll find it eventually why it's there.

Same example for the ten times in a row. Mix a Baltic guy with a Chinese, would plot close with Amerindian but only high relationship with Baltic and East Asians. Of course ANE has a better relationship with Baltic (EHG ish) since EHG is 75% ANE and 25% WHG. but both still drifts towards Eastern Eurasians generally cause of ANE ("only" 65/70% W.Eurasian)

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Yes that's because you still don't understand it's not a distance, (a distance to what...) I ve explained it about ten times. Each components have several relationships, one to each other all components. Look at the relationship of Amerindian to the others and you ll find it eventually why it's there.

Same example for the ten times in a row. Mix a Baltic guy with a Chinese, would plot close with Amerindian but only high relationship with Baltic and East Asians. Of course ANE has a better relationship with Baltic (EHG ish) since EHG is 75% ANE and 25% WHG. but both still drifts towards Eastern Eurasians generally cause of ANE ("only" 65/70% W.Eurasian)

Amerindian distances to all other components are always over 0.1, so far from everybody. What am I supposed to be seeing here besides that they are isolated from all other peoples and absolutely shouldn't be that close to Eastern Euro?

[Petalpusher]

Amerindian distances to all other components are always over 0.1, so far from everybody. What am I supposed to be seeing here besides that they are isolated from all other peoples and absolutely shouldn't be that close to Eastern Euro?

That Eastern is 100% ANE, WHG 0% and Amerindian is 50% ANE? How does that doesn't make "Eastern" NOT in between the two? Unless you miss the fact ANE is obviously closer to WHG than East Asians. Even if you don't understand the fst, just with these facts, it should be a surprise it ends up there.

Again Eastern (ANE) has unsurprisingly a better relationship in fst with EGH, since they are very closely related, you can just model EHG as 75% ANE and 25% WHG (Like Karelia/Samara), when Amerindians are 50% East Asians. I really don't know what else to tell you.

[Costas]

Add me please!

Abscisse (x-axis): 586 pixel
Ordonnée (y-axis): 240 pixel

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

That Eastern is 100%, Baltic 75% and Amerindian is 50% ANE? How does that doesn't make "Eastern" NOT in between the two? Unless you miss the fact ANE is obviously closer to WHG than East Asians. Even if you don't understand the fst, just with these facts, it should be a surprise it ends up there.

Again Eastern (ANE) has unsurprisingly a better relationship in fst with EGH, since they are very closely related, you can just model EHG as 75% ANE and 25% WHG, when Amerindians are 50% East Asians. I really don't know what else to tell you.

Where are you getting that the Eastern Euro component is 100% ANE? This calculator doesn't even use ANE, it uses components that are all based on modern populations. This calculator came out in 2013, and ANE, if I recall correctly, was only found in 2014. Sure, you can say the ANE is hidden underneath, but nobody today is even close to 100% ANE. The fact that you are saying all that already means that the FST distances released with the calculator aren't being used to space out the components as you claimed in the beginning (and it's pretty obvious, East med also should be quite a bit closer to Europe, the examples can go on and on), and it leads to wrong conclusions.

While the ancient populations that formed Amerindians can indeed be generally considered to be ANE and East Asian, Amerindians already drifted away from everybody due to isolation, and that's what the FST distances that they have show.

[Argentano]

Which is right, ANE (close to "Eastern") is between WHG and Amerindian at world scale, Amerindians are between ANE and East Asians, that's what they get it's well known and easy to verify when placing ancient samples, it's maybe not the absolute best calc for ancient but the general idea is still right. The pca is based on Fst relationships of course.

which would be the best calculator/map for us latinos?

[BirdMan]

Me (Puerto Rican):

Abscisse (x-axis): 347 pixel

Ordonnée (y-axis): 326 pixel

[Costas]

i think you are right, another map with the 3 in a triangle position would be better

Yeah but that doesn't take into account the diversity within European population.

For example I think our European components are quite different.

[Argentano]

373, 316

you have distant italian blood right? Thats probably north italian.