0
It is from MDLP K16 spreadsheet, calculators you mentioned first when discussing NA admixture in Iberia.
Neolithic which is very high in Iberians is fully-European related, as already mentioned it is highest in Sardianians/Basques and not any MENA group. North-western Europeans like English, Scottish, Norwegian will score high neolithic too, but very little Caucasus. It is in south-eastern Europe where Caucasus scores start to rise.but Neolithic component originated in Levant and migrated to Europe during the Neolithic expansion, it is still strong in South Europe and Levant. Caucasus Hunter Gatherer (CHG) spread into Arabia during the Bronze Age (that's where haplogroup J in Arabia come from) and haplogroup J became dominant via founder effect.
MENA's in that calculator score lot more Caucasian than neolithic, it's simply fact. Here, purest Levantines (where you claim neolithic is strong), Lebanese (3 population averages mean):
Caucasian: 47,38 %
Neolithic: 14, 05 %
Caucasus component is almost 3 times more. The same pattern in Arabian Gulf. That's why I claimed it's highly Natufian related, with ANE admixture. In this calculator neolithic component is simply lot more European-related than Caucasian.
(I'm not biased as I score only little bit more neolithic than Caucasian, people in eastern side of Europe have more Caucasian admixture than westerners)
But these are very different components. those calculators are not similar, therefore comparison isn't much possible. SW Asian from this calculator was probably split between Near Eastern and Caucasian in MDLP K16, that's why the scores are different.From Eurasia k9 ASI calculator
Saudi
SW Asian 65.30
Early_Neolithic_Farmers 15.01
Caucasus Hunter Gatherers 13.68
They only have 13% CHG
Bookmarks