Map of ANE, WHG and Early Neolithic Farmer admixture in Europe, West Asia and North Africa

[Demhat]

Now let's forget about the rather outdated admixture components of earlier calculators and concentrate on more ancient and ancestral ANE, WHG and Farmer components

Here is a rough map I made based on Eurogenes "West_Eurasia K8" results. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x8pm8sVcHqceiNFJMO082kxaBF5ePr4__bAK05VQRFw/edit#gid=62882571

Legend

ENF: Early Neolithic Farmer
ANE: Ancient North Eurasian
WHG: Western Hunters&Gatherers
SEA: South Eurasian (seems to be some kind of South_Central Asian component related to ANE)
EEA: East Eurasian
OCE: Oceanian
SSA: Sub Saharan African (but is in my opinion more of an "East African" type).

Components <1% were not taken into consideration.

http://img5.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/blankmapeurope57nabwr3eh.png


Update: Jews, Samaritans and Palestinians added.

Had to add Samaritans because they seem to be best proxy for ENF.

[Longbowman]

Sources?

[Black Wolf]

Sources?

http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2014/12/ane-is-primary-cause-of-west-to-east.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2014/12/the-fateful-triangle.html

[Tiberio]

Mainlander southern italian samples are from which region?

[Mars06]

What would you say the appearances of the purest forms of these components would be like?

[Demhat]

Sources?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x8pm8sVcHqceiNFJMO082kxaBF5ePr4__bAK05VQRFw/edit#gid=62882571

[Demhat]

Mainlander southern italian samples are from which region?

No idea, the samples are labeled as "South_Italian". Look at the spreadsheet

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x8pm8sVcHqceiNFJMO082kxaBF5ePr4__bAK05VQRFw/edit#gid=62882571


However the more Central Sample in Italy is from Abruzzo and not really Central but more South_Central.

[Tiberio]

So you have used a mixed of those two.

[Demhat]

What would you say the appearances of the purest forms of these components would be like?


For ANE.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3018/2910820856_c6fb37651c.jpghttp://farm4.staticflickr.com/3384/3193909062_199799d9b2_b.jpghttps://31.media.tumblr.com/dd8c33865ec383a2748dde49a9a5073c/tumblr_inline_mz91qzcYJd1s0jkdi.jpghttp://lilwizz.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/kalash3.jpghttps://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c5/32/87/c53287e28fc546fc75665c50df813176.jpg


For ENF something close to this.

Samaritans
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Flickr_-_Government_Press_Office_%28GPO%29_-_Samaritans_praying_during_Passover_holiday_ceremo ny_on_mount_Grizim.jpg





WHG is a bit harder to pinpoint because there are not many Europeans with dark skin color and light eyes. It must however be something close to ANE since they are almost like siblings.

With darker skin this woman would be a good guess for WHG.
http://b.bimg.dk/node-images/458/5/480x-u/5458400-russia-vote-justice-business-rights.jpg

[askra]

Again the same middle eastern third worlder speaking about sardinians, today he hasn't created fake maps or written that west asians are northern europeans.

[Demhat]

Again this middle eastern third worlder speaking about sardinians, today he hasn't created fake maps or wrote that west asians are northern europeans.

What have I said, to break your heart now again? I seriously don't understand what is going on in your head. :D

[Longbowman]

Again this middle eastern third worlder speaking about sardinians, today he hasn't created fake maps or written that west asians are northern europeans.

His data seems accurate, backed up with sources. What's your issue?

[Demhat]

nevermind.

[Demhat]

So you have used a mixed of those two.

For South Italy I used the South_Italy samples. For North Italy I used the North Italy samples. And for the more Central Region I used Abruzzo because this is the closest samples I could find.

[Black Wolf]

Again the same middle eastern third worlder speaking about sardinians, today he hasn't created fake maps or written that west asians are northern europeans.

What?

[Gaston]

Finally! People are taking into account non-obsolete calculators.


I've made this sketch of a map recently for another thread dedicated to european admixture (or the other way around):
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=53291&d=1418999614

Just add 14-16% in place of the question marks in NW Africa (data missing in the original run) and the picture is more complete.


EDIT: this is from the run giving the lower bound numbers for WHG.

[Übermensch]

whi is it not on gedmatch yet?

[Not a Cop]

Finally! People are taking into account non-obsolete calculators.


I've made this sketch of a map recently for another thread dedicated to european admixture (or the other way around):
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=53291&d=1418999614

Just add 14-16% in place of the question marks in NW Africa (data missing in the original run) and the picture is more complete.


EDIT: this is from the run giving the lower bound numbers for WHG.

Calcukator is interesting indeed, status of ancient europeans of Basques finally have some basis.

[Tiberio]

WHG is around 23% in Sicily overall in your spreadsheet and EEF is 65%. Correct please.

[Tiberio]

Weird. I remember greeks having around 17% ANE and WHG in the single digits.

Think it was this
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30123-Makin-a-map-of-EEF-WHG-and-ANE-admixtures-in-Europe-Please-post-your-data

He has used K8 of Eurogenes.
By the way i have calculated the percentage of ENF and WHG for Sicily and his are wrong. 23 WHG and 65 ENF. Correct.

[Longbowman]

Weird. I remember greeks having around 17% ANE and WHG in the single digits.

Think it was this
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30123-Makin-a-map-of-EEF-WHG-and-ANE-admixtures-in-Europe-Please-post-your-data

EDIT: Nvm, the numbers on your map are totally different from the lazaridis paper.

Yeah this is K8, as Tiberio said.

[Tiberio]

Look at that. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x8pm8sVcHqceiNFJMO082kxaBF5ePr4__bAK05VQRFw/edit?pli=1#gid=1855981760
Wrong percentage for Sicily. No 20% WHG but quite 23-24% and 64-65% ENF.

[Tiberio]

So Demhat correct this error.

[Hadouken]

nice

the west asian stats are all very similar

[Jana]

Nice thread!

So it seems Croats are most identical to Hungarians rather than Bosnians and Serbs. Rather suprising, but I heard CRO and HUN share same cluster at PCA plot anyway.....:mmmm:

[Demhat]

WHG is around 23% in Sicily overall in your spreadsheet and EEF is 65%. Correct please.

This are not the Sicily percentage but the "South Italy" samples.

I think you made a mistake This is not EEF but ENA. I recalculated even the Sicily (West Sicily and East Sicily) samples for you and I came to 68.9%

See here. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x8pm8sVcHqceiNFJMO082kxaBF5ePr4__bAK05VQRFw/edit#gid=62882571

27 samples Sicily samples.

I will take a look at the WHG percentages also. If I was wrong I will correct. Let me remind I wrote this is a "rough eye calculation" I didn't calculate them all perfect mathematically.

[Black Wolf]

If any of your get results from David please post them in this thread I created today. I received my results from him this morning. :)

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?153974-Eurogenes-K8-Results

[Tiberio]

Have you used Lower bound Near Eastern or Full?

[Sikeliot]

Mainland southern Italy and Greece score the same, it looks like.

[Demhat]

Finally! People are taking into account non-obsolete calculators.


I've made this sketch of a map recently for another thread dedicated to european admixture (or the other way around):
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=53291&d=1418999614

Just add 14-16% in place of the question marks in NW Africa (data missing in the original run) and the picture is more complete.


EDIT: this is from the run giving the lower bound numbers for WHG.

But now the remaining question is, can we determine "Europeaness" soley based on WHG? What qualifies WHG as more "European" as let's say ANE or ENF. Certanly WHG is much more Europe concentrated but as certanly it, or it's forefather reached Europe also somewhere from West or Central Asia since the Haplogroup I and C which carried this autosomal DNA came from West and Central Asia. yDNA I, beeing even the closest cousin to J (ANE).

Also as far as I remember some H&G from mesolithic North Europe carried already some 10-15% ANE.


The whole concept of "European genes" is completely outdated anyways imo. It's not the components what defines the regions, it's the frequency.

Central and North Europeans have at least 40% WHG and 10% ANE.
South Europeans have at least 48% ENF and 20% WHG.
East Europeans have at least 15% ANE and 45% WHG.


North Africans have at least 10% WHG , 15% SSA/East African and 60% ENF. And as we see now confirmed on the Egyptian samples. Egypt is the crossroad of North Africa and the Levant.

Irano-Anatolians, South Caucasians, Mesopotamians have at least 65% ENF and 15% ANE

Levantines have at least 75% ENF and 5% WHG and 5% ANE.

and Southern West Asians aka Arabians have at least 80% ENF and 8% SSA/East African.

[Demhat]

Have you used Lower bound Near Eastern or Full?

Full, because the full one makes more sense (even according to Eurogenes) . This is why it comes at first place. The lower bound was just an experiment of Davidski as he wrote. It is not that accurate or reliable.

[Tiberio]

Ok look at these percentages.
Central Sicilians 2 samples.
ENF
67%
67%

East Sicilians 10 samples
67%
68%
67%
66%
67%
66%
64%
66%
66%
66%

Western Sicilians 18 samples
67%
67%
69%
66%
66%
67%
65%
67%
62%
62%
68%
65%
66%
63%
65%
64%
65%
66%

[Sikeliot]

66-67% should be the average.

[Damião de Góis]

If you did Catalonia and Basque Country, why not doing the rest of spanish regions?

[Tiberio]

Yes Sikeliot and i've not counted the South_Italians samples.
The average of those samples is that:
18 samples
70%
67%
68%
70%
70%
68%
68%
69%
71%
68%
70%
71%
70%
66%
68%
66%
70%
70%

[Black Wolf]

But now the remaining question is, can we determine "Europeaness" soley based on WHG? What qualifies WHG as more "European" as let's say ANE or ENF. Certanly WHG is much more Europecon concentrated but as certanly it, or it's forefather reached Europe also somewhere from West or Central Asia since the Haplogroup I and C which carried this autosomal DNA came from West and Central Asia. yDNA I, beeing even the closest cousin to J (ANE).

Also as far as I remember some H&G from mesolithic North Europe carried already some 10-15% ANE. And as we see now confirmed on the Egyptian samples. Egypt is the crossroad of North Africa and the Levant.


The whole concept of "European genes" is completely outdated anyways imo. It's not the components what defines the regions, it's the frequency.

Central and North Europeans have at least 40% WHG and 10% ANE.
South Europeans have at least 48% ENF and 20% WHG.
East Europeans have at least 15% ANE and 45% WHG.


North Africans have at least 10% WHG, 15% SSSA/East African and 60% ENF.

Irano-Anatolians, South Caucasians, Mesopotamians have at least 65% ENF and 15% ANE

Levantines have at least 75% ENF and 5% WHG and 5% ANE

and Southern West Asians aka Arabians have at least 80% ENF and 8% SSA/East African.

You think Y-DNA haplogroup J is linked in some way to the ANE component? And what about the Egyptian samples?

[Harkonnen]

The Finnish number is based on only 3 samples, which is kinda ridiculous based on the massive variation inside Finland, compared to basically any other place in Europe. Basically at the extreme ends we have people with very high WHG/ANE/ENA, and then another type with with high farmer and lot lower everything else. But I don't know what Polako is up to with the 3 samples, probably scheaming something, bless the fella.

[Tiberio]

Abruzzo (good proxy also for Campania says a friend of mine).
11 samples
65%
66%
64%
64%
64%
65%
63%
65%
66%
66%
65%

[Sikeliot]

Yes Sikeliot and i've not counted the South_Italians samples.
The average of those samples is that:
18 samples
70%
67%
68%
70%
70%
68%
68%
69%
71%
68%
70%
71%
70%
66%
68%
66%
70%
70%

Those are probably higher because it accounts for Calabria, which is even more genetically eastern than Sicily.

[Harkonnen]

He is waiting for more samples.

What the hell are you talking about, the 1000g samples are all there for him use, he just did not put then in the run. Perhaps he had some reason for it, I don't know.

[Demhat]

Ok look at these percentages.
Central Sicilians 2 samples.
ENF
67%
67%

East Sicilians 10 samples
67%
68%
67%
66%
67%
66%
64%
66%
66%
66%

Western Sicilians 18 samples
67%
67%
69%
66%
66%
67%
65%
67%
62%
62%
68%
65%
66%
63%
65%
64%
65%
66%

@Tiberio-Sikeliot.

As I wrote I didn't actually use the Sicily but South_Italy samples since the results I marked for the regions is for South Italy as a whole.

The South Italy samples turn out as 68% ENF. The Sicily samples as 67%. I think this one percentage is just noise or do you want me to "correct" it down to 67%? I can do that but it seems to me rather unnecessary.

[Demhat]

If you did Catalonia and Basque Country, why not doing the rest of spanish regions?

Because Catalonia and Basque have some "special" status. They are more autonom as far as I know. And the Basque samples are from France.

[Damião de Góis]

Because Catalonia and Basque have some "special" status. They are more autonom as far as I know. And the Basque samples are from France.

They are? In what way?

[Tiberio]

WHG
Central Sicily 2 samples
20%
21%

East Sicily 10 samples
20%
20%
21%
22%
20%
22%
22%
22%
21%
22%

West Sicilians 18 samples
21%
19%
20%
22%
19%
21%
24%
21%
25%
24%
20%
25%
21%
23%
23%
24%
23%
21%

[Tiberio]

@Tiberio-Sikeliot.

As I wrote I didn't actually use the Sicily but South_Italy samples since the results I marked for the regions is for South Italy as a whole.

The South Italy samples turn out as 68% ENF. The Sicily samples as 67%. I think this one percentage is just noise or do you want me to "correct" it down to 67%? I can do that but it seems to me rather unnecessary.

The sicilian percentage is 67% so it's more accurate than those apparently mainlander southern italians.

[Demhat]

WHG
Central Sicily 2 samples
20%
21%

East Sicily 10 samples
20%
20%
21%
22%
20%
22%
22%
22%
21%
22%

West Sicilians 18 samples
21%
19%
20%
22%
19%
21%
24%
21%
25%
24%
20%
25%
21%
23%
23%
24%
23%
21%


Could you also list me the WHG for South_Italy, because I am quite buisy with other things. Than I will recalculate and if it is significantly (at least 2%) more than I noted, than I will correct it. to 22-23% or whatever it might come out.

[Harkonnen]

He opened crowdfunding for a study recently. So that might be it?

I've no idea what's going on exactly but I'd hold my horses before chimping out.

Please believe me, I know for a fact that he has a megaton of Finnish samples. He just chose not to choose them, perhaps he made some pca with this run, and he thougt some Finnish drift would hijack it, or something, I dunno.

[Demhat]

They are? In what way?

As I wrote, Basque samples are from France. Catalonia as far as I know is autonom and they do have quite strong Catalan-national feeling.So whats wrong about it beeing listed regionally/separate anyways?

[Demhat]

OK I recalculated the Sicily samples it came out as ~22%. So WHG is 22% and ENF 58% because South Italy 69 and Sicily 67-68%. I will correct that.

[Tiberio]

Ok Abruzzo and those South_Italy (i don't know from which region they are from though and they seem to be a bit outliers to be honest).

Abruzzo
24%
23%
23%
24%
23%
23%
24%
23%
23%
23%
22%

South_Italy
18%
21%
19%
20%
20%
20%
20%
18%
17%
19%
19%
19%
18%
20%
21%
28%
17%
19%

[Damião de Góis]

As I wrote, Basque samples are from France. Catalonia as far as I know is autonom and they do have quite strong Catalan-national feeling.So whats wrong about it beeing listed regionally/separate anyways?

There's no reason to list Catalonia and not other spanish aunotnomous communities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_communities_of_Spain). It's like if the UK also had regional samples and you chose to list only York just because. Makes no sense.

[Sikeliot]

Abruzzo seems to be close to mainland Greece with most of these scores.

As we can see, southern Italians, Sicilians, and Abruzzese are all primarily descended from West Asian farmers who settled in these places in the Neolithic, and Indo-European influence is low.

[Demhat]

Guys the "Central Italian" list is actually Abruzzo. I wrote in my opening post that I used the Abruzzo samples for "South_Central" Italy since Abruzzo was the closest samples I could get to Central Italy and quite frankly it is also allot closer to other Central Italian regions as it is to Sicily or Calabria. This is why I put the list further South than actual Central Italy.

I recalculated the South Italy/Sicily frequencies. It's now 68% ENF and 22% WHG.

[Tiberio]

Abruzzo is a good proxy for Campania and North Apulia says a friend of mine.
The overall Sicilian results are around 22% WHG and 66 and something of ENF without South_Italy which are outliers.

[Demhat]

Abruzzo is a good proxy for Campania and North Apulia says a friend of mine.
The overall Sicilian results are around 22% WHG and 66 and something of ENF without South_Italy which are outliers.

But why should the South_Italy samples be taken out if the whole data is about Southern Italy as a whole? I think 68% ENF and 22%WHG is a good compromise. Since it actually was 21.6% WHG I put it into 22% instead of 21.5%.

The only thing I could do, is take out South Italy totally and only calculate Sicily seperately but I need some time for that since I am not in the mood to do it now.

[Demhat]

By the way I calculated the Sicily ENF already new and it came out as ~67.6% . I only use full and not lower bound.

[Sikeliot]

What also is interesting is eastern and western Sicily do not differ much, which suggests to me that the idea of one side of the island having more of one influence than another is mostly false. All Sicilians seem to be a Neolithic West Asian population, with Paleolithic Med influence and very minor Indo-European. I'd rather understand it that way than talk about "Norman", "Phoenician", etc. influences.

[Demhat]

What also is interesting is eastern and western Sicily do not differ much, which suggests to me that the idea of one side of the island having more of one influence than another is mostly false. All Sicilians seem to be a Neolithic West Asian population, with Paleolithic Med influence and very minor Indo-European. I'd rather understand it that way than talk about "Norman", "Phoenician", etc. influences.

Nah you can't determine the "Indo Europeaness " based on this. If going this way we could argue that Sicily is "more" Indo European than Southwest Europeans because certanly and definitely the major ANE input into Europe came with Indo Europeans. The Indo Europeans themselves carried a whole chunk of ANE, ENF and some WHG. If we really had to explain it in modern components. Indo Europeans were some kind of 40% Caucasus_Gedrosia, 40% North European and 20% Southern. Some ancient Thracian individuals turned out as almost 50% Caucasus_Gedrosia, some other as almost 60% Southern while some as 50% North European. The Hungarian Iron Age Steppe invader (Indo European) was very similar. But this "West Asian, North European, Mediterranean" is outdated.

In general we can say the Indo Europeans were 30% ANE, 50% ENF and 20% WHG.

[Gaston]

The whole concept of "European genes" is completely outdated anyways imo. It's not the components what defines the regions, it's the frequency.


It's not what you thought until very recently. :thumbs up My map was made in one of your previous threads (where Kurds were according to you 75% European), to show the high Near Eastern ancestry in Europe and the low to nil European ancestry in West Asia.

I've been pointing out for a while how people here use outdated data to suit their agenda. West_Eurasia_K8 helps clear things out and I'm happy people are starting to pay attention to what is up-to-date.

[Black Wolf]

It's not what you thought until very recently. :thumbs up My map was made in one of your previous threads (where Kurds were according to you 75% European), to show the high Near Eastern ancestry in Europe and the low to nil European ancestry in West Asia.

I've been pointing out for a while how people here use outdated data to suit their agenda. West_Eurasia_K8 helps clear things out and I'm happy people are starting to pay attention to what is up-to-date.

I like how we can now finally separate out Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic hunter-gatherer ancestry from Neolithic farmer ancestry in West Eurasia. I count the WHG and ANE components as Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic hunter-gatherer ancestry because neither of them were part of the early Neolithic farmer populations of the Near East most likely while the Near Eastern component obviously is most likely the main if not the only component of the first Neolithic farmers.

[Demhat]

It's not what you thought until very recently. :thumbs up My map was made in one of your previous threads (where Kurds were according to you 75% European), to show the high Near Eastern ancestry in Europe and the low to nil European ancestry in West Asia.

I've been pointing out for a while how people here use outdated data to suit their agenda. West_Eurasia_K8 helps clear things out and I'm happy people are starting to pay attention to what is up-to-date.

Oh be sure thats what I thought for long time now but..
I was just playing the music the people wanted to listen too. I knew very well that it is not very accurate in speaking of Europeaness. Imagine me making a map on which I listed the "Near Easterness of Europeans", can you imagine the hate :)

So i used different terminology. You simply can't be too scientific on this board with so many Users who will get butthurt over anything.


You know I am actually not that active here. My playground is somewhere else, where knowledge about DNA and it's history and real migration path plays a bigger role.

[Longbowman]

I like how we can now finally separate out Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic hunter-gatherer ancestry from Neolithic farmer ancestry in West Eurasia. I count the WHG and ANE components as Upper Paleolithic/Mesolithic hunter-gatherer ancestry because neither of them were part of the early Neolithic farmer populations of the Near East most likely while the Near Eastern component obviously is most likely the main if not the only component of the first Neolithic farmers.

But doesn't EEF predate ANE?

Also, could someone draw up some averages for Ashkenazis and Sephardics? I'd be interested.

@Sikeliot: going by ANE, European Jews are more Indo-European than more SW Europeans.

[Nerdryk]

[QUOTE=Longbowman;3273196]But doesn't EEF predate ANE?[\QUOTE]

It predates the main wave of ANE into Europe, but a bit of ANE seems to have existed in Scandinavia at least around the time of the Neolithic migrations.

[Longbowman]

[QUOTE=Longbowman;3273196]But doesn't EEF predate ANE?[\QUOTE]

It predates the main wave of ANE into Europe, but a bit of ANE seems to have existed in Scandinavia at least around the time of the Neolithic migrations.

Interesting. Either way though, EEF is indigenous if ANE is. Though I would limit it to WHG.

[Black Wolf]

But doesn't EEF predate ANE?

Also, could someone draw up some averages for Ashkenazis and Sephardics? I'd be interested.

@Sikeliot: going by ANE, European Jews are more Indo-European than more SW Europeans.

EEF is not actually a true component. Or really it is a composite of Near Eastern genes and something very WHG like. This new K8 test can separate true WHG ancestry from Neolithic Near Eastern ancestry. Also I am talking about the deep origins of each of the components from the K8 test. I am not talking about when each of them arrived in Europe. I think that the WHG component originated in a European Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherer population and the ANE component originated in a Siberian Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherer population. Neither of those components most likely were present among the very first Neolithic farmers of the Near East. On the other hand the Near Eastern component originated in a Upper Paleolithic Near Eastern population but it later was the main component of the very first people to start farming in the Near East.

[Longbowman]

EEF is not actually a true component. Or really it is a composite of Near Eastern genes and something very WHG like. This new K8 test can separate true WHG ancestry from Neolithic Near Eastern ancestry. Also I am talking about the deep origins of each of the components from the K8 test. I am not talking about when each of them arrived in Europe. I think that the WHG component originated in a European Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherer population and the ANE component originated in a Siberian Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherer population. Neither of those components most likely were present among the very first Neolithic farmers of the Near East. On the other hand the Near Eastern component originated in a Upper Paleolithic Near Eastern population but it later was the main component of the very first people to start farming in the Near East.

Ah, fair enough. I read your post as implying ANE was more indigenous but re-reading I see my error.

[Demhat]

Update: Jews, Samaritans and Palestinians added.

Had to add Samaritans because they seem to be better (not perfect but still better) proxy for ENF.
87.5% ENF and far less SSA and generally less additional admixture than Saudis.

Samaritans pretty close to how we could imagine the early farmers, don't they?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Flickr_-_Government_Press_Office_%28GPO%29_-_Samaritans_praying_during_Passover_holiday_ceremo ny_on_mount_Grizim.jpg

[Willem]

Samaritans are the purest J00s.

[TheForeigner]

Samaritans are the purest J00s.

Samaritans are not Jews by religion or origin. They are descended from non-Jewish Semites brought by Assyrians and Babylonians to replace the deported Israelites and their religion is Abrahamic, but not Judaic.

[Willem]

Samaritans are not Jews by religion or origin. They are descended from non-Jewish Semites brought by Assyrians and Babylonians to replace the deported Israelites and their religion is Abrahamic, but not Judaic.

Racially they are closest thing to the original inhabitants of what is now Israel.

'Regular' Palestinians are much more foreign admixed (mainly SSA and Northern infleunces) and hence poor representatives of ancient Palestine.

[TheForeigner]

Racially they are closest thing to the original inhabitants of what is now Israel.

'Regular' Palestinians are much more foreign admixed (mainly SSA and Northern) and hence poor representatives of ancient Palestine.

How much SSA and what is ''northern''?

[Willem]

How much SSA and what is ''northern''?

See the OP.

As for northern, they seem slightly more WHG and ANE.

[TheForeigner]

See the OP.

As for northern, they seem slightly more WHG and ANE.

You mean the Jews?

[Willem]

You mean the Jews?

Nope, Samaritans vs Palestinians.

Samaritans look like the real natives of Palestine, while Palestinians seem admixed with foreigners.

[TheForeigner]

Nope, Samaritans vs Palestinians.

Samaritans look like the real natives of Palestine, while Palestinians seem admixed with foreigners.

Palestinians have significant Arabian admixture probably, but I doubt much negroid. They probably compare with South Europeans on the latter.

[Willem]

Palestinians have significant Arabian admixture probably, but I doubt much negroid. They probably compare with South Europeans on the latter.

I actually don't think it is Arabian admixture what is causing Palestinians to be deviant from Samaritans. Palestinians seem to have admixed with populations with lower ENF (so no Arabians - but probably blacks and Anatolians?).

[TheForeigner]

I actually don't think it is Arabian admixture what is causing Palestinians to be deviant from Samaritans. Palestinians seem to have admixed with populations with lower ENF (so no Arabians - but probably blacks and Anatolians?).

How much negroid do they have? And I doubt they mixed that much with Ottoman Turks.

[Willem]

How much negroid do they have? And I doubt they mixed that much with Ottoman Turks.

9.5%, even higher than the Saudis and they have lower ENF than the Saudis. So, it can't have come from Saudi Arabs, but most likely from slaves and maybe Egyptians.

[TheForeigner]

9.5%, even higher than the Saudis and they have lower ENF than the Saudis. So, it can't have come from Saudi Arabs, but most likely from slaves and maybe Egyptians.

Wow that is a lot- Are you sure that is not combined African, including North African? Are they really like octoroons almost?

[Hevo]

SSA shows at 9.5%. Highest SSA in europe is 0.5%, according to the map.

Spain has 1.5% according to the map.

[Willem]

Just saw. Seems weird.

It's probably from Berbers.

[wvwvw]

9.5%, even higher than the Saudis and they have lower ENF than the Saudis. So, it can't have come from Saudi Arabs, but most likely from slaves and maybe Egyptians.

Since Palestinians are a diverse population, it depends on the samples, the Levantine looking Palestinians obviously won't score 9,5% negroid.

[Demhat]

Wouldn't that be sardinians?

Nope EEF would be Sardinians. But EEF is not a "real" component, because EEF is ~4/5 ENF + ~1/5 WHG.

Excluding the WHG. Samaritans are closer to the early farmers.

[Demhat]

I actually don't think it is Arabian admixture what is causing Palestinians to be deviant from Samaritans. Palestinians seem to have admixed with populations with lower ENF (so no Arabians - but probably blacks and Anatolians?).

Palestinians are probably more Egyptian than Arabian admixed. Looking at their propotions it seems so. But than the SSA slightly suprised me also. I was expecting something on the 7% range. I suspect some Gazaen samples were among them.

As I wrote on the map. It seems so that most of the SSA admixture in West Eurasians is of East African type. SSA on this calculater is East African minus the ENF in East Africans.

[Demhat]

Phenotype does not equal genotype for 100%. So Palestinians can have around 9% SSA while at the same time looking almost completely West Eurasian.


As example, all North Africans have around 15-22% SSA but phenotypically they look more 90% to fully West Eurasian, because their SSA admixed has merged together with their West Eurasian ancestry and has created a stabilized look in which their predominant West Eurasian admixture started to dominate their phenotype.

[Demhat]

Something about the Sub Saharan component of West_Eurasia K8

Also keep in mind that the so called Sub-Saharan cluster is mixed, and might indicate something basal as opposed to African.

As I thought it's more of an East African Character. Probably 1/4% of it beeing very archaic West Eurasian admixture into East Africa.

[Black Wolf]

Nope EEF would be Sardinians. But EEF is not a "real" component, because EEF is ~4/5 ENF + ~1/5 WHG.

Excluding the WHG. Samaritans are one of the purest form of early farmers.

Correct.

[Black Wolf]

Spain has 1.5% according to the map.

Which actually makes sense.

[Demhat]

Which actually makes sense.

Of course it makes sense, just look what a small strip of water seperates Iberia from North Africa. Also the higher WHG in North Africa speaks for back and for migration. It's still "just" 1.5% anyways.

[Black Wolf]

Of course it makes sense, just look what a small strip of water seperates Iberia from North Africa. Also the higher WHG in North Africa speaks for back and for migration.

Yeah most of the WHG in North Africa has probably been there for a very long time.

[Longbowman]

Yeah most of the WHG in North Africa has probably been there for a very long time.

Definitely. ANE is trace to zero so it can't have come with Westerners.

[Black Wolf]

Definitely. ANE is trace to zero so it can't have come with Westerners.

WHG has probably been in North Africa since at least the Mesolithic.

[Demhat]

Definitely. ANE is trace to zero so it can't have come with Westerners.

Not with modern, but probably with mesolithic WHG from Iberia.

[Black Wolf]

Not with modern, but probably with mesolithic WHG from Iberia.

Mesolithic or Upper Paleolithic or both.

[Vasconcelos]

Mesolithic or Upper Paleolithic or both.

Same count be said about, say, EEA and SSA in Iberia?

[Black Wolf]

Same count be said about, say, EEA and SSA in Iberia?

It is possible but more likely the SSA in Iberia came with the Moors.

[Vasconcelos]

Wouldn't that have a sever impact on other values of Iberia, for instance WHG?
Because Galicians, and Cantabrians have similar values as Andalusians, so that theory doesn't make much sense historically. Aragon was under muslim occupation for much longer than Galicia, yet scores nearly 0.

[Damião de Góis]

Wouldn't that have a sever impact on other values of Iberia, for instance WHG?
Because Galicians, and Cantabrians have similar values as Andalusians, so that theory doesn't make much sense historically. Aragon was under muslim occupation for much longer than Galicia, yet scores nearly 0.

And i must be guessing ANE comes from Visigoths. It's really amazing how a few thousands managed to change the genome of every single one of the millions of people living in Iberia at the time.

[Gaston]

Samples from Murcia are more North African than the rest of Iberia.


North African influence in Iberia (and beyond) must have come in several waves, including in historical times. There is mtdna L in prehistorical remains (Navarra or Castilla, I don't remember) and mtdna M1 in early medieval Basques.
It's also probably through Iberia that the few European-specific L haplogroups might have come.

Interesting though that Iberia has still a lot of WHG admixture. It basically looks like French with NA admix. Or Basque + NA but one has to add extra ANE. This means part of the WHG in Iberia is not from mesolithic Iberians but from other and later European sources (Indo-European? Celts? Visigoths?). North African influence added 1 or 2% WHG at most.

[Vasconcelos]

Interesting though that Iberia has still a lot of WHG admixture. It basically looks like French with NA admix. Or Basque + NA but one has to add extra ANE. This means part of the WHG in Iberia is not from mesolithic Iberians but from other and later European sources (Indo-European? Celts? Visigoths?). North African influence added 1 or 2% WHG at most.

It's probably not because of recent migrations, but because the peninsula is further away from the place NEF came from (Levant through SE Europe), so the number of people migrating here was smaller than in Italy, etc.. which is also why they score lower on this.
That probably means that Iberian population is on average "older" than other South Europeans.

[Demhat]

Interesting though that Iberia has still a lot of WHG admixture. It basically looks like French with NA admix. Or Basque + NA but one has to add extra ANE. This means part of the WHG in Iberia is not from mesolithic Iberians but from other and later European sources (Indo-European? Celts? Visigoths?). North African influence added 1 or 2% WHG at most.

Interestingly the France figures is closer to that of Hungary (wasn't there a Bronze Age sample from Hungary who turned out as very French like?). The main difference between France and Iberia seems to be NA admixture, which did of course not only come in the form of "1,5%"Sub Saharan admixture" but with another portion of ~5% ENF and a percentage or so of additional WHG. So overall North African admixture in Iberia could be as high as 7.5%. But most of it is ENF anyways and we don't know when it came. Probably in various waves. Starting around paleolithic up to modern times.

And the second difference is the higher ANE figures in France of course.

[Demhat]

Iberia is a stabile mix of neolithic and mesolithic genes. But people shouldn't forget, and always take in mind. "Indo European" is not all ANE. ANE in Europe is just a sign of Indo European admixture, since it definitely was carried by Indo Europeans because the large majority of Europe lacked pre Bronze Age ANE admixture. But than In fact the biggest component among Indo Europeans was ENF as it looks like. ANE was the second strongest and WHG was also significant (probably around 25%). I think when Indo Europeans reached Iberia the ANE was already extremely diluted by the other dominant components such as ENF and WHG. Someone else and I have the theory that Indo Europeans had some kind of 45% ENF, 30% ANE and 25% WHG.

Now the ENF figures of Iberia ~50%, are pretty close to the supposed proto Indo European 45%. Thats a total of 95% match for that component. Than you have 25% PIE WHG vs ~38% from Iberia. Thats a total match of 65% and 30% of PIE ANE vs 7% for Iberia. Thats a total match of 23%.

Now the real Indo European influx into Iberia could be anything, wouldn't be able to know the exact figures because we can't tell how much of the match is additional admixture which came with them and how much is native mesolithic-neolithic and simply of similar origin.

What we can say however is that genetic similarity between Iberians and Indo Europeans is around ~63%. But as I said this doesn't mean the Indo European influx was also that high. It could be a recombination of native and Indo European genes which result in 63% similarity.
I personally think Indo European influx into Iberia was around 30%

[Ibericus]

Samples from Murcia are more North African than the rest of Iberia.


North African influence in Iberia (and beyond) must have come in several waves, including in historical times. There is mtdna L in prehistorical remains (Navarra or Castilla, I don't remember) and mtdna M1 in early medieval Basques.
It's also probably through Iberia that the few European-specific L haplogroups might have come.

Interesting though that Iberia has still a lot of WHG admixture. It basically looks like French with NA admix. Or Basque + NA but one has to add extra ANE. This means part of the WHG in Iberia is not from mesolithic Iberians but from other and later European sources (Indo-European? Celts? Visigoths?). North African influence added 1 or 2% WHG at most.
I've always suspected there is 2 murcian individuals who might have recent foreign ancestry. Not because of this test, it's from time ago since Dodecad with his portraits, also on the PCA plots of Polako you can see them two being apart from the rest.

[Ibericus]

Wouldn't that be sardinians?
Sardinians are similar to EEF (Early European Farmers) and they have around 34% of WHG. Not to confuse with ENF (Early Neolithic Farmers) are the pure farmers that left the near-east to migrate to Europe.

[Demhat]

One thing is however clear. Since ANE is the only component which reached Eurpope almost exclusively with Indo Europeans, populations with less ANE can be considered as "less Indo European admixed" and more native.

[Vasconcelos]

One thing is however clear. Since ANE is the only component which reached Eurpope almost exclusively with Indo Europeans, populations with less ANE can be considered as "less Indo European admixed" and more native.

How would that explain that populations who do not belong to the IE language group score similar ANE than their neighbours who do speak them? Basques, for instance.
Simply IEs not achieving cultural/linguistic dominance?

[Demhat]

Turks are as indo-european as russians?

In this hypothesis I was only taking Europe in consideration of course. :) In Western Asia depending on the linguistic group some of ANE is probably from different source. Since all three groups Indo Europeans, Caucasic speakers and Uralic speakers have high frequencies of this because they were/are neighbors and share a common ancestry. But than Anatolian Turks are mostly Indo Europeans who have been "Turkified" linguistically.

[Demhat]

How would that explain that populations who do not belong to the IE language group score similar ANE than their neighbours who do speak them? Basques, for instance.
Simply IEs not achieving cultural/linguistic dominance?

linguistic survivers simply. I tend to believe that all of Iberia was once Basque like and spoke a language similar to Basque. Later the invading Indo Europeans mixed with all Iberians. But the Basques managed to survive as linguistic isolate. Basques even though slightly less, could have also up to 25% Indo European admixture, just that they survived linguistically. We see the same in Central Asia. Turkmens and Tajiks are genetically very similar, both had very weak ~15-20% East Asian admixture from the invading Turkic speakers. But yet the one started to speak a Turkic language while the other (Tajiks) managed to save their language.