North African and Neareastern geneflow in Europe

[Cristiano viejo]

You don't have to score N.African on 23andme to get some in autosomal btw, probably not significant though.
Were you not who claimed that within the Iberian component the North African ancestry was hidden? :rolleyes:



Her ancestors had probably emigrated from Iberia before Moors came there. ;)

If that was so she would not know that they are from Aragón and Murcia :thumb001:

[Petalpusher]

Were you not who claimed that within the Iberian component the North African ancestry was hidden? :rolleyes:

It's not just for Iberians, like the East Asian is hidden for Finns, or most of the African SSA for N.Africans, once you run real autosomals, it's another story. "Iberian" on 23and me is more Basque or something in northern Spain, it's those who get the most of it, so little N.African is in there.

In here case it's not significant as she s only 1/4, and probably even just 1/8 of her ancestry has some N.African from Murcia, not Aragon. She gets 0.51% East African, but plenty of Euro, even in the north gets that. That's gonna look like noise most of the time.

[Cristiano viejo]

It's not just for Iberians, like the East Asian is hidden for Finns, or most of the African SSA for N.Africans, once you run real autosomals, it's another story. "Iberian" on 23and me is more Basque or something in northern Spain, it's those who get the most of it, so little N.African is in there.

In here case it's not significant as she s only 1/4, and probably even just 1/8 of her ancestry has some N.African from Murcia, not Aragon. She gets 0.51% East African, but plenty of Euro, even in the north gets that. That's gonna look like noise most of the time.

Yes, I know. It is noise when the thing involves French. It is real when it involves Spanish.

[Petalpusher]

Yes, I know. It is noise when the thing involves French. It is real when it involves Spanish.


The N.Africans input, even if little most of the time, stops or become insignificant in northern Spain and Basques. The datas are here, we don't score any. We cannot invent it just to please you.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1Y6nfb7Ka8E/Uaz_N0WrLSI/AAAAAAAAI24/XYZxZo9yHUk/s1600/iberia.jpg

[Cristiano viejo]

The N.Africans input, even if little most of the time, stops or become insignificant in northern Spain and Basques. The datas are here, we don't score any. We cannot invent it just to please you.

In more deeper calculators French also score N.African. Even by haplogroups you do
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

[Petalpusher]

In more deeper calculators French also score N.African. Even by haplogroups you do
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

Which Haplogroups are you talking about? E1b? It's on average lower than anywhere in Germany except the north. And only because the town of Paris "Ile de France" is highly Jewish. Haplogroups are anyway not very reliable for quantifying N.African cause different subclades (Balkans would be 30% N.African by this logic)... IBD is better (cf charts above)

[Cristiano viejo]

Which Haplogroups are you talking about? E1b? It's on average lower than anywhere in Germany except the north. And only because the town of Paris "Ile de France" is highly Jewish. Haplogroups are anyway not very reliable for quantifying N.African cause different subclades (Balkans would be 30% N.African by this logic)... IBD is better (cf charts above)

Not only haplogroups. Even in these maps that you have posted France scores something of everything. Less than Spain, yes, but still something.
You should know (I bet you do) that in more deeper calculators every country scores MENA and even SSA https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tFAa7oxWpcNN-OdMMjBdb4NeWKG7EkpKMzZJVW2_MME/edit#gid=244355057

[Petalpusher]

Not only haplogroups. Even in these maps that you have posted France scores something of everything. Less than Spain, yes, but still something.
You should know (I bet you do) that in more deeper calculators every country scores MENA and even SSA https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tFAa7oxWpcNN-OdMMjBdb4NeWKG7EkpKMzZJVW2_MME/edit#gid=244355057

Im not sure how difficult it is to interpret this IBD map for you, where do you see N.African when all the red is in Spain? There s even more N.African IBD in countries like Hungary or Slovenia than in France, for some reasons, but irrelevant at this level.

I know what all these components are in K7, they won't tell you about MENA and SSA specifically this test is not designed for that. If you are refering to Basal Eurasian, yes it's in every Caucasoid pop.

[Cristiano viejo]

Im not sure how difficult it is to interpret this IBD map for you, where do you see N.African when all the red is in Spain?
I see France darker than let say Norway; That means there is something in France.


There s even more N.African IBD in countries like Hungary or Slovenia than in France, for some reasons, but irrelevant at this level.
Yeah, only it is relevant when works for Spain :rolleyes:
Yourself is saying there is N.African IBD in France :noidea:


I know what all these components are in K7, they won't tell you about MENA and SSA specifically this test is not designed for that. If you are refering to Basal Eurasian, yes it's in every Caucasoid pop.
Are you saying that the SSA in that calculator https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tFAa7oxWpcNN-OdMMjBdb4NeWKG7EkpKMzZJVW2_MME/edit#gid=244355057 is false?

[Not a Cop]

I see France darker than let say Norway; That means there is something in France.


Yeah, only it is relevant when works for Spain :rolleyes:
Yourself is saying there is N.African IBD in France :noidea:

Do you understand, what does IBD mean?

[Cristiano viejo]

Do you understand, what does IBD mean?

I do. Do you do?

[Petalpusher]

I see France darker than let say Norway; That means there is something in France.


Yeah, only it is relevant when works for Spain :rolleyes:
Yourself is saying there is N.African IBD in France :noidea:


Sure 90% of the population of Europe is up a shade of N.African IBD than Scandinavia, which might have less only because they have some mongoloid in their northern part, which is detrimentory to any other sort of admixture be it Euro, MENA or anything else. Those are only three type of extra Euro IBD, we could add East_Asian, Indian, Australian etc.. but Scandinavia is indeed kind of upside down genetically, as there s generally more European admixture in the south than the north. You seems to be very good to distinguish minor differences in the yellow shades, but not much with red ones.

K7 is not designed to calculate SSA for Europeans, it was made to model Euro inside a simple triangle of WHG-ANE-BE, without involving anything else. Take any other calculator like the proven K15 and you ll see where is the N.African. Again, the best way is still to use IBD.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Sure 90% of the population of Europe is up a shade of N.African IBD than Scandinavia, which might have less only because they have some mongoloid in their northern part, which is detrimentory to any other sort of admixture be it Euro, MENA or anything else. Those are only three type of extra Euro IBD, we could add East_Asian, Indian, Australian etc.. but Scandinavia is indeed kind of upside down genetically, as there s generally more European admixture in the south than the north. You seems to be very good to distinguish minor differences in the yellow shades, but not much with red ones.

K7 is not designed to calculate SSA for Europeans, it was made to model Euro inside a simple triangle of WHG-ANE-BE, without involving anything else. Take any other calculator like the proven K15 and you ll see where is the N.African. Again, the best way is still to use IBD.

Iberians obviously have some North African, after all they are right below us. What I don't get is why Spaniards should score SSA on K7?

[crazyladybutterfly]

Iberians obviously have some North African, after all they are right below us. What I don't get is why Spaniards should score SSA on K7?

they dont score more than 1,5 % saa

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

they dont score more than 1,5 % saa

Spaniards don't score and shouldn't score even close to that.

[Bell Beaker]

Spaniards don't score and shouldn't score even close to that.

Galicians and other Western Spaniards usually score the same as Portuguese, but as we have already spoke most of it is east african/north african.

On the k-7 we score on average 0,76% which is accurate from my perspective. :)

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Galicians and other Western Spaniards usually score the same as Portuguese, but as we have already spoke most of it is east african/north african.

On the k-7 we score on average 0,76% which is accurate from my perspective. :)

The average of the Portuguese is 0.76% SSA in the K7 because of the slave trade and our history in Africa, not because of North African. The SSA in K7 is only actual African, not East Africans.

[Petalpusher]

Iberians obviously have some North African, after all they are right below us. What I don't get is why Spaniards should score SSA on K7?

You meant "why, shouldn't score" i guess.

This K7 is an interesting experiment, but Basal Eurasian doesn't exist, yet, there s no sample of it. It's predicted to exist but we don't have it. Eurogenes started off by making nmonte style kind of fits with just WHG (Villabruna), ANE (AG2-3) and that virtual "basal rich" component, those are always imperfect. It emcompasses surely a lot of things, some share across all Eurasian admixed pop, some others that are not.

Besides it's not on Gedmatch and im not sure it's ever gonna be. The K7 everybody can access is another calculator. Admixture makes mathematical fits, IBD is a different animal. Just like everybody is bound to share half of his segments with each parents, there s no uncertainty with IBD, if the segments are here, there s a relationship one way or another.


From the same study on North African and Neareastern geneflow in Europe :


https://s23.postimg.org/60nzsukl7/NA_NE_Fig_S7.png

Zero starts where the arrows begin, past that it's i guess either inflated WHG (ex Basque, Norwegians) or inflated Eastern Eurasian (Finnish), but that's not the purpose of the test and the pattern is pretty clear otherwise. Now everybody tends to focus on N.Africa only but there would be plenty of other things to test for, like ASI, ASE etc..Neareastern affinity, Egyptian/Saudi here, is also significant in southeast oriented pop.

[Cristiano viejo]

You meant "why, shouldn't score" i guess.


Why should we?

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

You meant "why, shouldn't score" i guess.

You are assuming that the North African we have came with 20% SSA, which is very debatable. Using K36:

Spaniard from Aragon:


Iberian 32.04
Italian 19.72
North_Atlantic 10.15
Basque 9.35
West_Med 6.17
North_Sea 4.97
Central_Euro 4.42
Fennoscandian 3.26
East_Central_Euro 2.95
French 2.59
East_Med 2.21
North_African 2.04
Arabian 0.08

Amerindian -
Armenian -
Central_African -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan -
East_Central_Asian -
Eastern_Euro -
Indo-Chinese -
Malayan -
Near_Eastern -
North_Caucasian -
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian -


Spaniard from Castilla-La-Mancha:


Iberian 30.08
Italian 12.90
North_Atlantic 8.66
French 8.55
Basque 8.12
North_Sea 7.37
West_Med 6.90
East_Med 4.30
North_African 3.57
Fennoscandian 3.14
East_Central_Euro 3.04
Armenian 1.82
Central_Euro 0.95
South_Asian 0.33
West_Caucasian 0.15
Oceanian 0.14

Amerindian -
Arabian -
Central_African -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan -
East_Central_Asian -
Eastern_Euro -
Malayan -
Near_Eastern -
North_Caucasian -
Northeast_African -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
Indo-Chinese -


The Iberian I've ever seen with the most North African, a Portuguese. Notice that even though the North African is high, he doesn't score in any other African. A modern Moroccan would have at least 3% Northeast_African to go with the 7% Berber:


Iberian 28.22
Italian 16.96
North_Atlantic 8.97
North_Sea 8.53
French 7.82
West_Med 7.78
North_African 7.25
Fennoscandian 4.28
East_Central_Euro 3.37
Basque 3.30
Near_Eastern 2.26
Central_Euro 1.15
East_Med 0.07

Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Central_African -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan -
East_Central_Asian -
Eastern_Euro -
Indo-Chinese -
Malayan -
North_Caucasian -
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian - -


Where is the African? Iberians are only choosing North African and not other Africans because they have Berber and Berber DNA peaks in North Africa, making it the best fit for those genes. For it to be a perfect fit though, we would need ancient DNA from North Africa to be able to have pure ancient Berber DNA without Arab or a lot of SSA, which unfortunately might be a while to get. Anyway:

Examples of Moroccans:

Moroccan 1 - Northeast_African 15.92 + West_African 4.62 + East_African 2.52 = 23.06% African. This is around the SSA value (20%) that most studies attribute to today's Moroccans (these studies include East Africans). Now, because I'm not retarded (I may be being too optimistic tho :P), and understand that if there are both a North African component and a fully West African in the calculator and this guy is still picking mainly a lot of Northeast_African (which is mainly based on Ethiopian Amhara, Ethiopian Jews, Ethiopian Omoros and Ethiopian Tigrays, which through various spreadsheets are the least African of the Sub-Saharan Africans, being a mix of around 67% Arab/North African and 33% actual African), then it's a bit unfair to say this guy is 23% full SSA right? Doing 15.92*(0.33)+4.62+ 2.52*(0.55 - East_African is based on Maasai's from Kenya, around 55% SSA) = 11.26 SSA, which is close to the SSA value that the only Moroccan that is on the K7 spreadsheet has (10.2, certainly a Northern Moroccan). Same for the other Moroccans...

North_African 36.01
Northeast_African 15.92
Iberian 15.59
Near_Eastern 9.95
Arabian 6.03
West_African 4.62
Italian 3.97
East_African 2.52
East_Med 2.32
West_Med 1.92
Basque 0.58
Oceanian 0.57

Amerindian -
Armenian -
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan -
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro -
Eastern_Euro -
Fennoscandian -
French -
Indo-Chinese -
Malayan -
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_Caucasian -


Moroccan 2 - Northeast_African 14.12 + West_African 7.81 = 21.93 African = 12.46 SSA

North_African 29.38
Northeast_African 14.12
Arabian 11.56
Iberian 11.46
Near_Eastern 9.41
West_African 7.81
West_Med 7.09
East_Med 5.64
East_Balkan 1.76
Basque 1.60
Italian 0.17

Amerindian -
Armenian -
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro -
Eastern_Euro -
Fennoscandian -
French -
Indo-Chinese -
Malayan -
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_Caucasian -


Moroccan 3 - Northeast_African 12.22 + West_African 5.93 + East_African 0.99 = 19.14 African = 10.5 SSA

North_African 28.10
Iberian 16.88
Northeast_African 12.22
Arabian 11.68
Italian 6.65
West_African 5.93
West_Med 5.10
Near_Eastern 4.66
East_Med 3.91
Basque 2.14
North_Sea 1.00
East_African 0.99
East_Balkan 0.56
French 0.18

Amerindian -
Armenian -
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_Asian -
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro -
Eastern_Euro -
Fennoscandian -
Indo-Chinese -
Malayan -
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_Caucasian -


Moroccan 4 - Northeast_African 13.36 + West_African 5.31 + Omotic 0.56 = 19.23 African = 10.27 SSA

North_African 32.18
Northeast_African 13.36
East_Med 10.85
Iberian 10.22
Near_Eastern 8.65
Italian 7.24
West_Med 5.72
West_African 5.31
Arabian 4.56
Basque 1.34
Omotic 0.56

Amerindian -
Armenian -
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan -
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro -
Eastern_Euro -
Fennoscandian -
French -
Indo-Chinese -
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea -
Malayan -
Oceanian -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_Caucasian -


These last two are practically like the Moroccan example in the K7.

Obviously we could discuss other things like the fact that Moroccans are around 15% Iberian, which means there certainly were contacts between Iberia and North African in ancient times, like the Iberomaurusian culture. They have a lot of mtDNA H which seems to have come from Iberia, and it's what makes North Africans have the most European DNA after Jews in the Middle East. There was a study about it:

The ancient Taforalt individuals carried the mtDNA Haplogroup N subclades like U6, H, JT and V, which points to population continuity in the region dating from the Iberomaurusian period.

If we reduce the SSA to half by using mixed Moroccans, they will still score in the same pattern as other Moroccans, only with half the percentages.

Half-Morrocan/Half-Danish:

North_African 15.70
Italian 14.53
Northeast_African 7.62
Iberian 6.75
East_Central_Euro 6.74
Near_Eastern 6.55
North_Sea 5.91
Central_Euro 5.66
North_Atlantic 5.08
French 4.95
Fennoscandian 4.94
Eastern_Euro 4.92
Arabian 4.46
East_African 3.06
West_African 1.94
Armenian 0.86
Volga-Ural 0.33


Half-Morrocan/Half-German:

Iberian 18.42
North_African 15.39
Fennoscandian 9.70
North_Sea 9.31
Italian 9.29
Northeast_African 8.70
Near_Eastern 6.29
Arabian 5.67
East_Med 3.14
French 2.62
Basque 2.18
East_Central_Euro 2.03
Central_Euro 1.91
East_Balkan 1.81
North_Atlantic 1.62
West_African 1.00
West_Med 0.60
East_African 0.28


PS: Gotta go, February 14 and stuff, I'll only be able to respond tomorrow.

[Petalpusher]

You are assuming that the North African we have came with 20% SSA, which is very debatable. Using K36:

Im not assuming anything, there is IBD of both SSA and N.African. It's like telling your mother is not your mother eventhough the IBD is there.

These calculations are wrong, just an example with your 2nd Moroccan sample :


North_African 29.38
Northeast_African 14.12
Arabian 11.56
Iberian 11.46
Near_Eastern 9.41
West_African 7.81
West_Med 7.09
East_Med 5.64
East_Balkan 1.76
Basque 1.60
Italian 0.17


That's : 29.38x20/100 + 14.12/2 + 7.81 = 20.746% SSA, not even counting "Arabian" and "Neareastern" which obviously have some SSA in them. Cranking up the K, only spread the SSA everywhere, like any other components you would try to quantify, a K36 is ridiculous for that. Morocco is usually even higher, more like +25% at low K.


Moroccan @ K6 (Eurasia K6 ANE)
26.83% SSA




ps: I ll move this discussion in another thread, since it has nothing to with Ilma results.

[Petalpusher]

Continuation of the discussion from Ilma 23andme's thread

[Ilma]

Eh, I have 0% North African ancestry in my DNA results thanks :p

But well, continue your discussion about those origins with portuguese and spanish members if you want here, my thread was flooded with that debate lol.

Just wanna tell that if my few spanish ancestors didn't breed and mix with moors despite the fact they knew the invasions, califats etc... Many catholics spanish for generations from centuries should score 0% North African as well.

[Cristiano viejo]

Eh, I have 0% North African ancestry in my DNA results thanks :p

But well, continue your discussion about those origins with portuguese and spanish members if you want here, my thread was flooded with that debate lol.

Just wanna tell that if my few spanish ancestors didn't breed and mix with moors despite the fact they knew the invasions, califats etc... Many catholics spanish for generations from centuries should score 0% North African as well.

Dont pay too attention in these comments. For start most of Moors really were just Iberians converted to Islam.
Look how the descendants of the Moors expelled of Spain look, they live in North Africa since their ancestors were expelled some centuries ago

http://31.media.tumblr.com/c13ea9080a43515981aa79634d6f5022/tumblr_mojem9zyEg1rgvqsso1_500.jpg
http://southpacificberets.com/resources/Belhassen2.jpg
http://6e.img.v4.skyrock.net/5966/49305966/pics/2631596912_1.jpg
http://webzine.unitedfashionforpeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/AVT_Abdelwahab-Meddeb_8055.jpeg
http://i43.tinypic.com/314tr0i.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/14vmnlv.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cWaVZ2bhDH4/TdfJK3NMgGI/AAAAAAAAChM/w11gMPNAOno/s1600/Vannier-AC-Belhaj.jpg
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-C2iiDRf2iLg/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAACE/OJkXEL-uGCs/photo.jpg
http://i40.tinypic.com/2hq71mx.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/25gv6hf.jpg
http://lobertrindsay.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/m1.jpghttp://lobertrindsay.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/m16.jpg
http://s7.postimg.org/cho1s2k6z/moriscos3.png
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hHZmnqMGUsE/Tg3URDLVC-I/AAAAAAAAAkc/WwYtXPHZq2s/s640/Cover.jpg[img]
http://s7.postimg.org/8k0s2nxdn/morisca3.png

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?88192-Classify-real-Moors

400 years later and many of them still look European :rolleyes:

[Ibericus]

In that study of IBD France only has 1 sample and it's from the north, so it's not representative for all of France, we would need more samples from all over the country. Some french on Dodecad score some north-african, including higher than some spaniards.

As for haplogroups, it's true that many samples of France had some frequencies of E-M81 (the so-called berber haplogroup) :

French n=3/85 3.5% Cruciani 2004.
French n=3/73 4.1% Scozzari 2001.
Auvergne n=5/89 5.62 Cruciani 2004.
Île-de-France (5/91) 5.49 Cruciani 2004.
Béarn, Gascony n=1/56 1.78% Martínez-Cruz et al. 2012,
Bigorre, Gacony n=1/44 2.72% Martínez-Cruz et al. 2012
Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur n=1/45 2.22% Ramos-Luis et al. 2013.
Nord-Pas-de-Calais n=3/70 4.29% Ramos-Luis et al. 2013
Midi-Pyrénées n=1/67 1.49% Ramos-Luis et al. 2013.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Im not assuming anything, there is IBD of both SSA and N.African. It's like telling your mother is not your mother eventhough the IBD is there.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1Y6nfb7Ka8E/Uaz_N0WrLSI/AAAAAAAAI24/XYZxZo9yHUk/s1600/iberia.jpg

Saying there is IBD without mentioning values is kinda pointless. Literally half of Iberia has the same SSA IBD as half of Greece which has practically no SSA, and that's supposed to show the huge 20% SSA that North Africans gave Iberians in the past? You could also make a map of SSA using the K7 averages if you wanted and make it look like that, after all most of Northern Europe has 0% as average and Spaniards have 0.09% as average (and the IBD mean in the map goes from 0 to 8), so you could paint Iberia in a very dark color to show all those 0.09% of difference as if it was anything significant.

In the very map you posted, the mean IBD shared for, for example, Galicians, is around 225 for North African and 4 for SSA. The SSA IBD is 1.8% of the North African IBD. Does this ratio look anything close to 20%?


These calculations are wrong, just an example with your 2nd Moroccan sample :




That's : 29.38x20/100 + 14.12/2 + 7.81 = 20.746% SSA, not even counting "Arabian" and "Near Eastern" which obviously have some SSA in them. Cranking up the K, only spread the SSA everywhere, like any other components you would try to quantify, a K36 is ridiculous for that. Morocco is usually even higher, more like +25% at low K.

You can't say that the 29.38 North African contains 20% SSA if there isn't another component made of pure Berber without SSA. In fact, considering he is scoring 23% other Africans while Iberians are scoring 0% means that they're going after mostly the Berber genes when scoring North African. The case of Iberians is especially true, they never score other Africans, meaning they are mostly going for the Berber genes. If a segment of Iberian DNA looks North African-like, even if it doesn't have 10% or 20% SSA, it will still choose North African cause it's the closest thing there is to Berber. Saying that to score North African, you have to necessarily score 20% SSA to go with it is simply wrong IMO. Your own IBD map shows the discrepancy between North African and SSA IBD is huge in Iberians. And, you know, most studies on North Africans agree that most of their SSA is relatively recent.

Same thing with Near_Eastern and Arabian, they score it cause it's the closest thing the calculator has to the specific segment of DNA being tested, it doesn't have to have the exact proportions of Near Easterns to score it.

Just to give another example, Bedouins in K7 have an average of 2% SSA. Surely the EUk36 won't see it, right?

Arabian 40.95
Near_Eastern 24.92
East_Med 21.82
Northeast_African 5.78
South_Central_Asian 3.33
North_African 1.70
West_Caucasian 1.10
Armenian 0.35

In my post before, I went through the trouble of specifically mentioning the populations that the Northeast African is based on cause their SSA is around 33%, not 50% as you used. 5.78x0.33=1.91%. Not saying this math should be used for rocket science, but it seems awfully coincidental that populations that score SSA in the EUk36 with populations that have higher levels of SSA than North Africans also score it in the K7, no?


Moroccan @ K6 (Eurasia K6 ANE)
26.83% SSA

Most calculators in Gedmatch are bad, and Kurd's calculators (Gedrosia) aren't an exception. You could use various different calculators to make what you claim true. Just use calculators with East Africans together with West Africans and watch the magic happen. But not all is bad though, through the Gedrosia K6, today I learned that Moroccans have an average of 9% ANE :) And Somalis have 5.1% ANE (lol). And Bedouins have 20%!

As a side note, according to you, for example, when the Irish (that have practically 0% East Asian) score 1%+ of Amerindian on the proven K15 (which isn't rare), then they actually have it (East Asian and all, not just the ANE!), cause the calculator is proven? I would say that what happened is just that some especially ANE-looking segments of the Irish person were tested and when the calculator was deciding which component they were most similar to, some portion of the Native American's DNA seemed like a really good option, what with their 45-50% ANE ancestry and whatnot. Now obviously, using for example the Karitiana population in South America that has 45% and 55% East Asian as an example, then the Irish person that has no East Asian certainly couldn't have picked Amerindian component according to you right? Except he does. He ignores the fact that there are 4 (FOUR!) European components that not only have different kinds of ANE percentages (the main three being North Sea, Baltic and Eastern Euro) but also are full of WHG which is obviously a lot more similar to the Irish genetics than East Asian, and then doesn't care about the at least 15000 years of drift that happened to Amerindian's ANE when it was separated by entering America, and scores 1%+ anyway. Obviously it doesn't always happen cause there is an element of chance to it, so some will score 1%+ and others will score less. Same thing with Iberians (and Sicilians), some have 4% North African in the k36 and only score 0.5-1% Northeast African, and others have 3% and score 2.55%, and others that actually have some small actual recent Sub-Saharan percentage will score it all in the Sub-Saharan category. And the North African that is scored in the K36 correlates exactly with the amount of known North African in the different populations of Iberia, as you can see correlating the three Iberians that I used with the IBD map that you showed, and also with the amount of E-M81 in the different regions.

[Petalpusher]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1Y6nfb7Ka8E/Uaz_N0WrLSI/AAAAAAAAI24/XYZxZo9yHUk/s1600/iberia.jpg

Saying there is IBD without mentioning values is kinda pointless. Literally half of Iberia has the same SSA IBD as half of Greece which has practically no SSA, and that's supposed to show the huge 20% SSA that North Africans gave Iberians in the past? You could also make a map of SSA using the K7 averages if you wanted and make it look like that, after all most of Northern Europe has 0% as average and Spaniards have 0.09% as average (and the IBD mean in the map goes from 0 to 8), so you could paint Iberia in a very dark color to show all those 0.09% of difference as if it was anything significant.

In the very map you posted, the mean IBD shared for, for example, Galicians, is around 225 for North African and 4 for SSA. The SSA IBD is 1.8% of the North African IBD. Does this ratio look anything close to 20%?



You can't say that the 29.38 North African contains 20% SSA if there isn't another component made of pure Berber without SSA. In fact, considering he is scoring 23% other Africans while Iberians are scoring 0% means that they're going after mostly the Berber genes when scoring North African. The case of Iberians is especially true, they never score other Africans, meaning they are mostly going for the Berber genes. If a segment of Iberian DNA looks North African-like, even if it doesn't have 10% or 20% SSA, it will still choose North African cause it's the closest thing there is to Berber. Saying that to score North African, you have to necessarily score 20% SSA to go with it is simply wrong IMO. Your own IBD map shows the discrepancy between North African and SSA IBD is huge in Iberians. And, you know, most studies on North Africans agree that most of their SSA is relatively recent.

Same thing with Near_Eastern and Arabian, they score it cause it's the closest thing the calculator has to the specific segment of DNA being tested, it doesn't have to have the exact proportions of Near Easterns to score it.

Just to give another example, Bedouins in K7 have an average of 2% SSA. Surely the EUk36 won't see it, right?

Arabian 40.95
Near_Eastern 24.92
East_Med 21.82
Northeast_African 5.78
South_Central_Asian 3.33
North_African 1.70
West_Caucasian 1.10
Armenian 0.35

In my post before, I went through the trouble of specifically mentioning the populations that the Northeast African is based on cause their SSA is around 33%, not 50% as you used. 5.78x0.33=1.91%. Not saying this math should be used for rocket science, but it seems awfully coincidental that populations that score SSA in the EUk36 with populations that have higher levels of SSA than North Africans also score it in the K7, no?



Most calculators in Gedmatch are bad, and Kurd's calculators (Gedrosia) aren't an exception. You could use various different calculators to make what you claim true. Just use calculators with East Africans together with West Africans and watch the magic happen. But not all is bad though, through the Gedrosia K6, today I learned that Moroccans have an average of 9% ANE :) And Somalis have 5.1% ANE (lol). And Bedouins have 20%!

As a side note, according to you, for example, when the Irish (that have practically 0% East Asian) score 1%+ of Amerindian on the proven K15 (which isn't rare), then they actually have it (East Asian and all, not just the ANE!), cause the calculator is proven? I would say that what happened is just that some especially ANE-looking segments of the Irish person were tested and when the calculator was deciding which component they were most similar to, some portion of the Native American's DNA seemed like a really good option, what with their 45-50% ANE ancestry and whatnot. Now obviously, using for example the Karitiana population in South America that has 45% and 55% East Asian as an example, then the Irish person that has no East Asian certainly couldn't have picked Amerindian component according to you right? Except he does. He ignores the fact that there are 4 (FOUR!) European components that not only have different kinds of ANE percentages (the main three being North Sea, Baltic and Eastern Euro) but also are full of WHG which is obviously a lot more similar to the Irish genetics than East Asian, and then doesn't care about the at least 15000 years of drift that happened to Amerindian's ANE when it was separated by entering America, and scores 1%+ anyway. Obviously it doesn't always happen cause there is an element of chance to it, so some will score 1%+ and others will score less. Same thing with Iberians (and Sicilians), some have 4% North African in the k36 and only score 0.5-1% Northeast African, and others have 3% and score 2.55%, and others that actually have some small actual recent Sub-Saharan percentage will score it all in the Sub-Saharan category. And the North African that is scored in the K36 correlates exactly with the amount of known North African in the different populations of Iberia, as you can see correlating the three Iberians that I used with the IBD map that you showed, and also with the amount of E-M81 in the different regions.

- SSA in Greece comes from Neareastern population (Egyptian/Saudi type) not particularly N.African IBD (maybe very little) but a sizeable neareastern IBD. Nobody claimed you had 20% SSA or that sort of amount. Im the one who has been showing people was overestimating here, it's between 5-10% N.African in most of Iberians (more in Portugal and more in the island for sure), which correlates perfectly with the kind of level of SSA you get, 1 to 2%, that is also fading quickly in the north as you get closer to the Basque country. It is exactly what you should get, not more not less. Admixture and IBD matches, countless studies agree, there's an orgy of datas and runs that are showing the same thing. The good news is, still remains 90-95% of admixture, and it's quite European, arguably much more than other southern European country.


- The ratio doesn't have to match. The SSA IBD is not with the SSA of N.Africans, it's real IBD with people of sub saharan countries but of course most of the time, it's through N.African who had it that you absorbed it.


- "Pure Berbers" without SSA don't exist, it's a myth, some have low SSA nowadays yes and relatively high paleolithic European, their SSA is in some rare cases maybe down to 10% but zero is a fantasy. Wether it's old and or doesn't matter, it doesn't go away. The study explicitly states it's recent (that means not 10ky old), you can see that when you analize the characteristics of the segment in IBD. Again what you score correlates with a N.African population that has the current level of SSA, that's why on the pca posted previously you go in the directions of N.Moroccans and nowhere else, it's the present day Moroccans. They make pca so that everyone can understand the datas easily, im sure everybody can interpret it correctly.


- That's why K7BR is 1 calculator out of 50 that isn't designed to measure SSA, of course that must be a coincidence you are both waving that very experimental one. You ve just proven that with Bedouins, if they only score 1.9%, it is very obviously underestimating it in some populations, it's 4 times that at the very least and yes K36 spread it everywhere in Neareastern, Arabian and so on. To make it clear again, that applies only to those who actually have SSA's IBD, if someone doesn't have shared segments with SSA, he can't score it, simple as that.


- ANE inflates your Amerindian affinity, yes, and even your ASE sort of stuff. Maybe the Irish have indeed 1% Amerindian, but only one way to be sure is to test their IBD. Do you have this data? I don't and it's unlikely.

Before anyone try make a not very smart hypothesis, that the affinity comes from the neolithic, no, the Basque have no IBD whatsoever with any, nor scoring N.African/SSA, they are litterally one of the most, if not the most distant to either N.African and neareastern combined and yet one of the most neolithic people, proper neolithic let's call it.


- Associating haplogroups with input is a very bad way to do genetic. In a very distant past it was relevant, but today only a few slightly challenged members believe there is a relation between your haplogroup and what you are or recently has been. That is, if you are basing everything on it, alone of course it's an interesting bit regardless.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

- SSA in Greece comes from Neareastern population (Egyptian/Saudi type) not particularly N.African IBD (maybe very little) but a sizeable neareastern IBD. Nobody claimed you had 20% SSA or that sort of amount. Im the one who has been showing people was overestimated here, it's between 5-10% N.African in most of Iberians (more in Portugal and more in the island for sure), which correlates perfectly with the kind of level of SSA you get, 1 to 2%, that is also fading quickly in the north as you get closer to the Basque country. It is exactly what you should get, not more not less. Admixture and IBD matches, countless studies agree, there's an orgy of datas and runs that are showing the same thing.

Where did you get 5-10% on most Iberians?


- The ratio doesn't have to match. The SSA IBD is not with the SSA of N.Africans, it's real IBD with people of sub saharan countries but of course most of the time, it's through N.African who had it that you absorbed it.

And I denied there is IBD? I said it's ridiculously low, practically Greece level low, which is not what you would get if you had 5-10% North African, each of them with 20% SSA.


- "Pure Berbers" without SSA don't exist, it's a myth, some have low SSA nowadays yes and relatively high paleolithic European, their SSA is in some rare cases maybe down to 10% but zero is a fantasy. Wether it's old and or doesn't matter, it doesn't go away. The study explicitly states it's recent, you can see that when you analize the characteristics of the segment in IBD. Again what you score correlates with a N.African population that has the current level of SSA, that's why on the pca posted previously you go in the directions of N.Moroccans and nowhere else, it's the present day Moroccans. They make pca so that everyone can understand the datas easily, im sure everybody can interpret it correctly.

I didn't say completely without SSA, I said with much less than 20%, which is what the IBD ratio shows. Literally, they are scoring 23% on other African populations, including 4 to 7% actual West African, on k36 while Iberians score 0%, and we're supposed to be exactly 10% of them?


- That's why K7BR is 1 calculator out of 50 that isn't designed to measure SSA, of course that must be a coincidence you are both waving that very experimental one. You ve just proven that with Bedouins, if they only score 1.9%, it is very obviously underestimating it in some populations, it's 4 times that at the very least and yes K36 spread it everywhere in Neareastern, Arabian and so on. To make it clear again, that applies only to those who actually have SSA's IBD, if someone doesn't have shared segments with SSA, he can't score it, simple as that.

He scores 6% Northeast African, and he might be a Saudi Arabian, I think Bedouins score more Arabian. Anyway I guess if the English, Irish, West Germans, French, etc, score close to 20% Iberian on K36, then they all have North African according to that logic right?


- ANE inflates your Amerindian affinity, yes, and even your ASE sort of stuff. Maybe the Irish have indeed 1% Amerindian, but only one way to be sure is to test their IBD. Do you have this data? I don't and it's unlikely.

Before anyone try make a not very smart hypothesis, that the affinity comes from the neolithic, no, the Basque have no IBD whatsoever with any, nor scoring N.African/SSA, they are litterally one of the most, if not the most distant to either N.African and neareastern combined and yet one of the most neolithic people, proper neolithic let's call it.

Why would the Basques score SSA or North African if they have none? They don't have a lot more things besides SSA or North African, they're mountain dwellers, very isolated. Again, why are you acting like the SSA IBD is very significant when it's at Greece levels? The North African is the one that is significant, not the SSA.


- Associating haplogroups with input is a very bad way to do genetic. In a very distant past it was relevant, but today only a few slightly challenged members believe there is a relation between your haplogroup and what you are or recently has been. That is, if you are basing everything on it, alone of course it's an interesting bit regardless.

I gave another besides the Haplogroups, and anyway they line up nicely, not only with the IDB map but also with the EUk36 North African.

[Petalpusher]

Where did you get 5-10% on most Iberians?

Best estimation based on the datas. What's yours, 0.00% ?



And I denied there is IBD? I said it's ridiculously low, practically Greece level low, which is not what you would get if you had 5-10% North African, each of them with 20% SSA.

5-10% N.African is ridiculously low... there are just people obsessing about it. Greece has more neareastern input, that just came with less SSA, that's why they are much closer to the neareast than you are, ironically to N.Africa as well (yes they didn't land genetically there for no reason) specially as their early neolithic was the same as any other European country and are way off the current modeling of Europe, like some other south/southeast countries.




I didn't say completely without SSA, I said with much less than 20%, which is what the IBD ratio shows. Literally, they are scoring 23% on other African populations, including 4 to 7% actual West African, on k36 while Iberians score 0%, and we're supposed to be exactly 10% of them?
It is unlikely those who contributed to Iberians, and if it was them, it would make you more N.African since you would need more of it to score the same amount of SSA. Same case than the Greek example above, for example.



He scores 6% Northeast African, and he might be a Saudi Arabian, I think Bedouins score more Arabian. Anyway I guess if the English, Irish, West Germans, French, etc, score close to 20% Iberian on K36, then they all have North African according to that logic right?
Not if they don't have the IBD and as expected don't score any relevant amount? you do realize there are common roots in Europe that trace back waaaaay before any input of N.Africans in Iberians, specially with the Basque, many people have very deep ancestral roots with them, yes even the Germans and English as you ve been able to notice. Iberian on K36 is Spanish Basque, Basque is French Basque. That is just proving further the input is relatively recent in Iberians.




Why would the Basques score SSA or North African if they have none? They don't have a lot more things besides SSA or North African, they're mountain dwellers, very isolated. Again, why are you acting like the SSA IBD is very significant when it's at Greece levels? The North African is the one that is significant, not the SSA.
Well you tell me... there s no possible way for them to score any, just like there s no possible way for people without relevant IBD, to score relevant amounts.

I didn't say it's huge, i said it's there. Nothing more nothing less. 0.2% may or may not be noise, 2% definetly isn't.

[Ibericus]

Where did you get 5-10% on most Iberians?.
Not at all, that's looks more likely for Western Iberia, in the East and North the range is more like 0-5%.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Not at all, that's looks more likely for Western Iberia, in the East and North the range is more like 0-5%.

Not even for Western Iberia, it just doesn't happen at all to have 10% NA. The average in Iberia I'd say is around 3%, not to mention that for the Galicians scoring 2.55% SSA, it would have to go up at least 12,5%. No study, no calculator approaches a 10% maximum in any Iberian population, much less an average of that.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Best estimation based on the datas. What's yours, 0.00% ?

Oh c'mon, don't pretend I've been saying that. Of course it isn't 0%, I've been talking about the percentages in the last posts and I never denied we have North African since the beginning, so that is kinda misguided. It's 0%(Northeast)-7%(West Iberia) for most Iberians based on a multitude calculators that measure North African, no matter how shit the rest of the calculator is (EUk36, the new MDLP 16, etc.). If you have studies or calculators that get to 10-12,5%, now is your time, I'll obviously change my mind if you do.



5-10% N.African is ridiculously low... there are just people obsessing about it. Greece has more neareastern input, that just came with less SSA, that's why they are much closer to the neareast than you are, ironically to N.Africa as well (yes they didn't land genetically there for no reason) specially as their early neolithic was the same as any other European country and are way off the current modeling of Europe, like some other south/southeast countries.

It's not about being ridiculously low or not, or me obsessing with it, it's simply the numbers being wrong - invented numbers.

Greece obviously has a lot more Near Eastern input which is more recent and not from Neolithic times, but that surely doesn't make them score close to 2.55% SSA on k15, even though they should be doing it according to the IBD map. I'm not even gonna start posting many Greek EUk36 cause I don't wanna be attacking Greeks, not my intention at all.

Greek from Messinia, literally at the heart of the SSA in the IBD map. Where is the SSA in the K15? Should be above 1%+ according to the map and scoring 13% East_Med on EUK36 (based on Cyprians, Druzes, Lebanese Christians, Lebanese_Druze).

EUK15
1 East_Med 20.84
2 West_Med 20.22
3 West_Asian 15.37
4 North_Sea 12.67
5 Atlantic 12.2
6 Baltic 9.56
7 Eastern_Euro 4.62
8 Red_Sea 3.02
9 Oceanian 0.94
10 Siberian 0.49
11 Amerindian 0.07

EUK36
Amerindian -
Arabian 1.23
Armenian 5.94
Basque 1.11
Central_African -
Central_Euro 5.14
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 9.10
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 3.44
East_Med 12.94
Eastern_Euro 2.53
Fennoscandian 1.64
French 3.66
Iberian 9.37
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 24.60
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 2.13
North_African 0.46
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian 5.95
North_Sea 0.23
Northeast_African -
Oceanian 0.28
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian 2.92
West_Med 7.29


Greek from Peloponnese, again at the heart of the 4 IBD mean - Where is it? In k36 he scores high Arabian, Near Eastern, East Med - It's supposed to have hidden SSA right? And even if he scored some, he still would have to reach the 1%+ minimal of Galicians that have the same SSA as them according to the IBD map:

1 East_Med 21.14
2 Atlantic 18.55
3 West_Med 13.37
4 West_Asian 13.08
5 North_Sea 10.75
6 Baltic 9.54
7 Red_Sea 6.32
8 Eastern_Euro 5.83
9 Southeast_Asian 1.16
10 Oceanian 0.26

EUK36:
Amerindian -
Arabian 6.02
Armenian 2.61
Basque 0.70
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 7.02
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 5.41
East_Med 14.48
Eastern_Euro 0.60
Fennoscandian 2.88
French 1.62
Iberian 9.56
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 21.72
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 5.30
North_African -
North_Atlantic 5.75
North_Caucasian 6.17
North_Sea 3.60
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural 1.77
West_African -
West_Caucasian 2.19
West_Med 2.59



It is unlikely those who contributed to Iberians, and if it was them, it would make you more N.African since you would need more of it to score the same amount of SSA. Same case than the Greek example above, for example.

... It's almost like it wasn't you who provided the SSA IBD map that proved the SSA was very low and I didn't provide Moroccans scoring 23% other Africans and Iberians 0%. It's like we are at the start of this conversation.


Not if they don't have the IBD and as expected don't score any relevant amount? you do realize there are common roots in Europe that trace back waaaaay before any input of N.Africans in Iberians, specially with the Basque, many people have very deep ancestral roots with them, yes even the Germans and English as you ve been able to notice. Iberian on K36 is Spanish Basque, Basque is French Basque. That is just proving further the input is relatively recent in Iberians.

That's not true, Iberian in K36 is not Spanish Basque, it's a collection of all the Spaniards that were collected from different regions... Andalucia, Galicia, Valencia, Murcia, etc. Western Europeans score high Iberian anyway regardless of the North African. The Basque component is the one that has French Basques. Here it is:


Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01619 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01620 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01623 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01624 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01673 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01675 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01676 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01682 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01684 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01613 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01615 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01625 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01626 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01631 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01632 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01670 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01672 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01512 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01513 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01679 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01680 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01770 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01771 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01503 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01504 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01746 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01747 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01500 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01501 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01506 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01507 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01524 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01525 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01602 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01603 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01610 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01612 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01783 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01784 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01536 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01537 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01761 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01762 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG02222 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01509 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01510 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01527 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01528 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01530 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01531 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01668 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536536 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536537 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536538 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536539 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536540 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536580 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536581 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536582 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536583 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536584 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536585 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536586 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01685 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01686 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01704 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01705 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01707 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01708 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01709 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01710 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_HG02237 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01617 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01618 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01628 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01630 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01756 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01757 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01515 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01516 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01518 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01519 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01521 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01522 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01700 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01702 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01605 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01606 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01607 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01608 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01773 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01775 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01776 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01777 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01779 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01781 0 0 0 -9



Well you tell me... there s no possible way for them to score any, just like there s no possible way for people without relevant IBD, to score relevant amounts.

I didn't say it's huge, i said it's there. Nothing more nothing less. 0.2% may or may not be noise, 2% definetly isn't.

They don't score any cause they don't have North African to be mistaken with Northeast African and the likes. The Iberians that have North African score a lot more SSA in the K15 than even if the North African we had was 20% SSA like you claim, there's no other component that easily takes care of the North African ancestry. Here, a Northeast Spaniard of Basque, Navarran and Catalonian ancestry:

EUk36 - 0.86 North African

Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Basque 10.31
Central_African -
Central_Euro 3.23
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 2.38
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 2.92
East_Med 1.10
Eastern_Euro 4.14
Fennoscandian -
French 5.04
Iberian 26.81
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 15.01
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 5.43
North_African 0.86
North_Atlantic 7.38
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea 7.97
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian -
West_Med 7.42


EUk15 - 1.16% SSA:

1 Atlantic 32.11
2 North_Sea 20.81
3 West_Med 19.83
4 East_Med 14.04
5 Eastern_Euro 5.7
6 Baltic 5.24
7 Red_Sea 1.1
8 Sub-Saharan 0.84
9 Northeast_African 0.32
10 Amerindian 0.02


I'm done now, I have presented too much stuff while you present none besides the IBD map that agrees with me and also agrees that our ratio SSA/NorthAfrican is quite a bit lower than 20%, you claim that Iberians are on average 5-10% North African (if it was through K15 it would have to be like 12,5%) and don't present anything to prove it. I also don't agree with your claim that the Irish, French, etc. have recent Amerindian when they score it on k15. Let's agree to disagree then. Thanks for the discussion anyway.

[Petalpusher]

So much things to talk about, let's try to do it step by step...


Oh c'mon, don't pretend I've been saying that. Of course it isn't 0%, I've been talking about the percentages in the last posts and I never denied we have North African since the beginning, so that is kinda misguided. It's 0%(Northeast)-7%(West Iberia) for most Iberians based on a multitude calculators that measure North African, no matter how shit the rest of the calculator is (EUk36, the new MDLP 16, etc.). If you have studies or calculators that get to 10-12,5%, now is your time, I'll obviously change my mind if you do.

0-7% on the left, 0-10% on the right. Zero is only in the Basque country or very close around, that's not what most Iberians get.

I ll agree to disagree then. it's my best honest opinion, contrary to some ridiculous claims i ve seen here or elsewhere of being 1/4 to 1/2 N.African. If you just want to scrape off percents, you are going to do it alone.




Greece obviously has a lot more Near Eastern input which is more recent and not from Neolithic times, but that surely doesn't make them score close to 2.55% SSA on k15, even though they should be doing it according to the IBD map. I'm not even gonna start posting many Greek EUk36 cause I don't wanna be attacking Greeks, not my intention at all.

Greek from Messinia, literally at the heart of the SSA in the IBD map. Where is the SSA in the K15? Should be above 1%+ according to the map and scoring 13% East_Med on EUK36 (based on Cyprians, Druzes, Lebanese Christians, Lebanese_Druze).

EUK15
1 East_Med 20.84
2 West_Med 20.22
3 West_Asian 15.37
4 North_Sea 12.67
5 Atlantic 12.2
6 Baltic 9.56
7 Eastern_Euro 4.62
8 Red_Sea 3.02
9 Oceanian 0.94
10 Siberian 0.49
11 Amerindian 0.07

EUK36
Amerindian -
Arabian 1.23
Armenian 5.94
Basque 1.11
Central_African -
Central_Euro 5.14
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 9.10
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 3.44
East_Med 12.94
Eastern_Euro 2.53
Fennoscandian 1.64
French 3.66
Iberian 9.37
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 24.60
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 2.13
North_African 0.46
North_Atlantic -
North_Caucasian 5.95
North_Sea 0.23
Northeast_African -
Oceanian 0.28
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian 2.92
West_Med 7.29


Greek from Peloponnese, again at the heart of the 4 IBD mean - Where is it? In k36 he scores high Arabian, Near Eastern, East Med - It's supposed to have hidden SSA right? And even if he scored some, he still would have to reach the 1%+ minimal of Galicians that have the same SSA as them according to the IBD map:

1 East_Med 21.14
2 Atlantic 18.55
3 West_Med 13.37
4 West_Asian 13.08
5 North_Sea 10.75
6 Baltic 9.54
7 Red_Sea 6.32
8 Eastern_Euro 5.83
9 Southeast_Asian 1.16
10 Oceanian 0.26

EUK36:
Amerindian -
Arabian 6.02
Armenian 2.61
Basque 0.70
Central_African -
Central_Euro -
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 7.02
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 5.41
East_Med 14.48
Eastern_Euro 0.60
Fennoscandian 2.88
French 1.62
Iberian 9.56
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 21.72
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 5.30
North_African -
North_Atlantic 5.75
North_Caucasian 6.17
North_Sea 3.60
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural 1.77
West_African -
West_Caucasian 2.19
West_Med 2.59







This is not how admixture fundamentaly works, it's a problem to discuss all this. Greece SSA is lower than this, the map shows interval gradients, the metrics datas are lower, i can post them if you want. Regardless of metrics, take a good look where East_ med and Red_sea are located on a pca. At the heart of the Levant and Saudi Arabians, it's their major components. Red_Sea is even past that and peaks in Yemen. The only two scored in excess by some populations, peaking outside Europe. There you have it, this is where all their SSA IBD is located, since well.. they have that IBD both the neareastern and the SSA they in turns score higher on those 2 than other Euro, mechanically also much less on the other more regular European components and those two have totally different "weight" as they are so distant, scoring 5% more of them isn't the same than scoring +5/-5% of something close to the core of Europe. If they wouldn't have this SSA IBD other European can still score less East_Med and Red_Sea but most likely from distant shared ancestry (Basal-ish) who just share some of what they made of without the SSA, theorically it can even be the geneflow is the other way (European input in the Levant for example) but for sure there is no SSA geneflow from Europe to the Levant. Both IBD at the same time are validating the geneflow.

The bottom line is still that if there are no causes, there can't be any sizeable consequences. If there are causes and you don't see the consequences, you need to take a better look. IBD>Admixture.

Do you see something called "North African" say in between Morocco and Algeria on the K15 pca? No, that's why yours isn't embedded in there. So you could say plenty of people actually score as much you are, just like the IBD map shows, for Sicilians etc.. you would be right, but because they score higher on some very distant components to Europe, it's hiding in there. Once you run lower K, it magically appears, but it's not magic, you just unravel everything that was embedded in very exotic components they score in excess. At least more than your are, and most of it is more of neareastern origins, as the PCA still shows. Maybe let's put it on again :

https://s3.postimg.org/j07iyi35v/NA_NE_Fig_S7.png



That's not true, Iberian in K36 is not Spanish Basque, it's a collection of all the Spaniards that were collected from different regions... Andalucia, Galicia, Valencia, Murcia, etc. Western Europeans score high Iberian anyway regardless of the North African. The Basque component is the one that has French Basques. Here it is:


Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01619 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01620 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01623 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Andalucia_HG01624 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01673 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01675 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01676 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01682 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Aragon_HG01684 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01613 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01615 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01625 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01626 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01631 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01632 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01670 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Baleares_HG01672 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01512 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01513 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01679 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01680 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01770 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cantabria_HG01771 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01503 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01504 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01746 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha_HG01747 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01500 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01501 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01506 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01507 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01524 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01525 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01602 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01603 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01610 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01612 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01783 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon_HG01784 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01536 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01537 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01761 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG01762 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Cataluna_HG02222 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01509 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01510 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01527 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01528 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01530 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01531 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Extremadura_HG01668 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536536 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536537 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536538 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536539 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536540 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536580 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536581 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536582 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536583 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536584 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536585 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_GSM536586 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01685 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01686 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01704 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01705 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01707 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01708 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01709 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Galicia_HG01710 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_HG02237 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01617 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01618 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01628 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01630 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01756 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Murcia_HG01757 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01515 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01516 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01518 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01519 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01521 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01522 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01700 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Pais_Vasco_HG01702 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01605 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01606 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01607 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01608 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01773 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01775 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01776 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01777 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01779 0 0 0 -9
Iberian Spanish_Valencia_HG01781 0 0 0 -9




They don't score any cause they don't have North African to be mistaken with Northeast African and the likes. The Iberians that have North African score a lot more SSA in the K15 than even if the North African we had was 20% SSA like you claim, there's no other component that easily takes care of the North African ancestry. Here, a Northeast Spaniard of Basque, Navarran and Catalonian ancestry:

EUk36 - 0.86 North African

Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Basque 10.31
Central_African -
Central_Euro 3.23
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 2.38
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 2.92
East_Med 1.10
Eastern_Euro 4.14
Fennoscandian -
French 5.04
Iberian 26.81
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 15.01
Malayan -
Near_Eastern 5.43
North_African 0.86
North_Atlantic 7.38
North_Caucasian -
North_Sea 7.97
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian -
West_Med 7.42


EUk15 - 1.16% SSA:

1 Atlantic 32.11
2 North_Sea 20.81
3 West_Med 19.83
4 East_Med 14.04
5 Eastern_Euro 5.7
6 Baltic 5.24
7 Red_Sea 1.1
8 Sub-Saharan 0.84
9 Northeast_African 0.32
10 Amerindian 0.02


Your K15 results are not from a full Basque, but im not sure if you want to show even him score some, or that it is relatively low.

Here is the Basque average (those who really score peanuts in Europe):



1 Atlantic 45.40
2 North_Sea 16.85
3 West_Med 25.04
4 Eastern_Euro 5.7
5 Baltic 4.79
6 East_Med 2.74
7 Red_Sea 0.73
8 Sub-Saharan 0.04
9 Northeast_African 0.11
10 Amerindian 0.03



Before you wonders, 0.11 + 0.04 is noise, yes, it's less than the Finnish average. Or well maybe it's not noise! just 10 times less than your "Basque". There are also many people who score 0 + 0% in the real world. BECAUSE they have no IBD whatsoever with Africans. The calculator would really like to show good will and give it to everybody, but he can't, when there s nothing to pickup or such faint signals, that is common even through most of Eurasia. That comes down to individuals at some point.



About K36:

North_Sea = Kent

North_Atlantic = Cornish

Italian = North_Italian + Tuscan

Basque = French_Basque

Iberian = Spanish Basque

These are the peaks of K36, low peaks, which is why it's still one of the most confusing calculator there is without an intricate understanding of admixture, but you really love to use it so everything is hiding in 3 dozens of components and it's impossible to see each tiny bits spreaded everywhere. You think Kent score 100% North_Sea? No. Cornish score 100% N_Atlantic? No. It is just where the component peaks at low levels, in Spain, "Iberian" peaks in Spanish Basque, that's a fact. Don't tell me im lying when you just don't understand how admixture works and how a run is built.

How do you create that "Iberian" component? You arbitrarly choose a region for Iberia that you consider the baseline and Spanish Basque are, since very arguably they are like other Iberians but unmixed as they have no IBD, you check those with the best scores and logically define that Spanish Basque (Pais Vasco in your list) is the most "Iberian", there you have it, basically it's your source for this component. It's not a mixmash of all these samples like you think it is. It's also the right way to do it so it's easier to bring up the right variation in the whole country. As Spanish Basques have very low to no N.African affinity, lower than most Europe, your N.African isn't in the "Iberian" of K36 if it peaks there, neither those who score it, and that's why they score quite some of it without having anywhere close to the same N.African/SSA IBD.





I also don't agree with your claim that the Irish, French, etc. have recent Amerindian when they score it on k15. Let's agree to disagree then. Thanks for the discussion anyway.

I ve said a couple of times, IBD would likely show some weird stuff if you were trying some Amerindian/ASI/ASE in highly steppe admixed Euro people (they tend to score more of those in admixture). The consequences may have a cause there too, but there are no study about it, there s not much to talk about, pretty much everyone has some ANE in Europe. If there s one rule for European DNA, anything that is not in the continuity of up paleo / mesolithic Europe, the WHG things basically and his close cousins, is by definition"exotic" to Europe, so we all have some stuff that is not native per say. People only focus on a few things.

You do however understand that what is today Amerindians are people who left Eurasia to cross Beringia about 15 000 years ago? There is no documented history of Amerindians invading Ireland or such things right, therefore very unlikely it's anything else than what they randomly score isn't just the reflection of a very distant common ancestry found in ANE. For ASI/ASE it could be different story as proto IE people really have mixed with C&S Asians before entering Europe in the Bronze Age.

[Ibericus]

In East Spain is more like 0-4% , if we look at the Dodecads that have a north-african component (which peaks on Mozabite Berbers at more than 80%) :

Dodecad K10
DOD189 Valencian 1.7%
DOD375 Valencian 0.3%
DOD217 Catalan 0%
DOD725 Catalan 0%
DOD237 Aragonese-Catalan 1.3%

v3 K=12
DOD189 Valencian 2.8%
DOD375 Valencian 0.8%
DOD725 Catalan 1.6%
DOD217 Catalan 2.1%
DOD237 Aragonese-Catalan 1.1%
Catalan (from Gedmatch) : 1.83%
Aragonese (from gedmatch) : 0.91%

K12b
DOD189 Valencian 3.7%
DOD375 Valencian 2.6%
DOD217 Catalan 2.7%
DOD725 Catalan 2.6%
DOD237 Aragonese-Catalan 2.1%
Catalan (from Gedmatch) : 1.92%
Aragonese (from gedmatch) : 2.7%
Cataluna_KG 2.4%
Baleares_KG 3.7%
Aragon_KG 3.4%
Valencia_KG 3.0%

[Petalpusher]

In East Spain is more like 0-4% , if we look at the Dodecads that have a north-african component (which peaks on Mozabite Berbers at more than 80%) :

Dodecad K10
DOD189 Valencian 1.7%
DOD375 Valencian 0.3%
DOD217 Catalan 0%
DOD725 Catalan 0%
DOD237 Aragonese-Catalan 1.3%

v3 K=12
DOD189 Valencian 2.8%
DOD375 Valencian 0.8%
DOD725 Catalan 1.6%
DOD217 Catalan 2.1%
DOD237 Aragonese-Catalan 1.1%
Catalan (from Gedmatch) : 1.83%
Aragonese (from gedmatch) : 0.91%

K12b
DOD189 Valencian 3.7%
DOD375 Valencian 2.6%
DOD217 Catalan 2.7%
DOD725 Catalan 2.6%
DOD237 Aragonese-Catalan 2.1%
Catalan (from Gedmatch) : 1.92%
Aragonese (from gedmatch) : 2.7%
Cataluna_KG 2.4%
Baleares_KG 3.7%
Aragon_KG 3.4%
Valencia_KG 3.0%

It sure is lower in the east, however the score you are presenting here are not the whole N.African input. N.Africans are not scoring 100% of it, there s also the SSA and everything else. A Moroccan for example on K12b score only 44% N.African. So for example, what would be 0-4% out of 44?% ?.... 0-10%.

[RN97]

Which Haplogroups are you talking about? E1b? It's on average lower than anywhere in Germany except the north. And only because the town of Paris "Ile de France" is highly Jewish. Haplogroups are anyway not very reliable for quantifying N.African cause different subclades (Balkans would be 30% N.African by this logic)... IBD is better (cf charts above)

could you explain to a noob what IBD means?

[RN97]

I see France darker than let say Norway; That means there is something in France.




What a retarded thing to say, lol.
This is coming from a Spaniard with dark hair and eyes. Basques are darker than Finns, obviously Basques must be less European, right?
Off course most "darker" Europeans including yourself probably have less HG ancestry or at least dominant ancestry from farmers from the fertile cerement that settled in Europe thousands of years ago. Not to mention that pigmentation largely has something to do with adaptation to the environment. That's why Spaniards are darker than a lot of populations like n. Italians even if n. Italians technically are less HG and have more of the stuff that usually makes one darker.

[Petalpusher]

could you explain to a noob what IBD means?

Long story short, you have 50% of your dna and segment from your mother, it proves you are her offspring (even in a court). Same for your father. It's basically the segments in common between two people or populations, you can then try to see how recent they are (more or less recombination, etc..). If you have something inflated with a population compared to all other Europeans, it means there has been admixture/geneflow.


Btw the top IBD list reveals something interesting

Portugal
Morocco_N
Tunisia
Sahara

Galicia
Morocco_N
Morocco_S
Tunisia

Andalusia
Tunisia
Morocco_N
Morocco_S

Spain (avg)
Morocco_N
Tunisia
Sahara

Canary Island
Sahara
Tunisia
Morocco_S


The interesting part is Algeria is never high, it's 2-3 times less than those so they were definetly not Algerians, everything else is very close in sharing, there could be some parts on the whole that also come from Tunisia for some reasons. Occidental Sahara being under Morocco, is just the reflection of their own IBD and where most of their direct SSA comes from. N.Morocco is still the best candidate, as it has always been.

[RN97]

Sure 90% of the population of Europe is up a shade of N.African IBD than Scandinavia, which might have less only because they have some mongoloid in their northern part, which is detrimentory to any other sort of admixture be it Euro, MENA or anything else. Those are only three type of extra Euro IBD, we could add East_Asian, Indian, Australian etc.. but Scandinavia is indeed kind of upside down genetically, as there s generally more European admixture in the south than the north. You seems to be very good to distinguish minor differences in the yellow shades, but not much with red ones.

K7 is not designed to calculate SSA for Europeans, it was made to model Euro inside a simple triangle of WHG-ANE-BE, without involving anything else. Take any other calculator like the proven K15 and you ll see where is the N.African. Again, the best way is still to use IBD.

That's honestly not a mystery at all. Northern Norwegians live in Lappland where the sami concentration is largest. They also probably mixed with them. Southern Norwegians live in lands that have long been populated by only Germanics and have had few samis historically. Most Norwegians are however from the south.

[Ibericus]

It sure is lower in the east, however the score you are presenting here are not the whole N.African input. N.Africans are not scoring 100% of it, there s also the SSA and everything else. A Moroccan for example on K12b score only 44% N.African. So for example, what would be 0-4% out of 44?% ?.... 0-10%.
No, because it's a component based on Mozabite Berbers, for example on K12b peaks at them with 98.5%

[Cristiano viejo]

What a retarded thing to say, lol.
This is coming from a Spaniard with dark hair and eyes. Basques are darker than Finns, obviously Basques must be less European, right?
Off course most "darker" Europeans including yourself probably have less HG ancestry or at least dominant ancestry from farmers from the fertile cerement that settled in Europe thousands of years ago. Not to mention that pigmentation largely has something to do with adaptation to the environment. That's why Spaniards are darker than a lot of populations like n. Italians even if n. Italians technically are less HG and have more of the stuff that usually makes one darker.
Stupid weird curly boy, France being darker in the map that Petalpusher posted :lol:
Look who is the retarded...

[Petalpusher]

No, because it's a component based on Mozabite Berbers, for example on K12b peaks at them with 98.5%

If it was Mozabite, you wouldn't score SSA, since they don't, it's all in their 98,5% N.African (but obviously they are like 25% SSA). So what what you score on, is Moroccan.

This is a guy from Murcia and Cataluna :

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Med 43.81
2 North_European 23.61
3 Caucasus 16.1
4 Southwest_Asian 6.29
5 Northwest_African 4.41
6 Gedrosia 3.9
7 East_African 0.82
8 Sub_Saharan 0.58
9 Southeast_Asian 0.47


He gets his regions first, he is fully Iberian. He s exactly 10% of a Moroccan here.

[RN97]

Stupid weird curly boy, France being darker in the map that Petalpusher posted :lol:
Look who is the retarded...

WTF are you talking about retard?
Off course France is darker when it comes to west asian (basically neolithic caucasian farmers that settled in Europe from the Fertile Crescent). Norway has much less of that type of ancectry. Northern Norwegians are less caucasian than Frenchmen, it's just a fact. Southern Norwegians as well, but not by much probably. Do you think sami/ Siberian-like admixture is European just because it's not n. African/ west Asian or SSA? Where else but Valladolid do they make retards like you?

[Cristiano viejo]

WTF are you talking about retard?
Off course France is darker when it comes to west asian (basically neolithic caucasian farmers that settled in Europe from the Fertile Crescent). Norway has much less of that type of ancectry. Northern Norwegians are less caucasian than Frenchmen, it's just a fact. Southern Norwegians as well, but not by much probably. Do you think sami/ Siberian-like admixture is European just because it's not n. African/ west Asian or SSA? Where else but Valladolid do they make retards like you?

Definitely in Romania. You are a weirdo curly boy obsessed with me. I said an obviousness: Francew being darker in that map than Norway... and do you say it is a retarded thing? :lol:
You are the retarded, weirdo curly boy.

[RN97]

Definitely in Romania. You are a weirdo curly boy obsessed with me. I said an obviousness: Francew being darker in that map than Norway... and do you say it is a retarded thing? :lol:
You are the retarded, weirdo curly boy.

Just shut your wannabe blonde dark haired, broken English writing babyface ass up boii!

[Cristiano viejo]

Just shut your wannabe blonde dark haired, broken English writing babyface ass up boii!

Stop persecuting me for every thread I post, wannabe straigh haired weirdo curly boy.

[Sikeliot]

IBD measures recently related i.e. "cousin" relationships and how recent the impact was, not autosomal impact in percentages (like GEDmatch).

Interesting thing is for southern Italy and Greece, the coastal areas have the most IBD sharing with the Near East, implying this is where most "historical" migrations occurred and they didn't penetrate far inland.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

So much things to talk about, let's try to do it step by step...

Nooooooooo lol I don't have time to write so much and I'm sure you don't too, I'll just touch on some things and that's it.


0-7% on the left, 0-10% on the right. Zero is only in the Basque country or very close around, that's not what most Iberians get.

I ll agree to disagree then. it's my best honest opinion, contrary to some ridiculous claims i ve seen here or elsewhere of being 1/4 to 1/2 N.African. If you just want to scrape off percents, you are going to do it alone.

It's lower on the right side of the peninsula than on the left side, this shouldn't even be debatable. To give you just a quick example, Eastern Andalusians have quite a bit lower NA than Western Andalusians even though they're both from the South, cause they descend mainly from people that had less NA from the beginning. Galicians and Northern Portuguese already had relatively high NA when the Reconquista started and passed it to the center and south of Portugal too, and also to a bit of Western Andalusia, making them appear Portuguese in most calculators even though they're from Andalusia. This map from a study done on the Iberians populations shows it very well - Genetic relatedness between Iberian populations:

https://s26.postimg.org/yh5io0puh/Genetic_relatedness_between_Iberian_populations.jp g

Anyway, there is a case to be made that a big part of North African DNA in Iberia didn't come from the Moors, but obviously it's long to explain, and genetics Blogs have already talked about it so it's just wasting time posting it here. Time will tell.


This is not how admixture fundamentaly works, it's a problem to discuss all this. Greece SSA is lower than this, the map shows interval gradients, the metrics datas are lower, i can post them if you want. Regardless of metrics, take a good look where East_ med and Red_sea are located on a pca. At the heart of the Levant and Saudi Arabians, it's their major components. Red_Sea is even past that and peaks in Yemen. The only two scored in excess by some populations, peaking outside Europe. There you have it, this is where all their SSA IBD is located, since well.. they have that IBD both the neareastern and the SSA they in turns score higher on those 2 than other Euro, mechanically also much less on the other more regular European components and those two have totally different "weight" as they are so distant, scoring 5% more of them isn't the same than scoring +5/-5% of something close to the core of Europe. If they wouldn't have this SSA IBD other European can still score less East_Med and Red_Sea but most likely from distant shared ancestry (Basal-ish) who just share some of what they made of without the SSA, theorically it can even be the geneflow is the other way (European input in the Levant for example) but for sure there is no SSA geneflow from Europe to the Levant. Both IBD at the same time are validating the geneflow.

The bottom line is still that if there are no causes, there can't be any sizeable consequences. If there are causes and you don't see the consequences, you need to take a better look. IBD>Admixture.

Do you see something called "North African" say in between Morocco and Algeria on the K15 pca? No, that's why yours isn't embedded in there. So you could say plenty of people actually score as much you are, just like the IBD map shows, for Sicilians etc.. you would be right, but because they score higher on some very distant components to Europe, it's hiding in there. Once you run lower K, it magically appears, but it's not magic, you just unravel everything that was embedded in very exotic components they score in excess. At least more than your are, and most of it is more of neareastern origins, as the PCA still shows. Maybe let's put it on again :

https://s3.postimg.org/j07iyi35v/NA_NE_Fig_S7.png

- Greece SSA: The map shows interval gradients obviously, but there is a black dot in Greece, meaning the population of that place got tested for SSA IBD, and quite clearly they scored as high as Galicians and people from Madrid, else Greece wouldn't have a big gradient like the rest of Europe. Even Piedmont (or around that place) in Northern Italy showed SSA as big as 1/4 of Iberia, or you could say half as much as Galicians as Madridistas, meaning the North African isn't affecting the SSA much like you would expect from Modern Moroccans. A study on all North Africans said this:


We observe two distinct, opposite gradients of ancestry: an east-to-west increase in likely autochthonous North African ancestry and an east-to-west decrease in likely Near Eastern Arabic ancestry. The indigenous North African ancestry may have been more common in Berber populations and appears most closely related to populations outside of Africa, but divergence between Maghrebi peoples and Near Eastern/Europeans likely precedes the Holocene (>12,000 ya). We also find significant signatures of sub-Saharan African ancestry that vary substantially among populations. These sub-Saharan ancestries appear to be a recent introduction into North African populations, dating to about 1,200 years ago in southern Morocco and about 750 years ago into Egypt, possibly reflecting the patterns of the trans-Saharan slave trade that occurred during this period.

Anyway, whatever the case, we will find out in the future with more ancient DNA, so there's no need to discuss it further. And btw, the EUK36 allows you to see all these clines (this isn't a thing to argue about, just a curiosity :P), the West-East North African cline and the East-West Near_Eastern cline:

Moroccan:

North_African 36.01
Northeast_African 15.92
Iberian 15.59
Near_Eastern 9.95
Arabian 6.03
West_African 4.62
Italian 3.97
East_African 2.52
East_Med 2.32
West_Med 1.92
Basque 0.58
Oceanian 0.57


Algerian:

North_African 25.08
Northeast_African 12.08
Near_Eastern 11.64
West_African 11.46
East_Med 10.26
Iberian 10.17
Arabian 8.72
West_Med 3.96
Italian 2.53
East_African 1.97
West_Caucasian 0.88
Central_African 0.59
Armenian 0.40
French 0.23


Tunisian:

North_African 22.19
Northeast_African 14.39
Near_Eastern 13.17
East_Med 13.11
Arabian 11.35
Iberian 10.93
West_Med 7.78
West_African 2.68
Italian 2.39
East_African 1.35
Central_Euro 0.61


Egyptian Copt (don't have a normal Egyptian :(, this one will have to do):

Near_Eastern 26.61
East_Med 24.97
Arabian 19.25
Northeast_African 14.25
North_African 8.01
West_Med 3.80
Armenian 2.28
West_Caucasian 0.83


This is why I like the EUk36, cause it actually let's you study populations decently, not because hurr durr i have less SSA on this calculator hurr durr (even though, again, pretty obvious that all North Africans show clear SSA besides the North African component, and they actually have fully African-like DNA segments when scoring West African).

- I can't tell you much about with the Red Sea component on the K15 cause nothing is released on how the calculator works, but it's pretty obvious it sucks at measuring Middle Eastern when Saudis have more East_Med than Red_Sea. The Middle Eastern component on the original EUTest actually works fine, contrary to Red Sea. Also in the K15, the East_Med component is closer to European components than to Red Sea, so it's pretty hard to call it strictly MENA, even Basques score like 3-5% of it on average. FST:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQS3VvTUYyYXd0akk/edit

You say IBD>Admixture, but then the IBD shows low SSA and you turn to K15 to say that we are 5-12,5% North African cause we score 1-2.5% SSA on it, when it doesn't have a North African component, and has a Northeast_African component with a lot of Arab/NorthAfrican-like admixture for us to score on. I already gave you examples of how this can happen (Amerindian in French and Irish is much less likely than this, and it happens anyway; West Europeans scoring Iberian in k36 cause they're looking for ENF-heavy populations for some of their DNA segments, and bypassing the North African that Iberians have while doing it), and you always dismiss it as impossible, so let's agree do disagree. One thing is for sure, the IBD map agrees with me.


Your K15 results are not from a full Basque, but im not sure if you want to show even him score some, or that it is relatively low.

Here is the Basque average (those who really score peanuts in Europe):



1 Atlantic 45.40
2 North_Sea 16.85
3 West_Med 25.04
4 Eastern_Euro 5.7
5 Baltic 4.79
6 East_Med 2.74
7 Red_Sea 0.73
8 Sub-Saharan 0.04
9 Northeast_African 0.11
10 Amerindian 0.03



Before you wonders, 0.11 + 0.04 is noise, yes, it's less than the Finnish average. Or well maybe it's not noise! just 10 times less than your "Basque". There are also many people who score 0 + 0% in the real world. BECAUSE they have no IBD whatsoever with Africans. The calculator would really like to show good will and give it to everybody, but he can't, when there s nothing to pickup or such faint signals, that is common even through most of Eurasia. That comes down to individuals at some point.

Again, I don't deny the SSA IBD, I deny it's significance. Iberia would be a lot darker on the map and with much higher values if what you claimed was true, probably the other places in Europe wouldn't even darken up. 5-12,5% NA with 20% SSA would darken up Iberia completely and certainly show mean IBD values of more than 0-6 (South Portugal/Lisbon is a different matter altogether) when Greece is showing values of 4, and Piedmont in North Italy 2.


About K36:

North_Sea = Kent

North_Atlantic = Cornish

Italian = North_Italian + Tuscan

Basque = French_Basque

Iberian = Spanish Basque

These are the peaks of K36, low peaks, which is why it's still one of the most confusing calculator there is without an intricate understanding of admixture, but you really love to use it so everything is hiding in 3 dozens of components and it's impossible to see each tiny bits spreaded everywhere. You think Kent score 100% North_Sea? No. Cornish score 100% N_Atlantic? No. It is just where the component peaks at low levels, in Spain, "Iberian" peaks in Spanish Basque, that's a fact. Don't tell me im lying when you just don't understand how admixture works and how a run is built.

How do you create that "Iberian" component? You arbitrarly choose a region for Iberia that you consider the baseline and Spanish Basque are, since very arguably they are like other Iberians but unmixed as they have no IBD, you check those with the best scores and logically define that Spanish Basque (Pais Vasco in your list) is the most "Iberian", there you have it, basically it's your source for this component. It's not a mixmash of all these samples like you think it is. It's also the right way to do it so it's easier to bring up the right variation in the whole country. As Spanish Basques have very low to no N.African affinity, lower than most Europe, your N.African isn't in the "Iberian" of K36 if it peaks there, neither those who score it, and that's why they score quite some of it without having anywhere close to the same N.African/SSA IBD.

I don't know why you're acting as if i thought populations like Kent would score 100% North Sea, I've been using K36 for a long time. If anything you thought North Africans would score close to 100% North African cause the North African to you obviously is scored always with 20% SSA to boot, so why would North Africans need any other African?

I said you were lying about the Iberian component being based on basques, which it isn't, it just peaks on Basques cause guess what, they're the most unmixed Iberians. No MENA (NA, Sephardic Jews), no Barbarians, practically no Romans, no West Asian from god knows where in ancient times, and they show it quite clearly by scoring mostly Southern European components with a very high Iberian score to boot. If there wasn't a Basque component, they'd score even higher on Iberian. About you saying the component only uses the Spanish Basques out of all the samples that are listed on the file about used samples that the maker released, I prefer to side with the data that the maker of the calculator released that shows clearly it uses a lot of Spaniards, sorry. And if it was just Basques, surely West Europeans would be dividing the attention between the Iberian component and Basque component (after all they would be based on the same population, Basques, and therefore West Europeans would probably score around half-half), but they aren't.


I ve said a couple of times, IBD would likely show some weird stuff if you were trying some Amerindian/ASI/ASE in highly steppe admixed Euro people (they tend to score more of those in admixture). The consequences may have a cause there too, but there are no study about it, there s not much to talk about, pretty much everyone has some ANE in Europe. If there s one rule for European DNA, anything that is not in the continuity of up paleo / mesolithic Europe, the WHG things basically and his close cousins, is by definition"exotic" to Europe, so we all have some stuff that is not native per say. People only focus on a few things.

You do however understand that what is today Amerindians are people who left Eurasia to cross Beringia about 15 000 years ago? There is no documented history of Amerindians invading Ireland or such things right, therefore very unlikely it's anything else than what they randomly score isn't just the reflection of a very distant common ancestry found in ANE. For ASI/ASE it could be different story as proto IE people really have mixed with C&S Asians before entering Europe in the Bronze Age.

Europeans are admixed, no doubt about that. In the end, as a personal opinion, everything that makes up a significant part of the DNA of Europeans should be considered at least partially European. ANE peaks in other populations, sure, but that happens when a population is successful enough, it spreads their DNA, and they clearly did. Today they are a very significant part of Northern and Eastern Europeans, and we should give them all the love they require ihihih :loveheart: Same thing with ENF, more in the South.

Yes I understand that, I literally said that ANE populations (probably already mixed with East Asian) passed to the Americans at least 15000 years ago 3 posts ago or something like that :confused: Again, Irish and French scoring 1%+ Amerindian on the K15 shows exactly what you are saying, they share a common ancestor with Amerindians (ANE), but they certainly don't share all the East Asian admixture that Amerindians have, and they score Amerindian anyway.



Well, this is my last post in this thread (hopefully this time for good), can't be spending 2-4 hours each day writing here, I'm sure it's the same for you. What we agree on we agree, and what we disagree on, time will surely tell. I'll fly away now :flypig: :) :flypig:

[Ibericus]

If it was Mozabite, you wouldn't score SSA, since they don't, it's all in their 98,5% N.African (but obviously they are like 25% SSA). So what what you score on, is Moroccan.
Not necessarily. For example the Valencian DOD375 scores 2.6% Northwest-African but 0% SSA and 0% East-African. Same with the Catalan DOD217 or the other Valencian DOD189.


Also with nMonte stats and selecting close european populations who have 0% NA gives me similar percentages (2.9%) and it prefers Mozabite over Moroccans :

Valencia_1KG
"French_Basque" 50.3
"North_Italian" 39.8
"Lithuanians" 6
"Mozabite" 2.65
"French" 0.5
"Georgians" 0.3
"Moroccans" 0.25

[1] "distance%=0.0451 / distance=0.000451"

The distance is very short, so it's a very good fit.

[Cristiano viejo]

It's lower on the right side of the peninsula than on the left side, this shouldn't even be debatable. To give you just a quick example, Eastern Andalusians have quite a bit lower NA than Western Andalusians even though they're both from the South, cause they descend mainly from people that had less NA from the beginning. Galicians and Northern Portuguese already had relatively high NA when the Reconquista started and passed it to the center and south of Portugal too, and also to a bit of Western Andalusia, making them appear Portuguese in most calculators even though they're from Andalusia. This map from a study done on the Iberians populations shows it very well - Genetic relatedness between Iberian populations:

https://s26.postimg.org/yh5io0puh/Genetic_relatedness_between_Iberian_populations.jp g



This correlates with history :thumbs

[Petalpusher]

Well, this is my last post in this thread (hopefully this time for good), can't be spending 2-4 hours each day writing here, I'm sure it's the same for you. What we agree on we agree, and what we disagree on, time will surely tell. I'll fly away now :flypig: :) :flypig:

Let's say i agree on most, just two things:

Im unsure if i understand you wrong, or you believe the gradient is an actual percentage of SSA. It's not, it's a value of IBD, just wanted to clear that up for everybody anyway (like the N.African isn't a value in percentage)

About the Basque Spanish being the "Iberian", if it's the peak it was sourced on it, closely related people around are still gonna score high, even high as them, but then all their other score begin to diverge. It's not because for example if i had an half Japanese sibling and we still share 50% of our dna, it would make me part Japanese. Different scenario : if i create a "Germanic" component based on Danemark/S.Sweden for example (i think Passa had this idea once). Why would it comes with Saami stuff if all these people don't have any Saami related bits? it would not. Yet Saami would still score one of the highest on it.

Higher K is picking up things more in fragments, it has both advantages and disadvantages. It is the basic procedure in any study to run both high and low K to make sure what we look at is really, what it is.

ps: I meant that left/right side as an anology of auctionning not that is was higher in the east! (ahah just realized that)

[Sikeliot]

Let's say i agree on most, just two things:

Im unsure if i understand you wrong, or you believe the gradient is an actual percentage of SSA. It's not, it's a value of IBD, just wanted to clear that up for everybody anyway (like the N.African isn't a value in percentage)

About the Basque Spanish being the "Iberian", if it's the peak it was sourced on it, closely related people around are still gonna score high, even high as them, but then all their other score begin to diverge. It's not because for example if i had an half Japanese sibling and we still share 50% of our dna, it would make me part Japanese. Different scenario : if i create a "Germanic" component based on Danemark/S.Sweden for example (i think Passa had this idea once). Why would it comes with Saami stuff if all these people don't have any Saami related bits? it would not. Yet Saami would still score one of the highest on it.

Higher K is picking up things more in fragments, it has both advantages and disadvantages. It is the basic procedure in any study to run both high and low K to make sure what we look at is really, what it is.

Doesn't IBD show how recent the match is? I.e. someone could be more SSA autosomally but have lower IBD because it is further back?

[Petalpusher]

Doesn't IBD show how recent the match is? I.e. someone could be more SSA autosomally but have lower IBD because it is further back?

The amount will be the same but the segments will be more spread out, so it could introduce some false negative, also false positive (statistically it balances itself anyway) but it won't go away that easily, not in the kind of timeframe we are talking about. Of course it's easier to have a good reading when it's something tangible, decimals differences yes, but not integer differences. We are still taking about relatively low levels of MENA in Europe it can be a bit shaky in some places but the general pattern is very clear imo, like on the pca or the map.

[Imamudin]

The N.Africans input, even if little most of the time, stops or become insignificant in northern Spain and Basques. The datas are here, we don't score any. We cannot invent it just to please you.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1Y6nfb7Ka8E/Uaz_N0WrLSI/AAAAAAAAI24/XYZxZo9yHUk/s1600/iberia.jpg

The map above is bullshit. I mean SSA and NA admixture in Russia and Kazakhstan, even higher than in France??? Come on!

[Sikeliot]

Here is what I am confused about.

Central Sicily there is a lighter color on par with northern/central Greece, while coastal Sicily and Peloponnese are darker. But based on autosomal DNA, central Sicily shifts heavily into West Asia and they have a lot of Armenian-like admixture. So why is their color lighter on the map?

[Petalpusher]

Here is what I am confused about.

Central Sicily there is a lighter color on par with northern/central Greece, while coastal Sicily and Peloponnese are darker. But based on autosomal DNA, central Sicily shifts heavily into West Asia and they have a lot of Armenian-like admixture. So why is their color lighter on the map?

Are you talking about the neareastern IBD? The neareastern isn't sourced in the Caucasus but Saudi Qatar and Egyptians (could have been better samples)

[Sikeliot]

Are you talking about the neareastern IBD? The neareastern isn't sourced in the Caucasus but Saudi Qatar and Egyptians (could have been better samples)

That makes sense. The inland of Sicily is very Caucasus shifted. But IBD is not autosomal, so I guess it's not a perfect guide.

[Petalpusher]

Not necessarily. For example the Valencian DOD375 scores 2.6% Northwest-African but 0% SSA and 0% East-African. Same with the Catalan DOD217 or the other Valencian DOD189.


Also with nMonte stats and selecting close european populations who have 0% NA gives me similar percentages (2.9%) and it prefers Mozabite over Moroccans :

Valencia_1KG
"French_Basque" 50.3
"North_Italian" 39.8
"Lithuanians" 6
"Mozabite" 2.65
"French" 0.5
"Georgians" 0.3
"Moroccans" 0.25

[1] "distance%=0.0451 / distance=0.000451"

The distance is very short, so it's a very good fit.

I don't want to argue about a couple of percent, i ve tried to give a realistic range.

The "Spanish" average is

Northwest Africa : 5.11
SSA 0.40
East Africa 0.20


What the average score is "Moroccan", not the Mozabite it would be a problem since being the 100% peak N.African they score only 0.50% SSA in the spreadsheet.. (it's all embedded in the N.African), and that would make the average Spanish as SSA as Mozabite appear to be. Obviously it's not the reality.

"Moroccan_North" on average score 44% Northwest African and 4% SSA. Spanish 5.11 NA + 0.50 SSA (0.40 West Africa + 0.20 East Africa (half is W.Africa)). It's EXACTLY the same 10:1 ratio . but i guess those who are on the lower end, can appear more as Mozabite than Moroccans (not that there is a big difference).

[Ibericus]

I don't want to argue about a couple of percent, i ve tried to give a realistic range.

The "Spanish" average is

Northwest Africa : 5.11
SSA 0.40
East Africa 0.20


What the average score is "Moroccan", not the Mozabite it would be a problem since being the 100% peak N.African they score only 0.50% SSA in the spreadsheet.. (it's all embedded in the N.African), and that would make the average Spanish as SSA as Mozabite appear to be. Obviously it's not the reality.

"Moroccan_North" on average score 44% Northwest African and 4% SSA. Spanish 5.11 NA + 0.50 SSA (0.40 West Africa + 0.20 East Africa (half is W.Africa)). It's EXACTLY the same 10:1 ratio . but i guess those who are on the lower end, can appear more as Mozabite than Moroccans (not that there is a big difference).
Don't know what spreadsheet you're looking at, the East-Africa is 0%, not 0.20% ; but anyways, I was talking about Eastern-Spaniards specifically, but that Spanish_D sample is not balanced because it has a lot of galicians. The "Spaniards" sample instead from Behar et al. (it has 6 catalans and 6 andalusians) scores :
3.0% NA + 0% East-Africa + 0.1% SSA

And Cataluña:
2.4% NA + 0% East-Africa + 0% SSA

Aragón :
3.4% NA + 0% East-Africa + 0% SSA

[Bell Beaker]

Don't know what spreadsheet you're looking at, the East-Africa is 0%, not 0.20% , but that Spanish_D sample is not balanced because it has a lot of galicians. The "Spaniard" sample for example (6 catalans and 6 andalusians) has :
3.0% NA + 0% East-Africa + 0.1% SSA

Andalusians are largely of Northern Descent even more than other other Southern Iberian groups like Alentejans and Algarvians.

I think people from the rural areas and small towns are more ethnic Andalusian....

[GiCa]

Cool. So from wich population of North Africa is this 5%?

Is it the Callifate before reconquista?

[Ibericus]

Cool. So from wich population of North Africa is this 5%?

Is it the Callifate before reconquista?
Some North Italians also score this component, i've seen three Venetians one scores 1.43%, another 1.48% , and another 1.82%.

But not, it's not the "Califate", since ancient spanish samples already from Neolithic onwards score this component

[GiCa]

Some North Italians also score this component, i've seen three Venetians one scores 1.43%, another 1.48% , and another 1.82%.

But not, it's not the "Califate", since ancient spanish samples already from Neolithic onwards score this component

Oh really. Interesting. But they say it s the Moroccans at least for Spain . I m curious for Italy instead

[GiCa]

Also the supposed West Med peak is shared between Iberia, Sardinia and Algeria-Morocco
But that is not counted as North African. I guess It s a thing of the west facade only

[Ibericus]

Also the supposed West Med peak is shared between Iberia, Sardinia and Algeria-Morocco
But that is not counted as North African. I guess It s a thing of the west facade only
North Italy also has very high West-Med, this has nothing to do with north-african, it's mostly Middle-Neolithic european farmers.

[Sikeliot]

Also the supposed West Med peak is shared between Iberia, Sardinia and Algeria-Morocco
But that is not counted as North African. I guess It s a thing of the west facade only

West Med component is transcontinental. It is highest amongst Sardinians, Iberians, and Berbers.

[Bell Beaker]

West Med component is transcontinental. It is highest amongst Sardinians, Iberians, and Berbers.

It's very high across Southern Western Europeans, including South Italians, Sardinians, Corsicans, Iberians and even Southern French.

Berbers have it too but I would say it's a secondary admixture.

[Ibericus]

It's very high across Southern Western Europeans, including South Italians, Sardinians, Corsicans, Iberians and even Southern French.

Berbers have it too but I would say it's a secondary admixture.
North Italians have more than South Italians

[GiCa]

No . It s (west) Euro-Maghrebi trans continental component.

Yes for the trans continental.

Only in sardinians it s above 30%

Both in Maghreb (morocco-Algeria) and Iberia it s 20-25%

In Italy it's less but I centre and north between 15-19%

[Bell Beaker]

North Italians have more than South Italians

I guess North Italians and Iberians share a common root.....

[Ibericus]

No . It s (west) Euro-Maghrebi trans continental component.

Yes for the trans continental.

Only in sardinians it s above 30%

Both in Maghreb (morocco-Algeria) and Iberia it s 20-25%

In Italy it's less but I centre and north between 15-19%
No, It's like this :

Neolithic farmers 50-60%
Sardinian 48%
Basque 25%
Moroccan 24%
Southwest_French 23.5%
Spanish 20-23%
North-Italian (Bergamo) 21.6%
Portuguese 21.6%
Swiss-Italian 21%
South-French, Toulouse 20.5%

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

The map above is bullshit. I mean SSA and NA admixture in Russia and Kazakhstan, even higher than in France??? Come on!

The black dot in Russia was measured and had 0. To the east of that dot, there are no more black dots meaning it wasn't measured, so you get the cline coming out of Greece and Cyprus, so yes, you could say the map is bullshit for you since it wasn't measured.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

West Med component is transcontinental. It is highest amongst Sardinians, Iberians, and Berbers.

Berbers have high West Med and Atlantic for MENAs cause they have very significant Iberian ancestry, not because it is transcontinental. West Med is around 45% ENF 55% WHG, and ENF peaks in South Europe in Sardinians.

[Sikeliot]

Berbers have high West Med and Atlantic for MENAs cause they have very significant Iberian ancestry, not because it is transcontinental. West Med is around 45% ENF 55% WHG, and ENF peaks in South Europe in Sardinians.

You think their Iberian ancestry is that high?

[Sikeliot]

No . It s (west) Euro-Maghrebi trans continental component.

Yes for the trans continental.

Only in sardinians it s above 30%

Both in Maghreb (morocco-Algeria) and Iberia it s 20-25%

In Italy it's less but I centre and north between 15-19%

Yes. People will try to whitewash it to be a European component but it is no more European than is the East Med one.

[crazyladybutterfly]

Yes. People will try to whitewash it to be a European component but it is no more European than is the East Med one.

fair enough

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

You think their Iberian ancestry is that high?

They're significantly Southern European, yes. And the Berber West Med numbers on the spreadsheet aren't very reliable. The Moroccans I have score 19-20% West Med and 12-13% Atlantic. Both of these components have significant ENF. They don't seem to be very interested in North Sea, always scoring 0, while modern Iberians score around the same North Sea as West Med.

[Ibericus]

Berbers have high West Med and Atlantic for MENAs cause they have very significant Iberian ancestry, not because it is transcontinental. West Med is around 45% ENF 55% WHG, and ENF peaks in South Europe in Sardinians.
Not exactly iberian ancestry, it's Neolithic farmer ancestry.


Yes. People will try to whitewash it to be a European component but it is no more European than is the East Med one.
Not at all. Because West-med has quite of WHG, while East-Med doesn't.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Yes. People will try to whitewash it to be a European component but it is no more European than is the East Med one.

It is more European than East Med... It's made of two main components, WHG and ENF, and they both peak in Europe. While East Med is definitely not MENA as many say, it is significantly closer to Red Sea than other European components are, although it's still closer to other European components than Red Sea.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Not exactly iberian ancestry, it's Neolithic farmer ancestry.

Very likely, that's what I meant when I said they aren't interested in North Sea like modern Iberians are. But we need ancient DNA as proof.

[Ibericus]

It is more European than East Med... It's made of two main components, WHG and ENF, and they both peak in Europe. While East Med is definitely not MENA as many say, it is significantly closer to Red Sea than other European components are, although it's still closer to other European components than Red Sea.
It is MENA. It peaks in Yemenite Jews.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

It is MENA. It peaks in Yemenite Jews.

Red Sea is Middle Eastern, that is what is supposed to be MENA, but in this calculator it doesn't work very well. Where it peaks is irrelevant, what matters are the fst distances, and they say clearly that east med is closer to the other European components than to Red Sea. Yemenite Jews might be scoring a lot of East Med, but that doesn't mean that it is a good fit at all (after all they have to score something), especially when the Red Sea component has problems.

[Ibericus]

Red Sea is Middle Eastern, that is what is supposed to be MENA, but in this calculator it doesn't work very well. Where it peaks is irrelevant, what matters are the fst distances, and they say clearly that east med is closer to the other European components than Red Sea. Yemenite Jews might be scoring a lot of East Med, but that doesn't mean that it is a good fit at all (after all they have to score something), especially when the Red Sea component has problems.
Red-Sea is just like East-Med but with some old East-African mix in it.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Red-Sea is just like East-Med but with some old East-African mix in it.

Do you have the populations that the components are based on? I never found it.

[Percivalle]

No . It s (west) Euro-Maghrebi trans continental component.

Yes for the trans continental.

Only in sardinians it s above 30%

Both in Maghreb (morocco-Algeria) and Iberia it s 20-25%

In Italy it's less but I centre and north between 15-19%


West-Med is the main component of the Neolithic farmer also known as Anatolian farmer.



No, It's like this :

Neolithic farmers 50-60%
Sardinian 48%
Basque 25%
Moroccan 24%
Southwest_French 23.5%
Spanish 20-23%
North-Italian (Bergamo) 21.6%
Portuguese 21.6%
Swiss-Italian 21%
South-French, Toulouse 20.5%


Sardinian 48.22%
Oetzi 47.53%
French Basque 25.4%
Moroccan 24.21%
Southwest French 23.54%
Spanish 20.7-23.95%
North-Italian (Bergamo) 21.6%
Portuguese 21.6%
Algerian 21.32%
Tunisian 20.6%
Tuscan 19.82%
South Italian 18.4%
Italian Jewish 17.84%
West Sicilian 17.75%
Greek Thessaly 17.47%
East Sicilian 17.35%
Central Greek 17.29%
Greek 17.16%
Italian_Abruzzo 16.14%
Cyprian 16%
French 15%
Ashkenazi 14.84%
Bulgarian 13.78%
Samaritan 13.52%
Romanian 12.48%
Lebanese Christian 11.81%
Serbian 11.74%
South Dutch 11.43%
Southwest English 11.16 %
West German 11.13%




Yes. People will try to whitewash it to be a European component but it is no more European than is the East Med one.

Even Otzi was 20% East-Med.

[Potentia]

Nooooooooo lol I don't have time to write so much and I'm sure you don't too, I'll just touch on some things and that's it.



It's lower on the right side of the peninsula than on the left side, this shouldn't even be debatable. To give you just a quick example, Eastern Andalusians have quite a bit lower NA than Western Andalusians even though they're both from the South, cause they descend mainly from people that had less NA from the beginning. Galicians and Northern Portuguese already had relatively high NA when the Reconquista started and passed it to the center and south of Portugal too, and also to a bit of Western Andalusia, making them appear Portuguese in most calculators even though they're from Andalusia. This map from a study done on the Iberians populations shows it very well - Genetic relatedness between Iberian populations:

https://s26.postimg.org/yh5io0puh/Genetic_relatedness_between_Iberian_populations.jp g

Anyway, there is a case to be made that a big part of North African DNA in Iberia didn't come from the Moors, but obviously it's long to explain, and genetics Blogs have already talked about it so it's just wasting time posting it here. Time will tell.


Whoa...

My surname, Juarez, originated in Galicia. Did my ancestors travel from Galicia, southwards, until they reached Andalusia? Then, from there, they went to the New World.

[PunhetaDeBacalhau]

Whoa...

My surname, Juarez, originated in Galicia. Did my ancestors travel from Galicia, southwards, until they reached Andalusia? Then, from there, they went to the New World.

You need a time machine to know that :) If they came from Western Andalusia it's very possible, although it's obvious that a person's surname only tells so much about their ancestry. People move around in Spain, it's one country.

[Petalpusher]

This is the FST of Eurogenes K15, it's the only thing that is needed to know, if people cannot figure it any other way :

Fst:
N_Sea Atlantic Baltic Eastern W_Med W_Asian E_Med Red_Sea S_Asian SE_Asian Siberian Amer Ocean NE_African
North_Sea
Atlantic 0.015
Baltic 0.02 0.022
Eastern_Euro 0.02 0.022 0.024
West_Med 0.029 0.028 0.037 0.038
West_Asian 0.027 0.026 0.033 0.031 0.035
East_Med 0.026 0.024 0.034 0.032 0.027 0.019
Middle_Eastern 0.053 0.05 0.059 0.058 0.051 0.046 0.038
South_Asian 0.06 0.062 0.064 0.056 0.075 0.053 0.055 0.078
Southeast_Asian 0.112 0.114 0.115 0.102 0.123 0.109 0.11 0.127 0.075
Siberian 0.111 0.113 0.114 0.1 0.125 0.11 0.112 0.13 0.083 0.056
Amerindian 0.138 0.141 0.141 0.128 0.156 0.14 0.143 0.161 0.12 0.113 0.107
Oceanian 0.178 0.179 0.181 0.173 0.188 0.176 0.174 0.19 0.145 0.166 0.178 0.217
NE_African 0.109 0.108 0.114 0.108 0.112 0.103 0.094 0.106 0.102 0.137 0.144 0.178 0.195
Sub-Saharan 0.144 0.144 0.148 0.142 0.149 0.139 0.132 0.139 0.131 0.164 0.171 0.204 0.219 0.042 0




1. NE_Africa @ 0

2. Subsaharan @ 42
3. East_med @ 94
4. S_Asian @ 102
5. W_Asian @ 103
6. Red_Sea @ 106
7. Eastern @ 108
8. Atlantic @ 108
9. North_Sea @ 109
10. West med @ 112
11. Baltic @ 114




1. Sub-Saharan @ 0

2. Northeast_African @ 42
3. S_Asian @ 131
4. East_med @ 132
5. Red_Sea @ 139
6. W_Asian @ 139
7. Eastern @ 142
8. Atlantic @ 144
9. North_Sea @ 144
10. Baltic @ 148
11. West_med @ 149


Not only the assumption is wrong, but it is actually the exact the opposite. It is the most unrelated thing to Africans someone can score (and also E.Asian/ASE/Amerindian, etc..)

[Insuperable]

This is the FST of Eurogenes K15, it's the only thing that is needed to know, if people cannot figure it any other way :

Fst:
N_Sea Atlantic Baltic Eastern W_Med W_Asian E_Med Red_Sea S_Asian SE_Asian Siberian Amer Ocean NE_African
North_Sea
Atlantic 0.015
Baltic 0.02 0.022
Eastern_Euro 0.02 0.022 0.024
West_Med 0.029 0.028 0.037 0.038
West_Asian 0.027 0.026 0.033 0.031 0.035
East_Med 0.026 0.024 0.034 0.032 0.027 0.019
Middle_Eastern 0.053 0.05 0.059 0.058 0.051 0.046 0.038
South_Asian 0.06 0.062 0.064 0.056 0.075 0.053 0.055 0.078
Southeast_Asian 0.112 0.114 0.115 0.102 0.123 0.109 0.11 0.127 0.075
Siberian 0.111 0.113 0.114 0.1 0.125 0.11 0.112 0.13 0.083 0.056
Amerindian 0.138 0.141 0.141 0.128 0.156 0.14 0.143 0.161 0.12 0.113 0.107
Oceanian 0.178 0.179 0.181 0.173 0.188 0.176 0.174 0.19 0.145 0.166 0.178 0.217
NE_African 0.109 0.108 0.114 0.108 0.112 0.103 0.094 0.106 0.102 0.137 0.144 0.178 0.195
Sub-Saharan 0.144 0.144 0.148 0.142 0.149 0.139 0.132 0.139 0.131 0.164 0.171 0.204 0.219 0.042 0




1. NE_Africa @ 0
2. Subsaharan @ 42
3. East_med @ 94
4. S_Asian @ 102
5. W_Asian @ 103
6. Red_Sea @ 106
7. Eastern @ 108
8. Atlantic @ 108
9. N.Sea @ 109
10. West med @ 112
11. Baltic @ 114




1. Sub-Saharan @ 0
2. Northeast_African @ 42
3. S_Asian @ 131
4. East_med @ 132
5. Red_Sea @ 139
6. W_Asian @ 139
7. Eastern @ 142
8. Atlantic @ 144
9. North_Sea @ 144
10. Baltic @ 148
11. West_med @ 149


Not only the assumption is wrong, but it is actually the exact the opposite. It is the most unrelated thing to Africans (and also E.Asian/ASE/Amerindian, etc..)

Jeez I would never think that Red Sea is more distant to SSA than East Med.

[Petalpusher]

Jeez I would never think that Red Sea is more distant to SSA than East Med.

That's because East med has something more related to SSA and more related to European at the same time. Yet peak more around the Levant (next to Syria, Lebanese), than Red_Sea (Saudi, Bedouins)

[Insuperable]

That's because East med has something more related to SSA and more related to European at the same time. Yet peak more around the Levant (next to Syria, Lebanese), than Red_Sea (Saudi, Bedouins)

What is the reference population here for NE Africa? Somalians and such? If so I am surprised Red Sea isn't closer to NE Africa.

[Petalpusher]

What is the reference population here for NE Africa? Somalians and such? If so I am surprised Red Sea isn't closer to NE Africa.

Somali & Ethiopians. It is slightly closer on a pca but not on fst (it's a relationship not a distance).

Just like if you mix, say, a Somali and a Swede, the guy is gonna have a great relationship with N.Europe (he is half), but still gonna be half African and far from any European. Not implying this is the case for East_med, the difference is of course more subtle but the idea is the same, it's a more polarized element. The fact West_med challenges even Baltic in its "un-relationship" with both West and East African, tells enough.

Amusing fact, if someone could score only 50% West_Med and 50% Baltic, he would be the closest ethnically to Germans on a pca and the most unrelated person to African in W.Eurasia. Fuel for thoughts.