South Asian admixture?

[TheForeigner]

What genetic evidence is there for South Asian admixture in Europeans? What is the frequency of it, what groups have it, how much do they have and is iit from Gypsies or some other source populaton?

[TheForeigner]

bump

[TeutonicBoyars]

How much are you talking about? I heard small amounts found with Eurogenes could be from Yamnaya admixture.

[StonyArabia]

Gypsy admixture would in the Balkans and parts of eastern-central Europe, if there is any South Asian admix its mostly likely from that source. The British might have South Asian admixture, but rather it's from the Indian colonial period and possibly assimilated Gypsies, British Gypsies like the Romanichals are pretty much British genetically with 10% South Asian, which it does not show on their phenotypes.

[Vigilance]

I heard that Spanish/Portuguese women have high %age of M mtdna...

[Cristiano viejo]

I heard that Spanish/Portuguese women have high %age of M mtdna...

They lied you.

[TheForeigner]

Actually I am surprised of any South Asian admixture in other parts of Asia too. How did it get there?

[Vigilance]

They lied you.


M1 is not restricted to Africa. It is relatively common in the Mediterranean, peaking in Iberia. M1 also enjoys a well-established presence in the Middle East, from the South of the Arabian Peninsula to Anatolia and from the Levant to Iran. In addition, M1 haplotypes have occasionally been observed in the Caucasus and the Trans Caucasus, and without any accompanying L lineages.[3][10] M1 has also been detected in Central Asia, seemingly reaching as far as Tibet.

[Cristiano viejo]

Perhaps among Gypsies.

[Jana]

I noticed Finns tend to score bits of south asian. It surely isn't from gypsies, but some older bronze age link.

[Leto]

I noticed Finns tend to score bits of south asian. It surely isn't from gypsies, but some older bronze age link.
Yes, the same with North Russians and Tatars. There were no Indians or Gypsies in the Middle Volga region.

[TheForeigner]

I noticed Finns tend to score bits of south asian. It surely isn't from gypsies, but some older bronze age link.

Don't tell me Indo-Europeans really had actual "Indo" in them!

[Jana]

Don't tell me Indo-Europeans really had actual "Indo" in them!
They definitely did :)

[TheForeigner]

They definitely did :)

Weren't they European kurgan people? How did they get Indian ancestry?

[Leto]

Weren't they European kurgan people? How did they get Indian ancestry?
The Yamnaya were like 55% Eastern HG and 45% Caucasus HG.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/19/0d/0f/190d0f8886607a14d185c3a9da0ec7b1.jpg

[CrazyCatLady]

Weren't they European kurgan people? How did they get Indian ancestry?

''European'' and ''Indian'' are modern constructions that didn't existed 5000 years ago.

Populations were moving all across Eurasia for centuries and not necessarily overlapping with concepts we know today.
Just to give you an example: What you call ''South Asian'' is in itself a mixed component of Indo-European, Neolithic Iranian and Veddoid, but in ancient times Veddoid-like and even Negrito-like populations inhabited places as far as Central Asia, they have been replaced first by Chalcolithic and Neolithic Farmers from Zagros mountains and after by Proto-Indo-Europeans who have been assimilated by Turko-Mongol peoples creating modern Central Asians. You could say the same about ''Indians'' or ''Europeans'' or anyone else, but with different populations and components.

All those populations are present in modern Central Asian DNA. They were not ''European'' or ''Indian'' or any modern term you can think of. This is an anthropology forum, you should avoid using inaccurate terms.

[TheForeigner]

Ok so Australoid like people lived in prehistoric times in Central Asia, but what about Iran, Kazakhstan and Europe? The PIE came from Southern Russian steppes, not Asia.

[CrazyCatLady]

Ok so Australoid like people lived in prehistoric times in Central Asia, but what about Iran, Kazakhstan and Europe? The PIE came from Southern Russian steppes, not Asia.

That's not what I said, you don't have very good interpretation skills. I said archaic populations doesn't necessarily correlate with our modern concepts about what most populations are. Most of the ''South Asian'' admixture in PIE comes from archaic populations not really related with modern South Asian but present in South Asian DNA, that's why calculators read it as ''South Asian''. There was no ''pure people'' in those times as ignorants like to believe. All human populations are more or less mixed between different components that were mixed between other components themselves. Not very difficult to understand if you have a regular IQ.

Central Asia was just an example I gave to you, heuristic one. And ''South Asian'' component from these comercial DNA companies is a mix of everything. They don't ''break'' the component in many other components like they do in Europe, so it already includes Indo-European and Neolthic Iranian, not only Veddoid.
Btw, Veddoid is the least important component of the ancestry of modern Indians, so I don't know why you equate Indian = Veddoid. It would be like saying European = ANE (Amerindian-like component). Dumb as hell.

[Leto]

That's not what I said, you don't have very good interpretation skills. I said archaic populations doesn't necessarily correlate with our modern concepts about what most populations are. Most of the ''South Asian'' admixture in PIE comes from archaic populations not really related with modern South Asian but present in South Asian DNA, that's why calculators read it as ''South Asian''. There was no ''pure people'' in those times as ignorants like to believe. All human populations are more or less mixed between different components that were mixed between other components themselves. Not very difficult to understand if you have a regular IQ.

Central Asia was just an example I gave to you, heuristic one. And ''South Asian'' component from these comercial DNA companies is a mix of everything. They don't ''break'' the component in many other components like they do in Europe, so it already includes Indo-European and Neolthic Iranian, not only Veddoid.
Btw, Veddoid is the least important component of the ancestry of modern Indians, so I don't know why you equate Indian = Veddoid. It would be like saying European = ANE (Amerindian-like component). Dumb as hell.
Who the hell are you to lecture people like that? You registred a fucking month ago. Or maybe you're someone else's sockpuppet?

[TheForeigner]

So just how far north, west, south and east did Australoid peoples lived in prehistoric times?

[TheForeigner]

They definitely did :)

How did they get Indian ancestry in your opinion?

[Jana]

How did they get Indian ancestry in your opinion?
As was already mention I believe it was from mixing with central asian farmers that carried south asian admixture :)

[TheForeigner]

As was already mention I believe it was from mixing with central asian farmers that carried south asian admixture :)

But how did it entered Europe? Indo-European tribes from European Russian steppe that spread through Europe, didn't mix with Central Asians or so I assume.

[Jana]

But how did it entered Europe? Indo-European tribes from European Russian steppe that spread through Europe, didn't mix with Central Asians or so I assume.

Well, if we follow R haplogroup origin, far home of them was Siberia. If I am not mistaken, he (Malt'a boy) already had bew bits of south asian admix.

Even modern north Caucasians have few percent "Indian" in them. It may be extremely ancient, I supose.

[TheForeigner]

Well, if we follow R haplogroup origin, far home of them was Siberia. If I am not mistaken, he (Malt'a boy) already had bew bits of south asian admix.

Even modern north Caucasians have few percent "Indian" in them. It may be extremely ancient, I supose.

Or maybe they are misinterpreting it.

[Jana]

Or maybe they are misinterpreting it.
Possible. But ANE itself has south asian affinities. It even reaches maximum frequencies, there.

[TheForeigner]

Possible. But ANE itself has south asian affinities. It even reaches maximum frequencies, there.

I find it hard to believe that PIEs and modern Europeans and all Middle Easterners have real ASI admixture.

[Jana]

I find it hard to believe that PIEs and modern Europeans and all Middle Easterners have real ASI admixture.
I don't think we have any ASI, at all. But Indo-Europeans weren't european genetically. They were Eurasian. Or pred. European, but with other admixtures too. CHG itself can harbour some south asian like genes. I'm really not sure. :)

[CrazyCatLady]

Who the hell are you to lecture people like that? You registred a fucking month ago. Or maybe you're someone else's sockpuppet?

lol

I'm only helping him, giving free information and improving his knowledge. What's the problem?

Seems it wasn't much helpful since he continued to say bullshit...

[Mingle]

South Asian admixture just means they have some Ancient South Eurasian (or "ASI"). It's a shared component with South Asians that South Asians tend to score in large amounts and non-South Asians tend to score in lesser or non-existent amounts.

[Mingle]

CHG itself can harbour some south asian like genes.

Not true.

[Jana]

Not true.
Why not ?

[Mingle]

Why not ?

People with the highest ASI/ASE tend to look very black whereas people with the highest CHG look white. I don't see how they would get mixed up, maybe I just don't know enough but they are pretty distinct as there are both people with high CHG and low ASE in addition to people with high CHG and non-existent ASE.

[CrazyCatLady]

South Asian admixture just means they have some Ancient South Eurasian (or "ASI"). It's a shared component with South Asians that South Asians tend to score in large amounts and non-South Asians tend to score in lesser or non-existent amounts.

So ''South Asian'' most likely means Ancestral South Eurasian, right? Not real ''Indian'' ancestry as I supposed. Even because ''Indian'' is already a mixed component of ASE and Western Eurasian.

[Jana]

People with the highest ASI/ASE tend to look very black whereas people with the highest CHG look white. I don't see how they would get mixed up, maybe I just don't know enough but they are pretty distinct as there are both people with high CHG and low ASE in addition to people with high CHG and non-existent ASE.
South Asian =/= ASI

[Mingle]

So ''South Asian'' most likely means Ancestral South Eurasian, right? Not real ''Indian'' ancestry as I supposed. Even because ''Indian'' is already a mixed component of ASE and Western Eurasian.

Actually South Asian is a mix of ASE and Iranian Neolithic, my bad. So the South Asian in Europeans could be partially ASE.

[CrazyCatLady]

South Asian =/= ASI

Yeah, that is what's tricking me here; the South Asian component this guy is talking about is ASE (Ancestral South Eurasian) or a mix of ASI + ANI?
ASI and ANI are already mixed components.

ASI is mostly Veddoid + Mongoloid and Caucasoid. ANI is pure West Eurasian (Indo-European + Neolithic Iranian).

[CrazyCatLady]

Actually South Asian is a mix of ASE and Iranian Neolithic, my bad. So the South Asian in Europeans could be partially ASE.

Actually ''South Asian'' is a mix of ANI + ASI. I may be wrong, but I think ASI isn't pure ASE.

[Mingle]

Actually ''South Asian'' is a mix of ANI + ASI. I may be wrong, but I think ASI isn't pure ASE.

That's outdated terminology. Usually when people say ASI (in that context), they mean South Indian not Ancestral South Indian. And South Indian is a mix of some ghost component and West Eurasian. Black Negritos are sometimes used as a proxy for ASI but that's not accurate as there has been considerable drift between Onges/Negritos and the people who have ASI in mainland India. From what I've heard, the DNA for it has been discovered, but the Indian government isn't releasing it for political reasons.

ANI is mainly Iranian Neolithic (Gedrosia). Most Indians score Indians score mainly Iran N and ASI with a bit of Caucasus.

I might sound contradictory since I didn't think much when making my original statement, but Europeans and South Asians may not have shared ancestry as there might be differences in the ASE. I don't know enough about ASE to say for sure, but there could be different types of ASE and ASE could be a mixed component of stuff that share similarities. I don't think it is, but it could be. I'll ask and come back with a clearer answer soon.

The ASE among Iranics, Indics, some Central Asian Turks, and maybe Southeast Asians & Tibetans is most likely shared ancestry though. Unless there were a diverse number of components grouped together as ASE/ASI, but I doubt it. Negritos/Negrito-like people lived most of large parts South-Central Asia and all of Southeast Asia before Caucasians and East Asians came so it's probably just blood from them. But they could have been diverse as well since I've heard there is a lot of genetic drift between the ASI in Indians and the Onges.

[Mingle]

Yeah, that is what's tricking me here; the South Asian component this guy is talking about is ASE (Ancestral South Eurasian) or a mix of ASI + ANI?
ASI and ANI are already mixed components.

ASI is mostly Veddoid + Mongoloid and Caucasoid. ANI is pure West Eurasian (Indo-European + Neolithic Iranian).

South Asian is a mixed component. ASI isn't. Sometimes South Asian is labeled as ASI. The Eurasia ASI K9 separates the two, but I've heard it's pretty flawed as well because of the reference population it uses.

[CrazyCatLady]

That's outdated terminology. Usually when people say ASI (in that context), they mean South Indian not Ancestral South Indian. And South Indian is a mix of some ghost component and West Eurasian. Black Negritos are sometimes used as a proxy for ASI but that's not accurate as there has been considerable drift between Onges/Negritos and the people who have ASI in mainland India. From what I've heard, the DNA for it has been discovered, but the Indian government isn't releasing it for political reasons.

ANI is mainly Iranian Neolithic (Gedrosia). Most Indians score Indians score mainly Iran N and ASI with a bit of Caucasus.

I might sound contradictory since I didn't think much when making my original statement, but Europeans and South Asians may not have shared ancestry as there might be differences in the ASE. I don't know enough about ASE to say for sure, but there could be different types of ASE and ASE could be a mixed component of stuff that share similarities. I don't think it is, but it could be. I'll ask and come back with a clearer answer soon.


Thanks for the explanation.
Just one question:

The North Euro component North Indians and upper caste South Indians score is already included in Neolithic Iranian or in Caucasus?

[Mingle]

Thanks for the explanation.
Just one question:

The North Euro component North Indians and upper caste South Indians score is already included in Neolithic Iranian or in Caucasus?

That's actual North(east) European stuff. It's shared ancestry with Russians, Finns, etc. It comes from the Yamnaya (Indo-European) expansion. Iranian Neolithic is sometimes grouped as part of the Caucasus component but in reality it's different. But South-Central Asians score both Caucasus and Iran N, the latter in significantly higher amounts.

[CrazyCatLady]

That's actual North(east) European stuff. It's shared ancestry with Russians, Finns, etc. It comes from the Yamnaya (Indo-European) expansion. Iranian Neolithic is sometimes grouped as part of the Caucasus component but in reality it's different. But South-Central Asians score both Caucasus and Iran N, the latter in significantly higher amounts.

I think it's correct to state ANI is a mixed component, right? Caucasus + Iran N (Gedrosia) + Yamnaya.

What about Mongoloid and Austronesian ancestry? It is included in ASI?

[Mingle]

I think it's correct to state ANI is a mixed component, right? Caucasus + Iran N (Gedrosia) + Yamnaya.

Yes. Most calculators don't include ANI. I don't know of any that do, but I only recently started using calculators. It's usually West Asian, Caucasian, and/or Gedrosia (Iran N).


What about Mongoloid and Austronesian ancestry? It is included in ASI?

I'm pretty confident that it isn't. If you look at the GEDmatch results of Indians (especially South Indians), they score minor Southeast Asian at over 5%, which is SE Asian from paleolithic times. Though the SE Asian in Bengalis, Assamese, Nepalis, and other neighboring peoples is from relatively recent mixing.

[CrazyCatLady]

I'm pretty confident that it isn't. If you look at the GEDmatch results of Indians (especially South Indians), they score minor Southeast Asian at over 5%, which is SE Asian from paleolithic times. Though the SE Asian in Bengalis, Assamese, Nepalis, and other neighboring peoples is from relatively recent mixing.

Mongoloid looking people are majority in some parts of India. What would they score?
Friend of mine visited Nepal and said most looked Mongoloid or partially Mongoloid. Specially in the mountainous areas.





Yes. Most calculators don't include ANI. I don't know of any that do, but I only recently started using calculators. It's usually West Asian, Caucasian, and/or Gedrosia (Iran N).

I've also read that upper caste North Indians, Kalash, Burusho, Pakistanis, Pak Pashtuns, Afghan Pashtuns and Tajiks score more Indo-European than Iranians and some Southern Europeans, is that true?

[Mingle]

Mongoloid looking people are majority in some parts of India. What would they score?
Friend of mine visited Nepal and said most looked Mongoloid or partially Mongoloid. Specially in the mountainous areas.

There are a few kinds of Nepalis:

• Madheshis (Biharis/Awadhis) - Madhesh aka Terai Region
• Khas (Brahmins, Kshatriyas) - Western Nepal
• Tibetans (Bhotia, Sherpa, Thakal) - Northern Nepal
• Kirats (including Tharus & Gurkhas who are linguistically Indicized Kirats or another Sino-Tibetan people) - Central & Eastern Nepal
• Magars - same as above
• Tamangs - same as above

The Madheshis are recent migrants by the way. The bottom four are Mongoloid Sino-Tibetans whereas the top two are Caucasoids.

I think the Caucasoids would score 10-15% East Eurasian ("Mongoloid"), except for maybe the Madheshis who would score less. The Mongoloids would probably score a similar amount of West Eurasian ("Caucasoid").

Northeast India is mainly Mongoloid, but I don't consider it part of the real India or view the people living there as Indians. Eastern Bangladesh was also mainly Mongoloid majority until a few centuries ago (though I think it was sparsely populated and swampy, I'm not sure on the details). The Chittagong Hill Tracts (except Chittagong proper) and Tripura were historically Burmese (Rakhine) and Tripuri/Tipra, and stayed that way until the 1970's (in the case lf the CHT) and stayes that way before Bengalis mass migrated there.


I've also read that upper caste North Indians, Kalash, Burusho, Pakistanis, Pak Pashtuns, Afghan Pashtuns and Tajiks score more Indo-European than Iranians and some Southern Europeans, is that true?

Yes it's true.

[Leto]

lol

I'm only helping him, giving free information and improving his knowledge. What's the problem?

Seems it wasn't much helpful since he continued to say bullshit...
Ah, never mind. I don't think your knowledge is bad.

[Leto]

South Asian is a mixed component. ASI isn't. Sometimes South Asian is labeled as ASI. The Eurasia ASI K9 separates the two, but I've heard it's pretty flawed as well because of the reference population it uses.
Stick to Dodecad K12b and Harappa. Eurasia K9 is crap, look at how much SE Asian it gives you.

[Hadouken]

Stick to Dodecad K12b and Harappa. Eurasia K9 is crap, look at how much SE Asian it gives you.

K9 is a good calculator tbh

[Leto]

That's actual North(east) European stuff. It's shared ancestry with Russians, Finns, etc. It comes from the Yamnaya (Indo-European) expansion. Iranian Neolithic is sometimes grouped as part of the Caucasus component but in reality it's different. But South-Central Asians score both Caucasus and Iran N, the latter in significantly higher amounts.
The NE component is the highest in Pamiris and some Afghans. The farther south of Afghanistan you move, the lower it becomes. However, in India its level also depends on the caste. The most 'European' Indians are probably Punjabis.

Iran Neolithic is Gedrosia, I think it appeared in India independently from the Aryan expansion, because Southern Indians score a considerable amount of West Asian/Gedrosia, but virtually no European.

[Mingle]

Stick to Dodecad K12b and Harappa. Eurasia K9 is crap, look at how much SE Asian it gives you.

Do you think it's possible that my K9 SE Asian isn't really SE Asian, but just related to it similar to how Gedrosia and Caucasian are related? It's possible some of that SE Asian was covered up by my South Asian, but then when the South Asian component gets broken down, then it appears. Just speculating.

I agree that Eurasia K9 is flawed, not sure to what degree it's flawed though.

[Mingle]

The NE component is the highest in Pamiris and some Afghans. The farther south of Afghanistan you move, the lower it becomes. However, in India its level also depends on the caste. The most 'European' Indians are probably Punjabis.

Iran Neolithic is Gedrosia, I think it appeared in India independently from the Aryan expansion, because Southern Indians score a considerable amount of West Asian/Gedrosia, but virtually no European.

I think some or most of it may have come from the Dravidian expansion. Large parts of India (if not most of India), especially the southern and eastern parts, were originally Austroasiatic speaking, but then Dravidians came later from West Asia (around Southwest Iran/Mesopotamia).

[Profileid]

I have a small amount of south asian somehow. It shows up on just about every calc so it's likely real,but I have no idea how it got there.
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?231246-Is-this-South-Asian-noise

[TheForeigner]

So what is the conclusion? How do Europeans and Middle Easterners got a little South Asian admixture?

[TheForeigner]

bump

[Jesse1961]

Actually I am surprised of any South Asian admixture in other parts of Asia too. How did it get there?

At gedmatch i get between 5 to 10 percent South Asian, depending on admix test used, but I do not have any known recent South Asian ancestor for the last 5 generations. I am a Filipino.

[Leto]

At gedmatch i get between 5 to 10 percent South Asian, depending on admix test used, but I do not have any known recent South Asian ancestor for the last 5 generations. I am a Filipino.
That's because Southeast Asia used to be inhabited by Austronesians before Mongoloids from the North came down there and largely displaced and absorbed the natives.

[TheForeigner]

That's because Southeast Asia used to be inhabited by Austronesians before Mongoloids from the North came down there and largely displaced and absorbed the natives.

I thought Austronesians is a linguistic group and the people belonging to them are Mongoloid. Anyway, you mean Negritos and Australoids lived in SE Asia and they were largely absorbed by Mongoloids.

[Mingle]

That's because Southeast Asia used to be inhabited by Austronesians before Mongoloids from the North came down there and largely displaced and absorbed the natives.

Austronesians are an ethnolinguistic group originally from Taiwan. The natives of Southeast Asia were Negritos.

[Mingle]

I have a small amount of south asian somehow. It shows up on just about every calc so it's likely real,but I have no idea how it got there.
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?231246-Is-this-South-Asian-noise

What do you get on ASI K9?

[Mingle]

So what is the conclusion? How do Europeans and Middle Easterners got a little South Asian admixture?

It's most likely shared Steppe admixture.

[Jana]

Stears has between 1-2 % of South Asian admixture on gedmatch calculators. I suspect it is from his highly unusual amount of North Caucasian ancestry for east-central European.

[Vigilance]

I noticed Finns tend to score bits of south asian. It surely isn't from gypsies, but some older bronze age link.

That is funny because people on Skadi commented that some Finns have Weddoid like features.

[Vigilance]

Don't tell me Indo-Europeans really had actual "Indo" in them!

Its the other way around actually.

[Jesse1961]

That's because Southeast Asia used to be inhabited by Austronesians before Mongoloids from the North came down there and largely displaced and absorbed the natives.

I see. I thought it's because our country especially the central and southern parts were once under the Madjapahit empire before the Spaniards came and colonized the country in late 1500s.

[Grishnack]

Stears has between 1-2 % of South Asian admixture on gedmatch calculators. I suspect it is from his highly unusual amount of North Caucasian ancestry for east-central European.

That's unusually high and we both know where that is from. :lol:

[Grishnack]

Why is there so much more South Asian in Northern Europe than in Southern Europe?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Oz6P5-SVEJciPX1TciGe-zoqA5JtOGIMG7nh-rCOj0c/edit#gid=804264822

[Jana]

That's unusually high and we both know where that is from. :lol:

Nope, because he has no MENA either Balkan to make it Gypsy. It's from his north Caucasian or Ugric admix, all caucasians score south asian and so do many Finns.

[Jana]

Why is there so much more South Asian in Northern Europe than in Southern Europe?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Oz6P5-SVEJciPX1TciGe-zoqA5JtOGIMG7nh-rCOj0c/edit#gid=804264822

Because northern Europeans have more IE admix than southerners, and IE people absorbed smaller amounts of South Asian like genes :)

[Hadouken]

Scythianz n shet

[Pahli]

Early Bronzeage Yamnaya had 5% South Asian topkek;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 61.9
2 West_Asia 26.03
3 South_Asia 5.28
4 Americas 4.56
5 SW_Europe 2.23

Compare to me and Iran_CHL:

Admix Results (sorted):

Me:

# Population Percent
1 West_Asia 45.62
2 SW_Europe 21.19
3 SW_Asia 15.51
4 NE_Europe 6.86
5 South_Asia 6.07
6 NE_Asia 1.6
7 East_Africa 0.93
8 Americas 0.93
9 Siberia 0.56
10 South_Africa 0.55
11 West_Africa 0.2

Iran_CHL which I most likely descend from;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 West_Asia 60.43
2 SW_Asia 14.44
3 SW_Europe 13.32
4 South_Asia 9.75
5 South_Africa 0.76
6 Oceania 0.44
7 East_Africa 0.35
8 Americas 0.27
9 SE_Asia 0.23

We still don't know where South Asian comes from, but its a component that was present in ancient CHG, possibly ANE as well.

[LoLeL]

It's related to IEs and other steppe invaders. You can find South Asian admixture among them.

[Kamal900]

Early Bronzeage Yamnaya had 5% South Asian topkek;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 61.9
2 West_Asia 26.03
3 South_Asia 5.28
4 Americas 4.56
5 SW_Europe 2.23

Compare to me and Iran_CHL:

Admix Results (sorted):

Me:

# Population Percent
1 West_Asia 45.62
2 SW_Europe 21.19
3 SW_Asia 15.51
4 NE_Europe 6.86
5 South_Asia 6.07
6 NE_Asia 1.6
7 East_Africa 0.93
8 Americas 0.93
9 Siberia 0.56
10 South_Africa 0.55
11 West_Africa 0.2

Iran_CHL which I most likely descend from;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 West_Asia 60.43
2 SW_Asia 14.44
3 SW_Europe 13.32
4 South_Asia 9.75
5 South_Africa 0.76
6 Oceania 0.44
7 East_Africa 0.35
8 Americas 0.27
9 SE_Asia 0.23

We still don't know where South Asian comes from, but its a component that was present in ancient CHG, possibly ANE as well.

Wow. The first results of the ancient PIE seem to be a mixture between Baltic/Finnish and West Asian. I though they had been predominately eastern European.

[Pahli]

Wow. The first results of the ancient PIE seem to be a mixture between Baltic/Finnish and West Asian. I though they had been predominately eastern European.

They are still dominantly Eastern European, at least in modern terms, the difference is that they just have elevated West Asian admixture and no Anatolian farmer admixture, otherwise they were still similar to modern Eastern Europeans.

[Grishnack]

Nope, because he has no MENA either Balkan to make it Gypsy. It's from his north Caucasian or Ugric admix, all caucasians score south asian and so do many Finns.

Yeah, it makes sense actually. Quite ironic when you think that the rest of Europe considers Romanians to be gypsies when we have one of the smallest ammount of South Asian admixture in Europe.

[Jana]

Yeah, it makes sense actually. Quite ironic when you think that the rest of Europe considers Romanians to be gypsies when we have one of the smallest ammount of South Asian admixture in Europe.

I think it's because of name (Romania - Roma). In Croatia many less educated people think Romania is ancient homeland of gypsies :lol:

As you know, we have absolutely no reason to hate Romania. But these stereotype comes from elswhere. So far biggest south asian score I seen that isn't Gypsy were one Finn, one Tatar and one Irishman quite interestingly.

[StonyArabia]

I think it's because of name (Romania - Roma). In Croatia many less educated people think Romania is ancient homeland of gypsies :lol:

As you know, we have absolutely no reason to hate Romania. But these stereotype comes from elswhere. So far biggest south asian score I seen that isn't Gypsy were one Finn, one Tatar and one Irishman quite interestingly.

The Irish probably got it from British colonial rule in India. Tatars they got from probably an Iranic type people. No idea about the Finn but most likely an assimilated Finnish Kale somewhere in his lineage, Kale being Gypsies.

[Leto]

Yeah, it makes sense actually. Quite ironic when you think that the rest of Europe considers Romanians to be gypsies when we have one of the smallest ammount of South Asian admixture in Europe.
How many partial Gypsies are there in Romania? Like 1/4 or 1/8.

[Pahli]

The Irish probably got it from British colonial rule in India. Tatars they got from probably an Iranic type people. No idea about the Finn but most likely an assimilated Finnish Kale somewhere in his lineage, Kale being Gypsies.

Iranic Steppe people had low amounts of South Asian, the highest I've seen was 5% in a Scythian samples, the others had less, around 2% or so.