MENA/Siberian/E.Asian?

[Senpai]

I've posted a thread before on this subject but with more research, my lust for knowledge grows..
I had my DNA tested with family tree originally and have since applied it to myheritage, dna.land, gedmatch etc in the last 6 months.

I seem to have a small piece of my DNA that is interpreted in different forms depending on the source. Roughly 3%-8% of my DNA is always either listed as some form of Siberian/Finnish/MENA but never usually together..
For instance; myheritage gives me 4% Middle Eastern and 4% North African, and 5.5% Finnish, dna.land and all my gedmatch calc's give me 2-5% Siberian (Nganasan on dna.land), PuntDNAL K10 gives me 2.27% East Asian which is far higher than any average in Western Europe.. And there are any more anomalies relating to such.

My question is why do I always seem to get some sort of Siberian/East Asian/MENA result within the same 8% gap, and why are such different pieces of DNA being mistaken for each other so often in my genome? Such obscure places for my ancestors to know anyone from.

[Kaspias]

I've posted a thread before on this subject but with more research, my lust for knowledge grows..
I had my DNA tested with family tree originally and have since applied it to myheritage, dna.land, gedmatch etc in the last 6 months.

I seem to have a small piece of my DNA that is interpreted in different forms depending on the source. Roughly 3%-8% of my DNA is always either listed as some form of Siberian/Finnish/MENA but never usually together..
For instance; myheritage gives me 4% Middle Eastern and 4% North African, and 5.5% Finnish, dna.land and all my gedmatch calc's give me 2-5% Siberian (Nganasan on dna.land), PuntDNAL K10 gives me 2.27% East Asian which is far higher than any average in Western Europe.. And there are any more anomalies relating to such.

My question is why do I always seem to get some sort of Siberian/East Asian/MENA result within the same 8% gap, and why are such different pieces of DNA being mistaken for each other so often in my genome? Such obscure places for my ancestors to know anyone from.

Siberian normal for Finns, that means Saami ancestry. But if you're just a Dutch or Frisian, you can suspect for primarily Saami ancestry, then Turkic ancestry.

MyHeritage gives everyone to North Africa and Middle East, don't take it serious. Also DNA.Land is really terrible calculator. I can share my results so you will see.

My ethnic background 50% south slav and 50% balkan turk.

https://image.ibb.co/cbMJ89/113x.png

You see MENA, but i don't have MENA ancestor in recent 400-500 years, i'm sure.

https://image.ibb.co/k79S1U/112x.png

Also DNA.Land. Ashkenazi and Arab XD


Gedmatch is most accurate one.

[Senpai]

Siberian normal for Finns, that means Saami ancestry. But if you're just a Dutch or Frisian, you can suspect for primarily Saami ancestry, then Turkic ancestry.

MyHeritage gives everyone to North Africa and Middle East, don't take it serious. Also DNA.Land is really terrible calculator. I can share my results so you will see.

My ethnic background 50% south slav and 50% balkan turk.

https://image.ibb.co/cbMJ89/113x.png

You see MENA, but i don't have MENA ancestor in recent 400-500 years, i'm sure.

https://image.ibb.co/k79S1U/112x.png

Also DNA.Land. Ashkenazi and Arab XD


Gedmatch is most accurate one.


Fair enough! and yeah, I figured dna.land was trash.

My mothers ancestry is mainly British Isles, and my fathers is mainly Dutch and German so I have no idea why my Finnish is so high, and I doubt it's just a random thing because I score at least 5% Finnish on almost everything. Looks like I have more research to do. Cheers

[Kaspias]

Fair enough! and yeah, I figured dna.land was trash.

My mothers ancestry is mainly British Isles, and my fathers is mainly Dutch and German so I have no idea why my Finnish is so high, and I doubt it's just a random thing because I score at least 5% Finnish on almost everything. Looks like I have more research to do. Cheers


If you score 4-5% Siberian or East asian in Gedmatch calculators, i think it's not random or noise. I don't have enough knowledge about British Isles but you either have native arctic/siberian blood or turkic/mongolic, finnic-ugric blood if your siberian/east asian score high in gedmatch.

Because both British people and German/Dutch people usually don't score that amount of siberia.

[Senpai]

If you score 4-5% Siberian or East asian in Gedmatch calculators, i think it's not random or noise. I don't have enough knowledge about British Isles but you either have native arctic/siberian blood or turkic/mongolic, finnic-ugric blood if your siberian/east asian score high in gedmatch.

Because both British people and German/Dutch people usually don't score that amount of siberia.

Which calc would you suggest I check with? I'll post my results afterwards. I have one ancestor that was adopted and her mother was really dark skinned and her son was said to look like a "Sheikh" and I figured since my family is obviously ignorant to Asian phenotypes, they could have been Turks. I really need to get my grandmother tested because it would clear all of this up.

[Kaspias]

Which calc would you suggest I check with? I'll post my results afterwards. I have one ancestor that was adopted and her mother was really dark skinned and her son was said to look like a "Sheikh" and I figured since my family is obviously ignorant to Asian phenotypes, they could have been Turks. I really need to get my grandmother tested because it would clear all of this up.

Sheiks usually don't have Siberian, they're mostly middle-easterner. Also actual Turks who carry high amount Siberian, yellow and white skinned. XD

You can take a look Eurogenes K13.

Siberian
East_Asian
Amerindian
Oceanian

Components are usually Turkic/Mongolic for European people. (Except people who have Amerindian ancestor)

[Senpai]

Sheiks usually don't have Siberian, they're mostly middle-easterner. Also actual Turks who carry high amount Siberian, yellow and white skinned. XD

You can take a look Eurogenes K13.

Siberian
East_Asian
Amerindian
Oceanian

Components are usually Turkic/Mongolic for European people. (Except people who have Amerindian ancestor)

I know! but my family is all Midwestern Americans. They think Turkic people are Arabs, hahaha. They have no idea what a Sheikh should look like. And I'll post some scores, one moment

[arkas]

Which calc would you suggest I check with? I'll post my results afterwards. I have one ancestor that was adopted and her mother was really dark skinned and her son was said to look like a "Sheikh" and I figured since my family is obviously ignorant to Asian phenotypes, they could have been Turks. I really need to get my grandmother tested because it would clear all of this up.

Some Turks can have some Mongoloid admixture, from ancestry in Central Asia, which also can show up as Siberian I believe. But I suppose you are unaware if you actually have any Turk ancestry.

[Senpai]

Sheiks usually don't have Siberian, they're mostly middle-easterner. Also actual Turks who carry high amount Siberian, yellow and white skinned. XD

You can take a look Eurogenes K13.

Siberian
East_Asian
Amerindian
Oceanian

Components are usually Turkic/Mongolic for European people. (Except people who have Amerindian ancestor)

K13
East Asian: 1.41
Siberian: 1.56

MDLP K11
Basal: 2.19
Iran Mesolithic 2.54

Reading the chart No Western Euro country in my ancestry even has .25% of Basal.

MDLP world-22
2.70 Near East
1.64 Samoedic

[Senpai]

Some Turks can have some Mongoloid admixture, from ancestry in Central Asia, which also can show up as Siberian I believe. But I suppose you are unaware if you actually have any Turk ancestry.


As of now it would just be speculation, but I know when I get my grandmother or father tested I assume.

[arkas]

As of now it would just be speculation, but I know when I get my grandmother or father tested I assume.

I actually would have thought you were Finnish. Anyways high five! Welcome to the partial Mongoloid club, I have 6.4% East Asian dna myself.

[Kaspias]

K13
East Asian: 1.41
Siberian: 1.56

MDLP K11
Basal: 2.19
Iran Mesolithic 2.54

Reading the chart No Western Euro country in my ancestry even has .25% of Basal.

MDLP world-22
2.70 Near East
1.64 Samoedic

Germans have 0.02 Siberian and Dutchs have 0.12 Siberian, so your Siberian so much for these people.

I checked eurogenes spreadsheet, germans usually score 6% east med 1% red sea etc. So your near_eastern might be normal but i'm not sure.

[Senpai]

Germans have 0.02 Siberian and Dutchs have 0.12 Siberian, so your Siberian so much for these people.

I checked eurogenes spreadsheet, germans usually score 6% east med 1% red sea etc. So your near_eastern might be normal but i'm not sure.

Yeah, I've been comparing everything to British, Dutch and German, and it all seems a bit high for the three so it has to be something noteworthy at least.

[Senpai]

I actually would have thought you were Finnish. Anyways high five! Welcome to the partial Mongoloid club, I have 6.4% East Asian dna myself.


Hahaha cheers!

[Leto]

You can take a look Eurogenes K13.

Siberian
East_Asian
Amerindian
Oceanian

Components are usually Turkic/Mongolic for European people. (Except people who have Amerindian ancestor)
Oceania has nothing to do with being Mongoloid. That's Melanesia, Australia and things like that. Google to see what Melanesians look like.
And in Europeans it's not always Turkic/Mongolic, in us Russians it's rather from Uralic speakers and in some cases from Siberians.

[Leto]

Germans have 0.02 Siberian and Dutchs have 0.12 Siberian, so your Siberian so much for these people.

I checked eurogenes spreadsheet, germans usually score 6% east med 1% red sea etc. So your near_eastern might be normal but i'm not sure.
What you see in the sheets doesn't mean any deviation from it equals being mixed. In fact you probably know that some references are not really representative to begin with. Take Turkey for example.

[Leto]

K13
East Asian: 1.41
Siberian: 1.56

MDLP K11
Basal: 2.19
Iran Mesolithic 2.54

Reading the chart No Western Euro country in my ancestry even has .25% of Basal.

MDLP world-22
2.70 Near East
1.64 Samoedic
Try Dodecad K12b and K7b.

[Kaspias]

Oceania has nothing to do with being Mongoloid. That's Melanesia, Australia and things like that. Google to see what Melanesians look like.
And in Europeans it's not always Turkic/Mongolic, in us Russians it's rather from Uralic speakers and in some cases from Siberians.

Oceania has nothing to do with being Mongoloid, but Turks often score Oceania because of Central Asia migrations, same case with amerindians.

For example;

My results

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 22.68
2 Baltic 19.39
3 West_Asian 15.26
4 North_Atlantic 14.84
5 West_Med 13.5
6 Siberian 6.86
7 Red_Sea 1.79
8 South_Asian 1.76
9 East_Asian 1.71
10 Sub-Saharan 0.91
11 Amerindian 0.8
12 Oceanian 0.5


Anatolian Turk

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 33.53
2 West_Asian 22.79
3 West_Med 15.12
4 Baltic 10.1
5 North_Atlantic 6.71
6 Red_Sea 4.26
7 Siberian 4.18
8 East_Asian 1.76
9 South_Asian 1.03
10 Oceanian 0.9
11 Sub-Saharan 0.12



Most of Uralic speakers are Tatars, and they are already Turk. Other speakers are ugric people, and i already mentioned them.

[Senpai]

Try Dodecad K12b and K7b.

k7b
1.61 Siberian
0.33 East Asian..
k12b
Siberian 1.15
West Asian 7.89 (also far higher than any known ancestry)
Northwest African 1.49
South and North West Asian are both sub 1% here but still .70

small percentage obviously but far higher than my countries of heritage.

[Leto]

Oceania has nothing to do with being Mongoloid, but Turks often score Oceania because of Central Asia migrations, same case with amerindians.

For example;

My results

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 22.68
2 Baltic 19.39
3 West_Asian 15.26
4 North_Atlantic 14.84
5 West_Med 12.5
6 Siberian 6.86
7 Red_Sea 2.79
8 South_Asian 1.76
9 East_Asian 1.71
10 Sub-Saharan 0.91
11 Amerindian 0.8
12 Oceanian 0.5


Anatolian Turk

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Med 33.53
2 West_Asian 22.79
3 West_Med 15.12
4 Baltic 10.1
5 North_Atlantic 6.71
6 Red_Sea 4.26
7 Siberian 4.18
8 East_Asian 1.76
9 South_Asian 1.03
10 Oceanian 0.9
11 Sub-Saharan 0.12



Most of Uralic speakers are Tatars, and they are already Turk. Other speakers are ugric people, and i already mentioned them.
Oceanian is rather South Asian. And below 1% it's obviously noise.
The Turkic languages are not Uralic, they are Altaic. The Uralic ones are Finnic, Ugric, Samoyedic.

[Senpai]

Caucasus, NOT West Asian, my bad.

[Krivich]

I've posted a thread before on this subject but with more research, my lust for knowledge grows..
I had my DNA tested with family tree originally and have since applied it to myheritage, dna.land, gedmatch etc in the last 6 months.

I seem to have a small piece of my DNA that is interpreted in different forms depending on the source. Roughly 3%-8% of my DNA is always either listed as some form of Siberian/Finnish/MENA but never usually together..
For instance; myheritage gives me 4% Middle Eastern and 4% North African, and 5.5% Finnish, dna.land and all my gedmatch calc's give me 2-5% Siberian (Nganasan on dna.land), PuntDNAL K10 gives me 2.27% East Asian which is far higher than any average in Western Europe.. And there are any more anomalies relating to such.

My question is why do I always seem to get some sort of Siberian/East Asian/MENA result within the same 8% gap, and why are such different pieces of DNA being mistaken for each other so often in my genome? Such obscure places for my ancestors to know anyone from.
1. Nganasan is a mixed Mongoloid-Caucasoid population that does not reflect 100% Siberian contribution. Look at their blond kids. The formation of the Nganasan on the basis of Eurasians EHG occurred in the Neolithic age + the recent admixture of Russian pioneers of Siberia. Why Nganasan put as a standard of Siberians is not clear
https://a.radikal.ru/a42/1808/88/915c8dc2ebae.jpg (https://radikal.ru)
https://b.radikal.ru/b07/1808/d9/4595d759179d.jpg (https://radikal.ru)
2. You have an absolutely normal level of Siberian admixture for a Central European. Why you made all that noise is not clear. Here is the Swedish K13

North_Atlantic 46.93
Baltic 30.62
West_Med 9.28
West_Asian 5.05
East_Med 2.51
Red_Sea -
South_Asian 1.12
East_Asian 0.59
Siberian 3.53
Amerindian 0.16
Oceanian -
Northeast_African 0.21
Sub-Saharan -

[Leto]

k7b
1.61 Siberian
0.33 East Asian..
k12b
Siberian 1.15
West Asian 7.89 (also far higher than any known ancestry)
Northwest African 1.49
South and North West Asian are both sub 1% here but still .70

small percentage obviously but far higher than my countries of heritage.
Well, you may be 1-2% Mongoloid. Not very common for people west of Poland but still probably happens.

[Leto]

Caucasus, NOT West Asian, my bad.
Every white person would get some Caucasus and Gedrosia on K12b. I'm 10% Caucasus and 5% Gedrosia. Gedrosia is fully Caucasoid too.

[Senpai]

1. Nganasan is a mixed Mongoloid-Caucasoid population that does not reflect 100% Siberian contribution. Look at their blond kids. The formation of the Nganasan on the basis of Eurasians EHG occurred in the Neolithic age + the recent admixture of Russian pioneers of Siberia. Why Nganasan put as a standard of Siberians is not clear
https://a.radikal.ru/a42/1808/88/915c8dc2ebae.jpg (https://radikal.ru)
https://b.radikal.ru/b07/1808/d9/4595d759179d.jpg (https://radikal.ru)
2. You have an absolutely normal level of Siberian admixture for a Central European. Why you made all that noise is not clear. Here is the Swedish K13

North_Atlantic 46.93
Baltic 30.62
West_Med 9.28
West_Asian 5.05
East_Med 2.51
Red_Sea -
South_Asian 1.12
East_Asian 0.59
Siberian 3.53
Amerindian 0.16
Oceanian -
Northeast_African 0.21
Sub-Saharan -

I used Nganasan as a measuring stick because I scored it at 3% with zero known ancestry from Russia, let alone Siberia. Also, I'm not Swedish. I'm almost entirely British Isles, Dutch, and a little Southwest Europe. I get where you're coming from but it just doesn't add up to me when comparing with the averages on the calc I'm applying. Also it doesn't explain the 5.5% Finnish and random 8% MENA that I'm getting. THat's why I posted this. It's either interpreted as MENA or Finnish/Sberian.. Which to me, is confusing as theyre not related closely whatsoever.

[Krivich]

I used Nganasan as a measuring stick because I scored it at 3% with zero known ancestry from Russia, let alone Siberia. Also, I'm not Swedish. I'm almost entirely British Isles, Dutch, and a little Southwest Europe. I get where you're coming from but it just doesn't add up to me when comparing with the averages on the calc I'm applying. Also it doesn't explain the 5.5% Finnish and random 8% MENA that I'm getting. THat's why I posted this. It's either interpreted as MENA or Finnish/Sberian.. Which to me, is confusing as theyre not related closely whatsoever.
There is the concept of the mean. You fit into the upper limit of the norm of their nationality. What is your k36?

[Krivich]

Well, you may be 1-2% Mongoloid. Not very common for people west of Poland but still probably happens.
The Siberian impurity in DNA is not a racial impurity. Mongoloid is an anthropological term, not a genetic one. Penetrating to the eastern Europeans, the early admixture of Siberia was not racially differentiated.

[Senpai]

There is the concept of the mean. You fit into the upper limit of the norm of their nationality. What is your k36?

Basque 1.12
Central_Euro 8.76
East_Balkan 2.98
East_Central_Euro 6.15
Eastern_Euro 5.78
Fennoscandian 8.24
French 11.59
Iberian 17.60
Italian 1.20
North_Atlantic 15.70
North_Caucasian 6.60
North_Sea 13.38
South_Chinese 0.34
West_African 0.55

interesting....

[Leto]

The Siberian impurity in DNA is not a racial impurity. Mongoloid is an anthropological term, not a genetic one. Penetrating to the eastern Europeans, the early admixture of Siberia was not racially differentiated.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean, but here is how close various components are to each other (Dodecad). West Eurasian - North_European, Atlantic_Med, Caucasus, Gedrosia and Southwest_Asian. Northwest_African is probably 75-80% West Eurasian, East_African is around 50%. Siberian, East_Asian and Southeast_Asian are entirely East Eurasian.
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?198388-Post-Dodecad-K12b-results&p=5200480&viewfull=1#post5200480

[Lauχum]

1. Nganasan is a mixed Mongoloid-Caucasoid population that does not reflect 100% Siberian contribution. Look at their blond kids. The formation of the Nganasan on the basis of Eurasians EHG occurred in the Neolithic age + the recent admixture of Russian pioneers of Siberia. Why Nganasan put as a standard of Siberians is not clear
https://a.radikal.ru/a42/1808/88/915c8dc2ebae.jpg (https://radikal.ru)
https://b.radikal.ru/b07/1808/d9/4595d759179d.jpg (https://radikal.ru)
2. You have an absolutely normal level of Siberian admixture for a Central European. Why you made all that noise is not clear. Here is the Swedish K13

North_Atlantic 46.93
Baltic 30.62
West_Med 9.28
West_Asian 5.05
East_Med 2.51
Red_Sea -
South_Asian 1.12
East_Asian 0.59
Siberian 3.53
Amerindian 0.16
Oceanian -
Northeast_African 0.21
Sub-Saharan -

These are Nenets, not Nganasan. You only have to google "Nganasan" to see they look like Inuits or some far eastern Siberian population like the Chukchi.

Here is a PCA, you can see where Nganasans cluster in the far top-left, not far from East Asians and clustering with Chukchi, Eskimos, Yakuts, etc.
79384