What Europeans have the least amount of MENA-like admix/Neolithic Farmer, CHG and Basal Eurasian?

[Maguzanci]

I'm thinking it is significantly Mongoloid admixed peripheral ones like Udmurt, Mari, Chuvash, Bashkir?

[Maguzanci]

Should post this in the broad genetic category instead of autosomal DNA.

[Token]

Balts and Uralics.

[VigVagKesalt]

Finns

[Maguzanci]

Balts and Uralics.

How much MENA-like Neolithic Farmer, CHG and Basal Eurasian do Balts and Uralics have? Can Bashkirs also counted or they are too Mongoloid?

[Maguzanci]

Bump

[Trouble]

Udmurts and others dont even fall on the European cline they are totally distinct pops. You are thinking of Finns and east Slavs especially Russians.

[Maguzanci]

Udmurts and others dont even fall on the European cline they are totally distinct pops. You are thinking of Finns and east Slavs especially Russians.

What makes Udmurts and Uralics distinct pops from the European cline? Is it their high Siberian Mongoloid admixture?

[Ymyyakhtakh]

Nenetses or Kalmyks?

Out of predominantly Europid populations, maybe Saami:

https://i.imgur.com/uEaRJLf.jpg

[Trouble]

What makes Udmurts and Uralics distinct pops from the European cline? Is it their high Siberian Mongoloid admixture?

Significantly more ANE, some east Asian, probably along with isolation and drift. This does not include those with minor Uralic admixture such as Finns but proper Uralics like Mari.

"sample": "Mansi:Average",
"fit": 13.2889,
"Mongola": 42.5,
"RUS_AfontovaGora3": 42.5,
"Latvian": 15,

"sample": "Mari:Average",
"fit": 12.5364,
"Latvian": 51.67,
"Mongola": 25.83,
"RUS_AfontovaGora3": 22.5,

[Wolfdog]

Vepsians, Finns, Komis, Latvians and Saamis seems to be less influenced by Neolithic farmers.

* LBK = Danubian farmers of Anatolian origin...

https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/vol_vlad/84228922/11802/11802_original.png

[dududud]

Neolithic farmer are not "mena like". It is an intake that is found in very small quantities in MENA populations ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe#/media/File:WestEurasia_admixture_crop.png

(light blue = Neolithic farmer).

[Trouble]

Neolithic farmer are not "mena like". It is an intake that is found in very small quantities in MENA populations ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe#/media/File:WestEurasia_admixture_crop.png

(light blue = Neolithic farmer).

idiotic...they are almost entirely neolithic.

[dududud]

idiotic...they are almost entirely neolithic.

No. They are not just "neolithic". Neolithic levant + Iran farmer + Caucasus + other thing? Yes, they are.

They are not predominantly Neolithic farmer, far away.

[Leto]

Finns and Estonians.

[Maguzanci]

Vepsians, Finns, Komis, Latvians and Saamis seems to be less influenced by Neolithic farmers.

* LBK = Danubian farmers of Anatolian origin...

https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/vol_vlad/84228922/11802/11802_original.png

What is CWC?

[Maguzanci]

Finns and Estonians.

What about Uralics like Komi Udmurt, Mari, or some Turkics like Chuvash? Do they score lower Neolithic Farmer, CHG and Basal Eurasian than the former two groups?

[Leto]

What about Uralics like Komi Udmurt, Mari, or some Turkics like Chuvash? Do they score lower Neolithic Farmer, CHG and Basal Eurasian than the former two groups?
They are outside of any mainstream European cluster, so I wouldn't take them into consideration. They are small and insignificant anyway, except for the Tatars.

[Leto]

Tatars and Chuvash definitely have higher CHG than Finns.

[Ymyyakhtakh]

If you don't want to count Saami, Komis, Maris, Udmurts, or Chuvashes, then far northern Russians from Arkhangelsk Oblast probably have less NWC (non-white Caucasoid) admixture than any Baltic Finnic people: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Rd332olbtYQs7dfVcEMnBCBRR0ILSLXCgDtZWm93XtA/edit#gid=661987578.


What is CWC?

Corded ware culture. The graph is from Tambets et al. 2018 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1522-1).

[Trouble]

No. They are not just "neolithic". Neolithic levant + Iran farmer + Caucasus + other thing? Yes, they are.

They are not predominantly Neolithic farmer, far away.

They have anatolian neolithic farmer, iran neolithic farmer, levant neolithic farmer. All these are farmer ancestry

[Leto]

If you don't want to count Saami, Komis, Maris, Udmurts, or Chuvashes, then far northern Russians from Arkhangelsk Oblast probably have less NWC (non-white Caucasoid) admixture than any Baltic Finnic people: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Rd332olbtYQs7dfVcEMnBCBRR0ILSLXCgDtZWm93XtA/edit#gid=661987578.



Corded ware culture. The graph is from Tambets et al. 2018 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1522-1).
Those Russian samples with over 10% Siberian are very unrepresentative of Russians. I mean my mother is a Vyatka Russian (Northeastern) and she is 8-9% on Gedmatch. On Davidski/G25 runs I am 4-5% EE. Or perhaps the Nganassan component in those spreadsheets is not entirely EE?
The EE average for ethnic Russians is around 5%.

G25 World K=8
Target: Leto_scaled
Distance: 2.6997% / 0.02699689
71.6 Baltic
18.2 Mediterranean
4.0 East_Asian
2.4 Caucasian
2.0 Atlantic
1.8 Amerindian

[Ymyyakhtakh]

Those Russian samples with over 10% Siberian are very unrepresentative of Russians. I mean my mother is a Vyatka Russian (Northeastern) and she is 8-9% on Gedmatch. On Davidski/G25 runs I am 4-5% EE. Or perhaps the Nganassan component in those spreadsheets is not entirely EE?
The EE average for ethnic Russians is around 5%.

G25 World
Target: Leto_scaled
Distance: 2.6997% / 0.02699689
71.6 Baltic
18.2 Mediterranean
4.0 East_Asian
2.4 Caucasian
2.0 Atlantic
1.8 Amerindian

Yeah, that's why I didn't even call them "northern Russian" but "far northern Russian".

Jeong et al. 2019 (The genetic history of admixture across inner Eurasia) (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332747456_The_genetic_history_of_admixture_across_ inner_Eurasia) included Russians from 3 different districts of Arkhangelsk Oblast (Krasnoborsky, Leshukonsky, and Pinezhsky), but all of them had a higher proportion of the Nganasan component than Vepsians (who are probably the most mong Baltic Finnic people):

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332747456/figure/fig5/AS:755606516400135@1557162040393/QpAdm-based-admixture-models-for-the-forest-tundra-and-steppe-forest-cline.png

In Khrunin et al. 2013 (A Genome-Wide Analysis of Populations from European Russia Reveals a New Pole of Genetic Diversity in Northern Europe) (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0058552), Russians from the Mezen district of Arkhangelsk Oblast also had a higher proportion of the Mongoloid component than Vepsians:

https://i.ibb.co/7rkz8zv/komi-admixture-khrunin-et-al-2013.png

[Maguzanci]

Tatars and Chuvash definitely have higher CHG than Finns.

Can CHG be consider MENA/West Asian? How much more?

Do they have lower Neolithic Farmers than Finns?

[Maguzanci]

If you don't want to count Saami, Komis, Maris, Udmurts, or Chuvashes, then far northern Russians from Arkhangelsk Oblast probably have less NWC (non-white Caucasoid) admixture than any Baltic Finnic people: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Rd332olbtYQs7dfVcEMnBCBRR0ILSLXCgDtZWm93XtA/edit#gid=661987578.



Corded ware culture. The graph is from Tambets et al. 2018 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1522-1).

Right. The CWC component seem to contain Neolithic Levant which seems MENA though.

How much non-white Caucasoid/MENA/West Asian do Uralics like Saami, Udmurt, Mari, etc have?

Also what is Lengyel_LN in the spreadsheet? Is it Neolithic Farmer related? It seems like Udmurt have the least which is at 18%. Maris seem even more mongoloid than Udmurts, would they have even less Lengyel?

[Leto]

Yeah, that's why I didn't even call them "northern Russian" but "far northern Russian".

Jeong et al. 2019 (The genetic history of admixture across inner Eurasia) (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332747456_The_genetic_history_of_admixture_across_ inner_Eurasia) included Russians from 3 different districts of Arkhangelsk Oblast (Krasnoborsky, Leshukonsky , and Pinezhsky), but all of them had a higher proportion of the Nganasan component than Vepsians (who are probably the most mong Baltic Finnic people):

I would like to add Ural Russians are probably the most EE-influenced. I think that's from the last 500 years or so (after the incorporation of Perm into the Tsardom). But then again, the Ural Federal District is home only to 8% of the Russian population. Siberia is more diverse and has many more recent settlers.

[Leto]

Can CHG be consider MENA/West Asian? How much more?

Do they have lower Neolithic Farmers than Finns?
I don't know. It's West Asian but most whites have some of it.

[Wolfdog]

Can CHG be consider MENA/West Asian? How much more?

Do they have lower Neolithic Farmers than Finns?

As far as I know, CHG = 50/50 blend = Basal Eurasians + West Eurasians

I am curious about origin of their West Eurasian component, is it closer to something like EHG or ANE ?

[Maguzanci]

I don't know. It's West Asian but most whites have some of it.

What components should I run in Global 25 to see how much Neolithic Farmers these Uralics have?

[Cumansky]

Of mainstream ones you see on GEDmatch RUS_Pinega

But has some Turkic admix significant but low South Wogs that what you look for

[Maguzanci]

Of mainstream ones you see on GEDmatch RUS_Pinega

But has some Turkic admix significant but low South Wogs that what you look for

What is his Gedmatch kit number?

[Aileron]

Me

[Synapsid]

I'm thinking it is significantly Mongoloid admixed peripheral ones like Udmurt, Mari, Chuvash, Bashkir?

Be honest, deep down you wished the Neolithic migration never happened in Europe since native WHG and EHG were more closer to ENA populations than modern basal admixed Europeans :icon_lol:. To be honest so do I. I find brachy phenotype more attractive than gracile phenotypes.

[Token]

Be honest, deep down you wished the Neolithic migration never happened in Europe since native WHG and EHG were more closer to ENA populations than modern basal admixed Europeans :icon_lol:. To be honest so do I. I find brachy phenotype more attractive than gracile phenotypes.

I wish all Europeans were still Magdalenians, Aurignacians and Gravettians.

[Adamastor]

Be honest, deep down you wished the Neolithic migration never happened in Europe since native WHG and EHG were more closer to ENA populations than modern basal admixed Europeans :icon_lol:. To be honest so do I. I find brachy phenotype more attractive than gracile phenotypes.

I would not consider Uralics like Mari and Udmurts genetically European though. They have a substantial amount of Mongoloid to be European, if they are Europeans why Tatars aren't Europeans as well?

If, let's say, North Africa had remained Christian it could be very well said to be ''European'' nowadays or if the Moors had mixed more with Iberians and South Italians average individual there could end up with 20-25% SSA, but would they be genetically Europeans just for living on the fringes of Europe?

For me a European genetic profile is made basically by the interaction of Neolithic + Steppe + WHG, any deviation from that norm starts to become non-Euro imo. 20-25% of admixture is too much to consider someone European genetically. Even extreme South Italians with their 20%+ post-Neolithic MENA are only borderline Euros IMO.

[Adamastor]

double

[Samnium]

I would not consider Uralics like Mari and Udmurts genetically European though. They have a substantial amount of Mongoloid to be European, if they are Europeans why Tatars aren't Europeans as well?

They are Uralic people, a distinct world from what Europe "means", then if they are Euros, why not North Caucasians ? Or Tatars as you've said. We can extend Europe to the Pacific Ocean if we want. A global Eurasian block.



For me a European genetic profile is made basically by the interaction of Neolithic + Steppe + WHG, any deviation from that norm starts to become non-Euro imo. 20-25% of admixture is too much to consider someone European genetically. Even extreme South Italians with their 20%+ post-Neolithic MENA are only borderline Euros IMO.

Extreme South Italians are peripherical Europeans but still Euros, otherwise I agree, pretty much every european population save some peculiar examples like Iberians or Italians can be modeled with a three-way model with WHG, Steppe and Neolithic.

[Kyp]

Gypsies?

[Leto]

They are Uralic people, a distinct world from what Europe "means", then if they are Euros, why not North Caucasians ? Or Tatars as you've said. We can extend Europe to the Pacific Ocean if we want. A global Eurasian block.

That's because Europe has no maritime border with Asia unlike Africa or the Americas. Geographic Europe conventionally ends in Russia (Chelyabinsk oblast, I believe).
The Caucasus is also a "gray" area because it transitions into Iran and Turkey.

[Synapsid]

I would not consider Uralics like Mari and Udmurts genetically European though. They have a substantial amount of Mongoloid to be European, if they are Europeans why Tatars aren't Europeans as well?

If, let's say, North Africa had remained Christian it could be very well said to be ''European'' nowadays or if the Moors had mixed more with Iberians and South Italians average individual there could end up with 20-25% SSA, but would they be genetically Europeans just for living on the fringes of Europe?

For me a European genetic profile is made basically by the interaction of Neolithic + Steppe + WHG, any deviation from that norm starts to become non-Euro imo. 20-25% of admixture is too much to consider someone European genetically. Even extreme South Italians with their 20%+ post-Neolithic MENA are only borderline Euros IMO.

If the Arab conquests never happened, the distinction between Europe and MENA world would be blurred. We saw in the Roman paper how Central Italy and Southern Italy became less N.Italian/Iberian like and more East Med by the Imperial period. This because there was no barrier in the Mediterranean period for migration and intermixing since they were all part of Pax-Roma, and modern notions and racial identity and preservation did really existed, or in the way see it now. What the Arabs did with the creation of islam is create a barrier between the southern half of the classical world and the northern half of the classical world. I would imagine if N. Africa remained Christian that there would still be a large presence of the Italic communities who were descendants of retired legionnaires who retired and cross mingling with Iberian traders, rather than friction and hatred and ethnic cleansing that we saw in the reconqesta. This would result in an decrease of any SSA (tbh they never really had high levels pre-arabic) that NA would have and an decrease in Iberomasurian, and increase in EEF/Neolithic ancestry that is already a present majority in Berbers along with some WHG/Steppe.

Also Uralics do have high East Eurasian that was not present or Native to Europe, but they are more European than even many European group in someways, such as having much higher European Hunter gathers lineages such as EHG (pale skin) and WHG (blue eyes). Their higher level afantova gora-3 releated ancestry also makes them more closely related to Paleo-Europeans and not just the Mesolithic hunter gatherers. So its a mixed bag really. Its depends on what angle you see things.
Also Finn

[Synapsid]

I wish all Europeans were still Magdalenians, Aurignacians and Gravettians.

Do think Europeans would be more pale, less gracile and more Brachy than modern Europeans?

[Samnium]

If the Arab conquests never happened, the distinction between Europe and MENA world would be blurred. We saw in the Roman paper how Central Italy and Southern Italy became less N.Italian/Iberian like and more East Med by the Imperial period.

That has to be taken with a grain of salt. Republican Romans were very different compared to modern Northern Italians, very high EEF, very low Steppe, and more WHG. They end up "plotting" in the same place because it's a 2D PCA but the components are really different. By they way we didn't even know how Southern Italians were before Imperial Era, so don't make conclusions while we don't have any ancient southern italian sample except the Sicilian Bell Beaker. Aegean "influence" is overstated definitely, there are provinces in Southern Italy that never saw one greek, and neither the mixing with provinces or regions was common (an exception rather).

I don't really know where this "post-Neolithic MENA" come, but certainly the conclusions and the interpretations given by Moots paper aren't really convincing.

[Synapsid]

That has to be taken with a grain of salt. Republican Romans were very different compared to modern Northern Italians, very high EEF, very low Steppe, and more WHG. They end up "plotting" in the same place because it's a 2D PCA but the components are really different. By they way we didn't even know how Southern Italians were before Imperial Era, so don't make conclusions while we don't have any ancient southern italian sample except the Sicilian Bell Beaker. Aegean "influence" is overstated definitely, there are provinces in Southern Italy that never saw one greek, and neither the mixing with provinces or regions was common (an exception rather).

I don't really know where this "post-Neolithic MENA" come, but certainly the conclusions and the interpretations given by Moots paper aren't really convincing.

Southern Italy and Sicily was the geographic choke point between the West Med and East Med, and before Islam made the Med a genetic barrier, there would have been many MENA trade ships (and greek) crossing the region, under the protection of Pax-Roma. Perhaps in such a scenario, there was inevitable mixing. Also, even if there was no Greeks in certain regions of S. italy, you can still have greek admixture indirectly. S. Italy was for the for the Greeks what Qubec was for France, it was a region of opportunity for Greeks who lived in a over crowed land (10 millions people lived in what is modern day Greece during the Hellenistic era, much of population living in dense city states or nutrient poor and rocky agricultural land). Literally hundreds of thousands of Aegean farmers and Greek merchants settled in S. Italy.

[Adamastor]

That has to be taken with a grain of salt. Republican Romans were very different compared to modern Northern Italians, very high EEF, very low Steppe, and more WHG. They end up "plotting" in the same place because it's a 2D PCA but the components are really different.

Early Ancient Republic Romans and also other groups like Northern Balkanites had a profile that is long gone in Europe: a type of ''Basqueoid'' genetic group from Iberia to Balkans; most populations in this range changed because admixture/miscigenation is the driving force of human culture, even if TA users don't like it, it's true. Humans will mix no matter what if you put people of different origins in the same geographic space. Most modern populations will disappear in the long run, just like WHG, Mota and ANE don't exist anymore.


I don't really know where this "post-Neolithic MENA" come, but certainly the conclusions and the interpretations given by Moots paper aren't really convincing.

We have two options: 1) Modern South Italians have 20-25% post-neolithic MENA or 2) the native population of South Italy in 2250 BC had a Middle Eastern profile.

[Kamal900]

I guess Northern Europeans who are genetically the most paleolithic Europeans in contrast to Southern Europeans who do have significant middle eastern or west asian admixtures - be it ancient or recent.

[Samnium]

We have two options: 1) Modern South Italians have 20-25% post-neolithic MENA or 2) the native population of South Italy in 2250 BC had a Middle Eastern profile.

Probably more the first option but I don't believe in the greek option, as I've said only a little portion of Southern Italy has been occupied by Greeks.

[Token]

Do think Europeans would be more pale, less gracile and more Brachy than modern Europeans?

They would be far more robust. Likely darker since pale skin and light hair only became prevalent due to steppe admixture.

[Rædwald]

Balts, and the surrounding regions

[Token]

Early Ancient Republic Romans and also other groups like Northern Balkanites had a profile that is long gone in Europe: a type of ''Basqueoid'' genetic group from Iberia to Balkans; most populations in this range changed because admixture/miscigenation is the driving force of human culture, even if TA users don't like it, it's true. Humans will mix no matter what if you put people of different origins in the same geographic space. Most modern populations will disappear in the long run, just like WHG, Mota and ANE don't exist anymore.
Some people say Iron Age Romans looked like North Italians only because they cluster together in bidimensional PCAs, but they actually had far less steppe and far more WHG than modern North Italians. That goes on to show fst distances aren't always trustable. Basque-like is how i'd describe it too.

[dududud]

They have anatolian neolithic farmer, iran neolithic farmer, levant neolithic farmer. All these are farmer ancestry

It's doesn't work like that, dude.

[SharpFork]

10 millions people lived in what is modern day Greece during the Hellenistic era, much of population living in dense city states or nutrient poor and rocky agricultural land). Literally hundreds of thousands of Aegean farmers and Greek merchants settled in S. Italy.
This is simply false and ridiculous, on what ground should anyone believe Greece had 10 million people? At best it had 1/4 of that, likely 1/5.

[SharpFork]

Probably more the first option but I don't believe in the greek option, as I've said only a little portion of Southern Italy has been occupied by Greeks.

It's probably a mix of pre-Roman Greek colonization, enslavement and forced movement of Easterns during Roman expansion, internal Roman migration, Byzantine migration, Arab control of Sicily and then Albanian and Greek refugees. On top of that if the Apulians were Illyrian in antiquity that could also partially explain the Aegean shift.

Which of those factors is more important I don't exactly know, but I would the Roman enslavement and internal migration must have played an important role.

[SharpFork]

Early Ancient Republic Romans and also other groups like Northern Balkanites had a profile that is long gone in Europe: a type of ''Basqueoid'' genetic group from Iberia to Balkans; most populations in this range changed because admixture/miscigenation is the driving force of human culture, even if TA users don't like it, it's true. Humans will mix no matter what if you put people of different origins in the same geographic space. Most modern populations will disappear in the long run, just like WHG, Mota and ANE don't exist anymore.
Sure humans mix but not nearly as inevitably as you imply, the existence of genetical differences between castes in India and how strong genetic borders exists shows that.

[SharpFork]

Some people say Iron Age Romans looked like North Italians only because they cluster together in bidimensional PCAs, but they actually had far less steppe and far more WHG than modern North Italians. That goes on to show fst distances aren't always trustable. Basque-like is how i'd describe it too.
What is the composition of North Italians vs Iron Age Romans? I'm not sure where I can check that.

[Leto]

Sure humans mix but not nearly as inevitably as you imply, the existence of genetical differences between castes in India and how strong genetic borders exists shows that.
Pro-miscegenation propaganda is a mainly Western/European phenomenon. Much of the so called Third World is barely affected by that. There might be mixing here and there between indigenous groups but nothing to the extent of what's happening in Europe and North America. However, even without the propaganda an increase of interethnic mixing would be inevitable due to globalization and modernity (migrations, urbanization, loss of religion and other factors).

[PaleoEuropean]

I'm thinking it is significantly Mongoloid admixed peripheral ones like Udmurt, Mari, Chuvash, Bashkir?

The Northern Scottish.

[Token]

What is the composition of North Italians vs Iron Age Romans? I'm not sure where I can check that.

You can compare them with G25. I've posted some runs in the 'West Med' thread but i can't find it now.

[Token]

What i find interesting is that Balts, despite having low farmer admixture, had pre-Christian beliefs heavily focused on agriculture and agricultural activities, unlike neighboring Germanic people. So much that they believed the Gods lived in fucking farmsteads in the sky with their families.

[Synapsid]

Amongst peripheral Europeans: Mari El, Tartars, Nanets, Kalmyks
Amongst core Europeans: Finns, Balts, North Russians, Saami, Mordovians, Komi

[Synapsid]

What i find interesting is that Balts, despite having low farmer admixture, had pre-Christian beliefs heavily focused on agriculture and agricultural activities, unlike neighboring Germanic people. So much that they believed the Gods lived in fucking farmsteads in the sky with their families.

Interestingly its was Corded Ware than introduced Farming to Baltics, not EEF populations. A bunch sex crazed steppe herders would be that the last people you'd think to bring a more stetted way of life