Thank you:thumb001:
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/7...uro1282010.png
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/4...raleuroped.png
Printable View
error error
^evon made a mistake with the graphs, SE1 is not 4.1% in the Mideastern cluster and according to Davide he did a lot of other calculating mistakes... but I'm to lazy to look at the spreadsheet right now, so I just remove the graphs.
West and Central Eurasia 3D view
http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/209...eurasia123.png
To my eye, these charts seem to show something of a ring. The main connection between populations is the Europe - Middle East - South Asia - Far East one, with a more tenuous one linking the extremes of the circumpolar peoples.
Do we think that if we had complete samples for all ethnic groups, we'd 'fill in the gaps'? I played around on paint with one graph, trying to work out from geography and ethnohistory WHO would be in the gaps;
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/9...acolshrink.png
The big red circle with a Ч in it is the Turkic speaking Chuvash on the middle Volga. Seems to me that we ought to stick the following in to tie them in better with the wider scheme; more Komi, Ob Ugrians (Mansi and Khanty), Nenets Samoyeds (to link the arctic continuum).
Gagauz, Crimean Tatars, Mordva, Kazan Tatars, Siberian Tatars (to link the central Europeans with the Turkics).
Nogai, Turkmen and Tajiks to get the southern Eurasian link.
And a big fat load of Tibetans to plug the gap in the south east. :p
Do we expect that there'll still be gaps?
Fascinating to see single ethnoses break down into cluster to demonstrate the plural origins that history often suspected... :thumbs
I'm wondering, though; why do the peoples roughly in the middle - Uygurs and Hazara - look so 'stretched'? Is this just a result of how the graph was made, or does it really reflect a greater diversity within their populations?
My result(NO2)
SE 6,71
NO 5,67
UK 5
HU 4,95
US 4,74
FR 4,39
North_Russia 4,36
PL 4,33
BY 4,11
ES 3,5
RU 3,43
PT 3,25
RO 3,07
DE 3
FI 3
IE 3
LT 2,9
Chuvash 2,82
GR 2,6
IT 2,56
Adygei 2,53
AJ 2,43
Selkup 1,89
Pathan 1,59
ASY 1,56
IR 1,53
TR 1,5
UZ 1,4
Uygur 1,2
Burusho 1,04
IN 1
Hazara 0,86
Altai 0,83
Yakagir 0,75
Nganassan 0,69
AA 0,69
ET 0,63
East Greenland 0,5
Tuva 0,5
Athabaks 0,47
Yakut 0,43
Buryat 0,42
Evenk 0,4
Orogen 0,33
West Greenland 0,33
Mongol 0,28
Daur 0,22
Dolgan 0,2
TU 0,2
Yoruba 0,19
CO 0,14
Pima 0,14
Xibo 0,14
Maya 0,11
She 0,1
Tujia 0,1
Han 0,09
Koryak 0,07
Bantu 0,06
JP 0,03
Something interesting...
NO1 - FI 6
NO2 - FI 3
NO3 - FI 5,75
NO5 - FI 5
I'm from East Norway and supposedly have some Forest Finn ancestry from the 17th century, while NO1 is a West Norwegian.
Can someone help me out with the new admixture analysis?
I'm going to guess none of that is enough to indicate admixture? :confused:
Soten, that's the overall picture. Here are your details:
Code:rs1029145 AFR
rs10492520 EAS
rs10514241 EAS
rs10779907 EAS
rs10825468 AFR
rs1105391 EAS
rs11060233 EAS
rs12089636 AFR
rs12217685 EAS
rs12220022 EAS
rs13232076 EAS
rs1334572 AFR
rs1364017 EAS
rs1463427 EAS
rs16839883 EAS
rs16883494 EAS
rs16903010 EAS
rs16903648 AFR
rs16920051 EAS
rs16934416 EAS
rs16957551 AFR
rs16957597 AFR
rs16957664 AFR
rs16988825 AFR
rs17011662 EAS
rs17013664 EAS
rs17013810 EAS
rs17014788 EAS
rs17015638 AFR
rs17044715 EAS
rs17067539 EAS
rs17078801 EAS
rs17087075 AFR
rs17087095 AFR
rs17251648 EAS
rs17599262 EAS
rs17748939 EAS
rs1858022 AFR
rs1892868 AFR
rs2069683 EAS
rs2073358 EAS
rs213135 EAS
rs2638298 AFR
rs264701 AFR
rs307274 EAS
rs3756514 EAS
rs3777456 EAS
rs3780660 EAS
rs3811842 EAS
rs3845461 EAS
rs3862609 EAS
rs401522 EAS
rs4939591 EAS
rs4987774 EAS
rs6499781 EAS
rs6812580 AFR
rs6928877 EAS
rs7190322 EAS
rs7201539 AFR
rs7271632 AFR
rs7275620 EAS
rs7290364 EAS
rs763880 EAS
rs7784129 EAS
rs877180 EAS
rs879017 EAS
rs9453955 AFR
rs951954 AFR
rs9556725 EAS
rs9812589 AFR
rs9912490 EAS