Printable View
Did you read Laz? Europeans fitting as descending from three ancestral populations was their big discovery. Maybe they don't trace every last drop of their blood to those populations, but we shouldn't see scored at 1% in east Eurasian or Sub Saharan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusarius
That would be the case if the components in Polako's K7 were identical to the three ancestral components used in Lazardis. But they aren't! Polako himself said that for example ANE in K7 is not based on the MA-1 genome as in Lazardis. These calculators look at the truth from different angles and with different resolutions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Haired
Apparently this has been fixed on Gedmatch. It wasn't giving correct results before.
Mine
Population
ANE 16.92%
ASE 1.02%
WHG-UHG 63.89%
East_Eurasian 1.17%
West_African -
East_African 0.20%
ENF 16.82%
Mum
Population
ANE 17.17%
ASE 1.75%
WHG-UHG 62.95%
East_Eurasian 0.61%
West_African -
East_African 0.45%
ENF 17.07%
Brother
Population
ANE 16.82%
ASE 1.65%
WHG-UHG 64.03%
East_Eurasian 0.75%
West_African 0.49%
East_African 0.16%
ENF 16.10%
Daughter
Population
ANE 15.44%
ASE 1.80%
WHG-UHG 64.26%
East_Eurasian 0.75%
West_African -
East_African 0.53%
ENF 17.23%
Population
ANE 15.60%
ASE 6.22%
WHG-UHG 35.38%
East_Eurasian 3.15%
West_African 0.14%
East_African 1.34%
ENF 38.17%
Population
ANE 10.70%
ASE 1.51%
WHG-UHG 42.44%
East_Eurasian 0.44%
West_African 0.15%
East_African -
ENF 44.77%
Zero ENF for me now! :)
ANE 20.78%
ASE 2.69%
WHG-UHG 67.88%
East_Eurasian 8.02%
West_African -
East_African 0.59%
ENF -
The GEDmatch version of this calculator seems to be much more accurate now. Here are my own GEDmatch results.
Population
ANE 15.61%
ASE 3.18%
WHG-UHG 57.33%
East_Eurasian 1.50%
West_African 0.62%
East_African 0.15%
ENF 21.61%
What do you think about the origins of the WHG-UHG component? It reaches it's highest frequencies among the Mesolithic samples such as La Brana but Polako said that it was probably present among the first Neolithic farmers of the Fertile Crescent as well as a minor component to ENF. What do you think about this I am curious?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusarius
Population
ANE 12.28% Ancestral Northern European
ASE 0.74% Ancestral South Eurasian
WHG-UHG 48.43% Western European/Unknown Hunter-Gatherer
East_Eurasian 0.82%
West_African 0.07%
East_African 0.27%
ENF 37.39% Early Neolithic Farmer
Tuscan/Abruzesse/Campanian/English
Population
ANE 13.21%
ASE 2.17%
WHG-UHG 51.54%
East_Eurasian 0.08%
West_African 0.65%
ENF 32.35%
ANE stands for ''Ancient North Eurasian'' not ''Ancestral Northern European''.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruben
I tend to think this UHG is tightly connected with Ancestral Indian and South Asian components in other calculators. I think it may be the main source of WHG-like admixture in Laz.'s EEF. What's your take on it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaxman
I also think that this UHG component is probably the main source of WHG like admixture in the EEF component from Laz. I do not know where it comes from though. Did the UHG component become part of the EEF component by admixture with Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in the Balkans? Or was it also part of the early Neolithic farmers genomes from the Fertile Crescent even if it was a minor component among them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusarius
Thank you I was looking for it! I was literally guessing while typing and I was too lazy to re-check the meaning of it.
Thank you for informing me at other forums as well ;)
Ancient Northern Euro sounds way cooler though ! :cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaxman
-- Gedmatch --
Graham
WHG-UHG 66.64%
ANE 15.37%
ENF 14.66%
ASE 2.46%
Mum
WHG-UHG 65.43%
ANE 16.06%
ENF 15.43%
ASE 1.70%
Dad
WHG-UHG 65.05%
ENF 16.79%
ANE 14.79%
ASE 2.39%
Mum
WHG-UHG 65.74%
ANE 17.57%
ENF 14.68%
ASE 1.40%
East_African 0.33%
West_African 0.29%
Population
ANE 10.09%
ASE 1.00%
WHG-UHG 52.08%
East_Eurasian -
West_African 0.90%
East_African 3.30%
ENF 32.62%
Population
ANE 10.27%
ASE 0.27%
WHG-UHG 43.44%
East_Eurasian 0.76%
West_African 0.38%
East_African -
ENF 44.87%
What is forumnostrum?
So ENFs were most similar to modern Middle Easterners while EEFs were a mix of ENF's and HGs? EEF's were basically a group which originated somewhere in Europe, presumebly SE Europe.
Population
ANE 18.46%
ASE 2.86%
WHG-UHG 40.60%
East_Eurasian 0.48%
West_African 0.16%
East_African 0.18%
ENF 37.26%
0.26% ANE
0.00% ASE
7.68% WHG-UHG
1.42% East_Eurasian
0.00% West_African
12.00% East_African
78.63% ENF *
The correct score is:
55.90% Early Neolithic Farmer
30.08% Western Hunter Gatherer/Unknown Hunter Gatherer
9.20% Ancient North Eurasian
2.18% East Eurasian
1.97% East African
0.54% West African
0.13% Ancient South Asian
All other scores are wrong.
That score is probably off, unless you're like 95% Jewish. Besides the creator says this test is designed only to predict ANE and the other components are not meant to be perfectly accurate but to take out all non-ANE. I wouldn't put to much faith in west Eurasians descending from the 3 same stone age populations. There's probably regional differences in WHG-like ancestry, and there could be other ancestral populations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longbowman
Population
ANE 15.59%
ASE 2.01%
WHG-UHG 20.41%
East_Eurasian 8.51%
West_African -
East_African 1.49%
ENF 52.00%
Population
ANE 16.20%
ASE 1.88%
WHG-UHG 61.79%
East_Eurasian 0.79%
West_African 0.93%
East_African 1.54%
ENF 16.86%
Population
ANE 15.60%
ASE 1.45%
WHG-UHG 62.20%
East_Eurasian 0.24%
West_African 0.09%
East_African 0.64%
ENF 19.79%
My father's ANE K7Quote:
Originally Posted by karen1300
Population
ANE 16.40%
ASE 1.97%
WHG-UHG 58.85%
East_Eurasian 1.65%
West_African 1.02%
East_African 1.92%
ENF 18.19%
His results look like they make sense considering his ancestry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Haired
It makes one wonder if the UHG part of the WHG-UHG component came from Southeast European Mesolithic hunter-gatherer populations?Quote:
Originally Posted by Solin
Almost certainly. Maybe some contribution from Anatolia or nearby, but I don't think there's any debating some of the UHG has to be Balkan.
..Also I think someone forgot to feed the hamsters...this site is slow as shit right now.
Polako has said that he thinks the WHG-UHG component may have been present among the earliest farmers of the Fertile Crescent in minority amounts. This would be from the UHG part of this composite component of course. I don't know about this though as UHG could have come to these West Asian and Middle Eastern populations later with migrations from west Anatolia or the Balkans. It is not really high at all in any groups native to that area of the world. Of course we need ancient DNA from the Middle East to prove any of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kale
WHG-UHG 54.51%
ENF 28.03%
ANE 14.09%
ASE 1.62%
East_African 0.83%
East_Eurasian 0.53%
West_African 0.38%
That's not correct for you. I got a 1% something East African which was absent totally on every other calculator except for this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by karen1300
ANE 16.23%
ASE 1.53%
WHG-UHG 61.80%
East_Eurasian 0.63%
West_African 0.49%
East_African 0.24%
ENF 19.09%
This calculator is more ancient and you could pick up stuff that aren't on other calculators.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielJ1eH
Typical British.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneeye
If it's that ancient it had to be before East Africa became mong rilzed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
Also North African isn't present on these calculators so that would probably be the reason. Whenever North African is an option East African always disappears so I doubt it.