Nothing new or surprising for me. I am predominantly Baltic Finnish.
Basque 0%
Mediterranean 1%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 93%
North Euro 6%
Printable View
Nothing new or surprising for me. I am predominantly Baltic Finnish.
Basque 0%
Mediterranean 1%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 93%
North Euro 6%
I´m such a mutt in comparison to Aino and most other Finns. :p :D
Here´s me:
Baltic Finnish 49 %
North Euro 38 %
Basque 6 %
Mediterranean 4 %
Southeast Euro 3 %
Polako made this comment on another froum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polako
edit edit edit
ignore
He should rather speak of a Northern Mesolithic or North Eastern European component, since Northern European implies relations to the modern Northern Europeans, but these are both less Mesolithic and less Northern Eurasian than Finns, so this is a misnomer, which makes no sense at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
The only sense it makes is to make this component look "more Northern European than actual Northern Europeans" (and with "actual Northern Europeans" I mean Northern Europeans since thousands of years already), which is an oxymoron.
According to the spreadsheet Lithuanians and Belarusians have the highest 'North Euro' score, while Finns have the highest 'Baltic Finnish' score.
Well, this doesn't wonder neither, since in Finns you have to substract a stronger Northern Eurasian component and Lit-Bela have less Neolithic influences. This was obvious from the archaeological record already, but in all those cases I wonder where the samples were taken from and whether future results will present us new differentiations, which I would always expect in Lithuania simply from West to East, in Belarussia more complex, but f.e. also along the rivers vs. "the less accessible and favourable woodlands".Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
Additionally, I wouldn't wonder about this "Northern component" being split up in the future, with more data available, because the Neolithic expansion happened to a large part from inside of the older spectrum, yet there was a differentiation present if comparing f.e. the Eastbaltic area with that of Southern Russia and the Ukraine.
I guess there might be something to find here too, further distinguishing the "real North Eastern Mesolithic" from those elements which were related, but expanded from the South in the Neolithic and Metal Age eras.
If this is recognisable in the archaeological record, why not in the genes? So far most of the time, if the archaeological record and typological analysis showed something clearly, the better the genetic tests were, the more they showed of this...
Thanks, Untermensch! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lolki
What did I say the other day, eh? Ah;
....Vindicated. :strokebeard:Quote:
Originally Posted by Osweo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
The Swedes
SE1
Basque 1%
Mediterranean 9%
Southeast European 1%
Baltic Finnish 12%
North Euro 77%
SE2
Basque 4%
Mediterranean 5%
Southeast European 3%
Baltic Finnish 17%
North Euro 71%
SE4
Basque 1%
Mediterranean 4%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 16%
North Euro 79%
SE5
Basque 0%
Mediterranean 6%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 19%
North Euro 75%
SE6
Basque 2%
Mediterranean 10%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 9%
North Euro 79%
SE7
Basque 7%
Mediterranean 0%
Southeast European 6%
Baltic Finnish 21%
North Euro 65%
SE8
Basque 7%
Mediterranean 0%
Southeast European 1%
Baltic Finnish 19%
North Euro 73%
*SE6 who have the lowest 'Baltic Finnish' score is Scanian.
Aren't Baltic-Finnish people the most Northern-European group of Europeans? As I see it, it's just a subgroup of Northern-Europeans in this research.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
I'll post the results of 2 Estonians.
EE1
Basque 0%
Mediterranean 0%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 26%
North Euro 74%
EE2 (Me)
Basque 2%
Mediterranean 2%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 28%
North Euro 68%
I am wondering about the Basque and Mediterranean components, maybe it is caused by the distant Estonian-Swede ancestry, there was even a discussion on Biodiversity that Swedes have more "Southern-European" genes. Most Swedes on Europe_k=5 have "high"(when compared to the 2 Estonians) Basque or Mediterranean scores.
EDIT: Here's also "EESE1", I think that person is half-Estonian and half-Swedish:
EESE1
Basque 3%
Mediterranean 3%
Southeast European 0%
Baltic Finnish 29%
North Euro 66%
^Estonians seem to score quite low Baltic Finnish percentages, not much more than Scandinavians actually. And compare this to my 49 % score which is probably already unusually low for a Finn. Could this be more evidence that Estonians are in many ways genetically closer to Latvians and Lithuanians? Here´s an interesting take on the subject.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...ot-like-finns/
Genetic drift has caused the Finns to be distant to everyone, while the Finnic people in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and NW-Russia haven't had that bottleneck effect. It is very logical that Estonians are more similar to Finnic people living next to them, than to Finnic people across the gulf. Livonians were culturally, linguistically and genetically the most similar Finnic group to the Estonians. I am certain that you cannot find any Latvian who wouldn't have several Livonian ancestors if you back in time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Draper
6000 years ago, the territories of modern Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were completely Finnic.
There are 2 Baltic-Finnish groups, a northern one and a southern one. The southern one mostly is assimilated into the Baltic populations, except the Estonians who still exist. I am guessing that the genetic base for the Baltic-Finnish people was taken from the northern group of Baltic-Finnish people and I am guessing that they were all Finns too.
EDIT: I did read your article and looks like the writer of it agrees with me.
Finns are perimeter Baltic-Finnish people, while Estonians aren't perimeter Baltic-Finnish people, just all the Finnics south and east of us got assimilated.Quote:
Finally, I would like to introduce one alternative model which I find plausible. Before the rise of the Indo-European language group the center of gravity of the Finnic languages was almost certainly much further to the south and east, and that Finland itself was on the perimeter. By this model the Indo-Europeanization of most Finnic speaking peoples left the Estonians as a rump. The Finns to the north of the Gulf of Finland were already then distinct from the Estonians and other southerly peoples before this process occurred. The reason I present this model is that there is evidence that Russification up to the present day has come at the expense of the Finnic language groups.
http://bga101.blogspot.com/2011/02/f...ixture-11.html
Quote:
However, as always, caveats apply. For instance, if there's an ancestral group missing, ADMIXTURE will, in a way, find the next best thing. This might be why some of the Americans with Native admixture scored higher than expected Finnish scores in the European run. At first glance this might seem a bit odd, but it actually makes sense, because an American of North European extraction with a few per cent of Amerindian ancestry will come out fairly similar to a Finn with some North Eurasian admixture.
I see that Baltic-Finnish = Finnish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
Just because most of the Baltic-Finnish people south and east of them have been assimilated, doesn't make them the most similar group to the original/central Baltic-Finnish people, as Don Draper's article pointed out. Finns are peripheral Baltic-Finnish people, when compared to the now assimilated Baltic-Finnish people.
Modern Thai are, as a completely different example, also less representative of the old Tai people which lived further North, so some Southern Chinese are "more typically Tai" than modern Thai people.
So while I'm not saying this is for sure the case here, it remains a possibility.
But probably the Finnish people in the Baltic area just got more Indo-European influence and less of the Northern Eurasian one in comparison, but are not more typically Finnish neither.
Agrippa, you have proved on numerous occasions that you practically do not know a thing about North-Eastern Europe, one good example is that you recently found out that the Saami are actually European. All your hypothesizes about this region are mostly wrong. If I were you, I would want to keep that "intelligent poster" image you have and not post about matters in which you are strongly lacking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
If the foreign Indo-European immigrants wouldn't have migrated to Northern-Europe, then the Baltic-Finnish "core" area would be somewhere south-east of Finland, I guess. If those now non-existent(assimilated) Baltic-Finnish people would have been the base of the Baltic-Finnish sample in Polako's project, then Americans with Amerindian ancestry wouldn't have high scores in certain areas. Out of all the Baltic-Finnish populations, the Finns are the only ones who have had to push the Saami population northwards, while assimilating them too and we all know that the originally completely European Saamis have some minor Siberian/Samoyed influence which then transferred to other populations.
First of all, I always said that the modern Sami are mixed, yet the Lappid type as such is racially more borderline. Since this is an important part of the racial make up of this people they are in that sense less European than lets say Swedes, Germans, Poles, Spaniards etc., that's what I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl
I wasn't even saying that this is no option, I just said that there are more options than that, so I don't get the point of your attitude to attack me out of nothing.Quote:
If the foreign Indo-European immigrants wouldn't have migrated to Northern-Europe, then the Baltic-Finnish "core" area would be somewhere south-east of Finland, I guess. If those now non-existent(assimilated) Baltic-Finnish people would have been the base of the Baltic-Finnish sample in Polako's project, then Americans with Amerindian ancestry wouldn't have high scores in certain areas. Out of all the Baltic-Finnish populations, the Finns are the only ones who have had to push the Saami population northwards, while assimilating them too and we all know that the originally completely European Saamis have some minor Siberian/Samoyed influence which then transferred to other populations.
You just can't prove it for sure by now, or can you?
Could North Euro be further divided into West and East?
I am in Polako's next run, will post results.
I will be surprised if I do not get a high Basque percentage.
It isn’t necessarily real admixture but allele patterns. I looked at the data with software, and I see odd things like one of the Portuguese samples (PT4) showing 7% Finnish. It's probably not Finnish but something else or by chance. That’s only one sample though.
The Basque cluster peaks to 100% in the French Basque. It’s high in the Spanish, Portuguese, and some French. The Mediterranean cluster peaks to 100% in the Sardinians. It’s second highest in the Italians. The Southeast European cluster appears highest in the Turks and Jews but not in the Southeast Europeans, so that’s a bad name for it. It’s 59% in the one Georgian sample. The Baltic/Finn cluster peaks to 100% in the Finns but not the Balts. North Russians and Estonians are the next highest. The North European cluster is highest in the Lithuanians with Belorussians coming second. Then, it becomes sporadic among other elasticities.
The Baltic/Finn cluster should be changed to Finnish. The Mediterranean cluster should have a more meaningful name, but it’s only a name. The Southeastern European cluster makes no sense. It’s not clear at all what this cluster means like the others, or what he did. It’s 0 in the Finns, Estonians, Basque, Sardinians, Lithuanians, and a few of the Scandinavians. He included only one Georgian and no Armenians. It would’ve been interesting to see West Asians, but the run appears to be more European oriented. Some of the samples didn’t add to 100% or 1. I’ve sorted the data, and the range is between 98-102%. For example, PL1 sums to 1.02 and CA5 sums to 0.98. I would like to see more clusters. Dienekes will be doing 64 clusters. With more clusters, we would be able to notice more differences among the samples. Polako does have an agenda though.
... but Osweo is so swarthy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lolki
People always confuse Neolithic and Mesolithic. The craniometrical evidence of West Asian origin for Central Europeans is interesting but not surprising as they genetically show it. The study showed what they measured, but they didn’t show the actual cranial measurements I was really hoping to see. Facial measurements would be interesting, and agriculture would’ve surely altered the face and jaw. The hunter-gatherers that adapted agriculture through cultural diffusion probably experienced physical changes, but surely not in the same way as the ones with actual genetic input from the farmers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
If you (FI6) are Southwestern Finnish, then it's really not unexpected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Draper
One Finn is 7% Finnish, then the rest range from 35% to 100%. That one sample with 7% is also 28% Southeastern European which is way too high compared to the others, so I don’t think he or she is entirely Finnish. Maybe Polako made a mistake? It’s not from someone that submitted his/her raw data to him but from a dataset.
The Belarusians range from 74% to 89% with an average of 80.2… with n=9. The Lithuanians range from 81% to 95% with an average of 89.3 with n=10. What happened to NO4? Some Germans are missing. Maybe they requested withdrawal?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
With more clusters, it should be more apparent. From “Migration waves to the Baltic Sea region” by T. Lappalainen et al. (2008), 43.9% of the 164 Lithuanians had (M46/Tat, P105). I tend to think of those mutations as Northeastern, but that’s only Y-DNA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
The 10 Lithuanians and 9 Belorussians were from “Genome Wide Structure of the Jewish People” by D. M. Behar et al. (2010, July 8). He included all them for the run. The Belorussians experienced more gene flow and were less isolated than the Lithuanians. It does depend on where the samples were taken. The Russians in that study came from Li et al. (2009). They were all from Vologda Oblast, and they had North Asian admixture and not representative of Russians in other areas. Polako labeled those 25 as North_Russian.
A Saami with a Nordid phenotype will still have a higher Northeast Asian affinity than a Norwegian with a Lappid phenotype.
NO4 was NO1's uncle so he was removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franz
I find it extremely intriguing that Polako decided to take the Lithuanians as a sample population for "Northern-European". Knowing his theories about the history of European populations, I shouldn't be surprised.
This is one of the reasons why I do not trust these "one-man" genetic researches.
I'll bring an example how this can influence people: Loki told me that Lithuanians and Belorussians are the most Northern-European Europeans.
Now if I made a genetic research and started collecting 23andme raw data, I could take the Scanian(southern-Swedish) population as my Northern-European sample population and then I could claim that Scanians are the most Northern-European Europeans, followed by Danes and Swedes.
Some people take these "one-man" genetic researches very seriously, which I find funny.
True, the Saami will likely have higher Asian affinity. As for phenotype, that depends on the classifier which is highly subjective. Whether you like it or not, genetics does reflect phenotype. For example, eye shape is genetically inherited.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
Sure, it has its quirks, and it's not perfect. It's still useful and showing patterns that make sense. On the Dodecad project, I don't know all the IDs. From what I observed, many Finns and Russians are showing the highest Northern European component. I noticed a strong correlation with those with the most North European having Northeast Asian and even East Asian. The Estonians scored very high and a few Norwegians and Swedes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl
Did he? I have used STRUCTURE, and the way it works is that the software finds the clusters all by itself. That is, you don't predefine any population as 'Northern European'. The clusters that the software finds are just given descriptive names afterwards based on the samples that score highest in the category.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl
My understanding is that ADMIXTURE works similarly. Polako did mention that the new version of ADMIXTURE allows supervised runs, which means that some samples are classified before the run. He didn't say he used that option, and I see no reason why he would have done that.
Where did I inherit my eye shape from?Quote:
Originally Posted by Franz
As you know already I'm NO2 and DOD197 on Dienekes, so you have probably had a chance to look at my results.
A "Lappid" phenotype is not exclusive to Saami, there are plenty of Norwegians who look "Lappish" and have neither Saami or North Eurasian admixture.
How should I know? I could make an educated guess, but they're most likely similar to other Norwegians. Most research is being done on diseases and other health aspects not so much on physical appearance like craniofacial traits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
Indeed, that will be the future research, then we will know it for sure if being done properly and objectively, open to the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franz
I have been classified as "Lappid" by many people(Bärin from Skadi even said my mother looked Half Japanese)
Point is, a typical Lappid would, among other things, have never the proportional and other features you have. So at best or worst, like you want to see it, you can only have an influence from that side and as we all know, even the core Lappid type is basically still more on the Europid side and at best/worst borderline.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
So any mix implies automatically a very small "foreign influence" and if just certain traits being kept alive, on their own, over generations, this influence can be reduced to almost nothing, yet the origin of specific traits remains as specific - oftentimes at least.
I guess that type of research might be difficult and complex or maybe not. The nose might be affected by hundreds or thousands of genes. The jaw can affect the shape of the nose, and that can be changed by diet. Environmental, social selection and mutations play their roles. For example, mouth breathing or an accident could alter the face.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrippa
There was some research on it: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090214162756.htm
Some excerpts:
Quote:
Facial traits vary among humans, but do tend to group by population. For example, in general, West Africans have wider faces than Europeans and Europeans have longer faces than West Africans.
"There is a strong relationship between genetic ancestry and facial traits," said Shriver. "Using individuals of combined ancestry, European and African, we can see how the target genes alter facial traits."
The researchers reported on a sample of 254 individuals using three-dimensional imaging and measured the distances between specific portions of the face. Each individual had provided a DNA sample.
"We started with 22 landmarks on the faces that could be accurately located in all the images," said Shriver.
From their DNA profiles, Shriver could determine the admixture percentages of each individual, how much of their genetic make up came from each group. He could then compare the genetically determined admixture to the facial feature differences and determine the relative differences from the parental populations.
"This type of study, done on admixed populations shows that each person is a composite of their ancestors and that the range of facial features is a continuum," says Shriver.
Shriver found that there was a very strong statistical correlation between the amounts of admixture and the facial traits.
My top 20 and graph by mnd661 from ABF
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/1334/no2b.jpgCode:SE4
SE5
NO3
EE1
NO1
SE8
US71
SE1
SE2
NO5
NO6
NO7
US61
US182
US111
SE6
North_Russian
US5
EE2
RU
When is a genetic map also a geographic map? Always and never
Quote:
Just after posting my last entry I realized that it might seem a bit confusing to those who don't really have much experience in reading PCA/MDS plots. So instead of rehashing it, I decided to make another entry about how to read such plots, which might come in handy to my project members. It's really not that difficult, if you keep in mind that they're never really geographic maps, but at the same time, always contain at least some results that show high correlation with geography.
In that last blog entry about the Balto-Slavs I concluded that, in terms of intra-European genetic diversity, Balts were more easterly than Slavs. I based this on both PCA/MDS plots and genetic distances. The reason I did this was because, as mentioned above, PCA/MDS results don't always gel with geography, especially when relative genetic isolates are included in the analysis. The plot I used from Nelis et al. 2009 showed clearly how adding a relative genetic isolate, like Eastern Finns from Kuusamo, can wreck the correlation between genes and geography.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p..._Europe2-2.png
Adding the samples from the Kuusamo isolate basically means that "east" is no longer in the same direction for all the samples on that plot. If we are to assume that it is in the same direction, we get absurd results like Swedes being more easterly than Russians. Obviously, there are now two, perhaps more, directions which correlate well with the geographic "east" within Europe. As you can see, I marked the two obvious ones on that plot as East 1 and East 2.
So now, it seems, we're facing a problem. Which "east" applies to the Balts and Slavs? If it's East 1, then Russians are more easterly than Lithuanians. If it's East 2, then it's the other way around. But not to worry, because it's easy to work that out. The simplest thing to do is to focus on the samples we're interested in, and zoom in on that area of the plot. So let's just leave the Swedes, North Germans, Czechs, Poles, Russians, Lithuanians and Latvians in the analysis, and ignore the Finnic and Southern European samples.
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p..._Europe3-1.png
OK, so now the plot makes much more sense; Swedes and North Germans are located west of Poles and Russians, as we'd expect. At the same time, if we're to follow this line of thinking, Lithuanians and Latvians are located east of Poles and Russians. Just to make sure this is correct, let's see what happens on a plot that doesn't include the Kuusamo isolate.
http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/4...12overview.png
The difference is clear; there's now only one "east", which runs towards the bottom of the plot (ie. west to east = vertical axis).
In order to cement these findings, we can now look at some pairwise intra-European genetic distances. Let's double check, for instance, that the Lithuanians and Latvians are indeed more easterly than the Poles and Russians, as opposed to just being, say, more northerly. For this I use the same table as in my last log entry.
Russians from Tver versus...
- Utah Americans of Northern and Western European origin (1.56)
- French (1.94)
- Swedes (1.59)
- Finns from Helsinki (2.10)
- Southern Italians (2.68)
- Spanish (2.32)
Lithuanians versus...
- Utah Americans of Northern and Western European origin (1.74)
- French (2.20)
- Swedes (1.74)
- Finns from Helsinki (2.33)
- Southern Italians (2.96)
- Spanish (2.62)
Lithuanians and Latvians are much less similar to western Europeans than Russians are. Therefore, they are more easterly than Russians in terms of intra-European genetic diversity. At the same time, they're not more similar to Northern European populations such as Swedes and Finns. Therefore, any claims, for instance, that they're simply more northerly than Russians don't hold up. In fact, based on all the pairwise scores, the best way to describe the situation is to say that Russians are more mainstream as far as intra-European genetic diversity is concerned, while there's something fairly unique about the Balts, which is especially evident when looking at Latvians.
As I've already noted in my last blog entry, I can't see this as being a recent development. Rather, the close genetic relationship between current Northern Slavs and Balts seems like the recent development, and likely due to mixing in the last 1000 years or so. Before that, I suspect, these two groups were much more distinct from each other than they are today.
By the way, there are two points I'd like to stress before signing off. Firstly, it's important to understand that what is "east" on an intra-European PCA/MDS plot, need not be "east" on an inter-continental plot. For instance, consider a Central European ethnic group with some minor East Eurasian admixture, and an Eastern European group with less East Eurasian admixture. The former will cluster "west" of the latter on an intra-European plot. However, when East Asian samples are added to the analysis, it then becomes an inter-continental plot, and the Central European group with the more significant Asian influence will pull "east" further than the Eastern Europeans. You can actually see something like that on the following two plots I published recently; intra-North Eurasian where Lithuanians cluster west of Hungarians, and intra-European, where the situation is reversed.
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/6818/neura12.pnghttp://img251.imageshack.us/img251/4...12overview.png
Anyone with an interest in these sorts of analyses should try and sort this out in their minds before attempting any sort of interpretation of PCA/DS plots.
Secondly, and this goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway; beware of making generalizations about entire language groups based on small sample sets. For instance, it's not reasonable to draw inferences about the relationship between Balts and Slavs based on the 10 Lithuanians from the Behar et al. study. These are just 10 people, possibly from near the Belorussian and Polish borders, and might be very different from their countrymen from another part of Lithuania, and even more distinct from Latvians. However, it is reasonable to do what I did, and that was to look at sample sets of tens and hundreds of individuals, from Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Russia, featured in recent peer-reviewed studies. As I say, this all pure logic, but sometimes it needs to be reiterated.
There's not much to do really. Just load the samples into ADMIXTURE correctly, and give them a spin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franz
There you have it, mystery solved.
You can call it the pink cluster if that makes you feel better.Quote:
The Southeast European cluster appears highest in the Turks and Jews but not in the Southeast Europeans, so that’s a bad name for it.
Have you ever hard of rounding off figures to the nearest per cent?Quote:
For example, PL1 sums to 1.02 and CA5 sums to 0.98. I would like to see more clusters. Dienekes will be doing 64 clusters. With more clusters, we would be able to notice more differences among the samples. Polako does have an agenda though.
By the way, what's my agenda? Please do tell. Mind you, if you come up with some crock of shit I'm gonna pressure you to prove it. And you better do a good job by loading up these samples into ADMIXTURE and showing us exactly how I "manipulated" them.
If you can't do that, then I'd suggest you keep your conspiracy theories to yourself.
I don't make mistakes like that. It's a sample from the Finnish HapMap. You can see how he's behaving in a study done by the Finns (look for the southernmost Finn).Quote:
Maybe Polako made a mistake? It’s not from someone that submitted his/her raw data to him but from a dataset.
Founder population-specific HapMap panel increases power in GWA studies through improved imputation accuracy and CNV tagging - supp info
Not gonna work, because ADMIXTURE goes ballistic at high Ks, especially with closely related groups.Quote:
With more clusters, it should be more apparent.
Europe at K=5 is all I can do without hundreds of samples from each country and ethnic group. Maybe 6 might work, but that'd take all night.
Obviously, they're related. Again, mystery solved. Glad I could help out.Quote:
What happened to NO4? Some Germans are missing. Maybe they requested withdrawal?
I find it funny that you actually decided to post this in public, without the foggiest idea how ADMIXTURE works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl
The program picks who has the highest of whatever, and the cluster that seems "Northern European" always peaks in Lithuanians.
If you don't think so, then try it. Everything's online. I'll give you $500 if you put it all together properly, and then miraculously prove myself and Behar wrong by showing that Lithuanians aren't the modal group for that component.
But if you fail, you owe me $500.
Bwahaha...yeah, you do that sunshine.Quote:
Now if I made a genetic research and started collecting 23andme raw data, I could take the Scanian(southern-Swedish) population as my Northern-European sample population and then I could claim that Scanians are the most Northern-European Europeans, followed by Danes and Swedes.
Basque 13%
Mediterranean 2%
Southeast European 3%
Baltic Finnish 7%
North Euro 75%
Top matches, excluding Americans, Canadians etc..
Quote:
- BY2
- IE3
- NO7
- IE4
- FR
- IE6
- UK16
- UK4
- DE1
- FR
- IE9
- IE8
- DE9
- RU11
- IE10
Something like that I expected. Parameters can be changed. There's more genetic diversity in there, so that explains the not so distinct cluster. Jews and Turks aren’t Southeastern European. As for cluster names, those that know more history, migrations, archaeology, etc. would understand them better. For those that don't, it's misleading.Quote:
Originally Posted by Polako
I've programmed using rounding algorithms. It's obviously rounding up whether it's round-ceiling or round-half-up, or whatever. Comparing the two extremes, 98% and 102%, there's a substantial 4% difference. Rounding to the nearest whole percent isn’t causing that. You or the spreadsheet is causing the limitation. You should fix it.Quote:
Have you ever hard of rounding off figures to the nearest per cent?
By the way, what's my agenda? Please do tell. Mind you, if you come up with some crock of shit I'm gonna pressure you to prove it. And you better do a good job by loading up these samples into ADMIXTURE and showing us exactly how I "manipulated" them.
If you can't do that, then I'd suggest you keep your conspiracy theories to yourself.
In order for me to prove that, you would have to give me all the data. It's not necessarily the results but the interpretations. Conspiracies are fun. I'm not the only one.
On your global MDS, some SNPs you picked between v3 and v2 data didn't overlap as they were no-calls. That caused skewness.Quote:
I don't make mistakes like that. It's a sample from the Finnish HapMap. You can see how he's behaving in a study done by the Finns (look for the southernmost Finn).
Founder population-specific HapMap panel increases power in GWA studies through improved imputation accuracy and CNV tagging - supp info
Upgrade your hardware or wait longer. v1.1 can use parallel processing on multi-core processors. Still, these simulations and programs like STRUCTURE which uses a different algorithm can have problems that is if the user uses them wrong.Quote:
Not gonna work, because ADMIXTURE goes ballistic at high Ks, especially with closely related groups.
Europe at K=5 is all I can do without hundreds of samples from each country and ethnic group. Maybe 6 might work, but that'd take all night.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> It wasn’t obvious, but it was a mystery.Quote:
Obviously, they're related. Again, mystery solved. Glad I could help out.
*Loki pours a glass of Tokaj while making this post of his top matches*
(thanks Graham)Quote:
1.HU
2.HU
3.HU
4.HU
5.HU
6.HU
7.CH1
8.HU
9.HU
10.HU
11.HU
12.HU
13.DE7
14.HU
15.US46
Polako did his run? I was supposed to be in the next one, but I never got my name.
Fine scale analysis of Eurogenes' British and Irish
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p217/dpwes/UK.png
SpreadsheetQuote:
Key: Red = Belarussian + Lihuanian (Baltic?), Yellow = Spanish (Iberian), Green = French (Atlantic?), Aqua = Hungarian (Central European), Blue = Italian (Southern European), Pink = Norwegian + Swedish (Scandinavian).
Fine scale analysis of Eurogenes' Scandinavians
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p217/dpwes/NOR-1.png(the second bar is me)
SpreadsheetQuote:
Key: Red = Belorussian + Lithuanian (Baltic?), Orange = East Finnish (Finnic), Green = French (Atlantic?), Aqua = Hungarian (Central European), Blue (not recorded) = Italian (Southern European), Dark Blue = Nganassan + Koryak + Yakut (Siberian), Lezgin (Caucasus or maybe Odin?).
Fine scale analysis of Eurogenes' Finns and Estonians
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p217/dpwes/FIN-1.png
Key: Red = Belorussian + Lithuanian (Balto-Slavic?), Orange = Pathan + Burusho (South Central Asian), Light Green = Finnish (Finnic), Green = French (Atlantic?), Aqua = Hungarian (Central European), Blue = Italian (Southern European), Dark Blue = Karitiana + Pima + Koryak (Amerindian), Purple = Koryak + Nganassan + Yakut (Siberian), Pink = Norwegian + Swedish (Scandinavian).
Spreadsheet
The two first bars are Estonians, EE1 and EE2.
It's pretty interesting, how the founder population in Lithuania has had an effect on these charts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pallantides
When purely looking at Y-DNA, Lithuania is the 2nd most Finno-Ugric country in Europe, after Finland. That red "Balto-Slavic" genetic group that forms quite definitely has a very large "southern-Finnic" component which is automatically labeled as Balto-Slavic, thus increasing the "Balto-Slavic", in native southern-Finnic populations.
What's the difference between the "Baltic" in the Scandinavian charts and the "Balto-Slavic" in the Estonian-Finnish chart?