Gedmatch calculators on Vahaduo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stearsolina

We have new Croatian K13 averages! Lucas please replace old one with them :) (they are made by Moro with help of other regulars from south Slavic genetic threads)

Code:

---

Croat_South,26.36,31.83,15.92,8.38,13.60,1.47,0.50 ,0.28,0.56,0.47,0.37,0.12,0.11
Croat_West,28.53,31.60,15.24,7.61,13.31,1.38,0.61, 0.38,0.36,0.38,0.40,0.13,0.07
Croat_East,26.84,34.60,14.13,8.26,12.31,1.43,0.22, 0.12,1.08,0.68,0.30,0.01,0.01
Croat_North,30.06,34.35,14.42,7.05,10.10,1.33,0.54 ,0.31,0.52,0.61,0.40,0.16,0.14
Croat,28.10,33.15,15.02,7.76,12.05,1.40,0.49,0.28, 0.59,0.54,0.38,0.12,0.10

---

---

OK added. What are those regions on the map?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucas

OK added. What are those regions on the map?

---

Thanks!

It's like this. North Croat includes NW and central regions around capital Zagreb (Kajkavian speaking north and centre in short)
East is Slavonia, with it's subregions Posavina, Baranja, Srijem. West are regions of Istria, Kvarner and Gorski kotar.
South is everything south of Sava river which was also border of Roman Dalmatia and Panonnia and it includes Dalmatia, Lika and all Bosnia-Herzegovina Croats.

This is most logical division we have so far :)

https://www.croatia.eu/images/01-07/regije_en.png

You can use this map for orientation. Sava river flows along northern border of Croatia and Bosnia btw.

rough division for visulization. So we got these 4 + one general weighted average. :)

https://i.imgur.com/CA3TOSk.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucas

OK added. What are those regions on the map?

---

As we (Stearsolina, vbnetkhio, and me) explained at the thread "Croat K13 regional (and national) averages", it is basically a variation of a map from Mršić et al. 2012, where Northern and Central region make "North", Eastern makes "East", Western makes "West" excluding the Lika-Senj County, which was added to the Southern plus Bosnia and Herzegovina making "South". The county of Lika-Senj could have been added to "West" and wouldn't make a substantial difference, but alongside other regions, the "South" approximately makes the borders of old medieval Croatia which was located south of river Sava. Also, due to historical connections and migrations as well genetical proximity with other "South" regions, it's more logical to include it in the "South" instead of "West" due to only geographical reasoning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucas

OK added. What are those regions on the map?

---

Hi @Lucas,
Please remove "Brahmins_from_Uttaranchal" from Dodecad K12b and "Brahmin_Uttaranchal" from Harappaworld since both of those are based on 1 outlier sample ran by Zack. Other actual Brahmins from Uttaranchal have very different result than that average which is very high East Asian.

Two actual Uttaranchal Brahmin samples and both have diverse results.
Sundriyal
1 S-Indian 38.16
2 Baloch 33.32
3 Caucasian 8.97
4 NE-Euro 8.86
5 NE-Asian 6.64
6 Siberian 1.82
7 American 0.74
8 Mediterranean 0.57
9 Beringian 0.49
10 Papuan 0.43

Nautiyal
1 S-Indian 34.85
2 Baloch 31.57
3 NE-Asian 12.62
4 NE-Euro 7.25
5 SE-Asian 4.06
6 Caucasian 3.68
7 Beringian 2.05
8 Siberian 1.61
9 Papuan 1.12
10 Mediterranean 0.71
11 American 0.5

Also please remove "Nepali" from harappaworld which was a meaningless average of two Brahmins and 1 Chhetri.

Please remove these on K13:
Latvian,26.7383333333,58.3616666667,6.41,2.7266666 667,0.7816666667,1.095,0.7733333333,0.0933333333,1 .4333333333,0.7316666667,0.3216666667,0.3283333333 ,0.22
Slovak,30.84,37.1846153846,12.9876923077,6.2976923 077,8.0007692308,1.0869230769,1.0276923077,0.39153 84615,0.5769230769,0.7338461538,0.5307692308,0.146 1538462,0.2138461538
Turk_Western_Thrace,18.13666667,18.07,14.46333333, 14.55333333,23.87,3.053333333,0.56,1.393333333,4.1 93333333,0.673333333,0.356666667,0.043333333,0.316 666667
Turk_Bulgaria_Northeast,19.86333333,21.44333333,13 .87666667,13.28666667,20.28333333,2.653333333,2.03 6666667,2.72,1.99,0.863333333,0.296666667,0.196666 667,0.493333333
Turk_Bulgaria_Central,20.69666667,18.65666667,15.3 9,15.38333333,18.53666667,2.72,2.336666667,1.65333 3333,3.256666667,0.893333333,0.196666667,0.17,0.11

And replace them with these, as I rounded them for aesthetic reasons:
Latvian,26.74,58.36,6.41,2.73,0.78,1.1,0.77,0.09,1 .43,0.73,0.32,0.33,0.22
Slovak,30.84,37.18,12.99,6.3,8,1.09,1.03,0.39,0.58 ,0.73,0.53,0.15,0.21
Turk_Western_Thrace,18.14,18.07,14.46,14.55,23.87, 3.05,0.56,1.39,4.19,0.67,0.36,0.04,0.32
Turk_Bulgaria_Northeast,19.86,21.44,13.88,13.29,20 .28,2.65,2.04,2.72,1.99,0.86,0.3,0.2,0.49
Turk_Bulgaria_Central,20.7,18.66,15.39,15.38,18.54 ,2.72,2.34,1.65,3.26,0.89,0.2,0.17,0.11

Please reduce the number of Macedonian and Balkan Turk averages, they shouldn't dominate the spreadsheet being small and insignificant populations. I can understand Turkey as a country of 83 million. But here we're talking about 1-2 million people only.

For Dodecadk12b:

Code:

---

Turkmen_Iran,21.19,9.46,0.54,1.15,5.45,12.76,4.94,0.22,6.77,11.03,26.38,0.12

---

Please delete the old Turkmen_Iran

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leto

Please reduce the number of Macedonian and Balkan Turk averages, they shouldn't dominate the spreadsheet being small and insignificant populations. I can understand Turkey as a country of 83 million. But here we're talking about 1-2 million people only.

---

Someone should make only a few averages for Macedonians (eg East, West, North, South) and Balkan Turks (eg 1 Turk_Bulgaria average instead of 4 Turk_Bulgaria averages). What about Greek averages (26, with national 27)? Any reason for such a high number? Italians due to the size of the country, individually established regions, and the population as well as regional peculiarities are fine, but what's the point of sub-regional Emilia_ovest, Emilia_est, Calabria_citra, Calabria_ultra?

It's great to keep sub-regional averages on the forum or some other spreadsheet as a piece of evidence for more detailed analysis and discussion, but on Vahaduo perhaps should only be general regional and national averages, not each island, village, city, partial region, and so on. Many of such averages are probably based on a very low number of samples which makes them biased as well.

Agree with posters above, some countries have way too many illogical averages. There are also two Swiss German and Swiss Italian averages for each ethicity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leto

Please reduce the number of Macedonian and Balkan Turk averages, they shouldn't dominate the spreadsheet being small and insignificant populations. I can understand Turkey as a country of 83 million. But here we're talking about 1-2 million people only.

---

There were reduced already by Thracian but still too many. I think I will make reduced averages for them as no one wants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoroLP

Someone should make only a few averages for Macedonians (eg East, West, North, South) and Balkan Turks (eg 1 Turk_Bulgaria average instead of 4 Turk_Bulgaria averages). What about Greek averages (26, with national 27)? Any reason for such a high number? Italians due to the size of the country, individually established regions, and the population as well as regional peculiarities are fine, but what's the point of sub-regional Emilia_ovest, Emilia_est, Calabria_citra, Calabria_ultra?

It's great to keep sub-regional averages on the forum or some other spreadsheet as a piece of evidence for more detailed analysis and discussion, but on Vahaduo perhaps should only be general regional and national averages, not each island, village, city, partial region, and so on. Many of such averages are probably based on a very low number of samples which makes them biased as well.

---

Yep, absolutely right. What the hell does citra, ultra even mean? Calabria is Calabria, you can't cover every single town or village. There are clearly defined regions of Italy and Greece for example and that administrative division should be followed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucas

There were reduced already by Thracian but still too many. I think I will make reduced averages for them as no one wants.

---

North Macedonia doesn't even differ substantially by region. As Moro pointed out, one can use a separate, more detailed spreadsheet if some more specific details are needed but for general use those things are redundant.

Luke, please don't forget Pamiri_Tajikistan :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leto

North Macedonia doesn't even differ substantially by region. As Moro pointed out, one can use a separate, more detailed spreadsheet if some more specific details are needed but for general use those things are redundant.

Luke, please don't forget Pamiri_Tajikistan :)

---

Basically this. I can understand that smaller countries also want to have many separate sub-divisions as they see among the larger countries, but when such sub-divisions aren't supported by visible genetic distances, than I believe it's more futile than helpful. I would even go as far as having one national average for small countries, max two regional ones and a national average.

Indeed Macedonians seem really homogenous genetically, I see basically no genetic difference between all these regions. Probably north and south and one general average would do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dunai

Basically this. I can understand that smaller countries also want to have many separate sub-divisions as they see among the larger countries, but when such sub-divisions aren't supported by visible genetic distances, than I believe it's more futile than helpful. I would even go as far as having one national average for small countries, max two regional ones and a national average.

---

Correct. No matter how many obscure Italian averages have been added, tomorrow there will still be an Italian person who doesn't get a close distance either because they are an outlier or because their raw data is fucked up and low SNP. Point is you can't satisfy everyone.

There are also lot of Pomak averages, considering their population is only 1 million total, and half of them live in Turkey (I'd guess many adopted Turkish identity). In Balkans their numbers are very small.
Greek averages are gigantic, they also should be reduced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stearsolina

There are also lot of Pomak averages, considering their population is only 1 million total, and half of them live in Turkey (I'd guess many adopted Turkish identity). In Balkans their numbers are very small.

---

Are they even a legit ethnic group? Those in Turkey are (being) Turkified and those in the homeland can pass as Bulgarian. I see no problem if an actual Pomak takes a test and comes up as Bulgarian on Gedmatch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leto

Are they even a legit ethnic group? Those in Turkey are (being) Turkified and those in the homeland can pass as Bulgarian. I see no problem if an actual Pomak takes a test and comes up as Bulgarian on Gedmatch.

---

They are like Bosniaks, have same origins as Christian Bulgarians but developed their own identity. It's legit IMO and should be respected. But Kaspias said many are getting Turkified indeed.
So many averages aren't needed for them because only part of total Pomak population which is small to begin with has Pomak identity and not Turkish for example.

Balkan Turks should be divided into three: Thrace, Deliorman, and Macedonia.
Pomaks should be divided into two: Greece, Bulgaria.

I can handle it next week.

While everyone is taking the opportunity to complain, the ancient names of French regions continue to bug me autistically. FRA_Armorica should be French_Northwest, FRA_Belgica should be French_North, the other ones don't come up on my oracles so I don't care ;)

Looking at the closeness of averages and given historical considerations I believe for Romania it's also plenty enough the three major historical regions: Moldavia, Transylvania+Banat, Wallachia+Dobruja.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Creoda

While everyone is taking the opportunity to complain, the ancient names of French regions continue to bug me autistically. FRA_Armorica should be French_Northwest, FRA_Belgica should be French_North, the other ones don't come up on my oracles so I don't care ;)

---

They bug me too tbh. I don't like FRA, DEU etc....write full country's name. And these ancient regional names may be confusing for average Joe.

Well, we Balkan Turks are not 1-2 million as Leto said but about 10 million. However, I agree with him and the rest, the spreadsheet will be better with well organized samples. We do not need too many regions.

As Kaspias mentioned, we can make 3 regions for Balkan Turks.

Not sure about Pomaks, I don't know we really need to separate them since they are closer to each others.

Vlach N. Macedonia Highlander is one of the users on TA, I am doubt he is really a Vlach. That is fine with a Vlach average or Torbeshi average.

Frankly, I do not understand picking samples from cosmopolitans. We do not even need Greek Istanbul sample, it is not even fully Greek. No Greek can be modeled as 1/8 Lezgin. the same goes for Greek Macedonia Thrace. Why we even have a Macedonia Thrace region? One Greek Macedonia - we do not need to have Central or Eastern or Western Macedonia- and one Greek Thrace are useful.

Spoiler!

Distance: 0.8841% / 0.88405084
Target: Greek_Macedonia_Thrace | ADC: 0.25x
32.0 Greek_Central
26.0 Pomak_Komotini
23.8 Greek_Eastern-Thrace
8.1 Turk_Crete
7.7 Armenian_East
1.3 Lezgin
0.6 Turk_East_Black_Sea
0.5 Laz

Distance: 1.5368% / 1.53680807
Target: Greek_Istanbul | ADC: 0.25x
50.5 Greek_Andros_Island
18.2 Turk_Central_Macedonia
12.1 Greek_Northern-Thrace
11.4 Lezgin
6.4 Pomak_Komotini
1.4 Laz

We can have another spreadsheet if people want to have much bigger spreadsheet with more regional/individual samples. But having well organized spreadsheet will be more accurate.

Well, I found a chance to finish Balkan Turks.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...09#post7035909

@Lucas

Please remove:

Code:

---

Turk_Western_Thrace,18.13666667,18.07,14.46333333,14.55333333,23.87,3.053333333,0.56,1.393333333,4.193333333,0.673333333,0.356666667,0.043333333,0.316666667
Turk_Eastern_Macedonia,19.61,20.485,16.035,15.235,20.385,1.56,0.81,1.94,1.98,0.27,0.235,0.095,0.23
Turk_Central_Macedonia,19.29,19.58,17.35,12.55,26.1,1.97,0,0.51,1.38,0.94,0,0,0.32
Turk_Bulgaria_East,19.03,11.49,14.52,19.18,23.94,3.15,1.32,2.12,4.28,0.44,0,0.16,0.37
Turk_Bulgaria_Northeast,19.86333333,21.44333333,13.87666667,13.28666667,20.28333333,2.653333333,2.036666667,2.72,1.99,0.863333333,0.296666667,0.196666667,0.493333333
Turk_Bulgaria_Central,20.69666667,18.65666667,15.39,15.38333333,18.53666667,2.72,2.336666667,1.653333333,3.256666667,0.893333333,0.196666667,0.17,0.11
Turk_Bulgaria_South,17.144,18.302,14.608,17.27,18.11,3.092,0.878,3.074,5.95,0.83,0.282,0.296,0.172
Turk_Eastern_Thrace,13.92,14.66,16.81,19.56,20.22,2.35,3.04,3.03,5.28,0.53,0.53,0.07,0
Turk_Balkan_average,18.51,18.70,15.05,15.48,20.71,2.77,1.31,2.16,3.69,0.70,0.25,0.24,0.28
Turk_N-Macedonia,19.62,26.16,14.14,12.18,18.91,2.55,2.33,1.13,2.05,0.67,0.04,0.21,0

---

and add:

Code:

---

Turk_Trakya,15.59,18.68,14.59,17.12,21.06,2.92,1.42,2.18,5.21,0.48,0.35,0.19,0.20
Turk_Deliorman,18.24,21.24,14.61,15.55,19.50,2.61,1.05,2.57,3.74,0.41,0.51,0.17,0.15
Turk_Makedonya,19.58,18.64,16.77,13.73,23.61,2.80,0.68,1.01,2.18,0.21,0.36,0.21,0.24

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Creoda

While everyone is taking the opportunity to complain, the ancient names of French regions continue to bug me autistically. FRA_Armorica should be French_Northwest, FRA_Belgica should be French_North, the other ones don't come up on my oracles so I don't care ;)

---

Peterski named them that. I agree, should be renamed. There was a description in one thread of his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thracian

Well, we Balkan Turks are not 1-2 million as Leto said but about 10 million. However, I agree with him and the rest, the spreadsheet will be better with well organized samples. We do not need too many regions.

---

In the actual Balkan states you guys are a lot less numerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leto

In the actual Balkan states you guys are a lot less numerous.

---

Yes, you are right about the Balkans. However, majority of our population already moved to Turkey and some big cities in Eastern Thrace and Western Anatolia such as Bursa, Balikesir or Izmir are full of Balkan Turks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Creoda

While everyone is taking the opportunity to complain, the ancient names of French regions continue to bug me autistically. FRA_Armorica should be French_Northwest, FRA_Belgica should be French_North, the other ones don't come up on my oracles so I don't care ;)

---

Yep it is anachronistic. Most people on FB don't know what regions there are:) Will be changed.

Ok I made Macedonia north and south. I also left only Vlach and Torbeshi average.

What are those new samples with "_B" in G25? I saw Iranian_B

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_Maul

What are those new samples with "_B" in G25? I saw Iranian_B

---

Recently unofficially converted by Davidski from some last paper on West Asia. There aren't in official sheet on his blog but were posted on Anthrogenica.
I added it on the end of every modern sheet for easier finding.

If Creoda wants to add more German regions better to make for whole former West Germany north-west, central-west, south-west and south-east. If we follow the rule to not make too many small regions in K13 updated sheet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dunai

Looking at the closeness of averages and given historical considerations I believe for Romania it's also plenty enough the three major historical regions: Moldavia, Transylvania+Banat, Wallachia+Dobruja.

---

No, it's not. Each one of them is quite different, and Romania is almost a 20m country. The one that could be removed perhaps is Romania_Wallachia, since it's the average of Muntenia and Oltenia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucas

Yep it is anachronistic. Most people on FB don't know what regions there are:) Will be changed.

---

Here is the map

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peterski

Feel free to test my regional French K13 and K15 averages. This is a continuation of:
(BTW, I intend to supplement with more samples, but they should already be good)

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...netic-clusters

Use with Vahaduo - Attachment 98857

Eurogenes K13:

Code:

---

FRA_Central,42.40,18.28,20.55,4.81,9.80,1.59,0.49,0.26,0.36,0.46,0.37,0.38,0.24
FRA_Alsace,40.65,22.72,16.81,6.48,9.58,1.60,0.39,0.47,0.25,0.36,0.27,0.16,0.26
FRA_Armorica,48.53,22.11,15.45,5.52,4.38,1.00,1.19,0.25,0.31,0.59,0.29,0.22,0.17
FRA_Belgica,43.27,20.59,17.19,6.01,8.41,1.49,0.81,0.36,0.38,0.48,0.30,0.27,0.43
FRA_Septimania,41.77,14.33,26.39,2.70,10.79,1.43,0.55,0.18,0.26,0.58,0.53,0.33,0.17
FRA_Provence,35.19,14.10,22.05,6.40,17.59,2.34,0.36,0.26,0.26,0.40,0.37,0.42,0.24
FRA_Aquitania,48.61,8.24,32.74,0.95,5.49,1.52,0.92,0.35,0.26,0.27,0.31,0.20,0.14

---

Eurogenes K15:

Code:

---

FRA_Central,27.38,27.39,8.88,6.00,16.19,3.96,6.85,1.54,0.33,0.16,0.21,0.29,0.25,0.37,0.19
FRA_Alsace,28.49,24.36,12.31,7.12,12.76,5.91,6.23,1.50,0.20,0.31,0.14,0.20,0.14,0.13,0.19
FRA_Armorica,33.63,28.77,9.43,8.78,10.92,3.51,2.23,0.79,0.81,0.15,0.14,0.39,0.18,0.15,0.12
FRA_Belgica,30.06,25.90,9.94,7.14,13.16,4.86,5.19,1.51,0.65,0.21,0.22,0.33,0.20,0.26,0.38
FRA_Septimania,23.44,30.07,6.86,5.00,20.86,2.32,7.92,1.58,0.42,0.08,0.14,0.41,0.38,0.36,0.15
FRA_Provence,21.75,23.86,7.06,4.44,18.01,6.15,14.55,2.44,0.32,0.13,0.18,0.25,0.24,0.47,0.16
FRA_Aquitania,20.30,39.32,4.81,2.49,24.29,0.77,4.44,1.91,0.45,0.30,0.23,0.20,0.21,0.17,0.13

---

https://i.imgur.com/WwtEH3E.png

=====

Swiss German Eurogenes K13 and K15:

Code:

---

Swiss_German,41.14,21.44,17.58,6.72,10.25,1.25,0.30,0.10,0.30,0.38,0.36,0.11,0.08

---

Code:

---

Swiss_German,29.02,24.29,11.25,7.06,13.51,5.61,7.40,1.10,0.15,0.01,0.10,0.21,0.17,0.07,0.04

---

=====

Edit:

Languedoc renamed Septimania:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimania

---

Alsace and Provence can remain, I think. Those are widely known regions. But the rest are less obvious except for Central of course.

Armorica = Northwest_French
Belgica = Northeast_French
Aquitania = Southwest_French
Languedoc = South_French

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucas

If Creoda wants to add more German regions better to make for whole former West Germany north-west, central-west, south-west and south-east. If we follow the rule to not make too many small regions in K13 updated sheet.

---

Germany is at least most populous European country if Russia is excluded. But I agree. Italy, Spain and Greece have too many averages for example.
I am suprised there isn't western Polish average by the way, pretty sure Peterski can easily make one if he wants. Because from what I saw they are genetically distinct from you for example.
Such average would be an improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stearsolina

Italy, Spain, and Greece have too many averages for example.

---

Hmm, Italy and Spain are incomparable to Greece with the size of the country and population. Italy and Spain, excluding Russia (and Turkey), are Top 5 European countries by population so it's fine if they have more than double 4-5 regional averages based on their administrative division. Greece (~10 million) has a population that is two times lower than Romania (~20 million), and almost the same thing is about their respective country area. Besides Italy and Spain, Germany, France, England, Ukraine, Poland, Romania, and the Netherlands statistically should or can have more than double 4-5 regional averages, perhaps according to their administrative division or else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ion Basescul

No, it's not. Each one of them is quite different, and Romania is almost a 20m country. The one that could be removed perhaps is Romania_Wallachia, since it's the average of Muntenia and Oltenia.

---

I'm not familiar with the administrative and historical/genetical division of Romania and Romanians and didn't check it now, but currently, there are 10 regional averages, perhaps should be lowered to 7, having averaged Romania_Moldavia and removing Muntenia and Oltenia if Wallachia is their average.

Let's keep in mind not all countries can be simply divided into North, South, etc. Some nations do have a more complex genetic history. Also many countries are unevenly populated. I know most people here are European but let's look at Egypt for example. Obviously the Nile valley would be the most important

Spoiler!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...n_density1.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoroLP

Hmm, Italy and Spain are incomparable to Greece with the size of the country and population. Italy and Spain, excluding Russia (and Turkey), are Top 5 countries by population so it's fine if they have more than double 4-5 regional averages based on their administrative division. Greece (~10 million) has a population that is two times lower than Romania (~20 million), and almost the same thing is about their respective country area. Romania also should have a bit more than 4-5 regional averages.

---

Agree, but Greece has far more genetic diversity than Spain for example. Iberians are very homogenous considering how big and populous their peninsula is.
Greece has Anatolian Greeks, Pontics, Islanders, Mainlanders, Cypriots, they are all very different from each other. But even with that having almost 30 averages is simply far too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leto

Here is the map

Alsace and Provence can remain, I think. Those are widely known regions. But the rest are less obvious except for Central of course.

Armorica = Northwest_French
Belgica = Northeast_French
Aquitania = Southwest_French
Languedoc = South_French

---

I did it already.