Caucasian & South-Asian genes in Japanese, Chinese, Korean and Mongolians

[GrebluBro]

Population East West Mediterr W.Asian SW Asian N-African S.Asian N.mongoloid S.Mongoloid
Mongolian 3.1 0.6 0.5 1.8 0.2 0.2 0.6 32.5 60.5
Japanese 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 26.7 70.8
Chinese 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 18.5 80.1
Korean 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 24.9 74.4

East => East Euro
S.Asian => South Asian


Source:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

[Longbowman]

Quelle surprise, the Mongols have European blood.

[Smeagol]

Quelle surprise, the Mongols have European blood.

Not a surprise at all. There were Indoeuropeans in the area in ancient times.

[Smeagol]

Any non East Asian genes in the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese though are insignificant.

[Longbowman]

Not a surprise at all. There were Indoeuropeans in the area in ancient times.

Hence, 'quelle surprise,' not 'good God!'

[TheBlondeSalad]

Not a surprise at all. There were Indoeuropeans in the area in ancient times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

[GrebluBro]

Quelle surprise, the Mongols have European blood.

Chinese and Japanese got South Asian genes too..
While spreading Buddhism, they did spread some of their genes lol

[Smeagol]

Chinese and Japanese got South Asian genes too..
White spreading Buddhism, they did spread some of their genes lol

Actually no. On other dodecad spredsheets they show up with 0% South Asian, I think it's just noise. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...DcTZEYlE#gid=0

[GrebluBro]

Actually no. On other dodecad spredsheets they show up with 0% South Asian, I think it's just noise. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...DcTZEYlE#gid=0

I disagree..
If you take East African, it has been consistently zero for several ethnicities and stayed 0.1 to 0.3 for some reasonable ethnicities..
Claiming 1.5% for Japanese as noise is not right..May be South Asian genes vary from 0% to 1% among Chinese..your spreadsheet sampled 8 Chinese with 0% as average and mine got 0.5%.. I don't think of noise in this excel sheet cuz almost ethnic percents sound very reliable for any ethnicity
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

[Smeagol]

I disagree..
If you take East African, it has been consistently zero for several ethnicities and stayed 0.1 to 0.3 for some reasonable ethnicities..
Claiming 1.5% for Japanese as noise is not right..May be South Asian genes vary from 0% to 1% among Chinese..your spreadsheet sampled 8 Chinese with 0% as average and mine got 0.5%.. I don't think of noise in this excel sheet cuz almost ethnic percents sound very reliable for any ethnicity
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

In the spreadsheet you posted, the Japanese as a whole have 0% South Asia, only one had 1.5%, and I'm guessing it could be recent admixture, since there's not historical reason for the Japanese to have any South Asian influence.. Anyway, even 1.5% is absolutely irrelevant.