I divided G25 modern averages in clusters:
Code:
curl -Ls 'drive.google.com/uc?export=download&id=1wZr-UOve0KUKo_Qbgeo27m-CQncZWb8y'>modernave
R -e 't=read.csv("modernave",header=T,row.names=1,check.names=F);k<-cutree(hclust(dist(t)),k=16);write.table(k,"clusters",sep=" ",quote=F,col.names=F)'
Then I did a PCA of the clusters for Europeans, Central Asians, North Asians, East Asians, Southeast Asians, and Americans:
In my graph, the percentage shown next to PC1 is bigger than the percentage shown next to PC2 because there's so many European and East/Southeast Asian populations in the plot. The percentage becomes smaller if I include less European populations. One horizontal square still represents the same distance as one vertical square.
Nganasans look like they're on a cline that goes from Southeast Asians to Americans. The Uralic cline from Saami to Nganasans is closer to Americans than the Turkic cline from Tatars to Yakuts. Maybe it's because of higher ANE ancestry in Uralics.
However in G25, Surui are about as far from Nganasan as from Han or Mari:
Distance to: Surui
.019 Karitiana
.089 Mayan
.386 Eskimo
.401 Greenlander_East
.441 Greenlander_West
.451 Chukchi
.473 Tlingit
.543 Shor
.559 Selkup
.559 Kazakh
.562 Ket
.562 Khanty
.563 Buryat
.564 Nivkh
.565 Nenets
.566 Todzin
.568 Mansi
.601 Han_Shandong
.604 Onge
.606 Nganassan
.616 Saami
.616 Mari
Bookmarks