The European Populations

[Neon Knight]

Is West med a european component? Peaks in spaniards and moroccans.

It peaks in the Basques. It would have a higher European weighting if Sardinia is counted as European but I think it is pretty clear that Sardinia lies almost exactly between Europe and Africa. That's why I skipped it.

[Neon Knight]

I never expected Sami to plot so high. They are really inside the european nations.

The Sami's Mongoloid admixture is exaggerated - they have virtually no East Asian influence. Same with Finns and Swedes.

I expected the Portuguese to come a bit higher, given their western edge location.

[Neon Knight]

It's still mostly WHG, if we consider SHG is 25% ANE and ANE is 2/3 West Eurasian that's not much non West Eurasian overall but arguably the fact SHG is as removed from Africans than WHG is also because of the relationship it got with east Eurasian due to the ANE. In the same way, for example a half English half Japanese would be more distant to Africans than any European but in the meantime he would also be less European and closer to like Australoids, Amerindans and obviously East Asians. Everything except WHG becomes a tradeoff, with SHG it's just not a huge one. Ultimately it's even Villabruna and KO1 (Hungarian HG) the most distants but it's like 1% more distant than the others.

But does basing modern European genetic identity on ancient HG DNA alone not ignore about 5000 years of genetic mutation? We know that even after 1000 years, Icelanders are not simply Norwegian + Scottish/Irish but a bit 'Icelandic' as well.

Also, if I understand correctly, population modelling only shows us the DNA matches between the individual and the populations it is looking at and ignores the DNA that does not match. So a modern Briton could be 10% HG, 10% ANE and 30% Yamnaya but the model would show these components as 20%, 20% and 60%, excluding the 'empty' half left by the DNA which did not match the ancient stuff.

[AK-47]

No way dude.
Stormfront has assured me that all European ethnic groups are of "wholly European ancestry."
This chart must be a Zionist conspiracy to make Europeans look admixed.
Good luck getting this chart posted on Stormfront, their cross-dressing mods will shit in their panties.

[Graham]

Natl 54.84 x 0.83 = 45.517
Balt 23.7 x 0.68 = 16.123
Wmed 10.8 x 0.67 = 6.3897
Wasian 4.6 x 0.22 = 1.3566
Emed 3.57 x 0.32 = 1.0054
Redsea 0 x 0.15 = 0
Siberian 0.10 * 0.21 = 0.021

= 70.413/70.29 = 100.17%

different idea.

[Petalpusher]

But does basing modern European genetic identity on ancient HG DNA alone not ignore about 5000 years of genetic mutation? We know that even after 1000 years, Icelanders are not simply Norwegian + Scottish/Irish but a bit 'Icelandic' as well.

Also, if I understand correctly, population modelling only shows us the DNA matches between the individual and the populations it is looking at and ignores the DNA that does not match. So a modern Briton could be 10% HG, 10% ANE and 30% Yamnaya but the model would show these components as 20%, 20% and 60%, excluding the 'empty' half left by the DNA which did not match the ancient stuff.

That's precisely why you need to base it off Fst instead, this is the actual main postulat of Fst : migration counters drift, roughly in equal measure (check Wright's model of fst) However a lot of migration has happened in the past 5-10k so the difference between populations aren't mostly due to drift.


I think a Scot just broke your calculator.

[Peterski]

Because the Baltic component is quite high in the Selkup Siberians, giving it a non-European shift, whereas the NA is significantly lower outside Europe (Algeria).

Isn't this due to recent (Medieval and later) Russian admixture though?

For example ancient Proto-Saami (Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov, Kola Peninsula, 1500 BC) were like modern Yukagirs and Mansi - whereas modern Saami are more European, due to recent mixing with Finns, Russians and Scandinavians:

https://d8v5jhqx5tv4l.cloudfront.net...candia-pca.png

[Bobby Martnen]

So I'd be about 65% Euro by these standards (because I cluster with Austrians)

[Peterski]

It peaks in the Basques. It would have a higher European weighting if Sardinia is counted as European but I think it is pretty clear that Sardinia lies almost exactly between Europe and Africa. That's why I skipped it.

Sardinians are the most unmixed descendants of Middle Neolithic farmers in Europe.

They are like living fossils of Western Europeans before the Indo-European expansion.

Other Western Europeans have been altered by Indo-European admixture.

[Leto]

Isn't this due to recent (Medieval and later) Russian admixture though?

For example ancient Proto-Saami (Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov, Kola Peninsula, 1500 BC) were like modern Yukagirs and Mansi - whereas modern Saami are more European, due to recent mixing with Finns, Russians and Scandinavians:

https://d8v5jhqx5tv4l.cloudfront.net...candia-pca.png

I don't think that's recent Russian admixture. I think it's more ancient and Steppe-related.