Eurogenes Biogeographic Ancestry Project

[Frederick]

Interesting idea

Germans, Austrians and Swiss
I add German/Polish mixes for comparation, because of my 2/3 "Eastern Terretories" anchestry.

Southeast Baltic:

DEPL2 - 34%
DEPL1 - 32%
DE1 - 24%(Thuringia, Saxony, Silesia)
DE5 - 23% (100% eastern terretories, now Poland)
DE8 - 21% (25% Westphalia, 50% Silesia, 25% East Prussia)
DE11 - 20% (50% Rhineland Palatinate, 50% Eastern Terretories)
DE16 - 20%
DE15 - 15%
DE12 - 15%
DE9 - 14%
DE10 - 13% (Bavaria, Hessia, Alsace (now France) )
DE17 - 12%
DE13 - 11%
DE7 - 10% (50% German baltic coast, 25% Baden Würthemberg, 12,5% Hessian, 12,5% Swiss)
AT1 - 8%
CH1 - 7%
DE14 - 6%
CH3 - 2%

Northern European

DE14 - 73%
DE7 - 63% (50% German baltic coast, 25% Baden Würthemberg, 12,5% Hessian, 12,5% Swiss)
DE8 -54% (25% Westphalia, 50% Silesia, 25% East Prussia)
CH3 - 38%
CH1 - 36%
AT1 - 33%
DE5 - 31% (100% eastern terretories, now Poland)
DE10 - 27% (Bavaria, Hessia, Alsace (now France)
DE17 - 27%
DE12 - 23%
DE11 - 21% (50% Rhineland Palatinate, 50% Eastern Terretories)
DEPL2 - 19%
DE13 - 16%
DE9 - 16%
DE16 - 14%
DE1 - 8% (Thuringia, Saxony, Silesia)
DE15 - 2%
DEPL1 - 0%

North Atlantic

DE15 - 56%
DE13 - 56%
DE1 - 52% (Thuringia, Saxony, Silesia)
DE9 - 49%
DE17 - 44%
DEPL1 - 40%
DE16 - 37%
DE12 - 35%
DE11 - 30% (50% Rhineland Palatinate, 50% Eastern Terretories)
DE5 - 30% (100% eastern terretories, now Poland)
DE10 - 30% (Bavaria, Hessia, Alsace (now France)
AT1 - 28%
CH1 - 24%
DEPL2 - 24%
DE8 - 3% (25% Westphalia, 50% Silesia, 25% East Prussia)
DE7 - 2% (50% German baltic coast, 25% Baden Würthemberg, 12,5% Hessian, 12,5% Swiss)
CH3 - 1%
DE14 - 0%

African and Asian all zero

Southern European

CH3 - 39%
DE12 - 26%
CH1 - 18%
DE11 - 17% (50% Rhineland Palatinate, 50% Eastern Terretories)
AT1 - 17%
DE14 - 16%
DE1 - 15% (Thuringia, Saxony, Silesia)
DE16 - 14%
DE10 - 14% (Bavaria, Hessia, Alsace (now France)
DE7 - 12% (50% German baltic coast, 25% Baden Würthemberg, 12,5% Hessian, 12,5% Swiss)
DEPL2 - 11%
DE8 - 11% (25% Westphalia, 50% Silesia, 25% East Prussia)
DE13 - 8%
DE5 - 8% (100% eastern terretories, now Poland)
DE9 -1%
DE15 - 0%
DE17 - 0%

Western European:

DE15 - 27%
DEPL1 - 25%
DE9 - 21%
CH3 - 20%
DE17 - 17%
DE10 - 17% (Bavaria, Hessia, Alsace (now France)
DE16 - 16%
CH1 - 15%
AT1 - 14%
DE7 - 13% (50% German baltic coast, 25% Baden Würthemberg, 12,5% Hessian, 12,5% Swiss)
DE11 - 12% (50% Rhineland Palatinate, 50% Eastern Terretories)
DE8 - 10% (25% Westphalia, 50% Silesia, 25% East Prussia)
DEPL2 - 12%
DE13 - 9%
DE5 - 8% (100% eastern terretories, now Poland)
DE14 - 5%
DE12 -0%
DE1 - 0% (Thuringia, Saxony, Silesia)

[Graham]

Don't know how this compares to the averages. Anyway there's my scores.


01.61% South East Baltic
40.65% Norn European
46.42% Norn Atlantic
00.00% Eas/Norn Euroasian
00.00% Sub Saharan Africa
03.89% South European
07.43% Western European

[Frederick]

Don't know how this compares to the averages. Anyway there's my scores.


01.61% South East Baltic
40.65% Norn European
46.42% Norn Atlantic
00.00% Eas/Norn Euroasian
00.00% Sub Saharan Africa
03.89% South European
07.43% Western European

I did maps of the averages:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...&postcount=584

I compare it for you:

01.61% (Scottish Average: 4%) South East Baltic (Lithuania centered)
40.65% (Scottish Average: 30%) Norn European (Sweden centered)
46.42% (Scottish Average: 48%) Norn Atlantic (Ireland centered)
00.00% Eas/Norn Euroasian
00.00% Sub Saharan Africa
03.89% (Scottish Average: 0%) South European (Greece centered)
07.43% (Scottish Average: 17%) Western European (Spain centered)

[Pallantides]

Seems You to are also more Northern European than me and less North Atlantic.


Graham/Pallantides/Scottish average - North Atlantic

46.42%/69.0%/48%


Graham/Pallantides/Scottish average - North European

40.65%/16.7%/30%

[Agrippa]

I like graphical depictions, so I made some to support my claims made already, namely that Northern European-North Atlantic and Western European-Southern European are split in a strange way individually, without a meaningful pattern, just compare for the Contintental Germanics (Dutch, German, Austrian, Swiss), Northern Europeans (DK, SE, NO, FI) and the Italian sample:






At least in this Central parts of Europe (but pretty much the rest too), from North to South, the components Northern-North Atlantic and Western-Southern are practically indistinguishable, if you sum them up to "Northern vs. Southern", the distribution makes sense, there is a logical pattern, otherwise not, if looking at individuals in which only one of the related components being counted at all!

If you sum them up, there is a logical and pretty much natural, biologically meaningful pattern, especially if comparing Northern Europe - Contintental Germanics - Italians in a row.

The only other important and as it seems independent 3rd component is Southern Baltic, as a clear indicator of Eastern-North Eastern ancestry - probably even "old Mesolithic" (?) ancestry.

How the related to identical components (Northern+North Atlantic vs. Western+Southern) being split individually is a methodological problem obviously and one might question whether it makes sense at all, if looking at the patterns.

Now I add the Spaniards and French - again, North vs. South makes sense, the split of the related components IN MOST individuals not:




I'm pretty sure the reason for this pattern for Western vs. Southern is that there were Basques or genetically closely related people included in the sample!

It is pretty obvious if looking at the French and Spaniards - most split up, in many ways, but some are just "Western European" and that Basque component is not easily to transmit into something meaningful for the rest of Europe.

[Frederick]

Its what Polako already said.

Especially the North-West is genetically extremly homogenious, wich makes it hard to find a meaningfull split.

But he still tries.

But I am still sure in the end it will be much better than measuring shapes of noses and theeth.

[Osweo]

nah...It wouldn't make any sense in my case, I'm a ür-Scandinavian after all

I've perhaps asked before, but is/are the home territory/ies of your ancestors in a particularly remote or inaccessible valley?

[Pallantides]

I've perhaps asked before, but is/are the home territory/ies of your ancestors in a particularly remote or inaccessible valley?

I have put down my ancestry here:
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...abba7a0f4c6d96

Norwegian, with ancestry from Oppland, Buskerud, Akershus, Hedmark, Sogn og Fjordane, Trøndelag, Nordland, Västra Götaland(Sweden) and 17th century Savonia(Finland)

*There have been a lot of migration within Norway over the years but the core area of my ancestry lies in Oppland... I guess it wasn't inaccessible enough.

[Frederick]

On the other hand....

Repeatedly we had a mysterious connection between Ireland and Norway now.
Also Dienekes "Western European" has a double center Ireland/Norway.

When I checked where exactly in Norway it centeres (not in this run but one of the INtra North ones), then Scandinavian North-Atlantic centered at the most western Coast of Norway and dropped like a stone at the border to Sweden.

While in Ireland it centered at the Western coast too.

If one digs one of those Anthrophology cave monkeys maps about "phenotypes" out of the shit, the "North Atlantic" of that (not this) run kind of correlated with the Trönder terretory or Ireland and Norway.

[Agrippa]

I edited my post above, I'm now pretty sure that the Western-Southern dichotomy is the result of Basques being included in this run and that the program had a problem to attribute that category to the rest, if looking through the samples, it is pretty obvious in my opinion.

Or has anybody else a better idea?

The Northern vs. North Atlantic split will be based on something similar one might call a distortion.

There is no meaningful explanation for the pattern.

On the other hand....

Repeatedly we had a mysterious connection between Ireland and Norway now.
Also Dienekes "Western European" has a double center Ireland/Norway.

When I checked where exactly in Norway it centeres (not in this run but one of the INtra North ones), then Scandinavian North-Atlantic centered at the most western Coast of Norway and dropped like a stone at the border to Sweden.

While in Ireland it centered at the Western coast too.

If one digs one of those Anthrophology cave monkeys maps about "phenotypes" out of the shit, the "North Atlantic" of that (not this) run kind of correlated with the Trönder terretory or Ireland and Norway.

Some of the Finns have a pred. "North Atlantic" component in their "Northern components" make up too, in Norway itself it is RANDOM!

You just try to make sense out of it, like some others did, when there is non, at least not on an individual basis, at least not for the populations/individuals I made the graphs of.

I made a graph of some British individuals, note the random pattern in the related components: