Eurogenes Biogeographic Ancestry Project

[Loki]

Human DNA today is different that when humans came out of Africa, otherwise all these autosomal differences between populations wouldn't exist, So it's irrelevant to the matter.

You are aware of the fact that Georgia is technically in Europe geographically? Thus, this West Asian element is found in highest proportions within Europe!

[poiuytrewq0987]

It's very clear the pattern followed :

It's far too easy for you to plainly categorise West Asian as automatically non-European. A lot of West Asian types came to Europe a long time ago before the Arabs expanded outside their peninsula. Undoubtedly, modern Syrians and others who peak in West Asian absorbed the original West Asians.

I think West Asian can be separated into two categories. One old pre-Islam, pre-Turkic West Asia and other post-Turkic, post-Islam West Asia. If we go by this system then we can confirm Europeans who carry some West Asian belong to the pre-Islam, pre-Turkic West Asia category and others such as Syrians, Turks, Iranians and Azeris belong to the latter category.

Paleo-West Asians clearly was much more similar to current Europeans in genes and phenotypical makeup otherwise we'd see a lot more foreign-looking Europeans today alike to modern West Asians that are largely composed of Arabs and Turkics. I think we can recognise West Asian as something that is much older with Iranian origins since the areas West Asian peaks in used to be dominated by various Iranian peoples such as Scythians, Persians, etc.

[Ibericus]

You are aware of the fact that Georgia is technically in Europe geographically? Thus, this West Asian element is found in highest proportions within Europe!

No, the highest proportions are not within Europe, more likely in the
Iranian Plateau :

[Loki]

No, the highest proportions are not within Europe, more likely in the
Iranian Plateau :

If my eyes are not failing me yet, Iran shows 49% ... whereas 63%, 65% and 72% seem to be north of the Caucasus.

[Agrippa]

Somewhat off-topic, but I can't understand one thing. In the Dodecad run, I have 26.6% "Mediterranean" and 10.8% "West Asian" ... but in Polako's run I only register 18% Mediterranean, which supposedly INCLUDES the West Asian.

I'm not sure you can compare it directly anyway and as you can see, the "West Asian" in the Dodecad runs varies a lot as well, depending on reference, samples, admixture program mode etc.

The unique european compoments are West, East euro and Med.

These components appear out of Europe too and are closest related to West Asian, especially West European, which is probably, if there is something real behind it, the "colonisation event" from different directions.

So there would be a more ancient (included in West European) and a more recent (independent) West Asian influence, since the West Asian core region is also part of the Europid core per se.

This makes it even more important and closer related, because of this colonisation eventS.

Also, like I said, the other components ARE NOT exclusively European, they appear in various other populations too.

The Lebanese for example have 28,8 "Mediterranean" and West-East is present too. "Mediterranean" is therefore the 2nd biggest (after WA) component in them.

Jordanians have 26,9 too, it is the biggest component in Morocco Jews with 35,4 - even the Yemenese have it at 15,7.

Do you realize that Iranians, Assyrians, Turks, Lebanese, etc are more than 50 % West-Asia ? Do you really believe these populations are half european ? Without it, they are only 20-30% euroepan, makes much more sense. Btw it's not just spaniards who have very low, Lithuanians, Polish, Scandinavians have also low levels of it. The Basques without it are already 99% European.

The biggest difference between some of this populations as West Asians and Europeans is rather not the ancestry primarily, but the time in between, because after the colonisations eventS there came both new migrations/genflow AND different selective regimes.

For example I wouldn't wonder if the remains of Çatalhöyük would be closest to the West Asian component, but also very close to Western European.

Now if looking at the remains of some of the Tells related to this movements and influences, what you see are quite often (Proto-)Mediterranoid variants, sometimes Alpinoid in between.

That's what dominated the region for quite some time, until new migrations, changing climates and selective trends changed the racial character of the regions in question, I'm speaking primarily of the "Armenoidisation". If you look at what is left of regional Mediterranids and Alpinoids f.e., they look often quite European/Euro-like. The main difference, racially, is the "Armenoidisation" and secondly new foreign influences, especially Orientalid and Mongoloid.

The Lebanese, Turks and Georgians which are not affected by this newer influences, look often quite European - racially, typologically, they are European actually.

So it is not the origin, but what happened AFTER that, which made the difference. Those going to Europe mixed with European locals and had a different development, including Nordisation and Dinarisation for example, those staying behind came under the influences mentioned for the region...

Yes, the R1a was born in Central Asia actually.

Parts of Central Asia were, that's the opinion of various authors at least and mine too, earlier inhabited by fully Europid people than most of Europe.

After all, one should keep in mind that ALL European elements had to enter the continent at some point of time, and most did so over Anatolia-Caucasus-Central Asia obviously...

Northern Europe, to point that out, was largely uninhabited during the last Ice Age, so the question always remains when and from where the new colonisers came after it. From what we know there were waves of colonisers from DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS at DIFFERENT TIMES and the position of Western European would reflect that perfectly, again, like mentioned before, with a major more ancient WA-related component INCLUDED.

Norwegians, Finnish, Lithuanians, Polish, Belarussians, etc. have also less than 4% of WA

A lot of other Europeans have practically no Eastern European...

Notice that these two components are pretty much some of the most distant ones in the European context and among the major components.

But, oh !, surpisingly Georgians they don't even cluster with europeans on genetic PCA plots, they cluster with Turks, Iranians, Armenians,etc

The question remains how old this differences are. Obviously there was relative isolation for thousands of years, after the colonisation events took place.

Now look at where the Basques or Sardinians are, because of their isolation and now add to that different developments and later influences - and you get what we have.

Human DNA today is different that when humans came out of Africa, otherwise all these autosomal differences between populations wouldn't exist, So it's irrelevant to the matter.

Genetically humans are still very closely related to each other, but nevertheless in the time IN BETWEEN many changes took place, which can't be all seen if looking at neutral percentages only, and ignoring the results of selection (!) and gendrift (!).

Similar to the case we are talking about.

By the way, that a component peaks NOW in a specific region, doesn't have to mean it originated there!

For example some regions in which NOW R1b or R1a and their variants peak, are not the cradle of that haplogroups.

Also, if you look at Western European, Eastern European, Mediterranean, you don't know for sure where they originated, but only where they peak today and not even that is always so clear, if looking at the distribution.

Probably some later expansions of different components and people carrying it eliminated original cradles of haplotypes and components visible in such admixture-results, you don't know that for sure.

To me the West Asian component of this latest K-12 run of Dienekes is indeed somewhat "less European" but not "non-European", if you get the difference.

That is like it is with blond hair and blue eyes, which is more frequent and exclusive in Europe and insofar dark hair and brown eyes could be considered "less European", since they are shared with non-Europeans to a greater extend, yet it is for sure, without any doubt and for all good reasons surely not "non-European", just less "Europe-specific".

[Ibericus]

These components appear out of Europe too and are closest related to West Asian, especially West European, which is probably, if there is something real behind it, the "colonisation event" from different directions.

Of course they appear out of Europe, but they peak in Europe, the South European component in the K=10 peaks in Sardinians and Basques, and the mediterranean in the K=12 peaks in Sardinians and North-Italians, there is nothing more european than that. Also, it's important the routes. Was this Southern-Euro imported from outside or exported outside ? The west-asian component seems clearly to have been introduced in Europe from the Caucasus/Iranian Plateau.

The Lebanese for example have 28,8 "Mediterranean" and West-East is present too. "Mediterranean" is therefore the 2nd biggest (after WA) component in them.

Jordanians have 26,9 too, it is the biggest component in Morocco Jews with 35,4 - even the Yemenese have it at 15,7.

yes, but that's the only european part they have. Otherwise, Lebanese would be 70% european, which is ridiculous. There has never been a massive presence of Europeans in the Levant. Also, the Morocco Jews have REAL european admixture, since some of them were sephardites expelled from Iberia.

The Lebanese, Turks and Georgians which are not affected by this newer influences, look often quite European, racially, typologically, they are European actually.

Caucasian you mean, not European. Genetically they don't cluster with Europeans.

The question remains how old this differences are. Obviously there was relative isolation for thousands of years, after the colonisation events took place.
Now look at where the Basques or Sardinians are, because of their isolation and now add to that different developments and later influences - and you get what we have.

That's not true, there is no isolation. See the surrounding areas of the Caucasus (Iranian plateau) have also very high levels of WA. And the surrounding areas of Basques, are genetically similar to them.

[d3cimat3d]

The one in the left looks russian admixed. Would be interesting too see how much East and North euro she has.

It's even more interesting to see the Kazakh persons results in Eurogenes:

NE Baltic: 32.4%

N Atlantic: 22.4%

S European: 11%

But, oh !, surpisingly Georgians they don't even cluster with europeans on genetic PCA plots, they cluster with Turks, Iranians, Armenians,etc :

That's because Georgians & Europeans have been in isolation after the ancient west Asian/North European split. Since then, both west Asians & North Europeans have drifted away from each other and formed their own distinct genetic groups - groups that Dodecad & Eurogenes still have trouble differentiating because they are so similar to one another.

I think we can recognize West Asian as something that is much older with Iranian origins since the areas West Asian peaks in used to be dominated by various Iranian peoples such as Scythians, Persians, etc.

Yes but most west Asian in central Asia came via. Neolithic farmers like the BMAC and after that with the Islamic expansions into the area. It's difficult to say how much west Asian the original Indo-European invaders into Asia carried, but looking at Mongolia is a good clue, since neither Neolithic farmers or Arabs could or would want to penetrate that far into barren Mongolia. Also, Mongols still have more east + west European than they do west Asian, so the Afanasevo people were largely east + west European with some west Asian.

[Ibericus]

It doesn't mean a thing. The Scandinavians have 0% Southern European. They're more isolated. But the majority of Europeans have a WA component that is larger than that. They're still Europeans.

Polish are isolated ? Spaniards isolated ? Lithuanians ? Geographically British or Irish are more isolated.

[Loki]

Otherwise, Lebanese would be 70% european, which is ridiculous.

That's not so ridiculous at all, many Lebanese could pass for Southern Europeans. 70% is a low figure.

There has never been a massive presence of Europeans in the Levant.

Irrelevant, because Indo-Europeans themselves (or their forebears) migrated from Asia into Europe anyway. So we are talking about progenitors of Europeans, not necessarily modern Europeans who have settled there.

[Ibericus]

That's because Georgians & Europeans have been in isolation after the ancient west Asian/North European split. Since then, both west Asians & North Europeans have drifted away from each other and formed their own distinct genetic groups - groups that Dodecad & Eurogenes still have trouble differentiating because they are so similar to one another.

So ? You are telling me the reason we are genetically different, but it's not the point, Africans are also different because of thousands of years of isolation. The point is that difference, and why West-Asia can't be considered as European.