0


Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 2,403/438 Given: 1,006/399 |
Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 1,668/68 Given: 877/44 |
Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 2,785/34 Given: 9/0 |
Mycenaeans (sadly their kits have been deleted):
I9006
Baloch 2.89
Caucasian 45.1
NE-Euro 10.44
American 0.31
Mediterranean 31.21
SW-Asian 9.97
San 0.07
I9010
Caucasian 35.14
NE-Euro 11.11
Mediterranean 43
SW-Asian 10.75
I9033
Baloch 4.34
Caucasian 37.45
NE-Euro 16.58
Mediterranean 35.17
SW-Asian 6.15
W-African 0.31
I9041
Baloch 2.66
Caucasian 39.9
NE-Euro 13.12
Mediterranean 34.44
SW-Asian 9.88
Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 1,055/10 Given: 1,743/105 |
Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 15,693/315 Given: 8,913/358 |
I wanna see the Turkmenistan_IA sample from Damgaard et al.
Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 1,055/10 Given: 1,743/105 |
Which populations were you expecting to be in the top 20?
And the Jewish populations listed all have some Southern European in them. Ashkenazim are 35-55% European on average, and most of it comes from Southern Europe. I don't think it's that bizarre that Jewish populations are some of the closest to the Neolithic Greek sample, considering the distances are quite far.
Thumbs Up/Down |
Received: 685/9 Given: 630/4 |
I was expecting mainland/island Greek populations to come up first, like Greek_Central, Greek_Thessaly, etc
It is bizarre because it isn't like this a population lost to history. Greeks have been in the peninsula for thousands of years. Of course they have changed but I thought the continuity would be stronger, especially since foreign populations are coming up first
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Bookmarks