0
My point is I already did everything you said we should do, there is no reason to somehow think my Apulian or French sample is not "northern" enough, which is what you seem to have been impliying.Originally Posted by Samnium
What's the point in dealing with fake components? I don't know what "east med" actually is while I can point at the Near Eastern DNA through actual ancient samples that simply didn't exist in Latium, Tuscany in the iron age and only existed up to 10% in Bronze Age Sicily, on the other hand all Southern Italians today have more of it and I choose the Apulian sample with least Near Eastern DNA, so again why are so skeptic?Well Eurogenes can be kind of outdated, and there are blurry component, but what you need to understand is that what Tuscans and Emilians are East Med shifted compared to other Northern Italians. Modeling someone that's half "apulian" (we can take that) and half Northern French would make him plotting along Lombardy, Piemonte, Veneto rather than Emilia. "Northern" ratios don't match at all.
Look we can dispute samples and their provenance all day, but their general layout and pattern is clear and Piedmont and Liguria have that kind of Near Eastern DNA, Lombardy, Trentino, Veneto, Aosta, "Northeast", Bergamo(totally on top of the alps!) don't have it to same extent(less than 3%).That's a common oracle in Eurogenes for Northern Italians, because yes they do have some East Med ancestry inherited mainly from Roman Imperial era, also you don't seem to understand that there are heavy differences in Northern Italy depending if it's the plain or an alpine area... You can't use Alpine areas as a benchmark for all Northern Italy, because they are very atypical genetically.
As they should given we are in the same ball park of Near Eastern DNA. French DNA doesn't eliminate the Near Eastern DNA.You're saying idiocies anyway, half Portuguese Italian half Central Greek (Apulian) model plot in Tuscany/Northern Tuscany, half French half Central Greece would plot in Emilia that's very Tuscan shifted ? That's not logical at all.
The value I had before:
49% ENF, 10.5% Near Eastern, 32.5% Steppe and 8% extra WHG
Are directly comparable to Ligurian(although the Ligurian sample is just one and has weird Berber-like admixture, so whatever):
49.5% ENF, 13% Near Eastern+Berber, 29% Steppe and 8.5% WHG
And Piedmont:
55% ENF, 8.5% Near Eastern, 32% Steppe and 4.5% WHG
Tuscany is not that far:
54% ENF, 13% Near Eastern, 29% Steppe and 3% WHG
While on the other hand, Veneto looks like this:
57% ENF, 2.5% Near Eastern, 33% Steppe and 7.5% WHG
And Trentino like this:
57% ENF, 36% Steppe and 7% WHG
Are all those sample from Italy invalid? Should we have the family history of all the peolpe there back to the late antique period? Should we arbitrarily exclude some samples? Honestly we are running in circles just because you are really stubborn about technicalities and non-issues.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks