Croatian Eurogenes results

[Jana]

It is not only. All these political and ethnic borders are made up and changed, but claiming one population group to another population average only due to ethnic identity which as such is controversial and contested for all of three of them, we should be objective and neutral. As a Croat I don't expect to have in Croatian average Croats from BiH when they should be in Bosnian average. If the Bosnian average is made of only one costitutional group then it doesn't represent the country BiH nor the Bosnian region.

That's why there are regional averages. BiH Croats are Croats like any other and should be included in overall Croat average, it's ethnic average not country related one.
Just like Csango and Szekely are included in Hungarian average.

Most people don't have interest in some Bosnian average as it means nothing, it's just a country and not an ethnic group.
All 3 people in BiH are similar anyway.

Serb new average is made of Serbs from many regions/countries also, with western Serbs dominating.

[Pribislav]

This is how Serb_Bosnia scores btw, it's closer to Croats than to other Serb averages

Distance to: Serbian_Bosnia

0.89679290 South_Croat_average
0.95634068 Croat_Bosnia
1.15990840 Croat_Split
1.34892086 Croatia_average_academic
1.83059758 Bosniak_new_average
2.09002093 Croat_Herzegovina
2.31010898 Bosniak_Sarajevo_academic
2.66100310 Szekely_Hungarian
2.97378336 Romanian_North_Moldova_Bukovina
3.02765379 South_Croat_Morlach_Cluster
3.04522464 Serbian_new
3.15672100 Moldova_North
3.39412544 Serb_Croatia
4.17004646 Croat_Zagreb
4.23139900 South_Croat_Slavic_Cluster
4.73693862 Moldavian
4.76462354 Romanian_Botosani
4.99141137 Bosniak_Tuzla
5.02121873 Csango_Gymes
5.33755445 Croatian_new
5.34777874 HungarianTA
5.56654940 Slovenian
5.69452259 Bulgarian_Dupnitsa
5.80700331 Serbian_Belgrade_academic
5.88880187 Romania_Moldavia_North

It's expected to be close to Bosniaks and BiH Croats though, that's natural.

I have some results of Serbs from Bosnia.

Western Bosnia 20200317_233946.jpg

Western Bosnia 20200319_113022.jpg

Western Bosnia 20200402_115518.jpg

Western-eastern Bosnia mix 20200319_080856.jpg

Northeastern Bosnia 20200319_111721.jpg

And few others, but can't found currently.

[MoroLP]

I think adding Kajkavian/NW average to this one (Zagreb, Split; BiH) will make it more realistic.
Because all these are southern Croat, Zagreb average is pretty similar to them too and lot of people there have southern roots.

It would be less Southern Croatian if excluded samples who are not from Croatia. If you wish, make separate Croatian averages, one for Croatia while the other with diaspora. That is only realistic and useful to trace regional origin for ind. samples.

[Jana]

It would be less Southern Croatian if excluded samples who are not from Croatia. If you wish, make a separate Croatian averages, one for Croatia while the other with diaspora. That is only realistic and useful to trace regional origin for ind. samples.

We need averages from places like Slavonia, Istria, Kvarner, Međimurje too.
So many regions are undersampled.

[Jana]

It would be less Southern Croatian if excluded samples who are not from Croatia. If you wish, make a separate Croatian averages, one for Croatia while the other with diaspora. That is only realistic and useful to trace regional origin for ind. samples.

Do you mean Croatia average should be based on Zagreb, Split and Kajkavian?
Croat_Bosnia on Vahaduo already includes both Bosnia and Herzegovina, so it's good average for BiH Croats put togheder.

[MoroLP]

That's why there are regional averages. BiH Croats are Croats like any other and should be included in overall Croat average, it's ethnic average not country related one.
Just like Csango and Szekely are included in Hungarian average.

Most people don't have interest in some Bosnian average as it means nothing, it's just a country and not an ethnic group.
All 3 people in BiH are similar anyway.

Serb new average is made of Serbs from many regions/countries also, with western Serbs dominating.

Ethnicity is only making a confusion if we know how the identities spread and to trace a historical origin we should stick to regions. For a reason Serbs in Croatia and BiH are more northern shifted than Serbs in Serbia and if they dominate the Serbian average then that isn't realistic and reliable for comparisions neither from genetical neither from demographical viewpoint... that's the point about BiH, the three groups are all too similar and should make the Bosnian average which is composed of their averages. Croatian_Croatia and Serbian_Serbia national average are or northern or southern from it, they are different, at least they should be.

[MoroLP]

Do you mean Croatia average should be based on Zagreb, Split and Kajkavian?
Croat_Bosnia on Vahaduo already includes both Bosnia and Herzegovina, so it's good average for BiH Croats put togheder.

Yes, we should have one Croatian average based on only samples from Croatia and second including the separate BiH Croat average... in the Croatian DNA Project & FTDNA probably can be found those from other regions... I already have three Istrian samples, then should be that Italian shifted guy, then there exist few with Y-DNA results who possibly done auDNA testing etc. What I saw from mine and other results, Istria is a mess, going from pro-Croatian and Serbian to Italian. I don't see what value we get from that region, but oh well, it's part of Western Croatia.

[Jana]

Yes, we should have one Croatian average based on only samples from Croatia and second including the separate BiH average... in the Croatian DNA Project & FTDNA probably can be found those from other regions.

I still see no point as Serbs will never do the same. For example it makes sense for Croatian Serbs to be grouped with other Serbs, not with Croats of Croatia.
Because than we can include all minorities in every country.

Dalmatia and Herzegovina are one unit in climate, geography, ethnography for example.
Bosnian Posavina is same as Slavonian Posavina.

Does it make sense to you to group Croat from for example Dubrovnik with one from Međimurje, but exclude Croat from Herzegovina 10 km from that town?

Average from Zagreb is very similar to one from Herzegovina for example, same Baltic score just ZG has higher North Atlantic.
You are aware how many people from Croatia proper are of recent or less recent BiH origin, right? Probably good part of samples given in Zagreb or Split are not pure Croats from Croatia.

So I see no sense in separate averages as there really is no big difference. Only NW Croats are different for now.

[Jana]

Yes, we should have one Croatian average based on only samples from Croatia and second including the separate BiH average... in the Croatian DNA Project & FTDNA probably can be found those from other regions... I already have three Istrian samples, then should be that Italian shifted guy, then there exist few with Y-DNA results who possibly done auDNA testing etc. What I saw from mine and other results, Istria is a mess.

It would be cool to have Istrian samples, please make thread about those you have, we are curious about them!
Well, not suprised Istria is historically very mixed. It's visible in linguistics too.

[Dušan]

I have some results of Serbs from Bosnia.

Western Bosnia 20200317_233946.jpg

Western Bosnia 20200319_113022.jpg

Western Bosnia 20200402_115518.jpg

Western-eastern Bosnia mix 20200319_080856.jpg

Northeastern Bosnia 20200319_111721.jpg

And few others, but can't found currently.

These are real Serbian average, based on a lot more samples than previous Serbian_new and Serb_Croatia.

Krajina_Serb_average,24.71,31.76,16.79,8.22,14.62, 1.55,0.43,0.22,0.81,0.56,0.38,0.03,0.03
Serbia_Serb_average,24.88,30.08,16.50,8.73,16.21,1 .24,0.66,0.28,0.54,0.45,0.31,0.05,0.06

I asked Lukasz to insert it into updated K13 calculator.
He still didn't do it.