Croatian Eurogenes results

[Pribislav]

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.

Yes, I know.

Your Krajina_Serb 24.71, 31.76, 16.79 etc. is only for Serbs from Croatia without Bosanska Krajina right?

Btw I got 3 new Krajina Serb results (with kits), one is from Lika (Marinko Vukovojac), one is from Kordun or Gorski Kotar (Milan Mamula), and one from East Slavonia (Branko Arsenić).
On SDP Mamula Serbs from Kordun are tested as I2-PH908, and those from Gorski Kotar as I2-Z17855.
Vukovojac is J2b1-M205.

[Jana]

Serbia Serb average need to be blended with academic BG averages to make it more realistic.

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
+
Serbian_Belgrade_academic,24.42,28.12,17.06,9.06,1 7.09,1.48,0.45,0.36,0.73,0.56,0.54,0.1,0.04

Than divide by 2

[Jana]

I will start collecting Croatian kits from ged and 23andme and emailing people so I can know their exact ancestry. Than I can add those kits to these few academics and make good averages.
Each kit will be added only after ancestry is confirmed, I will be doing no speculation, want to do it right.

[Mvakis]

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.

Does Krajina one include HungryLion and his kits? Because he has no place in it nor can any kits sent from him be trusted.

[MoroLP]

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.

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.

These are my main points:

1) I don't give a damn if Serbs will never do the same. If we know that some average is based on only one sample or is biased then we can ignore / remove from the source to get most accurate results for an analysis. Simple as that.

2) I didn't say that national average should include all the minorities and it is not necessary because we are dealing with ethno-nationalistic countries which dominant ethnic group makes the majority of population

3) Yes, the geographical proximity is excellent argument, and the fact there are not many Bosnian Croats which anyway are similar to Southern Croats, however, in terminological approach is problematic. Genetic studies on the Croats are primarily and mainly focused on Croatia, not the diaspora, and when someone thinks about Croatian average then it presumes that the average based only on Croatia and not other countries. Bosnian Croats are a regional population which belongs to the population of another country. I know that Zagreb and possibly other samples are not from specific Croatian region.

4) Exactly because of mixed and historically complex regions such as Istria we need accurate national and regional averages to trace regional ancestry. If I say that samples are ranging from Croatian to Serbian to Italian is because, as first, many villages really had different ethnic immigrants, as second, these averages are not made in a reliable manner and this thread as well proves it. Also the amount of "fun" depends on that, the more inaccurate averages the more fun, but nobody sane wants fun over accuracy and objectivity to trace ancestry.

5) If you want to have one Croatian average which will include all Croatian samples nevertheless the country, and are included only BiH Croats, fine, but then we have three groups of samples which are "southern" and similar (BiH, Split, Zagreb Croats) against only few samples which are "northern" (Zagreb, Kaykavian Croats). If want, for now, to make Croatian "more average" then we need to remove some samples and that should be of BiH Croats. So, as said, or we have one average which will include all samples or have two averages one of which will include diaspora.

6) I'm not that fond to share "sources" of my samples for now, especially not if the averages are not made in a reliable manner and don't have other samples, but could post some results. Will calculate now my father's result with new averages as already posted some on Forum.hr

[Jana]

These are my main points:

1) I don't give a damn if Serbs will never do the same. If we know that some average is based on only one sample or is biased then we can ignore / remove from the source to get most accurate results for an analysis. Simple as that.

2) I didn't say that national average should include all the minorities and it is not necessary because we are dealing with ethno-nationalistic countries which dominant ethnic group makes the majority of population

3) Yes, the geographical proximity is excellent argument, and the fact there are not many Bosnian Croats which anyway are similar to Southern Croats, however, in terminological approach is problematic. Genetic studies on the Croats are primarily and mainly focused on Croatia, not the diaspora, and when someone thinks about Croatian average then it presumes that the average based only on Croatia and not other countries. Bosnian Croats are a regional population which belongs to the population of another country. I know that Zagreb and possibly other samples are not from specific Croatian region.

4) Exactly because of mixed and historically complex regions such as Istria we need accurate national and regional averages to trace regional ancestry. If I say that samples are ranging from Croatian to Serbian to Italian is because, as first, many villages really had different ethnic immigrants, as second, these averages are not made in a reliable manner and this thread as well proves it. Also the amount of "fun" depends on that, the more inaccurate averages the more fun, but nobody sane wants fun over accuracy and objectivity to trace ancestry.

5) If you want to have one Croatian average which will include all Croatian samples nevertheless the country, and are included only BiH Croats, fine, but then we have three groups of samples which are "southern" and similar (BiH, Split, Zagreb Croats) against only few samples which are "northern" (Zagreb, Kaykavian Croats). If want, for now, to make Croatian "more average" then we need to remove some samples and that should be of BiH Croats. So, as said, or we have one average which will include all samples or have two averages one of which will include diaspora.

6) I'm not that fond to share "sources" of my samples for now, especially not if the averages are not made in a reliable manner and don't have other samples, but could post some results. Will calculate now my father's result with new averages as already posted some on Forum.hr

Look, I need help. I already started to message my connections on 23andme and will mail matches I find on gedmatch and conclude are Croats.
Most likely vast majority will not answer and I will get few replies.

So please do the same with your matches if it's possible.

Lastly, I don't see point if some people are not willing to share their kit results, they are not for me, but for all of us and to improve our averages.
I don't have any kits and every one we get with confirmed ancestry is a big step forward.

Compared to what Serbs or Moldovans have we have nothing.

I can make Croat_Croatia average out of Zagreb, Split and Kajkavian samples. Not that there will be any significant difference.
In fact, Split samples are more southern than those from BiH.

[Jana]

Yeah, can try to get some Eurogenes K13 from Croatian FTDNA project as well. I saw some posted there already.

[MoroLP]

So please do the same with your matches if it's possible...

I can make Croat_Croatia average out of Zagreb, Split and Kajkavian samples. Not that there will be any significant difference.

Will do the same these days and then will send them via PM... it doesn't matter if the difference is minimal as even then is important to have an average with clear borders.

[Jana]

Will do the same these days and then will send them via PM... it doesn't matter if the difference is minimal as even then is important to have an average with clear borders.

Alright, thanks

[CommonSense]

Yes, I know.

Your Krajina_Serb 24.71, 31.76, 16.79 etc. is only for Serbs from Croatia without Bosanska Krajina right?

Btw I got 3 new Krajina Serb results (with kits), one is from Lika (Marinko Vukovojac), one is from Kordun or Gorski Kotar (Milan Mamula), and one from East Slavonia (Branko Arsenić).
On SDP Mamula Serbs from Kordun are tested as I2-PH908, and those from Gorski Kotar as I2-Z17855.
Vukovojac is J2b1-M205.

It's unlikely he's from East Slavonia. I match him and have access to his family tree, but half of it is private. Anyway, his maternal grandfather is from the village Ćelije near Lajkovac, while the grandmother has an odd surname (possibly Russian or some other foreigner).



The surname Arsenić also exists in several villages in western Serbia, as well as two other surnames he listed (i guess they're from his paternal side [Trgovčević, Josipović]).

What's the point in drawing conclusions based on surnames alone? Pretty sure you never saw the family tree of any of the people you posted.