South Slav members PCA

[Kaspias]

Maybe it's just noise, but you have one of the highest combined percentages of the East_Asian, Siberian, Amerindian, and Oceanian components:

You can also add Balkan Turks:

Kaspias(balkan_turk/pomak),15.55,20.37,12.29,14.91,21.00,3.25,2.06,1.16,7.57,0.70,0.53,0,0.61
Kaspias_dad(balkan_turk),16.93,13.93,13.52,15.43,19.90,2.80,4.65,1.01,9.90,0.58,0.40,0.39,0.56
Kaspias_mom_phased(pomak),13.81,28.19,13.21,14.30,24.01,2.99,0,0,3.49,0,0,0,0
Kaspias_cousin(balkan_turk),17.97,15.09,16.47,14.51,19.29,4.72,3.36,1.44,6.13,0.75,0,0.25,0
Kayra(balkan_turk/bosniak),25.96,18.75,13.86,12.63,15.78,2.88,1.32,3.22,5.37,0,0.23,0,0
Deniz_mother(balkan_turk),20.45,22.68,13.98,14.7,16.89,3.43,0.77,2.68,2.91,0.51,0,1,0
Deniz_father(balkan_turk),14.22,25.08,14.69,16.55,20.91,1.36,0,0,5.15,0,0.83,0,1.2
Deniz_grandpa(balkan_turk),21.22,22.84,14.09,12.95,19.33,1.04,2.25,2.56,2.24,0.25,0.13,0,1.09
Deniz(balkan_turk),17.96,24,13.09,15.85,20.15,2.49,0.51,0,4.66,0,0,1.29,0
Karakartal(balkan_turk),15.53,15.92,15.36,17.97,23.45,4.04,1.20,0.82,4.08,0.44,1.20,0,0
Thracian(balkan_turk),19.94,16.83,13.89,16.36,21.68,3.87,3.67,0,3.02,0.39,0.34,0,0
migrec(balkan_turk),14.85,21.06,18.04,21.16,15.96,1.45,0.74,2.15,3.97,0,0.62,0,0
Meric(balkan_turk),13.43,18.24,10.68,16.99,21.38,1.88,1.88,3.00,10.03,1.41,0,0,1.09
Altay(balkan_turk),15.53,15.42,14.46,15.71,22.48,2.63,2.89,1.18,7.69,0.54,0.22,0,1.25

[Proto-Shaman]

try github.io

[MandM]

These are definitely wrong, since they are too different from the original.
I think people shouldn't really impute, because it doesn't always add value, since it tries to predict the values for the missing SNPs from the existing data. And as my own testing proved, the difference between the test with the lowest count of SNPs (55k with LivingDNA) and the highest count (AncestryDNA with 172k) proved to be minimal. The biggest difference was against MyHeritage, but for each component, the values didn't oscillate for more than 1-2% in either direction. So whatever company you test with, the data won't be as different from a test with full SNP count for Eurogenes or Dodecad calculators.

The above imputed one is certainly wrong, since for some components it oscillates with 5%.

I belive the one she uses are wrong, that one was input and gave me some exotic i dont realy have, this one a gave i belive is ok ots my ftdna, se3ms i have so many and no order witch one is witch

[Ion Basescul]

I belive the one she uses are wrong, that one was input and gave me some exotic i dont realy have, this one a gave i belive is ok ots my ftdna, se3ms i have so many and no order witch one is witch

Oh I see, I thought the below was the original

20.84,29.18,19.78,9.81,14.96,2.36,1.31,0,0.42,0.83 ,0.51,0,0

Tell Stearsolina to update your values in the K13 list, because everyone thinks that the above are the original.

[MandM]

Oh I see, I thought the below was the original

20.84,29.18,19.78,9.81,14.96,2.36,1.31,0,0.42,0.83 ,0.51,0,0

Tell Stearsolina to update your values in the K13 list, because everyone thinks that the above are the original.

No worrys! Its not like you could have known, i will tell here to put in the latest one

[knez01]

These are definitely wrong, since they are too different from the original.
I think people shouldn't really impute, because it doesn't always add value, since it tries to predict the values for the missing SNPs from the existing data. And as my own testing proved, the difference between the test with the lowest count of SNPs (55k with LivingDNA) and the highest count (AncestryDNA with 172k) proved to be minimal. The biggest difference was against MyHeritage, but for each component, the values didn't oscillate for more than 1-2% in either direction. So whatever company you test with, the data won't be as different from a test with full SNP count for Eurogenes or Dodecad calculators.

The above imputed one is certainly wrong, since for some components it oscillates with 5%.

The reason his imputation is not as accurate is because he used the DNAgenics imputation service, not the DNA.land.

[Ion Basescul]

The reason his imputation is not as accurate is because he used the DNAgenics imputation service, not the DNA.land.

Doesn't matter, it's still a prediction. The original is the best, until someone tests with a test that actually looks at more SNPs, even if the imputed one might make more sense or put you closer to your native population. It can and likely is a false positive. I'd advise you to also stick to the original raw data.

[knez01]

Doesn't matter, it's still a prediction. The original is the best, until someone tests with a test that actually looks at more SNPs, even if the imputed one might make more sense or put you closer to your native population. It can and likely is a false positive. I'd advise you to also stick to the original raw data.

I see where u are coming from but i disagree, I have a lot of samples of high snp original data and imputed low snp data and they are identical, imputation is overall mathematically accurate with little noise which is easily detectable. In my experience i only use imputed v5 after careful examination of it. Each to his own i guess!

[TheMaestro]

Maybe it's just noise, but you have one of the highest combined percentages of the East_Asian, Siberian, Amerindian, and Oceanian components:

So I really plot with Romanians, my magyar grandpa rn.

[CommonSense]

Terminator isn't 1/4 Croatian, he's 1/8 Jewish (almost certainly) and the rest of his ancestry is Serbian. Funnily enough, without him our cluster would be smaller by 1/5