0


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 52,620/1,011 Given: 43,526/788 |
I mean in my G25 calc. Your model has no west Euro proxy.
Target: Stearsolina_scaled
Distance: 1.6472% / 0.01647246
53.4 (Balto-)SlavicEU_Krakauer_Berg_MA_KRA001
15.4 Balkan:BGR_IA_I5769
14.0 Graeco-Roman:ITA_Rome_Imperial_RMPR111
8.8 Celtic_likeEU_Lech_EBA_AITI_78
6.2 (Balto-)Slavic:HUN_Avar_Szolad_Av2
1.4 Turkic:TUR_Ottoman_MA2195
0.8 Graeco-Roman:ITA_Rome_Imperial_RMPR76
And I think my calculator has serious flaws.


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 52,620/1,011 Given: 43,526/788 |



| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 19,314/97 Given: 15,034/51 |


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 3,467/7 Given: 1,535/1 |
I'm not sure, the radiocarbon datings should be available in the supplementary data of the study.
The mena samples were burried in richer graves than the locals, so maybe they didn't mix because of a class difference. This could've been a phenomenon specific for Viminacium only.


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 8,444/56 Given: 8,697/5 |
Which indicates that these two samples - that according to the PCA posted farther up are almost at the opposite ends of the spektrum - are applicable references for modelling old Balkan, even if hardly anyone gets modelled with CRO IA in G25. For whatever reason. And why this seems different in K13, remains a conundrum.
Target: rothaer_scaled
Distance: 1.0091% / 0.01009085
39.8 (Balto-)Slavic
39.0 Germanic
19.2 Celtic-like
1.8 Graeco-Roman
0.2 Finnic-like



| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 19,314/97 Given: 15,034/51 |


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 52,620/1,011 Given: 43,526/788 |



| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 19,314/97 Given: 15,034/51 |


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 3,467/7 Given: 1,535/1 |


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 52,620/1,011 Given: 43,526/788 |
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Bookmarks