# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics >  K12a admixture calculator

## Kardu

Has anybody tried this one yet? :) http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/12...t-al-2011.html

Here are my results:


0.85% Mediterranean
0.70% Far_Asian
0.00% Siberian
10.16% North_European
0.00% South_Asian
0.00% West_African
69.09% Caucasus
11.61% Gedrosia
0.00% East_African
7.23% Southwest_Asian
0.35% Southeast_Asian
0.00% Northwest_African

Seems more or less in accordance with the other tests

----------


## Knovas

Yes I did, and I'm absolutely disappointed with such admixture proportions. Just to be quick:

- The Caucasus and Gedrosia are both exagerated in all Southern Europe, and completely underestimated in the North. Just check the Greek average...they are about to be not European LOL.

- Culmination: Dodecad v4 will be based on this. I hope this will get refined...if not, it's time to go.


Here are mine, althought I desagree of course:

56.84% Mediterranean
25.48% North European
6.97% Caucasus
3.88% Southwest Asian
2.41% Gedrosia
2.14% Northwest African
1.79% South Asian
0.43% East African
0.02% Southeast Asian
0.02% West African
0.01% Siberian
0.00% Far Asian

----------


## Kardu

Interesting :)

Yes, the Caucasus component seems to be exaggerated even in my case :) I've never got such a high percentage before and my Mediterranean is practically gone...

----------


## Knovas

Well, what you get makes much sense. It seems like with the new samples he's still experimenting...it's the only thing I can think to understand it.

----------


## Kardu

Yes, that could be the reason..
And now my results are more in accordance with Behar's Georgians'

2,1% Mediterranean
14,3% North_European
73,4% Caucasus
7,8% Gedrosia
0,7% Southwest_Asian

----------


## Wilhelm

Strange this run. Germanics, like the Dutch, Scandinavians or Birtish have about 40% of mediterranean, it has never been that high, I suspect the label is wrong, it is more like an Atlantic/Southwest component, since it peaks in Basques at 70%. As for the Gedrosian component, it is higher in northerns european than in Southern Europeans.

----------


## Maciamo

The new Gedrosian component has a European peak in Northwest Europe (10% in Orcadians, 9% in Irish, 7.5% in British, 8% in Dutch, 7% in Basques...) which seems to correlate with the (North-)West European component of the K=10 admixtures. Balto-Slavic people almost completely lack it though. This makes me wonder if part of this Gedrosian component does not actually belong to a Proto-Indo-European source (linked to R1b, not R1a) from the Northwest Caucasus region.

The Caucasians have an equivalent percentage of Gedrosian as the one found in Northwest Europeans : 15% in the Kumyks (who have 20% of R1b, the 2nd highest in the Caucasus region after the Armenians), 11% in the Armenians (30% of R1b), 10% in the Adygeis, 8.5% in Abhkasians and Balkars (all three within the territory of Maykop Culture), 8% in the Georgians...

I don't see how genes from Balochistan could have ended up in Northwest Europe. The Caucasus is far more likely. Besides, the Euro7 calculator already showed a similar peak in Northwest Europe for the Caucasus component (max. 9% in Argyll Scots).

----------


## Knovas

This run makes no sense to me. Basically, I find plain impossible that Iberians could have more Caucasus + Gedrosian than Northern Europeans. Geography does not help to find such thing, all logic says it must be the opposite.

As I said, if the v4 will be based on this, there are several things to fix.

----------


## Wilhelm

> This run makes no sense to me. Basically, I find plain impossible that Iberians could have more Caucasus + Gedrosian than Northern Europeans. Geography does not help to find such thing, all logic says it must be the opposite.
> 
> As I said, if the v4 will be based on this, there are several things to fix.


Yes it's strange, but in some cases the difference is not that big, for example Germans have 7.8 caucasis + 4.4 gedrosian, similar to Spaniards 7.9 + 4.9

----------


## Knovas

Anyways, it's still wrong. It would be more reasonable to find higher Southwest Asian and Northwest African between Iberians in comparison with Northern Europeans, but having much lower Caucasus + Gedrosian. That point agrees with the first K=10, showing clearly higher West Asian/Caucasian admixture in Northern Euros. Other runs as well showed that there's more Asian influence in Northern Europe than in Iberia, which is a known fact.

----------


## Wilhelm

Look at the map of component, one can see that mediterranean is the most European component, while Northern-European in reality is more like a Northaest Euro or Balto-Slavic (peaks in Lithuanians-Finns)

----------


## Knovas

It's really confusing. Basques seem to be the only Southern European population getting something more or less reasonable. As I pointed above, one can check Greeks or Southern Italians, and they look no way European.

Obviously many things don't make any sense here.

----------


## Knovas

And by the way, I see apreciable discrepancies between the K12a spreadsheet and the Calculator results. For example, my East African disappeared and the South Asian increased. Specially this one is quite high in me in comparison with other Iberians, it seems to compensate the lower Gedrosia and Caucasus. Well, no comments xd

----------


## Kardu

Yes, I've noticed minor differences between the spreadsheet and my own calculations:) although the general picture is still the same

----------


## Dorianfinder

> Yes I did, and I'm absolutely disappointed with such admixture proportions. Just to be quick:
> 
> - The Caucasus and Gedrosia are both exagerated in all Southern Europe, and completely underestimated in the North. Just check the Greek average...they are about to be not European LOL.
> 
> - Culmination: Dodecad v4 will be based on this. I hope this will get refined...if not, it's time to go.
> 
> 
> Here are mine, althought I desagree of course:
> 
> ...


Here are my K12a results. The first time I've ever had any West African admixture, and it is appreciably high. Probably a remnant of some African component found throughout the Middle-East. This 'West' African is found at similar frequencies among the Bedouin (3.6%), Palestinian (2.7%), Sindhi (2.5%), Brahui in Balochistan (2.1%), Iranian (2.0%) and Syrian (2.0%) population. My opinion is that it is ancient out-of-Africa admixture still floating around in Southwest/South Asia. Another possibility may be it is not West African but due to a back migration from Southern Asian, and has been lumped together with West African due to its successful spread among West Africans, possibly carried by Indo-Arabo-Iranian admixtured individuals who traversed the Sahara and mixed with Central African populations many moons ago. 

33.59% North_European 
30.48% Mediterranean 
20.95% Caucasus 
6.14% Southwest_Asian 
5.13% Gedrosia 
1.94% West_African 
0.77% Northwest_African 
0.28% South_Asian 
0.27% East_African 
0.19% Far_Asian 
0.19% Southeast_Asian 
0.06% Siberian

----------


## Knovas

Your West African would probably partly disappear in the spreadsheet Dorian, as for example my East African is absent there. By the way, you are very different form the Greek average, so I guess you are not fully Greek, ¿right?. Also, ¿what do you think about the population averages (specially Greeks and Southern Italians)? It looks very rare to me.

----------


## Wilhelm

> Here are my K12a results. The first time I've ever had any West African admixture, and it is appreciably high. Probably a remnant of some African component found throughout the Middle-East. This 'West' African is found at similar frequencies among the Bedouin (3.6%), Palestinian (2.7%), Sindhi (2.5%), Brahui in Balochistan (2.1%), Iranian (2.0%) and Syrian (2.0%) population. My opinion is that it is ancient out-of-Africa admixture still floating around in Southwest/South Asia. Another possibility may be it is not West African but due to a back migration from Southern Asian, and has been lumped together with West African due to its successful spread among West Africans, possibly carried by Indo-Arabo-Iranian admixtured individuals who traversed the Sahara and mixed with Central African populations many moons ago. 
> 
> 33.59% North_European 
> 30.48% Mediterranean 
> 20.95% Caucasus 
> 6.14% Southwest_Asian 
> 5.13% Gedrosia 
> 1.94% West_African 
> 0.77% Northwest_African 
> ...


Are you full greek ? Doing a Oracle of your resuslts, the greeks are not even in top10, and by a large margin :

[1,] "Romanians" "8.4332" 
[2,] "Bulgarian_D" "9.2787" 
[3,] "Bulgarians_Y" "9.926" 
[4,] "N_Italian_D" "14.3159"
[5,] "Hungarians" "16.189" 
[6,] "O_Italian_D" "17.0714"
[7,] "TSI25" "18.2355"
[8,] "Tuscan" "18.3566"
[9,] "North_Italian" "18.3934"
[10,] "French" "19.8718"

----------


## Knovas

If Dorian has substantial Aromanian ancestors the picture is surely very different from the main Greeks. I know a Vlach Aromanian girl (and have seen many photos of her family), and she has nothing to do in phisical appearence with the main Greeks, which is the same pattern I observed in the others. Yes, quite blond hair and light eyes.

If he is ethnic Greek and I'm right in my Aromanian hypothesis origin, what the Dodecad Oracle shows makes sense as most Aromanians seem to be Balkanic descent, with substantial Northeast Eurtopean influece (most likely fit). That could be the reason why they often look much lighter than the average Greeks.

Let's see xd

----------


## Dorianfinder

> Your West African would probably partly disappear in the spreadsheet Dorian, as for example my East African is absent there. By the way, you are very different form the Greek average, so I guess you are not fully Greek, ¿right?. Also, ¿what do you think about the population averages (specially Greeks and Southern Italians)? It looks very rare to me.





> If Dorian has substantial Aromanian ancestors the picture is surely very different from the main Greeks. I know a Vlach Aromanian girl (and have seen many photos of her family), and she has nothing to do in phisical appearence with the main Greeks, which is the same pattern I observed in the others. Yes, quite blond hair and light eyes.
> 
> If he is ethnic Greek and I'm right in my Aromanian hypothesis origin, what the Dodecad Oracle shows makes sense as most Aromanians seem to be Balkanic descent, with substantial Northeast Eurtopean influece (most likely fit). That could be the reason why they often look much lighter than the average Greeks.
> 
> Let's see xd


My parents are both fully Greek. My mother's family originated from Sfakia on Crete and my father's family are from Milos. Depending where in Greece you sample, I should think that one will find varying amounts of North European and Caucasus but generally they amount to between 50-55% when added together. The Mediterranean component remains relatively constant at approximately 30% for Greeks. 

I believe that the Greek dodecad sample is not representative of all traditional Greek families. The same is probably true for Southern Italians. I'm not complaining though as I understand the challenges in mapping the regions admixture components. Not easy!

----------


## Knovas

Very interesting Dorian, and surprising! You fit much better in the Balkans than in Greece, and according to the present data the most likely argument for me was what I posted. No need to say there's no Aromanian Vlach joining the projects, so their proportions are still unknown...they could even be more Northern European than expected.

Now of course, new questions appear in regards for the main people inhabiting the near isles in Greece, but also it's evident that mainland Greeks aren't probably well represented with the present samples. Yes, not easy, too bad we'll have to wait a long time to know more about this.

----------


## Knovas

> Interesting :)
> 
> Yes, the Caucasus component seems to be exaggerated even in my case :) I've never got such a high percentage before and my Mediterranean is practically gone...


After doing some observations, I think this Caucasus now incorporates an apreciable amount of the previous Mediterranean admixture in the v3 run. That would explain why you get almost no Mediterranean now (increasing your Caucasus), and why I get more than 6% Caucasus being 0% West Asian before.

The Sardinian average is quite ilustrative considering their high Caucasus. A well known population for the huge Mediterranean/Southern Euro percents. I personally see the fit clearly.




> Look at the map of component, *one can see that mediterranean is the most European component*, while Northern-European in reality is more like a Northaest Euro or Balto-Slavic (peaks in Lithuanians-Finns)


This is probably right as attested by the Fst distances, and also would explain with the previous comment how Southern Europeans look, generally, much less European than their Northern neighbours in the spreadsheet.

----------


## Alan

As usual some people make false statements by taking some component names too literally. Before crying around some people should read Dienekes statements and I myself made a comment about it on Dodecad blog.

Here the comment to read



> if you look at "fst" you will see that Gedrosia and Caucasus/North European are very similar (probably the same ancestor) I believe that "Gedrosia" represents a Caucasian Gene flow into South-Central Asia. I would generally not take "components" too "literally". The names tell you were this component reaches its highest but this doesnt mean that they actually "developed" there. Take Ukrainians_Y as example, on dodecad v3 they had more of the "West European" component than "East European".


And here is what Dienekes writes about it.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/12...ians-came.html

The components are as always named after the Region where it is found at its highest *but 
*doesnt mean it actually originated there. BMAC is probably a much better place of origin.

What I think and am sure about. Gedrosia is an Aryan(Iranian) component, composed of North European (25%)-West Asian(60%) and the ANI (15%). Gedrosia in Northwest and Central Europe can quite well be explained with Alanic or similar influence imo.

And the "Mediterranean" of K12a is not the same as "Mediterranean" of v3. 

K12a "Mediterranean is actually South(west) European.

----------


## Knovas

Obviously it is not the same, and also the North European I'm sure it is less North European than ever. And no, it can't be only Southwest European, just go and check the British-Irish averages and you'll probably see this one is a strange mix of Western allele frequencies. What it comes out very clear is that it focusses strongly in Europe, a bit more in Southern Europe (¡and not always!) nothing else.

It's not crying, just noticing several things make little coherence in comparison with numerous previous runs, which of course worth to mention as clear fact. Somebody noted above for example that it's not normal that in Northern Europe we find often more Gedrosia than Caucasus, also in Iberia where de West Asian/Caucasus was very low now it is substantially increased, Sardinians who only showed a maximum of 2% in the same admixture (Eurasia7) now show 15%...etc. These are not false statements, I can assure you, is what the results reflect and the discrepancy is enough huge to say it. No need to say, we shouldn't be interpreting the components, they should come as much clear as possible to avoid problems like this. At least, that's what I think.

However, I appreciate your point of view, several things you said make sense.

----------


## Wilhelm

> As usual some people make false statements by taking some component names too literally. Before crying around some people should read Dienekes statements and I myself made a comment about it on Dodecad blog.
> 
> Here the comment to read
> 
> 
> And here is what Dienekes writes about it.
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/12...ians-came.html
> 
> The components are as always named after the Region where it is found at its highest *but 
> ...


About the mediterranean component, this is what I said already, it's not really mediterranean, it's southwestern euro, it is actually higher in Germanic people than in Greeks or Sicilians, so the mediterranean label is completely wrong.

----------


## Knovas

It's not only Southwest, just a general European cluster with substantial Western affinities. The figure for Sardinians it's too high to be only Southwest, and what the British, Irish, and some Central European get, does not make sense if it's pure Southwestern. The Euro7 Calculator show Sardinians are far from being the most Southwestern, so specially their percent does not match the estimation.

----------


## Kardu

> It's not only Southwest, just a general European cluster with substantial Western affinities. The figure for Sardinians it's too high to be only Southwest, and what the British, Irish, and some Central European get, does not make sense if it's pure Southwestern. The Euro7 Calculator show Sardinians are far from being the most Southwestern, so specially their percent does not match the estimation.


Interestingly Sardinians are the farthest population for me, according to K12a calculator.

----------


## Knovas

Yes that's what it seems. To be sure, it's very easy: just do the Dodecad Oracle with their average and see what they get in the top 10. Possibly the second population will appear unusually far, and none of the other ethnic groups could recieve such report.

----------


## Knovas

Here is:

DodecadOracle("Sardinian")
[,1] [,2] 
[1,] "Sardinian" "0" 
[2,] "French_Basque" "28.1787"
[3,] "IBS" "34.1048"
[4,] "Spanish_D" "34.5345"
[5,] "Spaniards" "34.5571"
[6,] "Portuguese_D" "38.0122"
[7,] "North_Italian" "38.161" 
[8,] "TSI25" "41.2697"
[9,] "N_Italian_D" "42.2777"
[10,] "Tuscan" "42.5162"

- 28 the second and 34 the third is a very huge distance as expected.

----------


## Dorianfinder

> Here is:
> 
> DodecadOracle("Sardinian")
> [,1] [,2] 
> [1,] "Sardinian" "0" 
> [2,] "French_Basque" "28.1787"
> [3,] "IBS" "34.1048"
> [4,] "Spanish_D" "34.5345"
> [5,] "Spaniards" "34.5571"
> ...


Compare it with the original DodecadOraclev1 version.

DodecadOracle("Sardinian")
[,1] [,2] 
[1,] "Sardinian" "0" 
[2,] "North_Italian" "11.4617"
[3,] "IBS" "13.0847"
[4,] "Spanish_D" "13.7445"
[5,] "Spaniards" "15.2315"
[6,] "N_Italian_D" "15.8146"
[7,] "Portuguese_D" "16.0297"
[8,] "Tuscan" "16.3536"
[9,] "O_Italian_D" "20.2754"
[10,] "C_Italian_D" "22.7405"

The Sardinian component seems to have undergone a substantial shift from it being closer to North Italian in the standard version to French Basque being the closest pop (not close though @ 28) in the current OracleK12a version.

----------


## Knovas

Correct Dorian, for this reason I don't think this Mediterranean means Southwestern or even plain Southern, it's too general: unusually high in several Northern areas and it's also the main component in both Sardinians and Basques. Dienekes' seems to be happy with this run for what I read, but several things look very strange.

I really wonder what kind of changes will be made on the Dodecad v4 if it's based on the same.

----------


## Alan

> Correct Dorian, for this reason I don't think this Mediterranean means Southwestern or even plain Southern, it's too general: unusually high in several Northern areas and it's also the main component in both Sardinians and Basques. Dienekes' seems to be happy with this run for what I read, but several things look very strange.I really wonder what kind of changes will be made on the Dodecad v4 if it's based on the same.


Actually considering this Mediterranean component of K12a South European is very correct. There is not much more of the_ Mediterranean_ element in North Europe as there is_ North European_ component among South Europeans. So why assume that North Europeans should have less _South European_ influence as South Europeans had_ North European_ influence? Didnt South Europe had more influence on North Europe than other way around? In my opinion K12a makes more sense than v3. Here I made a Near Eastern map were I placed some popuulations based on their admixture.Note that the Kurds_Y and Kurd_D samples are almost all *from Northeast Iraq and (North)west Iran.*

----------


## Knovas

It's still too high in Northern Europe, just check what Scandinavians get: Sweden (33.5%), Norway (36%)...and too bad there are no Danish averages. Without considering English, Germans, Dutch and so on, who get very high figures.

Of course there's Southern European influence in Northern Europe, but not that high (specially in the Northernmost). If we don't assume it's just a general European cluster it doesn't fit, because for the same reason we could see more Northern European influence in Southern Europe, but it's not the same high. And curiously, in largely Mongoloid populations (Selkup, Ket), the Northern European appears higher than in Southern European countries reporting 25% or more, which in my opinion makes no sense. Southern Europeans should get more almost all times and it's rather the opposite, so I personally can't agree with your analysis.

----------


## Wilhelm

Actually there is more "mediterranean" in Scandinavia than in Greece or Italy, so no, it's clearly not mediterranean. The label is wrong. It's more like a Southwestern component, since it peak in Basques/Sardinians, and is very high in germanics.

----------


## Alan

> It's still too high in Northern Europe, just check what Scandinavians get: Sweden (33.5%), Norway (36%)...and too bad there are no Danish averages. Without considering English, Germans, Dutch and so on, who get very high figures.
> 
> Of course there's Southern European influence in Northern Europe, but not that high (specially in the Northernmost). If we don't assume it's just a general European cluster it doesn't fit, because for the same reason we could see more Northern European influence in Southern Europe, but it's not the same high. And curiously, in largely Mongoloid populations (Selkup, Ket), the Northern European appears higher than in Southern European countries reporting 25% or more, which in my opinion makes no sense. Southern Europeans should get more almost all times and it's rather the opposite, so I personally can't agree with your analysis.



The same could be said about the North European component. You got 34% Mediterraean in Germans vs 25% North European in Spaniards. You got 36% Mediterranean in Norwegians vs 34% North European in Bulgarians. There is hardly a difference. If we consider Mediterranean(South European) as generel European we would have to consider North European as the same too. Historical it even would make more sense when North Europeans have more South European Genes as the other way around. Just think about Roman or the Neolthic expansion. Or the general Caucasoid expansion from a Southern Region. So it would generally make more sense if North Europeans have a chunk more southern Genes as the other way around.

----------


## Alan

> Actually there is more "mediterranean" in Scandinavia than in Greece or Italy, so no, it's clearly not mediterranean. The label is wrong. It's more like a Southwestern component, since it peak in Basques/Sardinians, and is very high in germanics.


 Its tendency is more towards Southwest Europe I agree but calling it South European would even come clother to reality than "general" European. The best name for this element is Southwest European imo.

----------


## razor

This is beginning to resemble an earlier discussion elsewhere (Dna forums? Can't quite remember) as to the appropriateness of "Western" versus "Eastern" European, who had more or less etc.. (with Poles dissatisfied at Ukrainian high scores). Perhaps Dienekes should change his nomenclature entirely and call his categories "A", "B" "C" etc.. or some other combinations (like "aa" "bb" so as not to confuse with haplogroups). Because it's really a question of genetic material, not of geography, politics, or ethnicity. A more neutral set of categories would be less conducive to (perhaps) needless debates.

----------


## Alan

> This is beginning to resemble an earlier discussion elsewhere (Dna forums? Can't quite remember) as to the appropriateness of "Western" versus "Eastern" European, who had more or less etc.. (with Poles dissatisfied at Ukrainian high scores). Perhaps Dienekes should change his nomenclature entirely and call his categories "A", "B" "C" etc.. or some other combinations (like "aa" "bb" so as not to confuse with haplogroups). Because it's really a question of genetic material, not of geography, politics, or ethnicity. A more neutral set of categories would be less conducive to (perhaps) needless debates.


 :Laughing:  I agree fully. Some people take the terms of components too literally and some use these terms, to bash other.

----------


## Knovas

At some level of resolution I personally prefer clear definitions for the components to avoid confusions. I think that's the logic way to proceed.

And no, the present North European is not general since it's much more focussed in Northern Europe than the Mediterranean is in Southern Europe (as I said, it's just focussed in Europe as whole), but it's also obvious there is an Asian overlap as atested by some of the mentioned results. That's the main reason why the Caucasus + Gedrosian is that low among Northern Europeans in comparison with Southern Europeans.

Basically, you can't expect populations that are open to Asia being less Asian than other's who aren't. As I said, finding more Sothwest Asian and Northwest African in the Southwest side makes more sense than finding more Gedrosia + Caucasus. I think it's easy to understand, so the problem is not taking the components too literally, the problem is they should come clear as day at this level...and they don't. That's all.

----------


## Alan

North European
Greek_D 18%
O_Italian_D 20%
Portuguese 25%
Spaniards 25%
Romanians 33%
Bulgarian 35%


Mediterranean (South European)
Polish_D 24%
Belorussians 18%
Finnish_D 15%
German_D 35%
British_Isles 40%

Are you really sure that their is any reason why we should assume that Mediterranean/South European is more general than North European? K12a in compare to v3 shows South Europeans as what they are, namely Mediterraneans with strong North European input while on v3 some South European populations appeared like a cross between Mediterraneans and North Europeans.

----------


## Wilhelm

> North European
> Greek_D 18%
> O_Italian_D 20%
> Portuguese 25%
> Spaniards 25%
> Romanians 33%
> Bulgarian 35%
> 
> 
> ...


Your comparison is not true for the reasons that the Northern component (which in reality is Balto-Finnic) is not higher in any Southern country than a northern country, while the reverse is true, there are Northern countries with higher Med than mediterranean countries, for example Scandianvia has more med than Greece, Italy or Cyprus. Simply, the genetics of Southern Europe are too diverse and complex, to just call it "mediterranean". Iberia or Sardinia are not your typical southern countries. What is high in Basques has nothing to do with Greece or Italy

----------


## Knovas

The reason is in what Scandinavians, Germans, English, Irish, Dutch, Orcadians and even Lithuanians, Belorussians and the Finnish (yes) get. The Mediterranean figure for this last populations has increased a lot in comparison with previous analysis, and the North European decreased in Southern Europe drastically going up with the so called Mediterranean. Go and see by yourself the Basques if you want, you'll see they go from more than 50% West Euro to only 21.6% North Euro now.

Of course is much general this Mediterranean, ¿how do you explain that so? And ¿how do you explain that largely Mongoloid populations now shift the Northern European results with higher figures than the Spaniards, Portuguese, Greeks and Italians who are the closest neighbours? Note that Romanians and Bulgarians just get more because they lack most of this "Mediterranean" element, no need to say, because it's not Med or South Euro, it's another thing.

I think all that I said it's enough important to think about it, and I haven't read any convincing explanation proving the opposite, however, I respect if you don't agree. In favor of this run I can say it works to distinguish populations (the previous were not bad in that issue though), the only problem is if the distintion is really correct or not for all I mentioned. Also, the points mentioned by Wilhelm ring the bells...

----------


## Goga

> there are Northern countries with higher Med than mediterranean countries, for example Scandianvia has more med than Greece, Italy or Cyprus. Simply, the genetics of Southern Europe are too diverse and complex, to just call it "mediterranean".


Huh? This doesn't make any sense. How do you know that Scandinavians have more Med. component than Greece, Italy etc. Greece, Italye etc. ARE the mediterranean countries...

Which data are you using?

I see only the Finnish data. And it's says that Finns have for about 15.3% Med. component . While Greece has 30.4% and North Italy 42.5%. And Spain 52.9%.


EDIT. Oh I see Sweden now and it has 33.5% Med. component. And Norway has 36% of Med component. Sorry for the mistake...

----------


## Alan

> Your comparison is not true for the reasons that the Northern component (which in reality is Balto-Finnic) is not higher in any Southern country than a northern country, while the reverse is true, there are Northern countries with higher Med than mediterranean countries, for example Scandianvia has more med than Greece, Italy or Cyprus.


On reverse they dont have more North European but *Caucasus*. And this is the reason why they share less Mediterranean. 




> Simply, the genetics of Southern Europe are too diverse and complex, to just call it "mediterranean".*Iberia or Sardinia are not your typical southern countries*. What is high in Basques has nothing to do with Greece or Italy


I knew that their is something else behind all this complains. Some people simply cant take that they are shown on Admixture programs as they in realty are.

----------


## Wilhelm

> On reverse they dont have more North European but *Caucasus*. And this is the reason why they share less Mediterranean.


Well, no. There are southern countries with less Caucasus than some northern countries.




> I knew that their is something else behind all this complains. Some people simply cant take that they are shown on Admixture programs as they in realty are.


It's not a complain, it's the truth. How do you explain then, that a component that peaks in Basques or Sardinians, is higher in Germanics than in Greeks or Italians ? 




> Some people simply cant take that they are shown on Admixture programs as they in realty are.


What reality do you talk about ? Im talking about facts. It's also not my fault that Spaniards are closer to Germanics than to Greeks or Sicilians. I think you are in the wrong forum, people here know what they are talking about, we are not inventing things up from air.

----------


## ElHorsto

Just wanted to add an - perhaps naive - idea to this dicussion that Mediterranean could represent the (late) Palaeolithic, Combe-Capelle in particular. Although that was based on the Dodecad map, it is still be interesting.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...050#post390050

----------


## Dagne

I also think that labelling admixture components is tricky because distinctions appear only on some deep historic level. As ElHorsto says Mediterranean may represent Palaeolithic Combe-Capelle (which is then in Palaeolithic was actually fully Mediterranean).
Whereas North European could represent Palaeolithic Hunter - Gatherers. The agriculturalists from the South pushed them away from the North West Europe towards North East Europe some 4000 years ago ... That's why the present day Scandinavians (Norwegians, Swedes, Danes) have quite high Mediterranean component and the Chuvash which are way on the Eastern side of Europe almost in Siberia - have very high scores of the North European component. The Northern European component may reflect Old Europe's (Palaeolithic) Hunter-Gathers, the Pitted Ware culture. 


See an article: 
Ancient DNA Reveals Lack of Continuity between Neolithic Hunter-Gatherers and Contemporary Scandinavians
http://www.cell.com/...960982209016947

"The driving force behind the transition from a foraging to a farming lifestyle in prehistoric Europe (Neolithization) has been debated for more than a century [1,2,3]. Of particular interest is whether population replacement or cultural exchange was responsible [3,4,5]. Scandinavia holds a unique place in this debate, for it maintained one of the last major hunter-gatherer complexes in Neolithic Europe, the Pitted Ware culture [6]. Intriguingly, these late hunter-gatherers existed in parallel to early farmers for more than a millennium before they vanished some 4,000 years ago [7,8]. The prolonged coexistence of the two cultures in Scandinavia has been cited as an argument against population replacement between the Mesolithic and the present [7,8]. Through analysis of DNA extracted from ancient Scandinavian human remains, we show that people of the Pitted Ware culture were not the direct ancestors of modern Scandinavians (including the Saami people of northern Scandinavia) but are more closely related to contemporary populations of the eastern Baltic region. Our findings support hypotheses arising from archaeological analyses that propose a Neolithic or post-Neolithic population replacement in Scandinavia [7]. Furthermore, our data are consistent with the view that the eastern Baltic represents a genetic refugia for some of the European hunter-gatherer populations."

----------


## Knovas

It could represent what you say, the problem is that if "Mediterraneans" pushed the Northern hunter gatherers away, it's very unlikely that Russians only show 17% (vs 33-36% in Scandinavians) when they should be the most affected by this circumstance.

We still return to the mentioned points if we want a reasonable explanation.

----------


## Dagne

I think Neolithic revolution (farming) to Scandinavia came through the Mediterranean region and thus they have comparatively high genetic imprint of the Palaeolithic Mediterranean. Meanwhile farming to those proto-peoples who are the present day Russians must have come also via other routes and peoples. 

This would also explain why the Balkan nations also don’t have such high scores in the Mediterranean component though they are in geographic proximity to the Mediterranean region. 

Moreover, one should have in mind that if Russian samples are taken from the Northern parts of Russia (which I think is the case with Dienke’s samples) they have more of Finno-Ugric which also moves the Mediterranean scores down.

----------


## Knovas

The European side of Russia it's quite big and diverse, ok, but note that actually there are 16 Dodecad samples and surely not all belong to the Northernmost, lacking then the Finno-Ugric element (substantially at least). I know the results for each Russian participant, and the maximum Mediterranean you can find is 26.1% in two individuals taking this run as reference, which it's still notably lower than the average for Scandinavians.

And about the Balkans, we just need more data, since as whole it's probably the most heterogeneous region of all Europe.

----------


## ElHorsto

> I think Neolithic revolution (farming) to Scandinavia came through the Mediterranean region and thus they have comparatively high genetic imprint of the Palaeolithic Mediterranean. Meanwhile farming to those proto-peoples who are the present day Russians must have come also via other routes and peoples.


Neolithic expansion was not necessarily the driving force which pushed Paleo-Meds to the north west. The Combe-Capelle finding was already in France 9500 years ago, without being neolithic. The arrows and stones found besides were from stone age hunter-gatherer time, no agriculture at all. Similar hunter-gatherer finds have been found also in the middle east. I believe that the ice free Atlantic coast had a more important role than neolithization.

----------


## Dagne

As far as I remember there was a debate going on with regard to Dodecad sample of Russians as they come from Vologda, the North Central European Part of Russia.

Accroding to one observer "in fact, these results mirror the previous mtDNA and Y chromosome work with regards to East Asian admixture in Vologda Russians. If I recall correctly, sampled Tambov-area Russians registered no East Asian mtDNA or Y chromosomes; incidentally, this was the area of Russia described as being the most “Nordic” by Coon. More sampling is required, obviously."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...europes-north/

It is not that Dienke did not want to choose a sample with better representation (including more Southern parts of Russia) but because Russians officially were not releasing other data. 

Well, I don't know the origins of those K-12 admixture Russians, but they again may be from this selected group.

----------


## Dagne

> Neolithic expansion was not necessarily the driving force which pushed Paleo-Meds to the north west. The Combe-Capelle finding was already in France 9500 years ago, without being neolithic. The arrows and stones found besides were from stone age hunter-gatherer time, no agriculture at all. Similar hunter-gatherer finds have been found also in the middle east. I believe that the ice free Atlantic coast had a more important role than neolithization.


Yes, I agree, the true picture is much more complex to explain by some one event.

----------


## Knovas

By the way Dagne, there are only 6 Lithuanians in the project, and just one Latvian and one Estonian joining Dodecad. The Baltic region obviously needs more representation, and I was wondering if you are already part of the Lithuanian samples or if you plan to test yourself in the near future.

Just curious, yours is a very interesting population.

----------


## Dagne

No, I haven't tested... I should do it, agree. Perhaps when I have some free cash :) 
According to Dienkes anthropometric calculator for females http://dienekes.awar...hro/indexf.html, I register by all parameters and independent parameters as 100% Iranian! :)

----------


## Knovas

> No, I haven't tested... I should do it, agree. Perhaps when I have some free cash :)
> According to Dienkes anthropometric calculator for females http://dienekes.awar...hro/indexf.html, I register by all parameters and independent parameters as 100% Iranian! :)


Let us know when you do ;)

I don't think the mentioned calculator and the equivalent for males is truly reliable. The best to get an accurate idea of ones genetic background is always do as much autosomal tests as possible. You'll see then that you have little to do with Iranians, I'm sure xd.

----------


## Dagne

> Let us know when you do ;)
> 
> I don't think the mentioned calculator and the equivalent for males is truly reliable. The best to get an accurate idea of ones genetic background is always do as much autosomal tests as possible. You'll see then that you have little to do with Iranians, I'm sure xd.


Yes, I agree, I am way too much fair in complextion, blue eyed, blond, tall for an Iranian ...

----------


## Goga

> No, I haven't tested... I should do it, agree. Perhaps when I have some free cash :) 
> According to Dienkes anthropometric calculator for females http://dienekes.awar...hro/indexf.html, I register by all parameters and independent parameters as 100% Iranian! :)


That's nonsense. I made a test with the anthropometric calculator and it said that I was from Slovenia  :Annoyed:  (not even a Greek, like most guys on that site!). But every time when I look at the mirror I see an Iranic person and I'm happy again...  :Smile:

----------


## Dagne

> That's nonsense. I made a test with the anthropometric calculator and it said that I was from Slovenia  (not even a Greek, like most guys on that site!). But every time when I look at the mirror I see an Iranic person and I'm happy again...


Yes, I understand that anthropometric calcluators cannot be precise, but perhaps there is a somewhat connection? Goga, did you do the autosomal testing? What are those compared to other Iranians?

----------


## Goga

> Goga, did you do the autosomal testing? What are those compared to other Iranians?


No, I don't have willingness to spend money on it. I want to do it for free, but I can't do it anywhere. I don't hurry cause I do know my parents and I know where I'm from. So I'm waiting for an opportunity do to it for free.

I'm of Kurdish origin. And since Kurds have the so called ancient 'Iranic' roots I do consider my ethnicity as Iranic.

----------


## Kardu

Goga, we might know several generations before us, but we can never be sure of a deeper past without doing a test :)

----------


## Dagne

> I'm of Kurdish origin. And since Kurds have the so called ancient 'Iranic' roots I do consider my ethnicity as Iranic.


This is very personal, of course, about your self-identity, but it is rather unusual from my point of logic - why to consider yourself Iranian if you're Kurdish? Usually people try to identify themselves with something more particular rather than more general - like people from Spain being Catalan or Basque ... Me also, being more than half Samogitian (one of the Lithuanian ethnicity) ...

----------


## Goga

> Goga, we might know several generations before us, but we can never be sure of a deeper past without doing a test :)


Without looking at the Kristal Boll I'm sure that my autosomal DNA would tell me that I'm from Kurdistan and that I do belong mostly to the West Asian group between Georgians (Caucasians) and Persians.




> This is very personal, of course, about your self-identity, but it is rather unusual from my point of logic - why to consider yourself Iranian if you're Kurdish? Usually people try to identify themselves with something more particular rather than more general - like people from Spain being Catalan or Basque ... Me also, being more than half Samogitian (one of the Lithuanian ethnicity) ...


I'm not an Iranian and I'm not from Iran, I'm 'Iranic'. And I absolutely ain't no a Pan-Iranist. I will be the luckiest person on earth when the free world will teach Persians a great lesson about freedom. For me Persians are the same as Turks and Arabs, and maybe even worse. 

But I'm who I am. I'm not only Iranic by 'ethnicity' (roots) but also by language, culture (ethics, moral standards, values) and also by religion. I mean even even my religion, that's related to the Zoroastrianism, is Iranic.

----------


## razor

Merry Christmas to all those celebrating, and/or sympathizing!
Back to the K12a.
I've joined the Dodecad project also (maybe soon we'll have enough Ukrainians-D). Dienekes ran my 23 & me results just days ago. Here is what he gives me: (I'll put the Yunusbaev Ukrs. in parenth. for comparison)
Mediterranean: 26.9 (19.5)
Far Asian: 0.3 (0.3)
Siberian: 1.5 (0.9)
North European: 52.3 (60.6)
South Asian: 1.0 (0.7)
West African: 0 (0)
Caucasus: 13.6 (13.7)
Gedrosia: 1.6 (0.8)
East African: 0 (0)
Southwest Asian 2.8 (2.9)
Southeast Asian: 0 (0.4)
Northwest African 0 (0.2)
Some of this I found a bit surprising. Gedmatch (which admits to some differences with the previous Dodecad calculator) had me practically identical to the Yunusbaev contingent. Now I see large distinctions in some areas (esp. NE and Med.). Perhaps this is due to the sample origin. The Yunusbaev group apparently sampled Ukrainians in the Caucasus area (we don't know how long they resided there or where they came from). I am of solid West Ukrainian stock on both sides of the family going back more than 400 years. We've assimilated a bit of Polish in recent generations, and I have a Melkite Arab 2nd great-grandmother (our paper trail interestingly enough was confirmed in this regard by McDonald's analysis of my X with its little Middle Eastern stretch).
Obviously a great deal more sampling is needed. But I'll wait with interest to see what Dienekes makes of this latest admixture experiment.

----------


## Knovas

What you get in this context looks good according you are mostly Western Ukranian.

Thanks for sharing it, Merry Christmas :)

----------

