# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics >  Modelling Admixture with D-stats

## Fire Haired14

I'm creating this thread to post admixture results using D-stats, instead of posting these results at Post Formal States Here!!. D-stat results can be used to get ancestry percentages for populations. What you do, is model a population's D-stat results in many differnt tests a mixture of another population's D-stat results in the same stats.

----------


## Fire Haired14

These results are so accurate it's scary. I didn't manipulate the data :). Modelling Europeans as Yamnaya+HungaryNeolithic+CHG+WHG. 

South Europe
EN_Hungary
Yamnaya
WHG
CHG
@ D

Sardinian
89%
1%
6%
4%
0.0045

Tuscan
71%
21%
2%
6%
0.0056

Bulgarian
62%
30%
2%
6%
0.0055

BasqueSpain
61%
18%
18%
3%
0.002

WestSicily
77%
12%
0%
11%
0.0148








North Europe
EN_Hungary
Yamnaya
WHG
CHG
@ D

Lithuanian
36%
44%
20%
0%
0.0031

BeloRussian
43%
44%
13%
0%
0.0064

Cornwall_England
45%
44%
11%
0%
0.002

Hungarian
53%
39%
8%
0%
0.0056

French
56%
34%
9%
1%
0.0033








Ancient Europe
EN_Hungary
Yamnaya
WHG
CHG
@ D

Spain_MN
76%
0%
24%
0%
0.0157

Sintashta
36%
55%
5%
4%
0.0075

HungaryBA
46%
28%
22%
4%
0.0049

----------


## Angela

Fwiw, these numbers make general sense to me, mainly because they track with what the academic papers found, which is close to 50% Yamnaya replacement in northern and central Europe and quite a bit less in southern Europe. The ENF numbers also track with prior work. As for WHG that also makes sense to me, as they were a very small population, and I think their impact was less.

I do think that the admixing population with Yamnaya might have been slightly different depending on the area. Perhaps for Italy it would be Remedello? I don't know how much of a difference that would make, however. Perhaps not a large one. 

If you have the time, could you run your program for Northern Italians? Thanks. 

Btw, what outgroups did you use?

----------


## LeBrok

I think that it is somewhat misleading as Yamnaya is a composite population and already includes EN farmers, WHG and CHG. Perhaps we should only compare Yamnaya to other contemporary composites like Late Neolithic European? This way we should truly see impact of Yamnaya in Europe.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> I think that it is somewhat misleading as Yamnaya is a composite population and already includes EN farmers, WHG and CHG. Perhaps we should only compare Yamnaya to other contemporary composites like Late Neolithic European? This way we should truly see impact of Yamnaya in Europe.


I'm not trying to get distant Paleolithic ancestry percentages. I'm modelling with the best proxies we have. EHG and CHG didn't migrate into Europe seperatly. They came together in populations like Yamnaya.

----------


## Fire Haired14

I modeled three differnt Jewish populations with the outgroups: MA1, Loschbour, LBK, and Kotais. All fit very well, as a mixture of their host populations, and Druze. 

Host populations are: Yemen, Georgian, and BeloRussian. 



Druze
Host Population


YemanJew
67%
32%
0.0058

Ashkenazi
67%
32%
0.0096

Georgian Jew
54%
46%
0.0054



The weird thing to me, is Ashkenazi Jews pass so easily pass as white. But DNA doesn't lie. If they were mostly converts from Central/East Europe, there's a 0.00000000...1% chance they'd be getting the results they're getting.

----------


## Tomenable

> The weird thing to me, is Ashkenazi Jews pass so easily pass as white. But DNA doesn't lie. If they were mostly converts from Central/East Europe, there's a 0.00000000...1% chance they'd be getting the results they're getting.



Gross had a hypothesis, that mostly "Aryan-looking" Jews survived the Holocaust (they had a greater chance to pass as Non-Jews). However, the vast majority of Jewish-Americans descend from Eastern & Central European Jews who emigrated to America between 1800 and 1939, before the Holocaust. So this hypothesis is baseless, at least as far as American Jews are concerned.

Check this thread - Eran Elhaik (who used to be a supporter of the so called Khazar hypothesis), now has a new theory, about Eastern Anatolian origins of Ashkenazi Jews: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...359#post476359

Proposed homeland:



According to a Polish Jew, Henryk Szpidbaum, the most common phenotype among Polish Jews was Armenoid (or Hither Asiatic or Anatolid). This hypothetical Eastern Anatolian homeland corresponds well to prevalence of Armenoid phenotype.

But Armenoid / Anatolid / Hither Asiatic phenotype is common in all of West Asia, not just in Eastern Anatolia.

A population of Ancient Levantine origin could also have a high percentage of this phenotype.

========================

*As for light skin of Ashkenazi Jews:*

Maybe in Ancient times, before Arabic expansion and Muslim Sub-Saharan slave trade, Middle Easterners were "whiter"? Some Non-Muslim populations of the Middle East still tend to be light, even if they never moved out of the region (e.g. Samaritans).

Or, alternatively, it could be that Ancient Jews had swarthy skin pigmentation until relatively late in time, but after that the same selective sweep favouring light skin tone made them light, which had made everybody else in Europe white before.

----------


## Tomenable

Maybe already in Early Medieval pogroms, swarthy Jews were more likely to die than white-skinned ones ???

==================

As for the Khazar hypothesis - we actually do have Khazar ancient DNA already:

*Saltovo-Mayaki culture (800-900 AD; associated with the Khazar Kaganate):*

Burial site, individual(s) - haplogroups:

Podgorovsky, sample A80301 - R1a1a1b2a (Y-DNA), I4a (mtDNA)
Podgorovsky, sample A80302 - D4m2 (mtDNA)
Podgorovsky, sample A80410 - G (Y-DNA)
Podgorovsky, sample A80411 - J2a (Y-DNA)
Aksenov & Demetrius, six samples - 6 x G2a (Y-DNA)

Sources:

- Afanasiev, G.E., M. V. Dobrovolskaya et al. (2015)
- Afanasiev, G.E., S. Wen et al. (2015)
- http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/medievaldna.shtml

*Compare that with modern Ashkenazi Jewish Y-DNA lineages:*

http://jewishdna.net

As for those ten Saltovo-Mayaki samples:

The problem is that we don't know if those were ethnic Khazars, or other inhabitants of the Khazar realm:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltovo-Mayaki

_"Saltovo-Mayaki is the name given by archaeologists to the early medieval culture of the Pontic steppe region roughly between the Don and the Dnieper Rivers. Their culture was a melting pot of Onogur, Khazar, Pecheneg, Magyar, Alan, and Slavic influences. During the ninth century the Saltovo-Mayaki culture was closely associated with the Khazar Khaganate, and archaeological sites from this period are one way that historians track the geographic scope of Khazar influence."

_==================

It would be nice to obtain aDNA samples from these Medieval graves at Worms, Germany:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post475572

----------


## John Doe

> I modeled three differnt Jewish populations with the outgroups: MA1, Loschbour, LBK, and Kotais. All fit very well, as a mixture of their host populations, and Druze. 
> 
> Host populations are: Yemen, Georgian, and BeloRussian. 
> 
> 
> 
> Druze
> Host Population
> 
> ...


Yemeni Jews are actually quite similar to non Jewish Yemenis, Saudis and Bedouin.

----------


## Angela

> Yemeni Jews are actually quite similar to non Jewish Yemenis, Saudis and Bedouin.


Indeed.

The reason the first set of data made some sort of sense is because, I'm assuming, it was based on ancient genomes. As soon as you start using modern populations things start to go haywire, and that's the case whether you're doing Admixture based runs, no matter how carefully done, or formal stats. 

Just as an example, I'm not sure about using the Druze for these purposes, as although they may not have admixed in the last 1000 years, they may or may not be a good proxy for the Jews of the Roman Era diaspora who are probably the major source population for Ashkenazim. The Druze have a rather unique ethnogenesis, not all of which derives from the Levant.

On some PCAs, the Syrians are closest.


It's true that Behar found that the most IBD sharing for Ashkenazim other than with other Jews was with Eastern Europeans, but that study is a bit old, and only was able to track rather large segments, which of course would be the most recent ones from their sojourn of about 1000 years in Eastern Europe. Even then, I don't think Behar sees the admixture as totalling one third of their genome.
IBD sharing with Ashkenazi.jpg

http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/...biol_preprints

Other analyses have shown anywhere from about 35% to about 50% "European" admixture. 


There are all sorts of problems with this approach. "European" is a cultural and geographical construct. "Europeans" come in various flavors. Some of these studies just willy, nilly decide West Europeans are the "real" Europeans, and model accordingly. That's the major problem with Shai Carmi's paper, in my opinion. I mean, really, Flanders?




If you model the admixture with "Southern Europeans" you're going to get a different breakdown.


The only way we're going to really know how much "admixture" there was between Jewish diaspora populations in the Near East with "Europeans" in Europe is to get an ancient genome. Then, one from the Rhineland around the time of the Ashkenazi ethnogenesis would be good. 

My hunch is that the Jewish diaspora populations from places like Anatolia, who may have already mixed with Greeks or Hellenized Anatolians, were already pretty similar to Southern Europeans, and so there actually wasn't a whole lot of admixture in Europe proper, but time will tell.

----------


## Angela

I'm aware that some people divide humanity into three or more "races", one of which is "Caucasian". I'm not aware of a scientific term called the "White" race. That's a mainly subjective term often used by Americans who don't know much about genetics.

As for the Druse, they have some rather stereotypical "Near Eastern" looking people, but some of them are not all that far removed from Europeans. Perhaps that's because they have had minimal impact from the Arabic invasions and any slave admixture from either West Africa or East Africa. It may also have something to do with their specific ethnogenesis. I don't know.I also don't know, as I mentioned, whether the Druse are all that good a sample for Roman Era diaspora Jews.

However, it's as well to be clear that a good number of them are hardly a whole different "race" even from Central Europeans.









There's quite a bit of variety:


Here are a Druze leader and Netanyahu. They don't look all that different to me, other than a bit of lightening in Netanyahu.

----------


## Angela

There's also the Syrian Alawites, who, as farmers in an isolated area holding to a minority religion have also not experienced the full brunt of the Arabic invasions. There's quite a bit of variety in them as well:



She could fit anywhere in Europe. Usually, he looks pretty Near Eastern, but in this picture he has a bit of a Spanish look to me. 


The Al-Assad family. The former president looks European to me, the son a little less so, but not much in this picture. In fact, here he's a dead ringer for my hairdresser, who comes from a Bulgarian Muslim family.



Another Syrian president and his family. There may be a class difference at play here, with the lower classes having a slightly different ethnogenesis.



There are definitely some stereotypically Near Eastern looking Alawites. Still, even these Alawite militiamen look closer to Europeans than other Syrians do, in my opinion.



Carlos Menem, former President of Argentina, is of Syrian origin: In his younger, less weird persona, I don't think I would have known he wasn't just a run of the mill Argentinian.


Steve Jobs' biological father: He actually looks quite Ashkenazi to me.

----------


## Fire Haired14

@John Doe, Angela,

It's very clear Yemen Jews are differnt from Yemens, when ancient West Eurasians are much closer to Yemen Jews than to Yemens. This is because Yemens have a lot more African admixture. Yemen Jews behave in these tests most like SW Asians.

----------


## Angela

> @John Doe, Angela,
> 
> It's very clear Yemen Jews are differnt from Yemens, when ancient West Eurasians are much closer to Yemen Jews than to Yemens. This is because Yemens have a lot more African admixture. Yemen Jews behave in these tests most like SW Asians.


As I mentioned upthread, imo results using modern populations are far less reliable than the ones you generated using ancient samples.

In addition, no one said or I'm sure meant to imply that the Yemeni Jews aren't somewhat different from Yemenis. There are still a lot of similarities.

They actually seem to cluster with the southernmost Palestinians and just northeast of the Saudis.

This is from Behar:


It's important for all of us to be very precise with language and terms, me included.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> As I mentioned upthread, imo results using modern populations are far less reliable than the ones you generated using ancient samples.


You're right except, because of the Outgroups I'm using Druze or Cypriot or anyone who is SW Asian but not EEF, is a good proxy for ancient Jews. My outgroups are: EEF, WHG, EHG, CHG, and MA1. All the outgroups have a pretty equal relationship to SW Asians, except MA1 has a much smaller one and EEF a much bigger one. 

Intra-SW Asian diversity doesn't make an affect at all because of my outgroups. So, a Jew from 1000 BC and a modern Druze, will behave the same way in the tests with my outgroups. Unless, SW Asians in 1000 BC had lots less African admixture or were somehow super EEF-like, both of which are unlikely. 

Ashkenazi Jew's fit as 90% EEF in Laz 2014 because they have a similar relationship to the non-West Eurasian outgroups they used as does EEF. The reason for this is probably shared basal Eurasian. So, CHG could be fit as 90% EEF, if we used only East Asian outgroups. However, me using EEF and WHG as outgroups, reveals Jew's relationship to EEF and WHG is too small for them to be mostly EEF. Instead they have a lot of decent from people with a similar amount of Basal Eurasian, but weren't EEF and had little or no WHG. The only people who fit the bill are SW Asians.

It's the same case with Yemen and Georgian Jews. Ancient West Eurasians are too close to Yemen Jews for them to have the high amount of African admixture Yemens do. CHG is too distant from Georgian Jews for them to have the same high amount of CHG Georgians do. 




> In addition, no one said or I'm sure meant to imply that the Yemeni Jews aren't somewhat different from Yemenis. There are still a lot of similarities.
> 
> They actually seem to cluster with the southernmost Palestinians and just northeast of the Saudis.


The Yemen Jews I have D-stats for are not very similar to Yemens. They're much more similar to Druze.

----------


## Angela

> Fire-Haired:
> The Yemen Jews I have D-stats for are not very similar to Yemens. They're much more similar to Druze.


From what I can remember, Yemeni Jews are about 5% "African", all of it East African. The other Yemenis have much more "African", over 15%, I think, and roughly half of it is West African. The Druze, on the other hand, are about 1.5 % East African in the same kind of analyses. I think that's what moves the Yemeni Jews away from the other Yemenis, given the divergent nature of "African" alleles compared to Eurasian ones. That places them close to Palestinians, especially Gaza type Palestinians rather than the Druse, in my opinion, who have a lot more northern Near Eastern and even Iranian ancestry is their ethnogenesis stories are to be believed. The Druse, in turn, are closer to Cypriots. It's a mistake to think all "Southwest Asians" are the same genetically either now or in the past.

The differences show up very strongly in phenotype.

Druse:




It's not just pigmentation; it's head structure and facial structure and features.




> Fire-Haired. Unless, SW Asians in 1000 BC had lots less African admixture or were somehow super EEF-like, both of which are unlikely.


How can it be unlikely given the known migration of entire Arabic tribes into the Middle East post the Islamic conquests? We're supposed to believe, according to Hellenthal and Busby and company that enough North Africans and Middle Easterners came into France in a forty year period (before being beaten back) to account for 20% of the total genome of Gaul, but whole tribes permanently settling in more northern areas of the Middle East didn't have any impact? 

With those invasions came the Arab slave trade, where many East African women, in particular, were imported into the Near East. 

I don't know how much of an impact they had, and neither does anybody else, but I do think this is part of what explains the difference in the results of isolated populations like the Druse versus Palestinians, for example, and in particular of Gaza type Palestinians and some Jordanians and certainly many Iraquis etc. 

That's why using the Druze is a good idea, although maybe using the Samaritans is an even better idea, since there's no question of any outside genetic flow in them for the last 3000 or so years, absent the best idea, which is waiting for an ancient genome. Using Cypriots is not a good idea, in my opinion. We just can't assume that coastal Levantines were the same as modern Cypriots.

Oh, for what it's worth, I think the flow from the direction of the Arabian peninsula, which itself picked up progressively more SSA genes as time went on, was continuous at least since the time of the Nabataens. It just depends when you draw the line.

----------


## Tomenable

Let's also not forget that most or many of modern Jewish-Americans are not 100% Jewish but mixed with other ethnicities.

Jews used to be endogamous as long as they were Orthodoxly religious, but this has endeded already some generations ago.

For example on another forum I have read posts claiming that some American "Jewish celebs" look "very Non-Jewish", and they listed people such as Gwyneth Paltrow, Paul Newman, etc. as examples. Fortunately there is a website *ethnicelebs.com*, which clearly says that these people are not fully Jewish. For example Gwyneth Paltrow is listed as ethnically mixed Jewish-German-Irish-English person, and Paul Newman as mixed Slovak-Jewish. Then for example Leelee Sobieski is also mixed Polish-Jewish-Swiss French. And so on.

IIRC, those were posts by a guy who tried to prove that Eran Elhaik is right in his claims that Jews come from Khazars. So he claimed that Gwyneth Paltrow and Paul Newman look "more Khazar than Jewish".  :Smile:  Do we even know how Khazars looked like?

Why did he expect to find "typically Jewish looks" in people who are just 1/2, 1/4/, 1/8 or even less Jewish? Another example - current First Lady of Poland is 1/4 Jewish and doesn't look much Jewish. Her daughter, 1/8 Jewish, doesn't look Jewish at all.

http://ethnicelebs.com

----------


## epoch

> There's also the Syrian Alawites, who, as farmers in an isolated area holding to a minority religion have also not experienced the full brunt of the Arabic invasions. There's quite a bit of variety in them as well:
> 
> 
> 
> She could fit anywhere in Europe. Usually, he looks pretty Near Eastern, but in this picture he has a bit of a Spanish look to me.




She is half British. I think this picture clearly shows it  :Smiling: 

EDIT: Nope, wrong. She a full-blooded Syrian, just raised in England. Good to see that a proper British upraising shows itself in someones looks! Well done, chaps!

----------


## epoch

> These results are so accurate it's scary. I didn't manipulate the data :). Modelling Europeans as Yamnaya+HungaryNeolithic+CHG+WHG. 
> 
> South Europe
> EN_Hungary
> Yamnaya
> WHG
> CHG
> @ D
> 
> ...


How does that work using other EEF's for EN_Hungary? I am especially curious at Gokhem.

----------


## Angela

> Let's also not forget that most or many of modern Jewish-Americans are not 100% Jewish but mixed with other ethnicities.
> 
> Jews used to be endogamous as long as they were Orthodoxly religious, but this has endeded already some generations ago.
> 
> For example on another forum I have read posts claiming that some American "Jewish celebs" look "very Non-Jewish", and they listed people such as Gwyneth Paltrow, Paul Newman, etc. as examples. Fortunately there is a website *ethnicelebs.com*, which clearly says that these people are not fully Jewish. For example Gwyneth Paltrow is listed as ethnically mixed Jewish-German-Irish-English person, and Paul Newman as mixed Slovak-Jewish. Then for example Leelee Sobieski is also mixed Polish-Jewish-Swiss French. And so on.
> 
> IIRC, those were posts by a guy who tried to prove that Eran Elhaik is right in his claims that Jews come from Khazars. So he claimed that Gwyneth Paltrow and Paul Newman look "more Khazar than Jewish".  Do we even know how Khazars looked like?
> 
> Why did he expect to find "typically Jewish looks" in people who are just 1/2, 1/4/, 1/8 or even less Jewish? Another example - current First Lady of Poland is 1/4 Jewish and doesn't look much Jewish. Her daughter, 1/8 Jewish, doesn't look Jewish at all.
> ...



There's a very funny blog on the internet run by an Ashkenazi Jew, or so I've been told, called "Jew or not Jew". :) I love his sensibility, writing style, and wit.
http://www.jewornotjew.com/

There you can learn, should you be interested, which famous people are Jews, half-Jews, quarter-Jews and barely Jews. :)

Goldie Hawn is only half Jewish. So is Scarlett Johannsen, who in addition has had a lot of facial surgery, at least. Jessica Biel is only 1/8 Jewish, which wouldn't have counted even for the Nazis.



On the other hand, both Natalie Portman, who I think is gracile Mediterranean, and Lauren Bacall, who I think looks sort of Central European, are 100% Jewish.



What a woman she was: a stunning face, a lean figure that had a panther's grace, and a husky, sexy growl of a voice. She was intelligent and witty on top of it all. I think she was probably pretty much irresistible; certainly, Humphrey Bogart thought so, throwing over his wife and his prior life for a girl a fraction of his age. Luckily for him she turned out to be a faithful and devoted wife, even through his long bout with lung cancer. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv2K62fTXIs



So was Bess Myerson, the first Jewish Miss America.



So, it's all a roll of the genetic dice.

@Epoch,
Yes, indeed, thank-goodness, because of course that's what everyone should aspire to...looking British or otherwise Northern European, of course. :)

----------


## Sile

What the hell has Religion got to do with Genetics?

----------


## Tomenable

> What the hell has Religion got to do with Genetics?


Check: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group




> There you can learn, should you be interested, which famous people are Jews, half-Jews, quarter-Jews and barely Jews. :)


So Ed Jew is not a Jew ?!  :Laughing: 

http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=1162

----------


## Fire Haired14

These are the type of Jews I see. Orthodox Jews, so I doubt many are admixed. 


Less than a mile from my house is the center for Jews in Chicago. And Chicago has a lot of Jews. They do look very white. Before DNA, I thought they were descended of German and Polish converts. I don't consider them exotic looking at all. Maybe if I saw more of them I'd notice a difference. 

I think the most logical explanations are: They have a lot of Southern European admixture and or some West Asians look more similar to Europeans than we think(like Angela was saying). 

In my D-stat admixture spreadsheet using ancient West Eurasian outgroups, Ashenazi Jews can fit as 55% Tuscan and 45% Druze. Ashkenazi's relationship to EEF is too weak to simply be converts from Greece or Rome-area. They also clearly have East African admixture, which makes it impossible for them to be South European converts(Not Sicily either, because Sicily has North African admixture not East African). IBD stats would be needed to confirm recent common ancestry with an ethnicity/region in South Europe. I saw IBD stats between Ashkenazi, Italian, and Greek, and it doesn't suggest any recent common ancestry. 

Ashkenazi: 55% Tuscany + 45% Druze @ D = 0.0094
Ashkenazi: 55% Greek + 45% Druze @ D = 0.0115

----------


## Tomenable

> I thought they were descended of German and Polish converts.


There were large statistical differences in *eye and hair colours* between Jews and host populations, though.

For example according to pre-war data from Virchow on pigmentation of Jewish and Christian school-children in four provinces of Germany, among Jews dark-haired school-children were consistently (no matter in which of those four regions) ca. 4 times more common than light-haired ones. By contrast, among Christian school-children, the proportion of dark-haired to light-haired individuals was between 1 to 3 (in Prussia) and around 1 to 1 (in Bavaria and Baden). This data from Virchow does not include children with "intermediate" hair colours (large percentages of both Jewish and Christian children). Anyway, it shows that even the "most brunette" of surveyed Christian groups - Bavarians - were still much blonder than Ashkenazim.

In Poland there were similar differences. According to Polish-Jewish author Henryk Szpidbaum, among Polish Jews only 20,6% had light eyes. Among Polish Christians frequency of light eyes is much higher - I have seen one source saying 68%, another one which says 72,4%. But it also depends on what definitions we are using, because some sources divide eye colours not just into "light" and "dark", but into "light", "intermediate" and "dark" - if we use this system, then in such case % of light eyes in Poland is smaller, ca. 45%, with another ca. 38% being "intermediate" and ca. 17% "dark" eyes.

Anthropologists such as Fishberg, Elkind, Yakowenko and Talko-Hryncewicz also found out, that the frequency of so called "pure brunette types" (defined as people with both dark hair and dark eyes - rather than for example dark hair + light eyes) among regional European Jewish populations ranged from 44 to 76 percent. And frequency of "pure blonds" (people with both light hair and light eyes) among the same groups ranged from 1 percent to 16 percent.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> There were *large statistical differences in eye and hair colours* between Jews and host populations, though.
> 
> For example according to pre-war data from Virchow on pigmentation of Jewish and Christian school-children in four provinces of Germany, among Jews dark-haired school-children were consistently (no matter in which of those four regions) ca. 4 times more common than light-haired ones. By contrast, among Christian school-children, the proportion of light-haired to dark-haired individuals was between 3 to 1 (in Prussia) and around 1 to 1 (in Bavaria and Baden).
> 
> In Poland there were similar differences. According to Polish-Jewish author Henryk Szpidbaum, among Polish Jews only 20,59% had light eyes. While among Polish Christians according to various other sources, between 68% and 72,4% have light eyes (by comparison among ethnically English Christians about 74% or more).


You're right and those stats are consistent with DNA. SNP data says about 70% of Ashkenazi Jews have Dark eyes, while 40% of Germans and Poles do. Ashkenazi Jews also have a lower frequency of SLC2A4, but most still have it unlike West Asians and pre-2500 BC Europeans. Obviously this is because they are mostly SW Asian. 

But, still they look much more like Germans than say Palestinians or Syrians. IMO, it's most likely because many SW Asians look more white than we think.

----------


## Tomenable

> You're right and those stats are consistent with DNA. SNP data says about 70% of Ashkenazi Jews have Dark eyes, while 40% of Germans and Poles do.


Good to know that there is consistency in this case, between observed traits and actual DNA.




> IMO, it's most likely because many SW Asians look more white than we think.


I have noticed that there is a considerable variation of skin colour among Syrians. Even among Palestinians too.

Many Syrians (and much fewer Palestinians, but still) actually have light skin by European standards.

But most are brown-skinned (especially when it comes to Palestinians).

----------


## Tomenable

BTW, do we have pigmentation SNPs from that Roman-era gladiator/soldier of Middle Eastern origin from York?




> I think the most logical explanations are: They have a lot of Southern European admixture and or some West Asians look more similar to Europeans than we think (like Angela was saying).





> In my D-stat admixture spreadsheet using ancient West Eurasian outgroups, Ashenazi Jews can fit as 55% Tuscan and 45% Druze. Ashkenazi's relationship to EEF is too weak to simply be converts from Greece or Rome-area. They also clearly have East African admixture, which makes it impossible for them to be South European converts(Not Sicily either, because Sicily has North African admixture not East African). IBD stats would be needed to confirm recent common ancestry with an ethnicity/region in South Europe. I saw IBD stats between Ashkenazi, Italian, and Greek, and it doesn't suggest any recent common ancestry.


I guess they are really descended mostly from those Ancient Jews/Israelites of the Roman province of Palestine. 

As their tradition claims: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUlM2a2tsOM

----------


## Sile

> Gross had a hypothesis, that mostly "Aryan-looking" Jews survived the Holocaust (they had a greater chance to pass as Non-Jews). However, the vast majority of Jewish-Americans descend from Eastern & Central European Jews who emigrated to America between 1800 and 1939, before the Holocaust. So this hypothesis is baseless, at least as far as American Jews are concerned.
> 
> Check this thread - Eran Elhaik (who used to be a supporter of the so called Khazar hypothesis), now has a new theory, about Eastern Anatolian origins of Ashkenazi Jews: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...359#post476359
> 
> Proposed homeland:
> 
> 
> 
> According to a Polish Jew, Henryk Szpidbaum, the most common phenotype among Polish Jews was Armenoid (or Hither Asiatic or Anatolid). This hypothetical Eastern Anatolian homeland corresponds well to prevalence of Armenoid phenotype.
> ...


That map is where 15-20% of T1 Ydna is , yet you show zero % .........why is that?

----------


## Tomenable

> These results are so accurate it's scary. I didn't manipulate the data :). Modelling Europeans as Yamnaya+HungaryNeolithic+CHG+WHG. 
> 
> South Europe
> EN_Hungary
> Yamnaya
> WHG
> CHG
> @ D
> 
> ...


Hmmm, what will happen if you use Anatolia Neolithic instead of Hungary Neolithic? 

I guess percent of WHG will increase (sicne EN_Hungary were more WHG admixed).

----------


## Tomenable

> These are the type of Jews I see. Orthodox Jews, so I doubt many are admixed.


Now this can be considered a large and representative sample:

----------


## Angela

> Now this can be considered a large and representative sample:


This crowd picture where we can't even see the faces clearly, and of the minority of Hasidic Jews to boot is supposed to tell us what exactly?

----------


## Tomenable

> This crowd picture where we can't even see the faces clearly, and of the minority of Hasidic Jews to boot is supposed to tell us what exactly?


A ridiculous video on how Jewish people supposedly look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Reh8GPFLG64

But before clicking the link above, watch this video below:

----------


## Angela

> A ridiculous video on how Jewish people supposedly look:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Reh8GPFLG64
> 
> But before clicking the link above, watch this video below:


If it's so ridiculous and no doubt anti-Semitic, why give it publicity? I think I'll pass.

As to your second video this is no surprise. The American Civil Liberties Union is a bastion of liberalism. Many of its members are American Jews. They have often defended the free speech rights of bigots of one variety or another, including anti-Jewish bigots. 

In one famous case, some of these morons wanted a permit to march down the streets of Skokie, Illinois, which not coincidentally was heavily Jewish, with a lot of Holocaust survivors living there. The ACLU went to court to argue they should get the permit. They did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...lage_of_Skokie

That's government action, though, like the government rulings that a monstrous group of Christian extremists, known as the Westboro Baptist Church, who wants to picket at the funerals of dead military personnel, can picket, but they have to stay well away from the funeral home and the people attending. Just so you get the full picture, they hate Catholics as well as Jews and gays.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church

Both of these organizations are tiny groups of total losers, despised by everyone, right, left, and center. America isn't Europe, where in certain countries there's tolerance for this garbage. 

Youtube is not a government or the state. Someone should explain to this girl that the first amendment in the U.S. only prohibits the "*government*" from interfering with people's free speech rights. I guess she either hasn't yet taken or slept through constitutional law. If I don't want some bigot in my house I can kick him out. If youtube doesn't want bigots, or people advocating the murder of Jews, or people inciting other people to riot, or people explaining how to build bombs, or jihadis recruiting on their site, they have, in my opinion, a perfect right to make that decision.

----------


## Tomenable

We have a lot of new genomes from the Middle East now (Lazaridis 2016 paper about farmers etc.). What happens if we model Ashkenazi Jews as a mixture of Bronze Age Levant + Europeans? Samples from Bronze Age Levant are for example I1705, I1706 and I1730. After all, Jewish ancient ancestors were Iron Age Hebrews, and it is believed that Hebrews descended from Bronze Age Canaanites, who had lived in the Levant. Some scholars also believe that Hebrews were new immigrants to the region, who replaced Canaanites. But we don't have Iron Age samples yet, so let's examine BA_Levant.

----------


## Sile

> We have a lot of new genomes from the Middle East now (Lazaridis 2016 paper about farmers etc.). What happens if we model Ashkenazi Jews as a mixture of Bronze Age Levant + Europeans? Samples from Bronze Age Levant are for example I1705, I1706 and I1730. After all, Jewish ancient ancestors were Iron Age Hebrews, and it is believed that Hebrews descended from Bronze Age Canaanites, who had lived in the Levant. Some scholars also believe that Hebrews were new immigrants to the region, who replaced Canaanites. But we don't have Iron Age samples yet, so let's examine BA_Levant.


What are you trying to say?

*The history of Judaism spans more than 3,000 years.**[14]* 

so it is late bronze-age
 
It developed in southern Levant .............so ,........ some of these Jews became Gentiles in the late iron-age i.e. Christ who married Mary a Phoenician Priestess of what was a "pagan" religion.

I do not know why you want to mix bronze-age markers with european , which European, modern ones?

BTW, I do not believe any Pagans ever existed...........for another thread.

----------


## Tomenable

Sile, 

It is believed that Ashkenazi Jews have some European admixture - so I want to see how much. That's why I asked to model them as a mix of Bronze Age Levantines + Europeans, to see what % of their ancestry is from BA_Levant and what % from Europe. Are you claiming that they are 100% BA Levantines with no any Euro admixture?

----------


## davef

A) I love discussing jewish genetics!

B) given that european jews don't have any whg ancestry to start with, this in my mind eliminates any theory regarding them as a mixture of the original diasporics plus north euro. The Polish and the Germans have tons of whg ancestry. If they originally plotted with Lebanese and other levantines and mixed with south italians and sicillians, they would plot far south of sicillians as opposed to along side of them (they would be half sicilian half Levant in most calculators instead of half north italian half Levant). They would also show a lot more ibd with South Italy than they do in reality. I can only logically conclude without evidence (I'll admit) that the Middle East was a bit more south euro like. I may be wrong bc I'm a big time amateur.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> We have a lot of new genomes from the Middle East now (Lazaridis 2016 paper about farmers etc.). What happens if we model Ashkenazi Jews as a mixture of Bronze Age Levant + Europeans? Samples from Bronze Age Levant are for example I1705, I1706 and I1730. After all, Jewish ancient ancestors were Iron Age Hebrews, and it is believed that Hebrews descended from Bronze Age Canaanites, who had lived in the Levant. Some scholars also believe that Hebrews were new immigrants to the region, who replaced Canaanites. But we don't have Iron Age samples yet, so let's examine BA_Levant.


Here are some results for Ashkenazi_Jews compared to Druze. 

First of all I have to show that Ashkenazi_Jews behave like European-shifted Druze in these states. So anything ancient Middle Eastern Druze have, Ashkenazi Jews have the same but less of it. 

"distance%=0.3247 / distance=0.003247"

Ashkenazi_Jew
"Druze" 61.55
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 22.45
"Yamnaya_Samara" 9.6
"Loschbour" 3.9
"Nganasan" 2.5
"Satsurblia" 0
"Jordan_EBA" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"India_South" 0
"Ulchi" 0
"Levant_Neolithic" 0

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My conclusions are Ashkenazi Jews and Druze are mostly LevantN/AnatoliaN-like with minor CHG ancestry(~10%), maybe some South Asian, and for Ashkenazi Jews significant European ancestry(comes out as Yamnaya, Loschbour, and inflated AnatoliaN). Their CHG ancestry probably arrived in Levant via people with lots of LevantN/AnatoliaN ancestry, so in total they might be 50%+ ancient Iran/Northern West Asia. 

"distance%=0.7723 / distance=0.007723"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Belarusian" 34.8
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 28.75
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 20.15
"Levant_Neolithic" 13.85
"Ulchi" 2.05
"India_South" 0.4
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"Nganasan" 0

"distance%=1.3645 / distance=0.013645"


Druze
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 50.8
"Belarusian" 16.85
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 15.45
"Levant_Neolithic" 13.8
"India_South" 3.1
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"Ulchi" 0
"Nganasan" 0


"distance%=1.0614 / distance=0.010614"


Ashkenazi_Jew
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 40.85
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 30.7
"Yamnaya_Samara" 15
"Levant_Neolithic" 4.6
"Loschbour" 3.9
"Nganasan" 2.5
"India_South" 2
"Ulchi" 0.45
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0

"distance%=1.4836 / distance=0.014836"


Druze
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 48.8
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 28.8
"Yamnaya_Samara" 8.95
"Levant_Neolithic" 8.45
"India_South" 4.8
"Ulchi" 0.1
"Loschbour" 0.1
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"Nganasan" 0


For Ashkenazi Jews they always choice Anatolia_N as their Western ancestor instead of Levant_N and Jordan_EBA, so when I only use Jordan_EBA as the Western ancestor this is the result.

"Anatolia_Neolithic" 41.75
"Jordan_EBA" 26.3
"Satsurblia" 16.1
"India_South" 7.95
"Yamnaya_Samara" 6.3
"Nganasan" 1.6
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"Ulchi" 0
"Loschbour" 0
"Levant_Neolithic" 0


When I do the same with Levant_N.

"distance%=1.9845 / distance=0.019845"




Ashkenazi_Jew
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 50.9
"Levant_Neolithic" 20.2
"Yamnaya_Samara" 20.05
"Loschbour" 8.1
"Nganasan" 0.75
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"India_South" 0
"Ulchi" 0

When i do the same with Druze.

"distance%=1.8875 / distance=0.018875"




Druze
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 59.7
"Jordan_EBA" 27.6
"Yamnaya_Samara" 8.45
"Loschbour" 3.95
"Nganasan" 0.3
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"India_South" 0
"Ulchi" 0

When I take out Iran_Chl, which has lots of EEF/LevantN-like stuff.

"distance%=1.7206 / distance=0.017206"
Druze
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 41.75
"Jordan_EBA" 26.3
"Satsurblia" 16.1
"India_South" 7.95
"Yamnaya_Samara" 6.3
"Nganasan" 1.6
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"Ulchi" 0
"Loschbour" 0
"Levant_Neolithic" 0


"distance%=1.8619 / distance=0.018619"


Druze
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 65.2
"Levant_Neolithic" 19.65
"Yamnaya_Samara" 11.9
"Loschbour" 3.15
"Ulchi" 0.1
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"India_South" 0
"Nganasan" 0



"distance%=1.1793 / distance=0.011793"




Ashkenazi_Jew
"Anatolia_Neolithic" 50.15
"Yamnaya_Samara" 15.6
"Jordan_EBA" 14.6
"Satsurblia" 9.35
"India_South" 4.4
"Nganasan" 3.6
"Loschbour" 2.3
"Iran_Neolithic" 0
"Yoruba" 0
"Ulchi" 0
"Levant_Neolithic" 0

----------


## Angela

> A) I love discussing jewish genetics!
> 
> B) given that european jews don't have any whg ancestry to start with, this in my mind eliminates any theory regarding them as a mixture of the original diasporics plus north euro. The Polish and the Germans have tons of whg ancestry. If they originally plotted with Lebanese and other levantines and mixed with south italians and sicillians, they would plot far south of sicillians as opposed to along side of them (they would be half sicilian half Levant in most calculators instead of half north italian half Levant). They would also show a lot more ibd with South Italy than they do in reality. I can only logically conclude without evidence (I'll admit) that the Middle East was a bit more south euro like. I may be wrong bc I'm a big time amateur.


As you can see from the data posted by Fire-Haired, they can indeed be modeled with WHG. 

Also, Behar et al 2013 has already shown that there is IBD sharing between Ashkenazim and Poles.

See:
https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi...biol_preprints

"The greatest level of sharingwas observed with Sephardi Jews, considerably greater than with other populations. Substantialsharing with Eastern Europeans was also observed, though at a much lower level."

Numerous older papers found the same thing, but the citations are in the Behar paper

Dienekes also did a fast IBD sharing analysis for various Jewish groups:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08...ewish-and.html

http://s12.postimg.org/omaza8osr/Jewish_Diaspora.png

The entire topic is discussed here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...-they-are-from

----------


## davef

He did a nice job! Yes I read the thread before I even signed up here and its pretty interesting but is the "whg" in jews actual whg from a northern euro population or is it something that resembles it? What gets to me is that in the lazaridis study mentioned in that thread, jews have absolutely none of it, yet they supposedly mixed with Polish who have a ton of it? And the ibd with Poles could be from jews to poles and not vice versa, according to that thread. I'm not quite convinced that jews have actual ancestry from north or Eastern Europe but I'm open to any counter argument.

----------


## Angela

> He did a nice job! Yes I read the thread before I even signed up here and its pretty interesting but is the "whg" in jews actual whg from a northern euro population or is it something that resembles it? What gets to me is that in the lazaridis study mentioned in that thread, jews have absolutely none of it, yet they supposedly mixed with Polish who have a ton of it? And the ibd with Poles could be from jews to poles and not vice versa, according to that thread. I'm not quite convinced that jews have actual ancestry from north or Eastern Europe but I'm open to any counter argument.


Precision is important when discussing these things, yes? It's true that in the Lazaridis et al three ancient population model, and in their graph based on f3 stats, the Ashkenazim, along with other populations, don't score any WHG. That's not the same as saying they don't have WHG, because they do, but it's included within the "farmer" percentage. 

In terms of the IBD sharing, why would you assume that the gene flow was all from the Jews into Slavs? I don't see any evidence that was the case. If nothing else, with each pogrom there were reported rapes. Some of those no doubt resulted in pregnancies, much as I would prefer not to discuss it. They may not have happened specifically in Poland, but they were "Slavic" genes nonetheless. That's why ultra-orthodox Jewish women still have very short hair and wear wigs. The custom developed in the Pale, and was to make them less attractive to the surrounding goyim. At least that's what my Orthodox friends have told me. 

Regardless, I don't see how the AJ failure to score any "additional" WHG means there wasn't a 3-5% influx of Slavic genes into the Ashkenazim. The Sicilians don't score any WHG, and yet we know that there was a large migration of northern Italians, who do score it (although not was much as in the Slavs), into Sicily in the Middle Ages. 

In the last page of the Lazaridis et al paper, in Extended Data Table 3, they discuss the range of the possible WHG ancestry in all of their chosen populations. The Greek range is from .019 to .060 and yet we know there was a Slavic migration into Greece, although it was heavier in the Balkans. That's not very impressive. WHG scores are low all over southern Europe. Look at the Tuscans and the Spaniards: they score 12% as a mean, but the low end of the range for the Spaniards is .066. (A bit off topic, but you might want to take a look at the total EEF scores for some of these populations: Bergamo (72%), Tuscan (75%) , Spanish (76%) , Albanians (78%), Greek (79%), Sardinians 82%. Bulgarians are very close to Bergamo, with .718, but of course Cavalli Sforza proved that 30 years ago.)
https://genetics.med.harvard.edu/rei...Ancestries.pdf

When you're talking about flow into such a bottlenecked group as the Ashkenazim, it's very possible that just chance determined what alleles were passed on. Drift is very important in such groups.

At any rate, even if, for some reason, someone wanted to discount the many and excellently done research papers on the Ashkenazim and other Jewish groups which show such admixture, we now have ancient genomes from the Levant Bronze Age, of a population which is pretty close to being a proto-Canaanite one, as I've said before. The Ashkenazim are pulled away from them toward Europe. We likewise have Samaritan dna, people whom we know both from history and from comparisons to the Ashkenazim, are related to them, and we know where they plot. Again, they're pulled away from the Samaritans. '

So, the admixture happened; what remains to be discovered, only through ancient dna, in my opinion, is when, where, from whom, and precisely how much.

----------


## Tomenable

King Casimir III of Poland had at least 6 illegitimate sons and several illegitimate daughters. Some of those children (including 2 sons) were with a Jewish woman. But I think that they became Christians, so in this case it would be IBD from Jews to Poles.

It is ironic that he did not have any legitimate sons, only "bastards". All of his legitimate children were daughters.

----------


## davef

Wow, thank you for the long detailed response! 

Going by the chart you posted, Ashkenazim are way way north of Bronze Age levant where we have our Canaanite. The difference is about as great as between Ashkenazim and British I would guess. 

So if Ashkenazic Jews were originally like these Canaanites, there's no way in my head that they remained like them up until they reached Central or Eastern Europe. Someone who is 95 percent Bronze Age levant and 5 percent polish would never plot as north as Ashkenazim do in the map.

----------


## Angela

> Wow, thank you for the long detailed response! 
> 
> Going by the chart you posted, Ashkenazim are way way north of Bronze Age levant where we have our Canaanite. The difference is about as great as between Ashkenazim and British I would guess. 
> 
> So if Ashkenazic Jews were originally like these Canaanites, there's no way in my head that they remained like them up until they reached Central or Eastern Europe. Someone who is 95 percent Bronze Age levant and 5 percent polish would never plot as north as Ashkenazim do in the map.


Obviously not. That's why the working theory has been admixture with southern Europeans in the interim, with the proposed vector usually being Greeks during the Hellenic period. Some central European admixture might have been picked up once they got to the Rhineland as well. 

The only Jews anywhere near the modern Levant are North African Jews. Whether that's because they're still mainly "original" Hebrews with only a small dollop of admixture with Sephardim and a few Ashkenazim, or whether the absorption of quite a bit of Berber ancestry also factors into the equation I can't tell.





> King Casimir III of Poland had at least 6 illegitimate sons and several illegitimate daughters. Some of those children (including 2 sons) were with a Jewish woman. But I think that they became Christians, so in this case it would be IBD from Jews to Poles.
> 
> It is ironic that he did not have any legitimate sons, only "bastards". All of his legitimate children were daughters.


It happens. The War of the Roses which so devastated England was because the male line ran out. Henry VIII of England had one legitimate son, but he died, so the crown passed to two of his daughters even though he had an illegitimate son. Of course, he blamed his wives for his predicament but the male plays a big role in the determination of the gender of the offspring. Also, past a certain point he seems to have been virtually incapable of begetting children of either gender.

As to Jewish gene flow into gentiles, I know some scholars claim there was a bit of Sephardic ancestry in Ferdinand and Isabella. I'm sure there's controversy about it, though, so I wouldn't bet on it.

"Isabella and Ferdinand expelled the Jews from Spain and made the Inquisition into a powerful institution whose main victims were Catholics of Jewish or Moorish ancestry. However, like a part of Iberians in general and most of Iberian nobility, Isabella had some Jewish ancestry: three of her great-great-grandparents had Iberian (Sephardic) Jewish roots. 
http://www.helium.com/items/764266-biogr...

The founder of Trastamara dynasty Henry II of Castile was a son of Castilian King Alfonso XI and his mistress of Jewish converso origin Eleanor of Guzman; his grandson Henry III of Castile married Katherine of Lancaster whose mother was a daughter of Castilian King Pedro the Cruel and his Jewish converso mistress/wife Maria de Padilla: Ines Pirez, a mistress of John I of Portugal and mother of Afonso, 1st Duke of Braganza was a Jewish converso; finally all royal families of Iberia and consequently, most of European royalty descended by female lines from the first Navarrese dynasty which was in part of Iberian Jewish descent, that includes ISABELLA's Castilian ancestors Alfonso XI and Pedro the Cruel, John I of Portugal, John of Gaunt, Eleanor of Aragon. etc. 

Peggy K. Liss, "Isabel the Queen," New York: Oxford University Press, 1992, p. 165; Norman Roth, "Conversos, Inquisition, and the Expulsion of the Jews from Spain," Madison, WI, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1995,p. 150; Isabel Violante Pereira, De Mendo da Guarda a D.Manuel I, Lisboa, 2001, Livros Horizonte; James Reston, Jr. "Dogs of God," New York: Doubleday, 2005, p. 18. 

As I said, don't take this as gospel, as I haven't tracked down each claim. In particular, I'd have to find the Iberian link to John of Gaunt.

----------


## davef

Actual Southern Euro admixture sounds legit but if it did happen, it had to have been way back when. 

Or maybe the levant became more euro like over time. The Bronze Age levant is tens of thousands of years old right? A lot can happen given that much time. Then it became less euro like after some of the jews left. Feel free to point out any flaws

----------


## Angela

> Actual Southern Euro admixture sounds legit but if it did happen, it had to have been way back when. 
> 
> Or maybe the levant became more euro like over time. The Bronze Age levant is tens of thousands of years old right? A lot can happen given that much time. Then it became less euro like after some of the jews left. Feel free to point out any flaws


Are you perhaps reading this hypothesis from posts by Sikeliot? I understand from other people that he's pushing this narrative along with dubious ideas about the Greeks, in my opinion.

The sample is from around 2300 BC, so, no, not tens of thousands of years ago. 
See Supplementary Table I here:
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/201...1.figures-only

The Hellenic Era would have begun in the first millennium BC, so not a huge stretch of time, in my opinion. More importantly, I'm not aware of any huge migration from Europe to the Levant during that intervening time, which is what it would require to move them that distance.

The only possible such movement would involve people like the coastal Philistines, *if* they were indeed from the Aegean or other places in Europe, but that's highly speculative as we have no idea really of the "ethnicity" of the Sea Peoples. Also highly speculative is how much admixture there would have been with the Hebrews. The latter were almost as endogamous as the Bedouins if we go by their history as expressed in the Old Testament, which perhaps shouldn't be that surprising as these are highly patriarchal initially pastoral groups. Even with the Canaanites, the fulmination against taking their women to wife covers pages. For some of the Hebrews the appropriate thing to do if they had a conflict with them was to kill all of them, men and women alike. Certainly, any admixture would have mostly entailed incorporating their women, for which there is indeed some evidence. Usually, most of the males over a certain age were put to the sword. One would think the Sea Peoples, Philistines included, would have been a male dominated group, so I doubt there was a huge amount of admixture, although there might have been some. 

By the Hellenic and Roman periods, attitudes among the Jews had changed, and from being a very "exclusive" religion, it had become an expansive, proselytizing religion. Of course, the institutionalized repression which they started to encounter in the first centuries AD led to a retreat and endogamy once more. 

See:
http://www.jewishideasdaily.com/5189...zing-religion/

"Historians agree that there were different attitudes toward conversion in the talmudic period, but disagree regarding the historical record. Historian Louis Feldman argues that Judaism took an "active approach" toward proselytizing during the Hellenic period, as shown by the dramatic increase in Jewish population at this time. It is precisely because this Jewish approach continued into the 5th century, Feldman says, even after the Roman conquest and the ascent of Christianity, that Roman-Christian jurists felt the need to issue repeated bans on Jewish proselytism. But Shaye Cohen contends that while the Judaism of late antiquity accepted converts, it never engaged in any outreach, especially institutional outreach. Martin Goodman generally sides with Cohen,arguing that while some 3rd century rabbis, influenced by missionary Christianity, "began assuming the desirability of a mission to proselytize," this notion was never widely held or seriously implemented, especially following the Roman bans on proselytizing.Understandably missing from this debate is the phenomenon of conversion of Gentile slaves to Judaism upon the completion of their servitude. Throughout the centuries, Jews, alas, definitely owned non-Jewish (and sometimes Jewish) slaves. Many talmudic sages argued that a Gentile slave purchased by a Jew must immerse in the_mikveh_ and, if male, undergo circumcision in a partial conversion; when the servitude was done, conversion could be completed. In line with the rule that conversion must be voluntary, a slave could reject this process; after 12 months of refusal, the slave would have to be sold. But slaves that agreed to the conversion process were required to keep most commandments; and their Jewish owner was prohibited from selling them to Gentiles, since such a sale would preclude their full conversion. 
Because of economic pressures and restrictions on conversion, Jews sometimes bought slaves without converting them, a practice allowed by some talmudic sages. Thus, it is difficult to argue that slavery was used to proselytize; the motivation for purchasing slaves was almost certainly socio-economic, not religious. Yet many historians believe that released slaves became a regular source of new members of the Jewish community, even after the talmudic period."

My research into the archives in my own area echoes some of this. Even two centuries after the bans against conversion of gentiles to Judaism had been implemented, the Pope was writing to the local Bishop of Luni to say that he should not be allowing a local Jewish landowner to convert his slaves. It couldn't have been extremely widespread, however, given that there is no out of the ordinary IBD sharing between Jews and Italians.

----------


## davef

2300 BC? Interesting! That sounds like its within the Bible range, date wise. 

Converted Greek slaves or non slaves may have made them plot where they plot according to your post. That seems possible. There is however debate against that as well. 

The IBD sharing with Greeks in your chart is nothing to celebrate. Then again, this is with modern ones. 

BUT, something must've turned a subset of a Bronze Age levant population into a population heavy in European /Anatolian farmer genes. A Bronze Age levant population will never make it to Europe genetically without intervention. 

Or, maybe this whole thing about Jews being Canaanites is bogus and they always were Euro like. :)

And what theory did this Sikeliot come up with regarding Greek people?

----------


## davef

This is a double post...
I might add that the mystery Euro population (Greeks seem more likely for historical reasons according to your post) that sent the Jews who then became Ashkenazim to Europe must've had an impact on them so big that a lot of their original Hebrew ancestry may have been lost. A half Bronze Age levant half sicilian (I'm guessing greece was more sicilian plotting back then) would be too south for where Ashkenazim plot today. A little Polish might not help much.

----------


## Fire Haired14

With the new Middle Eastern aDNA we can get good fits using D-stats for all West Eurasians only using ancient DNA. I'll post more about it later, but here are some interesting results.

First I'll show the new model for Europe. 

Two updates
*>Southern, Central Europe has NorthWest Asian ancestry(mixture of Anatolia_N, Levant_N, Caucasus_HG).* 
*>Saami have SHG ancestry*


Steppe
Europe_MN
Caucasus_HG
Levant_BA
NW African
Siberian
WHG
SHG


Italian_Tuscan
22.5
43.85
8
25.65
---
---
---
---
0.012477

Sardinian
3.2
67.45
4.8
24.55
---
---
---
---
0.010596

Spanish
28.2
50.95
4.25
10.5
5.4
---
---
---
0.009378

Basque_Spanish
28
68.95
3.05
0
---
---
---
---
0.009118

Bulgarian
32.65
38.4
8.35
20.6
---
---
---
---
0.011657

English_Cornwall
45.4
51.05
3.55
0
---
---
---
---
0.009454

Lithuanian
43.35
39.25
2.6
---
---
2.75
10.85
1.2
0.008322

Sami
32.55
23.1
0
---
---
26.4
6.9
11.05
0.025285




I've been saying for a long time Southern and Central Europeans have Cypriot-like admixture. The new ancient DNA supports this theory. Cypriots and Anatolia_Chl(they're not the same. Anatolia_CHl has more EEF) in D-stats fit well as Anatolia Neo+Levant BA+Caucasus HG. Cypriot and Anatolia_Chl fit well as an ancestor for South/Central Europe. I'm very confident an EEF/Levant/Caucasus admixed population from Anatolia or nearby migrated into Europe after the Neolithic. Jordan_BA can be fit as mostly Anatolia_N, with African and Iran_Neo admixture, and so it's contribution in Southern/Central Europe has been confused as Neolithic European ancestry. 

BTW, al Anatolia_Neo ancestry isn't from Europe_MN. Levant_BA and Steppe have it, so if you include that most Europeans are near 50% and Southern Europe is over 50%. The people who came into Europe from NW Asia after the Neolithic were mostly EEF, so....

When using EHG, WHG, EN_Europe, CHG, Levant_Neo these are results I get. 


Eastern_HG
Satsurblia
LBK_EN
Hungary_EN
Iberia_EN
Levant_Neolithic
Loschbour

Italian_Tuscan
15.6
17.15
58.8
0
0
7.2
0

English_Cornwall
25.3
16.15
42.55
0
7.55
0
8.45

Spanish
15.95
14.1
41.9
0
8.75
9.35
9.25




It's consistent using older genomes. When using more ancient genomes like these I get basically the same results. Yamnaya scores about 60% EHG(over 40%, 30% CHG and 10% Anatolia_Neo) which can be translated as about 50% Yamnaya for English, and 27% for Tuscan and Spanish. Notice Tuscan and Spanish though score as much CHG as English. That's because of Post-Neolithic ancestry from West Asia which had lots of CHG.

----------


## Fire Haired14

*Summary*: I'm not confident yet that such high amounts of Jordan_EBA admixture like above is realistic. I used Europe_MN references who have more WHG admixture than Neolithic Italy and Balkans probably had which rises Jordan_EBA percentages. It looks like Tuscany and Greece is mostly Anatolia_Neolithic(~60%) with significant EHG(15%)/Steppe(25-30%) admixture, and also some WHG(2-5%) and CHG/Iran_Neo(10-20%). Iran_Neo/CHG estimates are rough estimates and change with differnt references, but the EHG/Steppe percentage looks concrete and the Anatolia_Neolithic one looks pretty concrete. The Anatolia_Neolithic admixture arrived at differnt times. It's probable that lots arrived with Steppe admixture and some arrived with CHG/Iran_Neo admixture. 

Greece, Tuscany, and the rest of Italy and Balkans are fairlly similar but Sardinia is as we know differnt. They look like WHG admixed Neolithic European with 10-20% EHG and Iran_Neo/CHG admixture. Their WHG signal is stronger than Italy's and Balkan's, it's very real. Their EHG signal on the other hand is very weak but real, while Italy/Balkan's EHG is very strong. Like with Italy/Balkans their EEF admixture arrived at differnt times. Lots could have arrived with Iran_Chl/CHG admixture and EHG admixture. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The model above is good but not perfect. For Europe the only mystery is the Southern half. I'll move on to Middle East later. There's reason to put all of Europe under one entity, because everyone has a big chunk of Steppe and EEF and everyone has at least some WHG even in Greece. IMO, Greeks are largely maybe 50% from people who arrived from North of Greece after the Neolithic and brought with them Steppe and WHG admixture. 

I chose to use Greece, Tuscan, Sardinia to get good models for Southern Europe because Southern Italy/Spain as hard to model North African admixture and Northern Italy is shifted too far North. Balkans and Italy do have fairly similar proportions of ancestry even though they have few Y DNA connections. Spain is a bit differnt.


Eastern_HG
Satsurblia
Anatolia_Neolithic
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic
Loschbour
Hungary_HG
LaBrana1
Villabruna
India_South
Nganasan
Yoruba


Italian_Tuscan
16.05
14.15
60.65
0
4.8
0
0
4.35
0
---
---
---
0.014227

Greek
18.4
13.8
57.9
0
7
0
0
2.9
0
---
---
---
0.015684

Sardinian
4.15
6.45
75
0
2.75
0
0
11.65
0
---
---
---
0.013782




Yamnaya_Samara
Satsurblia
Anatolia_Neolithic
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic
Loschbour
Hungary_HG
LaBrana1
Villabruna
India_South
Nganasan
Yoruba


Italian_Tuscan
27.75
5.65
55.1
1.2
5.5
0
0
4.8
0
---
---
---
0.012863

Greek
31.6
3.9
52.4
0
8.6
0
0
3.5
0
---
---
---
0.014237

Sardinian
7.95
3.8
73.7
0
3.2
0.25
0
11.1
0
---
---
---
0.013508




So Southern Europe can be modeled mostly mostly Anatolia_Neolithic(50-60%) with significant Steppe/EHG admixture and minor WHG, CHG, and Iran_Neo admixture. When I take out Anatolia_Neolithic and replace it with "EF10"(10% Hungary WHG and 90% Anatolia Neolithic) or "EF15" to represent WHG admixed Neolithic Southern Europe(maybe not in Greece) here are the results. 


Yamnaya_Samara
Satsurblia
EF10
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic
Loschbour
Hungary_HG
LaBrana1
Villabruna
India_South
Nganasan
Yoruba


Italian_Tuscan
26.25
6.9
58.15
3.35
5.35
0
0
0
0
---
---
---
0.01354

Greek
28.7
5.3
56.1
0.05
9.85
0
0
0
0
---
---
---
0.014951

Sardinian
5.9
5.05
80.05
0
4.45
0
0
4.55
0
---
---
---
0.014315



Corded_Ware_Germany
Satsurblia
EF10
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic
Loschbour
Hungary_HG
LaBrana1
Villabruna
India_South
Nganasan
Yoruba


Italian_Tuscan
36.15
5.75
45.6
7.6
4.9
0
0
0
0
---
---
---
0.013112

Greek
39.25
4.05
43
3.95
9.75
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.014677

Sardinian
9.75
4.05
77.7

4.9
0
0
3.6
0
---
---
---
0.014176




Bell_Beaker_Germany
Satsurblia
EF10
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic
Loschbour
Hungary_HG
LaBrana1
Villabruna
India_South
Nganasan
Yoruba


Italian_Tuscan
45.5
9.65
36.35
5.2
3.3
0
0
0
0
---
---
---
0.01459

Greek
48.9
8.35
33.75
0
8.35
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.01651

Sardinian
17.2
4.15
72.85
0
3.9
0
0
1.9
0
---
---
---
0.013967




Bell_Beaker_Germany
Satsurblia
EF15
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic


Italian_Tuscan
44.45
10.95
31.85
12.75
0
0.015322

Greek
49.75
10.1
25.65
11.9
2.6
0.017207

Sardinian
12.9
5.6
75.3
2.9
3.3
0.014627




As WHG in the "EF" ancestor rises the CHG/Iran_Neo proportions rise. When EF15 is added for the first time Southern Europe needs Jordan_EBA admixture. When I add Anatolia_Chl no one needs admixture from them which is surprising.


Bell_Beaker_Germany
Satsurblia
EF15
Anatolia_Chalcolithic
Jordan_EBA
Iran_Neolithic


Italian_Tuscan
44.45
10.95
31.85
0
12.75
0
0.015322

Greek
49.8
10.05
25.6
0
11.95
2.6
0.017207

Sardinian
12.95
5.6
75.2
0
3
3.25
0.014627

----------


## davef

Assuming that the Bronze Age Levants are representative of how ancient Jews were genetically, I'm still open to the possibilities that modern European Jews either are true descendants of these people but absorbed a ton of South Euro like ancestry up to the point where they don't resemble their Biblical forefathers, or they started out from a South Euro like population. The former idea draws from the fact that they are extremely far from Bronze Age Levant (far as in the genetic distance between them and the British) and a half far South Euro (Sicily, Malta) half Bronze age Levantine wouldn't plot nearly as far into Europe where Euro Jews are now. 3-5 percent additional north/east euro won't do much to assist. The D-stats that Fire-Haired did an excellent job on show only 14 percent Bronze Age Jordan (don't know if that's the same as BA Levant, I'll have to see). 

I'm sure these opinions would make me the bad guy on most other anthro forums, as they aren't very "politically correct" but I don't set out to offend. I'll still be happy if someone is willing to spot out the holes and offer something that sides with the idea that Euro Jews resemble the Jews of the Bible genetically. I'm not counting on my opinions to be accurate.

----------


## Fire Haired14

The last results I posted for Ashkenazi Jews were of the form (Chimp, Row)(Mbuti, Colmn) this is of (Chimp, Colmn)(Mbuti, Row) and as far as I've seen the later creates better fits than the former.

@davef,

This is the best fit I've had for Ashkenazi Jew. It might be realistic. First admixture in the Balkans, then immigration to Eastern Europe and admixture there. 

BTW, Jordan_EBA is very similar to modern SW Asians but not the same. SW Asians have extra African ancestry and many have an extra load of Iran_Neo-like ancestry. Ashkenazi_Jews and Druze are ones with this extra load of Iran_Neo. 

I doubt Jordan_EBA is a good reference for ancient Jews. IMO, Modern Levanties are, like Druze, Palestinans, Samartians, etc. The Jews tell of migration in the Bible. They arrived in Israel only by the Late Bronze age about 1,500 years after Mr. Jordan_EBA was born. Who knows what type of admixture they picked up along the way and who knows what admixture arrived in the Levant in general after Jordan_EBA. 

distance=0.005375"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Druze" 50.05
"Greek" 34.5
"Belarusian" 11.05
"Jordan_EBA" 4.4
"Satsurblia" 0
"Iran_Neolithic" 0

----------


## Angela

OK, my patience is at an end, Tomenable. Now I'm going to have to waste time removing all these off topic posts to new threads. I don't appreciate it, and on a holiday no less. 

Cut it out, and I mean it!

----------


## davef

> The last results I posted for Ashkenazi Jews were of the form (Chimp, Row)(Mbuti, Colmn) this is of (Chimp, Colmn)(Mbuti, Row) and as far as I've seen the later creates better fits than the former.
> 
> @davef,
> 
> This is the best fit I've had for Ashkenazi Jew. It might be realistic. First admixture in the Balkans, then immigration to Eastern Europe and admixture there. 
> 
> BTW, Jordan_EBA is very similar to modern SW Asians but not the same. SW Asians have extra African ancestry and many have an extra load of Iran_Neo-like ancestry. Ashkenazi_Jews and Druze are ones with this extra load of Iran_Neo. 
> 
> I doubt Jordan_EBA is a good reference for ancient Jews. IMO, Modern Levanties are, like Druze, Palestinans, Samartians, etc. The Jews tell of migration in the Bible. They arrived in Israel only by the Late Bronze age about 1,500 years after Mr. Jordan_EBA was born. Who knows what type of admixture they picked up along the way and who knows what admixture arrived in the Levant in general after Jordan_EBA. 
> ...


Is a distance of .005 good? Also if you use south italy in place of greek, would the distance increase? That would be interesting

----------


## Angela

> Is a distance of .005 good? Also if you use south italy in place of greek, would the distance increase? That would be interesting


Doesn't matter, although it might be about the same given that South Italians/Sicilians and Greeks aren't all that different autosomally; there's no IBD sharing with South Italians. There is with Greeks.

----------


## Tomenable

> OK, my patience is at an end, Tomenable. Now I'm going to have to waste time removing all these off topic posts to new threads. I don't appreciate it, and on a holiday no less. 
> 
> Cut it out, and I mean it!


Well... you only forgot to remove your own Off-Topic posts, Angela.  :Smile: 

Anyway, I wish you a wonderful vacation.

----------


## Angela

> Well... you only forgot to remove your own Off-Topic posts, Angela. 
> 
> Anyway, I wish you a wonderful vacation.


Tomenable, you know very well that we are more liberal about posting off topic material than a lot of other sites. However, more than eight posts in a row about something that's off topic? That's a bit different. Just watch it.

Anyway, let's not quarrel. Thanks for the good wishes, but our three day Fourth of July week end is almost over. One more barbecue, for which I am leaving now! :)

----------


## Fire Haired14

> Is a distance of .005 good? Also if you use south italy in place of greek, would the distance increase? That would be interesting


Anything under 0.02 is a good fit. So 0.005 is very very good. Southern Italy is a bit of an outlier but maybe the Balkans were like Southern Italy(minus NW African ancestry) before Slavic migrations. 

Ashkenazi Jews get an equally good fit with South Italy.

distance=0.005037"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Italian_South" 51.1
"Druze" 34.95
"Belarusian" 13.95

Now assuming Ashkeanzi Jews came to Central/East Europe with no Southern European admixture. This fit works as well. It's not consistent with Y DNA. I haven't looked at Ashkenazi mtDNA though. 

distance=0.007639"


Ashkenazi_Jew
"Druze" 68.9
"Belarusian" 31.1

----------


## Fire Haired14

Angela has a temper lol.

----------


## Fire Haired14

HighLights:

*>Iran_Chalcolithic*: West Eurasian side is a mixture of Steppe and something high in CHG and EEF. Iran_Neo doesn't fit this profile. Iran_Chl fits well, but most South Asian's still need extra CHG.
*>Yamnaya*: Yamnaya is a better proxy for Steppe ancestry than Srubnaya. It doesn't look like South Asians have WHG ancestry which excludes the possibility of Srubnaya-like people. 

This is the best model I've found for South Asians. Iran_Neo is not a good ancestor proxy for them suprisingly. When I modeled them with Iran_Neo they usually scored 0, and instead scored equal amounts in CHG(Satsurblia) and Anatolia_N. According to these D-stats their non-ASI and Steppe ancestor was a CHG/EEF mix, and Iran_Neo doesn't fit that profile. It has too low CHG affinity not just too low EEF affinity. 

Iran_Late_Neo had some EEF_like admixture, but doesn't work either. Iran_Chl though had lots of EEF and CHG admixture and fits well as the none ASI and Steppe ancestor of South Asians, but most still need some extra CHG. 


Yamnaya_Samara
Srubnaya
Satsurblia
Anatolia_Neolithic
Levant_Neolithic
Iran_Chalcolithic
Hungary_HG
India_South
Han
Nganasan
Yoruba


Kalash
30.25
0
10.4
0
0
21.55
0
37.8
-----
-----
-----
0.010657

GujaratiA
15.3
10.7
2.9
0
0
17.85
0
53.25
-----
-----
-----
0.00596

Tajik_Ishkashim
27.75
17.1
6.55
6.35
0
14.55
0
17.8
4.35
5.55
-----
0.013662

Sindhi
16.8
0
5.65
0
0
27.5
0
50.05
-----
-----
-----
0.006482

Pathan
22.7
5.65
6.4
3.3
0
19.15
0
42.8
-----
-----
-----
0.009229

----------


## Fire Haired14

This model works well for SW Asia/North Africa. 


Highlights.


*>Extra load of ancient Iranian admixture in SW Asia and Egypt and Ashkenazi Jews(meaning admixture is at least 2,000 years old).*


*>Extra African admixture in most of SW Asia and a big load in North Africa.*


*>WHG admixture in Morocco. Could recently be from Spain or represent older admixture from Spain. 


>Similar amount of ancient Iranian admixture in Morocco as in Bronze age Jordan. Moroccans ancestors mostly arrived sometime between 9000 BC and 3000 BC from Levant, mixed with Africans(Yoruba) and Europeans(WHG), and have been isolated since then?*



Eastern_HG
Satsurblia
Levant_Neolithic
Iran_Chalcolithic
Hungary_HG
India_South
Nganasan
Yoruba


Jordan_EBA
2.9
0
62.35
34.75
0
-----
-----
0
0.00756

Druze
5.3
2.7
36.3
54.5
0.8
-----
-----
0.4
0.014096

BedouinB
2.85
0
43.25
48.5
0
-----
-----
5.4
0.01321

Egyptian
2.55
0
41.4
43.3
1.05
-----
-----
11.7
0.014943

Lebanese_Christian
2.7
0
35.25
58.65
3.4
-----
-----
0
0.015177

Lebanese_Muslim
5.4
0.5
32
59.55
0.85
-----
-----
1.7
0.013334

Moroccan
2.2
1.1
49.25
21.6
5.3
-----
-----
20.55
0.014024




So you can see modern SW Asia has significantly more ancient Iran-related admixture. Ashkenazi Jews show the same extra amount of Iran-related admixture. Since their ancestors left the Levant some 2,000 years ago, it means this admixture can't be too recent. When Iran_Chl is replaced by Iran_Neo, modern and Bronze age SW Asia/North Africa still prefer ancient Iran(Iran_Neo) over ancient Caucasus(Satsurblia) which is interesting. It could mean admixture came directly from Iran.


Iran_Chl had lots of Levant_N/Anatolia_N-related and CHG-related admixture. It's very differnt from Iran_Neo. So SW Asia/North Africa is definitely mostly descended of Levant_N/Anatolia_N-like people. 


Levant_N had some African admixture, but there's definitely more African admixture in modern SW Asia/North Africa. More African admixture than was in the Bronze age individual from Jordan. It looks like there might also be Steppe/Eastern_HG admixture.

----------


## Angela

> The last results I posted for Ashkenazi Jews were of the form (Chimp, Row)(Mbuti, Colmn) this is of (Chimp, Colmn)(Mbuti, Row) and as far as I've seen the later creates better fits than the former.
> 
> @davef,
> 
> This is the best fit I've had for Ashkenazi Jew. It might be realistic. First admixture in the Balkans, then immigration to Eastern Europe and admixture there. 
> 
> BTW, Jordan_EBA is very similar to modern SW Asians but not the same. SW Asians have extra African ancestry and many have an extra load of Iran_Neo-like ancestry. Ashkenazi_Jews and Druze are ones with this extra load of Iran_Neo. 
> 
> I doubt Jordan_EBA is a good reference for ancient Jews. IMO, Modern Levanties are, like Druze, Palestinans, Samartians, etc. The Jews tell of migration in the Bible. They arrived in Israel only by the Late Bronze age about 1,500 years after Mr. Jordan_EBA was born. Who knows what type of admixture they picked up along the way and who knows what admixture arrived in the Levant in general after Jordan_EBA. 
> ...


I agree, and that looks pretty good. Have you tried it with Samaritans instead of Druze?

----------


## Angela

[QUOTE]


> This model works well for SW Asia/North Africa. 
> 
> 
> Highlights.
> 
> 
> *>Extra load of ancient Iranian admixture in SW Asia and Egypt and Ashkenazi Jews(meaning admixture is at least 2,000 years old).*
> 
> 
> *>Extra African admixture in most of SW Asia and a big load in North Africa.*


This confirms what we know from history and from prior analyses. There's been a steady flow of African admixture moving north. The Arab slave trade after the Muslim invasions is often the explanation given, and I think that's part of it, with most of it coming from women slaves. However, I think there's always been some gene flow, and a good chunk of it came with the movement of tribes from Arabia, before, and especially after, Islam. They themselves mostly got it from women as well. It shows mostly in the mtDna, not the yDna. 




> WHG admixture in Morocco. Could recently be from Spain or represent older admixture from Spain.


Mostly older, in my opinion.




> >Similar amount of ancient Iranian admixture in Morocco as in Bronze age Jordan. Moroccans ancestors mostly arrived sometime between 9000 BC and 3000 BC from Levant, mixed with Africans(Yoruba) and Europeans(WHG), and have been isolated since then?


Not totally isolated, but not enough admixture to really change the autosomal signature.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> I agree, and that looks pretty good. Have you tried it with Samaritans instead of Druze?


I can't because Samartians aren't included in any D-stat spreadsheet I know of. The below models work. The extra African admixture in Palestinian and Lebanses_Muslim inflate Greek admixture. The model works but I'm pretty sure most of that African admixture came in the Middle Ages. 

This one is basically a repeat of the Druze+Greek+BelaRussian one. Druze is broken up into Jordan_EBA and Iran_Chl.

distance=0.010013"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Greek" 42.3
"Jordan_EBA" 34.05
"Iran_Chalcolithic" 13.1
"Belarusian" 10.55

These models also work.
distance=0.00537"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Greek" 74.45
"Palestinian" 25.55
"Belarusian" 0

distance=0.004519"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Greek" 60.15
"Lebanese_Muslim" 39.8
"Belarusian" 0.0

distance=0.005583"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Lebanese_Christian" 66.1
"Belarusian" 19.75
"Greek" 14.15

----------


## Angela

> Anything under 0.02 is a good fit. So 0.005 is very very good. Southern Italy is a bit of an outlier but maybe the Balkans were like Southern Italy(minus NW African ancestry) before Slavic migrations. 
> 
> Ashkenazi Jews get an equally good fit with South Italy.
> 
> distance=0.005037"
> Ashkenazi_Jew
> "Italian_South" 51.1
> "Druze" 34.95
> "Belarusian" 13.95
> ...


The top set of stats are most consistent with the amount of IBD sharing for the Ashkenazim with Slavs. That's certainly the admixture profile that various researchers, including Jewish researchers have posited in the past, so how come there's no evidence of IBD sharing? 

It's a puzzlement, to quote the King of Siam. :)

As for "Italian South", I've been saying forever that they're a highly drifted population. I see people are finally agreeing.

I've also been saying forever that it may very well turn out that they're the best proxy for what Greek populations were like in the Classical Era. Sicilians are a little different because of the influx of northern Italian and central Italian genes during the Middle Ages. I actually reconnected through 23andme with someone whose family went to Sicily from LaSpezia. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombards_of_Sicily

This explains it much better, including the location of the towns:
https://books.google.com/books?id=5a...Sicily&f=false

Here is a map:
http://s2.postimg.org/ichtvypt5/vncxm1.gif

----------


## Fire Haired14

> As for "Italian South", I've been saying forever that they're a highly drifted population. I see people are finally agreeing.


Do you have links to papers showing they're drifted?

----------


## Angela

This looks pretty good given everything we know:
_Ashkenazi_Jew_
_"Druze" 50.05_
_"Greek" 34.5_
_"Belarusian" 11.05_
_"Jordan_EBA" 4.4_
_"Satsurblia" 0_
_"Iran_Neolithic" 0

Now we'll see what the ancient dna shows.
_
I think Jews may have picked up a little Egyptian, if not from ancient times, then from Alexandrian Jews, which might explain that Jordan EBA 4.4%, but that's sheer speculation.

It would be nice if someone could model them with Samaritans at some point.

----------


## Angela

> Do you have links to papers showing they're drifted?


Not recent genetics papers, no, but Cavalli-Sforza maintained in all his writings about Italy that we're a very drifted population. It's not just true of the Sardinians. It's a function of geography, given that Italy is so mountainous. 

However, it's also a function of politics. With the end of the Empire, Italy was torn into lots of little pieces which were ruled by different foreign countries and which had very little to do with one another. Intermarriage was only within the valley, or the mountain, or the political unit.
"Campanilismo" or attachment to one's own town bell is still important in Italy today, although less so than in the past. 

That's part of why there is such a difference between north and south Italy. It's not just different migrations south of Rome versus north of Rome, although those are very important. It's that until the 1960s there was virtually no gene flow between the two areas. Almost all of my matches at 23andme are with people from Liguria, Emilia, Toscana and Piemonte. I don't have *one* "cousin" with southern Italian ancestry. I don't even have any from the Veneto. (Bizarrely, I have quite a few, although small, with people from Denmark, and some from the "Celtic" fringe in the British Isles.) Southern Italy, even more than Sicily, with its Lombard migrations, has been very isolated. The only attested gene flows in the last 1000 years, other than some short lived Muslim incursions and a well known resettlement, are from Albania, and some from the Byzantines, especially after the Muslim ascendancy. That's it, to my knowledge. Maybe if any of our Southern Italian members read this they can chime in, but that's my reading of the history. The only exception might be around Naples and Palermo, but as I already said, Sicily is a little different.

Oh, the Cavalli-Sforza book is called "Consanguinity, Inbreeding, and Genetic Drift in Italy". I've got a copy in my bookshelves. I think it's time I re-read it.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7800.html

----------


## Fire Haired14

Ok I trust that. Italy in Roman times might have been a differnt story though.

----------


## davef

distance=0.004519"
Ashkenazi_Jew
"Greek" 60.15
"Lebanese_Muslim" 39.8

This horse is in the lead ^
(Iphone won't let me copy Belarussisn but its 0 in this case.)

I also have South Italian ancestry as well, though I don't know exactly from where but it's definitely not sicilian. With the stats posted above and that whole South Italians are like Ancient Greek thig Angela was harping about ; I wonder what size toga fits me  :Poh: .

----------


## davef

And you know the big neolithic paper (genetic structure of worlds first farmers) that was just recently released a few weeks ago? South Italians are leagues away from anyone on the fst chart, then again how reliable is that measurement? I think they have the English as closer to Greeks in comparison to South Italians which blows my mind given that these two populations have such a history with each other.

I may be unaware of how fst can be misleading or misinterpreted. Is it a reliable measure of genetic closeness?

----------


## Fire Haired14

Back on Jews :). I have to say again they do look Northern European. Like I've said there's a historically large Ashekanzi Jewish community about a mile from my house. I've seen groups of them. Many have Light Brown or Blonde hair. I always see at least one with Red hair when there's a group. I had a Jewish teamate in Little League with bleach Blonde hair and everyone in his family had Blue eyes. Few or none have olive or Brown skin. Look at the few pictures on this thread there's always at least one Red beard in there. 

Bosnians look much more exotic and are darker, and you'll never see one with Red hair. I do trust DNA test results but I'm not gonna buy garbage about them actually looking like Palestinains or Druze. They simply do not. I walked by a baseball field today where there were a bunch of Ashkenazi kids with some traditional clothing on playing. My Dad said "See they must have gone to Scandinavia or something and mixed with people there" and explained they're not "He said no they're Northern European right?". He can't believe. He thought his whole life they were converts from Northern Europe. 

It doesn't make sense. Maybe Pigmentation does make a bigger difference than we think. Maybe Turkish would look white with paler features and Swedes would look Middle Eastern with darker ones.

----------


## Tomenable

Here is data on hair colours collected by pre-war anthropologists:

Land - % light hair (Jews / Gentiles) | % very dark hair (Jews / Gentiles):

Prussia - 11.23 / 39.75 | 43.34 / 14.05
Hesse - 11.17 / 31.53 | 41.50 / 13.22
Baden - 10.32 / 24.34 | 41.95 / 21.18
Bavaria - 10.38 / 20.36 | 39.45 21.10
Alsace-Lorraine - 13.51 / 18.44 | 34.59 / 25.21

Jews were statistically speaking much darker-haired than Gentiles.

Land - % of light hair for Jews (I couldn't find for Gentiles in these lands):

Silesia - 8.20 
Pommern - 8.85 
Brandenburg - 9.64 
East & West Prussia - 11.61 
Galicia - 13.97 
Posen - 12.39 
Congress Poland - 13.28
Bohemia - 8.29 
Lower Austria - 8.69 
Moravia - 9.86 
Bukovina - 13.55

 Data cited from "JewishEncyclopedia.com" website.

Henryk Szpidbaum (himself Jewish) in 1933 published data on pigmentation of Polish Jews:

Light hair - 13.28%
Light eyes - 20.59%

This is much lower than among Gentiles (68% to 72.4% light eyes, depending on source).

===============

According to Hans F. K. Günther, "Rassenkunde des jüdischen Volkes", published in 1930 (and cited by Henryk Szpidbaum in "Jews in Reborn Poland", 1933), already Ancient Hebrews had about 10% - 15% of light-haired individuals among them.




> I'm not gonna buy garbage about them actually looking like Palestinains


Palestinians are 15-20 percent Sub-Saharan, if I recall correctly.

This is probably due to Muslim slave trade in the last 1400 years.

----------


## John Doe

> Here is data on hair colours collected by pre-war anthropologists:
> 
> Land - % light hair (Jews / Gentiles) | % very dark hair (Jews / Gentiles):
> 
> Prussia - 11.23 / 39.75 | 43.34 / 14.05
> Hesse - 11.17 / 31.53 | 41.50 / 13.22
> Baden - 10.32 / 24.34 | 41.95 / 21.18
> Bavaria - 10.38 / 20.36 | 39.45 21.10
> Alsace-Lorraine - 13.51 / 18.44 | 34.59 / 25.21
> ...


The differences seem to be a lot smaller in the Alsace Loraine region, last time I checked I think there was also a higher frequency of J2 in that region, has there been any thorough sampling of the area?

----------


## oreo_cookie

> Doesn't matter, although it might be about the same given that South Italians/Sicilians and Greeks aren't all that different autosomally.


The key difference is the near absence of any North African affinity in Greeks (though it is higher in Iberia than in Sicily), and higher Steppe/Russian derived ancestry in Greece. Whether it is Indo-European from very ancient times, Middle Age Slavic, or something else entirely we will never know, just that such a difference exists.

I have said this for some time and you may not agree but I think southern Italians and Greeks are related in the sense that they descend, in close proportions, from the same waves of migration, but they are not directly descended from one another for the most part. Sicily was full of Lombard settlements but that still doesn't seem to have shifted them as north as most Greeks do, possibly because the admixture is concentrated in part of the population and didn't spread.

----------


## davef

How exactly do d-stats attempt to guess your ancestry? It looks like something you'd see from an oracle where it sees you as a mixture of various ancestries and gives an fst value but it does it after it reads your k(?) components beforehand. Here with d-stats, I don't see any "k" components being read, it just compares a population with another, kind of like how you compared Ashkenazim with a population that is 75 percent levant 25 percent Belarus.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> How exactly do d-stats attempt to guess your ancestry? It looks like something you'd see from an oracle where it sees you as a mixture of various ancestries and gives an fst value but it does it after it reads your k(?) components beforehand. Here with d-stats, I don't see any "k" components being read, it just compares a population with another, kind of like how you compared Ashkenazim with a population that is 75 percent levant 25 percent Belarus.


It is difficult to explain how D-stats make ancestry estimates but I'll try to. You gather a modern ethnic group's scores in a series of D-stats. Then you gather the scores of ancient DNA samples' in the same series of D-stats. Then you model the modern ethnic group's score in the series of D-stats as a mixture of the ancient populations' scores in those D-stats. After that I get ancestry scores and a fit score. The fit score tells me how well the ancient populations' D-stat results can explain a modern ethnic group's D-stat results. If I attempted to model Yoruba as a mixture of ancient Eurasians the fit score would be very bad.

----------


## Twilight

Looking at Basal-rich K7 D-stats, it apears that there are some flaws already. According to Eurogene Basal-rich K7, the Bedouins are 20% Villabruna. Villabruna cluster can from a hunter whom lived in Villabruna, Itally 14,000 ybp

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...2_MME/htmlview

----------


## Angela

His latest effort to try to segregate "Basal" from other West Eurasian components, I see. I'm sure it's as accurate as all his other efforts, which is to say not very accurate at all.

I thought some of his mania would dissipate now that we know there's no SSA in Basal, but I guess not. He has to try to get northern and eastern Europeans to be as "NON MIDDLE EAST" as possible, and this is his way. How very typical. 

Unfortunately, all that effort means he made Bedouins 20% Villabruna.

It's pretty funny, if you think about it. 

Meanwhile, for a lot of European countries, the number is quite close to Kurd's "Natufian" in Ancient Eurasia K6, which we know isn't all Basal. I'd stick to Kurd's analyses if I were you. 

If we want to accurately know the amount of "Basal" in people, which in my opinion probably stayed in India after that first exit from Africa, we have to wait to get a sample.

----------


## Twilight

Not a problem, in that case I'm guessing that Davidski over did it in "shrinking down Middle eastern Ancestry". None the less just curious, this mishap gives me a hypothesis. Kit Number F999915 belongs to La-Branda whom lived in 7,000 ybp Leon, Spain; Tardinoisian Culture territory. The Tardinoisian Culture should have had 100% Mesolithic Ancestry; since early farmers haven't even touched Leon,Spain yet 5,000 BC. I'm no professional scholar but could Davidski possibly use this Kit number as a guide to make Kit# F999915 0% Middle-eastern/EHG? :)
If the hypothesis is disproved, that's fine.




Kit Num: F999915
Threshold of components set to 1.000
Threshold of method set to 0.25%
Personal data has been read. 20 approximations mode.
*Gedmatch.Com*

*Near East Neolithic K13 4-Ancestors Oracle*

This program is based on 4-Ancestors Oracle Version 0.96 by Alexandr Burnashev.
Questions about results should be sent to him at: [email protected]
Original concept proposed by Sergey Kozlov.
Many thanks to Alexandr for helping us get this web version developed.

gedrosia K13 Oracle

*Admix Results (sorted):*

*#*
*Population*
*Percent*

1
SHG_WHG
74.08

2
CHG_EEF
16.38

3
EHG
5.32

4
ANCESTRAL_INDIAN
2.21

5
SE_ASIAN
1.01




Finished reading population data. 145 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 WHG @ 21.293156
2 Bichon @ 31.232016
3 SHG @ 31.232016
4 Russian @ 66.540367
5 Finnish @ 66.798676
6 Lithuanian @ 66.839561
7 Estonian @ 67.239021
8 Ukrainian @ 67.388542
9 Scottish @ 67.515564
10 Czech @ 68.484451
11 Icelandic @ 68.693863
12 Hungarian @ 68.948326
13 French @ 69.145271
14 English @ 69.226822
15 Norwegian @ 69.496941
16 Europe_LNBA @ 70.088615
17 Croatian @ 70.377365
18 Romanian @ 71.478378
19 Bulgarian @ 72.062195
20 Greek @ 74.698303

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Bichon +50% Lithuanian @ 18.003122


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Bichon +25% Norwegian +25% WHG @ 4.412613


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Finnish + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 2.690491
2 Russian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 2.691700
3 Bichon + Norwegian + WHG + WHG @ 2.843817
4 Norwegian + SHG + WHG + WHG @ 2.843817
5 Bichon + Estonian + WHG + WHG @ 2.893582
6 Estonian + SHG + WHG + WHG @ 2.893582
7 Bichon + Finnish + WHG + WHG @ 2.898687
8 Finnish + SHG + WHG + WHG @ 2.898687
9 Estonian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.003400
10 Bichon + Icelandic + WHG + WHG @ 3.023073
11 Icelandic + SHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.023073
12 Ukrainian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.038367
13 Bichon + Russian + WHG + WHG @ 3.041677
14 Russian + SHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.041677
15 Bichon + Ukrainian + WHG + WHG @ 3.081157
16 SHG + Ukrainian + WHG + WHG @ 3.081157
17 Bichon + Lithuanian + WHG + WHG @ 3.133910
18 Lithuanian + SHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.133910
19 Lithuanian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.259528
20 Norwegian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.281482

Done.

Elapsed time 0.3247 seconds.

Kit Num: F999915
Threshold of components set to 1.000
Threshold of method set to 0.25%
Personal data has been read. 20 approximations mode.
*Gedmatch.Com*

*Ancient Eurasia K6 4-Ancestors Oracle*

This program is based on 4-Ancestors Oracle Version 0.96 by Alexandr Burnashev.
Questions about results should be sent to him at: [email protected]
Original concept proposed by Sergey Kozlov.
Many thanks to Alexandr for helping us get this web version developed.
____________________________________
gedrosia K6 Oracle

*Admix Results (sorted):*

*#*
*Population*
*Percent*

1
West_European_Hunter_Gartherer
85.74

2
Natufian
4.27

3
Ancestral_North_Eurasian
3.12

4
East_Asian
2.96

5
Sub_Saharan
2.02

6
Ancestral_South_Eurasian
1.88




Finished reading population data. 136 populations found.
6 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Motala12 @ 9.882326
2 SHG @ 10.605214
3 Hungarian_KO1 @ 15.736077
4 WHG @ 15.736077
5 Lithuanian @ 46.346512
6 Estonian @ 47.625393
7 Finnish @ 48.364658
8 Europe_LNBA @ 49.643818
9 Icelandic @ 50.001297
10 Russian @ 50.851906
11 Basque @ 52.164665
12 Norwegian @ 52.281746
13 Scottish @ 52.337776
14 Ukrainian @ 53.206970
15 English @ 53.240925
16 Czech @ 53.547977
17 Steppe_MLBA @ 54.161293
18 GoyetQ116 @ 54.940918
19 French @ 55.521206
20 Hungarian @ 55.755707

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Hungarian_KO1 +50% SHG @ 9.211499


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Hungarian_KO1 +25% Hungarian_KO1 +25% Russian @ 4.256886


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 GoyetQ116 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 @ 3.037416
2 GoyetQ116 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + WHG @ 3.037416
3 GoyetQ116 + Hungarian_KO1 + WHG + WHG @ 3.037416
4 GoyetQ116 + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 3.037416
5 Finnish + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 @ 4.071750
6 Finnish + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + WHG @ 4.071750
7 Finnish + Hungarian_KO1 + WHG + WHG @ 4.071750
8 Finnish + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 4.071750
9 Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Russian @ 4.256886
10 Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Russian + WHG @ 4.256886
11 Hungarian_KO1 + Russian + WHG + WHG @ 4.256886
12 Russian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 4.256886
13 Estonian + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 @ 5.101576
14 Estonian + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + WHG @ 5.101576
15 Estonian + Hungarian_KO1 + WHG + WHG @ 5.101576
16 Estonian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 5.101576
17 Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Lithuanian @ 5.416894
18 Hungarian_KO1 + Hungarian_KO1 + Lithuanian + WHG @ 5.416894
19 Hungarian_KO1 + Lithuanian + WHG + WHG @ 5.416894
20 Lithuanian + WHG + WHG + WHG @ 5.416894

Done.

Elapsed time 0.3358 seconds.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> Looking at Basal-rich K7 D-stats, it apears that there are some flaws already. According to Eurogene Basal-rich K7, the Bedouins are 20% Villabruna. Villabruna cluster can from a hunter whom lived in Villabruna, Itally 14,000 ybp
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...2_MME/htmlview


People related to Villabruna contributed ancestry to Bedouin. You shouldn't have trouble believing people from Italy migrated as far east as Arabia, considering the long range migrations ancient DNA has documented. I'm not claiming people from Italy migrated to Arabia, I'msaying that mentioning Villabruna lived in Italy 14,000 years ago shouldn't make you doubt Bedouin have ancestry related to Villabruna.

----------


## Fire Haired14

@Angela,

Your lack of trust for David Wesolski's work is unfounded. He doesn't try to reduce Middle Easternism. Kud is not as good, there's no point in even arguing who's better. I dont like him trying to estimate Basal Eurasian ancestry, but his formal stat work he does it supports themodel inhisnew ADMIXTURE test.

----------


## Twilight

> People related to Villabruna contributed ancestry to Bedouin. You shouldn't have trouble believing people from Italy migrated as far east as Arabia, considering the long range migrations ancient DNA has documented. I'm not claiming people from Italy migrated to Arabia, I'msaying that mentioning Villabruna lived in Italy 14,000 years ago shouldn't make you doubt Bedouin have ancestry related to Villabruna.


Although I do realize that the Crusaders possibly settled in the Middle East not enough knights were recruited to make a huge mark as far asMiddle Eastern Ydna I levels go. The only noticeable record of Ydna I is in Turkey and surrounding provinces. 14,000 ybp was dominated by Ydna C, H2 and I and possibly E tribes, however Ydna I is mostly absent in the Middle East besides Turkey.
How can an ancient component leave it's mark on a culture without passing down it's Ydna, especially a whopping 20-35% in Middle Eastern Civilizations?

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml#mesolithic
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml

----------


## Fire Haired14

WHG in the Middle East is not from Crusades because ancient genomes tell us it has been in the Middle East since the Paleolithic. If the Basal Eurasian+Paleo North Eurasian-like theory is correct, WHG are the best proxy for the non-Basal side of Natufian and Anatolia_Neolithic. The Middle East has ancestry related to WHG, this is fact, exactly where it comes from is unknown. Their ancestors who were related to WHG didn't need to have Y DNA I or mtDNA U5 to be related to WHG.

----------


## Twilight

> WHG in the Middle East is not from Crusades because ancient genomes tell us it has been in the Middle East since the Paleolithic. If the Basal Eurasian+Paleo North Eurasian-like theory is correct, WHG are the best proxy for the non-Basal side of Natufian and Anatolia_Neolithic. The Middle East has ancestry related to WHG, this is fact, exactly where it comes from is unknown. Their ancestors who were related to WHG didn't need to have Y DNA I or mtDNA U5 to be related to WHG.



Thanks for the clarification, going to see if I can do some research on this subject.
Never heard of that theory before but if Basal Eurasians exist and this tree is correct --> ( http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/20...rasian_17.html ), then the Basal Culture must be breathtakingly ancient. The Onge (YDNA D and Mtdna M predominate tribes apparently) arrived in the Andaman Islands 48,500 ybp and is 1st cousins once removed to IJK like tribe; ANE WHG and EEF most recent common ancestor; who knows how many thousands of year old these Basal Europeans are at this point.

Never the less Angela has a point, we need a skeleton dna sample. If it's true that Basal Eurasians existed and took part in the ethnogenesis of EEF, I have a hunch we'll uncover our Basal Eurasian ancestor in the Desert somewhere in the Middle East.

Source: 
^ _a__ b__ M. Phillip Endicott; Thomas P. Gilbert; Chris Stringer; Carles Lalueza-Fox; Eske Willerslev; Anders J. Hansen; Alan Cooper (2003). "The Genetic Origins of the Andaman Islanders"(PDF). American Journal of Human Genetics. 72 (1): 178–184. doi:10.1086/345487. PMC 378623. PMID 12478481. Retrieved 21 April2009. The HVR‑1 data separate them into two lineages, identified on the Indian mainland ... as M4 and M2 ... The Andamanese M2 contains two haplotypes ... developed in situ, after an early colonization ... Alternatively, it is possible that the haplotypes have become extinct in India or are present at a low frequency and have not yet been sampled, but, in each case, an early settlement of the Andaman Islands by an M2‑bearing population is implied ... The Andaman M4 haplotype ... is still present among populations in India, suggesting it was subject to the late Pleistocene population expansions....__^ a b c d e Reich, David; Kumarasamy Thangaraj; Nick Patterson; Alkes L. Price; Lalji Singh (24 September 2009). "Reconstructing Indian Population History". Nature. 461 (7263): 489–494. doi:10.1038/nature08365. PMC 2842210. PMID 19779445.__^ Moorjani, Priya; Kumarasamy Thangaraj; Nick Patterson; Alkes L. Price; Lalji Singh; David Reich (5 September 2013). "Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India". American Journal of Human Genetics. 93 (3): 422–438. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.07.006. PMC 3769933. PMID 23932107._
_
Sent from my iPad_

----------


## Angela

> Looking at Basal-rich K7 D-stats, it apears that there are some flaws already. According to Eurogene Basal-rich K7, the Bedouins are 20% Villabruna. Villabruna cluster can from a hunter whom lived in Villabruna, Itally 14,000 ybp
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...2_MME/htmlview


Take a look at the "basal rich" numbers for modern Armenians. They're at about 58%. According to Lazaridis, Yamnaya is half EHG and half "modern Armenian like". For a simplistic take on that, this would make Yamnaya close to 30% basal rich, but all of a sudden some of them are only 12% basal rich.

I'll say it again. I personally don't have much interest in how much "Basal" everyone has, but if that's something of interest, then we have to wait until we find a "Basal Eurasian" sample.

----------


## davef

FireHaired, can you explain the discrepancy that Angela pointed out? I'm not flat out saying the data is wrong (besides, I'm in no position to deem it correct/incorrect).

----------


## Fire Haired14

> FireHaired, can you explain the discrepancy that Angela pointed out? I'm not flat out saying the data is wrong (besides, I'm in no position to deem it correct/incorrect).


No. Accurate tests won't make perfect sense. I will add though that David intentionally changed the test several times so Yamnaya would score higher Basal Eurasian not lower Basal Eurasian.

----------


## davef

No problem! Glad he saw the discrepancy and made attempts to boost up the basal.

----------


## Twilight

> No. Accurate tests won't make perfect sense. I will add though that David intentionally changed the test several times so Yamnaya would score higher Basal Eurasian not lower Basal Eurasian.


Does this mean that Davidski is declaring that Middle Paleolithic Basal Eurasians were living in the Caucasus?

----------

