# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics > Dodecad >  Dodecad project : highest percentage for each admixture

## Maciamo

*Matching phenotypes and genetic admixtures*

I am really interested to see what people with a high percentage of one admixture look like. 

The highest national average of "West European" is 68.5%, which is the average for Irish Dodecad members. But a handful of people listed in the spreadsheet exceed 70%, and one even reaches 75.1% (DOD298). This makes me wonder what is the highest percentage that a single individual could have (without resorting to intentional cross-breeding to recreate a 100% West European individual). If there was someone with over 90% of West European admixture, I infer that he or she would look quite close to the archetypal ancestral population of "West European" (read North-West European, or maybe R1b Proto-Indo-European).

The pure East European type is even more elusive. Lithuanians score the highest (61.5%). Only 4 project members exceed 60%, with a maximum of 67.8% (DOD468). 

The Mediterranean admixture doesn't reach more than 55% of any individual's genes, and usually in the isolated Sardinians.

It's not the case of all admixtures. The 'Northeast Asian' reaches 98.5% in the Koryaks, the 'Southeast Asian" approaches 92% in the Dai and Lahu, the Mbuti Pygmies are 98.3% 'Paleo African', North Kannadi are 81.6% 'South Asian'. In all these populations it should be possible to find individuals with 100% of a single admixture element. In others, I expect to find individuals with over 90% of one component (e.g. the Mozabites who are 76.3% 'Northwest African', Georgians who are 72.3% 'West Asian', and Saudis who are 71.5% 'Southwest Asian'). So we can have a good idea of what phenotypes match these genetic components.

It's ironic that it is for the three European components that the maximum percentages are the lowest.

*Looking for the origins of the three European populations*

So how comes that Europeans are mixed, and who were the three original populations from whom we inherited most of our genome ?

*Mediterranean*

It's easy to see why no population has kept a high level of Mediterranean genes with all the migrations that took place from all sides the Mediterranean since the Mesolithic. One might wonder if this "Mediterranean" component is even a coherent genetic element, as it is found in such disparate populations as Moroccans, Sardinians, Scandinavians or Iraqi, and pretty much everywhere in between. If it is, it could be the remnant of an aboriginal Paleolithic European population, men carrying Y-haplogroup I lineages, or even an older population whose Y-DNA has all but disappeared (hg F or IJ ?) because their genes were passed only by women. It actually would make sense if the Mediterranean element represented the IJ branch of the Y-chromosomal tree, as it is as common in the Middle East as in Europe. In other words, it would be a very ancient population, perhaps encompassing all the mtDNA subclades of H and V (and perhaps other haplogroups too).

This would explain why the Mediterranean element is so widespread geographically, but also why it reaches such high levels in northern Europe: nearly 25% in the Dutch and Orcadians, 20-22% in the Irish, British and Germans, and around 15% among Scandinavians. If Neolithic farmers reached northern Europe, they were probably more West Asian, and the West Asian element ranges from 4 to 7% in Scandinavia and the British Isles, which fits better with the percentage of haplogroups G2a and J2.

Let's take a concrete example. Belarusians and Poles have considerably more Mediterranean admixture than Lithuanians (14% and 17% against 6.5%, respectively). They also have a bit more West Asian and Southwest Asian (total 2.3% for Belarusians, 3.8% for Poles and 0.5% for Lithuanians). All three have a lot of R1a and some R1b. The main difference is that Belarusians and Poles have considerably more haplogroup I2 and J (20.5% and 13.5% against 7% for Lithuanians) as well as Neolithic haplogroups G2a and E1b1b (total 10.5% and 7.5% against 1.5% for Lithuania). It doesn't match exactly, but there is a trend. Haplogroups G2a and E1b1b are higher than the autosomal DNA from the Middle-East, but that's probably because they were diluted on the way by mixing with other European populations in the Balkans, since it was typically hunter-gatherers who sent their women to marry male farmers rather than the other way round (therefore the Y-DNA remained Middle Eastern, but the mtDNA became European).

*North-West European*

The West European component of the Dodecad Project being really a North-West European (NWE) one, I will use this denomination here.

Based on my analysis, the NWE component correlates best with haplogroups R1b1b2a1 and I1. 

Haplogroup I1 is a special case within haplogroup IJ because it experienced a dramatic bottleneck in the late Neolithic/early Bronze Age that surely had a serious impact on its autosomes. If the re-expansion of I1 with the flourishing of the early Germanic culture happened after the last I1 lineages blended with an R1b1b2a1 dominated population (such as in the Netherlands or Denmark, cradles of the Germanic civilisation), then it makes sense that we should see a correlation between the percentage of I1+R1b and the North-West European component.

In almost every case, we notice an imbalance towards a higher percentage of R1b than actual autosomes (except in Scandinavia and in Romania, where it is matches fairly well). 

Ireland has 86% but 68.5% of NWE.
Britain has 81% of R1b+I1 but 66% of NWE.
Germany has 60% of R1b+I1 but 53% of NWE.
France has 70% of R1b+I1 but 52% of NWE. 
Spain has 70% of R1b+I1 but 42% of NWE.
Portugal has 58% of R1b+I1 but 40% of NWE.

Why is that so ? I believe it has to do with the quick replacement of native lineages by R1b during the Bronze Age and the genetic predisposition of R1b to father more sons than other haplogroups. 

This imbalance is particularly obvious in South Italy and Turkey, where the percentage of R1b is about twice higher than the NWE component. This is simply because a lot of R1b isn't R1b1b2a1, but older Middle Eastern subclades, that are not associated with the the spread of the same people (namely the Proto-Indo-Europeans).

The percentage of mtDNA lineages should balance the difference between autosomal and Y-DNA ratios. 

Eastern Europe is the only region where the NWE autosomes exceed R1b+I1, and sometimes to a 3:1 ratio. 

Belarus has 13% of R1b+I1 but 28% of NWE
Russia has 11% of R1b+I1 but 32% of NWE
Poland has 23% of R1b+I1 but 35% of NWE
Hungary has 25% of R1b+I1 but 37% of NWE

I believe this is because R1b1b2a1 originated in Eastern Europe, in the Pontic steppes north of the Black Sea, expanded to Central, Northern, Western and Southern Europe, but was ultimately replaced by R1a tribes from northern Russia (the Balto-Slavs) and Central Asia (Scythians, Bulgars, etc.), who killed many of the R1b men left in Eastern Europe, and took their women (the same process as R1b people did when they invaded Europe). This is why the percentage of R1b has diminished in Eastern Europe, but NWE autosomes survived through maternal lineages.


*East European*

The percentage of East European component matches almost exactly the frequencies for haplogroup R1a. It's truly amazing : 2-3% in Ireland, 5-6% in the Netherlands, 6-7% in Turkey, 12% in Greece, 17% in Germany, 22% in Romania, around 30% in Hungary, around 50% in Poland, Belarus and Russia... Only Scandinavia has a bit more R1a (28% in Norway, 19% in Sweden) than East European autosomes (9.5% and 13%), perhaps due to a founder effect.

*The case of Finland*

One major exception is Finland, which is a very peculiar case indeed. Finnish people are overwhelmingly European autosomally (93%, against 6% Siberian), and do look Northern European, but their Y-DNA is in great part the Siberian N1c1 (nearly 60%). The best explanation is that these N1c1 lineages were actually for the biggest part autosomally European when they arrived in Finland. As both R1a and R1b are low in Finland (7.5% and 3.5%) but the East European autosomes reach 33% and the North-West European 53%, it means that N1c1 lineages are hiding both East and North-West European autosomes. 

It is usually assumed that N1c1 came to Finland from Siberia, but what if it first reach Fennoscandia, then recolonised Finland from northern Sweden, bringing I1, R1a, R1b and Swedish N1c1 in the operation ? The whole group would have been autosomally close to the Swedes, and a founder effect among the ruling class would have spread N1c1 with European autosomes. Sweden itself has only 0.5% of Northeast Asian/Siberian autosomes but 9% of N1c1, mostly concentrated in the north of the country, where an expansion towards Finland would have been most likely. The 6% of Siberian autosomes in Finland would represent the N1c1 that was already in Finland before the recolonisation from northern Sweden.

----------


## spongetaro

> [B][SIZE="3"If it is, it could be the remnant of an aboriginal Paleolithic European population, men carrying Y-haplogroup I lineages, or even an older population whose Y-DNA has all but disappeared (hg F or IJ ?) because their genes were passed only by women. It actually would make sense if the Mediterranean element represented the IJ branch of the Y-chromosomal tree, as it is as common in the Middle East as in Europe. In other words, it would be a very ancient population, perhaps encompassing all the mtDNA subclades of H and V (and perhaps other haplogroups too).


I find quite fascinating and scarry the idea that whole Y-DNA lineages could disappear

----------


## Maciamo

> I find quite fascinating and scarry the idea that whole Y-DNA lineages could disappear


Their disappearance doesn't necessarily mean that their carriers were driven to extinction. Every man is born with tiny mutations in his Y-chromosome compared to his father. Most of the time these have no obvious effect on fertility. But some mutations can lead to sterility (notably deletions), while others can lead to increased fertility (higher sperm production). A higher sperm count inevitably leads to a slight bias towards producing more boys. 

The reason is that male spermatozoa are faster than female ones, but also weaker to "chemical aggressions" from vaginal fluids (acidity in particular weakens or kills male spermatozoa). The lower the number of spermatozoa during conception, the higher the chances that the "swimmers" that will reach the egg will be the most resistant (the female ones). That is why higher sperm count increases the chances of male spermatozoa to survive and get to the egg first. You may have noticed that some families with 3 or more children have only girls or only boys. Some women have a more acidic vaginal tract than others, which will naturally select in favour of baby girls. Others are more alkaline, and therefore encourage the conception of boys. Vaginal pH can be influenced by the type of foods consumed, but there is also a strong genetic predisposition, which is why some women will always have boys, or always girls, no matter how much they try to change their diet. I think that mtDNA, which produces and regulates the energy of body cells, plays a major role in determining vaginal pH. It would make sense that very common mtDNA haplogroups correspond to a lower pH (more acid), since they select for baby girls, and therefore become more common in the population (as mtDNA is only inherited through females). Rare mtDNA haplogroups, such as I, W and X, for instance, probably select for boys. Each subclade is of course unique, considering that a single mutation can potentially change everything. This is why some mtDNA lineages become more common (those selecting girls) and others progressively disappear (those selecting boys).

The sperm count of a woman's partner is also determinant. Obviously a woman whose body is naturally alkaline with a husband with a high sperm count will have very high chances or having mostly boys. Y-DNA haplogroups with higher sperm count consequently produce more boys and become quickly more common than other haplogroups. Eventually, haplogroups associated with low sperm count are disappear naturally.

----------


## Dagne

How very interesting!
Also, I have seen many different admixture pictures from Dodecad. How are these clusters defined? 




For instance in this one, South Europeans are defined almost as Sardinians and North Europeans almost as Lithuanians http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2010/10/...y-project.html.

----------


## zdenek von reslaw

It is quite convincing that the Y haplogroup IJ represents the mediterranean component - possibly one of the oldest european components. Starting from the Near East/ Mesopotamia the ( originally semitic) carriers could reach areas to the east - Iran, and to the north, where after the glacial period the climate improved.




> I believe this is because R1b1b2a1 originated in Eastern Europe, in the Pontic steppes north of the Black Sea, expanded to Central, Northern, Western and Southern Europe, but was ultimately replaced by R1a tribes from northern Russia (the Balto-Slavs) and Central Asia (Scythians, Bulgars, etc.), who killed many of the R1b men left in Eastern Europe, and took their women (the same process as R1b people did when they invaded Europe). This is why the percentage of R1b has diminished in Eastern Europe, but NWE autosomes survived through maternal lineages.



There is evidence that R1a tribes settled in central - eastern Europe before R1b ( R1b1b2a1 ), e.g. Eulau, Germany, 3rd millenium BC, so they didn`t have to expel them from that area. 
The routes of migration of the R1´s most probably differed from each other.
R1b, usually connected with protoceltic population - if they were indoeuropean at all - could penetrate East Europe most likely from the south ( Unetice?) and from the west.




> One major exception is Finland, which is a very peculiar case indeed. Finnish people are overwhelmingly European autosomally (93%, against 6% Siberian), and do look Northern European, but their Y-DNA is in great part the Siberian N1c1 (nearly 60%). The best explanation is that these N1c1 lineages were actually for the biggest part autosomally European when they arrived in Finland. As both R1a and R1b are low in Finland (7.5% and 3.5%) but the East European autosomes reach 33% and the North-West European 53%, it means that N1c1 lineages are hiding both East and North-West European autosomes.


 As indigenous population in that part of europe, the N- people could have received the european autosomes from the indigenous I- people.
It is interesting for me that the settlement of the N people reached once much further to the west, perhaps as far as the Oder? Later on, there are some mentions about them, e.g. Tacitus, Fenni. Their component must have contributed, beside the Corded Ware and the I2a- tribes, to the east european anthropological type.
Languages like the Lithuanian must have assimilated some of the finno-ugric idiom

----------


## Knovas

The Mediterranean component or Southern European genetic, it's obvious that is lower in Europe than the Northern one. This is evident if you see K=10, analysis where the Northern European component is clearly higher. If we look at the West and the East European, probably the West European is the highest, and the East European perhaps can be lower in average than the Mediterranean one, but I prefer to distinguish only Northern and Southern Europe.

Then, it's imposible to find a group of people showing an extremely high Southern European concentration, because a significant amount of this was replaced a long time ago by other influences. The best example are the Sardinians, but note the diference between K=10 and K=12 in them...their results seem to be absurd, there is very little coherency, so probably special tools are needed to analyse this population properly. Or ¿wich one is on the truth?, ¿K=10 or K=12?

Another thing to consider in Southern Europe is that is not the same an "Iberian Southern Europe" and a "Greek Southern Europe". The genetic isolation of the original populations on each place we must asume that was completely diferent, so the phenotypes of course won't be the same too.

As you can see, there is much to talk about this.

----------


## Wilhelm

The Northwest European obviously includes also Norse ancestry, because Norwegians are second after Irish. This component has little to do with the West-European of Eurogenes that peaks in N.Spaniards/S.French

The mediterranean component seems to be associated with paleolithic I2 south-europeans. After peaking in Sardinians the second are North-Italians and then Iberians, so it's definately Southwest European.

----------


## Maciamo

> The mediterranean component seems to be associated with paleolithic I2 south-europeans. After peaking in Sardinians the second are North-Italians and then Iberians, so it's definately Southwest European.


The Mediterranean component is as common in Southeast Europe as in Southwest Europe. It's also very common all over the Middle East and North Africa. So it cannot be just I2, but more probably all the macro-haplogroup IJ and its mtDNA equivalents.

----------


## Knovas

The Mediterranean component includes Southwest and Southeast Europe, I'm sure about this. Obviously, an hypothetical Southwest European component would peak in Basques, Southern French and Northern Spaniards, and doing the same with the Southeast European, probably Greeks would get the highest score. Sardinians, of course, are a mistery since they get quite diferent results depending on the test.

----------


## luis77

This Mediterranean component is obviously not "European" but just "Mediterranean" as its name implies. Indeed if we look athe Genetic distances Fst provided by Dienekes we can clearly see that "West_Asian" is closer to "West_European" (0.048) than "Mediterranean" is (0.058) is! 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png

West_European vs East_European 0.044 
West_European vs West_Asian 0.048 
West_European vs Mediterranean 0.058 
West_European vs Southwest_Asian 0.065 
West_European vs Northwest_African 0.073 
West_European vs South_Asian 0.083 

West_European vs East_African 0.125 
West_European vs Southeast_Asian 0.142 
West_European vs Northeast_Asian 0.143 

West_European vs Neo_African 0.211 
West_European vs Palaeo_African 0.255

This "Mediterranean" component is also the closest to "North African" (0.067) just after "SouthWest Asian" (0.066)...

North African vs SouthWest Asian: 0.066
North African vs Mediterranean: 0.067
North African vs West Asian: 0.068
North African vs West European: 0.073
North African vs East European: 0.081

So definitely not "European" but just "Mediterranean"....

----------


## Knovas

I know who you are now. The only t.r.o.l.l. posting at 23andme now decided to join Eupedia. Very ill mental health.

Mediterranean means Southern European (Southwest + Southeast Europe). The way you post the distances it's absolutly WRONG. You must take all clusters as reference, and if you look carefully, you'll see that West Asian is closer to Neo African, Paleo African, and some other non European clusters than the Mediterranean is. That's easy to understand, since West Asian is one of the near eastern clusters, and Mediterranean is the 3rd European cluster. Even West European is closer to Paleo African than the Mediterranean is.

Time to accept the facts and treat your Ibero-Phobia  :Laughing:

----------


## Wilhelm2

How can it be not european, when Germans, Brits, and Orcadians have more than 20% ? Come on.

----------


## Goga

> That's easy to understand, since West Asian is one of the near eastern clusters, and Mediterranean is the 3rd European cluster. Even West European is closer to Paleo African than the Mediterranean is.
> 
> Time to accept the facts and treat your Ibero-Phobia


???

The Mediterranean borders to Africa! Between West Asia and Africa there is South West Asia! West Asia *doesn't* border with Africa!!!

Between Europe and Africa there is the Mediterranean. Spain, Greece are North Mediterranean European countries. Algeria, Tunesia , Lybya are South Mediterranean African countries.


Spain, Greece, Italy etc. do border with Africa.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> ???
> 
> The Mediterranean borders to Africa! Between West Asia and Africa there is South West Asia! West Asia *doesn't* border with Africa!!!
> 
> Between Europe and Africa there is the Mediterranean. Spain, Greece are North Mediterranean European countries. Algeria, Tunesia , Lybya are South Mediterranean African countries.
> 
> 
> Spain, Greece, Italy etc. do border with Africa.


 What ? Have you seen the table of Fst distances ? It's very clear.

----------


## Knovas

The West Asian GENETIC component it's closer to Africans than the Mediterranean one. That's fact, you are twisting things.

----------


## Goga

> What ? Have you seen the table of Fst distances ? It's very clear.


Yes, it's also very clear that Africa and the Mediterranean are neighbours!

----------


## Goga

> The West Asian GENETIC component it's closer to Africans than the Mediterranean one. That's fact, you are twisting things.


 ??? WHAT??

Kurds, Georgians, Persians have nothing to do with Africans!!

----------


## Wilhelm2

> Yes, it's also very clear that Africa and the Mediterranean are neighbours!


 We are talking about genetics here, not geography. Plus, West-Asia is connected to Africa by land, while the mediterranean is not.

----------


## Goga

> We are talking about genetics here, not geography. Plus, West-Asia is connected to Africa by land, while the mediterranean is not.


the Mediterranean have MUCH more AFRICAN hg. '*E*' than West Asia.

----------


## Knovas

No man. Some of you need special glasses for what I see. Look at the spreadsheet carefully: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png

As you can see, the number of West Asian compared to the African populations is smaller because it's much more closer.

The End

----------


## Wilhelm2

> This "Mediterranean" component is also the closest to "North African" (0.067) just after "SouthWest Asian" (0.066)...
> 
> North African vs SouthWest Asian: 0.066
> North African vs Mediterranean: 0.067
> North African vs West Asian: 0.068
> North African vs West European: 0.073
> North African vs East European: 0.081
> 
> So definitely not "European" but just "Mediterranean"....


 I love how you manipulate things. West-Asia is closer to East-Africa, Paleo-Africa and Southwest-Asia than Mediterranean is.

----------


## Goga

> No man. Some of you need special glasses for what I see. Look at the spreadsheet carefully: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png


So according to you I'm closer to your neighbour than you are???

There're no Africans in Kurdistan, Georgia etc. 99.99 % of peoples in Kurdistan, Georgia have never seen an African in their life!!!

----------


## Goga

> I love how you manipulate things. West-Asia is closer to East-Africa, Paleo-Africa and Southwest-Asia than Mediterranean is.


That's crazy. 

Mediterranean borders to Africa. They are neighbours!!!! West Asia (Georgia, Kurdistan) is thousands miles / kilometres away from Africa! With many deserts and high mountains in between.

----------


## Knovas

The distances must consider ALL clusters as I said, not only one. Impossible to fool anyone with such a silly strategy.

Like it or not, the GENETIC West Asian component it's closer to Africans. If you are not agree, create your own analysis.

PD: Doesn't matter how do you call the clusters, because they read allele frequencies, and that's impossible to change. Just to change the name, does not change anything else.

----------


## Goga

> Impossible to fool anyone with such a silly strategy.


Sorry to harm your feelings, but the Iberians are much closer to Africans, than West Asians like Kurds and Georgians. 

Most Georgians and Kurds have *never* seen an African in their life.

Between Kurdistan and Africa there're many deserts and high mountains, while the Mediterranean is NEXT TO Africa. West Asia (Georgia, Kurdistan) is thousands miles / kilometres away from Africa!

----------


## Knovas

That's simply not true. I share genoms with quite near easterns at 23andme, and the global similarity they show taking African regions as reference, is much more higher than any other simillarity showed by Iberians. The explanation is very easy: West Asian and Southwest Asian are INTERMEDIATE clusters, not the case of the Mediterranean, West European, and East European.

Sorry for YOU if the truth hurts your feelings.

----------


## Goga

> That's simply not true. I share genoms with quite near easterns at 23andme, and the global similarity they show taking African regions as reference, is much more higher than any other simillarity showed by Iberians. The explanation is very easy: West Asian and Southwest Asian are INTERMEDIATE clusters, not the case of the Mediterranean, West European, and East European.
> 
> Sorry for YOU if the truth hurts your feelings.


South West Asia is not Africa! Arabs are not Africans.


The Mediterranean is close to West Europe because of *R1b*. But the Mediterranean is closer to Africa than to East Europe! *More E than R1a!!!*


West Asia is very close to East Europe!!! And West Asia = West Asia!


Sorry to hurt your feelings.

----------


## Knovas

Stop with the nonsense, this is not a geography lesson. We talk about genetics, and near easterns are an INTERMIDIATE group (second time). Then, they are much closer to Africans, especially East Africans.

Time to pick some kleenex.

----------


## Goga

> Stop with the nonsense, this is not a geography lesson. We talk about genetics, and near easterns are an INTERMIDIATE group (second time). Then, they are much closer to Africans, especially East Africans.
> 
> Time to pick some kleenex.


Sure according to you CHINA is closer to Africa than the Mediterranean.

----------


## Knovas

China is predominatly Mongoloid, don't start twisting things again. Near Easterns are much more intermediate than them.

You should revise your notions, I can't understand how do you relate such things.

----------


## Goga

> China is predominatly Mongoloid, don't start twisting things again. Near Easterns are much more intermediate than them.
> 
> You should revise your notions, I can't understand how do you relate such things.


???

Are you saying that Georgians, Armenians or Kurds have more African blood in them than the Iberians???? That's crazy!!!!

Haplogroup E is African. The Mediterraneans have MUCH more E than West Asians. FACT!!!!


I have a question for you. What is closer to Africa: the Mediterranean or CHINA??? I'm sure you will say CHINA, lol...

----------


## Knovas

I'll answer your last question when I'll check 23andme again with the global similarities (I'm not sure now).

The other part has been answered. Intermediate clusters give higher affinities with so many different regions. And near easterns are much more simillar to Africans than any other Iberian. I'm 100% sure about this.

Sorry if you don't like, but this is what genetics say.


PD: And forget about haplogroups, they tell very little about the full admixture. But even, if you like that, don't forget to mention haplogrop T. Much more present between near easterns than Spaniards.

----------


## Goga

Near Easterns ARE not the same as WEST Asian. Some Near Easterns have Mongoloid roots, some Semitic roots, some Caucasian (Caucasus) roots and some Iranic roots.

I think that ARABS and Semites in the SOUTH are related to Africans, but not the people close to the Caucasus.
I think that Turks are even closer to China than to Africa.

Also some peoples in Africa have South West Asian roots (J1 & T). 

Sure Arabs are much much closer to Africans than the Mediterraneans will ever be. Semitic languages and African languages are very close.


T is maybe not from Africa.

----------


## Knovas

Near easterns are a core of West Asian and Southwest Asian. Even Georgians are not 100% West Asian (althought they are the most similar thing), so you'll always get aproximate numbers. I share genomes with a Georgian at 23andme, and he appeared more similar to Africans than Iberians. However, I'll try to share with other Georgians and tell you the results if you are interested.

----------


## Wilhelm2

And it's not true what you say. Kurds have more E than Spain (11.5 versus 7) you can check it in the table of Eupedia. But anyways, we are talking about autosomal here, not haplogroups.

----------


## Knovas

And they have Southwest Asian too. And Mediterranean, East European. West European...However, I read in other posts that he does not accept those results...¿what else can I say? XD

----------


## Wilhelm2

When looking at autosomal plots, the West-Asians are also closer to North-Africans, than any South-European :

----------


## Goga

> Near easterns are a core of West Asian and Southwest Asian. Even Georgians are not 100% West Asian (althought they are the most similar thing), so you'll always get aproximate numbers. I share genomes with a Georgian at 23andme, and he appeared more similar to Africans than Iberians. However, I'll try to share with other Georgians and tell you the results if you are interested.


Ok. West Asia and Southwest Asia is not 1 group. Southwest Asia has less J2, G2a, but much more J1, E.

I think that West Asia countries in the Caucasus are closer to East Europe than to Arabic countries. 

When they say that the Middle East is closer to Africa than Europe I think they mean Arabs. Because Arabs live in the Middle East and in Africa. *They exported J1 to Africa and imported E to the Middle East, mostly Southwest Asia.* These haplogroups tie both continents, together with T of course.

Thank you for the offer. I'm very much interested in the correlation between the African and Gerogian genome.

----------


## Goga

> When looking at autosomal plots, the West-Asians are also closer to North-Africans, than any South-European :


Where is Africa? I don't see Africa on this map.

PS. Oh sorry. Now I see Morrocan & Egyptian.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> Ok. West Asia and Southwest Asia is not 1 group. Southwest Asia has less J2, G2a, but much more J1, E.
> 
> I think that West Asia countries in the Caucasus are closer to East Europe than to Arabic countries. 
> 
> When they say that the Middle East is closer to Africa than Europe I think they mean Arabs. Because Arabs live in the Middle East and in Africa. *They exported J1 to Africa and imported E to the Middle East, mostly Southwest Asia.* These haplogroups tie both continents, together with T of course.
> 
> Thank you for the offer. I'm very much interested in the correlation between the African and Gerogian genome.


 You are mixing haplogroups with autosomal. Please, get your facts straight. People of Caucasus are much closer to middle-easterns than to East-Europeans. In fact, Georgians cluster with Irianians and Turks, as you can see in many autosomal plots.

----------


## Goga

> You are mixing haplogroups with autosomal. Please, get your facts straight. People of Caucasus are much closer to middle-easterns than to East-Europeans. In fact, Georgians cluster with Irianians and Turks, as you can see in many autosomal plots.


Where is this plot from?

Well as you can see on this map Spain and Italy are further away from Russia than Georgia from Russia !!!

Georgia is CLOSER to Russia than Spain to Russia!

----------


## Goga

Where is Greece???

Cyptriot DNA is as close to Africa as Georgian DNA to Africa.


I suppose that Greece is the same as Cyprus????

----------


## Knovas

In next days, I'll search for Georgian people at 23andme and post the African numbers of the global similarity if they accept me. I'll also show Iberian numbers for comparison. On the other side, I'll check the similarities of a Chinese person for comparison with Southern Europeans.

In the last exercise, you must keep in mind that a 100% Mediterranean person does not exist (chinese are 99% Asia aprox), and that this cluster does not make any distintion between Southwest and Southeast Europe. I say this because I'll use the numbers of the top scorer at Mediterranean between others. He is Iberian, what means essentially Southwest (54%) and the rest is Northern European (42%), with very little non European. As you can imagine, the similarities with African regions (specially black africa) are very low in this case. For the moment it's enough, just tell you to give an idea and consider all time the peculiarities of concrete populations.

----------


## Goga

BTW this whole map s*cks big time. How can Georgia be closer to Russia, than Spain or Italy to Russia, BUT at the same time also closer to Africa, than Spain to Africa. While Spain is next to Africa.

Maybe because Africans have Georgian genes otherwise this whole graph doesn't make ANY sense!!!!

Also they deliberately excluded Greece. Which scientist made this graph ???

----------


## Knovas

University professor Dr. Doug McDonald. 

Georgians have too much West Asian to be specially closer to Russians. Keep in mind that Russians have very high Northern European...I personally don't see nothing rare.

----------


## Goga

And Jews are closer to the Italians than the Basque to the Italians??

----------


## Goga

> University professor Dr. Doug McDonald. 
> 
> Georgians have too much West Asian to be specially closer to Russians. Keep in mind that Russians have very high Northern European...I personally don't see nothing rare.


No, Turks are even closer to Russians than Georgians. Turks have much less West Asian component in them than Georgians. Maybe the CENTRAL Asian component (mongoloid) connects Turks with Russians ???

I smell some fraud or he made big mistakes, but it's ok with me...

----------


## Knovas

Jews are characterized to have high West Asian and Southwest Asian, and Italians have quite of it too. It's perfectly possible.

If you see the Basques extremely removed it's because they represent a genetic isolate, and the same for Sardinians. In these two cases does not mean they are extremly different from Iberians or Italians, I think it's just a reperesentation of isolation. I don't take this two cases literaly, since one of my highest genome matches is Basque, and Doug McDonald told me that I was 100% Spanish.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> BTW this whole map s*cks big time. How can Georgia be closer to Russia, than Spain or Italy to Russia, BUT at the same time also closer to Africa, than Spain to Africa. While Spain is next to Africa.
> 
> Maybe because Africans have Georgian genes otherwise this whole graph doesn't make ANY sense!!!!
> 
> Also they deliberately excluded Greece. Which scientist made this graph ???


Please, calm down. It's from PhD Dr. Doug McDonald, a university professor. But if you don't like it, there are others from Dodecad or Eurogenes : 

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1...teurasia12.gif

http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o...al_Eurasia.png


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_6XAIk6ygt...s1600/waeu.png

----------


## Wilhelm2

> And Jews are closer to the Italians than the Basque to the Italians??


 Yes, of course. Jews are genetically very similiar to South-Italians and Greeks. While Basques are very different, they are almost 100% european,

----------


## Goga

> Please, calm down. It's from PhD Dr. Doug McDonald, a university professor. But if you don't like it, there are others from Dodecad or Eurogenes : 
> 
> http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1...teurasia12.gif
> 
> http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o...al_Eurasia.png
> 
> 
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_6XAIk6ygt...s1600/waeu.png


Thank you. But can you give me some sources, please. Where do you have this charts from?? They say nothing about Africans...

----------


## Knovas

> No, Turks are even closer to Russians than Georgians. Turks have much less West Asian component in them than Georgians. Maybe the CENTRAL Asian component (mongoloid) connects Turks with Russians ???
> 
> I smell some fraud or he made big mistakes, but it's ok with me...


Good point. Russians carry some Mongoloid genes, and if you put this together with the European and Mongoloid genes of the Turks, the similarity can be higher than the one showed by Georgians.

----------


## Goga

Btw on this map you can clearly see that the distance between Mozabite and GE (I suppose Georgia) and between Mozabite and ES (I suppose Spain) is - almost - the same.

West Asian (Georgian) Adygei and Lezgin are even further away from Mozabite (Berbers) than Spain from Mozabite (Berbers) ...

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1...teurasia12.gif


Some charts are even contradicting each other, lol...

Notice that some charts also say the West Asians are closer to East Europeans, than West Europeans to East Europeans.

----------


## Knovas

As more samples I can collect from 23andme, more clarified will be this question.

It's party time now. See you guys ;)

----------


## Anton, Bear's den

We have some Mongol shamans in South Siberia, they are relatives of the Turks. Turks in comments to video totally recognise it. 
And Georgians have nothing in common with Africa, they have a lot in common with Turks, Armenians, Azeris. Their distinctive feature is a big sharp nose. In Russia only minority of Northern Ossetians have a lot in common with Georgians because they live on the Caucasus. 
Do not forget that there are many natural obstacles for DNA distribution: Black Sea, Bosporus Strait, hardly penetrable Caucasus Mountains, scorching deserts of Central Asia etc...

----------


## Milovan

> *Matching phenotypes and genetic admixtures*
> 
> I am really interested to see what people with a high percentage of one admixture look like. 
> 
> The highest national average of "West European" is 68.5%, which is the average for Irish Dodecad members. But a handful of people listed in the spreadsheet exceed 70%, and one even reaches 75.1% (DOD298). This makes me wonder what is the highest percentage that a single individual could have (without resorting to intentional cross-breeding to recreate a 100% West European individual). If there was someone with over 90% of West European admixture, I infer that he or she would look quite close to the archetypal ancestral population of "West European" (read North-West European, or maybe R1b Proto-Indo-European).
> 
> The pure East European type is even more elusive. Lithuanians score the highest (61.5%). Only 4 project members exceed 60%, with a maximum of 67.8% (DOD468). 
> 
> The Mediterranean admixture doesn't reach more than 55% of any individual's genes, and usually in the isolated Sardinians.
> ...


I agree somewhat but I think "mediterranean" equates to haplogroup I and all it's subclades, pure I. I1 is going to be genetically closer to other I's then R's, so I'm saying even I1 will be included in mediterranean, you can see a slight amount of mediterranean in scandinavian autosomal which could easily be their I1.
what dodecad referred to as "north european" was pure hap R and its subclades, then that was split into "east european" and "west european" which to me are just R1a and R1b
"west asian" is obviously a caucasus (and perhaps they were in mesopotamia/iran before that, explaining it in every middle eastern population) is hap G and all it's subclades. G has very low percentages most places but very high autosomal, I believe these people must have sold large amounts of their women into slavery or were peaceful and as a result conquered many times.
"southwest asian" is obviously middle eastern and I would say it represents Hap J and it's subclades, I am sure "southwest asian" could be further split into northern and southern components (just like they split north european into east and west) which would correlate to J2 and J1. this would not be easy though as all J1 populations seem to be mixed with J2 and vice versa, they did do it with "north european" though so it is possible.
I think the "northwest african", obviously berber equates to certain haplogroups of E but not all subclades of E

why do I lump subclades of other haplogroups together but separate E?
E is older then all the other haplogroups mentioned here, has older mutations and perhaps many more mutations to the point I think some subclades of E should be treated as if they were separate haplogroups altogether
the only thing I can't figure out with my theory of the autosomal is, where are the older non berber hap E's of europe and where is E-v13? is it lumped into mediterranean with hap I or is it just not coming up in the tests? you only detect things you are testing for
maybe the E's were a founder effect and didn't make much of a dent in the gene pool. or lumped into "northwest african"

as far as N1c1 areas of europe, I'd say it was a founder effect. a warlike tribe of N1c1 conquering and taking female slaves of aryan groups from the region and absorbing them. over time (hundreds of years), there is hardly any siberian blood left in them. just look at finns, balts, russians etc they are obviously european. the autosomal is just revealing what your eyes already knew to be true.

what do you guys think of my theory so far?

----------


## Goga

> We have some Mongol shamans in South Siberia, they are relatives of the Turks. Turks in comments to video totally recognise it. 
> And Georgians have nothing in common with Africa, they have a lot in common with Turks, Armenians, Azeris. Their distinctive feature is a big sharp nose. In Russia only minority of Northern Ossetians have a lot in common with Georgians because they live on the Caucasus. 
> Do not forget that there are many natural obstacles for DNA distribution: Black Sea, Bosporus Strait, hardly penetrable Caucasus Mountains, scorching deserts of Central Asia etc...


Exactly. I tried to explain that to them. But to support their wild claims they came with some obscure contradicting charts.

The thing is that the REAL West Asians (Caucasians and Iranic folks with high I2a & R1a) are very close to East Europeans. They're even much closer to the East Europeans than the West Europeans to the East Europeans. Also there is a linguistically connection between Iranic West Asians and East Europeans. Both groups belong to IE Satem group!

I don't mean Arabs, they're absolutely not West Asian!


Very nice video, btw.

----------


## zdenek von reslaw

May I ask whats wrong with the Africans, that some people here try to stress their genetic distance to them? They are same people like you and me. Besides I´d like to make some considerations concerning the East European anthropological type – a region that concerns me more - and its possible components. 
The Corded Ware ( R1a ) expansion in the second half of the 3rd millenium BC reached at least Elbe. Before it, one of the important anthropological components in that part of Europe was the Comb Ceramic culture, associated with finno-ugric population. 
In the beginning of the Bronze Age the expansion of the middle- european Urnfield culture from south-west and south gave rise to the Lusatian culture, which assimilated the Corded Ware population living in that area ( roughly speaking from Elbe till Bug ).
To these genetically and archeologically undoubted facts I´d like to add some observations of more obvious nature. There are some common anthropological characteristics of the populations, say, Belarus, Poland and East Germany ( it should be noted that eastern Germany was previously settled by Slavs and their predecessors ) that distinguish them from the formations in North Germany and Balticum - two of the most archaic ones in Europe.
This is most likely due to the expansion of the Urnfields that cut the previous Corded Ware territorial continuity.
In slavic tradition, the legends from early slav chronicles, there are reports that their ancestors came from the Danube lands – this suits well with the Urnfield culture invasion.

----------


## Goga

Nothing wrong with Africans. But some confused fellas involve other races (Caucasian - from the Caucasus - and Iranic - maybe from the Central Asia -) that have absolutely nothing do to with this debate or Africans in general!

----------


## Antigone

> May I ask whats wrong with the Africans, that some people here try to stress their genetic distance to them?[/FONT]


It is the same racial superiority crap that has been around since colonial times, any open minded person would think that with the supposed high educational standards in Europe that this rubbish would be a thing of the past. Not so, unfortunately some are still clinging to the old delusions.

----------


## Knovas

Goga, 

There's no contradiction in what we post. You can go and check the Dodecad Distances, and some components are clearly more intermediate than others. What admixture reads is allele frequencies in the different chromosomes. That means that if you pick some Georgians for example, with an average of 75% West Asian, what admixture is reading is that this population has been bootlenecked in a specific region for a long time. The region in this case is not Africa, ok, but neither Europe, Arabia, or Asia. Then, what admixture is saying with a West Asian component, is that they are the most native to their place, of course, but other affinities are impossible to deny and are implicit in the West Asian component, since it's showed as something more intermediate than the European clusters for example.

As you can imagine I did not create the Dodecad distances and the Doug McDonald plots, but if that's not enough for you, will see the third opinion at 23andme. I think 3 genetic sites can't be wrong at the same time.

----------


## Goga

OK.

But there's a lot of misunderstanding here. 

1) First of all, who are Africans? Because Arabs in North Africa and Arabs in Arabia show very much affinity with each other. Berbers are Africans. But are Arabs in Africa African?

2) I believe that Arabic Africans have much more Asian DNA than European DNA, because they are from Asia and extensively settled in Africa. But that happened only in the last millennia or something. Before that Southwest Asia and West Asia exchanged some DNA with each other. West Asian J2 & J1 migrated to Arabia. So I think that if there is some affinity between Africans and West Asian that's because they have West Asian DNA in them and not vice versa.
What I mean is that Arabic Africans have much more West Asian genetic component in them than West Asians do have some genes from Africa.

3) I believe that the Mediterranean and (native) Africans are much closer to each other due to they have been neighbours for *thousands* of years. Every year many Africans are immigrating into Europe. But there was never such a migration in West Asia. Countries like Georgia and Armenia were closed behind the Communist iron curtain not long time ago (modern times).

As far as I know, *in West Asia there have been always sectarian & ethnic wars*. Africans have/had nothing to do in West Asia if they were looking for a 'better life'. West Asia is much a shittier place than Africa! Always wars and always insecurity. It is the hell on earth, while it also could be the paradise on earth.

Also, mountains in the Caucasus and West Asia are 2 times higher than the Pyrenees.

If there is some African DNA in West Asia, that's because of 2 or 3 imported African slaves from Arabistan! And Arabs (still) luve Africans...,... but only as their slaves.

Of course West Asians have some Arab/Semitic (Southwest Asian) blood, much more than the Mediterranean do. But the Mediterranean have much more *native* African blood in them than West Asians do!

I don't think some folks understand West Asia very well...

----------


## Knovas

Who are Africans? That's a good question.

In my opinion, true Africans are simply Negroid types. Note that North Africa has very strong Caucasoid influence, and ethnic Berbers are probably the most representative of this there (nothing to do with Negroids). North Africa is clearly very different from the rest of Africa, and the reason it's obvious if you check, for example, the Moroccan averge in Dodecad project. Then, it's almost sure that most Southern Europeans show higher similarities with North Africans than Georgians, because of the European and other Caucasoid correlations (ancient in the case of North Africa).

I must say I have checked some people at 23andme, and results are curious. I hadn't find a pure Georgian, the most similar is one with some Ukranian ancestry, and he appears to have the highest simillarity with Southern Europe (I mean, his own similarity). I'll try to find an ethnic Georgian, but I don't know how much time I'll need (looks difficult). For the moment, I'm going to post the results I have taking Africa as reference, including Iberians, Two Italians (one is Southern Italian), the mixed Georgian, and a modelic Chinese

The results are showed using the same scale for all people. True Negroids are a maximum diferenciated pole (West Africans), and the similarity showed with them, I think, must be taken seriously with independence of the main ancestry. Higher number means closer here.

CHINESE
North Africa: 65.15
East Africa: 63.93
South Africa: 63.83
Central Africa: 63.78
West Africa: 63.74

MIXED GEORGIAN (he is DOD665, and keep in mind he has substantial European admixture, what means that a real Georgian should appear more similar to Africans than him...however, check the numbers carefully in comparison, specially, with some of the Iberians)
North Africa: 66.49
East Africa: 63.65
South Africa: 63.53
Central Africa: 63.50
West Africa: 63.45

ITALIAN 1 (this one joins Dodecad, but I don't know the exact number...it's possible he has little African ancestry added to a high West Asian and Southwest Asian)
North Africa: 66.58
East Africa: 63.69
South Africa: 63.57
Central Africa: 63.52
West Africa: 63.49

ITALIAN 2 (DOD438 - Southern Italian)
North Africa: 66.68
East Africa: 63.81
South Africa: 63.70
Central Africa: 63.64
West Africa: 63.58

IBERIAN 1 (DOD541 - this one shows a bit atypical african admixture)
North Africa: 66.52
East Africa: 63.71
South Africa: 63.57
Central Africa: 63.53
West Africa: 63.48

IBERIAN 2 (DOD161)
North Africa: 66.55
East Africa: 63.64
South Africa: 63.51
Central Africa: 63.49
West Africa: 63.45

IBERIAN 3 (DOD740)
North Africa: 66.56
East Africa: 63.62
South Africa: 63.48
Central Africa: 63.45
West Africa: 63.39

IBERIAN 4 (DOD725)
North Africa: 66.60
East Africa: 63.57
South Africa: 63.44
Central Africa: 63.40
West Africa: 63.38

For the moment that's the information collected...what a huge post I made XD

Quick conclusions are that Mongoloid populations are more related to Africans than the Caucasoids are...at least, the total genome match appears to be higher. And it's apreciable that, in general terms, Iberians are too western to have I high genome similarity with negroids. With Italians (and probably Greeks) the thing seems to work different...will see if I find a pure Georgian one day to post the numbers. Also, if you want, I can look for more Italians and Greeks...some of them, specially North Italians, would appear a bit different.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> OK.
> 
> But there's a lot of misunderstanding here. 
> 
> 1) First of all, who are Africans? Because Arabs in North Africa and Arabs in Arabia show very much affinity with each other. Berbers are Africans. But are Arabs in Africa African?
> 
> 2) I believe that Arabic Africans have much more Asian DNA than European DNA, because they are from Asia and extensively settled in Africa. But that happened only in the last millennia or something. Before that Southwest Asia and West Asia exchanged some DNA with each other. West Asian J2 & J1 migrated to Arabia. So I think that if there is some affinity between Africans and West Asian that's because they have West Asian DNA in them and not vice versa.
> What I mean is that Arabic Africans have much more West Asian genetic component in them than West Asians do have some genes from Africa.
> 
> ...


 I think you are getting confused. Nobody is saying that Georgians or other Caucasus have african admixture. What we say is that the West-Asian component in it's pure form (100% west-asian, Georgians are about 72%) is closer to Paleo-African than the Mediterranean component, but still notice that the distances in both cases are extremey LARGE. It's not something invented by us.

----------


## Goga

I'm sorry to all readers if they got disappointed or insulted by my posts. I've nothing against Africans or other races and I do understand that this forum is all about Europe. All Homo sapiens are from Africa at the first place. This is my last message about this whole thing.






> I think you are getting confused. Nobody is saying that Georgians or other Caucasus have african admixture. What we say is that the West-Asian component in it's pure form (100% west-asian, Georgians are about 72%) is closer to Paleo-African than the Mediterranean component, but still notice that the distances in both cases are extremey LARGE. It's not something invented by us.


Lol, that's a lie and you know it. This whole topic is about ADMIXTURE. West Asian linage is not closer to Africa than the Mediterranean is. African lineage is E and the Mediterranean has more E than West Asia. According to some of your posts the admixture of West Asian is closer to Africans.

E is everywhere in the Mediterranean and it's all directly from Africa!

IF there is African DNA in West Asian then it is from the Greeks and/or Arabs. There's also 1 other possibility. Neo-Babylonians (Kassites) and Aryan Mitanni had some close ties with the ancient Egypt of Pharaohs, maybe some 'African' DNA slipped into West Asia at that times. But that was more than 3000 years ago. Otherwise I can't imagine other possibility.

West Asia ain't no _Disney Land_, lol. It's not a place where you can come and go. West Asian = at least *5000 years of NON-STOP war*. West Asia is the place where many great battles took place. Many races found their WATERLOO there. From the great Hurrians to many ARYAN kingdoms, to Alexander of Macedon, the Romans, the Mongols, Arabs, Russians and the list goes on. None of them are from Africa!

The same can't be said about the Mediterranean. Like Hannibal, African Arabs and Mouriscos that were in the Mediterranean. Also Greeks love Egyptians. All these people around the Mediterranean were the same and had same African linage, hg. E. 

If you want to come and live in West Asia you must have some HUGE balls, otherwise you won't survive. West Asia ain't no place for outsiders. People there have very close societies and are very traditional. If you want to come and live there (as a nation) you must take it by force.
Otherwise you will be wiped out. Hittites, Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians etc. all found their WATERLOO in West Asia. Even, if you live in West Asia as a 'newcomer' for 1000 years in West Asia it's not a guarantee that your ethnicity will survive. Turks who have been living here for almost 1000 years are may be the next victims of this harsh and hard reality. An European or African nation without help won't survive there for a very short time.

I even didn't wrote anything about brutal landscape in West Asia.

I rest my case.

----------


## Knovas

The distances talk clearly I think, the West Asian component is closer to Africa than the Mediterranean is. Then, ¿how do you explain that DOD725 with 54.4% Mediterranean + 2.2% North/East African, is much less similar to negroids than the Mixed Georgian I showed obove?

Be resonable man. Seriously, that's not to hurt anybody; just to get the best aproximation.

----------


## Goga

> Higher number means closer here.
> 
> MIXED GEORGIAN (he is DOD665, and keep in mind he has substantial European admixture, what means that a real Georgian should appear more similar to Africans than him...however, check the numbers carefully in comparison, specially, with some of the Iberians)
> North Africa: 66.49
> East Africa: 63.65
> South Africa: 63.53
> Central Africa: 63.50
> West Africa: 63.45
> 
> ...


I don't understand this, but does higher number mean CLOSER to Africans???

Of all people here the so called 'mixed' Georgian has the lowest numbers...

----------


## Knovas

100% Sure. At 23andme higher number means closer, because it's global similarity (higher number = more similar).

The mixed Georgian hasn't got the lowest numbers. He just has lower similarity with North Africa (Caucasoid), but comparing with the rest of Africans (Negroids) he has higher numbers than the most part of Iberians. What I tried to show posting Italians, is that they appear more similar, in great part, because they have substantial West Asian and Southwest Asian (but also added to some African ancestry in this case). But as you can see, the mentioned Iberian has 0% near eastern, and even having 2.2% North/East African, the mixed Georgian gets higher numbers than him (and also higher than two more Iberians). No better explanation than the one already given.

I think it's clear.

PD: Trust me. An ethnic Georgian would get even higher numbers compared to Africa than the one I used, because the European admixture is lower between them. Sure.

----------


## Goga

O ok, thank you very much. Now i do understand it. The most Iberians are closer to North Africans, but this mixed Georgian is closer to other Africans. This make sense. North Africans with high E are somehow the Mediterranean too. But when I'm talking about the European Mediterranean I'm talking about all nations around this sea. From Spain to Greeks.

Georgians are much closer to Arabs than the Iberians are, that's how they got more West-East-South African DNA, the Iberians are closer to North Africa, that's how they have more North African DNA.
But this is always what I told you: the Mediterraneans from Africa and Europe are close to each other, because they live next to each other for thousands of years.

I do also see that the Italians & Iberian1 have more DNA from ALL Africa than this 'mixed' Georgian. I guess a person from Greece has even more than these fellas from Italy and Iberian1. But we have just 1 example from Georgia.

Once again the Mediterranean is not only Southeast parts of Spain, but also Morocco, Libya, Italy, Greece etc..

----------


## Knovas

Greeks would appear with higher similarity because of the high West Asian and Southwest Asian, but they have very low African scores. What happens with some Spaniards and Portuguese is that they show enough African ancestry to have higher similarity, at least, than this Georgian (don't forget that an ethnic Georgian would get higher numbers than this one). But most of them would appear with more or less the same or lower.

I'll post more examples if I can, it's very difficult to find ethnic Georgians (but sure some of them join 23andme). Also, I'll, search for Greeks and other interesting examples if I think it's the case.

----------


## Wilhelm2

From what I've read, spaniards at 23andMe score even a higher similarity with Central-Asians than with North-Africans. Definately the mediterranean sea has acted as a genetic barrier.

----------


## Goga

You can almost build a beautiful masterpiece of a bridge between Ceuta - Gibraltar (Africa - Europe). Or maybe multiple bridges with some artificial islands in between. It's that close!

Ceuta - Gibraltar

- Miles: 16.95
- Kilometers: 27.28


http://www.mapcrow.info/Distance_bet..._Ceuta_SP.html

----------


## Knovas

The similarity with Central Asians is higher (66.75-66.90). However, similarities between closer populations must consider the main ancestry. That means in the case of Europeans, if a person is more similar to Europe than another one, proportinally, the second can have more asiatic in him than the other, even scoring less similarity with Central Asians and other Asians.

It depends on the case. However, the similarity with Black Africans is listed in a very low scale (63), and represents almost the same for all people. Of course, the similarity showed by Black Africans is more than 68. They are the most similar to its ancestral place.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> You can almost build a beautiful masterpiece of a bridge between Ceuta - Gibraltar (Africa - Europe). Or maybe multiple bridges with some artificial islands in between. It's that close!
> 
> Ceuta - Gibraltar
> 
> - Miles: 16.95
> - Kilometers: 27.28
> 
> 
> http://www.mapcrow.info/Distance_bet..._Ceuta_SP.html


Actually, there is genetic research that suggests the Straights of Gibraltar, because of its unpredictable currents, acted as a greater gene flow deterrent between North Africa and Europe than sections of the eastern Mediterranean. I think one of the posters on this thread may have details of the study available.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> Actually, there is genetic research that suggests the Straights of Gibraltar, because of its unpredictable currents, acted as a greater gene flow deterrent between North Africa and Europe than sections of the eastern Mediterranean. I think one of the posters on this thread may have details of the study available.


 Correct. Many studies talk about the genetic barrier of Gibraltar. For example, Andalusia which is right next to Gibraltar, showed about 1.6% of north-african E-M81 while France had 3.5%. Other studies :





> "An analysis of 11 Alu insertion polymorphisms...has been performed in several NW African...and Iberian...populations. Genetic distances and principal component analyses show a clear differentiation of NW African and Iberian groups of samples, suggesting a strong genetic barrier matching the geographical Mediterranean Sea barrier. The restriction to gene flow may be attributed to the navigational hazards across the Straits, but cultural factors must also have played a role. ... Iberian samples show a substantial degree of homogeneity and fall within the cluster of European-based genetic diversity."
> (Comas et al. 2000)





> A European wide study including Spaniards states: No significant correlation is apparent between North African admixture and geography. Genetic exchanges across the Mediterranean Sea, and especially in its western-most part where the geographic distance between continents is smallest (Spain), seem to have been limited or very limited, establishing the North African contribution at between 2.5% and 3.4%.
> 
> Dupanloup, I. (2004). "Estimating the Impact of Prehistoric Admixture on the Genome of Europeans".



Discover Magazine : Gene Flow stops at Gibraltar 

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...raltar-mostly/

----------


## Wilhelm2

Btw in this other table the Georgians are closer to Mozabite (North-Africans) than Basques or Sardinians (mediterranean) are, despite geographical distances : 

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...raltar-mostly/

----------


## Knovas

Perfectly possible. The difference is not so huge, more or less what I thought.

The similarity with North Africans appears to be higher in the case of Iberians because it's the same scale as Central Asians at 23andme (66). The real distance must take the European similarity as reference, and Georgians have very low European similarity compared to Iberians. That's the main reason why they appear a bit closer.

Europe (North/South) is the maximum diferenciated pole on the caucasoid side (67 near 68 scale), while West Africa followed by the rest, represents the primarly African/Negroid reference (63 scale).

----------


## Goga

> Perfectly possible. The difference is not so huge, more or less what I thought.
> 
> The similarity with North Africans appears to be higher in the case of Iberians because it's the same scale as Central Asians at 23andme (66). The real distance must take the European similarity as reference, and Georgians have very low European similarity compared to Iberians. That's the main reason why they appear a bit closer.


That's not entirely true. Georgians (and West Asians in general) are closer to Eastern Europeans than the Iberians are. Basque are very close to West European R1b folks. Because of R1b...

Georgian to Lithuanian = 0,039
Sardian to Lithuanian = 0,041
Basque to Lithuanian = 0,040

Btw, I don't understand how is it possible that Saudi is as far from Mozabite as Basque is. The same 0,077 distance. it doesn't make any sense. Georgian is closer to Mozabite than Saudi is ?????

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...raltar-mostly/

----------


## Knovas

A 100% Southwest Asian Saudí can be a bit far than Georgians. A 100% West Asian person hasn't been discovered for the moment, but quite Saudís are 100% Southwest Asian.

Mozabite have very high North African component, but they also carry 14% of others according to the K=12 v3 run.

Georgians can be similar to a small portion of Europe, but considering Europe as whole, their similarity appears quite low. I don't remember the European similarity of the mixed Georgian, but I think it was very low compared to most Europeans (both North and South).

----------


## Wilhelm2

> That's not entirely true. Georgians (and West Asians in general) are closer to Eastern Europeans than the Iberians are. Basque are very close to West European R1b folks. Because of R1b...
> 
> Georgian to Lithuanian = 0,039
> Sardian to Lithuanian = 0,041
> Basque to Lithuanian = 0,040
> 
> Btw, I don't understand how is it possible that Saudi is as far from Mozabite as Basque is. The same 0,077 distance. it doesn't make any sense. Georgian is closer to Mozabite than Saudi is ?????
> 
> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...raltar-mostly/


 False, because Basques and Sardinians are very homogeneus and isolated populations. But Iberians are closer to East-Europeans than Georgians are. For example, in this table, the Spaniards are closer to Russians than the Adygei ( a caucasus population, which are part of Russia) :

----------


## Goga

> False, because Basques and Sardinians are very homogeneus and isolated populations. But Iberians are closer to East-Europeans than Georgians are. For example, in this table, the Spaniards are closer to Russians than the Adygei ( a caucasus population, which are part of Russia) :


 I don't know what games you're playing, but if we compare Iberians to North Africans you're giving NATIVE homogeneous and isolated populations as example that have almost nothing in common with Africa. But I think that Spaniards are closer to Africans than Basques and Sardinians are. I think that Spaniards *WITHOUT* Basques are closer to North Africa than Georgians are.

West Asians and East Europeans are closer to each other before of the ARYAN (Iranic speaking folks) connection. I think that West Asian ARYANS (Iranic speaking folks) somehow influenced Eastern Europe.

I believe that R1b is not Indo-European at all. And that it has nothing to do with the ancient ARYANS.
That's why West Asians and East Europeans are closer to each other than Iberians (close to 100% of R1b) to East Europeans.

----------


## Goga

Btw, in this example given by YOU Georgians ( homogeneous Caucasians) are closer to Lithuanians (homogeneous Northeast European population) than NATIVE homogeneous Iberians to Lithuanians.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...raltar-mostly/

----------


## Wilhelm2

> Btw, in this example given by YOU Georgians ( homogeneous Caucasians) are closer to Lithuanians (homogeneous Northeast European population) than NATIVE homogeneous Iberians to Lithuanians.
> 
> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...raltar-mostly/


 In that link these are not Iberians, these are Basques. Spaniards are much closer to East-Europeans than West-Asians are, by far. See now this phylogenetic tree, the Iberians are in the same branch as the East-Europeans, while Georgians ARE NOT : 

http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/2...ngdodecad6.jpg

----------


## Knovas

Spaniards are listed in the graphic, but not in the distances. They seem to be closer, yes.

----------


## Goga

> In that link these are not Iberians, these are Basques. Spaniards are much closer to East-Europeans than West-Asians are, by far. See now this phylogenetic tree, the Iberians are in the same branch as the East-Europeans, while Georgians ARE NOT : 
> 
> http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/2...ngdodecad6.jpg


I'm sorry but this is the biggest nonsens that I have ever seen in my life.

You are a very confused fella. I don't know how old you're but you're still in search for your own identity. You can't even place your own people on the map. I will help you.

Spaniards are almost pure (your favourite term I think) Iberians. Basques are Iberians too. Both folks are kinsmen and are mostly native to Europe-Iberia. R1b is a native West Atlantic European marker. That has NOTHING to do with Eastern Europe!

Ukraine has only 4% of R1b, Lithuania only 5% etc.
Iberians don't have R1a, which is from Eastern Europe. Maybe 2% R1a.

Ukrainians/Lithuanians and Iberians differ from each other like day and night.

You're a smart fella. Don't develop racism out of your source of insecurity, because someday you will meet other confused fella that is even twice more racist than you ever can be...

----------


## Knovas

If we check the K=12 v3 spreadsheet, Lithuanians have quite West European matching Iberians much better than Georgians. Basques and Sardinians are too Isolated and must be probably excluded, since there are so many different ways to describe them using components. 

Check for example the K=12 with the Sardinian and Basque components, both are clearly different from the rest of Europe: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...CIee9KwK#gid=0

----------


## Goga

The problem is I think that you don't know who Georgians are. The infamous USSR leader and maybe the greatest butcher of all time Jozef *Stalin* was a Georgian! Many generals under the tsar's army were Georgians. They have the OLDEST nobility in the world. Fought bravely against huge (Turkish and Persian) Islamic armies and still kept their identity. That's a huge achievement in West Asia if you keep your identity, with Russians in north and Turks & Persians in south. There's maybe only 5 million of them. Great warriors...

----------


## Wilhelm2

> I'm sorry but this is the biggest nonsens that I have ever seen in my life.
> 
> You are a very confused fella. I don't know how old you're but you're still in search for your own identity. You can't even place your own people on the map. I will help you.
> 
> Spaniards are almost pure (your favourite term I think) Iberians. Basques are Iberians too. Both folks are kinsmen and are mostly native to Europe-Iberia. R1b is a native West Atlantic European marker. That has NOTHING to do with Eastern Europe!
> 
> Ukraine has only 4% of R1b, Lithuania only 5% etc.
> Iberians don't have R1a, which is from Eastern Europe. Maybe 2% R1a.
> 
> ...


 You are confusing haplogroups with autosomal dna again. For example, Lithuania has 40% of haplogroup N, yet they are genetically very close to the Polish, who have only 1% of N !! You see now. Western-European and East-Europeans are the closest to each other by far, not with West-Asians, who are closest to middle-easterns. In the Eurogenes plots the spaniards are closer to Polish or Lithuanians than Georgians are. Same in the case of Dodecad. Same in the case of Dr.McDonald. As you can see here, Spaniards are much closer to Hungarians, Lithuanians, Belarusians or Russians than Georgians are :

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

Haplogroups only give clues about ancient migration patterns. Autosomal DNA (full ancestry) is essentially what counts with respect to genetic clustering and distance.

----------


## Goga

LOL. I don't know where you got your maps from - please provide some links -, but on this map (posted by *YOU*) Georgians are closer to East Europe than Iberians (Basque and Spain) are!  :Laughing:   :Bored: 




>

----------


## Goga

DODECAD says that Spaniards have *4,1* % of African blood, while Georgians only *0,1* % in total !! HAHAHAHAHA

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

I don't care how much African blood Georgians or Spaniards have in them, but you loose big time!

_Game, set and match !_

----------


## Goga

> 


 
African.jpg

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

----------


## Alan

> I know who you are now. The only t.r.o.l.l. posting at 23andme now decided to join Eupedia. Very ill mental health.
> 
> Mediterranean means Southern European (Southwest + Southeast Europe). The way you post the distances it's absolutly WRONG. You must take all clusters as reference, and if you look carefully, you'll see that West Asian is closer to Neo African, Paleo African, and some other non European clusters than the Mediterranean is. That's easy to understand, since West Asian is one of the near eastern clusters, and Mediterranean is the 3rd European cluster. Even West European is closer to Paleo African than the Mediterranean is.
> 
> Time to accept the facts and treat your Ibero-Phobia


Knovas to be real, actually he says the truth. The difference between "Mediterranean" and "South European" is obviously not just the name. South European component was a bit smaller among Near Eastern and African Populations, but after Dienekes replaced it by Mediterranean this changed. And indeed West Asian is closer and almost seems like a West Asian version of West European. However Mediterranean is still more common in Europe.

----------


## Goga

I think they're a little bit con_ph_used because of their African genes, hahaha.

*4,1* % in Spain
0,1 % in Georgia

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

See the difference, muwhahahaha

----------


## Alan

Goga please dont be so rude to other People only because they dont agree with you.

The"Mediterranean Element just like Maciamo mentioned has most probably a connection with IJ. IJ is not only European but "Mediterranean" found in Europe as well Near East.

Thats why the "Mediterranean component is between West Asian, Southwest Asian and West/East European components. However indeed West Asian is closer to West/East European as Mediterranean is but at the same time it is also a bit closer to Southwest Asian. 

Relationship of West/East European to other components
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-P2GJvQzlQW.../s1600/1_2.png

----------


## Alan

> ???
> 
> Are you saying that Georgians, Armenians or Kurds have more African blood in them than the Iberians???? That's crazy!!!!
> 
> Haplogroup E is African. The Mediterraneans have MUCH more E than West Asians. FACT!!!!
> 
> 
> I have a question for you. What is closer to Africa: the Mediterranean or CHINA??? I'm sure you will say CHINA, lol...


He is saying that the West Asian component (Not West Asian folks) is a bit closer to African than Mediterranean is and he is right with this. But at the same time West Asian is closer to West/East European component.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> I think they're a little bit con_ph_used because of their African genes, hahaha.
> 
> *4,1* % in Spain
> 0,1 % in Georgia
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0
> 
> See the difference, muwhahahaha


 Georgia is only 30% european, yet Spain is over 90% like the rest of Europe. You don't get it, saying that West-Asia is closer to Africa doesn't imply having african admixture.

----------


## Alan

People one of the biggest mistakes made by dienekes was, to name the components after Regions. 

For example the so called "South Asian" component. When People hear this they usually connect it with South Asia When we find out more about the so called "South Asian" component, we recognize that there is no other component that is so much diverse. The so called "South Asian" component is a combination of two components, ASI and ANI. The South Asian among Kurds, Turks, Iranians is almost exclusively ANI.

This is what a Friend wrote me
""" See how close West Asian Component is to ANI

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FFgv5Ekbf5...s/s1600/nj.png
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ndsd2vCS9d.../ANI%252B4.png

In deep contrast, ASI is similar to Onge component.
From his blog:
http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/06/...n-context.html
"I have also ran supervised K=3 ADMIXTURE analysis that treated the ASI population as test data and CHB, Onge, Papuan as parental populations; the ASI turned out 100% "Onge", consistent with the idea that ASI is distantly related to Onge, although closer than with the other two populations.

It should be noted, however, that the similarity of ASI to Onge is not unexpected, since:

* Onge was used by Reich et al. (2009) to infer admixture proportions of Indian Cline populations, which were (in turn):
* used by myself to infer allele frequencies of ASI, and then:
* used by myself to create a synthetic population of ASI individuals.

So, the Onge-ness of ASI is contingent upon the accuracy of Reich et al. (2009)"


Dodecad mixed two completely different components (ANI and ASI) into one (South Asian), which is misleading. If you look at his blog he avoided to show ANI and ASI in one plot.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Fy6fGi0y3M.../s1600/1_2.png
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FFgv5Ekbf5...s/s1600/nj.png
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ndsd2vCS9d.../ANI%252B4.png

We can be sure ANI is closer to West Asian as to ASI.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> DODECAD says that Spaniards have *4,1* % of African blood, while Georgians only *0,1* % in total !! HAHAHAHAHA
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0
> 
> I don't care how much African blood Georgians or Spaniards have in them, but you loose big time!
> 
> _Game, set and match !_


What are you talking about? Just because Spaniards have slightly higher African affinities than Georgians doesn't mean a thing. Georgians have only 30% Euro compared to over 90% for Spaniards.

----------


## Goga

> Georgia is only 30% european, yet Spain is over 90% like the rest of Europe.


So what? But truly my congrats to your folks with their 99.99 % of European DNA. Cherish it, but maybe it's a loss for them that they don't have any West Asian DNA? Don't worry, It doesn't matter for me that they don't have West Asian DNA, they're still good and very artistic folks. And I love ART, so I don't care about their DNA.

And Georgians are 75 % West Asian and 25 % everything else, not 30 %. I salute them! RESPECT that they've got that much West Asian DNA, most of them all! True tough guys.

West Asia, the cradle of civilization. The place where great minds invented the writings and algebra. West Asia a place of real men with big balls and true warriors. Only the strongest survive there. Europe is a more friendly environment for women. And Europe is in general just a backyard of West Asia, like it always was and always will be.





> You don't get it, saying that West-Asia is closer to Africa doesn't imply having african admixture.


Oh, really? I thought it's all about the location of origin and the admixture of Y-DNA and MtDNA.

Don't worry, Portugal has even 8,7 % of African DNA. More than Spain, so if I was Spain I would build a great wall of China between Portugal and Spain to isolate Spain from these Africans from Portugal. They can harm your SUPERIOR and pure 24 carat European DNA.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> LOL. I don't know where you got your maps from - please provide some links -, but on this map (posted by *YOU*) Georgians are closer to East Europe than Iberians (Basque and Spain) are!


What map are you looking at? The one you put up was cut off at the bottom, where the Georgian cluster is. Wilhelm's map (it may be from Dienekes, but I'll let him confirm that) shows that Georgians are indeed very distant from Eastern Europeans and, by comparison, Spaniards much closer. What kind of childish game are you playing here?

----------


## Goga

> What are you talking about? Just because Spaniards have slightly higher African affinities than Georgians doesn't mean a thing. Georgians have only 30% Euro compared to over 90% for Spaniards.


So what honey?? Georgians are *75* % West Asian and not 70 % like you are saying. Get your numbers straight. Spaniards are still more African!!! The thing is that you don't like this fact and hate it, but I don't care a damn.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> Attachment 5093
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0


BTW, researchers generally consider anything below 2% as "genetic noise".

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> So what honey?? Georgian are 75% West Asian and not 70%. You're still more African!!! The thing is that you don't like this fact and hate it, but I don't care a damn.


Single digit percentages of X or Y do not matter since the European scores are overwhelmingly dominant for Spain, as is the case for all Western European countries. There is no liking or hating on this issue from me or anyone else. I really don't understand where you are coming from. What's the problem? People are just interpreting results through use of generally accepted scientific tools.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> So what honey?? Georgians are *75* % West Asian and not 70 % like you are saying. Get your numbers straight. Spaniards are still more African!!! The thing is that you don't like this fact and hate it, but I don't care a damn.


Oh, my mistake. Like 5% is going to make a world of difference.

----------


## Goga

> What's the problem?


I don't care about Africans (absolutely nothing wrong with them), but some fellas here claimed that West Asians are more African than the Mediterranean folks. And that's just false!

----------


## Goga

> Oh, my mistake. Like 5% is going to make a world of difference.


Everything, every precious West Asian % of DNA is sacred to me.




> I really don't understand where you are coming from.


I'm 100 % West Asian, baby. But I live in Europe.  :Angry:

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> I don't care about Africans (absolutely nothing wrong with them), but some fellas here claimed that West Asians are more African than the Mediterranean folks. And that's just false!


I could care less who has what. If you show Euro scores in the mid to high 80's and low 90s (as is the case in the western side of Europe) it's pretty darn clear what you are genetically. Posters are just trying to make certain that the results are being presented accurately.

If you have issues with Eupedia member interpretations, please, go ask people like Dienekes, Dr. McDonald, or Harvard Medical School, Johns Hopkins, UCal Berkeley, etc. Let them give you their expert opinions.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

@ Goga

100% West Asian? Lovely, I'm quite happy for you. :Great: 

Party hardy!

----------


## Goga

> I could care less who has what. If you show Euro scores in the mid to high 80's and low 90s (as is the case in the western end of Europe) it's pretty darn clear what you are genetically. Posters are just trying to make certain that the results are being presented accurately.
> 
> If you have issues with Eupedia member interpretations, please, go ask people like Dienekes, Dr. McDonald, or Harvard Medical School, Johns Hopkins, UCal Berkeley, etc. Let them give you their expert opinions.


Lol, It's not necessary. I'm not going to spent some money on this trash. I know who I'm, I'm not con_ph_used like some fellas. I'm 100 % 24 carat pure West Asian. ALL my ancestors were 24 carat pure West Asian and from the same pure noble RACE too. My roots are in Northwest Asia (north Mesopotamia not far from the Caucasus) and are dating back from the dawn of time. 10000, 20000, 30000 years old? I think - no I KNOW - I'm a true descendant of the Garden of Eden and Noah folks.

PS. I'm very happy for myself too. I'm smooth and beautiful very proud West Asian fella. And also very rich. I'm blessed !

----------


## Bodin

I dont see any use of clustering haplogroups this way , lets take one example : R1b is originaly from West Asia ( R1b* almoust exclusivly there ) , and come to West Europe 2-3.000 years ago , and G2a also West Asian , but come to West Europe significantly before that ( atleast early Neolithe - Treilles ) , and you calling lands with 90% R1b European , but lands with high G noneuropean . Also why would Balkans be more West Asiatic , when most (95% ) of its J2 , J1 , and E1b1b come to Europe lot before Spain R1b . (Also Balkans have pretty much European mth DNA ) . It is logicall that there is going to be a lot of overflow from West Asia to Balkans , and from Africa to Iberian penincula because they are separated just by few miles of water.

----------


## Knovas

@ Alan

¿How can you say, again, that Mediterranean is not Southern European? My god.

See the Spanish scores at other runs (K=10 and K=12 Sardinian and Basque components). Also, check the Eurogenes. It is impossible to deny a fact like this, even Maciamo claimed on this thread that Mediterranean was probably the most ancient European reported in populations.

You don't know how to check the distances. The West Asian has much more non European affinities than the Mediterranean has, doesn't mean anything that it's closer to West European if it's also closer to other non European clusters. And tell me, ¿how do you explain, if Mediterranean is not Southern European, that West European is even closer to Palaeo African than the Mediterranean is? Also, notice that Mediterranean has very low Asian affinities compared to East and West European. ¿How do you explain that again if it's not Southern European? It's time to use the brain and stop with the nonsense.

Here is the table, it's perfectly clear what I say: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png

Sorry guys, but you have absolutly NO REASON. The numbers have spoken, not me. This discussion was over since a VERY long time.

Most populations show more European admixture in the K=12 v3 run, including both Northern and Southern Europeans. Nothing rare on this, it is known that depending on the analysis results change. And actually, Polish, some Lithuanians, and some Mixed Slavs, are the ones who have increased more their European scores *due to the East European* component compared to other runs. So sorry, but as you can see, it's NOT due to the Mediterranean component. No way.

Here you have a very ilustrative example: DOD468 (Lithuanian) at K=10 is less than 89% European, while at K=12 v3 goes near 100% with 67.8% East European (highest percentage for this admixture) and only 7.1% Mediterranean. With the distances and this fact, it's perfectly proven there's no correlation with the Mediterranean attribution to explain this peculiarity.

Exactly, DOD468 scores 88.9% European at K=10 having only 7.1% Mediterranean at K=12 v3. And DOD725 with 54.4% Mediterranean in the last one (highest percentage for this admixture too), scored *89.7%* European at K=10...clearly more. There's no doubt we are refering to Europe here, since the clusters are named Southern and Northern European, althought it's quite obvious what East Euro, West Euro, and Mediterranean mean. 

I can continue posting examples all day if you aren't still sure. Quite pathetic questioning some things wich are clear as day.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> I dont see any use of clustering haplogroups this way , lets take one example : R1b is originaly from West Asia ( R1b* almoust exclusivly there ) , and come to West Europe 2-3.000 years ago , and G2a also West Asian , but come to West Europe significantly before that ( atleast early Neolithe - Treilles ) , and you calling lands with 90% R1b European , but lands with high G noneuropean . Also why would Balkans be more West Asiatic , when most (95% ) of its J2 , J1 , and E1b1b come to Europe lot before Spain R1b . (Also Balkans have pretty much European mth DNA ) . It is logicall that there is going to be a lot of overflow from West Asia to Balkans , and from Africa to Iberian penincula because they are separated just by few miles of water.


Perhaps you haven't read the research on this thread which shows that the Straights of Gibraltar acted as a strong barrier to gene flow from N. Africa. African genetic influences are quite low in Iberia, lower overall than an number of other countries.

----------


## Goga

Some people really don't get it. The Mediterranean is not only Europe. The Mediterranean is also Africa and Asia.

The South Europeans don't have any kind of monopoly on the The Mediterranean Sea. The Mediterranean Sea is of all kind of people. From Europe (Spain, Italy and Greece) and Africa (Algeria, Lybia, Egypt) to Asia (Palestine, Israel, Lebanon and Syria).

Of course is the Mediterranean *more* African. *50* % of the the Mediterranean *IS* in Africa! Some people are just delusional!

The Mediterranean = AFRICA, Asia & Europe.



the_mediterranean_basin.jpg

----------


## Goga

*All* (African, European and Asian) countries around the Mediterranean Sea have a very high Mediterranean component.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

----------


## Knovas

Man, I have already proven that the top Mediterranean scorer showed more total European than the top East European scorer at K=10 (Southern + Northern European). Why do you still continue saying that Mediterranean is not Southern European? It's 100% sure it is, and more ancient European than the other two. That's the main reason why you can find this component so widespread, because of its antiquity. North Africans Mixed with those peoples in ancient times, that's one of the reasons why they appear clearly different from Negroids (Sub-Saharan Africa).

Here you have the Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...CP-9p_wC#gid=0

Go and compare DOD468 and DOD725 (higher percentages on each admixture). I hope this time it's enough...incredible to be explaining such elemental thing at this level.

And look at the distances please. Mediterranean has incredibly less non European affinities compared with almost all Asian clusters, and even West European is closer to Palaeo African than Mediterranean. Be resonable.

----------


## Goga

> Man, I have already proven that the top Mediterranean scorer showed more total European than the top East European scorer at K=10 (Southern + Northern European). Why do you still continue saying that Mediterranean is not Southern European? It's 100% sure it is, and more ancient European than the other two.


Of course is NORTH Mediterranean 100% European, it is *IN* Europe. I think there're HUGE differences between north and south Mediterraneans.

Most north Mediterranean folks are mixed with Northwest European folks. People in Spain are much closer to people of England or France, because people of Spain have the same amount of Northwest DNA as peoples of England and France do. R1b connect these folks. French people are closer to Spaniards than they are to Russian, because French and Spanish people are from the same gene pool.

While South Mediterraneans are mixed with native African populations from the rest of Africa! They're 100% African.

*They must distinguish the north Mediterraneans from the south Mediterraneans. Like they splitted Europe in West - East.*

It's all about the admixture.

----------


## Knovas

Well, I must agree in part. Dienekes' should keep separated Southeast Europe from Southwest Europe to avoid confusions, like he did with Northern Europe (also, the Sardinian and Basque components run was more or less that thing). However, Iberians haven't the same Northern European as English, Irish, etc., but Southwestern European allele frequencies are clearly very similar to Northern Europe.

You can notice that Italians, Greeks, etc., althought they have high Mediterranean, they also have quite West Asian and Southwest Asian, wich is what definetely deviate them to other non European populations (not the Mediterranean scores, but I agree that separated would be better).

To separate North and South Mediterraneans is not possible. It's the same as if you try to separate the East or West European you can find in Europe from the one you can find in distant places of Asia (because some of these components are found even in Japan at very low frequencies). The only thing it represents the Mediterranean cluster in Africa is ancient Southern European admixture, nothing else. The same as the East or West European you can find in remote Asian places.

Here you have the Nepalese. A very good example of this: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PaZ2LRO_9-...epalese_12.png

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> I dont see any use of clustering haplogroups this way , lets take one example : R1b is originaly from West Asia ( R1b* almoust exclusivly there ) , and come to West Europe 2-3.000 years ago , and G2a also West Asian , but come to West Europe significantly before that ( atleast early Neolithe - Treilles ) , and you calling lands with 90% R1b European , but lands with high G noneuropean . Also why would Balkans be more West Asiatic , when most (95% ) of its J2 , J1 , and E1b1b come to Europe lot before Spain R1b . (Also Balkans have pretty much European mth DNA ) . It is logicall that there is going to be a lot of overflow from West Asia to Balkans , and from Africa to Iberian penincula because they are separated just by few miles of water.



Haplogroups?? Genetic clustering plots use autosomal DNA to measure similarities and differences between population groups, not haplogroups. Haplogroups have nothing to do with clustering. They primarily have value in the analysis of ancient migration patterns, not genetic distances.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> Of course is NORTH Mediterranean 100% European, it is *IN* Europe. I think there're HUGE differences between north and south Mediterraneans.
> 
> Most north Mediterranean folks are mixed with Northwest European folks. People in Spain are much closer to people of England or France, because people of Spain have the same amount of Northwest DNA as peoples of England and France do. R1b connect these folks. French people are closer to Spaniards than they are to Russian, because French and Spanish people are from the same gene pool.
> 
> While South Mediterraneans are mixed with native African populations from the rest of Africa! They're 100% African.
> 
> *They must distinguish the north Mediterraneans from the south Mediterraneans. Like they splitted Europe in West - East.*
> 
> It's all about the admixture.


Finally, something we can agree on. :Good Job:

----------


## Goga

> Well, I must agree in part. Dienekes' should keep separated Southeast Europe from Southwest Europe to avoid confusions, like he did with Northern Europe (also, the Sardinian and Basque components run was more or less that thing). However, Iberians haven't the same Northern European as English, Irish, etc., but Southwestern European allele frequencies are clearly very similar to Northern Europe.
> 
> You can notice that Italians, Greeks, etc., althought they have high Mediterranean, they also have quite West Asian and Southwest Asian, wich is what definetely deviate them to other non European populations (not the Mediterranean scores, but I agree that separated would be better).


Yes, not only in Northwest - Northeast Mediterranean but also in Southwest and Southeast. As you can see Arabic nations (Lebanon, Syria, Palestine) on the East coast of the Mediterranean Sea and Arabic nations on the South coast of the Mediterranean Sea have pretty much of the Mediterranean component in their DNA too. I'm pretty sure that their (Asian or African) Mediterranean component in them is more African than the West Asian component in Georgians.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0

----------


## Goga

So you can't say that the Mediterranean component is less African than the West Asian component. That's impossible and pure nonsense! It's all about *the origin & admixture of haplogorups*!

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> So you can't say that the Mediterranean component is less African than the West Asian component. That's impossible and pure nonsense! It's all about *the origin & admixture of haplogorups*!


No, not haplogroups, autosomal DNA.

----------


## Knovas

Ask Dienekes' (he created the distances) and the researchers who made clustering studies. As you can imagine, we are not inventing, just telling what they show.

----------


## Goga

> No, not haplogroups, autosomal DNA.


?

autosomal DNA = 22 pairs of Y chromosomes and X chromosomes in Homo sapien DNA.
Only 23rd pair can be XX, if you're a female. 23rd pair is a 'gender' pair.

Y-DNA haplogroups are derived from Y gender chromosome
MtDNA haplogorups are derived from X gender chromosome

*23rd gender pair chromosome has got the same ancestoral information as other 22 pairs of chromosomes do.*

If your 23rd gender Y chromosome says that you're R1b from your father, other 22 Y chromosomes would tell you the same thing.

So autosomal DNA = an admixture of haplogorups!

----------


## Knovas

100% FALSE

Go and tell the African Americans with Y-DNA R1b1b2a1a1 and mtDNA H3 they are trully Europeans and they'll be laughing all day. ¿Don't you see that haplogroups tell absolutly nothing in terms of recent ancestry? LOL

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> 100% FALSE
> 
> Go and tell the African Americans with Y-DNA R1b1b2a1a1 and mtDNA H3 they are trully Europeans and they'll be laughing all day. ¿Don't you see that haplogroups tell absolutly nothing in terms of recent ancestry? LOL


Correct. Haplogroups don't provide any measure of recent ancestry or admixture.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> ? 
> autosomal DNA = 22 pairs of Y chromosomes and X chromosomes in Homo sapien DNA.
> Only 23rd pair can be XX, if you're a female. 23rd pair is a 'gender' pair.
> 
> Y-DNA haplogroups are derived from Y gender chromosome
> MtDNA haplogorups are derived from X gender chromosome
> 
> *23rd gender pair chromosome has got the same ancestoral information as other 22 pairs of chromosomes do.*
> 
> ...


Nope, not "haplogroup admixture". You need to measure thousands of alleles to arrive at a full ancestry picture. That can only be achieved through autosomal DNA analysis. Forget haplogroups when it comes to recent ancestry.

----------


## Goga

> 100% FALSE
> 
> Go and tell the African Americans with Y-DNA R1b1b2a1a1 and mtDNA H3 they are trully Europeans and they'll be laughing all day. ¿Don't you see that haplogroups tell absolutly nothing in terms of recent ancestry? LOL


People (African Americans) with Y-DNA R1b1b2a1a1 and mtDNA H3 are more European than they're something else. Even if they are dark, they still got mostly European DNA. But if they're from the USA, they're 100% North American according to me.

If a nation has got E, R1b, J1 and J2 that would mean that that nation is an admixture of E, R1b, J1, J2 *and nothing else*. Plus the same with MtDNA.

Autosomal = Y-DNA + MtDNA.

Remember that the 'dark' features are more dominant over the 'light' feature. Black hair gene will defeat blond hair gene easily.

If aliens come on earth, they will laugh at us. Because all human DNA is the same and there's only 1 race and that's the Homo sapien race.

EDIT: But I'm still 100% West Asian.

----------


## Knovas

You are wrong. Actually, an African American with those hapologroups can be perfectly very close to Black Africans genetically speaking (not just appearence). I shared genomes with African Americans at 23andme, and I can assure you those cases trully exist. It's also possible that a few of them join Dodecad too, but I'd have to search.

You can believe it or not, but that's the truth.

Edited:
Here you have African americans at Dodecad (note the European ancestry): 245, 385, 475, 482, 483, 494, 500, 502 and 503.

All of them have the main ancestry in the Neo African and Paleo African clusters, then, their highest simillarity must be in the Sub-Saharan Africa. If I were you, I wouldn't bet none of them have 2 European haplogroups...

----------


## Goga

> You are wrong. Actually, an African American with those hapologroups can be perfectly very close to Balck Africans genetically speaking (not just appearence). I shared genomes with African Americans at 23andme, and I can assure you those cases trully exist. It's also possible that a few of them join Dodecad too, but I'd have to search.
> 
> You can believe it or not, but that's the truth.


That's true. And you're absolutely right!

An 'Afro' looking fella from USA with the European Y-DNA and MtDna linage has got much more European ancestry than he got something else.

A very black African from Africa can genetically be closer to a very white man from Sweden, than that same white man from Swede to his white native Swedish neighbour.

Why do you think that the high educated gifted folks - who control the world - say that races don't exist, but that there's just 1 race and that's a Homo sapien race.

That's why Y-DNA is only useful if you don't know your father and you want to determine who your father or mother is or *if you want to trace some migrationwaves*!

The most important thing if you want to save your nation & roots is to save your culture and language! You can change your DNA every time as you want. Jews changed their DNA many times, Turks changed their DNA etc. But NEVER their language!

In new era with computers and microchips people can even be not of 'flesh'.


I respect your opinion, but everybody has got his own opinion.

But I'm still 100% West Asian.

----------


## Knovas

Congratulations.

If you are 100% West Asian and submit your sample you'll be the first case reported. I encourage you to participate XD

----------


## Wilhelm2

> I dont see any use of clustering haplogroups this way , lets take one example : R1b is originaly from West Asia ( R1b* almoust exclusivly there ) , and come to West Europe 2-3.000 years ago , and G2a also West Asian , but come to West Europe significantly before that ( atleast early Neolithe - Treilles ) , and you calling lands with 90% R1b European , but lands with high G noneuropean . Also why would Balkans be more West Asiatic , when most (95% ) of its J2 , J1 , and E1b1b come to Europe lot before Spain R1b . (Also Balkans have pretty much European mth DNA ) . It is logicall that there is going to be a lot of overflow from West Asia to Balkans , and from Africa to Iberian penincula because they are separated just by few miles of water.


 We are not talking about haplogroups here, but autosomal.




> *All* (African, European and Asian) countries around the Mediterranean Sea have a very high Mediterranean component.
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...COCa89AJ#gid=0


 The peak is in Europe (North-Italians, Sardinians). The Mediterranean presence in North-Africa is due to ancient european influx (that why there is also mtDNA H1, H3, V in North-Africa).




> So you can't say that the Mediterranean component is less African than the West Asian component. That's impossible and pure nonsense! It's all about *the origin & admixture of haplogorups*!


 This is not about haplogrops. Is about the autosomal Fst distances between components.




> ?
> 
> autosomal DNA = 22 pairs of Y chromosomes and X chromosomes in Homo sapien DNA.
> Only 23rd pair can be XX, if you're a female. 23rd pair is a 'gender' pair.
> 
> Y-DNA haplogroups are derived from Y gender chromosome
> MtDNA haplogorups are derived from X gender chromosome
> 
> *23rd gender pair chromosome has got the same ancestoral information as other 22 pairs of chromosomes do.*
> ...


Non-sense. You only have 1 Y-chromosome, not 22.




> People (African Americans) with Y-DNA R1b1b2a1a1 and mtDNA H3 are more European than they're something else. Even if they are dark, they still got mostly European DNA. But if they're from the USA, they're 100% North American according to me.


Wrong. An african-american with an african y-dna can be autosomally more european than another african-american with an R1b y-dna. People have thousands of ancestors, and your y-dna only tells about one single direct line.

----------


## Goga

> Non-sense. You only have 1 Y-chromosome, not 22.
> 
> 
> Wrong. An african-american with an african y-dna can be autosomally more european than another african-american with an R1b y-dna. People have thousands of ancestors, and your y-dna only tells about one single direct line.


Ok, you don't call it an Y-chromosome. I named it just wrongly. But you have got 22 pairs of autosomal DNA. They're in pairs of two. That's mean 44 chromosomes. 22 you got from your mother (X) and 22 you got from your father (Y). This is what I mean! From every pair you got 1 chromosome from your mom (X) and 1 from your dad (Y)! *So 22 from X and 22 from Y* !!

Read carefully what I wrote. I wrote that an Afro-American with an European linage from both sides has got probably more Eurpean ancestry than something else (African or Chinese or West Asian etc. ancestry)...

BTW, I'm 100% West Asian and you're NOT!

----------


## Goga

Yes people belong to 100000000000 ancestors, but if in your nation there are only 5 most dominant haplogroups, than you are mostly an admixture of these haplogroups with very few exceptions! And not something else! 
A West Asian *CAN* be O3 (Y-Dna from China) but that's a very rare haplogroup in West Asia. So it's unlikely that somebody in West Asia wil be O3 and very few are mixed with O3.

Close communities only breed with each other, so if your people are E and R1b, than you are largely E & R1b! 

If there is a family of J2 people and they will move to Venus. They will only breed with each other. They will only be J2 folks!

Haplogroups are the most certain factor if you want to determine your roots

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> Ok, you don't call it an Y-chromosom. I named it just wrongly. But you have got 22 pairs of autosomal DNA. They're in pairs of two. That's mean 44 chromosoms. 22 you got from your mother (X) and 22 you got from your father (Y). This is what I mean! From every pair you got 1 chromosom from your mom (X) and 1 from your dad (Y)! *So 22 from X and 22 from Y* !!
> 
> Read carefully what I wrote. I wrote that an Afro-american with the European linages from both sides has got probably more Eurpean ancestry than something else (African ancestry)...
> 
> BTW, I'm 100% West Asian and you're NOT!


And how about what you inherited from your grandparents, great-grandparents, great-greatgrandparents, etc.? You have to examine thousands of alleles to determine full ancestry. Haplogroup frequencies are only a tiny piece of the puzzle. 

And, don't forget, DNA behaves randomly and recombines.

----------


## Goga

> And how about what you inherited from your grandparents, great-grandparents, great-greatgrandparents, etc.? You have to examine thousands of alleles to determine full ancestry. Haplogroup frequencies are only a tiny piece of the puzzle. 
> 
> And, don't forget, genes behave randomly and recombine.


Your father = his father + his mother. His Y-DNA & MtDNA and her Y-DNA & MtDNA. And the father of your father has got Y-DNA & MtDNA + Y-DNA & MtDNA from his father and Y-DNA & MtDNA + Y-DNA & MtDNA from HIS mother. 

So you inherit Y-DNA's and MtDNA's from your ancestors. 

But if in your race there're 5 known Y-DNA haplogroups and only 5 known MtDNA haplogroups then the probalilty that you're an admixtures of these haplogroups is HUGE!!! 

I'm very much interested in the human DNA. That's why when I am interested in somebody's "roots" (where they're from), I'm only looking at her/his nations' haplogroup distribution of Y-DNA.

Like I said, it's all about the admixture of haplogroups !

You can't measure genes, btw....

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> Your father = his father + his mother. His Y-DNA & MtDNA and her Y-DNA & MtDNA. And the father of your father has got Y-DNA & MtDNA + Y-DNA & MtDNA from his father and Y-DNA & MtDNA + Y-DNA & MtDNA from HIS mother. 
> 
> So you inherit Y-DNA's and MtDNA's from your ancestors. 
> 
> But if in your race there're 5 known Y-DNA haplogroups and only 5 known MtDNA haplogroups then the probalilty that you're an admixtures of these haplogroups is HUGE!!! 
> 
> I'm very much interested in the human DNA. That's why when I am interested in somebody's "roots" (where they're from), I'm only looking at her/his nations' haplogroup distribution of Y-DNA.
> 
> Like I said, it's all about the admixture of haplogroups !
> ...


I didn't say you could measure genes.

----------


## Alan

@Knovas I am not going to much into this but please let me know, how you explain, that a Kurdish friend of mine who had 18 "South European" in Dodecad v1 has now 22% "Mediterranean" on V3 when South European and Mediterranean are exactly the same?

----------


## Goga

How much of the Tunisian DNA is Mediterranean? Because according to new studies Tunisians don't have much European (Vandals) DNA!

"_The most common lineage was the North African haplogroup E-M81 (71%), being fixed in two Berber samples (Chenini–Douiret and Jradou), suggesting isolation and genetic drift. Differential levels of paternal gene flow from the Near East were detected in the Tunisian samples (J-M267 lineage over 30%); however, no major sub-Saharan African or European influence was found._"

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/08...and-mtdna.html

----------


## Goga

> People one of the biggest mistakes made by dienekes was, to name the components after Regions. 
> 
> For example the so called "South Asian" component. When People hear this they usually connect it with South Asia When we find out more about the so called "South Asian" component, we recognize that there is no other component that is so much diverse. The so called "South Asian" component is a combination of two components, ASI and ANI. The South Asian among Kurds, Turks, Iranians is almost exclusively ANI.
> 
> This is what a Friend wrote me
> """ See how close West Asian Component is to ANI
> 
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FFgv5Ekbf5...s/s1600/nj.png
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ndsd2vCS9d.../ANI%252B4.png
> ...


Yes, ANI is proto-Indo-European or maybe even before that, and according to Dienekes it is from West Asia that migrated into Central Asia. It's most probably R1a/R2a. 

But when do you think ANI in West Asian population came back into West Asia? With Medes/Scythians, Mitanni or Parthians? Or is it just native to West Asia? I don't understand this.

*why Ancestral North Indians came from West Asia, not Eastern Europe :* 
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05...ancestral.html

http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/06/...s-on-west.html

http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/05/...an-groups.html

----------


## Knovas

> @Knovas I am not going to much into this but please let me know, how you explain, that a Kurdish friend of mine who had 18 "South European" in Dodecad v1 has now 22% "Mediterranean" on V3 when South European and Mediterranean are exactly the same?


It's very easy to understand Alan. None of the clusters are the same comparing with K=10 for an obvious reason. K=10 was composed of 10 components, while K=12, of course, has 12. That means ALL distances must change, not only for Southern Europe with the Mediterranean, also for Northern Europe (West and East European). And the African continent too, where you can perfectly apreciate that, for example, the East African component is not the same as the K=10 run because Neo African and Palaeo African are added (changing the distances we found before).

The problem some people has, is to think that Mediterranean is the only cluster changing the distances because of the general name, but as I showed above, the same happens with all clusters. For example the East European, I proved that increases much more the European score than the Mediterranean in Northern European populations...so if you want to speculate about a cluster, it's clear that the Mediterranean is not the best example. But the fact is we had 2 clusters for Europe before, and now we have three, being impossible to get the same results with new Fst distances.

Conclusion:
West and East European refer to Northern Europe, while Mediterranean refers to Southern Europe. The scores are increased in BOTH ancestries, and you are free to think wich run was more accurate (K=10 or K=12), but the meaning of the clusters it's perfectly clear while checking the distances. If you check for example the other K=12 (Sardinian and Basque components), you'll see the scores change another time for the same reason (12 components too), but are still different from the K=12 v3 because this time includes isolated regions (Basque country and Sardinia).

Different runs always change the scores, althought they try to measure the same. Checking Eurogenes you can find different scores in clusters wich were named the same way before...just slightly different interpretations of a concrete ancestry.

Basic knowledge; only plain observation is required.

----------


## Wilhelm2

> How much of the Tunisian DNA is Mediterranean? Because according to new studies Tunisians don't have much European (Vandals) DNA!
> 
> "_The most common lineage was the North African haplogroup E-M81 (71%), being fixed in two Berber samples (Chenini–Douiret and Jradou), suggesting isolation and genetic drift. Differential levels of paternal gene flow from the Near East were detected in the Tunisian samples (J-M267 lineage over 30%); however, no major sub-Saharan African or European influence was found._"
> 
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/08...and-mtdna.html


 You are only looking at y-dna. See their mtDNA.

----------


## luis77

> This Mediterranean component is obviously not "European" but just "Mediterranean" as its name implies. Indeed if we look athe Genetic distances Fst provided by Dienekes we can clearly see that "West_Asian" is closer to "West_European" (0.048) than "Mediterranean" is (0.058) is! 
> 
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png
> 
> West_European vs East_European 0.044 
> West_European vs West_Asian 0.048 
> West_European vs Mediterranean 0.058 
> West_European vs Southwest_Asian 0.065 
> West_European vs Northwest_African 0.073 
> ...


 
In fact, here is a *neighbour joining tree* of the 12 components created by Dienekes to better illustrate this

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-llezDuKBAw...c/s1600/nj.png

As we see the Mediterranean clusters FIRST with SouthWest Asian ("Arab") and THEN with West and East European clusters, so definitely not "European" but just "Mediterranean" ...

----------


## Knovas

It doesn't mean absolutly nothing since the distances are clear, and West Asian is closer to Southwest Asian than Mediterranean. Here you have again, don't forget the glasses: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png

The top Mediterranean scorer has more Total European at K=10 than the top East European scorer (Southern + Northern European). Following your absurd logic, then, East European must be not European too. 

Search for DOD725 and DOD468 at K=10 Spreadsheet, come on: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...CP-9p_wC#gid=0

Also check the different variations of the individuals, wich it seems you didn't want to see: http://dodecad.blogspot.com/search?u...max-results=12

Keep dreaming is not European fella.

----------


## Goga

> In fact, here is a *neighbour joining tree* of the 12 components created by Dienekes to better illustrate this
> 
> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-llezDuKBAw...c/s1600/nj.png
> 
> As we see the Mediterranean clusters FIRST with SouthWest Asian ("Arab") and THEN with West and East European clusters, so definitely not "European" but just "Mediterranean" ...


You're absolutely right!

Dodecad clusters Mediterranean closer to SouthWest Asian than West Asian to SouthWest Asian. Just LOOK!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3LQChXZX2a...ojected1_2.png

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zSOnNtMJSS...ojected1_2.png

----------


## Knovas

West Asian with Southwest Asian is 0.054, while Mediterranean with Southwest Asian is 0.057. That means West Asian is closer, not Mediterranean.

Completely FALSE ;)

----------


## Goga

> West Asian with Southwest Asian is 0.054, while Mediterranean with Southwest Asian is 0.057. That means West Asian is closer, not Mediterranean.
> 
> Completely FALSE ;)






http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/06/...s-on-west.html

----------


## Goga

Spanish folks ARE closer to other *West* European population, because they have *very MUCH North European* component in them. And *not* because of their Mediterranean component! Why don't you understand this????

----------


## Knovas

You are the one who doesn't understand. CHECK K=10 WHERE CLUSTERS ARE NAMED *SOUTHERN EUROPEAN* AND *NORTHERN EUROPEAN*.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...CP-9p_wC#gid=0

DOD725 with 54.4% Mediterranean scores 89.7% European, while the Lithuanian scoring almost ¡68%! East European scores 88.9%. CLEARLY LESS than the guy you say it's not scoring European .

It's time to go to bed.

PD: OWNED! XD

----------


## Goga

??? Your logic doesn't make any sense!!!!


I see by DOD725: 52.3 South European and 37.4 North European. Of course he is for 52.3 + 37.4 = 89.7 % European. I think he is even *100 %* European, because he is from Europe!!!

But the South European (yes EUROPEAN) component is still closer to Southwest Asian (ASIAN) than West Asian (yes ASIAN) component to Southwest Asian.

*WHY?* Because West Asian and North European were thousands years ago SAME (maybe proto Indo-European) folks!!! One part lives in (moved to) NORTH Europe and other part lives in West ASIA!

Use your brains man.

Good night...

----------


## Knovas

Dienekes' distances say West Asian is closer to Southwest Asian than the Mediterranean is at K=12. Go and ask him, the information is not mine.

And well, at K=10 it's true what you say, Southern European it's a bit closer to Southwest Asian than West Asian: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_UOHFTxL-bO...s1600/dist.png

So you must accept, even, that the Mediterranean means more European than the K=10 Southern European...if you want to be right, it's your obligation to accept such fact considering the distances.

----------


## Goga

No, according to Dienekes Mediter. is closer to Southwest Asia!



http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-llezDuKBAw...c/s1600/nj.png



I believe Medit. is a *native* EUROPEAN component, while North European is much less European and has got the same origin as West Asian component, goes back to thousands years ago!


Please, don't be stubborn. It's not a shame to acknowledge that you was not right. It is a shame if you continue to spread the same nonsense. Only fools never change their minds!


Good night. I'm done here!

----------


## Knovas

That's just a picture man, with mathematics it's impossible to be wrong. Numbers have spoken clearly, no margin of error.

However, you are free to think what you want.

----------


## Goga

Ok, you're right on this one. But this is not a picture! This was done by a computer!

Spanish folks are 100% European and are very close to other West (Atlantic) Europeans, because they have North European component in them and North Europeans have Medit. component in them...




> http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/06/...s-on-west.html

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

It's clear that Mediterranean refers to South Europe going by the Dodecad runs I examined. What's there to argue about?

----------


## Goga

SECOND diagram is *MUCH* better. I don't think South Europe has the same roots as Southwest Asian. But they share some haplogroups with each other, like hg. E .


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-llezDuKBAw...c/s1600/nj.png


ANI is from West Asia and maybe is North European also from West Asia!! All (Indo-European) roads lead not to ROME, but to WEST Asia! Maybe is South European NOT really Indo European? Basque DNA confirms that!

Acording to Dienekes Ancestral North Indians (ANI) came from West Asia, not Eastern Europe:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05...ancestral.html
http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/06/...s-on-west.html


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FFgv5Ekbf5...s/s1600/nj.png

----------


## Goga

> What's there to argue about?


It's possible that South European/Mediterranean and Northeast European have *different origin* but they are 'intermarried' (*mixed*) with each other. While it's possible that Northeast European and West Asian are 'brother' components and have *same origin*.

Here you can find more info about it:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...persion-of-I.E.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...g-to-the-media

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...-G2a-in-Basque

----------


## Knovas

The Mediterranean component it's almost sure the most ancient European. According to Dienekes', if I remember well, the presence of this component between Orcadians and others at substantial level, must be atributed to the megalitic builders.

Iberia has plenty of those ancient monuments. Just in Catalunya you can find too many of them. Its antiquity has not been concreted, there's only speculation around.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> The Mediterranean component it's almost sure the most ancient European. According to Dienekes', if I remember well, the presence of this component between Orcadians and others at substantial level, must be atributed to the megalitic builders.
> 
> Iberia has plenty of those ancient monuments. Just in Catalunya you can find too many of them. Its antiquity has not been concreted, there's only speculation around.


These monuments are all over Iberia, from north to south. Just drive along parts of Andalusia and Southern Portugal and you can see stretch upon stretch of megalithic burial stones and other similar structures. There is even an area of Alentejo (S. Portugal) with a mini Stonehenge of sorts. The same type of stone arrangements are found all along the Atlantic Facade. The connections are quite clear and there is even greater evidence regarding a Bronze Age Atlantic cultural continuum (Cunliffe, 2005, 2006, 2010).

----------


## Wilhelm2

Germans, British, Orcadians, Dutch, etc have all over 20% mediterranean. North-Italians have over 50%. Is imposible to not be a european component.

----------


## Knovas

It's the component with less Asian affinities, and the less similar to negroids after East European. Doesn't matter how do you call it, the meaning it's perfectly known: Southern European / Paleolithic European.

----------


## Goga

> It's the component with less Asian affinities, and the less similar to negroids after East European. Doesn't matter how do you call it, the meaning it's perfectly known: Southern European / Paleolithic European.


Not true. South European is closer to Southwest Asian than North European and West Asian are. I'm not sure what Dienkes wrote about affinities between S. European and North African. I'm to lazy to search for that info.

----------


## Knovas

Stop contradicting yourself man, you accepted the fact a few posts ago...LOL. Southwest Asian is the ONLY Asian cluster closer to Mediterranean, the rest are NOT. And West Asian is closer to East African and Black Africans than Mediterranean. Even West European is closer to Negroids than Mediterranean. 

Here you have the distances: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png

Yes, it's Southern European or Paleolithic European. Mediterranean is just a general name, the meaning it's perfectly clear.

----------


## Goga

> Stop contradicting yourself man, you accepted the fact a few posts ago...LOL. Southwest Asian is the ONLY Asian cluster closer to Mediterranean, the rest are NOT. And West Asian is closer to East African and Black Africans than Mediterranean. Even West European is closer to Negroids than Mediterranean. 
> 
> Here you have the distances: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Pw7x-HD7ON.../s1600/fst.png
> 
> Yes, it's Southern European or Paleolithic European. Mediterranean is just a general name, the meaning it's perfectly clear.


I'm not contradicting myself. Don't you see that South European/Mediterranean is even here closer to Northwest African? 

Northwest African to South European = 0.067
Northwest African to West Asian = 0.068


But yes according to this is West Asian closer to other African components.

----------


## Knovas

The fact is that I don't know what were you replying. ¿What wasn't true of what I said? Your comment had no sense in that context.

----------


## Goga

> The fact is that I don't know what were you replying. ¿What wasn't true of what I said? Your comment had no sense in that context.


You wrote that Medit. / South European has less Asian affinities than other components. Which is not true. Medit. / South European is closer to Southwest Asian and North African than North European and West Asian are.

However maybe it's true that West Asian is closer to other 'African' components. I've just seen 1 example though.

----------


## Knovas

Man, read again the text. IT'S TRUE.

East/West European and West Asian are much more closer to SOUTH ASIAN, NORTHEAST ASIAN AND SOUTHEAST ASIAN than Mediterranean. Then, they have MUCH MORE ASIAN AFFINITIES.

Case closed.

----------


## Goga

> Man, read again the text. IT'S TRUE.
> 
> East/West European and West Asian are much more closer to SOUTH ASIAN, NORTHEAST ASIAN AND SOUTHEAST ASIAN than Mediterranean. Then, they have MUCH MORE ASIAN AFFINITIES.
> 
> Case closed.


Now I do understand you! It's much clearer, your other post was very cryptic! Mediterranean is *only* closer to Northwest African and Southwest Asia, what makes sense cause they lie next to each other. While West Asian is closer to *all other* Asian and maybe African components. Now we do agree with each other! 

South European is the oldest & native European component! Goes back to the prehistoric times!

----------


## Knovas

It's very difficult to agree. I have a lot of work with you XD

Congratulations  :Laughing:

----------


## Goga

> It's very difficult to agree. I have a lot of work with you XD
> 
> Congratulations


I do really hope I'm not going to post here again. I spent very much time on this damn  :Heart:  European, Asian & African components that gave me very much headaches. Too much time if you aks me...

 :Good Job:

----------


## luis77

... and one more interesting detail that definitely proves that this "Mediterranean" is ... "Mediterranean" and not "European" at all. 

The highest percentage is DOD725 at 54.4%, from North Italy, right, but DOD168, a Tunisian, is... at 42.4%! so only 12% difference. This difference is too small to make this component "European".

And last but not least, this component peaks in ... Sardinians, who are geographically intermediate between South Europe and North Africa.

----------


## Knovas

Listen charlatan, the Tunisian scores 37.7% European at K=10, while here he scores 49.6% at K=12. The difference is 11.9%, and you can perfectly check Polish people who has increased much more than him with the EAST EUROPEAN component.

Another thing, DOD725 is not from North Italy, he is Iberian, and scores 89.7% total Euroepan at K=10. Check here all that I'm saying:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...CP-9p_wC#gid=0

Definetely, Mediterranean is the MOST ancient European, like it or not. Time to go to bed, anti-Iberian ;) 

 EDITED: 
Here you have a Polish example:

 K=10
 DOD707 South Europe (12.3) + North Europe (75.6) = 87.9 %

K=12 v3
DOD 707: W.E (32.9) + E.E (51.8) + Medit. (15.3) = 100 %


 The difference is *12.1%* from K=10 to K=12, and the Mediterranean is VERY low in him.


*And Sardinian average:
* *K=10*
 *South Europe (96.5) + North Europe (0.6) = 97.1 %*

 *K=12 v3*
 *West European (30.3) + East European (0.0) + Mediterranean (55.5) = 85.8 %

This one has even DECREASED with the Mediterranean component.


You have absolutely NO REASON.
*

----------


## Wilhelm2

> ... and one more interesting detail that definitely proves that this "Mediterranean" is ... "Mediterranean" and not "European" at all. 
> 
> The highest percentage is DOD725 at 54.4%, from North Italy, right, but DOD168, a Tunisian, is... at 42.4%! so only 12% difference. This difference is too small to make this component "European".
> 
> And last but not least, this component peaks in ... Sardinians, who are geographically intermediate between South Europe and North Africa.


 And what makes you think that Tunisians can't have european ancestry, even if pre-neolithic ? Why do you think in North-Africa there is mtDNA H1, H3, V which is of European origin ? Plus Sardinians are ethnically european, even if geographically they are an Island in the middle of the mediterranean.

Btw this label is arbitrary, it could have been called South-European, or could have been splitted between Basque and Sardinian, like in other runs. So if this component is not Europen, explain to me how can Scandinavians have 15% or Germans 25%, it is certainly of european origin, unless you suggest that northern-europeans are 15-20% of non-european.

----------


## Knovas

He knows the truth perfectly. As I said, he is the only t.r.o.l.l. joining 23andme, and the only thing he is worried about is to find the way to spread more lies about Spaniards.

Too bad. It's time to remove the Portuguese flag, we know you are half North African and half French.

By the way, here is a message *he posted* in *ancestry thread* were it's possible to check his Dodecad results:
EuroMed - *DOD004* : 100% Western Mediterranean : 50% NorthWest Mediterranean (Occitan) and 50% SouthWest Mediterranean (Berber/Jew): http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2010/11/...?commentPage=1

5.3 EE + 26.9 WE + 30.5 Medit. = 62.7% Euro

Nothing to do with Spaniards or Portuguese (91% and 86% European).


Sweet Dreams.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> ... and one more interesting detail that definitely proves that this "Mediterranean" is ... "Mediterranean" and not "European" at all. 
> 
> The highest percentage is DOD725 at 54.4%, from North Italy, right, but DOD168, a Tunisian, is... at 42.4%! so only 12% difference. This difference is too small to make this component "European".
> 
> And last but not least, this component peaks in ... Sardinians, who are geographically intermediate between South Europe and North Africa.


"...definitely proves...Mediterranean is...not European"? Where do you come up with these odd notions? Are you serious? 

Do you know anything about Tunisians? And, don't you think it's about time you stopped pretending to be Portuguese. You are as much Portuguese as I'm Seminole. :Useless:

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> He knows the truth perfectly. As I said, he is the only t.r.o.l.l. joining 23andme, and the only thing he is worried about is to find the way to spread more lies about Spaniards.
> 
> Too bad. It's time to remove the Portuguese flag, we know you are half North African and half French.
> 
> By the way, here is a message *he posted* in *ancestry thread* were it's possible to check his Dodecad results:
> EuroMed - *DOD004* : 100% Western Mediterranean : 50% NorthWest Mediterranean (Occitan) and 50% SouthWest Mediterranean (Berber/Jew): http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2010/11/...?commentPage=1
> 
> 5.3 EE + 26.9 WE + 30.5 Medit. = 62.7% Euro
> 
> ...


Oh, so that's the guy so many people on 23 & me are complaining about. :Laughing:

----------


## Eldritch

> Mediterranean means Southern European (Southwest + Southeast Europe). The way you post the distances it's absolutly WRONG. You must take all clusters as reference, and if you look carefully, you'll see that West Asian is closer to Neo African, Paleo African, and some other non European clusters than the Mediterranean is. That's easy to understand, since West Asian is one of the near eastern clusters, and Mediterranean is the 3rd European cluster. Even West European is closer to Paleo African than the Mediterranean is.


West Asian component is the closest to Northern European one.

----------


## Knovas

True, but does not refute anything I said in the text you quote (if that was your intention). Actually I never denied this part of the Fst Distances in the whole thread, just pointed out that the clusters should be considered taking all the rest as reference. That simple.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

Some people have phobias concerning certain ethnic groups and spread the most insane lies and distortions about them. What a world ... a world of faux realities. LOL!

----------


## silkyslovanbojkovsky

Very Interesting its amazing how related all Europeans are to eachother.

----------


## silkyslovanbojkovsky

> Yes, it's also very clear that Africa and the Mediterranean are neighbours!


 Sure Just with a huge body of water inbetween them.

----------


## silkyslovanbojkovsky

> Some people have phobias concerning certain ethnic groups and spread the most insane lies and distortions about them. What a world ... a world of faux realities. LOL!


Its note a phobia its somekind of perverted hate or jelousy. ive often noticed how there is somekind of movement that wants to seperate southern europe from the rest of europe. Especially spain and portugal, and brainwash southern europeans to believe they are not european, but middle eastern or north african.

----------


## Alexandros

Going back to the original post by Maciamo, I am Greek Cypriot and 63% Mediterranean based on my recently released GENO 2.0 results. I consider this quite a high % for a single source population. I have not yet uploaded any of my data to Dodecad or any similar admixture analysis tool.

----------


## silkyslovanbojkovsky

> You can almost build a beautiful masterpiece of a bridge between Ceuta - Gibraltar (Africa - Europe). Or maybe multiple bridges with some artificial islands in between. It's that close!
> 
> Ceuta - Gibraltar
> 
> - Miles: 16.95
> - Kilometers: 27.28
> 
> 
> http://www.mapcrow.info/Distance_bet..._Ceuta_SP.html


So what? It just makes it all the more amazing that Spanish people and Moroccans are so genetically different.

----------


## Tabaccus Maximus

Maciamo,
I am not totally sure what you are asking...

My results are 95% Northwest European and 5% Middle Eastern (*edit, I had mistakenly put Near Eastern). Of course my ancestors are islanders as previously mentioned, every proven progenitor being probably most at the 300 and 400 year mark were all British.
No intermarriage or crossed lines since colonial times, other than ordinary statistical average for an American, but then converging at the usual date for British Islanders which is something around 1400 A.D. at 90%.

As for looks, I always thought the Tarim mummies were strangely familial in their appearance (even though they are apparently R1a).
If I sat at a kitchen table with un-dead Tarim people they could easily be family members.

----------


## silkyslovanbojkovsky

> It is the same racial superiority crap that has been around since colonial times, any open minded person would think that with the supposed high educational standards in Europe that this rubbish would be a thing of the past. Not so, unfortunately some are still clinging to the old delusions.


It has nothing to do with that at all. Africans are equal humans like everybody else. There is nothing wrong to have African ancestry. The fact is that there is somekind of racist agenda, to claim southern Europe, especially Iberia, as somehow being closer to north Africa and the middle east. Usually this comes from non Europeans, but it is quite a strong movment. The fact is that Southern Europe is genetically different from Africans, North or Sub Saharan, so its annoying when people try to deny facts.

----------


## Noman

> He knows the truth perfectly. As I said, he is the only t.r.o.l.l. joining 23andme, and the only thing he is worried about is to find the way to spread more lies about Spaniards.
> 
> Too bad. It's time to remove the Portuguese flag, we know you are half North African and half French.
> 
> By the way, here is a message *he posted* in *ancestry thread* were it's possible to check his Dodecad results:
> EuroMed - *DOD004* : 100% Western Mediterranean : 50% NorthWest Mediterranean (Occitan) and 50% SouthWest Mediterranean (Berber/Jew): http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2010/11/...?commentPage=1
> 
> 5.3 EE + 26.9 WE + 30.5 Medit. = 62.7% Euro
> 
> ...


So he was born in the middle of the atlantic ocean, then?

That's actually what I expect many or even most portuguese to be today, aisde from some tiny reference population here and there. It's not like galicia where there's good genetic continuity. And I would never call an Occitain person French, they are as close to a parisian/nuestrian as a Berber is.

----------


## Knovas

He has genetically nothing to do with the Portuguese as I proved (no Portuguese ancestors). And the Portuguese are not 50% Berber as you can imagine, and they are pretty similar to Galicians as far as I know.

You're right about the Occitan issue though. They are nation, doesn't matter genetics, so definitely my mistake.

----------


## Tabaccus Maximus

Let me ask a stupid question. Am I reading my results right?
I have autosomal 'family finder' testing from familytreedna that show 95% NWE and 5% Middle Eastern.
Are you using some sort of different metric to arrive at what you call NWE from what family finder does?

I thought I would ask since my results look like an outlier

----------


## Knovas

I don't know which pattern FTDNA uses. I guess if you run your raw data using Dodecad and Eurogenes calculators, your results would be typically Northwestern.

So yes, the figures and the names change depending on the test.

----------


## Wilhelm

> So he was born in the middle of the atlantic ocean, then?
> 
> That's actually what I expect many or even most portuguese to be today, aisde from some tiny reference population here and there. It's not like galicia where there's good genetic continuity. And I would never call an Occitain person French, they are as close to a parisian/nuestrian as a Berber is.


WTF ?  :Useless:

----------


## Tabaccus Maximus

> I don't know which pattern FTDNA uses. I guess if you run your raw data using Dodecad and Eurogenes calculators, your results would be typically Northwestern.
> 
> So yes, the figures and the names change depending on the test.



Thanks, that is good to know. I'll have to try one of these other calculators. I'm curious to see how much the calculators differ from the ftdna.
Thanks again!

----------

