Search This Blog


Saturday, December 28, 2013

EEF-WHG-ANE test for Europeans

This is a test that attempts to fit you to the three inferred prehistoric European populations as described in this recent preprint. The relevant Excel file can be downloaded here, and all you have to do is stick your Eurogenes K13 results into the fields provided to get the EEF-WHG-ANE ancestry proportions. A modified version for Near Eastern and Southeast European users can be accessed here.

The test is based on correlations between the average levels of the Eurogenes K13 and the ancient components among selected European populations (see here). Below is a brief description of each of the ancient components.

Early European Farmer (EEF): apparently this is a hybrid component, the result of mixture between "Basal Eurasians" and a WHG-like population possibly from the Balkans. It's based on a 7500 year old Linearbandkeramik (LBK) sample from Stuttgart, Germany, but today peaks at just over 80% among Sardinians.

West European Hunter-Gatherer (WHG): this ancestral component is based on an 8,000 year old forager from the Loschbour rock shelter in Luxembourg, who belonged to Y-chromosome haplogroup I2a1b. However, today the WHG component peaks among Estonians and Lithuanians, in the East Baltic region, at almost 50%.

Ancient North Eurasian (ANE): this is the twist in the tale, a component based on a 24,000 year old Upper Paleolithic forager from South Central Siberia, belonging to Y-DNA R*, and known as Mal'ta boy or MA-1. This component was very likely present in Southern Scandinavia since at least the Mesolithic, but only seems to have reached Western Europe after the Neolithic. At some point it also spread into the Americas. In Europe today it peaks among Estonians at just over 18%, and, intriguingly, reaches a similar level among Scots. However, numbers weren't given in the paper for Finns, Russians and Mordovians, who, according to one of the maps, also carry very high ANE, but their results are confounded by more recent Siberian (ENA) admixture.

It's important to note that this test is only likely to be accurate for people of European ancestry, and indeed only those who aren't outliers from the main European clines of genetic diversity. For details of what that means, please consult the aforementioned paper. However, roughly speaking, if you're of European origin and don't score more than 3% East Asian, Siberian, Amerindian, South Asian, Oceanian, Northeast African and/or Sub-Saharan admixture, then you should get a coherent result. Users from the Near East and Caucasus should run the version specifically designed for them, while those from Southeastern Europe might find it useful to run both calculators and then compare the results.

Thanks to project member DESUK1 for putting this together at such short notice, and MfA for the modified version. Please post your results in the comments section below and state your ancestry when you do. This will help us to improve the accuracy of the test. My results make perfect sense, considering my Polish ancestry, relative to those of the reference samples (see here and here).

EEF 42.012706
WHG 40.52702615
ANE 17.46026785

Below that is a PCA courtesy of project member PL16, based on the EEF-WHG-ANE test results for selected populations. The positions of the ancestral EEF, WHG and ANE groups reflect the PCA loadings (see here).

This is my interpretation of who these components represent. Of course, this model might change when more ancient genomes are analyzed.

WHG and WHG/ANE: indigenous European hunter-gatherers
EEF: mixed European/Near Eastern Neolithic farmers
ANE/WHG: Proto-Indo-European invaders from the Eastern European steppe
ENA/ANE: early Uralics from the Volga-Ural region
EEF/WHG/ANE: late Indo-Europeans (ie. Celts, Germanics and Slavs)


Iosif Lazaridis, Nick Patterson, Alissa Mittnik, et al., Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans, bioRxiv, Posted December 23, 2013, doi: 10.1101/001552

See also...

Ancient human genomes suggest (more than) three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans

Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) levels across Asia


DarthVadent2 said...

Ethnicity: Assyrian

Rounded to the nearest percent.

My Results

EEF 101%
WHG -7.61%
ANE 6.6%

Davidski said...

Yeah, that looks pretty good actually. The negative WHG but positive ANE make sense.

barakobama said...

Wow this is awesome, I have been waiting for a test that can accurately tell you how much ancestry you have from the major ancestral populations to modern Europeans. I agree with everything you have said so I have nothing to argue about. You are the only Polish sample I have seen and I am surprised you have more EEF than WHG. Even though I wish I had more WGH I probably have more EEF. The WGH results from other Europeans is very constant with north European in your tests, it is highest in northeast Baltics. The higher amount of EEF ancestry in most Europeans is not that big of a surprise to me because of how little Mesolithic mtDNA survived.

Yesterday I found out I have mtDNA U5b2a2. Today it is most popular in central Europe(my maternal line is from Prussia) and I can't remember any more specifics but I read it is estimated to be over 10,000 years old. That was written before an over 10,000 year old U5b2a2 sample was found in Mesolithic Germany, there are also U5b2a2 samples in Germany from the Neolithic. So my best guess is my maternal line was in central Europe for well over 10,000 years before coming to America a little more than 100 years ago.

I am still very confused about the pigmentation from Mesolithic and Neolithic Europe. Both the Mesolithic samples probably had blue eyes but I have heard that the ~8,000ybp man from Luxemburg had the ancestral dark skin alleles in SLC24A5, SLC45A2, and TYR. Even though most west Asians have the light skin alleles. It wouldn't make sense to me that blue eyes were popular in Mesolithic Europe but they had dark skin.

Today light hair and eyes are obviously connected with Mesolithic European ancestry and pale skin. So I have assumed they must have been very pale overall. So far both hair and eye color samples from Neolithic Europeans(Otzi and LBK girl) are brown eyed and dark haired. They both also probably had pale skin. This may mean their near eastern ancestors had pale skin or it is from mixing with hunter gatherers. If they brought the pale skin from the near east it would mean pale skin probably existed in the common ancestors of Mesolithic Europeans and Neolithic near easterns. I still think very exclusively European pigmentation pale skin, non dark hair, and non brown eyes comes from the hunter gatherers. But who knows there are a lot of possibilities. Those features for whatever reasons for whatever may have first became popular in the Neolithic. That could be true for red hair which is not very spread out in Europe. It is possible many Mesolithic Europeans were dark skinned.

Davidski said...

Yep, but my WHG + ANE is way higher than EEF, so overall I'm more hunter than farmer.

Also, EEF is probably of mixed hunter/farmer origin anyway.

DarthVadent2 said...

I was going to ask, why am I scoring negative for WHG instead of 0.00?

Davidski said...

I think it's because you're not European, so your result is just totally out of range. But it still makes sense in a way, because according to the paper Near Easterners are supposed to score loads of EEF, minor ANE, and no WHG.

Seinundzeit said...

This calculator is rather inapplicable to me, as I'm significantly outside the range of modern European genetic variation. In fact, I'm not even close (but that's pretty obvious). On top of that, 5%-15% of my genetic ancestry is derived from an ancient population of South Eurasians, and they obviously aren't a part of this model. Nevertheless, I'm predominantly West Eurasian, and my largest component for Eurogenes K13 is "West Asian", so I thought it might be fun to see what this makes of me.

EEF 59.45%
WHG 24.20%
ANE 16.33%

I'm tempted to treat my "ANE" percentage as capturing all of my non-West Eurasian admixture, since I'm consistently 4%-6% Siberian-Amerindian on most calculators, along with the 10% "ASI". But that wouldn't be accurate, since I'm 9.39% Baltic, and 1.53% North_Atlantic.

MfA said...

Doesn't seem to be accurate for West Asians.

Davidski said...

Yes, but I'm not sure how that can be corrected? Maybe the only way is to produce different Excel files for North Caucasians and others?

But why is there a Near East category in that table and no EEF? It appears to be a somewhat different test.

MfA said...

Yes seperate spreadsheet is a necessity.. There shouldn't be a WHG for West Asians.

Check page 93. btw Druze and Cypriot's been added.

Gui S said...

I am getting
EEF = 62.5%
WHG = 25.6%
ANE = 11.8%

Almost equal to the "Southern French" results from the study (which really is Southwestern French/Basquoid).
However, my K13 Oracle indicates that I am more akin to :
11 54.2% Southwest_French + 45.8% Serbian @ 2.04
(and various other mixtures of Spanish and Central Europe/Balkans)

If I try to convert this Oracle mixture into WHG-EEF-ANE (by doing 54.2% "South French" + 45.8% [bulgarian+croatian]/2, it would yield:
EEF = 63.8%
WHG = 23.42%
ANE = 12.78%

Which is actually pretty close!

Gui S said...

Which seems to indicate that the EEF-WHG-ANE is not very good at capturing the differences between Balkans and Southwestern Europe. Perhaps these two areas must have drifted apart in recent times?

Samuli Pahalahti said...

EEF: 32,49
WHG: 48,08
ANE: 19,42

Ancestry: Finnish.

Davidski said...

I'd say they were affected by very similar ancient migrations, but I doubt there ever was much direct contact between them, and that's why they're easy to split apart in most tests.

Tesmos said...

Davidski, should i use the default results or the Oracle 4 admix results or both?

Davidski said...

Use the default results. But feel free to try both and compare.

About Time said...

Awesome. Thanks, all.

EEF 42.88566032
WHG 40.69272823
ANE 16.42161145

5/8 Irish
1/4 German+Polish (Pomeranian)
1/8 Misc. Anglo-American

crowens3 said...

EEF 52.29688936
WHG 33.27529106
ANE 14.42781958

Ancestry: approximately 42% German, 34% British, 10% Irish, 6% Prussian, 7% unknown European by DNA, 1% Non-European by DNA (South Asian and Native American)

Solothurn said...

British with all known recent British ancestry :)

46.82% EEF
37.84% WHG
15.35% ANE

crowens3 said...

My results best fit the French reference, which makes sense since I'm mostly a blend between British and German:

EEF: 52.3 vs.55.4
WHG: 33.3 vs. 31.1
ANE: 14.4 vs. 13.5

Chad Rohlfsen said...

EEF 49.45444227
WHG 35.84980714
ANE 14.69575059

9/16 British / Irish (mostly English), 1/8 Danish, 1/8 NE German (Pomeranian), 5/64 Alsatian, 1/16 Bavarian, rest is Jewish and possibly very minor Finnish

jackson_montgomery_devoni said...

Wow very cool stuff! I am of mixed European origins being 25% Italian (Calabria region), 25% Finnish and 50% Irish/British. Here are my results below.

EEF 52,06229091
WHG 33,16776121
ANE 14,76994788

And here are my Eurogenes K13 results for comparison.

North_Atlantic 37.20%
Baltic 27.20%
West_Med 11.37%
West_Asian 7.31%
East_Med 9.84%
Red_Sea 1.40%
South_Asian 1.31%
East_Asian 0.40%
Siberian 1.53%
Amerindian 1.17%
Oceanian 1.15%
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan 0.11%

So you can see if I add up all of my Asian scores from the Eurogenes K13 calculator that I score more than the 3% Asian that Davidski said above may confound results. However I still think my results are actually quite accurate given what I know of my ancestry. So I still think my EEF-WHG-ANE test results make sense and do not seem that far off.

What do you think Davidski? Do you think my EEF-WHG-ANE test results above make sense even though I score more than 3% Asian when all the Asian type components are added together on my Eurogenes K13 results?

crowens3 said...

My Asian/Native American scores total more than 3% but my results were consistent with my European ancestry.
North_Atlantic 42.06%
Baltic 23.61%
West_Med 14.70%
West_Asian 7.54%
East_Med 7.42%
Red_Sea 0.18%
South_Asian 1.65%
East_Asian -    
Siberian 0.08%
Amerindian 1.16%
Oceanian 0.83%
Northeast_African 0.76%
Sub-Saharan -    

Pamela Wolfe said...

Davidski, Looks like I'm close to Basque/Croatian/French. Sound about right?

EEF: 52.1886
WHG: 33.81963
ANE: 13.99178

North Atlantic: 49.71
Baltic: 20.73
W Med: 15.49
W Asian: 3.49
E Med: 7.95
Red Sea: 0.99
Oceanian: 1.30
Sub-Saharan: 0.35
All the rest are 0

ZeGrammarNazi said...

EEF: 46.17
WHG: 38.28
ANE: 15.57

You may remember me as Rochefaton from the old anthro forums, btw.

Wulf Talented said...

1/8th Polish rest is English.

EEF 47.14084739
WHG 37.31034369
ANE 15.54880892

K13 results,

North_Atlantic 49.45%
Baltic 24.16%
West_Med 11.77%
West_Asian 6.68%
East_Med 3.17%
Red_Sea 1.63%
South_Asian 0.26%
East_Asian -
Siberian 0.53%
Amerindian 1.02%
Oceanian 0.79%
Northeast_African 0.53%
Sub-Saharan -

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

West Ukrainian Boyko Highlander:
EEF 56.19615948
WHG 30.02961359
ANE 13.77422694

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 34.92
2 North_Atlantic 26.87
3 West_Med 15.12
4 East_Med 15.09
5 West_Asian 5
6 East_Asian 0.88
7 Northeast_African 0.67
8 Amerindian 0.52
9 Siberian 0.4
10 Red_Sea 0.32
11 Oceanian 0.22

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

My best fit is Croatians - the same as in basically all admixture calculators.

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

It's kinda funny to be East Slavic and have less ANE than most West Europeans here : )

ZeGrammarNazi said...

Congrats on getting your results. My wife and daughter belong to haplogroup U5b2a2 as well.

Fanty said...

EEF: 50,13553163
WHG: 35,05970286
ANE: 14,80476551

German of mixed backround. Northwest Germans mixed with refugees from the lost eastern parts of the German Empire. One of the refugee grandparents (from Kaliningrad/Königsberg in East Prussia) was 1/4 Lithuanian and had a baltid phenotype.

Fanty said...

Ah forgot to mention:
The K13 (from wich this calculator here, calculates the results says, my results match:

1 Austrian @ 9.528
2 Hungarian @ 9.923
3 German @ 10.731
4 Dutch @ 12.716
5 Swedish @ 14.262
6 North_Swedish @ 14.733
7 Norwegian @ 14.981
8 Polish @ 15.317
9 Southeast_English @ 15.826
10 French @ 15.955

ZeGrammarNazi said...

Here is an OpenOffice-based RMSD Calculator for the European Ancient DNA Calculator Davidski made. All you have to do is plug your results from Davidski's spreadsheet into the calculator and you will get your distance from the European populations in the study as well as a chart.

Here is my chart:

and here are my 10 closest populations:

Orcadian 0.25
Ukrainian: 0.28
English: 1.82
Czech: 2.53
Belorussian: 2.92
Norwegian: 3.05
Scottish: 3.97
Icelandic: 4.47
French: 5.30
Lithuanian: 5.73

barakobama said...

Wow, you have more WGH than the Lithuanian and the only European that has more than you are Estonians with 49%. The results of WGH ancestry in Europe is very constant with what Davidski and others have found. We already know basically how hunter gatherer ancestry is distributed in Europe. I think WGH in this test is probably more accurate than north European in globe13, K12b, etc. Because there is no way some Europeans have 80% hunter gatherer ancestry. The vast majority of the mtDNA from pre Neolithic European hunter gatherers were replaced by new farmer lineages even in Finland and the Baltic.

In my opinion and I think maybe also Davidski a lot of WGH ancestry was brought back to much of Europe during the metal ages because of migrations by Indo Europeans in far eastern Europe. This may is also probably connected with the spread of ANE ancestry. Your high amount of ANE may be connected with east asian ancestry in Finnish. But those ANE's had no east Asian type ancestry so I don't know.

I think the reason why Germanic Scandinavians have more WGH than continental Germanics and British-Irish is because they may have mixed with people related to Pitted ware aka native hunter gatherers of Scandinavia and the Baltic. The same may be true for why Baltics have more than Polish and Ukrainian. There is really no evidence in ancient mtDNA and Y DNA from Scandinavia and Karelia of genetic continuum. So it would make sense they descend mainly from peoples who came in the metal ages.

barakobama said...

Davidski this is exactly what you were asking for a few weeks ago right? Didn't you say modern people should be put in ancient clusters and that is exactly what this is? I have been hoping to take an autosomal DNA test like this. Is there some way I can get results from this? I have my dad's autosomal DNA's raw SNP data from Geno 2.0, could the test be done on him? Me or my dad probably wont be any help to your research since were European mutts(German, British, Norwegian, I have some Swiss and Austrian). My dad got way to much Meditreaen and to little north European in Geno 2,0 so I bet both of us have more EEF. I am hoping for more WGH though.

What about the hunter gatherers from Motola Sweden they were basically the same as the hunter gatherer from Luxmeburg, right? I would assume the only difference between the Luxemburg man and La Brana's and Pitted ware hunter gatherers is the Luxemburg man was pure hunter gatherer. Also is it true the Luxembirg man had blue eyes but dark skin?

Fanty said...

"What about the hunter gatherers from Motola Sweden they were basically the same as the hunter gatherer from Luxmeburg, right?"

As far as I know, the Swedish HG show ANE admixture (19%) that is not existant in the non-scandinavian HG and the Farmers, while today its all over Europe.

Davidski said...

Check out this PCA of Europeans and Bedouin. Note that some Ukrainians are the only Eastern Europeans, apart from Hungarians and groups from the Balkans, that deviate from the main European cline. This is probably because they're from near the Balkans, and as a result have inflated EEF ancestry. You're one of these Ukrainians.

Dmytro said...

George Knysh U6

EEF: 46.98893
WHG: 37.14375
ANE: 15.86132

My wife U8

EEF: 45.53602
WHG: 38.10983
ANE: 16.35416

My mother in law U7

EEF: 46.92782
WHG: 37.15106
ANE: 15.92112

And out of interest, my daughter-in law who's 50% Ukrainian and 50% British (English/Scottish/Irish mix)

EEF: 45.29225
WGH: 38.61179
ANE: 16.09597

António Vitor said...

Southern Portuguese (me):
Early European farmer: 70,794981369
Western hunter gatherer: 19,6804103377
Ancient North Eurasian: 9,5246082933

barakobama said...

Besides that though were they the same as the Luxemburg hunter gatherer? My computer cant download the paper so I cant judge for myself. If ANE existed in very early Scandinavians it probably also existed in mainland Europe which is where they would have probably originated. There is also a possibility it came through Finland. I wish they would be able to confirm what Y DNA haplogroup that Q1a2+ but Q1- hunter gatherer from Sweden had. y DNA Q1a2 is surprisingly popular in Norway-Sweden today and Eupedia assumes it is somehow from Huns.

Who knows how ANE got all over Europe it may have been in many areas during the Mesolithic and Neolithic. But I think Indo European migrations with y DNA R1b L11 and R1a M417 are probably the main source. Maybe R1b in the near east is connected to ANE in the near east. I still don't really understand what ANE is if that ancient north Eurasian population was so mixed. What were they mutts, some type of west Eurasian, or something else.

No one who has access to the study has answered this question. Did the Luxemburg hunter gatherer have the ancestral dark skin alleles to SLC4A5, SLC2A5, and TYR? That wouldn't make sense since he probably had blue eyes and that most west Asians have the derived light skin allele. It would be radical news if the Luxemburg man had the ancestral dark skin alleles, so I am begging to know if he did. I doubt he did because he had La Brana-1 had blue eyes and I bet La Brana-1 will come out as pale skinned, but maybe not. I would think the evolution from dark skinned to pale skinned has a lot to do with genetics so if there was a radical pigmentation change in the Neolithic it would effect the genetics of all Europeans.

Davidski said...

Loschbour doesn't show any ANE, and neither does Stuttgart. So it's highly unlikely that ANE was present among hunter-gatherers in Western Europe or Neolithic farmers in Western and Central Europe.

But ANE is at about 19% in Motala12, so maybe it was a majority component among European Russian hunter-gatherers? We sorely need ancient genomes from across Russia to help solve this riddle of where and when the ANE in Europe came from.

Having said that, WHG and ANE are very closely related. So I'm wondering whether the fact that Motala12 looks mixed doesn't mean that they're basically the same, but representative of the western and eastern extremes of the Mammoth Steppe gene pool? Check out how close the ANE and WHG ancestral populations are on this schematic. It'll be interesting to see how this changes when more genomes from the Mammoth Steppe are analyzed.

In any case, I think it's easy to understand why the Near East has some ANE but no WHG, because the best way to get from the Mammoth Steppe into the Near East was via Central Asia.

Brandon said...

Davidski, why not make an admixture calculator from these three ancestral components directly? I don't understand the point of deriving them from the K=13 membership clusters--unless someone ran these aDNA genomes through your K=13 calculator for you (are they on gedmatch?) and sent you those results, while withholding the actual genomes.

I've looked around on the web. Are the raw files for Loschbour, MA-1 and Stuttgart publicly available?

Black Taylor said...

3/4 British, 1/4 Flemish

EFF: 47.60
WHG: 37.16
ANE: 15.25

Using Oracle for K13 I'm closest to Southeast English at 3.18 and West Scottish at 3.20.

Black Taylor said...

My 100% Czech wife, all four grandparents from around Prague

EEF: 47.09
WHG: 37.34
ANE: 15.84

Using Oracle for K13 she's closest to Hungarian at 7.16 and Austrian at 7.54. Not very exciting results, looks like she might as well be British since we have identical EEF/WHG/ANE ratios.

Davidski said...

Loschbour and Stuttgart aren't available online yet. But even if they were, I'm not sure how it'd be possible to create three different clusters based on just three samples. ADMIXTURE would very likely end up creating clusters from the more numerous modern samples, which probably wouldn't resemble closely the EEF, WHG and ANE clusters.

So the only way to do this for now is the way we did it here. It seems to have worked quite well too, but like I said above, it only works for people who don't deviate much from the main European clines of genetic diversity.

In the future, when many more ancient genomes are freely available, we'll be able to use them directly as reference samples to create more accurate ancient clusters.

Davidski said...

Ancestral clusters based on prehistoric samples are often unlikely to be very useful for working out recent fine-scale ancestry.

Erik said...

Kit Number F269390

English/Scottish/German/Irish Ancestry

EEF 65.11353
WGH 23.17872
ANE 11.70775

Anna Lindén said...

EEF 36.0823882374
WHG 46.0219392222
ANE 17.8956725404

My ancestors are Swedish (75 %) and Forest-Finnish (25 %).

barakobama said...

My dad took Geno 2.0 test and we have his raw data or whatever could I get his K=13 results then WGH, EEF, and ANE?

barakobama said...

I want to really understand what you think of ANE. You think ANE was not mixed just many different modern populations have ancestry from ANE. You think ANE was very closely related to WGH, and that Motola12 and Locshbour are western extremes of the mammoth steppe while MA1 was an eastern extreme. You think ANE and WGH mixed across the mammoth steppe. You think ANE may be connected with Y DNA R and Q. You think in copper age Indo Europeans and other far eastern Europeans spread ANE to much of Europe, and also recent mixing with Near easterns help spread it. You think ANE arrived in the near east through central Asia not Indo Europeans originally from eastern Europe. You think the hunter gatherers of far eastern Europe had a large amount of ANE and WGH. You think ANE was absent in central-western European Mesolithic hunter gatherers and early near eastern and central-western European farmers.

WHG and ANE don't look close in that link you showed. EEF was shown to have a lot of west Eurasian ancestry and WGH was 100% west Eurasian descended. while ANE was put as descended from a brother clade of west Eurasian. Many modern Europeans were shifted up towards ANE but that is just because they have some ANE ancestry.

I wish it would be confirmed AG2 had Y DNA R1a1a1 M417*. They based ANE on him too, right? Do you know if he was very similar to MA1? I forget his age too, wasn't he 11,000-17,000 years old? If AG2 had R1a M417* that proves he was somehow connected with later Indo Europeans from far eastern Europe. If the Yamna were so WGH like how did they get full of Y DNA R1a1a1 M417*? It makes total sense R1a got to far eastern Europe through Siberia and central Asia. I still have to consider that AG2 got his R1a from eastern Europe but R(XR1, R2) in the same area almost 10,000 years before and hg I in Mesolithic Europe is evidence against that. Y DNA R1b which seems native the near east may have gotten there through central Asia and with ANE ancestry. I bet there is some ANE ancestry in Siberia and central Asia today and some unique R lineages. Unless migrations over thousands of years made ANE ancestry dis appear.

Davidski said...

Sure, you just need to upload his raw data to GEDmatch.

Oaie Porc said...

1/2 Northern Carpathians (Hutsul), 1/2 Central Moldavian Plateau (Moldavian):

EEF 57.82%
WHG 28.41%
ANE 13.75%

Rob Witzel said...

EEF 50.95857124
WHG 34.22318074
ANE 14.81824802

About 50% German, 50% English/Scots Irish mix

barakobama said...

In my GEDmatch account there is a section that says upload data from your testing company and then a section under that is autosomal raw data, national Geographic is not one of the chooses. It is only FTDNA gamily finder, FTDNA X-data, 23andMe, and I have the raw data in an excel document right now it was emailed to me from someone from FTDNA and he says in the email it is an unzipped download, and on GEDmatch under it says Do NOT un-zip the file before uploading. I had a feeling it wouldn't work.

barakobama said...

There is no way you are 65% EEF and 23% WGH If you are really English, Scottish, Irish, and German. Are you something else too?

Davidski said...

ANE was based on MA1 only, because AG2 was a low quality sample. But from the data available AG2 looks purely ANE too.

Also, AG2 was likely Q according to the latest web chatter. But we'll just have to wait for a better sequence of his Y-chromosome to find out for sure.

And I think the reason ANE was classified as a brother clade to the West Eurasian clade, as opposed to a more easterly variant of the same Northwest Eurasian clade, is due to the small number of samples tested so far. What we need are several ancient genomes from Russia to fill the gap between WHG and ANE, and show that the differences between them are clinal not discrete.

barakobama said...

Do I need a Eurogenes kit number?

Davidski said...

I don't know what you need. I haven't uploaded any data to GEDmatch for years. But I'm sure they have some instructions there that you can follow.

PF said...

EEF 88.38918418
WHG 4.47946179
ANE 7.131354031


MfA said...

I optimised the original file for West Asians according to the study..
You can download the file from here:

Comparison with study results:
West Asian medians:

Here's my results (Kurdish):
Near East 82.265%
ANE 17.735%

Davidski said...

Very interesting. Thanks.

I'll update the post accordingly in a few minutes.

barakobama said...

EEF is very connected to Meditreaen in your tests right? So then why do near easterns score such high EEF? Is it because they have west Eurasian ancestry that is not WGH? Because dominate I guess components in the near east are not very related to Meditreaen. Just because the early European farmers came from the near east does not mean they were very similar to modern near easterns, which they were not. Those claims LBK had most similar mtDNA to modern near easterns is total BS. Now we have autosomal DNA from a LBK farmer to prove he was most related to Sardinia, Otzi, and Funnel beaker farmers. At first I knew that claim was wrong because their mtDNA wasn't really that similar to any modern near easterns.

barakobama said...

Jews definitely have kept more original Jewish blood than most think. I have seen Jews results in globe13 and other tests and they are at least 50% of near eastern ancestry. I haven't studied it in detail but it looks like Ashkenazi did not mix that much with Germans but instead with southeast Europeans. The very low amount of WGH is even more evidence of that. People assume because Jews look European they must have mainly European ancestry.

The Samaritans in Israel who have very pure southwest Asian ancestry surprisingly many had pale skin, some had light colored eyes, and a few I saw had red hair like Jews in Europe. There were also Samaritans with brownish skin unlike most Jews.

barakobama said...

Germanic central Europeans and Celto-Germanic British and Irish usually have very similar results in all the different autosomal DNA tests I have seen. I am very surprised by how low WHG and high EEF ancestry they have. Although it is not very surprising because east Europeans(not Balkans) and Scandinavians always have significantly more north Euro and less Meditreaen, so significantly more hunter gatherer ancestry and less farmer ancestry. This is kind of dis appointing because I am a little over 75% German-Austrian-Swiss and English-Cornish-Scottish but also around 25% Norwegian. I already know I would probably score higher EEF than WGH.

barakobama said...

Its alright based on my ancestry I have a pretty good idea what my results would be. 100% WGH I wish.

I wonder if there are some European hunter gatherers left in some far away island near the north pole or in the Atlantic Oceana. Sami don't count they also have signfcant farmer ancestry. ~50% U5b1(almost all under the same deep subclade) and ~50% V is not like Mesolithic Europeans. Obviously they have such high of the two because of random genetic drift and V isn't even a hunter gatherer haplogroup. It doesn't matter of Sami technically are hunter gatherers they have farmer ancestors.

Davidski said...

Near Easterners score high EEF in this test because it's a best fit test, and Near Easterners are a best fit for EEF, obviously because about half of that component comes from the Near East. They can't score any WHG, because it's basically missing from the Near East, and it's too different from anything native to that region. They can only score low ANE, because again, it's not similar to anything native to the Near East, although it is present there at low levels.

Following on from that, the reason EEF is overall more similar to Sardinians, Oetzi, and the Funnel beaker farmer, than to modern Near Easterners, is because it seems to be a hybrid European/Near Eastern component. Think about it; Near Easterners don't have any WHG, but EEF is partly WHG-like, so of course it'll be a better match for early Neolithic farmers and present-day Southern Europeans.

Fanty said...

"I guess components in the near east are not very related to Meditreaen."

They are.

Southwest Asian components (centering on the Arabian peninsular) are closely related to the Sardinian centered "Mediteranian". At least they usualy show short F-Distances.

In a K2 (2 assumed populations) its usualy the contrast Finland versus Arabia and most of the Mediteranian component becomes absorbed into the Arab component.

Ponto said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fanty said...

"The Neolithic farmers in Europe came mostly from Anatolia and the Transcaucasus not the Near East."

Wich does not automatically mean, they are comparable to modern inhabitants of West Asia. We have to assume that modern West Asians are totaly different to the ones who lived there in ancient times. Much like Spanish hunter gatherers are more like Baltic people could it be that ancient Anatolians are more like modern Arabs. Thats a possibility until aDNA proves different. ;-)

barakobama said...

What your saying seems like the right answer but it is not constant with what I have already learned. I guess this is evidence modern near easterns(which ones) have a lot of the same ancestry as early European farmers. the absence of ANE though is a basic and obvious difference between modern near easterns and EEF. How would a east Eurasian or sub Saharan African score in this test?

Davidski, I thought you agreed EEF's were very different from modern near easterns. You know better than me the connection with north European and west Asian. How are Meditreaen and southwest Asian more connected? Just because the early farmers of Europe came from the near east doesn't mean modern near easterns are EEF's closest match, a lot can change in 9,000 years.

I have interpreted autosomal DNA of west Eurasians as saying the near east is the origin of west Eurasians and is most diverse, and that specifically European groups are descended from hunter gatherers who left the near east in the upper Palaeolithic. It seems there are many different west Eurasian groups in the near east, their not all the same. Aren't Arabians less related to Afghanes than the Luxmeburg man(100%? European)?

Davidski you say half of EEF is from the near east, what part? I don't see how it is half WGH. Otzi, Sardinians, and Gok4 definitely don't seem to be half hunter gatherer descended their north European in K12b was well under 10%.

In K=19 the LBK girl had vast majority some purple color with minority N. European which was 100% in the hunter gatherers. mtDNA in central Europe goes from 100% U5, U4, and U2e in the Mesolithic to under 4%(115 mtDNA samples) U5 in early Neolithic LBK with no U4 and U2e. Y DNA I is only 4 out of 31 in Neolithic European Y DNA. It seems to me at least western-central-Scandinavian farmers rarely mixed with hunter gatherers.

PF said...

I was surprised by the very high EEF. Perhaps Jews' clustering closely with Italians is more indicative of some Italians having high EEF ancestry and less of converts during Roman times? I guess this would go together with the idea that some of those classic "European" ashkenazi mtDNA haplogroups are actually near eastern in origin.

About Time said...

f3 statistics show that Arabs are a mix of EEF (Stuttgart LBK) and African. The reason Near Easterners score high for EEF is because they are part EEF or maybe part Basal Eurasian. See Table 10 of the original paper.

Also, if there is some need to discuss outdated phenotype theories, at least let's stick to solid findings. The book to refer to is "An Introduction to the Anthropology of the Near East" by C. U. Ariens Kappers.

Lots of information about Armenians, Assyrians, Arabs, Phoenicians, Persians, Greeks, you name it. I posted here some quotes from the book with old studies of the Kurgan population (mostly dark haired by the way) and its similarity to Anau "Caspians."

A big clue, actual Armenoids were considered morphologically similar to SE Europeans and (the authors argue, probably wrongly) to Turkic populations. Not to Bedouins. If you are going to use this dated terminology, at least be familiar with the vocabulary and what it anatomically referred to.

This stuff should be taken with a big grain of salt, but the book has some gems of info and a pretty good survey of the Middle East. A lot better than blog commenters who are confusing Saudis with "Armenoids" based on pigmentation and, apparently, facial features instead of actual cranial anatomy (flattened vs projecting occiput).

barakobama said...

On Google images most Samaritans have pale skin, I saw a bunch with blue eyes, and a few with red hair and one with red hair and freckles. I wont be surprised if most look like typical southwest Asians, I just told him what I saw.

I say trust what the experts say about geographic and cultural origin of Neolithic Europeans.

You cant make the assumption southeast Europe was connected and the same as northwest west Asia before the Neolithic. I think the Meditreaen component or whatever came straight to Europe from the near east only in the Neolithic.

You cant ignore the Fst stuff. I don't see how anyone could discover were the ancestors of all west Eurasians lived, I say don't trust that study. West Asian(globe13) peaks in north Caucasians, and its close brother north European peaks in northeast Baltics.

barakobama said...

'f3 statistics show that Arabs are a mix of EEF (Stuttgart LBK) and African. The reason Near Easterners score high for EEF is because they are part EEF or maybe part Basal Eurasian. See Table 10 of the original paper."

That's interesting I have heard Davidski say that if you take away Europeans hunter gatherer admixture in Meditreaen and African admixture in southwest Asian they are the same component. I do think there is related blood to EEF in the near east but the west Asian component which is most related to what the European hunter gatherers had is not very related. My PC wont allow me to see the real paper.

No one excepted Armenoids to be similar in physical features to southeast Europeans. I except very pure southwest Asians like Arabs to be similar to Sardinia and early European farmers.

Which Kurgen people were very dark haired, and how else could they tell besides ancient DNA? I read posts about this a few months ago and I want to know how reliable getting hair color is from the remains. The Pontiac steppe people from 3,000-2,000BC were reported as having darker eyes than average modern Europeans. But the Kurgen(Indo Iranian) people of Asia from the bronze and iron age were as light haired and eyes as any modern Europeans maybe more than any modern ones. I doubt all ancient Kurgen people were very related to each other. Indo European languages and the Kurgen spread to many places and mixed with many different people.

barakobama said...

I doubt that study which claimed there is mainly European mtDNA in Ashkenazi. The high amount of near eastern ancestry in Italy and the Balkans is definitely connected I have wondered for a while what their source is.

About Time said...

Why is Jewish mtDNA different from Arabs? The Torah specifically says Jacob (symbolic of the first Jewish ancestors) was told not to marry a Canaanite woman, but instead to go to his kinsman Laban and marry one of his daughters.

The Arabs themselves say they are descendants of Ishmael the son of Hagar. They only claim descent from Abraham through the male line, and that might only apply to some Arab lineages by the way.

As for Roman converts en masse? Really hard to imagine that happening in on any scale. The cultures were in a major clash (as in, what happened to the Second Temple?) that was resolved only when Paul split the differences and made a new religion that could appeal to people from both sides. Converts joined the new religion, not old school Judaism which was hard to understand (for Romans) and being completely restructured then anyway (no Temple).

Davidski said...

I've already explained this several times. Here's my last attempt:

The Mediterranean and Southwest Asian clusters are largely made up of the same allele frequencies from the Near East, that's why they're so close to each other in terms of Fst. But the Mediterranean cluster, when carried by Europeans, has WHG-like admixture, while the Southwest Asian cluster has SSA admixture. That's why EEF shows highest affinity to Western Mediterranean Europeans, and not to Southwest Asians.

On the other hand, the North European cluster is made up of WHG and ANE, which it shares with the West Asian cluster, especially the ANE. That's why these two clusters are so close in terms of Fst. However, the West Asian cluster is in large part made up of an ancient component, or components, native to the Near East, which is what differentiates it from the North European cluster.

I think the problem here is that you don't understand that modern ADMIXTURE clusters are complex composites of the ancient ancestral populations. They're produced by very recent isolation, endogamy and genetic drift.

Erik said...

Not that I know of maybe a little Danish and french. My dad is from Yorkshire and my mom is from Fife Scotland, I will run it again maybe I messed up somehow? here is my K13 results

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Austrian + Danish + Southeast_English + West_Scottish @ 2.156
2 Austrian + Danish + Danish + West_Scottish @ 2.168
3 Danish + German + German + Southeast_English @ 2.199
4 Danish + Danish + German + German @ 2.222
5 Austrian + Danish + Danish + Orcadian @ 2.237
6 Austrian + Danish + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 2.238
7 Austrian + Danish + Danish + Southeast_English @ 2.241
8 Austrian + Danish + Orcadian + Southeast_English @ 2.288
9 Austrian + Danish + Danish + Danish @ 2.295
10 Austrian + Danish + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 2.298
11 Austrian + Danish + Danish + Southwest_English @ 2.329
12 Austrian + Orcadian + Southeast_English + West_Scottish @ 2.330
13 Danish + Hungarian + Southeast_English + West_Scottish @ 2.334
14 Danish + German + German + Orcadian @ 2.352
15 Austrian + Danish + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 2.353
16 Austrian + Danish + Irish + Southeast_English @ 2.381
17 Austrian + Southeast_English + West_Scottish + West_Scottish @ 2.383
18 Austrian + Danish + Danish + Irish @ 2.414
19 Austrian + Orcadian + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 2.420
20 Danish + Danish + Hungarian + West_Scottish @ 2.421

Erik said...

North_Atlantic 47.54%
Baltic 25.17%
West_Med 11.68%
West_Asian 5.71%
East_Med 5.99%
Red_Sea 0.44%
South_Asian 1.29%
East_Asian -
Siberian 1.64%
Amerindian -
Oceanian 0.52%

Erik said...

I went back and ran I see where I went wrong last time this is my results

EEF 47.56158
WHG 37.10323
ANE 15.3352

barakobama said...

That is similar to other people with similar ancestry. You and a bunch of other people here have basically the same ancestry as I do German-British but I am also about 25% Norwegian so a little more WGH and less EEF. I wish I could do the test myself but I have an idea of what I probably have.

My dad in Geno 2,0 got about 10% less north European and 10% more Meditreaen than people of his ancestry. So that means more farmer ancestry and less hunter gatherer. I bet I am around what you are then.

barakobama said...

I highly doubt Jews only married Jews, they probably mixed into the new people they meet in the holy land. Where did you ever hear Paul created Christianity? Christ anity obviously Jesus Christ the messiah. If you read the books actually written by Paul you will learn he was a hater and killer of Christians at first and was later converted miraculously into the religion, some say he created.

My older brother and father have master degree's and both are getting PGD's in a few years on the history of the church, so I have learned some things from them. If you read the books written by Paul and others they make it clear Christianity is for the gentile and the Jew, Jesus said it a few times spread it to all nations. There was a little conflict at first between Jew and gentile but I don't think it remained a big problem. Most Jews rejected Christianity, most Christians were gentiles in no time. I doubt Christianity made Jew and Roman relations more peaceful. Since many Romans became Christian it may have actually caused more conflict.

It gets annoying when people who are anti Christian create their own definitions for Christianity that are designed to show it in a negative way. Paul greatly influenced the early Christian church and the theology in modern Christians but he did not create the religion. Do you see people at church worshipping Paul or Jesus?

barakobama said...

I think I understand you now thanks for explaining. I still have two questions though. West Asian has no close relation to southwest Asian-Mediterranean? I don't get how you can be for sure that ANE exists in north European and west Asian when it was just found like a few months ago. I trust what you say and still consider all the possibilities I can.

Did this WGH, EEF, and ANE admixture thing come originally from the study? I think those theories that the hunter gatherers of Europe were almost completely replaced has been proven incorrect. There are quite a few of modern Europeans with mainly hunter gatherer ancestry and there is pigmentation that is exclusive to Europe that probably descends from the hunter gatherers. Basing everything on mtDNA H is a joke!! It was a bad assumption people made that it must mean that it will be constant with total ancestry.

Davidski said...

Yes, of course the West Asian cluster is closely related to the Southwest Asian and Mediterranean clusters. I just said that above, when I pointed out that it was in large part made up of a component native to the Near East.

But the West Asian cluster is shifted towards the north and east, which we’ve known for a long time. The only thing that’s changed now is that we know why…because of ANE influence.

We’ve also known for a while that the North Euro cluster was in large part of indigenous European hunter-gatherer origin. We just didn’t know to what extent, and we still don’t really know that to be honest, but currently it looks to be entirely of hunter-gatherer origin.

However, this doesn’t mean that most of the mtDNA H lineages found in Europe today aren’t derived from a few lineages that entered the continent during the Neolithic. There was plenty of time since then for the farmer mtDNA H to expand, and become disassociated from Near Eastern autosomal DNA across Northern and Eastern Europe.

So not much is certain even now, except that Y-DNA I was in Europe since the Mesolithic at least, that indigenous Europeans almost entirely carried mtDNA U, and that Northern and Eastern Europeans have more hunter-gatherer ancestry than Southern Europeans.

We just have to wait for more Mesolithic and Palaeolithic genomes from across Europe, especially Russia. If ANE is there, along with Y-DNA R and maybe non-trivial levels of mtDNA H, that will make things very interesting indeed. At the same time, we also need ancient genomes from the Near East, to see when ANE got there and helped to create the West Asian cluster.

About Time said...

Barak, I posted long quotes here some time ago (forgot which thread). They know Kurgans had dark hair because they observed it in the actual burials in Russia. Long before DNA.

They had similar cranial features to Anau and still found in Kurds.

Barak, Armenoids are in fact similar to SE Europeans according to the old school anatomy. Might relate to the West Asian and East Med % Austrians, Serbs, Hungarians, and even further that shows up all the time in GEDmatch. So called Dinaric.

About Time said...

Forgot to mention, best fit for dark haired Russian Kurgans was Punjabis. In genome parlance, "Gedrosians."

barakobama said...

So they were saying the Kurgen people looked similar to some west Asians and southeast Europeans. Do you know where they came from? It would make some sense they were very early Kurgan burials in southeast-central Europe from around 3,000-2,000bc. Because Y DNA R1b L11 in west Europe which so many believe was spread with Indo European Celts, Germans, and Italians its lineage goes back to the near east at some point and it probably went through southeast Europe.

About Time said...

No. 2 subjects.

Kurgans were like Anau and Punjabis. Similar to some Kurds. ProjectIng occiput. Maybe "Gedrosia" / ANI.

Armenoids similar to Dinarics. Flattened occiput. Maybe "West Asian / East Med."

barakobama said...

How could Punjabis who are south Asian and Anau who are from near the eastern coast of the Caspien sea be similar and how could they be similar to ancient kurgan people?

Hopefully ancient DNA will give answers, I wish they would tell where these kurgans came from. The European steppe area has probably changed a lot genetically since Yamna culture. Y DNA R1a1a1 M417 was definitely dominate in at least some areas based on their ancient and modern descendants Y DNA samples. They were probably a mixture of hunter gatherer of farmer but was it the same type of farmers that define EEF. There could have been hot spots of R1b in copper age European steppe I have heard many argue that there were. The ancient DNA from Yamna people I saw on a map came mainly from around the black sea, and were reported as undoubtley European and that was partly based on their pale skin and it was also said they had darker eyes than average modern Europeans. Their descendants in Asia who were probably Indo Iranians were extremely light haired and eyes, I bet they brought those features straight from Russia or if could have been from admixture from Europeans that already lived there. Honestly I doubt that early Kurgan people were similar to south Asians, only west Asians if they came from a R1b branch. It seems all from around Russia-Ukraine were most like modern Europeans. Ancient DNA is the best way to figure out who early Kurgan people were.

I have been skeptical of the people who theorize stuff about human genetics based on skull shape and other features, I guess before DNA that's all they could do. I know some of it must be accurate.

barakobama said...

I forgot to put in the last post that Gedorsia in K12b seems very connected to R1b L23 in Europe and is absent in ancient European farmer and hunter gatherer samples I don't know about the knew ones. I am pretty sure Gedorsia peaks around Pakistan and is a mixture of something related to Caucasus and south Asian. I have no idea maybe the R1b in Europe and west Asia came from north central Asia.

About Time said...

Barak, one word: Gedrosia.

Actually Kurds do not represent dark haired "Punjabi" Kurgan type (my mistake). Authors reported similar Punjabi morphology in Anau, Hissarlik/Troy, Mohenjo Daro, Damghan, Al Ubaid, Kish, Alishar (looked it up).

Modern Punjabis. Some modern Turcomans, Baltis.

Take it with a grain of salt, but much better than making up theories based on pigmentation and pop culture ideas.

Davidski said...

The paper on the ancient DNA from Andronovo and Scythian Kurgans is freely available here...

The full genomes from these samples are long overdue. But I bet they'll be identical to present-day Northeast Europeans when they're published.

About Time said...

Davidski, eagerly awaiting study. Authors of that old book on Middle East said old Kurgan type (more Punjabi) was different from later Scythians (more West Asian).

No mention of Andronovo (probably wasn't known about back then). Authors seemed to have poor understanding of Turko-Mongols and thought they were related to Armenians (!). As I said, grain of salt.

barakobama said...

I will be shocked if they don't have R1a Z93. Their mtDNA genepool was pretty different than what is in any modern Europeans. They look like a mixture of far east European hunter gatherer(U5a, U4, and U2e) and near eastern farmer(H, T1, K2, etc.) they had a much higher amount of U5, U2, and U4 than any modern Europeans. Northeast Europeans like Lithuanians are not 100% from the related Corded ware people. They don't come from the source I don't think there is anyone who would perfectly match those ancient kurgen people just probably some close but long lost relatives.

Davidski said...

Well in any case, I can't see them resembling Punjabis or even West Asians in any way. They'll have high ANE and WHG, loads of R1a-Z645, and over 50% will have blond hair/blue eyes. My bet is that on a PCA of West Eurasia, they'll cluster as north as Lithuanians, but much further east.

About Time said...

Will be fascinating to see how they relate to Mal'ta.

Unknown said...

Here are my results:
EEF 38%
WHG 44%
ANE 18%

I'm 3/4 Russian from the Urals and 1/4 Western Ukrainian. My K13 Siberian component, however, is quite high - 7.5%, so I understand the results may not be too reliable.

Davidski said...

I've updated the post. Check out the PCA done by project member PL16.

Matt said...

they'll cluster as north as Lithuanians, but much further east

If you assumed Georgians (or any North Caucasian population) are a composite of the "Kurgan" population and a Near Eastern population in the same manner and to the same degree that the Spanish are a composite of a Lithuanian-like "Western European" population and a Near Eastern population, and the Lithuanian and Kurgan had some similarities, then...

You could try to recreate a "Kurgan" phenotype by taking a Georgian average face and graphically shifting it along a Spanish->Lithuanian axis.

Here is a graphic version using a face transformer - (using composites from London 2012 olympic athletes). Lithuanian, Spanish and Georgian are genuine while "population X" is Georgian transformed by the difference between Spanish->Lithuanian.

Using an Armenian rather than Georgian reference gives a similar effect -

Anna Lindén said...

Interesting, then your EEF-percent is higher than mine: EEF: 36 %, WHG: 46 %, ANE: 18 %. I'm 3/4 Swede and 1/4 Forest-Finn, according to ancestors. My K13 Siberian component is: 3,99 %. It would be interesting to know how your high Siberian component effect your results.

Kurti said...

Gedrosia is more West Asian like than Caucasus.
Long time ago Dienekes made a break up of these components.

Gedrosia is like 92% "West Asian" and 8% ANI (Ancestral North Indian) of K7

while Caucasus is like 58% "West Asian", 36% "Southern" and 6% North European of "Atlantic_Baltic" from K7.

see diagram

Kurti said...

If I am not wrong, the "minor" ANE must be, because closest to ANE the Mal'ta individual was 1/3 North Euro and 1/3 Caucasus_Gedrosia like.

So the Caucasus_Gedrosia signal in modern Europeans must have come together with North Euro in connection of Indo Europeans.

steven perkins said...

I am 90% British Isles; and then German, French, Norwegian, Swedish and Forest Finn.

My results:
EEF 46.8213013121
WHG 37.8627939274
ANE 15.3159047605

Oracle results:
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 49.61
2 Baltic 25.8
3 West_Med 13.74
4 West_Asian 4.06
5 East_Med 3.66
6 Amerindian 0.9
7 Oceanian 0.84
8 Red_Sea 0.72
9 Sub-Saharan 0.53
10 Northeast_African 0.15

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dutch 2.44
2 Orcadian 2.97
3 Southeast_English 3.01
4 Danish 3.57
5 Irish 4.27
6 Southwest_English 4.4
7 West_Scottish 4.72
8 German 5.16
9 Norwegian 5.57
10 Swedish 6.75
11 North_Swedish 12.49
12 French 12.54
13 Austrian 16.06
14 Hungarian 17.14
15 Spanish_Cataluna 19.6
16 Southwest_Finnish 20.23
17 Southwest_French 20.38
18 Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon 20.71
19 Spanish_Galicia 20.91
20 Spanish_Cantabria 21.02

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Pop (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 72.5% Southeast_English + 27.5% Swedish @ 1.71
2 87.3% Southwest_English + 12.7% Belorussian @ 1.71
3 58.9% Dutch + 41.1% Southeast_English @ 1.72
4 91.8% Southeast_English + 8.2% Estonian @ 1.75
5 87.2% Southwest_English + 12.8% Estonian @ 1.76
6 83.6% Southeast_English + 16.4% North_Swedish @ 1.77
7 88.6% Southwest_English + 11.4% Lithuanian @1.79
8 89.3% Southeast_English +10.7% Southwest_Finnish @1.79
9 92.9% Southeast_English + 7.1% Lithuanian @ 1.81
10 83.4% Southwest_English +16.6% Southwest_Finnish @1.84
11 91.7% Southeast_English + 8.3% Finnish @ 1.86
12 72% Dutch + 28% Southwest_English @ 1.88
13 69.1% Southeast_English + 30.9% Norwegian @ 1.89
14 81.5% Norwegian + 18.5% Spanish_Aragon @ 1.9
15 86.8% Southwest_English + 13.2% Finnish @ 1.92
16 92.8% Southeast_English + 7.2% East_Finnish @ 1.94
17 92.5% Southeast_English + 7.5% Belorussian @ 1.98
18 75.9% Southwest_English + 24.1% North_Swedish @ 2.01
19 95.1% Dutch + 4.9% French_Basque @ 2.02
20 61.6% Dutch + 38.4% Orcadian @ 2.02

Apologies for the formatting.

Seth Reeder said...

I scored the following:

51.42894% Early European Farmer
34.30316% West European Hunter Gatherer
14.26789% Ancient North Eurasian

My ancestral background is primarily British Islander (over 75%, mostly recent immigrants - as recent as 1923 and as far back as 1848 - others were colonial). The remaining portion consists mostly of German (mostly 1848 immigrants, few were colonial), and there is some more distant Portuguese and Ashkenazi admixture.

Unknown said...

My brother-in-law (Russian, Volga-Ural) has an even higher EEF - 40.5% (WHG 42%, ANE 18%). His Siberian is 8.6%. I'm also curious how this component might skew our results.

Onur said...

That "South Asian" component, which makes about 8% of the "Gedrosia" component, is by no means exclusively composed of ANI. It is a composite of ASI (=Ancestral South Indian) and ANI, but mostly made up of ASI. But even the "West Asian" portion of the "Gedrosia" component includes some ASI as the "West Asian" component itself is a composite of the "Gedrosia" and "Caucasus" components:

MDS plots, too, confirm the non-negligible ASI element in the "Gedrosia" component:

In short, the ASI admixture of the "Gedrosia" component is obvious.

Davidski said...

From what I've seen so far, Siberian admixture is represented as inflated WHG and ANE in this test. I initially assumed that it would just result in an inflated ANE, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Onur said...

From what I've seen so far, Siberian admixture is represented as inflated WHG and ANE in this test. I initially assumed that it would just result in an inflated ANE, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

That is because WHG and ANE are in equal distance to the Mongoloid race.

Anna Lindén said...

The average Swede has about 17 % ANE. If the ANE percent is inflated in Russians because of more recent Siberian admixture, then the original ANE must be as high in Sweden as i Russia, or even higher. Am I wrong?

Michael Clarke said...

When I attempt to download the excel file I get an already completed sheet with someone else's results. What am I doing wrong. Can someone help, please?

Davidski said...

Just replace the scores that are already in there with your own. The best way to do that is to copy and paste from another Excel sheet. The EEF-WHG-ANE proportions will then change automatically.

Anna Lindén said...

Well, it didn't work for me. I got to ask somebody else to do the test for me.

Kurti said...

Sorry but you are wrong, this is something already Palisto tried to explain you. in Dodecad K12b when Gedrosia as component appears, "South Asian" plots next to Onge Just like only ASI exclusively does.
This is one prove that the South Asian in Gedrosia is ANI.

Second it that according to Dienekes himself the South Asian in Iranians is allot more ANI like (something around 70%) see his own graph ->

So the average South Asians was 10% in Dodecad v3. If you take out the 70% ANI, 3% ASI remains. And this is exactly the percentage of South Asian among Iranians in Dodecad k12b

Onur what you still fail to understand about the graph you are showing me is that K7 "South Asian" is NOT the same as K12b "South Asian". And in fact it confirms my thoughts not yours.
You seem to not understand the graph here.

The graph here shows us that in Dodecad K7b, where no Gedrosia exists, a section of it (ANI) has wondered under the "South Asian" designation and NOT that Gedrosia of K12b is made up of South Asian of K12b. You need to understand that K12b and K7b are not the same. In K7b where some of the Gedrosia genes end up in "South Asian" the "South Asian" frequency is also lot higher than in K12b where ANI Genes wander into Gedrosia.

Iranians K12b 3% vs K7b 7%. It is so obvious that I still don't get how you don't understand it.

You will also realize this in fst tables of Dodecad K7b in which South Asian is allot closer to West Eurasian components because it is ANI/ASI mixed

See here ->

While in K12b it is further away

It is so obvious that in K12b South Asian something misses, something West Eurasian which was added in K7b.

K7b South Asian (ANI part of Gedrosia is included) is not the same as K12b South Asian (ASI exclusive).

So your attempt to prove "ASI" genes in Gedrosia with the "South Asian" component of K7b, is false.

I think you really need to contact Dienekes and ask him about this. What Gedrosia really is.

Michael Clarke said...

Many thanks

EEF 46.36
WHG 38.01
ANE 15.63

Davidski said...

Like many of these components, Gedrosia is a complex composite. In fact, it seems to be a complex composite of other complex composites. So it's really not very useful for working out ancient population movements.

The so called West Asian component, of which Gedrosia sort of seems to be a subset of, appeared for a while to be a very convincing signal of a Copper Age or even later migration from the Caucasus or surrounds to most of Europe. But it now just looks like a signal of late ANE introgression into Western Europe, the Caucasus, West Asia and South Central Asia. The main reason it shows all over Europe is because Europeans carry a lot of ANE, but are less drifted and less isolated than some of the reference samples from the Caucasus and Pakistan, and thus less likely to trigger a widespread component like that.

Similarly, Gedrosia is also linked to the ANE present in Europe, West Asia and South Central Asia. But again, it's not a signal of direct gene flow between these regions, but rather of late ANE introgression from a third party into these regions.

So the main questions now are where did ANE expand from just after the Neolithic, and why did it expand in apparently such a massive way.

Kurti said...

Davidski I know, in ancient times allot of what is nowadays part of Gedrosia, Caucasus, ASI, Amerindian, North European was one bigger "component" with the same origin. somewhere between Central, North and West Asia. But this was not the part were we disagreed my point is that it is unlikely that the modern component known as Gedrosia has no significant (if any) admixture of the modern component known as "ASI". This is the point were we disagree.

barakobama said...

Davidski, "The so called West Asian component, of which Gedrosia sort of seems to be a subset of, appeared for a while to be a very convincing signal of a Copper Age or even later migration from the Caucasus or surrounds to most of Europe. But it now just looks like a signal of late ANE introgression into Western Europe, the Caucasus, West Asia and South Central Asia."

In K12b Otzi had no Gedorsia but had 22.3% Caucasus and 7.6% southwest Asian, in K7b he had 1.4% west Asian, in globe13 he had 6% west Asian and 15.9% southwest Asian. There are similar rates in Sardinia who also showed almost no ANE.

I am assuming that the west Asians in those tests are distributed very similarly, I know Caucasus is. Saying west Asian in Europe is from migrations in the copper age or even later can't be true because Otzi seems like he was purely Neolithic descended and has west asian. If those west Asians and the Caucasus are distributed in very similar ways they must be mainly descended from pre Neolithic people of west Asia. If those components are "late introgressions" of ANE that means there must have been major population changes in west Asia and north south Asia since the Neolithic.

Gedorsia to me at first seemed like the eastern branch of west Asian while Caucasus was the western branch. When I looked at the Fst's it was very close to south Asian so I assumed it had some south Asian.

When I saw Mal'ta's results in K=19 from the new study I thought maybe it could be somewhat connected to ANE or Mal'ta had some related ancestry to Gedorsia. Since I had heard there is a lot of diversity of Y DNA P in south Asia I thought maybe Mal'ta had a south Asian paternal line and that Y DNA P is connected with Gedorsia and ANE.

You can’t ignore the similarity between the distribution of R1b(specifically L23) in Europe and Gedorsia. ANE is very high in Finland and eastern Europe but Gedorsia is almost completely absent. I bet Gedorsia in Europe has some west Asian type ancestry that came with ANE type ancestry and R1b.
I understand what you mean by modern components are a mixture of many ancient components. I don't know all the stuff you do so I don't know how to tell what type of mixture a component has except through Fst's and guessing based on its distribution. How do you know that the reason west Asian and north European are so related is because both have a lot of ANE and west Asian has some north European, and that Mal’ta was not mixed just he was from a population that contributed to many people? Do you mainly just connect dots from results or compare the real SNP’s to come up with your conclusions?

Davidski said...

Right, I was referring to Dienekes' earlier tests which showed that Oetzi didn't have any of the West Asian component, from I think the K7 run. Later runs with the newer K7 showed that he did. But I can't remember the details. In any case, the French Basques show a very high Gedrosia level, but they're one of the few European populations that can be modeled as purely EEF/WHG, without any ANE. So Gedrosia isn't interchangeable with ANE by any means, though it might have some sort of indirect relationship.

And yes, it's obvious that the reason the West Asian and North European components are so closely related is because both have a lot of ANE. Take a look at the results of the North Caucasian samples in this study. This is what the authors say...

"An interesting implication of this analysis is that ANE-related ancestry may be particularly high in the Northeast Caucasus, as both fitted and lower bound values for Lezgins and Chechens exceed inferred ANE values for Europeans (compare Table S12.8 and Table S12.12). The high affinity of the Northeast Caucasus to MA1 is also demonstrated in Extended Data Fig. 7 where the statistic f4(Test, Chimp; MA1, Loschbour) exhibits highest values in the region. In light of our other results, it is not surprising that these populations would have high ANE-related ancestry. They are at the northern end of the Near Eastern cline (Fig. 1B)."

The North Caucasus is where the West Asian component peaks. So with such high ANE levels, no wonder that component is closely related to the North European component. Northern Europeans also carry a lot of ANE, and even more WHG, which is closely related to ANE. How can that not be reflected in the Fst between the West Asian and North European components?

Also, how can MA-1 be a mix of components created from modern samples collected 24,000 years after his death? That makes no sense at all. Obviously, what's happening there is that MA-1's relatives contributed DNA to all of these modern populations, and eventually, when we have a lot of their genomes, they'll create a robust ANE cluster in ADMIXTURE that will be seen all the way from Europe to South Central Asia. I bet MA-1 will show 100% membership in that cluster, with no signs of admixture from any modern population.

barakobama said...

So you agree not all west Asian and Gedorsia in Europe are result of ANE ancestry but they may be connected, I agree. I wish I could see the results of how much ANE the northeast Caucasus have and the rest of the world. I know west Asian peaks in the Caucasus like maybe ANE, but is ANE connected with west Asian in the rest of the near east? I can understand how it could be connected with Gedorsia and west Asian in parts of Europe but not eastern Europe.

Do you think west Asian is most related to southwest Asian and Meditreaen if you take away the ANE? That would make sense since near easterns score such high EEF. Is there a way to find how related WGH is to ANE and modern west Asian components.

I can't wait till there are genomes taken from pre Neolithic near easterns or Neolithic ones I bet they will be similar to EEF. The T2b from pre pottery Neolithic Syria makes me think they were ancestral to the early farmers of Europe and not very much so to modern near easterns.

ANE is highest in northeastern Europeans and Scandinavians like north European, right? I think north European is very descended from WGH, some EEF, and some ANE. ANE was absent from the ~8,000ybp hunter gatherer from Luxemburg, I have heard Motola12 had 18% what about the rest of the Swedish hunter gatherers? Those Swedish hunter gatherers had similar ancestry to the Luxemburg man there is no doubt about that, but where did Motola12 get his ANE from that's a mystery. I wouldn't be surprised if MA1 was very mixed or pure. His mtDNA U* and R* probably means he was at least a little mixed. He could be mixed of ancestors that helped create modern components. If ANE peaks in the northeast Caucasus why didn't he have any west Asian?

Davidski said...

Have you read that study yet?

You can see some of the levels of ANE in the North Caucasus and Near East listed in this table...

And here on the left you can see the differences in ANE levels between Europe, the North Caucasus, Near East and North Africa...

So the West Asian component probably wouldn't even exist if not for ANE. Most of the Near Eastern populations would be a mix of Southwest Asian and Mediterranean, which is basically what the West Asian is minus the ANE.

Actually, Motala12 is 19% ANE. That's basically because Sweden is closer to Siberia than Luxembourg is. If this study included Mesolithic genomes from Russia, they'd be even more ANE than Motala12.

And yeah, MA-1 is part West Asian. Look at the ADMIXTURE graph from the study. He appears around 1/3 West Asian or rather North Caucasian at the higher Ks, and then around a third Kalash at the final K. But like I said, he only appears that way. It's the North Caucasians and Kalash who have ANE ancestry.

barakobama said...

My PC wont allow me to download Lazaridis et al. 2013 because it has strict anti-virus security, maybe I will be allowed to download it then print it and put the security settings back on.

I was able to get an image of the K=19 of MA1, the new hunter gatherers, and Stuttgart.

MA1 looks extremely mixed. The most is N. European then Kalash(Caucasus + Gedorsia) now I see he did have a good amount of west Asian. He also had some south Asian and native American. I heard that native Americans score around the same amount of ANE as Europeans. I don't know what to say about the Oceania and Pygmy stuff.

I can see in those links you showed ANE is very high in Caucasus people. It also exists in Druze who are southwest Asian and Cypriots who are west Asian at around the same rate as in southern Europeans. ANE distribution is Europe does seem similar to WGH and north European. In that map I did see some correlation between west Asian and ANE in the near east but not very obvious. I can't tell if it exists in southwest Asia and north Africa I doubt it does.

So ANE exists in some hotspots of west Asian and Gedorsia, probably not a decent level in all. I don't know what to say I guess maybe west Asian and Gedorsia could have significant ANE ancestry. I want to find out if in the near east ANE correlates with the distribution of west Asian. If it is non existent in most of north Africa and deep in Arabia I guess that would mean only west Asian could possibly have significant ANE ancestry.

It is interesting that north Africans in globe13 were almost entirely a mix between southwest Asian and Meditreaen like you predicted west Asian would be if you take away the ANE ancestry. Is the original autosomal DNA of the near east and north Africa one big family but ANE messed with west Asian and WGH messed with Meditreaen and made it not seem that way. And WGH their long lost relative who went to Europe over 30,000 years ago and became pretty isolated?

I want to get all of MA1's results, see how ANE, WGH, and EEF are distributed, get all the fst's distribution, bla bla bla from modern tests, then make my own conclusions. I am still very confused and I don't have any of the info written down. This is all brand new before MA1 genome it would have sounded crazy to say a upper Palaeolithic Siberian people contributed so much ancestry to so many modern people including most west Asians, Europeans, and native Americans. If MA1 was very pure I wonder were his people would be placed in the modern non African family, west Eurasian?

Onur said...


Could you please stop misrepresenting my statements? I should say that I do not blame you for that, because I think at least some of your views on this issue are due to misunderstanding of the general issue on your part, but some of it is likely to be psychological as well. One cannot assess the level of ASI-relationship of ADMIXTURE components without resorting to the ASI estimations of populations. My assessments were based on comparison of the estimated ASI ancestry level of populations with their levels of the Dodecad components and also on the composition and relationships of the Dodecad components. I was very meticulous in my comparison, and checked the results multiple times.

The K12b "South Asian" and K7b "South Asian" components are not as different as you suggest. Looking at their positions in MDS plots makes that clear. They are almost the same components. They are both ASI-majority, ANI-minority composite components. "Gedrosia" absorbs some of the ASI of K7b "South Asian", that is why the level of K12b "South Asian" is higher than the level of K7b "South Asian" in most South Asian and South Asia-leaning populations.

Davidski said...

@barak, ANE is the brother clade to West Eurasian proper, or WHG...

Not only that, but it looks like they weren't separated totally. That's why the differences between the three hunter-gatherer genomes are clinal.

Loschbour (WHG) > Motala12 (WHG/ANE) > MA-1 (ANE)

And if you look again at that map I posted above, ANE not only reaches a peak in the Caucasus, but it's completely missing from Sardinia. Just like the West Asian component.

Anna Lindén said...

Now it works for me too. A question to Davidski: What is "calcs" on the sheet?

Davidski said...

CALCS is just short for calculators.

Kurti said...

@Onur I am not going to waste more time on you. The only individual here who seems to have some psychologically issues, and who is so obsessed about proving ASI admixture in Iranians, is you.

Even Palisto gave it up after a few comments on you. I bet not even Dienekes would be able to convince you about his own component. You seem to generally confuse two different components of two different calculators just because they use to have the same name (K7 South Asian and K12b South Asian).

@Barak Obama the reason why in some runs Ötzi showed Caucasian admixture is because Caucasus is not entirely "West Asian".

As we see on this break up.

The Caucasus Ötzi scored is very likely related to the "Southern" part in the Caucasus component.

Kurti said...

Onur is obsessed to prove that Iranians and Kurds are "Less West Asian" than other. Look at this link in the Comment section and tell me he isn't.

Anna Lindén said...

Yes, but what about the figures:
One: -52,45044 36,501365
Two: 51,501135 46,55633
Three: 42,889021 18,103471
36,5, 46,6 and 18,1 is close to my EEF/WHG/ANE-precent, but not exactly.

barakobama said...

Thanks for that link Kurti, I have no idea how they figure that out but it helps a lot. Otzi did have west Asian in him though you can see it in globe13, K7b, and for Caucasus in K12b. K and then number just means they try to find a certain amount of groups from the people they test? I was just able to download parts of Laz 2013 and they had tons of K's results for the ancient samples and modern samples. How would their K7 be different from Eurogenes K7?? is it just about the people they test?

Davidski said...

Forget those old tests. Have a look at this ADMIXTURE analysis from the study.

It shows a cream colored component that peaks in the Caucasus and is found at decent levels in almost all Europeans, except Basques and Sardinians. MA-1 shows about a third of it in many of the higher K runs, but for him it switches to the Kalash-specific component in some of the runs.

Obviously, what we're seeing there is ANE admixture in Europe, West Asia and South Central Asia. But it's being expressed in a weird way as North Caucasian and Kalash components, similar to the old West Asian and Gedrosia components, and I'd say that's due to the isolation and drift in some of those isolated mountain communities.

That's why ADMIXTURE results are so difficult to use as signals of ancient population movements. You don't really know what you're looking at much of the time. It could be admixture from population A to population B, or in fact gene flow the opposite way, or maybe third party gene flow from population C.

But anyway, when we look at all of these results together, the thing that really sticks out is the high ANE in the North Caucasus. This is interesting, because Motala12 also had high ANE, and obviously MA-1 was purely ANE. So ANE obviously expanded into the Near East and South Central Asia from somewhere in the north, probably during the Bronze Age. What we don't know is whether this expansion was from Eastern Europe or Siberia, and only more ancient genomes can answer that question. Here's what the authors from this study say...

"A geographically parsimonious hypothesis would be that a major component of present-day European ancestry was formed in eastern Europe or western Siberia where western and eastern hunter-gatherer groups could plausibly have intermixed. Motala12 has an estimated WHG/(WHG+ANE) ratio of 81% (S12.7), higher than that estimated for the population contributing to modern Europeans (Fig. S12.14). Motala and Mal’ta are separated by 5,000km in space and about 17 thousand years in time, leaving ample room for a genetically intermediate population. The lack of WHG ancestry in the Near East (Extended Data Fig. 6, Fig. 1B) together with the presence of ANE ancestry there (Table S12.12) suggests that the population who contributed ANE ancestry there may have lacked substantial amounts of WHG ancestry, and thus have a much lower (or even zero) WHG/(WHG+ANE) ratio."

Unknown said...

I've checked proportions for another relative of mine (all grandparents from Western Urals). She's got the highest Siberian percentage I've seen among Russians, plus some Amerindian. But, surprisingly, her ANE is almost the same as mine, while WHG is even lower than mine:
EEF 38.9
WHG 42.6
ANE 18.4

Here're the person's K13 results:
North_Atlantic 24.8
Baltic 43.2
West_Med 6.2
West_Asian 11.9
East_Med 0.0
Red_Sea 0.0
South_Asian 0.7
East_Asian 0.0
Siberian 10.2
Amerindian 2.3
Oceanian 0.4
Northeast_African 0.2
Sub-Saharan 0.1

barakobama said...

I just realized how much amazing stuff Laz 2013 has, I am definitely going to read and take notes on as much as i can. I have been waiting for the paper on La Brana-1's genome to come out but of course Laz 2013 is much better. I wonder if the reason the paper for La Brana-1 is taking longer than they said it would is because the are comparing him with all of the stuff found in Laz 2013.

Onur said...


The ASI admixture in Iranians and Kurds I am talking about is very small (not more than a few percent). I do not understand your over-reaction to that. As I said, the K12b "South Asian" and K7b "South Asian" components are so much similar to each other that they are almost the same components:

Look at the ADMIXTURE analysis results of the Lazaridis et al. 2013 paper:

The light green component of K=20, which peaks in the Mala, exists in Iranians in non-negligible levels while it is almost non-existent in all other West Eurasian populations analyzed (unfortunately Kurds are not included in that ADMIXTURE analysis, but based on their existing ADMIXTURE analysis results they are expected to have that component in smaller levels than Iranians have but nevertheless in non-negligible levels). Looking at its worldwide distribution and levels, it is clear that that component is a majority ASI, minority ANI composite component. Georgians, who are a better ANI proxy than are Iranians according to Moorjani et al. 2013, lack that component, which is consistent with the fact that the ANI element of that component is in minority level in its composition while its ASI element is in the majority level.

You should answer my specific arguments rather than resorting to name-callings if you want to make a contribution to this discussion.

Anna Lindén said...

Interesting. If high Siberian admixture inflates ANE and WHG, the ANE- and WHG-precent in these Russian Uralian exemples must have been surprisingly low from the start. That's not what you would expect, at least not low ANE-percent.

Richard Rocca said...

My wife is of 100% Polish ancestry by way of her 4 grandparents. Her paternal grandfather is from Zalesie, Podlasie, Poland near the Lithuanian/Belarussian border. He was I2a1b-M423 like the Loschbour hunter-gatherer. Below are are my wife's results which are very close to Davidski:

EEF 41.83587054
WHG 40.99387637
ANE 17.17025309

Davidski said...

I think you guys are confusing people, since you're not really discussing the test or the Laz 2013 study.

barakobama said...

Pyromatic, 'You may all be very interested to know that Ken Nordtvedt contacted one of the study's authors and had him check the various SNPs thought to be phyloequivalent to M423 in the Loschbour and Motala12 remains. He states that approximately half of these SNPs are derived and the other half ancestral in these remains, breaking the phyloequivalence and suggesting that these individuals are from the population ancestral to the modern I2-M423 crowd or on a separate, now extinct line. He's updated his I2-M423 tree to reflect the positions of Loschbour and Motala12 on the tree."

Laz 2013 reported Loschbour as being negative for the three modern subclades and Motola12 as negative for L621 which dominates I2a1b in eastern Europe, and a very rare subclade M359.2. If Motola12 and Loschbour are had intermediates between I2a1b and I2a1 that may mean modern I2a1b spread mainly after the Mesolithic, or Motola and Loschbour's lines today are just extinct.

I won't be surprised if Y DNA I was dominate in the mtDNA U5, U4, and U2e hunter gatherers of Europe. It has maybe been 30,000 years that Y DNA I or its ancestral forms has been in Europe. We know that is true for U5(because of ancient mtDNA) and possibly U2e and U4. Autosomal DNA from stone age European hunter gatherers has also showed they were a part of a distinct branch in the west Eurasian family tree. Except for probably some mixing with ANE and east Asians in far eastern Europe and possibly near easterns in southeastern Europe they were around 100% the same thing. Similar to isolated peoples today like Native Americans, Australian aboriginals, and Onge. I wonder why it wasn't till farmers from the near east came before they seriously mixed with another people.

About Time said...

In case someone wants to make a more detailed heat maps, I applied the WHG-EEF-ANE calc to the Eurogenes K13 populations. Would be fascinating with more granularity IMO.


Fanty said...

I just realised the huge difference for Spain.
the paper says 7% WHG and the calculator says 23%

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fanty said...

A crude map of mine (all 3 components seperate for better imagination)
Added for comparation: Y-DNA maps and a blue eye map. ;-P

About Time said...

@Fanty, nice maps. The poor fit of I2a1 with WHG ancestry might be because it was WHG women (not men) that were more accepted in Basal/EEF villages. Their mtDNA survived, not so much the Y-DNA.

The Basals/EEF were calling the shots (in their own villages at least), and the EEF men were scared of the WHG males. That wouldn't always stop a handsome and intelligent Basal male from charming a WHG maiden and her kinfolk now and then and bringing her into the village.

The EEF women were competitive of the outsider WHG women (I can imagine the jealous gossip), but that social obstacle could be overcome with advocacy from EEF suitors and good behavior. Just one theory.

A different theory, from looking at the I2a1 and G maps. Both distributions are kind of similar (more in south, less in north), except that I2a1 looks like it might have survived in Balkans and pushed out somewhat into West Ukraine and Belarus etc.

It could be that I2a1 was not just WHG but also involved in EEF (contrary to my first scenario). Both WHG and EEF got crowded out by ANE when it rolled in, which somewhat fits R1a distribution (except for high levels in Ireland).

Your ANE map is strange though for Balkans. Did you use the converted %, or the actual data from paper? If you used data from paper, then the "ANE gap" in the Balkans stands out. Almost like Balkans was a refugium for non-ANE groups at some point.

Fanty said...

Hm. I think the gap on the balkans is more an error of mine to not keep an eye on the quiet large ANE difference between paper and converted calculator. (something like 12 versus 17 in Balkan countries), so its probably wrong.

Seems like the conversion gives far lower ANE in the Balkans than the paper did.

Besides Scottland (paper conformed) and Ireland (conversion) there is another extremely high ANE region in the extreme west: Pais Vasco in Spain. It has (paper numbers) eastern European levels of ANE, extremely larger than other Spanish levels.

Fanty said...

"It could be that I2a1 was not just WHG but also involved in EEF"
Yeah possibly. The paper claimed that EEF was a mixed population and not the original Anatolian migrants. It was suposedly mixed with a "WHG like populaton", wich Davidsky things, could have been picked up in the Balkans.

Maybe those assimilated WHG males had been save from extermination or something like that.

About Time said...

The early Balkan farmers were gracile with a lot of health problems (legacy of inbreeding depression?). Probably not so physically intimidating, I'd guess.

If the EEF villages were subject to being raided (probably yes), then Basal/EEF would have benefited from having some WHG males around who were able/willing to fight and establish a reputation that would deter attackers.

About Time said...

Good catch wrt Pais Vasco. Paper shows (Extended Data Table 3):

Pais Vasco 0.163 ANE (Full modeling)
Spanish 0.123 ANE (Full modeling)
French 0.135 ANE (Full modeling)

but reverses in second part of table:

Pais Vasco 0.136 +/- 0.053 ANE (minimal assumptions)
Spanish 0.165 +/- .057 ANE (minimal assumptions)
French 0.142 +/- .046 ANE (minimal assumptions)

So hard to say much. But if Pais Vasco has more ANE than Spain, that's very interesting.

Similar ambiguity looking at Greek, Bulgarian, and Albanian ANE numbers in the same tables, by the way.

Grey said...

"Because there is no way some Europeans have 80% hunter gatherer ancestry. The vast majority of the mtDNA from pre Neolithic European hunter gatherers were replaced by new farmer lineages even in Finland and the Baltic."

Argentinians have mostly Amerindian mtDNA while having a very high percentage of European autosomal DNA. I'm not saying that's applicable to this case just saying the interplay of the three components is capable of producing very odd end results.

Davidski said...

The averaged fits in that table look way more reliable, because for one, Pais Vasco can be fit as EEF/WHG with no ANE admixture. But all of the estimates are pretty rough, and that obviously includes those obtained with the Excel formula.

By the way, interesting maps Fanty.

Davidski said...

There are some interesting comments at the link below about how early farmers and hunter-gatherers might have mixed...

"The farmers bred more rapidly than the other group; their birth rate was four times greater than that of the hunters and gatherers. This was attributable to both to the high carbohydrate diet and the fact that they had secure accommodation.

Women from the hunter-gatherer communities did intermarry with the farmers and they probably saw this as an enhancement of their social status. There was very little traffic the other way."

spagetiMeatball said...

And yet farmer Y-DNA is very rare in Europe today. Weird.

Davidski said...

Yeah, but did you notice this part?

"Although the farmers’ settled life had its advantages, there was also a price to pay. Their carbohydrate-rich diet was a source of rapid energy but also produced unfortunate side-effects, such as caries. The so-called diseases of civilization appeared and there was even the risk of epidemics."

It's well known that the Neolithic cultures of Central Europe collapsed in a heap during the late Neolithic. This created a vacuum that probably, at least in part, attracted the Corded Ware and Bell Beaker groups from the fringes to really push into Central Europe.

We don't know what happened to the Near Eastern-like Neolithic males, with their Y-DNA G, E and maybe J, at this intriguing time. But maybe they got largely wiped out? In any case, it's clear that many of their women survived to pass on their lineages in the post-Neolithic Europe, probably as wives or slaves of the invading males from the east, and perhaps west (depending on where R1b came from).

barakobama said...

I don't know that much about the archeology but I do know modern west and north Europeans are very different from Stuttgart and Otzi, and that there is evidence in mtDNA and Y DNA the Bell beaker, Corded ware, and Unetice people were very different from Neolithic central Europeans. I think Stuttgart's people first mainly replaced Luschbour's people then her people were mainly replaced by my people(modern people there).

That rise project will probably find that Corded ware people fit much better with modern Slavs, Germans, Balts and Celts(not saying their languages are more related than being Indo European) than with Stuttgart and Otzi. There is a load of evidence of this genetic change that happened in Europe because of Indo Europeans. Corded ware culture I think may represent the main ancestors of modern east Europeans but not west. Germans, Celts, and Italians probably came from another separate migration from eastern Europe. I think there was also some near eastern admixture that occurred in Italy and the Balkans after the Neolithic.

Anna Lindén said...

The results of my mother's second cousin, a Swede with Forest-Finnish ancestors:

EEF: 34,5658
WHG: 46,699468
ANE: 18,734733

Christy from Canada said...

My results. My ethnicity Scottish/English/Irish. Although my father's Y-DNA was N. Admix results show significant Mediterranean, Baltic amounts as well
EEF 47.97800627
WHG 36.91984567
ANE 15.10214806

Locrian said...

EEF -- 49.72917
WHG -- 35.49097
ANE -- 14.77986

English — no surprises here at all. Very much in line with other respondents.

Hermann-Josef Winter said...

EEF -- 51,33647
WHG -- 34,12553
ANE -- 14,53798

German - paternal ancestry is fuzzy.

Rachel R. said...

EEF 50.81
WHG 34.45
ANE 14.73

mother is 1/4 Lithuanian, 1/4 Slovene, and the remaining half all or almost-all English heritage
father is mostly of English heritage, with small bits of Irish, etc. mixed in
(essentially 100% European, though, even with all the bits and pieces)

Because of the Slovene, I went ahead and ran the southeast Europe one, too:

Near East 91.39
ANE 8.6

P.Lett said...

My father (Czech republic)
EEF 50.2653
WHG 34.6251
ANE 15.1096

My mother (Czech republic)
EEF 46.7602
WHG 37.1868
ANE 16.053

My wife (Ukraina, Russia (West Siberia), Poland )
EEF 40.429
WHG 42.0483
ANE 17.5227

Matthew Langley said...

EEF 50.256
WHG 34.955
ANE 14.787

I'm American with mostly British Isles and a bit of German ancestry, seems to match quite closely to the "English" which makes sense.

CPfromEngland said...

EEF 49.36
WHG 35.68
ANE 14.94

I'm English (all my known ancestors for the past 350-odd years were from central England) and my father's results are virtually identical:

EEF 49.55
WHG 35.61
ANE 14.62

Unknown said...

Can someone please explain the conversion to me, I am obviously missing something simple? These are my K13 results:

North_Atlantic 51.09%
Baltic 20.33%
West_Med 15.84%
West_Asian 6.84%
East_Med 3.35%
Red_Sea 0.99%
South_Asian 1.42%
East_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian -
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan 0.14%

My mother is English X2e1,
My father is Scottish R1b1b2a1a1

kdfrederick said...

My ancestry is:
75% SW German
25% Welsh and English

EEF 52.78
WHG 33.27
ANE 13.95

Michelle Neff said...

EEF 48.29
WHG 36.67
ANE 15.04

I was expecting more WHG as my MtDNA is U2e1 and my direct maternal line is from Stuttgart. :)

Helgenes50 said...


My Ancestry is 100 % Normand
and we have the same results

EEF 52,40
WHG 33,72
ANE 13,87

CatchingAllTheSouls said...

What do you think of mine? I am primarily of English descent:

EEF 50.79075511
WHG 34.91653284
ANE 14.29271205

CatchingAllTheSouls said...

(Just for reference)

Also how can I tell how much closer to the Saxons I am genetically versus the Native Britons? My SE and SW English appear to be very balanced.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Southeast_English @ 5.634
2 Southwest_English @ 5.848
3 Dutch @ 7.507
4 Orcadian @ 7.616
5 German @ 8.024
6 Danish @ 8.537
7 Irish @ 8.574
8 West_Scottish @ 8.825
9 French @ 9.876
10 Norwegian @ 11.962
179 iterations.

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Norwegian +50% Southwest_French @ 3.840
2 50% Southwest_French +50% Swedish @ 4.097
3 50% Norwegian +50% Spanish_Cantabria @ 4.187
4 50% French +50% Irish @ 4.194
5 50% French +50% Orcadian @ 4.230
6 50% French +50% Southwest_English @ 4.266
7 50% French +50% West_Scottish @ 4.315
8 50% Norwegian +50% Spanish_Cataluna @ 4.387
9 50% Spanish_Cantabria +50% Swedish @ 4.437
10 50% Danish +50% French @ 4.699
16110 iterations.

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% German +25% French_Basque +25% Norwegian @ 1.895
2 50% Danish +25% Austrian +25% French_Basque @ 1.950
3 50% Irish +25% Austrian +25% French_Basque @ 2.065
4 50% German +25% Dutch +25% French_Basque @ 2.076
5 50% German +25% French_Basque +25% Swedish @ 2.083
6 50% Orcadian +25% Austrian +25% French_Basque @ 2.147
7 50% Irish +25% French_Basque +25% Hungarian @ 2.161
8 50% Danish +25% French_Basque +25% Hungarian @ 2.161
9 50% Dutch +25% Southwest_English +25% Southwest_French @ 2.184
10 50% West_Scottish +25% French_Basque +25% Hungarian @ 2.191
414812 iterations.

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Austrian + Danish + French_Basque + Irish @ 1.847
2 French_Basque + German + German + Norwegian @ 1.895
3 Austrian + Danish + French_Basque + West_Scottish @ 1.905
4 Austrian + French_Basque + Norwegian + West_Scottish @ 1.944
5 Austrian + Danish + Danish + French_Basque @ 1.950
6 Austrian + French_Basque + Norwegian + Southwest_English @ 1.967
7 Austrian + Danish + French_Basque + Orcadian @ 1.984
8 Danish + French_Basque + Hungarian + West_Scottish @ 2.009
9 Danish + French_Basque + Hungarian + Irish @ 2.013
10 Austrian + French_Basque + Irish + Orcadian @ 2.023
11 Austrian + French_Basque + Irish + Norwegian @ 2.048
12 Austrian + French_Basque + Irish + Irish @ 2.065
13 Dutch + French_Basque + German + German @ 2.076
14 Austrian + French_Basque + Orcadian + West_Scottish @ 2.081
15 French_Basque + German + German + Swedish @ 2.083
16 Austrian + French_Basque + Irish + West_Scottish @ 2.102
17 Austrian + Dutch + French_Basque + West_Scottish @ 2.122
18 French_Basque + Hungarian + Irish + West_Scottish @ 2.143
19 Austrian + French_Basque + Orcadian + Orcadian @ 2.147
20 French_Basque + Hungarian + Irish + Irish @ 2.161

Pillar_of_fire said...

all are Bulgarian samples
65.38730448 22.95392474 11.65877078
65.32630184 23.00357685 11.67012131
65.47369614 22.87952291 11.64678094
65.32083668 23.01010587 11.66905745
65.3223501 23.01069316 11.66695675
65.31037258 23.01790283 11.67172459
65.36851327 22.9729874 11.65849934
65.4880221 22.86875415 11.64322375
65.33057338 23.00130206 11.66812456
65.28277914 23.03973887 11.67748199
65.46306039 22.89014523 11.64679439
65.31565556 23.01694428 11.66740016
65.29444327 23.03139675 11.67415998

EK said...

Ancestry: 3/4 Russian, 1/4 AJ

EEF 52.72%
WHG 32.35%
ANE 14.93%

Suvi-Tuuli Allan said...

I'm a Finn from Central Ostrobothnia, Western Finland. My ancestry is mostly from that very same area.

EEF: 35,0642348634
WHG: 46,4532070431
ANE: 18,4825580934

Guy Jacks said...

Ethnicity: Ashkenazi Jewish

Rounded to results:

EEF: 88%
WHG: 5%
ANE: 7%

Guy Jacks said...

I can't enter my info in the modified version for Near Eastern and Southeast Europeans, anyway to fix this?

Guy Jacks said...

These results are from the modified version for Southeast Europeans and Near Easterners:
Ethnicity: Ashkenazi Jewish
Near East: 84%
ANE: 16%

jackson_montgomery_devoni said...

Why do the French Basques score around 10% ANE on average in this test when Lazaridis found no ANE among them?