01-18-2024, 05:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2024, 05:44 PM by alanarchae.)
just checking it’s not April the 1st. Makes no sense on any level including SNP dating. It’s obviously wrong.
Analyses of complete genomes of 10 French Late Mesolithic individuals form the sites
|
01-18-2024, 05:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2024, 05:44 PM by alanarchae.)
just checking it’s not April the 1st. Makes no sense on any level including SNP dating. It’s obviously wrong.
01-18-2024, 05:57 PM
(01-18-2024, 03:25 PM)Pribislav Wrote: I can tell just by the number of valid markers teepean posted that hoe004 and hoe005 are females, there's no need to check the BAMs. Somebody posted on Eurogenes that it must be contamination which made me smile. Even if they weren't the wrong gender the calls quoted are C to T and G to A and should be treated with extreme caution anyway : )
01-18-2024, 06:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2024, 07:22 PM by alanarchae.)
(01-18-2024, 05:57 PM)jdean Wrote:(01-18-2024, 03:25 PM)Pribislav Wrote: I can tell just by the number of valid markers teepean posted thatbe hoe004 and hoe005 are females, there's no need to check the BAMs. At least one hold out Franco-Cantabrian model guy will be screaming yesssssss and hitting the bottle now but will be in for a rude awakening once he sobers up. These snp reads look several multiples too young to fit the archaeological dates. Got to be wrong or contamination.
01-18-2024, 06:15 PM
(01-18-2024, 06:02 PM)alanarchae Wrote: At least one hold out Franco-Cantabrian model guy will be screaming yesssssss and hitting the hitter now but will be in for a rude awakening once he sobers up. These snp reads look several multiples too young to fit the archaeological dates. Got to be wrong or contamination. I don't think he ever sobers up : )
01-18-2024, 07:24 PM
(01-18-2024, 06:15 PM)jdean Wrote:(01-18-2024, 06:02 PM)alanarchae Wrote: At least one hold out Franco-Cantabrian model guy will be screaming yesssssss and hitting the hitter now but will be in for a rude awakening once he sobers up. These snp reads look several multiples too young to fit the archaeological dates. Got to be wrong or contamination. well if he actually lives in Spain (I doubt it) then at least alcohol is super cheap compared to northern Europe
Their autosomal results look rather typical.
Can someone check tev002? Is it actually A1*(xA1a) or could it be A1b downstream?
01-18-2024, 08:04 PM
(01-18-2024, 07:24 PM)alanarchae Wrote:(01-18-2024, 06:15 PM)jdean Wrote:(01-18-2024, 06:02 PM)alanarchae Wrote: At least one hold out Franco-Cantabrian model guy will be screaming yesssssss and hitting the hitter now but will be in for a rude awakening once he sobers up. These snp reads look several multiples too young to fit the archaeological dates. Got to be wrong or contamination. I recall that someone with sufficient computer expertise said the person in question is actually an Hispanic-American who lives in Houston, Texas. I can't confirm that, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
01-18-2024, 08:07 PM
(01-18-2024, 07:32 PM)Qrts Wrote: Their autosomal results look rather typical. Maybe low_coverage ?
Target: CapsianWGS_scaled
Distance: 1.2510% / 0.01251049 37.2 Iberomaurusian 36.8 Early_European_Farmer 12.8 Early_Levantine_Farmer 8.0 Steppe_Pastoralist 4.8 SSA 0.4 Iran_Neolithic FTDNA : 91% North Africa +<2% Bedouin + <2 Southern-Levantinfo + <1 Sephardic Jewish + 3% Malta + 3% Iberian Peninsula 23andME : 100% North Africa WGS ( Y-DNA and mtDNA) Y-DNA: E-A30032< A30480 ~1610 CE mtDNA: V25b 800CE ? ( age mtDNA not accurate )
01-18-2024, 08:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2024, 08:27 PM by rmstevens2.)
(01-18-2024, 06:02 PM)alanarchae Wrote:(01-18-2024, 05:57 PM)jdean Wrote:(01-18-2024, 03:25 PM)Pribislav Wrote: I can tell just by the number of valid markers teepean posted thatbe hoe004 and hoe005 are females, there's no need to check the BAMs. What does Common Sense say to that guy when he meets him on the street? "Howdy, stranger!"
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
01-19-2024, 02:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-19-2024, 02:43 AM by rmstevens2.)
(01-18-2024, 03:25 PM)Pribislav Wrote: I can tell just by the number of valid markers teepean posted that hoe004 and hoe005 are females, there's no need to check the BAMs. Serious question: what is it about the number of valid markers that makes you think those two samples are female? Sorry I sound ignorant asking that question, but I'd really like to know. For me the great weight of the evidence says they cannot be any kind of L52, and certainly not members of modern L52 subclades. Based on what you wrote, I wonder if they are in fact female, and I'd like to have this controversy resolved before the usual goofballs make a nuisance of themselves with these erroneous results. Thanks!
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
01-19-2024, 03:18 AM
Apparently there are very few "valid markers":
hoe004 R-L52 14992 hoe005 R-L52 18903 tev002 A-1* 1717 ………… hoe002 I-Y3104 94608 hoe003 I-Y3104 128055 stp001 I-STS616 127816 tev001 I-L460 61589 tev003 I-Y3104 128063
Apropos of the above, Göran Runström posted the following on the Big Y Facebook page a little earlier today:
Göran Runström Admin Top Contributor · · Many are asking about French DNA and here is some aDNA data from what looks like a new upcoming paper from Uppsala University. All 5 ancient men in the study belong to Y-DNA haplogroup I2. Analyses of complete genomes of 10 French Late Mesolithic individuals form the sites of Hoedic, Téviec and Champigny Since the early Holocene, western and central Europe was inhabited by a genetically distinct group of Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHGs). These groups were eventually replaced and assimilated by the incoming Neolithic farmers. The western Atlantic façade was home to some of the last Mesolithic sites of mainland Europe, represented by the iconic open-air sites at Hoedic and Téviec in southern Brittany, France. These sites are known for the unusually well-preserved and rich burials. Genomic studies of Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers have been limited to single or a few individuals per site and our understanding of the social dynamics of the last Mesolithic hunter-gatherers of Europe and their interactions with incoming farmers is limited. We sequenced and analyzed the complete genomes of 10 individuals from the Late Mesolithic sites of Hoedic, Téviec, and Champigny, in France, four of which sequenced to between 23- and 8-times genome coverage. The analysis of genomic, chronological and dietary data revealed that the Late Mesolithic populations in Brittany maintained distinct social units within a network of exchanging mates. This resulted in low intra-group biological relatedness that prevented consanguineous mating, despite the small population size of the Late Mesolithic groups. We found no genetic ancestry from Neolithic farmers in the analyzed hunter-gatherers, even though some of them may have coexisted with the first farming groups in neighboring regions. Hence, contrary to previous conclusions based on stable isotope data from the same sites, the Late Mesolithic forager community was limited in mate-exchange to neighboring hunter-gatherer groups, to the exclusion of Neolithic farmers. https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB71770
Paper Trail: 42% English, 31.5% Scottish, 12.5% Irish, 6.25% German, 6.25% Sicilian & 1.5% French.
LDNA©: Britain & Ireland: 89.3% (51.5% English, 37.8% Scottish & Irish), N.W. Germanic: 7.8%, Europe South: 2.9% (Southern Italy & Sicily) BigY 700: I1-Z141 >F2642 >Y3649 >Y7198 (c.365 AD) >Y168300 (c.410 AD) >A13248 (c.880 AD) >A13252 (c.1055 AD) >FT81015 (c.1285 AD) >A13243 (c.1620 AD) >FT80854 (c.1700 AD) >FT80630 (1893 AD).
01-19-2024, 04:01 AM
(01-19-2024, 03:46 AM)JMcB Wrote: Apropos of the above, Göran Runström posted the following on the Big Y Facebook page a little earlier today: That apparently backs up Pribislav's earlier assertion that the samples with bogus L52 calls are females.
Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us.
- Wisdom of Sirach 44:1
01-19-2024, 04:50 AM
(01-19-2024, 02:42 AM)rmstevens2 Wrote: Serious question: what is it about the number of valid markers that makes you think those two samples are female? I did a quick verification for the number of non-zero markers for chr 24 (Y). hoe004 1201 hoe005 1639 There are near 65 000 markers in total but almost all are 0 except for the numbers above. At my level I can't tell for sure if these are males or females. Please note that for HO dataset there are only 500 markers included for CHR 24 . |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|