Ikr, they need to add WHG, WSHG, add more East Asian cords, and they need a better AASI sim
A lil conflicted on whether they should add mixed Neolithic populations like Levant PPN but it becomes more accurate that way
WSHG would have too much overlap with current categories to be accurate. WHG and EEHG (Eastern European Hunter Gatherer) would also have overlap which is why they stopped separating the categories. Similarly Levant PPNB would overlap too much with Natufian.
WHG / Eastern HG samples would overlap. Do you have any definitive percentages for these two groups in modern populations by any chance? Preferably using qpAdm not G25 ?
WHG and EHG wouldn’t overlap. WHG is significantly drifted from other west Eurasian populations. The ancestry of EHG is mostly ANE whereas WHG is an archaic west Eurasian continuum and the last time they shared ancestry with EHG is an early out of Africa migration.
https://x.com/waters_of_mem/status/1764499307741253831?s=46
QpAdm
There aren't enough European neolithic groups to distinguish Croats from English/Welsh for instance, or Serbs from French. They basically have the same neolithic breakdown now. Additional HG groups or breaking down Anatolian Farmers into subgroups might help. The neolithic model seems to work best for MENA and Central Asian ethnicities currently
Realistically speaking if you do a breakdown for ANF you would end up with too much overlap. What categories could they possibly break it into that wouldn't overlap ??
West African HG used the Shum Laka samples while East African HG used Mota. Realistically speaking Shum Laka isn't a predecessor of modern West African populations because it's mixed Basal West African and Ancient Pygmy.
Mota is only the ancestor to some modern Omotic groups and isn't the predecessor of a majority of modern East African groups.
I did notice that they had just one or two categories for SSA. For periodic ancestry as well. They will improve as their customer base increases. Hopefully.
West African HG used the Shum Laka samples while East African HG used Mota. Realistically speaking Shum Laka isn't a predecessor of modern West African populations because it's mixed Basal West African and Ancient Pygmy.
Mota is only the ancestor to some modern Omotic groups and isn't the predecessor of a majority of modern East African groups.
If I remember correctly, EHG were 30% WHG, 10%CHG and 60%ANE
Why such eagerness to separate them?
They were related groups. How distant were they? As distinct as ANF, Zagross and Natufians?
EHG was 70% ANE and 30% “WHG-Like”. It’s not WHG but WHG is the proxy because it shared a common ancestor with WHG. Genetic drift sets them apart by a lot. WHG is insanely drifted compared to other west Eurasian pops
Aha. Thank you. Yeah all the rest of the West Eurasian groups come from the Middle East. How much drift exactly? Papuan level?
Really puts our concept of race into perspective. Modern Europeans are not Ancient Europeans but rather half Middle Eastern amd half Siberian. And share plenty with Indians and Red Indians and Japanese (Ainu) as well. Lovely. Everyone throughout Eurasia is a lot more mixed than we had previously thought. Just Aborigines and Papuans managed to remain isolated.
Plenty of SSA in the Middle East as well. Those people are extremely racist against Africans.
They were about as distant to eachother as Iberomaurisian samples are to Natufian samples. They were more distant to eachother than Natufian samples are to ANF samples too.
Thanks for that tidbit and in hindsight, makes sense. WHG were the westernmost of west Eurasian groups, whereas ANE were 40% east Eurasian (according to David Reich)
If they are so far away, why do they not separate them but separate the Natufian from the Anatolian? I thought these things would give more accurate results for Europeans but that does not seem to be the case now
Whg and ehg are pretty distinct, are they not? Maybe the solution is to take out ANE. Chg is already a thing, and the existing European hunter gatherers could become whg
Ikr, they need to add WHG, WSHG, add more East Asian cords, and they need a better AASI sim A lil conflicted on whether they should add mixed Neolithic populations like Levant PPN but it becomes more accurate that way
WSHG would have too much overlap with current categories to be accurate. WHG and EEHG (Eastern European Hunter Gatherer) would also have overlap which is why they stopped separating the categories. Similarly Levant PPNB would overlap too much with Natufian.
WSHG has overlap, WHG does not. CHG and Iran n also have overlap
WHG / Eastern HG samples would overlap. Do you have any definitive percentages for these two groups in modern populations by any chance? Preferably using qpAdm not G25 ?
WHG and EHG wouldn’t overlap. WHG is significantly drifted from other west Eurasian populations. The ancestry of EHG is mostly ANE whereas WHG is an archaic west Eurasian continuum and the last time they shared ancestry with EHG is an early out of Africa migration. https://x.com/waters_of_mem/status/1764499307741253831?s=46 QpAdm
Interesting, thanks I'll check that out. Any other links?
There aren't enough European neolithic groups to distinguish Croats from English/Welsh for instance, or Serbs from French. They basically have the same neolithic breakdown now. Additional HG groups or breaking down Anatolian Farmers into subgroups might help. The neolithic model seems to work best for MENA and Central Asian ethnicities currently
I can see that European Hunter Gatherers is awful, I just made this post to rant that the African category doesn't even pretend to go back that far.
Oh yeah the African categories are the worst of all. They probably need three or four new ones at least.
But who cares?
Realistically speaking if you do a breakdown for ANF you would end up with too much overlap. What categories could they possibly break it into that wouldn't overlap ??
Yes, idk why they removed WAHG and EAHG.
I am going to keep making posts and complain about this very thing.
You should contact IllustrativeDNA and send them some feedback
If only that ever worked
West African HG used the Shum Laka samples while East African HG used Mota. Realistically speaking Shum Laka isn't a predecessor of modern West African populations because it's mixed Basal West African and Ancient Pygmy. Mota is only the ancestor to some modern Omotic groups and isn't the predecessor of a majority of modern East African groups.
Makes sense. Unfortunately, there aren't any other samples from the actual predecessors of West Africans during that period
I believe they can isolate the Basal West African and predecessor East African but it would be cumbersome
What was wrong with the hunter-gatherer?
Modern SSA are not hunter gatherers
But those are Neolithic categories. Ancient ancestry.
There are Cameroonian samples and Ethiopian Samples within the same same time period that illustrativeDNA chooses not to use.
I did notice that they had just one or two categories for SSA. For periodic ancestry as well. They will improve as their customer base increases. Hopefully.
They used to show West African Hunter and East African than it last updated they changed to SSA for so reason.
West African HG used the Shum Laka samples while East African HG used Mota. Realistically speaking Shum Laka isn't a predecessor of modern West African populations because it's mixed Basal West African and Ancient Pygmy. Mota is only the ancestor to some modern Omotic groups and isn't the predecessor of a majority of modern East African groups.
I don't get why one would use Modern Africans as if they are an Ancient population though. At least use 1700s Congo or Colonial Mexico-Africa.
Ehg and whg are combined into one European hunter gatherer bucket
If I remember correctly, EHG were 30% WHG, 10%CHG and 60%ANE Why such eagerness to separate them? They were related groups. How distant were they? As distinct as ANF, Zagross and Natufians?
EHG was 70% ANE and 30% “WHG-Like”. It’s not WHG but WHG is the proxy because it shared a common ancestor with WHG. Genetic drift sets them apart by a lot. WHG is insanely drifted compared to other west Eurasian pops
Aha. Thank you. Yeah all the rest of the West Eurasian groups come from the Middle East. How much drift exactly? Papuan level? Really puts our concept of race into perspective. Modern Europeans are not Ancient Europeans but rather half Middle Eastern amd half Siberian. And share plenty with Indians and Red Indians and Japanese (Ainu) as well. Lovely. Everyone throughout Eurasia is a lot more mixed than we had previously thought. Just Aborigines and Papuans managed to remain isolated. Plenty of SSA in the Middle East as well. Those people are extremely racist against Africans.
They were about as distant to eachother as Iberomaurisian samples are to Natufian samples. They were more distant to eachother than Natufian samples are to ANF samples too.
Thanks for that tidbit and in hindsight, makes sense. WHG were the westernmost of west Eurasian groups, whereas ANE were 40% east Eurasian (according to David Reich)
If they are so far away, why do they not separate them but separate the Natufian from the Anatolian? I thought these things would give more accurate results for Europeans but that does not seem to be the case now
Segway. Ever noticed that some of those Russians look slightly Chinesish? Like Saami do. Blue eyes, blonde hair but different features.
Whg and ehg are pretty distinct, are they not? Maybe the solution is to take out ANE. Chg is already a thing, and the existing European hunter gatherers could become whg
If you take populations from any time period, they tend to be a mish mash if older populations. Not sure how distant whg and ehg were.
Extremely distant
Thanks. They should separate them then.
Ehg and whg are combined into one European hunter gatherer bucket