PDA

View Full Version : Reason Why Near Eastern People Score Zero Or Negative WHG Scores



J Man
12-14-2014, 09:30 PM
Why do Near Eastern peoples who do the EEF-WHG-ANE test from Eurogenes get zero or even negative scores for the WHG component? Is it because they actually do not have any true WHG type ancestry? For example I have seen an Assyrian's results where he/she scores -7.61% in the WHG component on this test. Why is that exactly?

http://bga101.blogspot.ca/2013/12/eef-whg-ane-test-for-europeans.html

DMXX
12-14-2014, 10:06 PM
Presumably because EEF itself is (as far as I recall) a composite of a Near-Eastern component and WHG. As WHG doesn't appear to be a contributing component among many Near-Eastern groups (such as the Assyrians), that's expressed in the results as negative WHG and surplus EEF, as the latter is mostly Near-Eastern in origin. It's basically a form of statistical compensation based on the three-way model being tailored specifically for Europeans.

Having said this, not all Near-Easterners are -% WHG; Iranians and Kurds (as well as Armenians if we count them as such) tended to score a few percentage points of WHG despite the above. Why this is the case, I am uncertain. A steppe origin could be possible (e.g. via Yamnaya, through either actual WHG picked up via the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, or EHG native to Eastern Europe, which I believe Davidski commented was closest to WHG overall).

Kurd
12-14-2014, 10:17 PM
Presumably because EEF itself is (as far as I recall) a composite of a Near-Eastern component and WHG. As WHG doesn't appear to be a contributing component among many Near-Eastern groups (such as the Assyrians), that's expressed in the results as negative WHG and surplus EEF, as the latter is mostly Near-Eastern in origin. It's basically a form of statistical compensation based on the three-way model being tailored specifically for Europeans.

Having said this, not all Near-Easterners are -% WHG; Iranians and Kurds (as well as Armenians if we count them as such) tended to score a few percentage points of WHG despite the above. Why this is the case, I am uncertain. A steppe origin could be possible (e.g. via Yamnaya, through either actual WHG picked up via the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, or EHG native to Eastern Europe, which I believe Davidski commented was closest to WHG overall).

My opinion echoes DMXX's. Case in point, my WHG is 8.22%.

J Man
12-14-2014, 10:37 PM
Thank you DMXX that makes sense.

ZephyrousMandaru
12-15-2014, 12:40 AM
The EEF component is also partly composed of WHG, so any WHG or WHG-like ancestry is being allotted into the EEF component. This is why Northern Europeans tend to score higher amounts of EEF than they actually should be. Eurogenes ANE K=7 is better at dividing WHG, ANE and ENF. Since ENF is a Near Eastern component that controls for WHG and UHG. Some Middle Eastern ethnic groups, namely those who are speakers of Indo-European languages tend to score higher rates of not only the Near Eastern UHG, but also the European WHG as well.

Krefter
12-15-2014, 01:22 AM
The EEF component is also partly composed of WHG, so any WHG or WHG-like ancestry is being allotted into the EEF component. This is why Northern Europeans tend to score higher amounts of EEF than they actually should be. Eurogenes ANE K=7 is better at dividing WHG, ANE and ENF. Since ENF is a Near Eastern component that controls for WHG and UHG. Some Middle Eastern ethnic groups, namely those who are speakers of Indo-European languages tend to score higher rates of not only the Near Eastern UHG, but also the European WHG as well.

EHG(Eastern European hunter gatherers) are closer to WHG than to MA1(ANE) on this PCA.

http://imageshack.com/a/img540/4412/blmKW4.png

SHG(Scandinavian hunter gatherers) which was ~20% ANE according to ANE K7 are far closer to WHG than to EHG. In my opinion EHG was at the very least 20% WHG(assuming the rest is ANE). So IMO Samara Yamna was ~10% WHG at the very least. That's more than any near easterns have and if you breakdown Indo European one's Yamna-type ancestry their WHG ancestry compared to other near easterns should be slightly higher.

J Man
12-15-2014, 01:55 AM
EHG(Eastern European hunter gatherers) are closer to WHG than to MA1(ANE) on this PCA.

http://imageshack.com/a/img540/4412/blmKW4.png

SHG(Scandinavian hunter gatherers) which was ~20% ANE according to ANE K7 are far closer to WHG than to EHG. In my opinion EHG was at the very least 20% WHG(assuming the rest is ANE). So IMO Samara Yamna was ~10% WHG at the very least. That's more than any near easterns have and if you breakdown Indo European one's Yamna-type ancestry their WHG ancestry compared to other near easterns should be slightly higher.


Which samples make up EHG?

Krefter
12-15-2014, 02:44 AM
Which samples make up EHG?

Davidski somehow got a hold of a PCA created by Reich for his upcoming paper. EHG are Mesolithic samples from Karelia and Samara.

Now Reich and others might attempt to break down modern Euros as EHG, WHG, and EEF. Reich predicted EHG ancestry in CWC(36%), and he may have done the same with some modern Euros. For example Lithuanians can probably fit fairly well as as 30% EHG, 35% WHG, and 35% EEF and Basque can probably fit fairly well as 12% EHG, 28% WHG, and 60% EEF.

alan
12-15-2014, 03:36 AM
I worry about the terms eastern and western HG. The problem is what they are changes over time. During the LGM and even for a while after there was a clear division between the Magdallenian derived groups who were presumably WHG and the late Gravettian groups around the Black Sea/Balkans and adjacent.

However the western group spread very far east in Europe to NW Russia and north Ukraine at some point and would have mixed slightly. Then perhaps around 10000 years ago or more you potentially had Siberian mal'ta type genes coming into north-east Europe and parts of Scandinavia as well as the Ukraine area etc.

So what you will find in eastern and northern Europe the genetics will change over time because mixing happened. If one wanted a pure eastern hunter component prior to mixing then you would need to push back to an earlier date before the western, eastern and Siberian groups started to mix or the original meaning of western and eastern hunter gatherer will be lost.

Note that the western hunter gatherers didnt have a post-LGM input from the east. It was the hunters eastern of a line from the Baltic to the Dniester who had the more complex situation of highly varying inputs of local gravettian, western Magdallenian derived and Siberian derived elements overlapping in the very late Paleolithic and early Mesolithic. To be more precise the north-east of Europe and much of Scandinavia and even the Baltic states were western derived hunters who moved in as the area became viable but who soon after had a small Siberian input added c. 8-9000BC while the area around Ukraine was largely Gravettian but with western tradition hunters on its northern fringes and a similar Siberian input c. 8000-7000BC. So, the results would change over time.

If you really wanted an idea of what pure western European and pure eastern European hunters genetics were like who had survived in those refugia you would have to look back to before 10000BC before the mixing happened. However, at no time did actual eastern hunters move west so any eastern hunter gatherer in far western Europe is a false reading or it was brought by much late post-Neolithic migrants from the east and north who happened to be carrying some of those genes.

True eastern late gravettian European hunters of the sort who had been there in the LGM making mammoth bone houses etc seem to have been located mostly in Ukraine, adjacent parts of the Balkans. There is debate about what happened to them but they didnt break out of eastern Europe so they would not have contributed genes to the west.

My worry is that eastern hunter gatherer could be being defined by samples that post-date the mixing of the three hunter traditions in eastern and therefore already admixed compared to the original situation after the LGM. Motala for example dates to just after possible Siberian elements penetrated Scandinavia so hence he has ANE. His great grandfather may not have had ANE and was likely pure western. What I would really like to see is a pre-Younger Dryas hunter from Ukraine and adjacent - that would give you a good idea of what eastern hunter was.

alan
12-15-2014, 03:51 AM
I should point out that to address the title of this thread that hunters of the western tradition who poured out from the western regugia post-LGM didnt pentrate east of the NW corner of Russia/NW Ukraine in the north, didnt penetrate east of Slovakia in the central Europe and didnt penetrate past even as far as Italy in the south of Europe. So, if this is what WHG represents then we wouldnt expect that WHG to be found in hunters in Italy, the Balkans, most of Ukraine, south Russia etc and we certainly wouldnt expect any to be found outside Europe and in all likelihood any WHG in those regions must have come in much later times - probably post-Neolithic movements. Where there was a dominance of western hunter traditions groups was Iberia, France, the Alps, much of central Europe, Scandinavia etc. As far as I can see this actually does fit rather well given WHG is much lower in Italy, SE Europe and Asia where western tradition hunters never went and I suspect what little is located there is derived from much later movements from western, central and northern Europe right into the historic era.

Krefter
12-15-2014, 03:54 AM
Alan, I know EHG is mixed like EEF. Of course EHG doesn't work perfectly for any Europeans, but it does work pretty well for most. The terminology will keep changing, but for now EHG, WHG, and EEF are working nicely. The WHG is obviously the best out of the three. I feel more confident with EHG than MA-1, because EHG is only 8,000 years old or so. If you divide a modern Euro's ANE score by 60 you can get a general ideal how much EHG they have.

J Man
12-15-2014, 04:06 AM
Davidski somehow got a hold of a PCA created by Reich for his upcoming paper. EHG are Mesolithic samples from Karelia and Samara.

Now Reich and others might attempt to break down modern Euros as EHG, WHG, and EEF. Reich predicted EHG ancestry in CWC(36%), and he may have done the same with some modern Euros. For example Lithuanians can probably fit fairly well as as 30% EHG, 35% WHG, and 35% EEF and Basque can probably fit fairly well as 12% EHG, 28% WHG, and 60% EEF.

Cool we shall have to wait and see.

J Man
12-15-2014, 04:08 AM
Alan, I know EHG is mixed like EEF. Of course EHG doesn't work perfectly for any Europeans, but it does work pretty well for most. The terminology will keep changing, but for now EHG, WHG, and EEF are working nicely. The WHG is obviously the best out of the three. I feel more confident with EHG than MA-1, because EHG is only 8,000 years old or so. If you divide a modern Euro's ANE score by 60 you can get a general ideal how much EHG they have.

I have around 15% ANE so I get 0.25 when dividing 15 by 60. So I have 0.25% EHG ancestry? That does not seem right.


And thinking this way how would one get accurate WHG scores? Division?

Krefter
12-15-2014, 04:36 AM
K01 lived in Hungary about 7,000 years ago had Y DNA I2a and was nearly identical to Loschbour and La Brana-1. There's I2a, I1, and C1a2-V20 along with G2a and F* from Neolithic Hungary. There's also Mesolithic U5b2a5 sample from Croatia.

What would be in southeast Europe during the Mesolithic if not ANE or WHG, something related but different? Like in Scandinavia I doubt the Mesolithic people of SE Europe made much of an effect on modern ones, and for that reason they mostly follow the same trend as other Europeans.

Krefter
12-15-2014, 04:46 AM
I have around 15% ANE so I get 0.25 when dividing 15 by 60. So I have 0.25% EHG ancestry? That does not seem right.


And thinking this way how would one get accurate WHG scores? Division?

Yeah, you probably do have something like 25% EHG ancestry, if not that there's no doubt in my mind you have over 10%. Of course though you get some of your ANE from currently unconfirmed sources, but EHG is the only confirmed one as of far, and probably the main one. If you multiply 40 WHG by 0.25 you get 10 WHG coming from EHG and the rest must be coming from a more western source. This is all based on the assumption that Laz's model is correct and that EHG is 60% ANE and 40% WHG.

Finno-Urgics have the same EHG-signal as IE Europeans, IMO because Uralic languages originated in former EHG territory like IE languages. So your Finnish ANE is probably mostly or entirely EHG to.

vettor
12-15-2014, 09:13 AM
The EEF component is also partly composed of WHG, so any WHG or WHG-like ancestry is being allotted into the EEF component. This is why Northern Europeans tend to score higher amounts of EEF than they actually should be. Eurogenes ANE K=7 is better at dividing WHG, ANE and ENF. Since ENF is a Near Eastern component that controls for WHG and UHG. Some Middle Eastern ethnic groups, namely those who are speakers of Indo-European languages tend to score higher rates of not only the Near Eastern UHG, but also the European WHG as well.

I score 69 EEF and 20 in WHG...........but in K7 test I get a high WHG of 52 ....makes no sense

Tsakhur
01-29-2016, 11:39 PM
The EEF component is also partly composed of WHG, so any WHG or WHG-like ancestry is being allotted into the EEF component. This is why Northern Europeans tend to score higher amounts of EEF than they actually should be. Eurogenes ANE K=7 is better at dividing WHG, ANE and ENF. Since ENF is a Near Eastern component that controls for WHG and UHG. Some Middle Eastern ethnic groups, namely those who are speakers of Indo-European languages tend to score higher rates of not only the Near Eastern UHG, but also the European WHG as well.

Oh so this is what you mean regarding the UHG in Middle East. Most Middle Eastern groups don't have any WHG at all except some Indo-European speakers, North African Berbers (include North Africa in this case) and North Caucasian groups.