Greek Gedmatch Results - with ancestry from various parts of the country

[lacreme]

These extractors are not very reliable, in general. Only way to know for sure, it's to test. Morley gives me some outdated branch of U152, which couldn't be further from the actual truth, other than both (my clade and morley's prediction) being downstreams of M269.

But in any case will his subclade definitely be downstream of I1 ? Or could be something unrelated like I2 or some kind of J or even further away ?

[Johnny ola]

Target: Chris_scaled
Distance: 2.0599% / 0.02059906
39.0 Anatolia_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
28.8 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
25.2 Anatolia_Barcin_N
7.0 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N

[dosas]

But in any case will his subclade definitely be downstream of I1 ? Or could be something unrelated like I2 or some kind of J or even further away ?

Only way to know is to test properly, I am afraid. FTDNA has some cheaper entry options.

[Johnny ola]

Your friend has a decent west asian input,it is probably coming from his West Anatolian type of ancestry thought.His Iran N more specific not CHG.

[Greekscholar]

Here are some screenshots from some modern Greek population averages, your friend, and myself (to represent the NE_Aegean islands.) The model was created by Sorcelow, one of the Greek posters on this site. The first result is normal, the second is with a small penalty added to clear out some of the noise. As the other PCAs and models have shown, your friend is very close to the average for Smyrna Greeks. You can see that the Smyrna average is intermediate between the Mainland averages and the Aegean averages in regard to West Asian and Steppe.

[dosas]

snip

The components in those tables are arbitrarily named and misleading. Greek_Thrace scoring 47.2 'Central-Med', what is that even supposed to mean, ?

[Greekscholar]

Lastly, here is my 4-part Bronze Age model for Greeks. This one shows off your friend's West Asian (as Johnny noticed from another model) component.

[dosas]

Johny's model of neolithic components is the correct one. Greek_Thrace's breakdown in those tables is just hilarious, no offense, greekscholar, I know you mean well.

[Greekscholar]

The components in those tables are arbitrarily named and misleading. Greek_Thrace scoring 47.2 'Central-Med', what is that even supposed to mean, ?

If memory serves, it includes Mycenaean, Italic, and some of the Balkan Iron Age samples. For Greeks it seems to be a proxy for Mycenaean, although as you note, the fit is poor for the Thracian sample (I have yet to find a model that does work for this one.) I like this model because it is consistent for individual samples as well as group averages and is normally able to differentiate Southern Italians from Greeks (as well as any test can.)

[Greekscholar]

Johny's model of neolithic components is the correct one. Greek_Thrace's breakdown in those tables is just hilarious, no offense, greekscholar, I know you mean well.

???

Both models I posted work well for you, I think. I am open to any ideas on how to model that one Thracian sample. I have never been able to get a good fit for it.

Target: dosas_scaled
Distance: 2.5346% / 0.02534622
41.4 GRC_Mycenaean
38.0 ARM_LBA
10.6 Levant_Canaanite_MBA
10.0 Baltic_LTU_BA


Target: dosas_scaled
Distance: 2.4154% / 0.02415366
48.0 Central_Med
27.0 West_Asian
15.4 Steppe
7.0 Baltic
1.8 Red_Sea
0.8 Oceanian

Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 1.1314% / 0.01131409
50.4 Central_Med
28.0 Steppe
12.6 Baltic
7.8 West_Asian
1.0 Red_Sea
0.2 East_Asian

Target: Greek_Trabzon
Distance: 2.9450% / 0.02945020
48.2 West_Asian
45.0 Central_Med
6.2 Red_Sea
0.6 Steppe