Black Irish come from R1b Iranians?

[joeyc]

Not just you, but the Italian gene pool.

There is no Italian gene pool, muchacho. Italians are genetically less homogeneous than Slavs as whole (Including South Slavs).

Funny coming from the guy who desperately wants to put a lot of reliability on "prediction" studies using only 1 SNP. Plus the SNPs that Brisighelli et al. used are AIMS (ancestry-informative markers), you don't need huge numbers of those to get reliable results. Italians had higher levels of both Asian and African AIMS than any other Europeans sampled in that study, including the Portuguese.

Brisighelli et al. uses the 52 SNPs genotyped according to Sánchez et al. 2006

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?...eotide polymorphisms for human identification

Indeed comparing genome wide studies (which require 300.000/1.000.000 of SNPs to be reliable) with pigmentation prediction studies, is very clever.

Check again, because Italians are also scoring it. And Boutique et al. is about IBDs, not quite the same as admixture analysis the way you have in mind. IBDs are about shared ancestry. Several possibilities can be conjured up to explain it.

Botigué et al. has also an admixture analysis.

Look how Iberians (And, Gal, Spa, Por, Canls...) are the only Europeans scoring significant amount of both SSA (light blue) and Magrebi (Orange) admixtures.

 

[Drac II]

There is no Italian gene pool, muchacho. Italians are genetically less homogeneous than Slavs as whole (Including South Slavs).

Sure there is, bambino, just like in any other country.

Brisighelli et al. uses the 52 SNPs genotyped according to Sánchez et al. 2006

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?...eotide polymorphisms for human identification

Indeed comparing genome wide studies (which require 300.000/1.000.000 of SNPs to be reliable) with pigmentation prediction studies, is very clever.

Indeed it is, since pigmentation seems like a more complex and less explored subject than ancestry markers. Even haplogroups have been used for such purposes for decades. It is only more recently that we have started seeing these pigmentation prediction attempts. Plus with AIMS you don't need such huge numbers of markers. Huckins et al. 2014 used as little as 25 markers and still obtained good results.

Botigué et al.

has also an admixture analysis.

Look how Iberians (And, Gal, Spa, Por, Canls...) are the only Europeans scoring significant amount of both SSA (light blue) and Magrebi (Orange) admixtures.

Yes, it is the same one I gave the link for, and if you bother to look at K=6 you will notice that "And", "Gal" and "Spa" don't show any SSA, while "Ita" still does.

 

[joeyc]

Sure there is, bambino, just like in any other country.

No there isn't. Do not try teach me things about my country.

Indeed it is, since pigmentation seems like a more complex and less explored subject than ancestry markers. Even haplogroups have been used for such purposes for decades. It is only more recently that we have started seeing these pigmentation prediction attempts. Plus with AIMS you don't need such huge numbers of markers. Huckins et al. 2014 used as little as 25 markers and still obtained good results.

Huckins et al. 2014 used 25 AIMs for PCA plot, not for an admixture analysis, which is a computer algorithm designed for large numbers of SNPs.

Yes, it is the same one I gave the link for, and if you bother to look at K=6 you will notice that "And", "Gal" and "Spa" don't show any SSA, while "Ita" still does.

Yes because the SSA got sucked in the North African component (very high in Iberians and almost zero in Italy).

 

[Drac II]

No there isn't. Do not try teach me things about my country.

So Italy must be the only country in the world without a gene pool. You should communicate this amazing discovery to geneticists.

Huckins et al. 2014 used 25 AIMs for PCA plot, not for an admixture analysis, which is a computer algorithm designed for large numbers of SNPs.

Kosoy et al. 2009, Ruiz-Narvaez et al. 2011 also used small numbers of AIMS in studies regarding admixture. There is a reason why no other geneticists -at least that I am aware of- have criticized that part of Brisighelli et al.'s study. They did not do anything outrageous or that is considered some sort of capital mistake in genetics. You don't need humongous quantities of AIMS to get good results.

Plus another thing: all the other European samples in the study got the exact same 52 AIMS "treatment". It was not like it was only the Italians who did and everyone else got a higher set of ancestry informative markers. It was Italians who scored higher than all others using the same AIMS. Even if we accepted that the 9.2% might be an inflated percentage due to low AIMS, it would obviously also mean that it is also proportionally inflated for everyone else as well. So even if we reduced the actual percentage by, say, half, Italians would still score higher than even Portuguese.

Yes because the SSA got sucked in the North African component (very high in Iberians and almost zero in Italy).

If it got "sucked in" then it probably wasn't SSA to begin with.

 

[joeyc]

So Italy must be the only country in the world without a gene pool. You should communicate this amazing discovery to geneticists.

Italy has not an homogeneous gene pool. So you can't generalize a statement regarding DNA for the whole country.

Kosoy et al. 2009, Ruiz-Narvaez et al. 2011 also used small numbers of AIMS in studies regarding admixture. There is a reason why no other geneticists -at least that I am aware of- have criticized that part of Brisighelli et al.'s study. They did not do anything outrageous or that is considered some sort of capital mistake in genetics. You don't need humongous quantities of AIMS to get good results.

Plus another thing: all the other European samples in the study got the exact same 52 AIMS "treatment". It was not like it was only the Italians who did and everyone else got a higher set of ancestry informative markers. It was Italians who scored higher than all others using the same AIMS. Even if we accepted that the 9.2% might be an inflated percentage due to low AIMS, it would obviously also mean that it is also proportionally inflated for everyone else as well. So even if we reduced the actual percentage by, say, half, Italians would still score higher than even Portuguese.

An admixture analysis with only 52 SNPs is not reliabe, muchacho. The computer algorithm was designed to work with hundreds of thousands of SNPs, not 52.

I don't think you really understand how admixture analysis really works.

If it got "sucked in" then it probably wasn't SSA to begin with.

North Africans score 20% SSA on average. Of course the SSA among Iberians will get sucked in North African cluster on the higher Ks. That's not rocket science.

 

[mihaitzateo]

Lol,why some people here thinks that having African admixture is shameful?
Or that being dark is related to African admixture?
There are plenty of darker Romanians,but their admixture is neither containing African or South Asian,instead,is of other Asian source,this darkness (Central or East Asian).
Besides,Eastern Europeans are very light skinned but well known for being very corrupt,very trouble makers (see Russians & Ukrainians,alto Latvia&Lithuania) so light skin does not tell too much about civilization and education.
Eastern Europeans were in contact,or even mixed,with Tatars,Mongols and so on and from here they are so trouble makers and lacked of education.(is
not inherited by genes but by the way in which people are behaving and what are the values for the people and so on ).
I can show you people from Central Asia living in tents and eating raw flesh and being very cruel and backward ,with light blue eyes and skin as white as paper.

 

[Drac II]

Italy has not an homogeneous gene pool. So you can't generalize a statement regarding DNA for the whole country.

Technically speaking, no country has a homogeneous gene pool. So there is nothing unique here. That still doesn't prevent countries from having gene pools. Countries way more diverse than Italy, like Brazil, for example, still have gene pools.

An admixture analysis with only 52 SNPs is not reliabe, muchacho. The computer algorithm was designed to work with hundreds of thousands of SNPs, not 52.

I don't think you really understand how admixture analysis really works.

Yes, bambino, I am sure that you know better than all these geneticists who write admixture studies using AIMS.

North Africans score 20% SSA on average. Of course the SSA among Iberians will get sucked in North African cluster on the higher Ks. That's not rocket science.

Says who? Last time I checked North Africans show a wide varying range of SSA admixture, so it would depend on what North Africans we are talking about. Plus they must not be very informative markers if they can't distinguish two different populations. Plus Middle Easterners, of which Italy has plenty of, also have a varying range of SSA. It seems that it did not cause the SSA in the Italian sample to completely "vanish".

 

[joeyc]

Technically speaking, no country has a homogeneous gene pool. So there is nothing unique here. That still doesn't prevent countries from having gene pools. Countries way more diverse than Italy, like Brazil, for example, still have gene pools.

You are working on semantics here. None has denied that there is an Italian genepool. I've just denied that the Italian genepool is homogeneous. Indeed it's the less homogeneous in Europe.

Yes, bambino, I am sure that you know better than all these geneticists who write admixture studies using AIMS.

The accuracy of the admixture analysis is directly proportional to the number of SNPs used. 99% of geneticists know that.

Says who? Last time I checked North Africans show a wide varying range of SSA admixture, so it would depend on what North Africans we are talking about. Plus they must not be very informative markers if they can't distinguish two different populations. Plus Middle Easterners, of which Italy has plenty of, also have a varying range of SSA. It seems that it did not cause the SSA in the Italian sample to completely "vanish".

I am talking about the North Africans used in this study, who have plenty of SSA. The North African cluster, which appears on the high Ks, is centered on them.

And Italians have barely any SSA the lower Ks, which are the most informative when it comes to showing SSA admixture.

 

[Drac II]

You are working on semantics here. None has denied that there is an Italian genepool. I've just denied that the Italian genepool is homogeneous. Indeed it's the less homogeneous in Europe.

I am going by what you wrote, and you clearly originally wrote: "there is no Italian gene pool, muchacho" (???)

The accuracy of the admixture analysis is directly proportional to the number of SNPs used. 99% of geneticists know that.

Unfortunately, not all SNPs are as useful for such purposes, therefore geneticists create sets of them to be used, like AIMS. Like I showed you before, it is known that you don't need huge amounts of these to get good results in genetic studies.

I am talking about the North Africans used in this study, who have plenty of SSA. The North African cluster, which appears on the high Ks, is centered on them.

And Italians have barely any SSA the lower Ks, which are the most informative when it comes to showing SSA admixture.

Says who? Youm? Higher Ks are considered more informative. Plus the Middle Eastern sample has actually more SSA than some of the North African samples.

 

[joeyc]

[/I]

I am going by what you wrote, and you clearly originally wrote: "there is no Italian gene pool, muchacho" (???)

And after that I've said "there is not a homogeneous Italian genepool. So what's your point?

Unfortunately, not all SNPs are as useful for such purposes, therefore geneticists create sets of them to be used, like AIMS. Like I showed you before, it is known that you don't need huge amounts of these to get good results in genetic studies.

That's not how Admixture Analysis works. Otherwise 99% of Admixture Analysis would not use hundreds of thousands of SNPs.

Says who? Youm? Higher Ks are considered more informative. Plus the Middle Eastern sample has actually more SSA than some of the North African samples.

On the higher Ks, some components hide some signals because many clusters are centered on Admixed populations. So the runs with many Ks are less informative than the ones with less Ks. The Qataris have much less SSA than any North African. Check better.

 

[Drac II]

And after that I've said "there is not a homogeneous Italian genepool. So what's your point?

Only after you persisted in claiming that Italy had no gene pool.

That's not how Admixture Analysis works. Otherwise 99% of Admixture Analysis would not use hundreds of thousands of SNPs.

Different researchers prefer different methods. The ones who use AIMS often don't use such large numbers of markers.

On the higher Ks, some components hide some signals because many clusters are centered on Admixed populations. So the runs with many Ks are less informative than the ones with less Ks. The Qataris have much less SSA than any North African. Check better.

Look around genetics blogs/forums, the highger Ks are considered more informative. The Qataris at k=6 have more "blue" than 3 of the North African samples.

 

[joeyc]

Look around genetics blogs/forums, the highger Ks are considered more informative. The Qataris at k=6 have more "blue" than 3 of the North African samples.

Look around blogs??? Components centered on admixed populations like North Africans, hide other signals. That's why runs on lower Ks are more informative when it comes to showing SSA admixture. I could make countless of examples, but anyone with a mean IQ above average will agree with me.

 

[Drac II]

Look around blogs??? Components centered on admixed populations like North Africans, hide other signals. That's why runs on lower Ks are more informative when it comes to showing SSA admixture. I could make countless of examples, but anyone with a mean IQ above average will agree with me.

If you look around genetic blogs/forums, the consensus seems to be that the higher Ks are better.

Since Qataris are also "admixed" then they should also "hide" it. It doesn't seem they are doing a very good job at it, though.

 

[joeyc]

Dude you makes no sense. Lower Ks are more informative when it comes to showing SSA admixture. That's the truth.

You are either just kidding or are simply mentally challenged.

 

[Drac II]

Dude you makes no sense. Lower Ks are more informative when it comes to showing SSA admixture. That's the truth.

You are either just kidding or are simply mentally challenged.

This "law" is written where exactly?

 

[joeyc]

This "law" is written where exactly?

It's official. You are mentally challenged.

 

[MOESAN]

[/I][/COLOR]

Technically speaking, no country has a homogeneous gene pool. So there is nothing unique here. That still doesn't prevent countries from having gene pools. Countries way more diverse than Italy, like Brazil, for example, still have gene pools.

that said, it is true that Italy on plottings and other "distance"maps whatever their value, shows a VERY VERY STRETCHED picture from N-Italians close to Iberians (it could be refined after some time?) to Sicilians and southern Italians closer to Greeks: no central or western Europe country shows a so big difference between regions, for I know, taking in account the current knowledge...
by the way, you can name me "bambino" if you want, I'm 65's and it would please me...
no offence, of course!

 

[Drac II]

It's official. You are mentally challenged.

I never claimed to be an expert on the relative values of Ks, I am just going by what I have seen in genetic blogs/forums that higher Ks seem to be considered as more accurate. But if you can point out a study that validates your point then do so.

 

[Knovas]

Look how Iberians (And, Gal, Spa, Por, Canls...) are the only Europeans scoring significant amount of both SSA (light blue) and Magrebi (Orange) admixtures.

The Sub-Saharan references aren't the best at all, since only Yorubas are included and they carry some West Eurasian ancestry related to North Africa. No Biaka Pygmies, no Mbuti Pygmies, no San, and so on. Also, excluding East Eurasian populations does not help, since it obviously affects the purple component as well as the yellow one to a lesser extent.

Even ignoring such evident methodological problems, the low amount of "SSA" (also present in some Italian and even Basque samples, which is quite rare among the later) is simply ridiculous to be taken seriously if one does not have an agenda. That doesn't change phenotype so drastically as some individuals would like to hear.

It only can be concluded that it's all about some people's hate. Otherwise, we wouldn't be discussing insignificant figures.

Time to keep on topic, please.

 

[Degredado]

Funny how these concepts change over time... in the days when the Mediterranean was the center of the world, Greeks prided themselves in being olive-skinned and in being darker than the "barbarians" from the North (and also in being lighter than the Egyptians, it's true). Now that we live in an era of Anglo-Germanic "supremacy", everyone in Southern Europe (and other places) wants to claim light skin and light eyes, and abuse each other for possibly being slightly darker than the other.

I can imagine Germans 2000 years ago having these passionate disputes over who had darker hair and darker eyes (and thus more similar to the Romans)