FTDNA has launched a new “Ancient Origins” analysis, and I’ve been asked a few times now what I think of the “Metal Age invader” component in this test. Essentially, I share the view of one of the commentators in the comments here.
FTDNA now models Europeans as a mix of hunter-gatherers (Loschbour, La Brana 1 and Motala), early European farmers (Stuttgart, Iceman, LBK) and so called “Metal Age invaders” which are based on Corded Ware and Yamnaya samples – so the latter is what we more typically call “steppe admixture”. (Plus they add non-European admixture in case someone has it very evidently.) This model looks crude for our present-day standards, and their results look very different from what I’ve seen here in Davidski’s analyses or in other ancient-DNA calculators on Gedmatch, as their inferred proportions of steppe admixture are much lower, about half of that inferred by others. And moreover to me it looks completely wrong that FTDNA suggests that I (1/4 Italian, strong southwest European component) have more Metal Age invader admixture than my fully East Prussian grandmother.
Indeed, any Early Bronze Age Steppe-inspired component should peak at 40-50% amongst Northern and Eastern Euros. This apparently doesn’t. Why? No idea. I know better than almost anyone else that there’s no such thing as a perfect ancestry test, and FTDNA has every right to offer an experimental analysis to its clients, so let’s leave it at that. But if you want to see what an ADMIXTURE test with a half-decent Yamnaya component looks like, then check out my attempt [HERE]. These are graphs from the linked blog entry showing inferred levels of Yamnaya-related ancestry proportions for Europeans and West Asians.
Wolfgang Haak et al., Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe, bioRxiv, Posted February 10, 2015, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/013433
See also… The Metal Age invader that never was #2
Source Eurogenes Blog
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий