Eye Color Probabilities for French Iron Age Samples

Analysis of 34 samples:
Distribution of Eye Colors:
Brown: 22 samples (64.7%)
Blue: 12 samples (35.3%)

Detailed Probabilities:
ATT27: Blue (88%)
ATT3: Brown (79%)
ATT52-2: Blue (91%)
BES1154: Blue (91%)
BUCHA43: Brown (43%)
CHF106: Brown (84%)
CLR23: Brown (51%)
CLR24: Brown (99%)
CLR31: Brown (94%)
CLR35: Brown (98%)
CLR44: Brown (97%)
COL239: Brown (77%)
COL330: Brown (84%)
GGI12-2: Blue (78%)
ERS83-2: Blue (93%)
GDF1231: Brown (79%)
GDF1264: Brown (84%)
GDF1341: Brown (51%)
GDF1348: Brown (99%)
GDF1349B: Brown (99%)
GLN141: Brown (94%)
GGx287B: Blue (91%)
ISE6950: Brown (84%)
PAL170: Brown (92%)
Pech3: Brown (72%)
Pech9: Brown (99%)
PEY73: Blue (95%)
PT7: Brown (97%)
SCPG2: Brown (35%)
UN129: Blue (95%)
UN19: Brown (90%)
UN85: Blue (95%)
VAS75: Blue (90%)
VAS79-2: Brown (91%)
WET429: Blue (96%)
Key Observations:

Brown eye probabilities range from 35% to 99%;
Blue eye probabilities range from 78% to 96%;
15 samples have a probability ≥90% for their predicted color;
Sample BUCHA43 has the lowest probability (43% for brown);
Sample SCPG2 has a relatively low probability (35% for brown);

This analysis shows a predominance of brown eyes in the French Iron Age population, with a significant presence of blue eyes. The probabilities are generally high, suggesting good confidence in these predictions for most samples.

Skin Color Predictions for French Iron Age Samples

Predicted Skin Color:
Intermediate: 82.4% (28 samples);
Unpredictable: 8.8% (3 samples);
Mixed Intermediate: 5.9% (2 samples);
Dark: 2.9% (1 sample).

Skin Pigmentation:
Intermediate: 85.3% (29 samples), probabilities range from 0.5 to 0.95;
Pale: 14.7% (5 samples), probabilities range from 0.48 to 0.8

Second Skin Pigmentation:
Pale: 82.4% (28 samples), probabilities range from 0.09 to 0.44;
Intermediate: 11.8% (4 samples), probabilities range from 0.30 to 0.40;
Dark: 5.9% (2 samples), probabilities of 0.36 and 0.39

Key Observations:
The majority of samples are predicted with intermediate pigmentation.
There is a strong concordance between the main prediction and the first pigmentation.

The second pigmentation shows a trend towards lighter tones.
Intermediate pigmentation probabilities are generally higher than other categories.

Few isolated cases show predictions of dark or mixed skin.
This analysis suggests that the French Iron Age population mainly had intermediate skin color, with a secondary tendency towards lighter tones. The diversity of predictions indicates some variation within the population.

Neanderthal woman reconstruction 2014
@illyrianometer

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-01888-7

Hallstatt populations show a greater genetic affinity with modern French, Spanish, and Belgian populations, while medieval populations from southern Germany (Alemannic and Bavarian) are more similar to present-day Danes, Northern Germans, Dutch, and Scandinavians.
These southern German populations are genetically indistinguishable from Iron Age and medieval groups in northern Germany and Scandinavia. This similarity results from a significant genetic influx from these regions, affecting northern and southern Germany differently.

Most modern Germans fall between the Hallstatt and medieval southern German clusters, suggesting a resurgence of ancestors enriched with Early European Farmer (EEF) ancestry, particularly in southern Germany. The Hallstatt gene pool is dominated by R1b-M269 and G2a-P303 lineages. Individuals bearing the G2a-L497 haplogroup show greater southern European ancestry than those with R1b-M269. Modern Germans can be modeled as a tripartite mix between Hallstatt populations, Romans, and a northeastern European source.

Previous studies on Y-chromosome haplogroups of modern Germans have shown a minor Slavic paternal ancestry (~20%) in eastern Germany, indicating that the medieval Slavic expansion into Europe was a demographic event and not merely linguistic.

@illyrianometer

Neolithic admixture of Albanians from Tirana using qpadm at 2

(Kinda weird results compared to other Albanians)

Coefficient value 0.553 means 55.3%

🧬 Uzbekistan DNA: A Tapestry of Ancestry

Ancient DNA (qpAdm):

🐎 36.7% Proto-Turkic
🌾 20% Anatolian
🐎 19.9% Steppe Proto-Indo-European
🇮🇷 11.9% Iran Neolithic
🌳 6.1% AASI (Ancient Ancestral South Indians)
🌳 2.9% Tarim Basin
🌳 2.5% Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer

🧬 G25 Breakdown:

46.8% Iranic Avestan
🐎 35.4% Proto-Turk
17.8% South Asian

🤝 Genetically close to Hazara outlier population.
@illyrianometer

Admixture among a Post-Medieval Croat

Deep eurasian breakdown of Uzbeks
Caucasoid=60.4%
Mongoloid=34.4%
Australoid=5.2%

Some people claim there is deliberate attempt to make central asia mixed with south asians?


Read a research paper before making such claims

Unlike preceding Copper Age individuals from Turan, people of the BMAC cluster also harbored an additional 2–5% ancestry related (deeply in time) to Andamanese Hunter-Gatherers (AHG).

It is very simple people who don't read research papers often claim works of other people are part of some nationalist agenda





Source:-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6822619/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR15yrWoGg8Dcy6uXpwBGYBuKxGwkVHR35z4v-dj1fiy7mDcXR1GHNCgApM_aem_t9nyNEZqGM_x4vDnPG6ftA

@illyrianometer

Uzbekistan europid/non europid analysis based on pca argument used by ethnic nationalists

Europid cluster is cluster which is formed among populations with steppe,anatolian and Western_Hunter_Gatherer admixture

Non europid contains other group out of europid cluster usually additional non europid components

One may take care this analysis has no Paleolithic definition rather Neolithic to bronze age definition

@illyrianometer