Clustering of human populations

[Dienekes]

From the new Rosenberg paper, shows distinctly the major racial groups, as well as the extent of admixture in several human populations. Note that the best clustering occurs for K=5 and K=6.

Of particular interest is the complete absence of a Sub-Saharan component in the southern European samples, and the presence of a small Mongoloid component at the eastern outskirts of Europe among the Russians and Adygei, as expected.

[Crimson Guard]

Nice! Sicilians are included in the Italian sample correct?

[Dienekes]

I dont know.

[Crimson Guard]

really? OK! I guess we'll have to assume they where,but they do seperate the Tuscan's & Sardinians here.

[Ilmatar]

Sardinians are probably separated because of their genetic isolation pointed out by Cavalli-Sforza. However, according to this Sardinians are perfectly in line with the remaining Southern Europeans. This could be of course due to different timeframe used in studies (Cavalli-Sforza's "outlies" tend to be such because of the genetic isolation in the past couple of thousands years).

[Planet Asia]

That isn't "racial clustering" Pontikos, read:

"Our evidence for clustering should not be taken as evidence of our support of any particular concept of “biological race.” In general, representations of human genetic diversity are evaluated based on their ability to facilitate further research into such topics as human evolutionary history and the identification of medically important genotypes that vary in frequency across populations. Both clines and clusters are among the constructs that meet this standard of usefulness: for example, clines of allele frequency variation have proven important for inference about the genetic history of Europe [15], and clusters have been shown to be valuable for avoidance of the false positive associations that result from population structure in genetic association studies [16]. The arguments about the existence or nonexistence of “biological races” in the absence of a specific context are largely orthogonal to the question of scientific utility, and they should not obscure the fact that, ultimately, the primary goals for studies of genetic variation in humans are to make inferences about human evolutionary history, human biology, and the genetic causes of disease."


genetics.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pgen.0010070


One again, another layman interpretation of a genetic study by Dienekes, when the author made no such comments about "racial" clusters.

[Agrippa]

If there is a direct correlation to inherited, regionally clustered, phenotypical feature combinations which are RACES - than this genetic characteristics can be linked to races, only a fool can deny that and whether some mentions it or not is of no importance.
Thats like making a big deal out of the difference of a politicians saying: "I knowingly said something wrong to you", or, "you lied". Its basically the same, a try to ignore displeasing facts, to fog the truth.

[Planet Asia]

agrippa said:

If there is a direct correlation to inherited, regionally clustered, phenotypical feature combinations which are RACES - than this genetic characteristics can be linked to races, only a fool can deny that and whether some mentions it or not is of no importance.
Thats like making a big deal out of the difference of a politicians saying: "I knowingly said something wrong to you", or, "you lied". Its basically the same, a try to ignore displeasing facts, to fog the truth.

The point of the matter is that the authors put an emphasis on clustering by geographic regions genetically, not phenotypically. They even pointed out that their study should *NOT* be used for the purpose of determining biological races, but Dienekes posted it as racial clusters which is distorting the true intent and message of the author.

[ndrthl]

Dr. Alan Goodman questions the validity of drawing 'racial borders' here:

www.dodona.proboards35.com/index.cgi?board=racesoc&action=display&thread=1132573111

Ethnic/racial discrepancies involve high levels of complexity, which can lead to many misconceptions.

[Planet Asia]

Not only that, but if we were to try and correlate this genetic study with physical traits *WITHOUT* predefined racial categories there would discordance. Melanesians share a great deal of physical traits with sub-Saharan Africans but you would not know that by looking at this study because genetically there is a huge distance between them. Makrani have more sub-saharan African lineages than Melanesians, but Melanesians look closer to sub-saharan Africans physically, thus there is no concordance with physical traits and lineages.

[Agrippa]

The point of the matter is that the authors put an emphasis on clustering by geographic regions genetically, not phenotypically. They even pointed out that their study should *NOT* be used for the purpose of determining biological races, but Dienekes posted it as racial clusters which is distorting the true intent and message of the author.

True, but do you deny the obvious correlation?

What you said about Melanesids is true, but thats convergent evolution and its interesting that its still possible to distinguish them from East Asian/Mongolids.

The Australo-Melanesid was always seen as something special though some put it in the Negroid category as "East-Negrids" f.e.
But even then the distinction to Africans of a similar (not same) specialisation was made clear.

[Planet Asia]

agrippa said:

The point of the matter is that the authors put an emphasis on clustering by geographic regions genetically, not phenotypically. They even pointed out that their study should *NOT* be used for the purpose of determining biological races, but Dienekes posted it as racial clusters which is distorting the true intent and message of the author.

True, but do you deny the obvious correlation?

What you said about Melanesids is true, but thats convergent evolution and its interesting that its still possible to distinguish them from East Asian/Mongolids.

The Australo-Melanesid was always seen as something special though some put it in the Negroid category as "East-Negrids" f.e.
But even then the distinction to Africans of a similar (not same) specialisation was made clear.

I repeat, if you try to correlate phenotypic traits[not arbitrarily predefined races] with this genetic study you are going to have discordance, thus as the authors have even said, this study should *NOT* be used for racial clusters, thats intentionally misinterpreting this study.

[tictactoe]

bertrand said:

agrippa said:

I repeat, ...should *NOT* .

They found evidence for race, however we should not talk about race. They behave like dogmatic communist founding out that socialism won't work, however we should not talk about that. You behave that way too. With regards to race what are you afraid of?

[Planet Asia]

tictactoe said:

bertrand said:

agrippa said:

I repeat, ...should *NOT* .

They found evidence for race, however we should not talk about race. They behave like dogmatic communist founding out that socialism won't work, however we should not talk about that. You behave that way too. With regards to race what are you afraid of?

This study simply found that people cluster together by geographical region, not race, that was the conclusion of the author, adding to it would be corrupting what it was truly intended for. They state explicitly that their work should be used as proof for race.

[Dienekes]

bertrand said:

That isn't "racial clustering" Pontikos, read:

"Our evidence for clustering should not be taken as evidence of our support of any particular concept of “biological race.”

It is not evidence for any particular concept of biological race. The authors neither deny nor affirm the existence of biological race, which they view as orthogonal to their work.

Of course, the fact that geographical origin and self-identification has been found to map nearly 100% to old notions of "race" "disproves" the existence of race. So, does the observation that clustering occurs because of sharp genetic change in the Himalayas and the Sahara, which just happen, by "accident" to be the traditionally accepted limits of the major races.