I wanted to share three exploratory results and get feedback from people who understand Horn African ancestry modeling, especially the behavior of Levantine / North African proxies in mixed Horn-related models.

For context, I am **not** treating any of this as a formal ancestry claim. I know G25 distances are not proof of descent, and my qpAdm model was **formally rejected**. I am mainly trying to understand why the same broad pattern keeps appearing.

My qpAdm exploratory run used public AADR references. Across several rounds, no tested model formally passed:

* Round 2: 24 tested, 0 accepted
* Round 3: 96 tested, 0 accepted
* Round 4: 64 tested, 0 accepted
* Round 5: 64 tested, 0 accepted

The least-bad cleaned model was:

**CEU + Tanzania\_Swahili-oNearEast + Lebanon\_IA3**

With approximate weights:

* **CEU:** 41.2% ± 9.2
* **Tanzania\_Swahili-oNearEast:** 38.8% ± 2.6
* **Lebanon\_IA3:** 20.0% ± 9.5

But the p-value was around:

**p ≈ 4.0e-168**

So this is clearly **not** a valid qpAdm ancestry model. I am reading Lebanon\_IA3 only as a possible stand-in for some broader ancient Levantine / Red Sea / Near Eastern-related affinity that is not being captured well by the public reference set.

What makes it interesting is that my G25 “Eurasiatic\_Array\_Scaled” distances seem to pull in two related directions.

First, when compared to modern-ish populations, my closest results are heavily North African:

* **Tunisia: Kef\_Sousse** — 0.0837
* **Algerian: Algerian43A22** — 0.0871
* **Tunisia: Tunisois** — 0.0875
* **Tunisia: Beja** — 0.0883
* **Algerian: ALG100** — 0.0893
* **Tunisia: Msaken** — 0.0895
* **Berber\_Tunisia\_Sen: BerSF8** — 0.0898
* **Berber\_Tunisia\_Sen: BerSF5** — 0.0897
* **Tunisian: Tunisian20D4** — 0.0903
* **Tunisian: Tunisian20F4** — 0.0926

Then, when compared to ancient samples, the closest hits include a lot of African-shifted Mediterranean, Punic, Guanche, and Islamic-period Iberian / North African-like references:

* **Austria\_Ovilava\_Roman\_oAfrica.SG:R10667.SG** — 0.0992
* **CanaryIslands\_Guanche.SG:gun005\_noUDG.SG** — 0.1003
* **England\_Saxon\_oAfrica.SG:EA503.SG** — 0.1050
* **Spain\_NazariPeriod\_LateMuslim:I8146** — 0.1052
* **Punic:I24215** — 0.1080
* **Punic:I1735** — 0.1118
* **Punic:I24673** — 0.1128
* **Italy\_Imperial\_oAfrica.SG:R132.SG** — 0.1131
* **Portugal\_Miroico\_LateRoman\_oAfrica.SG:R10503.SG** — 0.1140
* **Punic:I3528** — 0.1168
* **CanaryIslands\_Guanche.SG:gun008\_noUDG.SG** — 0.1167
* **Punic:I2200** — 0.1208
* **CanaryIslands\_Guanche.SG:gun011\_noUDG.SG** — 0.1209
* **CanaryIslands\_Guanche.SG:gun012\_noUDG.SG** — 0.1222
* **Spain\_BellBeaker\_oAfrica:I4246** — 0.1240
* **Punic:I2405** — 0.1235
* **Spain\_NazariPeriod\_Muslim:I7425** — 0.1263
* **Turkey\_Byzantine\_oAfrica:I8372** — 0.1270
* **Italy\_Sardinia\_IA\_Punic\_1:VIL011** — 0.1287
* **Tunisia\_Punic\_oAfrica2.SG:R1778.SG** — 0.1289
* **Punic:I24039** — 0.1299

My current interpretation is:

The qpAdm result does **not** prove Lebanon\_IA3 ancestry, and the G25 results do **not** prove Punic, Guanche, Tunisian, or North African ancestry. But the repeated pattern may be showing that my “Eurasiatic” side is best approximated by a combination of Northwest European-like ancestry plus Horn/East African-like ancestry plus a Levantine / North African / Red Sea-related component.

In other words, I am wondering whether Lebanon\_IA3 is simply functioning as a generic ancient Near Eastern proxy for something closer to Horn African / Red Sea admixture that is missing from the reference set.

Questions for the subreddit:

1. In Horn African qpAdm modeling, does **Lebanon\_IA3** often appear as a stand-in when closer ancient Ethiopian / Eritrean / Red Sea / Sudanese references are missing?
2. Do close G25 distances to **Tunisian, Algerian, Punic, Guanche, and oAfrica Mediterranean samples** usually indicate real North African-like affinity, or can they appear because those samples are themselves mixtures of African + Mediterranean + Levantine-like ancestry?
3. Would a better qpAdm model probably need ancient or more specific references from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan/Nubia, the Red Sea corridor, or Arabia?
4. Is it reasonable to interpret this as a broad **Horn/East African + West Eurasian + Levantine/North African-like proxy effect**, rather than a literal Punic or Lebanese signal?

Again, I am treating this as exploratory only. I am mainly looking for methodological feedback on proxy behavior, not trying to make a literal ethnic claim from rejected qpAdm or G25 distances.

Exploratory qpAdm rejected, but my G25 “Eurasiatic” distances keep pulling Maghrebi / Punic / Guanche-like. How should I interpret this?