how common is this look in iberia?

>TUR_Barcin_N
This sample is itself 60% Natufian so:

41.2 + 19.5 = 60.7% Natufian.
5.1 + 31.4 = 36.5% Natufian.
1.8 + 32.7 = 34.5% Natufian.
3.5 + 31.6 = 35.1% Natufian

Yamnaya were half CHG so I guess Northrons are roughly 25% Churka.

They all have inbred MENA ears
And the italian has Black admixture

4th from right is SS admixed
Italians clearly have Black dna in their gene pool

AHG is a mixture of two components that peak among Natufians and WHG, while Barcin is a mixture of AHG + Iran_N + additional Natufian through the intermediary of Levant_N.

>As expected from AHG’s intermediate position on PCA between Epipaleolithic/Neolithic Levantines and WHG, Patterson’s D- statistics12 of the form D (AHG, WHG; Natufian/Levant_N, Mbuti) ≥ 4.8 SE (standard error) and D (AHG, Natufian/Levant_N; WHG, Mbuti) ≥ 9.0 SE (table 10 S3) indicates that AHG is distinct from both the WHG and Epipaleolithic/Neolithic Levantine populations and yet shares extra affinity with each when compared to the other. Accordingly, we find an adequate two-way admixture model using qpAdm12 (χ p = 0.158), in which AHG derives around half of his ancestry from a Neolithic Levantine-related gene pool (48.0 ± 4.5 %; estimate ± 1 SE) and the rest from the WHG-related one (tables S4 and S5).

Europeans are a mixture of Semites, Ooga Booga spear chuckers, and Steppe rapists.

>AHG is a mixture of two components that peak among Natufians and WHG, while Barcin is a mixture of AHG + Iran_N + additional Natufian through the intermediary of Levant_N.
it's not, stop spreading outdated information

>While these results do not suggest that the AHG gene pool originated as a mixture of Levant_N and WHG, both of which lived millennia later than AHG, it still robustly supports that AHG is genetically intermediate between WHG and Levant_N.

this quote is from the same study btw:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6425003/

these results DO NOT SUGGEST that the ahg is a mixture of the two

and the dzudzuana paper completely destroyed any outdated crap about them being natufian+whg

barcin is not part natufian, it descends from AHG that predates the natufian
and that genetic profile existed far back in time, the duzduzana from the paleolithic plots with the anatolian farmer

before you post that chart that models AHG with natufian+whg, yes it could be modeled that way among other ways but it's not a mixture of the two, that study itself explicitly states that even if modeled like that the AHG predates the natufian by a lot and doesn't descend from natufians

with the dzudzuana from the paleolithic already plotting with anatolian farmers
>We first estimated FST, a measure of population genetic differentiation, to assess the genetic relationships between ancient West Eurasian populations. Post-glacial Near Easterners and North Africans (PGNE) (CHG, Natufians, Taforalt11 Ibero-Maurusians from North Africa, and early Neolithic farmers from Anatolia, Iran, the Levant, and the Maghreb) are strongly differentiated from all European and Siberian hunter-gatherers (ESHG) (FST = 0.078-0.267). By contrast, Dzudzuana is genetically closer to both contemporaneous Gravettians from Europe (0.051±0.012) and also to the much later Neolithic Anatolian farmers (0.039±0.005) who are genetically closest to them according to this measure.
>Outgroup f3-statistics show that Dzudzuana clusters with Near Eastern populations primarily from Anatolia
>A genetic relationship between Dzudzuana and Neolithic Anatolians is also shown by principal components analysis (PCA) in the space of ‘outgroup f4-statistics’16 of the form f4(Test, O1; O2, O3) where (O1; O2, O3) is a triple of outgroups (Fig. 1c; Methods);