Asia Minor DNA

[malchik]

Some test takers have some percentage of Asia Minor DNA showing up in their results.

I think it is rather funny that people with ancestors from Europe suddenly start thinking about their connections with modern-day Turkey, while others suspect of middle-age connections with Sephardic Jews and some even speculate ancient connections with Hittites...


Where does the reference for comparison come from?

What is the Asia Minor DNA really indicating?

What is the Asia Minor DNA really NOT indicating?

Why is it actually labeled Asia Minor?

How is it labeled in other DNA tests?


Basic questions in the my MyOrigins Basics forum...

Please share your thoughts, maybe some scientific data and of course their sources.

[Armando]

I find over and over that 23andme has results that most closely match well documented genealogy.

[MMaddi]

I find over and over that 23andme has results that most closely match well documented genealogy.

I agree with Armando on this. I would add that the Asia Minor category in myOrigins does seem problematic and subject to speculation.

However, it is the case that FTDNA has explained in public presentations that they've designed myOrigins to pick up ancient ancestry, on the order of 1,000 to several thousand years ago. 23andMe, on the other hand, designed their Ancestry Composition feature to hone in on the last 500 years of ancestry. That's one reason why 23andMe's admixture estimates more accurately reflect the paper trail ancestry of their customers.

Given that those with Italian ancestry are consistently given significantly higher percentages of Asia Minor than those with northern European ancestry, this probably reflects the strong genetic influence in Italy from the Neolithic to as recently as 1,000 years ago from Middle Eastern populations, including from Asia Minor. So, it's certainly plausible that the percentages of Asia Minor given my myOrigins does reflect someone's ancestry, but very deep ancestry. Still, it is a problem that it's misleading to people who take it at face value and begin looking for mystery Middle Eastern ancestry in their tree.

[malchik]

I agree with Armando on this. I would add that the Asia Minor category in myOrigins does seem problematic and subject to speculation.

However, it is the case that FTDNA has explained in public presentations that they've designed myOrigins to pick up ancient ancestry, on the order of 1,000 to several thousand years ago. 23andMe, on the other hand, designed their Ancestry Composition feature to hone in on the last 500 years of ancestry. That's one reason why 23andMe's admixture estimates more accurately reflect the paper trail ancestry of their customers.

Given that those with Italian ancestry are consistently given significantly higher percentages of Asia Minor than those with northern European ancestry, this probably reflects the strong genetic influence in Italy from the Neolithic to as recently as 1,000 years ago from Middle Eastern populations, including from Asia Minor. So, it's certainly plausible that the percentages of Asia Minor given my myOrigins does reflect someone's ancestry, but very deep ancestry. Still, it is a problem that it's misleading to people who take it at face value and begin looking for mystery Middle Eastern ancestry in their tree.

I liked your post, it is very informative. Thank you.

[Laurie_Robinson]

Hello;

So if I'm reading your correctly my MO2 results of:

British Isles: 46%
Scandinavian 22%
West/Central European 15%
Southeastern European 9%
Asia Minor 5%

could actually be picking up a deep ancestry migration route from pre-Turkic (perhaps even pre-Greek/Byzantine) Asia Minor into Europe that goes back thousands of years?

My known ancestry from three grand parents is Scottish, Luxembourgish and Norwegian. The fourth is adopted so unknown, but assumed European origins.

I am fascinated by that 9% South Eastern European and 5% Asia Minor ancestry and how recent it could possibly be. Any thoughts?

[MMaddi]

Hello;

So if I'm reading your correctly my MO2 results of:

British Isles: 46%
Scandinavian 22%
West/Central European 15%
Southeastern European 9%
Asia Minor 5%

could actually be picking up a deep ancestry migration route from pre-Turkic (perhaps even pre-Greek/Byzantine) Asia Minor into Europe that goes back thousands of years?

My known ancestry from three grand parents is Scottish, Luxembourgish and Norwegian. The fourth is adopted so unknown, but assumed European origins.

I am fascinated by that 9% South Eastern European and 5% Asia Minor ancestry and how recent it could possibly be. Any thoughts?

With one grandparent adopted, it's hard to say. The combined 14% Southeastern Europe/Asia Minor could represent about half of the ancestry of the adopted grandparent, which might be Italian (more likely) or Greek. Or it could represent deep ancestry combined from all four grandparents.

The biggest problem is that the new version of myOrigins seems to be right on the mark for some, but totally off the mark for others. It doesn't seem to have a lot of consistency or reliability. There are numerous threads on this board that you can read about the problem.

[vinnie]

I cannot respond in reference to MO v2, but modern Armenians, not modern Turks, were the reference population for the Asia Minor component. MO v1 supposedly represented up to 2K years ago, but I don't know what time span v2 is supposed to represent.

[Tmason]

I found this interesting. My brother and I are showing 9% and 8% Asia Minor, respectively.

Until recently, my mother, who is of Ashkenazi descent, hadn't been tested, so I just assumed the "Asia Minor" stuff came from her Jewish heritage. But when she was tested, she didn't have any Asia Minor, so it must have come from my father's side. But they are "British" as far back as I've been able to trace, so I don't know why anyone should be showing a non-trivial Asia Minor component.

[MMaddi]

I found this interesting. My brother and I are showing 9% and 8% Asia Minor, respectively.

Until recently, my mother, who is of Ashkenazi descent, hadn't been tested, so I just assumed the "Asia Minor" stuff came from her Jewish heritage. But when she was tested, she didn't have any Asia Minor, so it must have come from my father's side. But they are "British" as far back as I've been able to trace, so I don't know why anyone should be showing a non-trivial Asia Minor component.

You may be experiencing what I described as a serious problem with myOrigins 2.0 in my previous post above: "The biggest problem is that the new version of myOrigins seems to be right on the mark for some, but totally off the mark for others. It doesn't seem to have a lot of consistency or reliability. There are numerous threads on this board that you can read about the problem."

In your case, with no known ancestry that comes from southern or southeastern Europe, you may be seeing the reliability problem of the estimates or the Asia Minor may represent deep ancestry that is being picked up. The previous version of myOrigins did specify that estimates could reflect ancestry from up to several thousand years ago. Perhaps the new version is doing the same in some cases.

[Tmason]

Hmmm. I just checked what I used to be under MO 1. I was still 5% Asia Minor according to that. So it's actually gone up!

I don't know if either estimate is (a) a problem, (b) something very ancient that need not concern us when researching recent ancestors, or (c) something more recent that we just don't know.

I know looks are one of the least reliable or scientific methods for estimating anyone's ancestry, but my father and his mother were unusually dark-skinned, for northern Europeans. If they had been presented as "part-Turkish", I don't believe anybody would have questioned it for a minute. They were darker than my Jewish family!

In the British New Year tradition of "first footing", where the darkest available adult male for some reason carries a lump of coal through the house, the honour always fell to my dad.

[winner]

I found this interesting. My brother and I are showing 9% and 8% Asia Minor, respectively.

Until recently, my mother, who is of Ashkenazi descent, hadn't been tested, so I just assumed the "Asia Minor" stuff came from her Jewish heritage. But when she was tested, she didn't have any Asia Minor, so it must have come from my father's side. But they are "British" as far back as I've been able to trace, so I don't know why anyone should be showing a non-trivial Asia Minor component.

My ancestors are from the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal), mainly. But, I have ancestors from the Netherlands, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Native Americans, Africans, Moors, Arabs, Phoenicians, and, maybe, Persians and Syrians. I had 8% of Asia Minor. Now, I have <2% of Asia Minor. I had no Ashkenazi. Now, I have 2% Ashkenazi. My ancestors were Sephardic Jews, mainly.

[winner]

My ancestors are from the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal), mainly. But, I have ancestors from the Netherlands, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Native Americans, Africans, Moors, Arabs, Phoenicians, and, maybe, Persians and Syrians. I had 8% of Asia Minor. Now, I have <2% of Asia Minor. I had no Ashkenazi. Now, I have 2% Ashkenazi. My ancestors were Sephardic Jews, mainly.

My mother had no Asia Minor. Now, she has <1% of Asia Minor and <1% of West Middle East.

[khazaria]

I had no Ashkenazi. Now, I have 2% Ashkenazi. My ancestors were Sephardic Jews, mainly.

Winner,
Genealogical ancestry doesn't always match genetic ancestry.

You've been referring repeatedly, for years, to your "Sephardic" ancestors. It might, perhaps, be true that your paper trail includes a Sephardi Converso immigrant or two who immigrated from Iberia to Brazil, but as you know from our earlier conversations, after I did a deep investigation of your GEDmatch and Family Finder matches, I found that you and your mother do not match any Jews on any valid triangulating autosomal DNA segments - neither Ashkenazic Jews nor Sephardic Jews.

Your "Ashkenazi" reading in MyOrigins 2.0 is noise. Neither that nor your "West Middle East" reading reflect Sephardic DNA, in your case.

[winner]

Winner,
Genealogical ancestry doesn't always match genetic ancestry.

You've been referring repeatedly, for years, to your "Sephardic" ancestors. It might, perhaps, be true that your paper trail includes a Sephardi Converso immigrant or two who immigrated from Iberia to Brazil, but as you know from our earlier conversations, after I did a deep investigation of your GEDmatch and Family Finder matches, I found that you and your mother do not match any Jews on any valid triangulating autosomal DNA segments - neither Ashkenazic Jews nor Sephardic Jews.

Your "Ashkenazi" reading in MyOrigins 2.0 is noise. Neither that nor your "West Middle East" reading reflect Sephardic DNA, in your case.

khazaria, now I give up of DNA. Unfortunately, the companies are not able finding Sephardic ancestry of Conversos from Brazil, in the 1400's, 1300's. I have a lot of Sephardic Jews as ancestors, not two or three. Sorry, you are geneticists. However, the rabbies don't accept DNA tests as proof of Jewish ancestry. Genealogy is more important. I stop with DNA tests, right now. Please, don't reply this message!

GOODBYE!

[khclm]

Genealogy doesn't prove Jewish blood, it proves an affiliation to Jewish communities.

Genetics, however, can indicate how much the affiliation to Jewish communities is backed up by Jewish genes.

Maybe in the MyOrigins 3.0, the Jewish genes will pop up...