Go Back   Family Tree DNA Forums > Family Tree DNA Communications > Announcements and New Features

Announcements and New Features Announcements of changes at Family Tree DNA and to the FTDNA website. This is also for general communications by FTDNA staff.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 5th April 2017, 08:30 PM
LarryBurford LarryBurford is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 195

On FTDNA I did have 35% Scandinavian and 34% British Isles as my top two. I now have 0% Scandinavian and 80% British Isles.

On Ancestry I have.
Great Britain 39%
Europe West 21%
Scandinavia 19%
Ireland 11%
Iberian Peninsula 8%
Italy/Greece 1%
Europe East < 1%

23&me is different also
Northwestern European
British & Irish
French & German
Broadly Northwestern European
Southern European
Broadly Southern European
Eastern European

I have came to the conclusion they are all guessing.

Last edited by LarryBurford; 5th April 2017 at 08:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2017, 08:54 PM
CuriousAdoptee CuriousAdoptee is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 50
My new MyOrigins results are bizarre. I really don't get where the Southwest Europe is coming from.

Three of my four grandparents are 100% German and primarily from Pomerania and Lower Saxony.

British Isles 30%
East Europe 10%
Southeast Europe 17%
West and Central Europe 43%

Euro East used to be 40% and now that's switched to Southeast Europe? I can understand differences in whether Pomerania is considered Euro East or West/Central Europe on different tests but Southeast Europe seems wrong unless it's looking at well over 1000 years ago.

On Ancestry, I have 15% Scandinavian which it seems like many people from Northern Germany have. But SE Europe is strange since neither AncestryDNA nor 23 & Me show that I have any Southeastern European ancestry.
Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2017, 09:23 PM
Frank Kelch Frank Kelch is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 181
Originally Posted by Anizio View Post
...In terms of the Britishness, on one hand it is entirely possible for you to be more "British" than both of your parents...
GreerPalmer clearly said that he is listed as being more British than both his parents combined. Clearly, something is wrong.
Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2017, 09:36 PM
Anizio Anizio is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 22
Originally Posted by Frank Kelch View Post
GreerPalmer clearly said that he is listed as being more British than both his parents combined. Clearly, something is wrong.
I agree something is wrong since most people are complaining about over representation of British DNA in their results, but he did not explain how much more, and forgets its not an exact science. If his parents were hypothetically 40% each, and he got 82% I'd call that within the margin of error....
Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2017, 10:29 PM
Avocadodiva Avocadodiva is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3
Cool British Isles going down? Maybe . . .

[QUOTE=Anizio;437918] A lot of people seem to suddenly have an increase of British Isles DNA results in their new MyOrigins.

My answer is, this is a flaw in their interpretation model. People who should have no British, and had no British before suddenly do. And people who had British have their British DNA % increased now. QUOTE]

I administer both of my grandparents accounts. Both actually went DOWN rather significantly in British Isles. Their Western European % went way up.

Also, both had minor (20% or less) amounts of Southern Europe previously. Now, Grandpa has 2% Southeast Europe (Balkans?) and Grandma has 16% Iberian.

I'm wondering if the some of the British actually went to the Iberian now. I've heard there is a little it of Gaelic crossover there.

But they seem to be in the minority in seeing BI% go down.
Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2017, 10:51 PM
DNA_Anon DNA_Anon is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by Anizio View Post
Your question mirrors a lot of peoples, including mine. A lot of people seem to suddenly have an increase of British Isles DNA results in their new MyOrigins.
Hi Anizio

Thanks, yes the changes are a bit strange. Interesting that other people have had big changes.I would have expected makeup to be a fair bit from scandinavia and/or central Europe as well as a some Iberian or one of those ancient pathways - via celtic areas.

My old results are:

British Isles 71%
Scandinavia 22%
Southern Europe 3%
Asia Minor 5%

New Results
British Isles 87%
Scandinavia 0%
Finnish (trace) <2%
SE Europe 6%
Iberia 4%
Asia Minor 0%
N Africa (trace) 2%

So some of the new results make sense, especially mediterraneoan stuff. However the almost complete disappearance of 20% Scadinavian to British makes little sense to disappear altogether. I would have thought that as analysis improves over time, British Isles would reduce and there would be greater certainty over other components.

I have also had some changes in mediterranean/Asia Minor but that makes some sense and also an increase in Iberia/north African (also makes some sense). Even have trace Finnish now which I believe could be consistent with a Scandinavian pathway.

Basically the problem is that I don't know enough about how their analysis/interpretation works. I am concerned too much of it is based on locations of people now (in their database) rather than on the underlying historical DNA. Alternatively it could be a change in intereptation of clusters.

But I reckon over time British Isles should decrease. Just hoping its not just being marketed to the USA to tell people where in Europe they came from. Those of us who know some of our history in Europe are interested in where we came from too. Especially the UK which has multiple waves since the ice ages

cheers Anon

Last edited by DNA_Anon; 5th April 2017 at 10:53 PM. Reason: Formatting
Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2017, 12:16 AM
wombat wombat is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 275
MyOrigins 2.0 kinda of went in a worse direction for Eastern Europeans in a way

It seems that they tried really hard to make anyone from the huge region be able to score near 100% Eastern European if their ancestry is all from that region but in so doing they now took even in MORE boundary areas and seem to filter even more to bias towards Eastern European purely. So they started with a base category that really only fully peaks in Latvians and Lithuanians (and close for a few Belarusians and Russians) and tried to pack it so it could take in a huge area with genetic diversity and get most of them to be able to also peak.

While perhaps this is better in some cases it also leaves a very huge region with virtually no substructure at all, even less than with MyOrigins 1.0 and almost no hints for many as where at all in the entire region the ancestry comes from. For those very mixed that may be fine and maybe it's better this way but for those more from just one area with all the clues removed it's sort of a disappointment. Oddly enough even the old Geno 2.0 with basic ancient components could let one easily tell often enough someone who was mostly Polish from mostly Latvian from mostly Romanian from mostly Hungarian from mostly Russian. With MyOrigins 1.0 you could still get some hints as to that and still often tell it apart. With MyOrigins 2.0 a great many people from all of those countries might score basically identically now with now hint whatsoever.

And on top of that, as it was, it often hid minor ancestries one might have from the region, especially if you were Baltic, but now it just wipes any hint of any other ancestry you might have away (other than for Finnish). But if you are Eastern European it really tends to hide if you had a bit of say German or Dutch of Swedish or Balkan, it all just gets called 100% Eastern European now, totally, as it was the old MyOrigins often didn't reveal any of that for Baltic people, in particular. Old Geno 2.0 could pick up Oceanian but now it seems they try to make even eastern Eastern Europeans be able to score as near 100% Eastern European as possible so they seem to try to bias so towards Eastern European and filter out as much Asian signals as possible from Mongols that even other stuff gets erased too.

So while I guess they have a region that now maybe can come in solidly Eastern European by percentage it encompasses such a vast area now, with even wide fringes taking in much of Germany, Austria, even some of Scandinavian and averaging away small bits of even farther Western European that it gives people largely from Eastern Europe no details at all now (other than for possible Finnish). So man people just get 100% Eastern European from across such a huge area now and so many still don't get any hints of their German or even more exotic bits shown now if they are from this region. So I'd say the update is basically useless for Eastern Europeans and in some ways worse than before. For many people with largely Eastern European ancestry it does them no good whatsoever and even less good.

FWIW this is what we have pieced together for my mom using paper and also all DNA tests together for a couple hints:

maybe 7.8125% (to give a rough estimate) German (Baltic Germans traced back so far that have not turned into something else as far back as we have managed each of the lines to this point)

3.125% mix of Scottish/English and who knows what else but probably mostly German or perhaps Scandinavian (we just have a Barklai/Barclay/Berkeley surname appear on a Baltic German line at this level but who knows if the line had taken some Baltic German/Scandinavian or other non-Scottish/English wives along the way before this level or not, I suspect it's going to have at least bit of non-Scottish/English mixed in, wouldn't be surprised if a lot)

1.5625% probably Polish

3.125% possibly mixed Dutch and South Pacific (Geno 2.0 gives Oceanian and we have traced one Baltic German line that split to half Latvian and then part of that Latvian side to an ancestor whose marriage record says that she is the daughter of the guy running the Hollander Krug (Netherlands House/Tavern/Inn) and considering that my mom has a couple ultra Dutch DNA matches, this is on the strictly maternal line and our mtDNA is not ancient Latvian-type and the Geno 2.0 Oceanian and the Dutch exploring the South Pacific and all we sort of suspect maybe some sailor trader's kids ended up in this tavern just outside a major trading city in Latvia and something with the tavern and inn and went on and we got some outside of Latvian input to our ancestry) and a trace of Latvian

9.375% greater Jelgava region Latvian

25% Valmiera region Latvian (I believe every line traced at least to the late 1700s, most to at least mid-1700s, many to early 1700s and a few into the 1600s including one to as far back as 1649)

as much as 50% Nereta region Latvian (although one out of wedlock and some DNA matching ties to this one family with crazy rumors and some others with relations to that line opens a slight chance to maybe 3.125% French and South Pacific and then the Dutch and South Pacific plus a trace of Latvian becomes mixed Dutch and Latvian instead)

So that would be around 83%-87% deeply ethnic Latvian for centuries. But also a mix of other stuff, some not from Baltics or Eastern Europe in general.

On Geno 2.0:
51% Northern European basic ancient component
29% Mediterranean basic ancient component
17% Southwest Asian basic ancient component
2% Oceanian

can't find it at the moment

Eastern European 90.3%
Scandinavian 3.6%
Broadly Northwestern European 4.7%
Broadly Southern European 0.6%

Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0:
96% Eastern Europe
2 or 3% Finland and Northern Siberia

MyOrigins 2.0:
100% Eastern European

Eurogenes K13:
54% Baltic
33% North_Atlantic
6% West_Med
3% East_med
1% West_Asian
1% Oceanian

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Lithuanian @ 5.697521

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Estonian +50% Lithuanian @ 4.948126

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Estonian +25% Lithuanian +25% Lithuanian @ 4.948126

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Estonian + Estonian + Lithuanian + Lithuanian @ 4.948126
2 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Southwest_Finnish @ 5.096645
3 Estonian + Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Lithuanian @ 5.103139
4 Belorussian + Estonian + Lithuanian + Lithuanian @ 5.133492
Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2017, 12:18 AM
wombat wombat is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 275
Originally Posted by Cmac View Post
Which one is right than? Let me get this straight, on my old origins I had:
90% European
70% Southern European
20% Scandinavian
10% North African

92% European
70% Iberian
15% Southeast Europe
7% Scandinavian
8% North African

How can there be such a huge mistake between Scandinavian and southeast European?
My father on his original results had 26% Scandinavian and now he's got none?
My mother on her original results had 18% Scandinavian and now she's got 8%?
There's a huge discrepancy here, something is wrong, or someone was deceiving the public originally.
This is a great way to deter people away from these tests, wait until I post these huge changes on my page and people will become even more skeptical about DNA testing.
Great way to advertise.
Weird, you are the second person I've seen he seems to have had some Scandinavians turn into Southeastern European!
Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2017, 12:25 AM
wombat wombat is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 275
Originally Posted by LLK View Post
My old result: Eastern Europe - 74%, 18% Western & Central Europe, 2% Finland & Northern Siberia and 6% Jews.

Currently: 96% Eastern Europe and 4% from various groups: Jews, Southern Europe, Central Asia and North and Central America.

My dad old score: 80% Eastern Europe, 20% Western & Central Europe.

My father new score: 100% Eastern Europe.

My grandfather old result:86 % Eastern Europe, 8% Southern Europe and 6% Finland & Northern Siberia.

My grandfather new score: 99% Eastern Europe and 1% from various populations: Finland and Siberia

As for me, the new algorithm is a joke. The results are not specific to the old, but it is a completely different story. I understand differences in the level of statistical error or similar populations (Finland, Siberia and North America), but the difference of 20% raises a lot of doubts for me as a scientist. We need to wait for methodological clarification from FMT DNA and reference populations.

My old results basically corresponded to my paper knowledge. The new ones are detached for me.
What it means is that you probably are almost 100% Eastern European and can now directly read that off. OTOH since so many over the entire region now get that it gives you no hints at all as to what part in that huge region. Before your results were unlikely to be say Baltic unless you had a full Western European grandparent. Now they could be Baltic, they could be Polish, they could be Hungarian, they could be Romanian, etc, but who knows? Everyone scores so similarly now.

Before you didn't get 100% since you were not Baltic so you had some differences compared to the average Baltic (and some Belarusian and a few Russians) in what they were looking for so you got that other component to add some more western and southern elements since you had a bit less ancient hunter gatherer and a bit more farmer and so on.

Now they added so much fringe to the region they can score more people fully from the region but it also now shows barely any structure, no hints. And that can also blend in recent ancestry and call it all Eastern European now. So maybe you were actually say 80% Baltic and 20% far Western European, but now it needed to take in so much of Germany and Austria and so on to get more people in Eastern Europe to be able to score that fully it expanded the region to fully include many types of Germans and many other people.

Last edited by wombat; 6th April 2017 at 12:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2017, 12:30 AM
wombat wombat is offline
FTDNA Customer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 275
Originally Posted by Ericjle View Post
I hate to criticize FTDNA, but they went from best match to my ancestry (75% German, 25% English) to the worst. They now have me 0% Central European(Germany, France) and 67% England These results are absolutely trash. So now the best results to my actual ancestry are at GenMatch.
It seems that Germany had three main types of people and they now heavily bias one type towards the English to whom they are most similar and heavily bias another type to Eastern European (who they shouldn't be THAT close to).

So it may mean that your German ancestry was more of the type most similar to what the English share in their deep ancestry.
Reply With Quote


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My Origins results - Mother/Daughter have very different results Krystalia myOrigins Basics 11 6th April 2017 09:43 PM
Difference Between MyOrigins Results and Ancestral Origins Results Stephen Rhodes DNA and Genealogy for Beginners 5 5th April 2017 05:14 PM
Different Results Between Ancestry DNA, My Origins and Ancient Origins arialilo myOrigins Basics 0 29th March 2017 05:22 AM
My Origins results and what I look like Rodolpho Recreation Room 19 11th February 2017 09:28 PM
My Origins Results...... Taz85 myOrigins Basics 170 7th November 2014 11:36 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 AM.

Family Tree DNA - World Headquarters

1445 North Loop West, Suite 820
Houston, Texas 77008, USA

Phone: (713) 868-1438 | Fax: (832) 201-7147
Copyright 2001-2010 Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.