New My Origins Results

[hlascarlet]

Where's my OLD results

Just looking at my new Origins results and they don't make any sense. Where can I find my old results to compare??
These are my new results:
British Isles 78%
Southeast Europe 18%
Scandinavia 3%

Where are my German roots and what's up with this SE Europe?? My true origins are nearly 50% German and the rest British Isles. My father is 50% German and 50% British Isles. I also have German and British Isles on my mother's side. That's it. I may have a trace of Scandinavian which is correct, but I certainly am not 18% SE European!!

[hlascarlet]

Really strange origins

Instead he got some native south American and some traces of Oceanic.

Yes, me too, S.American and Oceanic!! That's crazy! I wonder how many people got that thrown in?? Sounds like a contamination problem to me!

[wombat]

Hi, since this is a very low percentage for my mom that is why I am questioning it. I have traced my mom's Hungarian ancestors to the 1700's and none were Jewish. Also if there was any it would lean more towards Ashkenazic instead of Sephardic in Hungary from what I have learned about it. I am sure there will be changes to the My Origins in the future and the percentages will change once again. I appreciate your reply though.

Maybe it somehow mistook some excess ancient farmer genes in your Hungarian background compared to the base Eastern European sample and someone decided to call it Sephardic instead of Iberian or Southeast European? Just a wild forced guess.

Although maybe more likely is that it's hard to pick out Sephardic and they also do share ancestry with Ashkenazi just not some of the bottleneck mutations but it might be possibly easy to mix up the two and it got tricked in your case by some quirk in the little bits you inherited and didn't inherit.

[wombat]

"my OLD Origins":
Eastern Europe 58%
Southern Europe 16%
Western & Central Europe 16%
Finland & Northern Siberia 6%
Asia Minor 3%


"my NEW Origins":
East Europe 75%
Southeast Europe 23%

and some trace rubbish.

The new numbers make much more sense to me, as my mother is Polish and father is Slovak. There is some "colour" to my father's family, presumably southeastern influence.

both sets of #s actually make sense for you if you understand what the categories mean (Geno 2.0 NG shows you modern references and you get an idea what the ratios for various regions were supposed to be and why so your old results actually made sense for Polish plus a bit of Slovakian too)

[wombat]

Based on my new and old results above, I conclude that the new "East" European boundary was enlarged, taking former "Western and Central" European area, as well as encompassing geography further north and east. Conversely, I also believe the old "Southern" European boundary was enlarged, at the expense of the former "Eastern" European boundary, to become the new "Southeast" European category.

therefore:

...my old 58% "Eastern" expanded to encompass former "Central" geography (+~15%), further expanded to encompass former "Finland and Northern Siberia" geography (+~5%), but also contracted (-~4%) with geography becoming part of the new expanded "Southeast" boundary category.

...my old 16% "Southern" expanded north and east to encompass former "Eastern" geography (+~4%), and further expanded to encompass former "Asia Minor" (Anatolian) geography (~+3%).

yes from what I have been seeing, that generally seems to be how it's working

[sandy028601]

genealogy

[QUOTE=georgian1950;438094]I am not so sure about that, at least when one gets more than five or so generations back.

Jack[/QUOTE hi jack, to be honest with you genealogy is one of the hardest things that anyone could think about doing, the time and money spent on it. but it's well worth it. the things i had discovered about both of my paternal and my maternal lineages had been trace back to at least thirteen generations back to the 1600's to 1700's

[nygaard]

southeast europe

i dont know why i get 12.5 southeast europe,my father is armenian and i have 43 percent asia minor must be from him.my mother is 100 percent scandinavian.can trace mothers family to norway and denmark back about 400 years on her father and mothers side.her fathers family can go back more than 400 years in norway,and in denmark to skåne,about 1590.

[192971]

My population components in the earlier version of myOrigins were:
95% "Finland and Northern Siberia" +
5% "Scandinavia"

In the new version I have this:
100% "Finland"

It is great, of course. No more confusion!

[Frank Kelch]

My population components in the earlier version of myOrigins were:
95% "Finland and Northern Siberia" +
5% "Scandinavia"

In the new version I have this:
100% "Finland"

It is great, of course. No more confusion!

I don't see the problem, your new results are pretty consistent with your old results.

[georgian1950]

[QUOTE=sandy028601;438304]

I am not so sure about that, at least when one gets more than five or so generations back.

Jack[/QUOTE hi jack, to be honest with you genealogy is one of the hardest things that anyone could think about doing, the time and money spent on it. but it's well worth it. the things i had discovered about both of my paternal and my maternal lineages had been trace back to at least thirteen generations back to the 1600's to 1700's

Hi Sandy, I know the effort that goes into this endeavor and I do not mean to be picking at you. I'm just saying that I have come across a lot of lines which look good on paper, but the DNA says otherwise. I have many doubts about the state of the art with admixture analysis, but sometimes something is there which might suggest that some lines need to be reconsidered.

Jack

[Cav6]

Skeptical

My Origin report went from 35% Southwest Europe, 34% Scandinavian to a split between the British Isles and Eastern Europe and now 8 % Mideastern. My only zero distance mtDNA full spectrum are from Sweden. I trust this whole process a lot less than I used to. Seems like a BS money scam to me.

[sandy028601]

[QUOTE=georgian1950;438339]

Hi Sandy, I know the effort that goes into this endeavor and I do not mean to be picking at you. I'm just saying that I have come across a lot of lines which look good on paper, but the DNA says otherwise. I have many doubts about the state of the art with admixture analysis, but sometimes something is there which might suggest that some lines need to be reconsidered.

Jack

its ok Jack I understand, it's all good

[EastAnglian]

Ashkenazi Jewish

My family are from East Anglia and I have traced them back to the 16th Century. All local country folk and English Christian.

I don't have any problem with having Ashkenazi Jewish or any other Jewish Diaspora ancestry, it would be quite cool but I cannot see how it can be accurate.

I'm showing 4 percent, could this be a mix up with more ancient Middle Eastern origins?, farmers obviously came to Europe during the Neolithic. I did consider that perhaps this percentage came over during the Roman period.

My previous results didn't show any Non-European, I would expect to be 3-5% Asian as most Europeans are but this seems rather bizarre.

Anyone else with English origins getting these kind of results?

My Scandinavian has disappeared, even though my ancestors came from Danelaw. Gedmatch gets it right, matches me with Norwegian and Danish populations on the EU test.

[EastAnglian]

Ashkenazi Jewish or East Mediterranean?

Hmm, I think FTDNA is confusing Ashkenazi Jewish with East Mediterranean. Ashkenazi Jewish have an East Mediterranean element. I think the East Med came over with the Romans or it could be more archaic than that.

[LLK]

The new algorithm is obviously flawed

Unfortunately, in my opinion, the new algorithm is obviously flawed. Below empirical evidence.

My OLD:
Eastern Europe: 75 %
Western and Central Europe : 18 %
Jewish (Ask): 6 %
Finland and North Siberia: 1%
My NEW:
Eastern Europe: 96 %
Jewish (Ask) > 2 %
Central and North America > 2%
Central Asia > 2%
Southeastern Europe > 2%

Father OLD:
Eastern Europe: 80 %
Western and Central Europe: 20 %

Father NEW:
Eastern Europe: 100 %

Mother only new:
Eastern Europe: 76 %
Jewish (Ask): 17 %
Finland: 5 %
Soutchestern Europe: 2%
Central and North America: >2%





My great-grandfather was a Jew. According to the first result I had 6% of Jews, now I have> 2%. But my mother has 17% of Jews according to the new statement. In turn, according to DNA.LAND I have 10% of the Jews, and my mother 20% plus a few percent of the Mediterranean. All gedmatch calculators confirm similar results.

Another thing in the original result, similarly in DNA.LAND I have a blast from Finland. My mom has 5% from Finland according to the new one. I zero. I have a doppelganger from Central Asia but none of my parents!

The new algorism is flawed in my opinion, it connects probably large parts of the genes and captures them in a very general way (less accurately than the last). Something that is typical of Central European Jews (genetically mixed) can be as well attributed to Eastern Europe or the Diaspora according to unclear criteria.

The old results were understandable to me and coincided between me and my parents. The new results are divergent and with the knowledge I have from other calculators is certainly not correct, headed with a marginal but illustrative level of a new algorithm: Central Asia unknown to my parents.I hope that they will improve the algorithm, or will clearly show the methodological basis of their research.