Tribes scores

[Eki]

I'd guess that since your highest ENFSI match is 7.5E-13, you probably have also non-European ancestors. Even my lowest ENFSI match is 6.8E-12 (Switzerland) and my highest is 1.6E-10 (Finland). Everything else is E-11.

I looked at my Tribes scores and noticed how much the composition of a sample is more important than the nationality:

1. Iceland 16.8
2. Finland 16.3
3. Strathclyde, Scotland 12.2
4. Norway 10.9
5. Portugal 10.2
6. Finland 10.1

So, I'm close to one Finnish population but closer to a Portuguese population than another Finnish population.

[NormanGalway]

Eki,
Did you do ENSFI with all the relevant markers (including D2 and D19), or minus those two?

[Eki]

Eki,
Did you do ENSFI with all the relevant markers (including D2 and D19), or minus those two?

No, just the markers DNA Tribes gave me.

[Jodee]

I'd guess that since your highest ENFSI match is 7.5E-13, you probably have also non-European ancestors. Even my lowest ENFSI match is 6.8E-12 (Switzerland) and my highest is 1.6E-10 (Finland). Everything else is E-11.

Thanks Eki - yes, i wonder - it would be good if i had a cousin in Denmark tested, to see differences in E values, as well as the influences that show up.

Jodee

[Sonia]

I think my earliest analysis of your alleles was wrong here is the correct one:

0.022 NA, 0.105 ASIAN 0.786 US CAUCASIAN, 0.048 US AFRICAN

Noaide

Hi Tom,

Good question about the Asian. Noaide also ran Gram's allele values and is finding stronger results than DNA Tribes & Omnipop:

European 0.020 (2%)
East Asian 0.183 (18%)
African 0.797 (80%)

The US African percent is about the same as her SNPs from ABDNA. The high EA parallels the "unusual" DNA Tribes results (and the percent is about what ABDNA had called European.) I don't know if they really are unusual now. Anyway, I'll be waiting for Noaide's "STRUCTURE 2.1 for Dummies" tutorial

[Noaide]

European 0.020 (2%)
East Asian 0.183 (18%)
African 0.797 (80%)

The US African percent is about the same as her SNPs from ABDNA. The high EA parallels the "unusual" DNA Tribes results (and the percent is about what ABDNA had called European.) I don't know if they really are unusual now.

In 13 loci CODIS European also affiliate with East Asian because the number of markers dont discriminate well enough (maybe because of closer etnic affiliation), its possible that East Asian actually represent European.

Noaide

[tomcat]

Eki,
Did you do ENSFI with all the relevant markers (including D2 and D19), or minus those two?

Eki, If you have and enter D2 and D19 your match scores will go down - the more markers the higher the hurdle to a 'match' just as with Y and Mt-DNA.

[tomcat]

Sonia and Noaide,

Apropos this discussion, I ran all five sibling profiles through CSFS and all got CFS, RCMP and FBI Caucasian as the top three matches (various order of matches and various scores, E13 to E15).

In fourth all got a match to CFS East Indian (four E14's and one E16).

In fifth two got matches to FBI African American (E 14 and E16), one matched to RCMP Coastal Salish, one to FBI Apache, and one to RCMP Japanese (all E15).

In sixth place two matched CFS African American (E16 and E17), one to CFS Asian (E15), one to RCMP Saskatchewan Native (E16), and one to Salish (E15).

In seventh place, two matched CFS Asian (E15 and E18), one CFS African American (E16), one RCMP Texas African American (E17), one RCMP North Ontario Native (E16).

In eighth place, one matched RCMP Texas African American, one FBI Apache (E16), one CFS Asian (E17), one FBI African American (E16), and one to Saskatchewan Native (E15).

In ninth place, one matched Japanese (E18), two to FBI African American (E15 and E16), one Salish (E17), and one to Apache (E16).

And in tenth place, two to Saskatchewan Native (E16 and E19), one to Salish (E19), one to CFS African American (E16), and one to Japanese (E16).

[Noaide]

So, I'm close to one Finnish population but closer to a Portuguese population than another Finnish population.

What this should tell you is that the European populations is so closely related to each other that even minor frequency differences will assign you to distant more unrelated populations, it may also have something to do with the resolution of the 13 autosomal markers and its ability to correctly assign you to your population.

Its important to see the difference between autosomal STR and autosomal SNP, it has very good anology in Y-STR and Y-SNP. STR mutate much quicker while SNP change very slowly. This have implication for how far back the STR can see backwards in time.

Imagine how it would be if you had Y-STR without haplogroup prediction or Y-SNP test. You would be able to some extent to identify close lineages with 12 STR markers but not really far back, however with SNP test you can see much further back in time but miss the much more recent picture STR gives you.

Noaide

[NormanGalway]

so Noaide, does this mean you recommend the ABDNA approach?
I've never done the Euro test they offer...

[Noaide]

so Noaide, does this mean you recommend the ABDNA approach?
I've never done the Euro test they offer...

They say in this article that SNP and STR give "complementary" information that must mean that they provide different information.

Noaide

[tomcat]

Noaide,

Do you understand the calculations that support Omnipop, CSFS, and ENFSI? (They must all be related and similar to Tribes).
I wonder if you can judge which is the more conservative?
And is there a method to make Omnipop, ENFSI and CSF results directly comparable to one another?

[Noaide]

Do you understand the calculations that support Omnipop, CSFS, and ENFSI? (They must all be related and similar to Tribes).
I wonder if you can judge which is the more conservative?
And is there a method to make Omnipop, ENFSI and CSF results directly comparable to one another?

I have only studied Omnipop and ENSFI, and as far as I can tell both are based on simple probability calculation and should therefore be similar when it comes to nominal probabilities. CSFS I do not remember but I think its also based on the same probability calculation.

They all simply take the probability (based on frequency data) in a collection of populations for the given two alleles for each loci and then sum it per population and sort it. The population with the highest probability is ranked as closest to the individual. I think the same apply to the individual population match in DNATribes. The World Match in DNATribes involves cluster analysis or predefined clusters.

Noaide

[tomcat]

Thank you Noaide.

[Kathleen Carrow]

New database

Maybe some of you have seen this but there now are several functioning databases at the DNA-FP site..one of which is the atDNA..if your markers are in you are good to go...