Tribes scores

[tomcat]

... I wonder why is my scores are so high ...?

Your numbers are high because there is a high likelihood that your profile would find a match among the populations named. My numbers went way up with 21 markers. But, in the past, Tribes numbers for the admixed have bounced about a bit from update to update, so I don't expect to keep the numbers I currently have and my matches may change with the addition of new populations. My analysis on page 196 of this thread.

[Noaide]

WIth DNATribes my closest matches are in Gabon and I also have close matches with African Americans and in Tswana South Africa. I think that it would be interesting to see what my decomeMe results would be.

A very "accurate" test in other words My DNATribes result seem to have a close link with the polynesians in the pacific, basically on the other side of the world of my genetic homeland. I only had one population match (the last of the 20) in europe and they were the dutch.

[J Man]

If I remember correctly, you are actually 3/4 Italian and 1/4 Finnish. You shouldn't be matched to Gabon and Tswana. Do you have Italian matches?
Maybe the Finnish had some ancestral East Asian and the Italian had some ancestral African. I think I had read somewhere that Italians (and maybe Sicilians. Meditterraneans) can have about 10%.

I am actually only 1/4 Italian (Calabria). You are correct that I am 1/4 Finnish. My other half is of Scots-Irish background.

Most people told me before that the African matches may be related to my Italian background. I do not have any real close Italian matches on DNATribes. My closest Italian match is way down the list.

[rainbow]

My AncestryByDNA 2.5 test results showed 3% Sub-Saharan African and 4% East Asian admixture. WIth DNATribes my closest matches are in Gabon and I also have close matches with African Americans and in Tswana South Africa. I think that it would be interesting to see what my decomeMe results would be.

If I remember correctly, you are actually 3/4 Italian and 1/4 Finnish. You shouldn't be matched to Gabon and Tswana. Do you have Italian matches?
Maybe the Finnish had some ancestral East Asian and the Italian had some ancestral African. I think I had read somewhere that Italians (and maybe Sicilians. Meditterraneans) can have about 10%.

[tomcat]

I just open the article link, and didnt pay a dime.

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/c...14842/PDFSTART

I get 'access denied' but if you got a coy of the PDF, the paper, for free then you are under no purchase agreement obligation and can send me a copy with impunity: [email protected]

I have the Supplement, don't need a copy of that.

[Noaide]

What you will see in the Supplemental is that VERY FEW of these highly ancestry-informative SNP's are exclusive to one ancestry over all others, most of these SNP's have some incidence in more than one ancestry.

Thats correct, its all about frequencies, but you must look at all markers in the comparisment before it makes sense.

[Noaide]

Here's a lead on this matter. The paper costs money but the Supplemental material is free.

I just open the article link, and didnt pay a dime.

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/117914842/PDFSTART

[J Man]

As of the moment, those two companies are charging close to $1000.00 for those tests. As time goes by, I guess, they will lower the price.

I have also read some people have expressed reservation about the Dcodeme results when Sub-Saharan and East Asian admixture has consistently been reported among people of Euro ancestry. I have read the 23and Me results were a little different, but they did not specify. It may be those results are accurate, but people were not prepared for it. Although they are clearly in the range of 3-4% African and 5 or 7% East Asian. In other words, nothing extraordinary. I have not seen any reported NA yet, though. I guess the doubts center on the fact that almost everyone reports both admixtures.

My AncestryByDNA 2.5 test results showed 3% Sub-Saharan African and 4% East Asian admixture. WIth DNATribes my closest matches are in Gabon and I also have close matches with African Americans and in Tswana South Africa. I think that it would be interesting to see what my decomeMe results would be.

[tomcat]

According to the authors, these are the most informative SNP's identified to-date. There may be more informative SNP's identified in the future. Statisticians have their ways of dealing with the problem and delivering most-likely/probability estimates of admixture percentages that the authors maintain stand-up to other statistical tests.

We know all humans had a common origin - Africa. We know that at any point in the past there were fewer humans than there are today. Hence at any point in the past all humans were even more alike than we are today. But even today we are only slightly different from one another. Genetics is about making 'mountains' of significance out of molecular mole hills. And for that you need statistics!

[Kathleen Carrow]

Here's a lead on this matter. The paper costs money but the Supplemental material is free. What you will see in the Supplemental is that VERY FEW of these highly ancestry-informative SNP's are exclusive to one ancestry over all others, most of these SNP's have some incidence in more than one ancestry.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-04/1207472694

Tom
So that means they are NOT so informative I guess? Are there ANY that are clearly informative?

[tomcat]

Here's a lead on this matter. The paper costs money but the Supplemental material is free. What you will see in the Supplemental is that VERY FEW of these highly ancestry-informative SNP's are exclusive to one ancestry over all others, most of these SNP's have some incidence in more than one ancestry.

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2008-04/1207472694

[juan carlos]

Okay, then it ain't ADMIXTURE. It could be ANCESTRAL or, at the very low levels evidenced, a REMNANT of ancient ancestry preserved in one or another European population, to varying degrees, for reasons specific to their population history.

That could very well be the case.

[tomcat]

Okay, then it ain't ADMIXTURE. It could be ANCESTRAL or, at the very low levels evidenced, a REMNANT of ancient ancestry preserved in one or another European population, to varying degrees, for reasons specific to their population history.

[juan carlos]

If persons of pedigreed European ancestry (pedigreed Europeans rather than admixed Americans!) test-out for minor African and Asian percentages then minor African and Asian percentages are normal for Europeans.

That is what the results seem to indicate. Some of the people are Europeans, others are Americans who say they are 100% of Euro background. Of course, no one knows for sure. But the results do indicate minor sub-Saharan and East Asian admixture for almost everyone.

[tomcat]

...

I have also read some people have expressed reservation about the Dcodeme results when Sub-Saharan and East Asian admixture has consistently been reported among people of Euro ancestry.
...
I guess the doubts center on the fact that almost everyone reports both admixtures.

If persons of pedigreed European ancestry (pedigreed Europeans rather than admixed Americans!) test-out for minor African and Asian percentages then minor African and Asian percentages are normal for Europeans.