Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New EURO DNA 2.0

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Noaide
    Forget the gypsy explanation!

    Why would you say that? It is unlikely but nevertheless could have occured in some way.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by J Man
      Why would you say that? It is unlikely but nevertheless could have occured in some way.
      Yes it may in some cases occur but there is simply no way a few gypsy travellers could make such great impact on European genetics. So there is no way to tell if their where gypsies or not. Please take a look at Euro 1.0 manual at ABDNA website.

      Noaide

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Noaide
        Yes it may in some cases occur but there is simply no way a few gypsy travellers could make such great impact on European genetics. So there is no way to tell if their where gypsies or not. Please take a look at Euro 1.0 manual at ABDNA website.

        Noaide

        I have looked at it. I don't think that it is all attributed to the gypsies personally but some of it may be. Most likely it is much more ancient or may even be incorrect results. EURO-DNA 1.0 is not as good as 2.0 and 2.0 has already shown Iberians to be in their own cluster mainly.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by J Man
          I have looked at it. I don't think that it is all attributed to the gypsies personally but some of it may be. Most likely it is much more ancient or may even be incorrect results. EURO-DNA 1.0 is not as good as 2.0 and 2.0 has already shown Iberians to be in their own cluster mainly.
          Euro 2.0 may cluster Iberians but Euro 2.0 also excludes the Near Easterners and South Asians.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by tomcat
            Euro 2.0 may cluster Iberians but Euro 2.0 also excludes the Near Easterners and South Asians.

            Yes that is because it is based solely on European ancestry from the European continent. Not the Near East or South Asia.

            Comment


            • #36
              So, Euro 2.0 invalidates Euro 1.0 findings? I didn't see anything in the Euro 2.0 manual about that. Nor did I see anything on tests of exclusion on neighboring populations such as NE and SA. Hence we cannot say whether NE and SA may cluster with Iberians 14-15% under Euro 2.0 because NE and SA have not, evidently, been tested with the Euro 2.0 marker set. But NE and SA do cluster 14-15% with Iberians with the Euro 1.0 marker set.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by tomcat
                So, Euro 2.0 invalidates Euro 1.0 findings? I didn't see anything in the Euro 2.0 manual about that. Nor did I see anything on tests of exclusion on neighboring populations such as NE and SA. Hence we cannot say whether NE and SA may cluster with Iberians 14-15% under Euro 2.0 because NE and SA have not, evidently, been tested with the Euro 2.0 marker set. But NE and SA do cluster 14-15% with Iberians with the Euro 1.0 marker set.

                I don't think it invalidates the EURO DNA 1.0 findings. I think that the 2.0 test clearly just looks at ancestry from just the European continent. The ME and SA markers are overlooked yes because they are not from Europe.

                Comment


                • #38
                  This is why I wonder if it's worth doing the Euro 2.0. Mum got 65% NE 12% SE and 22% SA so basically it would test only about 70% of her total make up.
                  And 50% of that we know is English so I would expect at least 50% to CE.
                  AbDNA tell me that she could still do the test even with such a high SA score.
                  Maybe if Iberian did show up it might explain the SA but if we have Celtic ancestry which is highly likely and she gets an Iberian score, how do we know it's not actually Celtic?! Or is it more recent?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by burto
                    This is why I wonder if it's worth doing the Euro 2.0. Mum got 65% NE 12% SE and 22% SA so basically it would test only about 70% of her total make up.
                    And 50% of that we know is English so I would expect at least 50% to CE.
                    AbDNA tell me that she could still do the test even with such a high SA score.
                    Maybe if Iberian did show up it might explain the SA but if we have Celtic ancestry which is highly likely and she gets an Iberian score, how do we know it's not actually Celtic?! Or is it more recent?
                    Not really, you see according to DNAPrints ABDNA and Euro 1.0 test both East Asian, Native American, Sub-Sahara African and European categories and in addition the North European, Middle Eastern, Meditterian, South East European and South Asian categories have all been observed in continental european populations.

                    Noaide

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by J Man
                      ...The ME and SA markers are overlooked yes because they are not from Europe.
                      There are no exclusively ME and SA markers or even exclusively NA, SSA, IE or EA markers, there are only human markers that may have a somewhat greater incidence in one human macro-population versus another.

                      Such power of discrimination as Euro 2.0 may have comes equally from its narrowness of focus - its exclusion of human populations outside continental Europe - as from its huge marker set.

                      If you got odd scores from AbDNA and they were not too large you can take the Euro 2.0. The Euro 2.0 will not resolve any issues raised by your odd AbDNA scores, it will only dissolve them into the geographical categories of Euro 2.0. That could be the correct resolution, or not. Only DNAPrint can say.

                      Last edited by tomcat; 12 September 2007, 02:15 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Autosomal DNA testing is still very much in it's infancy. It is progressing though as EURO DNA 2.0 shows. IT makes sense to me why it is progressing so slowly. It is because of the recombination issues and the large amount of chromosomes tested. I believe that within the next 20 years or so that it will be an excellent way to test ancestry.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Any Euro 2.0 results yet?

                          Has an one gotton their Euro 2.0 tests results back yet. How about you James. Yours should be due any day now. I won't get mine till around Nov 25 or so. Can't wait for another 9 weeks to see how their compare to the 1.0.
                          Maria

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Still Awaiting Results From Eurodna 2.0

                            Maria,

                            I still haven't gotten the results yet, but - as you say - they're due any day now. I am chomping at the bit, so to speak.

                            When they do arrive, I will post them here - and compare them with my results from my other tests, autosomal and otherwise.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Euro 2.0

                              I don't qualify for DNAPrint's new Euro 2.0 test. They still have the same criteria as last years Euro 1.0. Anyone with 15% or more of "Native American" cannot have the test done. Last year I bought the Euro 1.0, but they only did the basic 4 category 2.5 and refunded the difference because they say I am 17%. I didn't know I had any Native American.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Darn...

                                Any Euro 2.0 test results yet. I have to resubmit my Euro 2.0 for lack of DNA! Now it will be up into Jan before I get the results!

                                Maria

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X