ABDNA Test Results...

[Maria_W]

Tom.

I have no explanation for the test results....

Any one else test several generations with ABDNA and get these kind of results were the child has more than the parent and grandparent?

Maria

[Maria_W]

Confused

Tom.
Could you please explain your whole posting?
Maria

[tomcat]

Tom.

I have no explanation for the test results....

Any one else test several generations with ABDNA and get these kind of results were the child has more than the parent and grandparent?

Maria

Have you tested the father of your daughter?

[tomcat]

Does AbDNA Have a 'One Drop Rule'?

The statistical equivalent on the 'one drop rule' might explain these, and other, strange results in which children are more 'ethnic' than their parent(s).

AbDNA samples 175 SNP's from across the autosome. (They must sample broadly in order to be able to claim their assessment represents the whole person).

Not all the SNP's are equally ethnically distinctive. Some are more ethnically distinctive than others. Some as less so.

The ethnically ambiguous SNP's are scored to one ethnicity or another on the basis of the presence of a 'one drop' SNP. That is a SNP most highly distinctive for any particular ethnicity.

So, if you have a bunch of SNP's that 'could be' Native, or African, you will only get a Native or African score if you also have one or more of the SNP's that are most highly distinctive for that ancestry. If you don't have the 'one drop' SNP's then all your 'could be' Native or African SNP's are read as the next most likely ancestry.

Just a proposal. I would like to hear any other likely explanations for the mystery of appearing and disappearing ancestries.

And, as per my earlier, SNP's are stable mutations and AbDNA always samples the same 175 SNP's.

So what gives?

[GregKiroKHR1bL1]

My guess:

There is a certain amount of statistical uncertainty within this test. The autosomes are real. The uncertainty is with the analysis. Since they do not follow each allele for thousands of years, it is difficult to find UEPs for autosomes. So, from the data you presented, your daughter received Native American autosomes from her material grandmother. It is hard to tell if they do not let us view the raw data.

. . .

Any one else test several generations with ABDNA and get these kind of results were the child has more than the parent and grandparent?

Maria

[Kathleen Carrow]

Have you tested the father of your daughter?

That is a good point...also to compare the alleles that Maria's daughter and she share in common..
I have not gotten that far yet..
( I have 4 kids but only 1 sibling)

[tomcat]

... So, from the data you presented, your daughter received Native American autosomes from her material grandmother...

And the vehicle of that transmission was Maria who has a lower Native score than her daughter but a higher Native score than the grandmother.

I allow that SNP's get shuffled, that two siblings might get differing score for any given ancestry, but how can it be, on the basis of the same 175 SNP's that a mother can bequeath SNP's she evidently DOES NOT HAVE?

[marvallen]

It's the beauty of autosomal tests. The companies tell you what you want to here...

[Maria_W]

Tested father...

To all,

Yes, I tested my husband, he is Crystals father. He received 98% European and 2% East Asian. With a margin of 0-6% Amerindian. So....

Maria

[Maria_W]

The meaning of autosomal dna is ?

I must be missing something here...I thought the basis of autosomal dna was that it takes into account every ancestor that you have ever had. That it picks and chooses randomly(everyone differently) what dna you will inherit from whom. Lets consider this:Why couldn't my daughter Crystal have inherited some common ancestry informatve markers of mine and her grandmothers to make up some of her 14%, then the rest of the 14% could be from her markers in common with her maternal g.grandmother or grandfather..

Maria

[rainbow]

Rainbow.

I think you can look at it 2 ways: If you were using blood quantum (which is not autosomal dna based and started by the us government)where every generation divides 100/50/25/12.5/6.25 then no it makes no sense.
But we are using autosomal dna based testing which comes from everyone of her ancestors and it is random and can give you all kinds of results. We were all given different amounts. Its a genetic roll of the dice. I admit I was surprised at the 14%, which is twice as high as her grandmothers results and 1 1/2 higher than mine. My daughter is very happy with it. Have you figured out where yours comes from?

Maria

I haven't figured where mine comes from. I did think it was from my father because my mom has zero. But after your tests... ...could I get 17% from my mom who has zero? It defies logic.
My mom still thinks she has some NA even after the test says she doesn't. She's doing a lot more genealogical research and found lots of distant cousins on her North Carolina mother's side who are also doing research and lots of families intermarried. My mom says that she found that Pocahantas son Thomas came back to the US and fathered a Jane Rolfe. She says she found that there are over a hundred families that descend from Jane. My mom says 20 are in our family tree. But I haven't seen any proof of that. She does geneology differently from me. She looks for others of the same family names and they compare research, fitting pieces of the puzzle. She found Clark, Trent, and lots more.
Then there is my mothers mothers mothers father who was born in South Carolina and he moved to North Carolina that I have no info on because the courthouse that contained records burned during the Civil War. Before my mom had her dna test done I thought my Amerind dna was from my mothers side.
I'm still waiting for my paternal grandmothers birth certificate from New Jersey. I like to research from the most recent knowledge and work back. After I get my fathers mothers birth record, I'll try to get my fathers mothers mothers birth record. I need to know her birthdate or at least how old she was when she gave birth to request a record.

[tomcat]

I must be missing something here...I thought the basis of autosomal dna was that it takes into account every ancestor that you have ever had. That it picks and chooses randomly(everyone differently) what dna you will inherit from whom. Lets consider this:Why couldn't my daughter Crystal have inherited some common ancestry informatve markers of mine and her grandmothers to make up some of her 14%, then the rest of the 14% could be from her markers in common with her maternal g.grandmother or grandfather..

Maria

All true. But the test is based on 175 SNP's. Everyone who takes the test has the same 175 SNP's tested. Because inheritance is only nominally 50/50 your daughter may have inherited more of your Native SNP's than SNP's from her father but how could she have inherited more Native SNP's than you had so as to give her a larger Native score than you got?

This is not a questioning of the actual ancestry of you or your daughter, it is a question of how the test works.

[Maria_W]

Autosomal dna ....

It appears were dealing with 2 different parts here with me and anyone else who has heritage from the Colonial time frame back to the 1600's say through the late 1700's. Since the test can not go back to the 1600's (which some people say it can't, don't know what this is based on)where I have my proven Potowomecke heritage then these ABDNA test results do not reflect my already proven 1600's decent. And then it either reflects a second more recent line of decent(which some of you question, since it is getting higher as it goes down the generations) in which case I have to do alot of research or I have wasted my money on these tests.....But, at the very least I have the Potowomecke heritage. Which I am very proud of! This is what I don't understand. Autosomal DNA takes into account every ancestor that you ever had. We know that much. O.k. and we know that it is random and picks and chooses who to inherit it from. But if it does not go back as far as the 1600's then it is only random from what time frame. You can't tell dna what time frame to pick from. How come you can get DNA from 1000's of years ago? Is that only mtDNA and Y DNA? So comments welcome...

Maria

[Kathleen Carrow]

It appears were dealing with 2 different parts here with me and anyone else who has heritage from the Colonial time frame back to the 1600's say through the late 1700's. Since the test can not go back to the 1600's (which some people say it can't, don't know what this is based on)where I have my proven Potowomecke heritage then these ABDNA test results do not reflect my already proven 1600's decent. And then it either reflects a second more recent line of decent(which some of you question, since it is getting higher as it goes down the generations) in which case I have to do alot of research or I have wasted my money on these tests.....But, at the very least I have the Potowomecke heritage. Which I am very proud of! This is what I don't understand. Autosomal DNA takes into account every ancestor that you ever had. We know that much. O.k. and we know that it is random and picks and chooses who to inherit it from. But if it does not go back as far as the 1600's then it is only random from what time frame. You can't tell dna what time frame to pick from. How come you can get DNA from 1000's of years ago? Is that only mtDNA and Y DNA? So comments welcome...

Maria

Maria
Some of the X markers go back for 2000 years per Thomas Krahn..
specific ones are XS10074,10075,10075...they are pretty much unchanged..

The autosomal tests that you have done are informative also BUT
( BIG BUT) the folks who "read" them..like DNA Tribes etc..have given it a "best shot" but as you know they are not infallible and are open to MUCH question..

My hypothesis for my Salish scores is that it is the Slavic/Estonian/Polish alleles that "look" NA..
I have my CCR5 in for testing now..it may look Siberian..

I do have some closer Carrow cousins testing now..maybe our X markers will match..except they are daughter of Carrow males who carry the Y chromsome..and I am a granddaughter of a Carrow female( Dad's mom)
but eventually we will get there..

As you can see from how most of us struggle with what our results mean..they ARE informative but what do they say??

And they only go so far back in time..except for the Y , mtDNA and less so..the X markers for females..

You already tested your X markers so make sure you have them listed at DNA Fingerprint..

also Family Tree DNA is coming out with a new geographical DB I think later in 2008..
there is no "quick fix" unfortunately as alleles can show just that you "resemble" something..
Your daughter "resembles" something more than you do I think..

[tomcat]

...Autosomal DNA takes into account every ancestor that you ever had. We know that much....

The SNP's can be ancient but 175 of them could not possibly cover every ancestor ... you would have to do the whole genome to get that kind of coverage.