Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DNA Print test and mulatto ancestry

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

  • DNA Print test and mulatto ancestry

    Hey,

    I got the results of my DNA Print test but am unclear how to interpret them in terms of the question that inspired the test. I have established that two of my ancestors were classified as mulatto in colonial tax records but as white in the 1790 census. At least two others are probable but unproven members of the same category. Local tradition insists that these mulattoes were mostly NA, but Paul Heinegg's research suggests they were predominantly African American.

    My numerical score of 100-0-0-0 offers no help in resolving this question, but the bar chart shows a 1/3 possibility of as little as 92% EU and up to 8% NA or EA and 2% AF (formerly SA.) At least I think that's what it means when it says that the 100% score is "twice as likely" as the alternatives.

    While awaiting an answer from DNA Print on the results, I'll ask if anyone here can interpret. Does it mean that my mulatto ancestors were 4 times as likely to be either NA or EA than AF? Or that their mixture was likely 4 parts NA or EA to one part AF? Is there *anything* that these results imply about the disputed ancestry of these colonial mulattoes?

    KPJ

  • #2
    Re: DNA Print test and mulatto ancestry

    Originally posted by kpauljohnson
    Hey,

    I got the results of my DNA Print test but am unclear how to interpret them in terms of the question that inspired the test. I have established that two of my ancestors were classified as mulatto in colonial tax records but as white in the 1790 census. At least two others are probable but unproven members of the same category. Local tradition insists that these mulattoes were mostly NA, but Paul Heinegg's research suggests they were predominantly African American.

    My numerical score of 100-0-0-0 offers no help in resolving this question, but the bar chart shows a 1/3 possibility of as little as 92% EU and up to 8% NA or EA and 2% AF (formerly SA.) At least I think that's what it means when it says that the 100% score is "twice as likely" as the alternatives.

    While awaiting an answer from DNA Print on the results, I'll ask if anyone here can interpret. Does it mean that my mulatto ancestors were 4 times as likely to be either NA or EA than AF? Or that their mixture was likely 4 parts NA or EA to one part AF? Is there *anything* that these results imply about the disputed ancestry of these colonial mulattoes?

    KPJ
    Hi,
    sorry, The bad news is the results don't tell you anything about Native American v's subsaharan ancestry. The statistical confidence intervals I don't think refer to your actual results, but are the confidence intervals usually used for all tests of 100% European.
    Unfortunately DNA print tests are not sensitive enough to detect admixture that goes back to 1800 - which is a great shame because I have a "mestee" ancestor whose ancestry I would like to know more about.
    From what I can work out, percentages of less than 10% of any of the four "racial" types on a DNAprint test need to be interpreted with caution.
    Angela.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks, Angela, for the helpful response. Familytreedna referred me to DNAPrint and vice versa, so I am still trying to get an answer to the question about the meaning of the differences between NA, EA, and AF on the bar chart. Do these have individual significance, or are they the same for everyone who scores 100-0-0-0? That's the big puzzle.

      Paul

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kpauljohnson
        Thanks, Angela, for the helpful response. Familytreedna referred me to DNAPrint and vice versa, so I am still trying to get an answer to the question about the meaning of the differences between NA, EA, and AF on the bar chart. Do these have individual significance, or are they the same for everyone who scores 100-0-0-0? That's the big puzzle.

        Paul
        Hi Paul,

        My suspicion is that the confidence intervals are the same for everyone who scores 100-0-0-0.

        I do know that a percentage of europeans (particularly in eastern europe) score with a low percentage of east asian genes, so I'm assuming that is factored into the confidence intervals for all peoples scores. Have you tried looking at the "ancestry by dna" website (the direct marketers of DNA print)????
        It has a more - indepth description of the test.
        http://www.ancestrybydna.com/


        Angela.

        Comment


        • #5
          I would also like to know as a person of mixed ancestry/mulatto ancestry wether it is worthwhile to get a dna print test or something more aligned to ancestrybydna's testing.

          I know because of genealogy research done that my father's father was a mix of irish/african/dutch/zanzibari[east african]french/ and some swedish and japanese. The one swedish descended ancestor brought in a circulatory disorder that my father,me and two cousins all inherited from her and which she died of ,according to my great uncle.
          My father's mother's ancestors were irish/welsh/english/african and unknown.
          My own mothers ancestors were african[damuru]/phillipino/german-dutch and from places like st helena and trista de cuna which i dont know anything about.

          Since I dont belong to any race and am most refered to as looking 'syrian',greek, and dont resemble either of my parents,I would like to know which ethnic group I took after.Or am I a culmination of them all?.In my family and extended family I look the most southern european/arab,the remaining look white because they married into anglo saxon families or puetro rican/brazillian/asian looking .The fact that I look italian/syrian/greek etc says alot about where those races intersected and orginally came from!.
          Last edited by grandplan; 24 February 2004, 08:08 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by grandplan
            I would also like to know as a person of mixed ancestry/mulatto ancestry wether it is worthwhile to get a dna print test or something more aligned to ancestrybydna's testing.

            I know because of genealogy research done that my father's father was a mix of irish/african/dutch/zanzibari[east african]french/ and some swedish and japanese. The one swedish descended ancestor brought in a circulatory disorder that my father,me and two cousins all inherited from her and which she died of ,according to my great uncle.
            My father's mother's ancestors were irish/welsh/english/african and unknown.
            My own mothers ancestors were african[damuru]/phillipino/german-dutch and from places like st helena and trista de cuna which i dont know anything about.

            Since I dont belong to any race and am most refered to as looking 'syrian',greek, and dont resemble either of my parents,I would like to know which ethnic group I took after.Or am I a culmination of them all?.In my family and extended family I look the most southern european/arab,the remaining look white because they married into anglo saxon families or puetro rican/brazillian/asian looking .The fact that I look italian/syrian/greek etc says alot about where those races intersected and orginally came from!.
            I'd say that you are a culmination of them all. For you, a DNA print test might be interesting, as you have admixture from several different sources (& not just one "Mulatto" great grand parent and 15 indoeuropean greatgrandparents).
            Phenotypically you probably do look quite mediterranean, but genetically (in terms of mtDNA & Y-chromosome haplotypes) mediterranean people are 100% "european", rather than a mixture.

            Angela

            Comment

            Working...
            X