Autosomal DNA Results Interpretation

[tomcat]

As this thread seems to have settled on matters of African ancestry, I would like to point out a recent a study by Doron Behar that is available for free: http://www.ajhg.org/AJHG/fulltext/S0002-9297(08)00255-3

AND that 309 L haplo FGS from that study have been submitted to GenBank: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1210796093

[Duval]

As this thread seems to have settled on matters of African ancestry, I would like to point out a recent a study by Doron Behar that is available for free: http://www.ajhg.org/AJHG/fulltext/S0002-9297(08)00255-3

AND that 309 L haplo FGS from that study have been submitted to GenBank: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1210796093

Tomcat, what is your opinion on DNAtribes? I ordered this test for my wife and I and sent in the samples. Basically I am trying to see how mine results measure up to that of my late brother who used DNAprint.
Its interesting to me that different dna forums have different takes on these tests. I wonder if peoples perceptions on the validity of tests are driven by whether they agree of disagree with their respective resultss.
Another question is, what is the error rate in y-chromosone or mtDNA?
Thanks
Ray Duval

[tomcat]

Duval,

I like the DNATribes test because it has been continuously improved over the two years it has been on the market and because the population studies on which it is based are continually expanding. (In comparison, AbDNA has been revised only once, the population dataset is limited, and it has never been extended through additional sampling).

Generally, it seems that those who get autosomal results that are affirming like these tests and those that don't don't. And, for some, there is also the genalogical issue of not being able to attribute autosomal results to specific lines. But, while the science underlying both tests is legitimate, both come with a large dose of statistics. As they say, 'one can prove anything with statistics' (except to another statistician).

Don't know what you mean about error rate in Y an Mt. The sequencing technology is well established. But, depending on one's haplotype, haplogroup assignment can be an issue. I would urge anyone to forego HVR testing and go directly to FGS for Mt. And I think everyone ought to SNP their Y.

[Duval]

Duval,
Don't know what you mean about error rate in Y an Mt. The sequencing technology is well established. But, depending on one's haplotype, haplogroup assignment can be an issue. I would urge anyone to forego HVR testing and go directly to FGS for Mt. And I think everyone ought to SNP their Y.

Thanks Tomcat,
I meant do people ever get the wrong Haplogroup assigned to them via mistakes on the labs part? The reason I ask is that I noticed that some Happlo groups are very similar such as Haplo C from Asia and Halpo C from the Americas. Also Halpo L seems to be the original Halpogroup from which all others descend, can this one be confused with another since there has to be some connnection to all other groups. I know I sound foolish! But I am trying to learn as much as possible without having to go back to school and become a geneticist!
What is FGS??

[tomcat]

Duval,

Classification can be an issue. You may have noticed different companies can differ on haplogroup assignment. But haplogroup and subclade can be firmly established (according to current phylogeny) by selective testing of SNP's in Y and the mitocondrial coding region. FTDNA routinely checks the mito coding region for haplo assignment and offers a variety of Y SNP's to firmly establish Y clades.

Y and Mt phyogeny is an ongoing project, subject to change as new information emerges from studies. Per your example, the difference between Asian and Native American mitochondrial C can be clearly discerned in the coding region, although those coding region SNP's are not the ones sampled by FTDNA to broadly establish membership in haplogroup C. If one was a C based on HVR1, the best way to locate your place on the C limb of the mito tree is to do FGS, because FTDNA does not now, and may not in the foreseeable future, offer subclade testing for C or any of the haplogroups other than H.

FGS is the 'full genomic sequence' of your mitochondrion, all 16,000+ base pairs, all there is to be sequenced. It includes the hypervariable regions HVR1&2 and the coding region - the 'working' area of the mitochondrion that codes for proteins - that is why FTDNA calls it, 'the last MtDNA test you will ever need.' It is, in absolute terms, an expensive test, but in relative terms, it is the best value in mitochodrial testing. One of the chief benefits, I see, is to avoid the endless, incremental testing (haplogroup, subclade, sub-sub-clade, sub-sub-sub-clade) that characterizes Y-Land (or Mt-Land if you chose to go that route).

Seems to be no other way to do Y. Y is the third smallest human chromosome but still contains 50 million base pairs! It is going to be some time before we get that sorted. Thomas Krahn of FTDNA proposed a 'Walk on Y' testing protocol to take some bigger strides on Y but that has yet to be implemented. However, recently some testers who took the DeCodeMe test, that includes Y-SNP's among the 1 million SNP's that test sequences, have turned-up 3 Y-SNP's that show variance across the vast landscape of R1b's.

It isn't hopeless, but it is SLOW!

[Duval]

Tomcat,
That was truly amazing!

[Jambalaia32]

Awaiting autosomal database

I can't wait until family tree has an autosomal database( and sorenson's)! Maybe they'll explain more about autosomal then.

[Duval]

Confused but LOL!

Duval,

Classification can be an issue. You may have noticed different companies can differ on haplogroup assignment. But haplogroup and subclade can be firmly established (according to current phylogeny) by selective testing of SNP's in Y and the mitocondrial coding region. FTDNA routinely checks the mito coding region for haplo assignment and offers a variety of Y SNP's to firmly establish Y clades.

Hi Tomcat,

I just got back my results from DNA tribes. They placed all me all over the map in Africa, but neither the Native American or the European showed up! I had suubmitted samples to DNAprint a few weeks before I did DNA tribes to see how I matched up against my brother. According to DNA print I am 39% African-20 % European and 41 % Native. According to DNA tribes I have absolutely no Native American and very, very little European. WHich means that either my dad may not be my dad (alhtough we are identical) LOL and of course my mothers mtDNA is African although she her famliy are are extremely Native looking. I think the mirror test and family history says is best.
RD

[tomcat]

Hi Tomcat,

I just got back my results from DNA tribes. They placed all me all over the map in Africa, but neither the Native American or the European showed up! I had suubmitted samples to DNAprint a few weeks before I did DNA tribes to see how I matched up against my brother. According to DNA print I am 39% African-20 % European and 41 % Native. According to DNA tribes I have absolutely no Native American and very, very little European. WHich means that either my dad may not be my dad (alhtough we are identical) LOL and of course my mothers mtDNA is African although she her famliy are are extremely Native looking. I think the mirror test and family history says is best.
RD

Why not post your Tribes so others can see them? The World Region scores can be quite informative.

[Duval]

Why not post your Tribes so others can see them? The World Region scores can be quite informative.

DNA Tribes Genetic Ancestry Analysis
www.dnatribes.com - Customer support: [email protected]
6/12/2008 - Page 8 of 10

Here they Go Tomcat, This is actually quite funny and a total waste of time. DNA Tribes is eaither looking at something totally different than what I understood them to be looking for or there is a major flaw. Thanks for all your help Tomcat.
RD

DNA Tribes Genetic Ancestry Analysis

Part B: Your High Resolution Native Population Match Results
South Sotho (South Africa) (0.39)
Zulu (South Africa) (0.33)
Tsonga (Shangaan) (0.33)
Tswana (South Africa) (0.35)
Venda (South Africa) (0.31)
Xhosa (South Africa) (0.23)
Tanzania (0.36)
Equatorial Guinea (0.37)
Ovambo Bantu (Namibia) (0.24)
Ovambo Bantu (Namibia) (0.2)
Fang (Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea) (0.21)
Bubi (Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea) (0.18)
Ewondo (Febe Village, Cameroon) (0.12)
Northern Portugal (0.56)
Angola (0.15)
Guineau-Bissau (0.14)
Northern Portugal (0.47)
Tunisia (0.46)
Guinea-Bissau (0.17)

African-American (Canada) (0.63)
Afro-Caribbean (United Kingdom) (0.75)
South Sotho (South Africa) (0.39)
African-American (U.S.A.) (0.63)
Zulu (South Africa) (0.33)
Tsonga (Shangaan) (0.33)
African-American (0.52)
Afro-Caribbean (Jamaica) (0.47)
Tswana (South Africa) (0.35)
African-American (0.54)
Venda (South Africa) (0.31)
African-American (Illinois, U.S.A.) (0.46)
Xhosa (South Africa) (0.23)
Tanzania (0.36)
Afro-Caribbean (Bahamas) (0.42)
Equatorial Guinea (0.37)
African-American (California, U.S.A.) (0.42)
African-American (U.S.A.) (0.39)
African-American (Alabama, U.S.A.) (0.35)
Ovambo Bantu (Namibia) (0.24)

Amazonian (0)
Ojibwa (0)
Athabaskan (0)
Mexican (0)
Patagonian (0)
Arctic (0)
North Amerindian (0)
Central American (0)
Mayan (0)
Salishan (0)
Andean (0)
Polynesian (0)
South Chinese (0)
Japanese (0)
North Chinese (0)
South India (0)
Southeast Asian (0)
Australian (0)
Eastern India (0)
Malay Archipelago (0)
Tibetan (0)
Altaian (0)
North India (0)
Mesopotamian (0)
Arabian (0.01)
Mestizo (0.02)
Levantine (0.04)
Eastern European (0.04)
Finno-Ugrian (0.07)
Northwest European (0.07)
Aegean (0.09)
Mediterranean (0.08)
North African (0.11)
East African (0.2)
Southern African (0.26)
West African (0.35)
Southern African (0.26)