Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An East Asian's AncestryByDNA2.5 Results

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

  • An East Asian's AncestryByDNA2.5 Results

    Hi I am east Asian. 100% Korean as far back as my family records can take us and that is well over 600 years.

    Well, I got my Ancestry by DNA 2.5 test results back and they are;
    East Asian 95%
    European 2%
    Native american 3%
    Sub Saharan African 0%

    So, where did I get the European and native American genes from? And can I find out when timewise the Native American and European genes got into my system?
    Thanks
    Last edited by Hando; 21 May 2008, 08:27 PM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Hando
    Hi I am east Asian. 100% Korean as far back as my family records can take us and that is well over 600 years.

    Well, I got my Ancestry by DNA 2.5 test results back and they are;
    East Asian 95%
    European 2%
    Native american 3%
    Sub Saharan African 0%

    So, where did I get the European and native American genes from? And can I find out when timewise the Native American and European genes got into my system?
    Thanks
    The chief scientist at ABDNA once told me that Koreans typically test 5% Native American. In other words there is some overlap between NA and EA but it does not mean that you have either NA or European (it is statistical noise).

    My last visit to Korea included a visit to Kyongju where my Korean son-in-law's dad and I went to the Buddhist temple that is built on the site of the supposed birthplace of his earliest known Kim ancestor. He is a direct descendant of Kim Mich'u (262-284 AD), as is my eldest grandaughter.

    Comment


    • #3
      Anyone else also believe it is "Statistical noise?"

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DKF
        My last visit to Korea included a visit to Kyongju where my Korean son-in-law's dad and I went to the Buddhist temple that is built on the site of the supposed birthplace of his earliest known Kim ancestor. He is a direct descendant of Kim Mich'u (262-284 AD), as is my eldest grandaughter.
        Hi DKF, I recently spoke to a Korean history professor and he has me confused. This professor told me that gynocologists told him that there is a 5% possibility that every child who is born has a father who is not his mother's husband. Ie his real father is someone other than his purported father.
        Is this true? Are there any gynocologsits who can corroborate or dismiss this?

        2)Also, so does this mean that over the length of 20 generations, a child will be born to a different father than the supposed "real" father or am I missing a factor in the formula? I just assumed 5% X 20 = 100% chance of wrong father....

        If I am correct in my assumptions then for example, the Danish royal family who have been around for over 100 years will have had "fake" sons, since they have over 30 generations?
        Please let me know. Am I missing something in my calculations? I was never good at statistics or maths.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think I heard similar numbers too, but I don't think there is any evidence for them. Perhaps they're just legends, or perhaps it's one particular situation that has been generalized out of context. My personal guess is that such probability is much lower than 5%.

          As for your point 2, I think you are confusing averages with certainty. Taking your 5% number for true, this would mean _on average_ one child out of 20 generations. But that's an average, some would have zero and some two. Plus, it depends on the family and the situation. Clearly, in a controlled situation such as a royal family, the probability could be lower, and in other situations (such as wars etc.) it could be higher.

          cacio

          Comment


          • #6
            I read that some Scandinavians and Eastern Europeans get low results for East Asian and Native American. There probably is admixture in the general population/gene pool. Is that called 'founder effect'?
            And lots of Mediterraneans and Middle East people have a small amount of African.
            AncestryByDna told me that their Native American markers coincide with Central Asian. So your Native American may be either from stragglers who wandered away from Siberia and didn't go across the Bering Land bridge and instead stayed in Asia, or, may be from ancestors who traveled the Silk Road, or from Ghengis Khan's armies that went eastward, or from people of Uyghur or Tocharian descent that went further east.
            I know of someone from Norway who got a low percentage of African and East Asian from decodeme. And his highest match DNATribes was to Crete.
            There are legends about 'raven-haired' people in Norse mythology, (the Aesir were from Asia), and there is a legend that Odin was the son of Priam of Troy. Troy was pretty close to Crete.
            Sami's from Finland, etc get about 15% Native American, that I suppose may be from Central Asian or Artic Amerind admixture.
            My favorite idea explaining your low result is that it's from people who traveled along the Silk Road and further on to Korea, since you have some European too.
            Last edited by rainbow; 22 May 2008, 09:46 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rainbow
              My favorite idea explaining your low result is that it's from people who traveled along the Silk Road and further on to Korea, since you have some European too.
              So your suggesting that my 2% European came from either Tocharians or Uighers or other Caucasians who travelled the silk road? And not "statistical noise" as dkf suggested? I wasnt sure what u meant....

              Comment


              • #8
                Also, sorry i meant the danish royal family have been around for over 1000 years, not 100.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Either the results are valid or they are not. If it is valid then try to think of where it could possibly be from. I know nothing about Korea's history. Maybe you have ideas of your own about when and how those genes got to you in Korea.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If it's from Mongol invasion, then that could explain your European and Native American (Central Asian markers) results because maybe some of the Mongols were already mixed with European genes.
                    Connecting the World to Asian Culture! Everything from event coverage to exclusive interviews of your favorite Asian star and model!


                    Amazons in myth: History's first mention of a race of warrior women is found in Homer's ILIAD, an account of the Trojan War, probably written in the 8th
                    Last edited by rainbow; 22 May 2008, 10:14 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Hando
                      Hi DKF, I recently spoke to a Korean history professor and he has me confused. This professor told me that gynocologists told him that there is a 5% possibility that every child who is born has a father who is not his mother's husband. Ie his real father is someone other than his purported father.
                      Is this true? Are there any gynocologsits who can corroborate or dismiss this?

                      2)Also, so does this mean that over the length of 20 generations, a child will be born to a different father than the supposed "real" father or am I missing a factor in the formula? I just assumed 5% X 20 = 100% chance of wrong father....

                      If I am correct in my assumptions then for example, the Danish royal family who have been around for over 100 years will have had "fake" sons, since they have over 30 generations?
                      Please let me know. Am I missing something in my calculations? I was never good at statistics or maths.
                      Fact is that if varies in relation to time and place. Giving a single figure of say 5% is highly misleading. I have a review paper on the matter and the rate of "non-parental events" varies dramatically across the globe, and archival research suggests that it is also a function of historical time (more likely in one era than another). In addition factors such as socio-economic status must be factored in. I have done extensive Y testing in cousins of many different lines in my family and back to ancestors in common in the 1600s and never once is there an npe. In my Shetland project I can see evidence of varying percentages but in some families there is clear evidence that although separated by 600 years, those with the same surname have the same (a couple of mutations of course) Y-chromosome motif.

                      Your "European" falls within the confidence interval that includes zero. There are those with a romantic bent and prone to flights of fantasy who will want to read meaning in tea leaves but for anyone who is interested in cold hard fact - statistical noise. The test is somewhat of a blunt instrument unless one understands its properties. The scores are "best estimates" and nothing more. A small percentage of this or that in someone who is 100% Korean means nothing. I fully expect that my son-in-law would score similar to you but the figures would be slightly different. There is no way that the test can resolve down to even 10% with any degree of validity. I really don't think we should expect it to be able to do this but many people have a tiny amount of NA and hope that it will show up in this test. If it does it means nothing without a paper trail, and if it does not then it could easily be a false negative.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Hando
                        Also, sorry i meant the danish royal family have been around for over 1000 years, not 100.
                        That's okay, I know what you meant.

                        And thanks for sharing your very interesting AncestryByDna results.

                        Originally posted by Hando
                        So your suggesting that my 2% European came from either Tocharians or Uighers or other Caucasians who travelled the silk road?
                        Yes, I think that is a possibility. Or possibly from Mongolians who were already mixed with Sarmations. Or maybe a combination of all possibilities.
                        Last edited by rainbow; 22 May 2008, 11:13 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Generational dilution and database confidence levels could easily support intervals of 0 to 10% as being "statistical noise".

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by marvallen
                            Generational dilution and database confidence levels could easily support intervals of 0 to 10% as being "statistical noise".
                            "Generational dilution" implies the admixture measured is "real" and not "statistical noise" but the scores are within AbDNA's range for "noise." Unfortunately, there is no way to discern the difference. Take it or leave. Make of it what you will. Or "upgrade" to a whole genome scan (DeCodeMe, etc.).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi,
                              You could also test another member of your family if you have the funds.
                              My Mum got 11% East Asian (could be as high as 20%) and I did the test to see if it was valid and sure enough I got 1% East Asian (could be as high as 10%) and as autosomal DNA is dished out to each child randomly I figured out the East Asian is significant but I drew the short straw and didn't get much

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X