New Tribes' Populations

[tomcat]

Additions to the Tribes comparative database posted today:

New East Asian Populations:
Han (Jinan, China) (420)
Shanghai, China (1,000)

New European Populations:
Bashkir (Russian Federation) (100)
Belarus (2,196)
Belarus (96)
Chuvash (Russian Federation) (96)
Kharkov, Ukraine (114)
Komi (Russian Federation) (103)
Mari (Russian Federation) (44)
Moldova (92)
Mordva-Erzia (Russian Federation) (52)
Mordva-Moksha (Russian Federation) (47)
Moscow, Russia (187)
Northern Dobruja, Romania (569)
Russian (100)
Tatar-Mishary (Russian Federation) (94)
Transylvania, Romania (1,977)
Udmurt (Russian Federation) (93)
Ukrainian (97)

New Latin American Populations:
Santa Catarina, Brazil (3,000)

New Siberian Populations:
Yakut (Russian Federation) (94)

New South Asian Populations:
Indian Tamil (Sri Lanka) (40)
Sinhalese (Sri Lanka) (292)
Sri Lankan Moor (Sri Lanka) (74)
Sri Lankan Tamil (Sri Lanka) (107)

[Maria_W]

Great...

Tom,

Thank you for letting us know! Will report back...

Maria

[Maria_W]

Are they even open..?

Sent for my reports about 2 hours ago and then relized today is a holiday and they may not be open...They probably aren't doing reports today.....

Maria

[Maria_W]

Thank you DNA Tribes...

Just get my reports from DNA Tribes..

As far as the Native Panel, its all 0's. Basically what I expected... Have to look at other panels...

Maria

[Maria_W]

Europa results...

Here are my Jan 19, 2009 results:

1. Polish: (0.66) 437.30 Score dropped.
2. Celtic: (0.57) 413.00 Score dropped.
3. Germanic: (0.58) 317.41 Score dropped.
4. Finno-Ugrian: (0.60) 290.34 Score increased.
5. Balkan (0.57) 284.48 Score increased.
6. Norse: (0.52) 231.04 Score dropped.
7. Spanish: (0.05) 221.04 Score increased.
8. Russian: (0.54) 141.88 Russian Score dropped.
9. Portuguesse (0.39) 106.13 Score dropped.
10. Italian (0.41) 94.81 Score increased.
11. Greek (0.32) 32.77 Score increased.
12. Basque (0.14) 10.92 Score drooped.
13. Ashkenazi: (0.02) 0.67 Score stayed the same.

What amazes me is that I can have a score higher than the people born in thier own country, like 66% for Poland

Comments welcome.... Any one else care to post test results?

Maria

[Jim Honeychuck]

1 Pomerania-Kujawy, Northern Poland (0.68) 890.40
2 Serbia and Montenegro (0.7) 670.32
3 Italy (0.66) 598.97
4 European-Aboriginal (mixed) (Riverine Region, Australia) (0.8) 592.73
5 Andalusia, Spain (0.48) 475.92
6 Spain (0.58) 382.31
7 Poland (0.7) 378.10
8 Lombardia, Italy (0.63) 374.97
9 Upper Silesia, Poland (0.65) 369.29
10 Emilia-Romagna, Italy (0.67) 365.60
11 European-Aboriginal (mixed) (New South Wales, Australia) (0.78) 361.07 12 Toulouse, France (0.62) 350.13
13 Italy (0.6) 333.79
14 Serbia (0.57) 320.45
15 Albanian (Kosovo, Albania) (0.61) 315.12
16 European-Aboriginal (mixed) (Southeast Australia) (0.71) 310.73
17 Moldova (0.72) 310.63 new population
18 Northern Dobruja, Romania (0.72) 305.74 new population
19 Csango (Romania) (0.5) 304.02
20 European-Aboriginal (mixed) (Western Australia) (0.82) 300.99
21 Indian (Malaysia) (0.82) 292.90
22 Transylvania, Romania (0.71) 284.75 new population
23 Central Poland (0.52) 282.35
24 Germany (0.5) 280.46
25 Germany (0.51) 280.46

Known ancestry is Irish on my mother's side and a Slovak/Polish/German/prob. Romanian mix on my father's.

23andMe picks up the Irish, DNA Tribes does not. Otherwise, DNA Tribes results look good.

Regards,
Jim

[Maria_W]

DNA Tribes results...

Jim,

Thanks for posting your results...You have some high numbers...Sure is slow in here lately...Going to post some more of my results..Have 4 more panels...

Maria

[Maria_W]

Central Asian Panel...

Here are my Jan 19, 2009 results...1 and above.

1. Roma (Eastern Slovakia) (0.23) 43.42
2. Baskir (Russian Federation) (0.29) 9.15
3. Roma (Eastern Hungary) (0.21) 7.26
4. Mordva-Moksha (Russian Federation) (0.17) 2.91
5. Mordva-Ezria (Russian Federation) (0.16) 2.26
6. Komi (Russian Federation) (0.15) 2.15
7. Roma (Roma) (0.13) 2.07
8. Tartar-Mishary (Russian Federation) (0.13) 1.57
9. Chuvash (Russian Federation) (0.12) 1.53

Maria

[tomcat]

I didn't spring for this update. But I did ask Tribes for their NA admixture estimation on the profiles of myself and 5 siblings. Based on 13-marker profiles, 2 of the 5 sibs were judged most likely 100% European with 1 of those potentially 1/8 NA. The other 3, and I based on my 21-marker profile, were 1/8-1/4 NA. I got 1/4 NA most likely, the others were 1/8 NA most likely. All except 1 had European as most likely majority ancestry.

[JuanCarlos]

I didn't spring for this update. But I did ask Tribes for their NA admixture estimation on the profiles of myself and 5 siblings. Based on 13-marker profiles, 2 of the 5 sibs were judged most likely 100% European with 1 of those potentially 1/8 NA. The other 3, and I based on my 21-marker profile, were 1/8-1/4 NA. I got 1/4 NA most likely, the others were 1/8 NA most likely. All except 1 had European as most likely majority ancestry.

How did you get DNA Tribes to do that? Do they charge extra for that? It's usually Lucas Martin who answers the e mails but, usually, he only gives very succint information. Short and official.

[tomcat]

I asked for the estimations from Lucas, referencing the fact he had provided them to others. There was no charge.

[JuanCarlos]

I asked for the estimations from Lucas, referencing the fact he had provided them to others. There was no charge.

Thank you, Tomcat

[rainbow]

I asked for the estimations from Lucas, referencing the fact he had provided them to others. There was no charge.

Mine is also 1/8 to 1/4 NA.
I just ordered the new update analysis and I'll probably see my new results in my email sometime tomorrow, if I am online then.

[DKF]

I didn't spring for this update. But I did ask Tribes for their NA admixture estimation on the profiles of myself and 5 siblings. Based on 13-marker profiles, 2 of the 5 sibs were judged most likely 100% European with 1 of those potentially 1/8 NA. The other 3, and I based on my 21-marker profile, were 1/8-1/4 NA. I got 1/4 NA most likely, the others were 1/8 NA most likely. All except 1 had European as most likely majority ancestry.

Tomcat, do you believe what they are telling you (is there cross validation) or are they just telling you what they think that you want to hear (which does appear to have happened in some instances).

I cannot see how 21 STR markers can provide any information of significance unless the marker repeat values were very distinct and unique to certain populations (and that is vanishingly rare).

I just went through a process of examining all 130 Mb or so of 5 autosomes looking for matches in the HDGP-CEPH panel. The only non-European matches were East Asian (but only Yakut showed up, the closest genetically to Native Americans), plus Native American Pima and Maya. All matches were over 1 Mb and 100 SNPs. It would seem that an approach such as this is the only practical way to estimate minority ancestry (although it is not available commercially).

It does not seem reasonable to expect anything of significance from a mere 21 STR markers when there are 22 autosomes so at best one marker per chromosome. So again, are these numbers you are getting valid? How can they say 1/4 or anything so specific with the data they have to work with?

[tomcat]

With a shake of coarse-grained sea salt

DKF,

Don't know if Lucas is telling me what I want to hear but he did answer my question as to estimation of NA ancestry. Likely I would get a different answer to a different question. For all I know sibling profiles may also be consistent with 1/4-1/8 African ancestry, or any random American with no Native ancestry might be estimated as having 1/8-1/4 Native ancestry.