New Tribes' Populations

[rainbow]

Wow, seventeen European sub-regions! Have any Europa testers done this upgrade? What do you think?

I'm waiting for my updated Europa. Probably won't change much. I'll probably still get Portuguese in first place, even though I am not Portuguese. Then maybe Celtic in 2nd. And maybe Belgic in 3rd place.
I wonder what my Scythian and Thracian scores would be.

[rainbow]

My new updated Europa is in.

Portuguese is still in first place at (0.34) 75.28
Belgic is second at (0.33) 52.81
Spanish is third at (0.28) 47.08
Celtic is fourth at (0.25) 41.72
Italian (0.29) 32.59
Germanic (0.25) 25.28
Balkan (0.26) 23.18
Norse (0.24) 23.04
Thracian (0.28) 21.07
Greek (0.23) 15.78
Finnic (0.23) 12.95
Basque (0.13) 11.89
Scythian (0.19) 8.90
Polish (0.15) 7.15
Russian (0.12) 4.11
Urals (0.14) 3.47
Ashkenazic (0.03) 1.10


My Native American panel still has no matches. Athabaskan (Alaska) is at the top of that list at (0.01) 0.01


My regular report, Part B, has picked up Maghrebi at #20 at (0.34) 45.96!
My top match in Part B is still Syria at (0.6) 183.82
And my World Regions, Part D, has the same twelve as last time plus a new one - East African at (0.01) 1.54! That makes it thirteen altogether.


According to the Europa document, the Urals is where the Mongols and Huns (Hunnic) were from.

[Noaide]

Saturday, May 30, 2009
DNA Tribes Digest for May 30, 2009: Genetic Relationships among South American Indians

The new issue of DNA Tribes Digest is now available. This month's feature article is "Genetic Relationships among South American Indians," where we explore genetic characteristics in the Patagonian, Amazonian, and Andean regions.

Table of Contents for May 30, 2009

Introduction
Genetic Relationships among South American Indians
At the Ends of the Earth: the Patagonian Region
Eden of the Americas: the Amazonian Region
Mountain Backbone of South America: the Andean Region
Conclusion

I have no trouble with using the CODIS markers in population genetics studies as these contain many individuals and then in effect many markers, however to use these markers as means for investigating individual ancestry and especially minor ancestry is really waste of time and money.

[tomcat]

My new updated Europa is in.

Portuguese is still in first place at (0.34) 75.28
Belgic is second at (0.33) 52.81
Spanish is third at (0.28) 47.08
Celtic is fourth at (0.25) 41.72
Italian (0.29) 32.59
Germanic (0.25) 25.28
Balkan (0.26) 23.18
Norse (0.24) 23.04
Thracian (0.28) 21.07
Greek (0.23) 15.78
Finnic (0.23) 12.95
Basque (0.13) 11.89
Scythian (0.19) 8.90
Polish (0.15) 7.15
Russian (0.12) 4.11
Urals (0.14) 3.47
Ashkenazic (0.03) 1.10
...

Don't know what it might mean but I find it interesting that the geographic pattern of your top matches is generally south-north-south-north, etc. Pattern begins to morph at Thracian.

[Maria_W]

July Europa update...

1. Polish 548.96 (0.7)
2. Celtic 523.17 (0.57)
3. Germany 479.22 (0.65)
4. Balkan 376.49 (0.62)
5. Russian 326.01 (0.65)
6. Norse 283.88 (0.56)
7. Spanish 262.01 (0.51)
8. Belgic 207.27 (0.52)
9. Thracian 124.30 (0.54)
10. Portugueses 111.06 (0.39)
11. Italian 96.64 (0.44)
12. Greek 71.20 (0.43)
13. Finnic 52.37 (0.41)
14. Scythian 50.21 (0.4)
15. Basque 11.53 (.13)
16. Urals 12.07 (0.01)
17. Askenazi .96 (0.20)

Maria

[Maria_W]

Native American...

My Native American panel has all 0's. As expected....

Maria

[Maria_W]

African American...

My African American panel results were:

Sudan 0.03 (0)
Guinea-Bassau 0.03 (0)
Sudan 0.01 (0)

Maria

[BlackWolf]

Just got back my Native American panel, only one match

Chol Maya 0.01 (0.01)

[rainbow]

Just got back my Native American panel, only one match

Chol Maya 0.01 (0.01)

Hi,

That's your top match, meaning it is at the top of your list, but it isn't actually a match. A "match", according to DNATribes, is 1.00 and above.


At the top of my list I have Athabaskan (Alaska) at 0.01 (0.01). In some updates it is under 1.00 and not a match. And in other updates it is over 1.00 and a match.

[Maria_W]

DNA Tribes...

New population data comming in mid September per Lucas at DNA Tribes...

Maria

[tomcat]

Thanks Maria.

DNAT might promote these additions; "Coming in September 2009 ..."

I don't expect to update unless the new populations are relevant. New populations are a given. Tribes ought to be working on new algorithms.

[Maria_W]

Time to change algorithms...

Tom,

I agree, I always have to go to their website or email them..
Yes, wish they would change their algorithms also...
Will see what is new the middle of the month...

Maria

[tomcat]

One can hope. Maybe next year they will give up their dubious Deep Ancestry analsis and get practical. Improbable Crosses. Lesotho x Evenki=Michigan Soccer Mom.

[jah]

apology & query (via synthesis of ideas)

Tom, it's been a long time since we last corresponded. I wanted to apologize if I was offensive in any previous exchange. Also, I think that your idea about possible Slavic slavery in Andalusia as a part of my ancestry seems very plausible. You may be interested to learn that in tracking my ancestral paper trail, I discovered that my Spanish mitochondrial ancestress is in fact real, and very recent (last 150-200 years).

Anyway, have you ever discussed Tribes' algorithms with Ann Turner? (Pardon me if you have posted on this previously. If so, could you direct me accordingly?)

Thanks, John

[tomcat]

I never have discussed Tribes' algorithms with Ann Turner.

I think the standard matching algorithm, and Tribes version of it, work surprisingly well. But, if one is admixed, as most of us are, our admixed profiles drive our matches whereas we would like our several ancestry components to register on their own terms.

In example, I am one-half Ukrainian Ashkenazi and one-half American Frontier Blend with a significant Native component. It ought to be possible, with today's computer and software technology, to run every possible combination of my alleles to yield a series of paired results; 1a and 1b and so forth, where #a is the mirror of #b, the alleles in #a are 'opposite' or other than the alleles in #b.

In my case, I woud expect that relatively few of my potential haplotyes would register as 100% Ukrainian Ashkenazi and that their opposites would all register as Native, to a degree.

Through a follow-on analysis of those pairs that best conform to known ancestry it may be possible to disclose minor ancestry components.

This may not work in cases of multiple admixture.