Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Tribes' Populations

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by tomcat View Post
    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.
    If you don't mind me asking tomcat, what in your report, or in anything substantive that you can refer to (other than an interpretive statement from a company representative), would tend to support or confirm or at least be consistent with this 1/8 to 1/4 NA statement?

    The reason I am asking is that I have heard this before in relation to reports where there was nothing I could see in their data that would even remotely lead anyone, at least me, to see what the company allegedly saw. It is perhaps a "canned statement". Even with 657 K markers (but we are talking about 21 here) it is only with great hesitation that anyone could reasonably make such assessments. It just boggles my mind. There is something called "truth in advertising" and I might tend to question whether any test with 21 markers is able to make claims of this nature when the markers where not specifically chosen for their ancestral informative properties - but are being deployed in this way irrespective.
    Last edited by DKF; 28 January 2009, 01:23 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DKF View Post
      If you don't mind me asking tomcat, what in your report, or in anything substantive that you can refer to (other than an interpretive statement from a company representative), would tend to support or confirm or at least be consistent with this 1/8 to 1/4 NA statement?...
      On my 21-marker upgrade of a year ago, regular and extended reports I have numerous lesser matches (but >1.0) to Mestizo and Central Asian populations. The estimation of 1/8-1/4 is not inconsistent with an AbDNA admixture estimate of 31% NA from three years back or out-of-line with the evidence of family phenotypes.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by DKF View Post
        ...I might tend to question whether any test with 21 markers is able to make claims of this nature when the markers where not specifically chosen for their ancestral informative properties - but are being deployed in this way irrespective.
        Well, I have never been 'unhappy' with my Tribes reports, they have always seemed 'accurate' in a quick-sketch sort of way (I have personally done the 9, 13, 15, and 21-marker iterations). Hence, I have always been impressed with how well the profile-matching system works, and hoped that an elaboration of the statistics might yield even more.(I may be inclined to see-the-world-in-a-grain-of-sand or act like a-dog-with-a-bone or make lemonade-when-given-lemons).

        But my genealogy is rather simple, albeit shallow, a 100% Ashkenazi paternal line and a Euro-Native maternal line.

        Comment


        • #19
          In my new updated analyis the Athabaskan (Alaska) went from a match to a non-match again. It is now 0.01. All others in my Native American Panel are 0.00

          In my Europa my top match is again Portuguese, followed by Norse, then Spanish, then Celtic.

          My 'World Regions" now have twelve regions of 1.0 and above.

          My top 20 are pretty much the same as last time, but I picked up another match in Turkey.

          My global populations have even more matches to Brazil, 12 in all, plus Azores, plus Puerto Rican (top match).
          So that is 14 Latin American matches in my global top 20.

          Comment


          • #20
            In Detail

            Originally posted by DKF View Post
            If you don't mind me asking tomcat, what in your report, or in anything substantive that you can refer to (other than an interpretive statement from a company representative), would tend to support or confirm or at least be consistent with this 1/8 to 1/4 NA statement?...
            At the time of my upgrade to 21 markers, I compared my World Region scores to those of the Ashkenazi sample.pdf. (World Region is the closest tribes comes to an admixture analysis). My results were more similar to Ashkenazi than not. My roster of Top 20 matches were mostly the same as Ashkenazi, but the ranking of my matches was different. All my strongest matches were among Ashkenazis' weakest and my weakest among Ashkenazis' strongest. My strongest matches had a more easterly geography than Ashkenazi (Arabian vs. Mediterranean, Mesopotamian vs. N.W. Europe, N. Indian vs, Aegean, Aegean vs. E. European, S. Indian vs. Levantine, etc.) I reasoned that if my maternal ancestry was wholly European my strongest matches ought to have been shifted toward Western Europe.

            In fact, of my TOP 40 matches, only 3 were to European 'outliers', two to the Roma at rank 6 and 23 and one to Portugal at rank 27, whereas 13 of my TOP 40 matches are to Central or South American populations beginning at rank 12.

            Of my 364 positive (1.0 or greater) matches, 12 were to Central America, 49 to South America, 16 to Hispanics, 7 to Central Asians, and 4 to Native American populations for a total of 88 or about 1/4 of all positive matches (a fraction that merely coincides with the estimate and is without significance).

            So, I find plenty of support in my results for the estimate of 1/8-1/4 NA.
            Last edited by tomcat; 29 January 2009, 11:32 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by tomcat View Post
              At the time of my upgrade to 21 markers, I compared my World Region scores to those of the Ashkenazi sample.pdf. (World Region is the closest tribes comes to an admixture analysis). My results were more similar to Ashkenazi than not. My roster of Top 20 matches were mostly the same as Ashkenazi, but the ranking of my matches was different. All my strongest matches were among Ashkenazis' weakest and my weakest among Ashkenazis' strongest. My strongest matches had a more easterly geography than Ashkenazi (Arabian vs. Mediterranean, Mesopotamian vs. N.W. Europe, N. Indian vs, Aegean, Aegean vs. E. European, S. Indian vs. Levantine, etc.) I reasoned that if my maternal ancestry was wholly European my strongest matches ought to have been shifted toward Western Europe.

              In fact, of my TOP 40 matches, only 3 were to European 'outliers', two to the Roma at rank 6 and 23 and one to Portugal at rank 27, whereas 13 of my TOP 40 matches are to Central or South American populations beginning at rank 12.

              Of my 364 positive (1.0 or greater) matches, 12 were to Central America, 49 to South America, 16 to Hispanics, 7 to Central Asians, and 4 to Native American populations for a total of 88 or about 1/4 of all positive matches (a fraction that merely coincides with the estimate and is without significance).

              So, I find plenty of support in my results for the estimate of 1/8-1/4 NA.
              You tell 'em.

              364 positive (1.0 and above) matches? That is impressive! I only had two hundred something for each update.
              While typing this I just checked my new extended to see how many this time....408 matches at 1.0 and above. Not trying to brag.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by rainbow View Post

                My global populations have even more matches to Brazil, 12 in all, plus Azores, plus Puerto Rican (top match).
                So that is 14 Latin American matches in my global top 20.

                Correction: My global has only eleven matches to Brazil(ian), and then one match to Puerto Rican, one match to Azores, and a match to Portugal, and a match to Northeast Spain.

                In my extended I have 408 matches. I have even more latin American matches now. Brazil is in my top 20, my extended includes various matches to Brazil, Venezuela, Honduras, Costa Rica, Mexcio, Argentina, Colombia, & Ecuador. I also have a few matches to Roma, and Greece, Syria, Morocco, etc.

                Comment


                • #23
                  my 2009 updated analysis results

                  DNA Tribes Europa:
                  Portuguese (0.32) 72.89
                  Norse (0.32) 49.11
                  Spanish (0.28) 44.07
                  Celtic (0.26) 36.41
                  Italian (0.26) 29.92
                  Balkan (0.31) 28.40
                  Germanic (0.26) 22.26
                  Finno-Ugrian (0.27) 19.42
                  Greek (0.28) 18.16
                  Basque (0.14) 14.22
                  Russian (0.16) 7.05
                  Polish (0.15) 6.80
                  Ashkenazi (0.03) 1.72


                  DNA Tribes analysis
                  Part B:
                  Syria (0.6) 191.27
                  Morocco (0.39) 152.82
                  Portugal (0.35) 101.52
                  Northeast Spain (0.37) 84.04
                  Flemish (0.4) 78.03
                  Switzerland (0.33) 75.18
                  Central Portugal (0.39) 71.63
                  Portugal (0.33) 68.73
                  France (0.36) 63.63
                  Flemish (Belgium) (0.32) 63.09
                  Andalusia, Spain (0.24) 62.01
                  Flemish (0.38) 61.81
                  Extremadura, Spain (0.31) 54.48
                  Bosnian Mountain Villages (0.41) 54.13
                  Arab (Israel) (0.34) 52.91
                  Denmark (0.28) 51.93
                  Piemonte, Italy (0.33) 51.44
                  Sicily, Italy (0.39) 51.17
                  Turkey (0.39) 49.78
                  Duzce, Turkey (0.35) 44.60


                  Part C: Global matches (I take this to mean where my 'blend' best matches blends around the world).
                  Puerto Rican (Springfield, Massachusetts, USA) (0.52) 209.00
                  Sergipe, Brazil (0.39) 207.37
                  Syria (0.6) 191.27
                  Morocco (0.39) 152.82
                  Sao Paulo, Brazil (0.4) 124.70
                  Brazil (0.47) 117.07
                  Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (0.46) 114.84
                  Minas Gerais, Brazil (0.39) 112.68
                  Santa Catarina, Brazil (0.46) 110.32 (yes, twice)
                  Santa Catarina, Brazil (0.47) 105.19
                  Brazilian (Southeastern, Southern & Central Brazil) (0.45) 102.82
                  Portugal (0.35) 101.52
                  Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (0.38) 95.42
                  Azores Archipelago (0.46) 93.67
                  Paraiba, Brazil (0.32) 92.82
                  Northeast Spain (0.37) 84.04
                  Caucasian (0.34) 84.00
                  Flemish (0.4) 78.03
                  Belem, Brazil (0.41) 77.73
                  Switzerland (0.33) 75.18


                  Part D: World Regions. I have twelve of 1.0 and greater.
                  North African (0.32) 65.35
                  Mediterranean (0.34) 53.57
                  Northwest European (0.3) 44.48
                  Levantine (0.37) 40.80
                  Aegean (0.39) 37.86
                  Mestizo (0.45) 28.41
                  Mesopotamian (0.32) 22.85
                  Finno-Ugrian (0.26) 19.42
                  Eastern European (0.21) 14.23
                  North India (0.34) 10.80
                  Arabian (0.15) 9.65
                  South India (0.07) 1.40

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    My Roma matches. And Central Asian & Russian matches.

                    Originally posted by Maria_W View Post
                    Here are my Jan 19, 2009 results...1 and above.

                    1. Roma (Eastern Slovakia) (0.23) 43.42
                    2. Bashkir (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
                    Hi
                    I didn't order a Central Asian panel, but I jotted down yours and looked in my extended report to see what my scores are (1.0 and above), and I included all the Roma matches, and I looked at the DNA Tribes website to see what else is in their CA panel that I may or may not have.

                    I'll start with my Roma matches.
                    Roma (Eastern Slovakia) (0.21) 28.47
                    Roma (Eastern Hungary) (0.22) 9.55
                    Roma (Greece) (0.26) 6.63
                    Roma (Northwest Croatia) (0.06) 5.49
                    Roma (Baranya, Hungary) (0.07) 3.53
                    Roma (Republic of Macedonia) (0.07) 1.38

                    Miscellaneous Central Asian scores of 1.0 and greater.
                    Bashkir (0.4) 12.57
                    Chuvash (0.22) 4.57
                    Komi (Perm Krai, Russia) (0.27) 4.53
                    Uzbek (Xinjiang, Chinese Turkestan) (0.11) 2.48
                    (I don't match Tartar or Mordva, etc.)

                    And I see you listed some more matches in Russia, so I looked to see what else I match in Russia. Mine are:
                    Southern Russia (Stavropol, Orel and Saratov regions) (0.18) 9.94
                    Saratov, Russia (0.21) 5.40
                    Russia (0.1) 4.27
                    Russian (0.14) 3.64
                    Velikiy Novgorod, Russia (0.18) 2.43
                    Moscow, Russia (0.07) 1.65
                    Belgorod, Russia (0.2) 1.64
                    Mineralnye Vody, Russia (0.13) 1.61
                    Last edited by rainbow; 29 January 2009, 02:38 PM. Reason: mispelled something

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      In my first DNA Tribes, back in late 2006/early 2007, I had Mozambique as my second highest match.
                      In my newest extended report I see there are 3 Mozambiques, all at (0) with one at 0.30, the other two are 0.03. Japan & Korea are also (0).


                      According to my mother we are mostly Scottish & English (on her side). My father has a tiny bit of Scottish too (and English).

                      Here are my 4 Scotland match scores;
                      Dundee, Scotland (0.22) 38.07
                      Glasgow, Scotland (0.17) 18.23
                      Strathclyde, Scotland (0.14) 15.48
                      Dundee, Scotland (0.14) 9.92

                      My 1 England match:
                      London, England (0.27) 29.40

                      United Kingdom (5 matches):
                      United Kingdom (0.26) 25.37
                      United Kingdom (0.38) 23.26
                      Wales, United Kingdom (0.18) 12.84
                      United Kingdom (0.03) 8.14
                      Last edited by rainbow; 29 January 2009, 03:34 PM. Reason: adding London & United Kingdom

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Hey Rainbow,
                        I just recently got my Europa scores and my top match was also Portuguese.

                        Portuguese (0.84)5,149.36
                        Ashkenazi (0.61)1,571.00
                        Celtic (0.7)1,173.28
                        Balkan (0.67)641.68
                        Italian (0.68)597.60
                        Germanic (0.66)585.48
                        Norse (0.61)459.09
                        Polish (0.57)214.63
                        Greek (0.59)205.44
                        Spanish (0.4)112.02
                        Russian (0.45)78.25
                        Finno-Ugrian (0.32)38.41
                        Basque (0.19)22.82

                        I haven't had my scores updated since the new populations have been added, but based on my main Tribes report, I don't think the populations would factor in much for me.

                        Tiffany

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Maria_W View Post

                          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
                          I think it's odd, too. My score for Iran was 99% and Kuwait was 94%. Almost all my native population matches were in the 80th or 90th percentile.

                          Tiffany

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Tribes is offering a new report on the genetics of the Coastal Silk Routes to complement their last on the Inland Silk Route. Go to Tribes News and Updates section to download a free PDF.
                            Last edited by tomcat; 1 February 2009, 09:59 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by tomcat View Post
                              Tribes is offering a new report on the genetics of the Coastal Silk Routes to complement their last on the Inland Silk Route. Go to Tribes News and Updates section to download a free PDF.
                              I did earlier but I had to go and couldn't read it. I'll try again now. I'm sure it'll be fascinating.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Just for the record, I shared my latest results with my mom. She says she noticed that they always match me to foreign, exotic places and not to places where my ancestors actually came from. She says they are ripping people off (it's a waste of money), and it is ridiculous.

                                I'm going to read the new digest pdf now...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X