Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reference Populations Discussion

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

  • Reference Populations Discussion

    Looking at the reference populations and comparing it to my results has brought up some issues - maybe you have seen this too? I want to discuss this and anybody else that has this issue. After looking at it and my own known history I think a difference can be seen in the recent and ancestral aspects particularly with your Y-DNA (I1-Z138) and mtDNA (H6a1b3a) (at least I think so in my case. So here is the data:

    Me: Med 39 Euro 38 SWA 22

    The two populations they gave me: Note that I total 99% so 1% is unknown.(As we discovered earlier the order is irrelevent)

    Greek: Med 54 Euro 28 SWA 17 (+18, -10, -5)
    British: Med 33 Euro 50 SWA17 (-6, +12, -5)

    Now after reading some other populations I think they could/should/maybe have used another reference esp. in place of the Greek.

    German: Med 36 Euro 46 SWA 17 (-3, +8, -5)

    Seems as if they should have chosen this instead of Greek which fits with my recent ancestry (Grandpa 1/2 German and a Great G-Ma 1/2 German). But wait theres more>

    Bulgarian: Med 47 Euro 31 SWA 20 NEA 2 (+8, -7, -2, +2)

    This seems like a better choice than Greek as well even though there is a 2% NEA - but that could have faded out while going west which fits well with the direct lineages. Is this a reasonble conclusion. Would this be a better reference for my ancient lineage w/ the German for more recent? But wait there is more>

    Romanian: Med 43 Euro 36 SWA 19 NEA 2 (+4, -2, -3, +1)

    Same as the Bulgarian but even closer with Me: 39 38 22

    Why didn't they or the computer chose this? It seems to also fit with my migration pattern of the direct lineages. All three of these are seemingly better than the Greek and even the British - except for that 2% NEA but remeber I had 1% unknown and my recent known ancestors are from the British Isles and Germany.

    Am I just seeing things or should one of the THREE have been chosen instead of Greek and even maybe British for my deep ancestry? Discuss and share your own similar issues.

  • #2
    My recent ancestry is 7/8 British Isles and 1/8 Danish.

    Me: N. Euro 45, Med 35, SWA 17, NEA 2
    Geno gave my first reference population as
    British 49, 33, 17
    and second German 46, 36, 17

    Although I have no ancestors in the past 7 generations the numbers are close. Dr McDonald also said that I look all German. He explained it that I have a small middle east and eastern europe segment that is pulling me east.

    I was hoping that Geno would pick up my Danish heritage but the numbers were not as close
    Danish 53, 30, 16
    Geno did pick up the NEA which could be attributed to the Saami people of far northern Scandinavia, they are listed in my maternal Haplogroup which is my Danish side.

    Comment


    • #3
      Geno 2

      I also decided to go over the population better and compare since they actually changed one of my populations from their original "guess" from German to Bulgarian. I exactly matched the Bulgarian population and they gave me German which was a surprise and the Greek also a bit of a surprise. I don't know 1/2 of my DNA but all other tools point to Italian, Romanian or the areas surrounding. My children come out with those areas so there must be something to it. Going over the list Romanian fits second best after Bulgarian and than the Tuscan and Greek tie. I am missing the 2% N Asian in the Bulgarian and Romanian but I have an unassigned 2 % so it could be that. I think they will be making changes as they did with one of my populations. I actually was very surprised as the results are still coming out and I didn't think they would be going over the ones that were out already. I wonder what happened? People that have knowledge of their lineage are going to question some of Geno's results I have no doubt!!

      Comment


      • #4
        It seems that they need to tighten-up how the computer assigns/infers the references. Actually, I am not upset - this is the inference part and it is Beta. I always anticipated using the data and researching and checking for myself. I am glad for the results and glad I have the data - just curious why

        Comment


        • #5
          Geno

          @JTR
          I guess I am looking for some affirmation to my thoughts on what is going on with the results. I am not as sure as most here on the DNA results and where and how it places you in the world and populations. Unlike most here the unknown for me has me questioning everything and never really giving me an answer. Their first guess of German as a ref pop had me going in another direction for 3 weeks and now the Bulgarian...makes your head spin!!!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Neves View Post
            Although I have no ancestors in the past 7 generations
            oops should read
            Although I have no "German" ancestors in the past 7 generations

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by auntsha View Post
              @JTR
              I guess I am looking for some affirmation to my thoughts on what is going on with the results. I am not as sure as most here on the DNA results and where and how it places you in the world and populations. Unlike most here the unknown for me has me questioning everything and never really giving me an answer. Their first guess of German as a ref pop had me going in another direction for 3 weeks and now the Bulgarian...makes your head spin!!!
              I kinda look at it like this - those references are what matches your results most closely, even though we have seen some trouble with that. As such they don't necessarily tell you that your recent ancestors are from this population or geographic region. So if you are not sure of those recent ancestors this probably won't help much.

              For me, all of my known ancestors that originate outside of America come from Germany and the British Isles so that makes sense but the closest to my results were Bulgarian and Romanian w/out the 2% (I had 1% unclear) so this could reflect ancient DNA that traveled west to Germany and British Isles but my signature relfects those modern populations of Romania and Bulgaria more closely - yet I don't expect to find any relatives there even back 10-15 generations.

              I don't know if that helps.
              Last edited by JTR; 13 December 2012, 11:57 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Do they have a FAQ section on their site yet to try and explain how they come to their answers? If they don't I hope they do soon so everyone can get an idea about how they are arriving at the results.

                Comment


                • #9
                  My ancestry is French via Quebec and is well documented. I trace both paternal and maternal lines into France. I have an exact mtDNA match from a full sequence mtDNA test to a woman who lives in France and we share a common ancestor.
                  My Geno 2 tests gives me a Danish population match as the closest with a second to Greece. This achieved by significantly lowering my northern European score and increasing the Mediterranean score when compared to different utilities on gedmatch.
                  Geno- N Euro 41 Med 40
                  Eurogenes N Euro 54 Med 31

                  So I don't know,it doesn't make sense to me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    mm with these german / greek results I think it is a bug, it puzzled me before but now you say other references populations are closer it's even more strange.
                    moreover, I think they alreadey have changed some results, fingers crossed when I have mine I hope they will have corrected the system

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X