Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A question about 8%

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

  • A question about 8%

    This may not be possible to answer, but I thought it worth a try.

    My results from the Geno2 project show 8% SubSaharan Africa (41% Northern Eurpoean, 33% Mediterreanean, 16% SouthWest asia). The Sub-SaharanAfrican is not unexpected because my father is from Barabados and we know of one ancestor that would be a contributor to that category. However what was surprising was the 8%. I was expecting about 2-3%.

    The known contibutor was my Grandfather's Grandfather's Mother. From what I had read, IF she was the ONLY contributor, then I might expect at most 2% or so. But to get 8% would mean that there must be more? Is that correct?

    Is there anyway to formulate a set of possible combinations, IF the only contributors were in my father's paternal line? And the maternal line was very Eurpoean?

    It opens up other avenues of searching if the 8% signifies more than 1 contributor.

    I am still waiting for my father's results. Solely based on my limited understanding, I am expecting his Sub-Saharan African to be at 16%. If it is less, than it means my understanding is wrong.

    Any response is much appreciated...

  • #2
    DNA recombination is random and you can get a lot of contribution from one ancestor or almost none. It is not uncommon even for siblings to have very different percentages since you never know what is copied from which parent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by trifud View Post
      DNA recombination is random and you can get a lot of contribution from one ancestor or almost none. It is not uncommon even for siblings to have very different percentages since you never know what is copied from which parent.
      I have seen the Dodecad globe13 results of multiple unrelated families and it is very good at showing siblings to be very close to each other and they are very close to 1/2 the total of the two parents combined.

      At the same time using very good genealogical records and the Dodecad globe13 results of more than 30 people the DNA of ancestors from a certain continent within the past 6 or 7 generations the DNA will show up with at least at 4%.

      Her problem is that she can't get a hold of autosomal results of her great-grandparents in order to tell which one contributed and she probably can't get a hold of good genealogical records so there is no way for her to know if the 8% was from one ancestor or multiple ancestors.

      Dodecad globe13 can be used with Felix's program at http://www.y-str.org/2013/07/diy-dod...1-wrapper.html

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by PamelaLG View Post
        This may not be possible to answer, but I thought it worth a try.

        My results from the Geno2 project show 8% SubSaharan Africa (41% Northern Eurpoean, 33% Mediterreanean, 16% SouthWest asia). The Sub-SaharanAfrican is not unexpected because my father is from Barabados and we know of one ancestor that would be a contributor to that category. However what was surprising was the 8%. I was expecting about 2-3%.
        With 33% Mediterranean, & some SWA, seems like you have some either strong southern to Greek background or middle eastern ancestry? I'm just guessing of course.


        The known contibutor was my Grandfather's Grandfather's Mother. From what I had read, IF she was the ONLY contributor, then I might expect at most 2% or so. But to get 8% would mean that there must be more? Is that correct?
        So she was your 3x great-grandmother. And yes, genealogically that would make her contribution to you 3.125%. Of course with randomness, could be more or less. But you're right about that 8%. There had to have been another contributor somewhere.


        Is there anyway to formulate a set of possible combinations, IF the only contributors were in my father's paternal line? And the maternal line was very Eurpoean?

        It opens up other avenues of searching if the 8% signifies more than 1 contributor.
        I was like this when I saw my results from Population Finder a year and a half ago. I thought how come I received more of something I didn't expect. Then only recently, including last week Wed. my mom finally admitted that she heard as a child that she was (probably?) adopted. So this explains the weird % in my ancestry and her ancestry composition.


        I am still waiting for my father's results. Solely based on my limited understanding, I am expecting his Sub-Saharan African to be at 16%. If it is less, than it means my understanding is wrong.

        Any response is much appreciated...
        Well, you're making the assumption that this could only come from your father. I don't know what your mother is, but if she is still alive, get her tested too, or a sibling of hers. I did that since my father isn't alive, because it was causing something weird and different in my results vs. my mother's. So after I had my paternal aunt get tested, it confirmed my suspicions.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mamoahina View Post
          With 33% Mediterranean, & some SWA, seems like you have some either strong southern to Greek background or middle eastern ancestry?
          The Geno 2.0 Reference populations are quite different from other tests and every European gets Mediterranean and Southwest Asian.

          For example my results are 43% Northern European, 38% Mediterranean, and 18% Southwest Asian. My first reference population is British. My myOrigins results are 75% British Isles, 22% Scandinavia, 3% Asia Minor.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mamoahina View Post
            With 33% Mediterranean, & some SWA, seems like you have some either strong southern to Greek background or middle eastern ancestry? I'm just guessing of course.
            You can't use a single population to suggest ancestry of a person with just that information. There are many populations that have a lot of Mediterranean. There is no telling what her actual ancestry is since she is mixed. When there is mixture and the actual ancestry is unknown it is very hard to determine what the cause is. In certain situations it can be done with multiple relatives testing and comparing matches and triangulating. There are only some components that can be picked out as being a definite cause for recent ancestry.

            The reference populations can be seen at https://genographic.nationalgeograph...e-populations/ and you will see a lot of populations with large amounts of the Mediterranean component.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Armando View Post
              The reference populations can be seen at https://genographic.nationalgeograph...e-populations/ and you will see a lot of populations with large amounts of the Mediterranean component.
              The link Armando provided should clarify for mamoahina what significance, if any, the 33% Mediterranean has for the original poster. It is the case that Northern European populations have significant percentages of Mediterranean, so mamoahina's suggestion that the original poster has strong Greek or other southern European ancestry is not supported.

              Here are some examples of Mediterranean percentages that you can see at Armando's link:

              British (United Kingdom) - 33
              Danish - 30
              Finnish (far north of Europe) - 17
              German - 36

              If you want to see what the Mediterranean percentage is like in actual Southern European populations, consider these:

              Bulgarian - 47
              Greek - 54
              Iberian (Spain & Portugal) - 48
              Tuscan (Italy) - 54

              The Mediterranean component is present in all European populations, higher in the South. It represents the Neolithic migrations from the Middle East through the Mediterranean, especially Greece/the Balkans and Italy, that brought agriculture into Europe. Those Neolithic migrants eventually replaced most of the native European hunter-gatherers, although less so in the North than in the South.

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't want to pay for Winzip to run the program above. Can someone suggest a good, free alternative? Thanks in advance.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by vinnie View Post
                  I don't want to pay for Winzip to run the program above. Can someone suggest a good, free alternative? Thanks in advance.
                  I use the free zip/unzip program called jZip. It works fine for me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well...

                    Thanks for all the replies.

                    I've received my father's results and it was a surprise but explains a lot. He does have a bit more than 2x African that I have - at 17%. And the explanation - His maternal line is L2a1a1 which means of course that he gets some contribution from his mother's side. He had no idea about that.

                    It also means he has more information to help him reseaerch her line as he had discounted certain records as not being relevant to his mother's family...

                    Cheers all
                    Pamela

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X