Interesting but also Strange Results

[girlperson1]

It looks like you only clicked the "resolution" bar once to get down to "Regional Resolution." If you click it twice it brings you down to "Sub-regional Resolution," which will be more specific. It will give you percentages for "French and German," Italian, Iberian, etc.

Quite a difference anyway.

99.4% European

Northern European
18.8% French & German
2.9% British & Irish
38.2% Nonspecific Northern European
1.1% Eastern European

Southern European
0.9% Nonspecific Southern European
37.5% Nonspecific European
0.6% Unassigned

[MMaddi]

It appears that 23andme has now changed things around a bit:

My new Ancestry Composition is:

99.4% European
59.9% Northern European
1.1% Eastern European
0.9% Southern European
37.5% Nonspecific European
0.6% Unassigned

This data is totally useless.

It looks like you only clicked the "resolution" bar once to get down to "Regional Resolution." If you click it twice it brings you down to "Sub-regional Resolution," which will be more specific. It will give you percentages for "French and German," Italian, Iberian, etc.

[girlperson1]

I received autosomal results from 23andme AND Family Tree DNA. Here they are:

23andme results:

5.1% French & German
2.3% Scandinavian
57.7% Nonspecific North European
0.9% Eastern European
0.8% Ashkenazi
0.1% Nonspecific South European
33.2% Nonspecific European

Family Tree DNA results:

91.17% Western European
(Orcadian)
+/- 2.93%

8.83% Middle Eastern
(Palestinian, Bedouin, Bedouin South, Druze, Jewish, Mozabite)
+/- 2.93%

It appears that 23andme has now changed things around a bit:

My new Ancestry Composition is:

99.4% European
59.9% Northern European
1.1% Eastern European
0.9% Southern European
37.5% Nonspecific European
0.6% Unassigned

This data is totally useless.

[girlperson1]

Try emailing them at

[email protected]

Thank you!!, I Emailed them and they just responded a little while ago. They were apparently unaware of a problem but will fix it as soon as they can. Thank you!!!

[prairielad]

Yes, I have come to realize this.

I've tried to create a registration for Gedmatch but it doesn't seem to connect. Anyone know why?

Try emailing them at

[email protected]

[girlperson1]

If you only tested for % than you wasted your money since it wont help you find your ancestors to lead to a paper trail. If you tested to find cousins to lead you to further a paper trail than your money was well spent. Your cousin matches and population are two different DNA tests that they decided to offer together when offering autosomal DNA testing.

Actually, I tested with 23andme for health/medical reasons ..... curiosity. But after I saw the population information I became curious and when I transferred my 23andme results to FTDNA, my curiosity grew into a mild psychosis I'm okay now

https://promethease.com gives better, more detailed results when you upload your 23andme raw data. I'm still reviewing. Best $5 I've spent so far on this wild goose chase.

23andme also reported that I'm 3% neanderthal. Now, THAT is something I truly believe to be true.

[girlperson1]

girlperson1: Yes, it was money-well spent! and testing is a dna record of your "link in a chain that extends into the future"........that is, if you have children.

No offspring.

[Yaffa]

So basically, this whole notion of autosomal DNA is very much in its infancy stages. So like 23andme, I shouldn't take Population Finder too seriously, at least for now. (Mutters to herself, "hopefully, it was money well-spent").

If you only tested for % than you wasted your money since it wont help you find your ancestors to lead to a paper trail. If you tested to find cousins to lead you to further a paper trail than your money was well spent. Your cousin matches and population are two different DNA tests that they decided to offer together when offering autosomal DNA testing.

[Biblioteque]

girlperson1: Yes, it was money-well spent! and testing is a dna record of your "link in a chain that extends into the future"........that is, if you have children.

[girlperson1]

Snip...

Population Finder is very crude and lags far behind both the commercial competition and the free utilities on Gedmatch.

Yes, I have come to realize this.

I've tried to create a registration for Gedmatch but it doesn't seem to connect. Anyone know why?

[girlperson1]

Because it was publicly available, and no German (or generic Isles) reference population was, when Population Finder was assembled.

You cannot compare people's DNA to that of populations that are not adequately screened and sampled and published.

Of course, several private projects do have such sample sets now.

So basically, this whole notion of autosomal DNA is very much in its infancy stages. So like 23andme, I shouldn't take Population Finder too seriously, at least for now. (Mutters to herself, "hopefully, it was money well-spent").

[Javelin]

This is probably more of a question aimed at FTDNA: Why use "Orcadian" as a population reference to cover almost all of Western Europe

Because it was publicly available, and no German (or generic Isles) reference population was, when Population Finder was assembled.

You cannot compare people's DNA to that of populations that are not adequately screened and sampled and published.

Of course, several private projects do have such sample sets now.

[girlperson1]

Yes, but Population Finder uses a very limited number of populations as references. Orcadian is one of them. It stands in for most of northwest Europe, including Scandinavia, Germany, and France, as well as the British Isles.

Population Finder is very crude and lags far behind both the commercial competition and the free utilities on Gedmatch.

I suspect (but am not sure) you'd show a lot more Scandinavian and/or British Isles if you had a significant Orkney component. Ancestry Composition in Speculative Mode might give you some more insights.

This is probably more of a question aimed at FTDNA: Why use "Orcadian" as a population reference to cover almost all of Western Europe when the Orkney Islands historically had very small populations of people. I would think if you use "Orcadian" to describe a population, that you would be specifically pointing at someone from the Orkney Islands, a place where very few people have lived. It Seems STUPID to me. If you want to represent the vast majority of Europeans, perhaps using GERMANY is a more accurate population reference and yet, for unknown reasons, GERMANY is missing from the list. Why?????

[girlperson1]

[QUOTE=josh w.;372673]Yes, Orcadian could mean the Orkneys. But most people high on that component are not from the Orkneys, e.g. British, main island Scotch, Welsh, Irish and Norwegian.[/QUOTE

FTDNA should try to be a bit more specific.

What's interesting about the Orkney Islands is that up until about the 1700's or so, a now extinct "northern germanic" was spoken there. So I guess, in a very technical sense, FTDNA might be right if they consider "Orcadians" as "western Europeans" due the usage of "germanic" languages. But then again, studies have shown that the spread of languages does not always correlate with the spread of DNA.

[josh w.]

So they do list Orcadian as Orkney Islands.

Yes, Orcadian could mean the Orkneys. But most people high on that component are not from the Orkneys, e.g. British, main island Scotch, Welsh, Irish and Norwegian.