Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Illumina Chip Population Finder Results

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
    Even with the SNP's there's confusion between Central Asians and Native American's, hence some of the comments from project admins like that of the Eurogenes Project.
    Yeah, but not Native American and Middle Eastern.

    Comment


    • #47
      ME and NA cannot be confused in results

      This is a question I posed to FTDNA about my results:

      Question 2
      Some feedback I received from various forum members was that the Northeast European in my results could be a mistake and that it could be a combination of Western European and Native American giving off a result of Northeast European. Is that possible?

      Their answer:
      Question 2: Unless you have reason to believe there is even more Native American ancestry in your family than was detected by the Population Finder, it is very unlikely that the "Northern European" portion of the result is due even in part to Native American ancestry. We have a limited number of populations to compare your DNA to, and we base the region on the location your DNA best fits, even if that fit is not very strong. In other words, a result of Northern European means definitely European, and maybe from a northern population. It can instead be European and from another population like Southern Europe or Western Europe (including Iberia).


      Apply this response to the ongoing conversation about ME and NA, and the answer one gets is that, ME and NA would never be confused, but we know SE and ME can because of migration. The ME result could be from European ancestors who had heritage from Iberia or SE.

      What is the margin of error on your ME?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by dawer View Post
        Apply this response to the ongoing conversation about ME and NA, and the answer one gets is that, ME and NA would never be confused, but we know SE and ME can because of migration. The ME result could be from European ancestors who had heritage from Iberia or SE.

        What is the margin of error on your ME?
        Indeed another option, over at Eurogenes some Ashkenazim (Jewish folks ultimately being Middle Eastern in origin in some part) scores and such were partially erroneous for those with Southern European ancestry.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
          Indeed another option, over at Eurogenes some Ashkenazim (Jewish folks ultimately being Middle Eastern in origin in some part) scores and such were partially erroneous for those with Southern European ancestry.

          I dont think you will find a lot of Jewish people in the Christian bible belt especially 100 years ago.

          Like FTDNA states they have a LIMITED population to compare to. When you have records that state Indian. Y or MT DNA Indian. You match people on FF with confirmed Indian ancestry one has to wonder since they are using LIMITED populations, Hopefully they improve PF. Not that it really matters since it wont help research your ancestors the way paper and Y and MT DNA will

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Yaffa View Post
            I dont think you will find a lot of Jewish people in the Christian bible belt especially 100 years ago.
            It doesn't have to be Jewish, it could be people with Southern European ancestry (some of their ancestry getting confused as Middle Eastern/Jewish), there was a bit of migratin' from Maryland to deeper Southern parts back in the day, Maryland being Catholic had a number of Portuguese, some "converso" and such, I myself descend from some Maryland Portuguese.

            Even in the FTDNA's Cumberland Gap Y-DNA project there's some Semitic Y-DNA haplogroups poppin' up and all (J1's and subclades plenty of J1's to be found in the project, the J2's could be explained by other settlements besides Jews, though that's not to say J2 is disassociated, of course J2 is found among Jewish folks but they seem to be more responsible for the spread of J1 from what I can tell than J2 which could have spread Westward with agriculture during the Neolithic).

            If someone from the South has an elevated amount of Southern European ancestors then they could have an elevated Mid East score compared to those with more North Atlantic ancestry and such.

            Like FTDNA states they have a LIMITED population to compare to. When you have records that state Indian. Y or MT DNA Indian. You match people on FF with confirmed Indian ancestry one has to wonder since they are using LIMITED populations, Hopefully they improve PF. Not that it really matters since it wont help research your ancestors the way paper and Y and MT DNA will
            I'm in agreement about the limited population status of FTDNA, I don't think they have a single North American Indian reference population, all coming from Central or South America if I'm not mistaken.

            Comment


            • #51
              Also that NA ancestor probably wasn't 100% NA herself (I'm assuming it was a she from your mt haplogroup.) She could've had some Spanish heritage from farther back and not know it. The Spanish have a lot of ME genes due to 700 years of Moorish Invasion/Occupation.

              And there was a Spanish settlement in Appalachia in the 16th century. That early in the game, the Spanish didn't bring women with them and took NA women as wives. Here's a link: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...nish_fort.html

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
                It doesn't have to be Jewish, it could be people with Southern European ancestry (some of their ancestry getting confused as Middle Eastern/Jewish), there was a bit of migratin' from Maryland to deeper Southern parts back in the day, Maryland being Catholic had a number of Portuguese, some "converso" and such, I myself descend from some Maryland Portuguese.

                Even in the FTDNA's Cumberland Gap Y-DNA project there's some Semitic Y-DNA haplogroups poppin' up and all (J1's and subclades plenty of J1's to be found in the project, the J2's could be explained by other settlements besides Jews, though that's not to say J2 is disassociated, of course J2 is found among Jewish folks but they seem to be more responsible for the spread of J1 from what I can tell than J2 which could have spread Westward with agriculture during the Neolithic).

                If someone from the South has an elevated amount of Southern European ancestors then they could have an elevated Mid East score compared to those with more North Atlantic ancestry and such.



                I'm in agreement about the limited population status of FTDNA, I don't think they have a single North American Indian reference population, all coming from Central or South America if I'm not mistaken.

                I know some of the people who claimed Portuguese actually come up E1b that are African but may have come out of Portugal and spoke Portuguese.
                I do see the Cumberland Gap has J's but those haplogroups go back a long way so when you consider mixing of bloodlines I do not see enough J to cause a 12-13 % ME In the living descendants. Per FTDNA 12-13 % equals either a great grandparent or 2 second great grandparents. PF is supposed to be a % of your closer ancestors.

                They dont have any North American Indian populations and Im sure they are missing many others as well since they do state LIMITED

                I have no South European results only Western European, Central American Indian and ME. My direct line family was not in the Cumberland Gap although possible cousin lines were. I cant trace back that far. I cant even trace back to ancestor fighting in the Rev War
                Last edited by Yaffa; 13th March 2011, 09:25 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  So, where exactly is this Christian bible belt supposed to be?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    My own NA ancestry is North American (Purepecha), but that is not in the list of reference populations. So FTDNA saw that it was a close enough match to the Pima they do have on file, and that was enough to report it. I also have ME ancestry and the % they reported is in line with family tradition. They reported both ancestries separately from each other (I actually think the NA % is higher than it should be).

                    YDNA and MTDNA are often good, but they are completely different than the autosomal testing in Population Finder. PF doesnt take into consideration the results of YDNA or MTDNA, plus these tests only look at one line each.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by ragnar View Post
                      So, where exactly is this Christian bible belt supposed to be?
                      North Carolina is known as the Bible Belt.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Yaffa View Post
                        I know some of the people who claimed Portuguese actually come up E1b that are African but may have come out of Portugal and spoke Portuguese.
                        My Portuguese ancestor was J2a4b. Surname Carrica/Carrico. So I doubt Africa on that one, rather the spread of agriculture into the West.


                        I do see the Cumberland Gap has J's but those haplogroups go back a long way so when you consider mixing of bloodlines I do not see enough J to cause a 12-13 % ME In the living descendants. Per FTDNA 12-13 % equals either a great grandparent or 2 second great grandparents. PF is supposed to be a % of your closer ancestors.
                        I was in particular looking at J1c3 haplogroup (containing the Cohanim haplotype) as opposed to J1a or J2. Even if it came to the South via the British Isle's it's not outlandish to say that they were Jewish converts and such. Not saying it's responsible for all of a Middle Eastern admixture score (as to have 12% would imply a very recent ancestor), but to deny that Jews could be responsible for some doesn't sit right given a history of conversion and assimilation in some instances.

                        They dont have any North American Indian populations and Im sure they are missing many others as well since they do state LIMITED
                        Tis a shame really, can't see FTDNA's logic in excluding Northern American Indian's from the references.

                        I have no South European results only Western European, Central American Indian and ME. My direct line family was not in the Cumberland Gap although possible cousin lines were. I cant trace back that far. I cant even trace back to ancestor fighting in the Rev War
                        You don't have to have a Southern European percentage per say to have some of that Middle Eastern score being the result of possible Southern Euro segments being confused as Mid East if the only segments one inherits from some Southern Euro ancestors are easily confused with Middle Eastern segments, given that Southern European settlement is really nothing new to the colonies or the South (by way of Southern Euro descending folks from places like PA and Maryland migrating Southward) it's not outlandish to speculate. Not sayin' you do have South Euro ancestry or anything, just throwin' out a possibility for an elevated Middle Eastern score when it's known that certain Mid East and Southern Euro segments are confusable/cause false positives.
                        Last edited by Barreldriver; 14th March 2011, 01:38 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Wiki def - US Bible Belt

                          Here is the link to the Wikipedia description of "Bible Belt"... and a couple of quotes from the page.

                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_belt

                          Bible Belt is an informal term for an area of the United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is extremely high.

                          The name "Bible Belt" has been applied historically to the South and parts of the Midwest, but is more commonly identified with the South. In a 1961 study, Wilbur Zielinkski delineated the region as the area in which Baptist denominations are the predominant religious affiliation. The region thus defined included most of the Southern United States, including most of Texas and Oklahoma in the southwest, and in the states south of the Ohio River, and extending east to include central West Virginia, Virginia south of Northern Virginia, and parts of Maryland. In addition, the Bible Belt covers parts of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. A 1978 study by Charles Heatwole identified the Bible Belt as the region dominated by 24 fundamentalist Protestant denominations, corresponding to essentially the same area mapped by Zielinski

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by AngeliaR View Post
                            Here is the link to the Wikipedia description of "Bible Belt"... and a couple of quotes from the page.

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_belt

                            Bible Belt is an informal term for an area of the United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is extremely high.

                            The name "Bible Belt" has been applied historically to the South and parts of the Midwest, but is more commonly identified with the South. In a 1961 study, Wilbur Zielinkski delineated the region as the area in which Baptist denominations are the predominant religious affiliation. The region thus defined included most of the Southern United States, including most of Texas and Oklahoma in the southwest, and in the states south of the Ohio River, and extending east to include central West Virginia, Virginia south of Northern Virginia, and parts of Maryland. In addition, the Bible Belt covers parts of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. A 1978 study by Charles Heatwole identified the Bible Belt as the region dominated by 24 fundamentalist Protestant denominations, corresponding to essentially the same area mapped by Zielinski
                            There are also a Lot of Christians in that area but NC is also the bible belt and with Wiki people can write what ever they want and change what ever they want.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
                              My Portuguese ancestor was J2a4b. Surname Carrica/Carrico. So I doubt Africa on that one, rather the spread of agriculture into the West.




                              I was in particular looking at J1c3 haplogroup (containing the Cohanim haplotype) as opposed to J1a or J2. Even if it came to the South via the British Isle's it's not outlandish to say that they were Jewish converts and such. Not saying it's responsible for all of a Middle Eastern admixture score (as to have 12% would imply a very recent ancestor), but to deny that Jews could be responsible for some doesn't sit right given a history of conversion and assimilation in some instances.



                              Tis a shame really, can't see FTDNA's logic in excluding Northern American Indian's from the references.



                              You don't have to have a Southern European percentage per say to have some of that Middle Eastern score being the result of possible Southern Euro segments being confused as Mid East if the only segments one inherits from some Southern Euro ancestors are easily confused with Middle Eastern segments, given that Southern European settlement is really nothing new to the colonies or the South (by way of Southern Euro descending folks from places like PA and Maryland migrating Southward) it's not outlandish to speculate. Not sayin' you do have South Euro ancestry or anything, just throwin' out a possibility for an elevated Middle Eastern score when it's known that certain Mid East and Southern Euro segments are confusable/cause false positives.

                              I know your throwing out possibilities but FTDNA claims that PF results are from your close ancestors not people in the 1600's -early 1700's which I cant trace back to. Your ancestors that far back should not being showing up in a PF test. They are not using many populations when calculating PF so the test is not going to be accurate. To be accurate they need to be using all populations. "IF" The PF test can calculate ancestors in the 1700's or before FTDNA needs to inform people that PF results may not be close to the living.

                              Also I have no matches on FF to people of Middle East or surrounding areas. All my matches are either Western European, 2 who have proven American Indian ancestors that I know of and one who claims to have American Indian with no proof. One of my 2 matches I know has close to the living Indian Ancestors like I do.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by AngeliaR View Post
                                Here is the link to the Wikipedia description of "Bible Belt"... and a couple of quotes from the page.

                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_belt

                                Bible Belt is an informal term for an area of the United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is extremely high.

                                The name "Bible Belt" has been applied historically to the South and parts of the Midwest, but is more commonly identified with the South. In a 1961 study, Wilbur Zielinkski delineated the region as the area in which Baptist denominations are the predominant religious affiliation. The region thus defined included most of the Southern United States, including most of Texas and Oklahoma in the southwest, and in the states south of the Ohio River, and extending east to include central West Virginia, Virginia south of Northern Virginia, and parts of Maryland. In addition, the Bible Belt covers parts of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. A 1978 study by Charles Heatwole identified the Bible Belt as the region dominated by 24 fundamentalist Protestant denominations, corresponding to essentially the same area mapped by Zielinski
                                Since you want to go with Wiki- You missed this one

                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_Belt

                                Bible Belt is an informal term for an area of the United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is extremely high.

                                The Bible Belt consists of much of the Southern United States and part of the Southwestern United States. During the colonial period (1607

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X