Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Illumina Chip Population Finder Results

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

  • #61
    Oxford English Dictionary definition

    Bible belt n. a designation of those parts of the United States reputed to be fanatically puritan or fundamentalist; also attrib.
    1926 Amer. Mercury Feb. 141/2 The Baptist Record, of Jackson, Miss., [is] in the heart of the *Bible and Lynching Belt.
    1926 S. Lewis in G. Frankau My Unsent. Journey xi. 148 I'm collecting parsons, Gilbert.‥ That's why I've been living in Kansas City. It's the centre of the Bible belt.
    1960 20th Cent. Dec. 558 Nashville is‥the Bible Belt capital.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Yaffa View Post
      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.
      Have you checked out the Eurogenes Project? The way those tests are done they would break beyond the limitations of PF and Ancestry Painting, the latest round of runs has been focusing on ancient population movements which would have formed the genetic legacy of certain groups, something like that would sort the mess out. My latest results from the project match pretty darn close to my known genealogy.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
        Have you checked out the Eurogenes Project? The way those tests are done they would break beyond the limitations of PF and Ancestry Painting, the latest round of runs has been focusing on ancient population movements which would have formed the genetic legacy of certain groups, something like that would sort the mess out. My latest results from the project match pretty darn close to my known genealogy.
        I haven't checked the Eurogenes project. Im waiting for them to upgrade PF and see what changes. Does the project need both X and Autosomal? Having trouble downloading the files.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Yaffa View Post
          I haven't checked the Eurogenes project. Im waiting for them to upgrade PF and see what changes. Does the project need both X and Autosomal? Having trouble downloading the files.
          I just sent my autosomal file. I had trouble with my first PF file as well, I had back up with 23andMe though. I'm still waiting for the upgrade of the PF as well so I can send that raw data in to see if there's any drastic changes or not.

          Comment


          • #65
            Yaffa,

            I would recommend trying out Dr. McDonald's analysis also. Both offer their services for free. I personally prefer McDonald's analysis though (if he's in a more receptive mood than usual). This is because each person's autosomal DNA is unique and needs an individual "tailor-made" look into their background. David's Eurogene project does not do runs individually since it's more for a generalized look into the populations of Europe (and perhaps the Middle East and all other populations intermediate of these two), hence the name "Eurogenes". However, neither are anywhere near perfect, especially for those with mixed backgrounds and with ancestral backgrounds that aren't exactly well represented (Native Americans being one of these groups). For the latter reason, I believe this opens the door for "strange" results.

            Another alternative is to have DNATribes analyze your autosomal results. They charge $99 however (and that's their discounted price). Some really like (and strongly prefer) DNATribes, despite the cost. I personally don't think it's any worse than the aforementioned Eurogenes or McDonalds, but because they charge, I would use it as a last resort.

            Also with the Eurogenes project, I haven't seen David do any runs specifically for Family Finder customers in a long time (or perhaps I missed a few?)

            I have tested all of the above and have gotten many mixed (and inconsistent) results. I think the most unusual is the 9+% Middle Eastern result I've gotten with Population Finder. It has not been reproduced anywhere else, so I tend to think it's "noise" or just flat out wrong. I have had both sides of my family test their autosomal DNA just to compare with mine and have found many inconsistencies between my results/interpretations vs. theirs.

            No Middle East result appears on either side of my family. Dr. McDonald shows a 2-3% Middle East AFFINITY for my father's side of the family (which is normal for Northwest Europeans), but shows a -2% Affinity for my mother's side. Comparing affinity scores with purported admixture amounts is probably just apples vs. oranges, but the results should be consistent with each other. Population Finder is considered an admixture test; Dr. McDonald and Eurogene's is considered more along the lines of an affinity evaluation (but it seems Dr. McDonald tries to give an admixutre amount based on the affinity scores).

            Comment


            • #66
              That was a very good post by gijoeinfinity. McDonalds is now using his chromosome painting, where you can see the different colored segments. Each color represents a biogeographic ancestry line, or admixture. Native American, Middle Eastern, SSA, South Asian. He never did one for me, but my niece did get one and I saw it. It made sense. Before that, I only had the affinity test done. I also must say I did send my raw data to DNA Tribes for their SNP analysis and my opinion is this test is much more accurate than their regular ones. If you list your grandparents' countries of origin, then you get the discount. It's similar to answering 23andMe's Where are you from? survey.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
                Tis a shame really, can't see FTDNA's logic in excluding Northern American Indian's from the references.
                It's not a deliberate exclusion, but the reference populations aren't complete. The NA populations in PF were tested many years ago as part of the Human Genome Diversity Project, which was terminated prematurely (in my opinion) for political reasons (accusations of "biopiracy" and the like).

                However, all is not lost. There was a relatively small founder population for Native Americans, and comparisons with the Pima and Maya groups can be informative. There is an STR that's found at some levels in all Native American populations tested so far, but not in Asia. That's a good indicator of a founding population.

                Comment


                • #68
                  PF can show both deep and recent heritage

                  Yaffa is correct in that PF looks at recent ancestors (maybe 5 generations). But there is a way for ancient heritage to show up in recent ancestors, according to the FAQs. For instance, my family may have one or several NA ancestors in the 1800s, but by the 1900s there are no full blooded NAs in my family. My PF results show NA ancestry even though I have 0 NA ancestors in my family in the last 110-150 years. I do have, however, several lines in my family with Mestizo ancestry (NA/something else), and the NA ancestry is several thousands of years old.

                  On one side of my family, I have ME ancestry as recent as one generation ago. On the other I have no ME ancestor in the last 500 years, however, my Iberian ancestors were of ME heritage. In Mexico, from Colonial times, they intermarried with others of like heritage and it wasn't until the 1800s when they began mixing with folks who had Mestizo or NA heritage.

                  In the case of my NA ancestry, it is most likely deep heritage showing up in recent ancestors. In the ME ancestry, in my case, it is both deep and recent ancestry mixing together. The margin of error for my ME results is less than 1%.

                  I have more of a tan than my younger brother, who is very light skin with dark hair. It is obvious that I inherited more NA features than he did, and the PF results for both of us are likely to be different, because we each got different amounts of heritage from our family (he hasn't tested). This is also in the FAQs.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Barreldriver View Post
                    I just sent my autosomal file. I had trouble with my first PF file as well, I had back up with 23andMe though. I'm still waiting for the upgrade of the PF as well so I can send that raw data in to see if there's any drastic changes or not.
                    I have not taken 23andme so Ill wait and see what new PF states since they are upgrading the old results to see if anything changes

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by dawer View Post
                      Yaffa is correct in that PF looks at recent ancestors (maybe 5 generations). But there is a way for ancient heritage to show up in recent ancestors, according to the FAQs. For instance, my family may have one or several NA ancestors in the 1800s, but by the 1900s there are no full blooded NAs in my family. My PF results show NA ancestry even though I have 0 NA ancestors in my family in the last 110-150 years. I do have, however, several lines in my family with Mestizo ancestry (NA/something else), and the NA ancestry is several thousands of years old.

                      On one side of my family, I have ME ancestry as recent as one generation ago. On the other I have no ME ancestor in the last 500 years, however, my Iberian ancestors were of ME heritage. In Mexico, from Colonial times, they intermarried with others of like heritage and it wasn't until the 1800s when they began mixing with folks who had Mestizo or NA heritage.

                      In the case of my NA ancestry, it is most likely deep heritage showing up in recent ancestors. In the ME ancestry, in my case, it is both deep and recent ancestry mixing together. The margin of error for my ME results is less than 1%.

                      I have more of a tan than my younger brother, who is very light skin with dark hair. It is obvious that I inherited more NA features than he did, and the PF results for both of us are likely to be different, because we each got different amounts of heritage from our family (he hasn't tested). This is also in the FAQs.
                      My only known full blood is my 2nd great grandmother who first married a European English. She was shunned from her family because of this marriage and him being white. 2nd husband we know is mixed. Most of the living family still dark today. A few with lighter skin but more dark than light.

                      My margin of error ME is higher than yours between 3-4. My Western Europe between 3-4 and My Central American Indian .22
                      Last edited by Yaffa; 14th March 2011, 02:56 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by gijoeinfinity View Post
                        Yaffa,

                        I would recommend trying out Dr. McDonald's analysis also. Both offer their services for free. I personally prefer McDonald's analysis though (if he's in a more receptive mood than usual). This is because each person's autosomal DNA is unique and needs an individual "tailor-made" look into their background. David's Eurogene project does not do runs individually since it's more for a generalized look into the populations of Europe (and perhaps the Middle East and all other populations intermediate of these two), hence the name "Eurogenes". However, neither are anywhere near perfect, especially for those with mixed backgrounds and with ancestral backgrounds that aren't exactly well represented (Native Americans being one of these groups). For the latter reason, I believe this opens the door for "strange" results.

                        Another alternative is to have DNATribes analyze your autosomal results. They charge $99 however (and that's their discounted price). Some really like (and strongly prefer) DNATribes, despite the cost. I personally don't think it's any worse than the aforementioned Eurogenes or McDonalds, but because they charge, I would use it as a last resort.

                        Also with the Eurogenes project, I haven't seen David do any runs specifically for Family Finder customers in a long time (or perhaps I missed a few?)

                        I have tested all of the above and have gotten many mixed (and inconsistent) results. I think the most unusual is the 9+% Middle Eastern result I've gotten with Population Finder. It has not been reproduced anywhere else, so I tend to think it's "noise" or just flat out wrong. I have had both sides of my family test their autosomal DNA just to compare with mine and have found many inconsistencies between my results/interpretations vs. theirs.

                        No Middle East result appears on either side of my family. Dr. McDonald shows a 2-3% Middle East AFFINITY for my father's side of the family (which is normal for Northwest Europeans), but shows a -2% Affinity for my mother's side. Comparing affinity scores with purported admixture amounts is probably just apples vs. oranges, but the results should be consistent with each other. Population Finder is considered an admixture test; Dr. McDonald and Eurogene's is considered more along the lines of an affinity evaluation (but it seems Dr. McDonald tries to give an admixutre amount based on the affinity scores).

                        Thanks. I know the results are different with every test and have no interest in spending money on % tests. Took the FF test to find cousins and got PF with it. Just as curious as you are as to why the ME. Just waiting to see if they improve ME with new upgrade.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Either I will wait and see if McDonald will send me a chromosone painting too, or I will email him to ask if I can have one too.

                          DNA Tribes is famous for their STR analysis. They now also offer SNP analysis. The grandparent discount is for agreeing to add your raw data to their research and listing where each your grandparents were born, such as "New Jersey, United States". The website says the grandparents don't have to be from the same area, and, if unknown, you can list "Unknown". So I think adoptees can use the "grandparent info discount" too.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by rainbow View Post
                            Either I will wait and see if McDonald will send me a chromosone painting too, or I will email him to ask if I can have one too.
                            The mosaics from McDonald are handy, got one a while back from him. Heard somewhere over at DNAforums that he'll be accepting FTDNA files at some point in time.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by gijoeinfinity View Post
                              Yaffa,

                              I would recommend trying out Dr. McDonald's analysis also. Both offer their services for free. I personally prefer McDonald's analysis though (if he's in a more receptive mood than usual). This is because each person's autosomal DNA is unique and needs an individual "tailor-made" look into their background. David's Eurogene project does not do runs individually since it's more for a generalized look into the populations of Europe (and perhaps the Middle East and all other populations intermediate of these two), hence the name "Eurogenes". However, neither are anywhere near perfect, especially for those with mixed backgrounds and with ancestral backgrounds that aren't exactly well represented (Native Americans being one of these groups). For the latter reason, I believe this opens the door for "strange" results.

                              Another alternative is to have DNATribes analyze your autosomal results. They charge $99 however (and that's their discounted price). Some really like (and strongly prefer) DNATribes, despite the cost. I personally don't think it's any worse than the aforementioned Eurogenes or McDonalds, but because they charge, I would use it as a last resort.

                              Also with the Eurogenes project, I haven't seen David do any runs specifically for Family Finder customers in a long time (or perhaps I missed a few?)

                              I have tested all of the above and have gotten many mixed (and inconsistent) results. I think the most unusual is the 9+% Middle Eastern result I've gotten with Population Finder. It has not been reproduced anywhere else, so I tend to think it's "noise" or just flat out wrong. I have had both sides of my family test their autosomal DNA just to compare with mine and have found many inconsistencies between my results/interpretations vs. theirs.

                              No Middle East result appears on either side of my family. Dr. McDonald shows a 2-3% Middle East AFFINITY for my father's side of the family (which is normal for Northwest Europeans), but shows a -2% Affinity for my mother's side. Comparing affinity scores with purported admixture amounts is probably just apples vs. oranges, but the results should be consistent with each other. Population Finder is considered an admixture test; Dr. McDonald and Eurogene's is considered more along the lines of an affinity evaluation (but it seems Dr. McDonald tries to give an admixutre amount based on the affinity scores).
                              What is your Margin of error on you Middle Eastern % on PF? Mine between 3-4. This goes with my Western European also between 3-4.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Yaffa,

                                The margin of error for me is +/- 2.77% for Middle East. My NE Euro MOE is +/- 3.41.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X