Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Native American/Central Asia/Oceania from one ancestor?

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

  • Native American/Central Asia/Oceania from one ancestor?

    So, our results came back with FTDNA, and most of it made sense based on our known genealogy. Even the Native American ancestry did show in the results, supposedly. What I am wondering is how to interpret this. Since the 1600s all of our family came from the east coast of the United States. There are no known ancestors from East Asia, Southeast Asia, or Australia - its extremely unlikely in the past 500 years.

    Did anyone else with known Native American ancestry receive Oceania in their results?

    Is trace results of Native American North American, Central Asia, and Oceania a strong indicator of a distant Native ancestor, or are they referring to different ancestors?

  • #2
    I got a trace of Oceana too on MyHeritage and GEDMatch from my Uncle's sample, but not on FTDNA unless it's the <2% SouthEast Asia. It's my understanding (I read "somewhere") that Oceana can tag along with AmerIndian, of which my Uncle was 33% (with 3% coming from SoAmerica.) I think it said something about the South America AmerIndian is the culprit, that the DNA resembles Oceana. Sorry I couldn't be more specific. I don't really know that much of DNA, I just read a lot.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by RebeccaR View Post
      I got a trace of Oceana too on MyHeritage and GEDMatch from my Uncle's sample, but not on FTDNA unless it's the <2% SouthEast Asia. It's my understanding (I read "somewhere") that Oceana can tag along with AmerIndian, of which my Uncle was 33% (with 3% coming from SoAmerica.) I think it said something about the South America AmerIndian is the culprit, that the DNA resembles Oceana. Sorry I couldn't be more specific. I don't really know that much of DNA, I just read a lot.
      Thank you.
      Mine reads Less Than One Percent for all three (Native American North America, Central Asia, and Oceania). The ancestors in question are all 6-7 generations back, or further. Working on documentation and verifying, supposed to be Cherokee or Shawnee. If you also received some Southeast Asian on here, our results sound legitimate. On Gedmatch, we also get Southeast Asia, Oceania, and Siberia, mixed in with the Amerindian result. Its not Conclusive for absolute proof of Native ancestry, but its an indication.

      Comment


      • #4
        My Uncle has two Mexican born parents, so his AmerIndian will be higher than those with USA AmerIndian, who became nearly extinct from the influx of all the Europeans.

        I think all the companies differ, and I suppose they'll change again later as they improve their research on the populations. It's been a disappointment that they couldn't get more specific on AmerIndian, the desire for people to know is surely there.

        The 30/3% that I quoted was from FTDNA. I think they did a good job with it because they highlighted exactly where my Grandmother's known family lived for hundreds of years. I think they missed somewhat my Grandfather's location where his family lived for hundreds of years though. They didn't highlight Jalisco, MX they highlighted Maya on the Yucatan instead.

        Ancestry said 34% and didn't get specific, it was a 2-3 year old test so maybe they get more specific now I don't know.

        MyHeritage hyperinflated it and gave him a whopping 48.1/1.4 (I think they took some from Europe and gave it back to the Natives.) So if you're looking for AmerIndian, try uploading the rawDNA over to them. They were good at listing it, but then again, they missed some others that were smaller percentages, so they might still overlook it.

        For GEDMatch, I liked the MDLP World-22 calculator because I thought it was the most detailed on AmerIndians. Here's a spreadsheet of all their calculators and what populations they define. For him there, they gave him (north/meso/south) 10.96/17.57/4.9 which the total of them was consistent with Ancestry and FTDNA.

        https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...82Hcf/pubhtml#
        Last edited by RebeccaR; 5th December 2017, 08:35 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by RebeccaR View Post
          My Uncle has two Mexican born parents, so his AmerIndian will be higher than those with USA AmerIndian, who became nearly extinct from the influx of all the Europeans.

          I think all the companies differ, and I suppose they'll change again later as they improve their research on the populations. It's been a disappointment that they couldn't get more specific on AmerIndian, the desire for people to know is surely there.

          The 30/3% that I quoted was from FTDNA. I think they did a good job with it because they highlighted exactly where my Grandmother's known family lived for hundreds of years. I think they missed somewhat my Grandfather's location where his family lived for hundreds of years though. They didn't highlight Jalisco, MX they highlighted Maya on the Yucatan instead.

          Ancestry said 34% and didn't get specific, it was a 2-3 year old test so maybe they get more specific now I don't know.

          MyHeritage hyperinflated it and gave him a whopping 48.1/1.4 (I think they took some from Europe and gave it back to the Natives.) So if you're looking for AmerIndian, try uploading the rawDNA over to them. They were good at listing it, but then again, they missed some others that were smaller percentages, so they might still overlook it.

          For GEDMatch, I liked the MDLP World-22 calculator because I thought it was the most detailed on AmerIndians. Here's a spreadsheet of all their calculators and what populations they define. For him there, they gave him (north/meso/south) 10.96/17.57/4.9 which the total of them was consistent with Ancestry and FTDNA.

          https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...82Hcf/pubhtml#
          Well....I have heard that Myheritage is also not quite accurate, even with Amerindian estimates. So it sounds like you agree on that . . even if inflating the Native percent might be the "right thing" to do hahaha . . .. .

          I would say Gedmatch generally agrees with the percents for Amerindian and East/Central Asia. It also shows the trace amount of African, but I think Gedmatch is more accurate on the European percents. Family Tree DNA seems a bit too general about those. Maybe it is just more "deep ancestry", what those populations were in the past few thousand years. That is fascinating, but does not look accurate as far as the past 500 years.

          I don't get much Amerindian on MDLP-22 World calculator. Just a bit - maybe it is the reference population or algorhythm? It does show up on MDLP K23b, Eurogenes 36, and the rest of them.

          Maybe some other folks who got unexpected Oceania and Southeast Asia percents can chime in here. I appreciate your thoughts, Rebecca. And your absolutely correct about "North Amerindian" as opposed to Central or South. There arent hardly any reference populations for North Amerindian, as far as I know. Glad you got to see your grandmothers information in there - it is real tricky for many of us to do that, if not impossible. Keep looking!

          Comment


          • #6
            My father has a Penobscot ancestress, like 9 generations ago, and he has traces of Oceania in myOrigins.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Marianne View Post
              My father has a Penobscot ancestress, like 9 generations ago, and he has traces of Oceania in myOrigins.

              Oh! Very interesting.
              Maybe this info can help others out there make educated guesses. Thanks!

              Comment

              Working...
              X