PDA

View Full Version : Results from Ancestry.com, 97% European ?



IphonePlus
04-25-2017, 03:25 PM
I have a question concerning test results that someone that I knew got from Ancestry.com. The results they got were this roughly: 97% European (including Irish, British, Scandinavian, Mediterranean, Iberian), 1% Middle Eastern, <1% Caucasian, 1% Unidentified. Does this mean a minority her ancestors came literally from the Middle East/ Caucus mountains ? From I what I can find, there seems to be an inconsistency with taking a genetic test from Ancestry.com vs 23andme and I can't interpret them. Is this Middle Eastern/Caucus DNA being misconstrued as something else, say Slavic ? As far as I know, she doesn't have ancestors on her family tree from that area, but I could be wrong. How many generations would this ancestry go back if it's true? I have included a picture of someone's results that are very similar to the person I know. Here is an example from this article from BusinessInsider:

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-dna-test-23andme-vs-ancestry-2016-11


"Here's what the results looked like on an interactive map that they provided. Apart from a trace 1% of DNA from Asia, roughly 99% of my genes suggested European roots, particularly from the Scandinavian countries of Norway and Sweden. By my own rough calculations, I should be 50% Norwegian and at least 37.5% Swedish, so the results weren't super surprising to me."

"Ancestry lets you look at a more detailed breakdown of your results as well. Here, I noticed something interesting: While AncestryDNA told me I was less than 1% Finnish, 23andMe had estimated that close to 5% of my genes could be traced to Finland. Wanting to know what to make of the difference, I spoke with 23andMe population genetics expert Kasia Bryc, and Cathy Ball, Ancestry's Cathy Ball, vice president of genomics and bioinformatics."

Thee author of the article got 1% Asian from Ancestry.com, but then she got 100% European from 23andMe. Can someone clear up any confusion here for me ? Thank you.15436

IphonePlus
04-25-2017, 03:56 PM
Thank you ahead of time for those who help.

Judith
04-25-2017, 04:45 PM
Hi Iphone You will find many comments on this forum about the testing companies and their ethnicity predictions. The consensus is the least worse is 23&me but they are all poor. If your friend downloads her data and uploads to GEDmatch then she can get a better prediction.
Voodoo with chicken bones was one of the wittier descriptions of these claims! But getting new cousins is good and GEDmatch taking data from all testing companies is best. Welcome to the forum for both you and your friend!

IphonePlus
04-25-2017, 05:00 PM
Hello Judith ! Thank you for your help. Let me ask you a question: do you have any sources that determine why ancestry.com is poor ? i want to learn about this as much as possible. But I haven't been able to find any closure on this, it seems to me that Ancestry.com can sometimes bring random areas into the Map of Ancestry. It's weird honestly. People with Finnish ancestry are often mistaken for having Asian ancestry instead. I know the history of Fenno-Scandanavia is nuanced but it's not Finland is right next to China.

MacUalraig
04-25-2017, 05:13 PM
I have a question concerning test results that someone that I knew got from Ancestry.com. The results they got were this roughly: 97% European (including Irish, British, Scandinavian, Mediterranean, Iberian), 1% Middle Eastern, <1% Caucasian, 1% Unidentified. Does this mean a minority her ancestors came literally from the Middle East/ Caucus mountains ? From I what I can find, there seems to be an inconsistency with taking a genetic test from Ancestry.com vs 23andme and I can't interpret them. Is this Middle Eastern/Caucus DNA being misconstrued as something else, say Slavic ? As far as I know, she doesn't have ancestors on her family tree from that area, but I could be wrong. How many generations would this ancestry go back if it's true? Here is an example from this article from BusinessInsider:

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-dna-test-23andme-vs-ancestry-2016-11


"Here's what the results looked like on an interactive map that they provided. Apart from a trace 1% of DNA from Asia, roughly 99% of my genes suggested European roots, particularly from the Scandinavian countries of Norway and Sweden. By my own rough calculations, I should be 50% Norwegian and at least 37.5% Swedish, so the results weren't super surprising to me."

"Ancestry lets you look at a more detailed breakdown of your results as well. Here, I noticed something interesting: While AncestryDNA told me I was less than 1% Finnish, 23andMe had estimated that close to 5% of my genes could be traced to Finland. Wanting to know what to make of the difference, I spoke with 23andMe population genetics expert Kasia Bryc, and Cathy Ball, Ancestry's Cathy Ball, vice president of genomics and bioinformatics."

Thee author of the article got 1% Asian from Ancestry.com, but then she got 100% European from 23andMe. Can someone clear up any confusion here for me ? Thank you.

The chunks <5% appear in a separate section 'Trace regions' and personally I ignore them ;-) Some refer to them as 'noise'.

What may be more interesting is what if any 'Genetic Communities' she is in, ask her that. These are more detailed and worked out differently. They supposedly represent the more recent past ie hundreds rather than thousands of years.

IphonePlus
04-25-2017, 05:38 PM
Hello MacUalraig ! It's nice to chat with you. I have Scottish in me as well! (his name was Gordon and settled in the USA around 400 years ago.)

I saw her genetic community, she is apart of the Pennsylvania region and French Canadian group on Ancestry.com. On her map, Pennsylvania was colored red, Quebec was colored orange. Also are you saying that both the 1% Middle Eastern and 1% Caucasian are just noise ?

Thank you for your help

MacUalraig
04-25-2017, 06:39 PM
I'm saying I wouldn't take much notice or get worked up about wondering how she connects to those areas at 1%. Others may disagree though.

IphonePlus
04-25-2017, 06:52 PM
Oh no, I just wanted to know what "statistical noise" might be in this case. If it's 2% is it actually an ancestor from Caucus Mountains or Middle East? It would be interesting to go to her genealogy. It's the same thing with myself: I might have a Native American ancestor and I wanted to know if that part of my ancestry. would just get dumped in the "statistical noise" category. So, if it does come up I want to be sure that I have it.

IphonePlus
04-25-2017, 07:57 PM
Here is a picture of someone's result on Anthrogenica that are very similar to the person in question, is there some sort of Irish-Central Asian connection ?15437

Also I finnally got ahold of the actual percentages broken down

Person A
European 97%
Ireland 29%
Europe West 27%
Scandanavia 15%
Iberian Penisula 11%
Europe East 2%

West Asia 2%
low confidence region
Middle East 1%
Caucasus <1%

Unidentified 1%
Thank you for all who help further !

sktibo
04-26-2017, 04:24 AM
Hi, there's no short simple way I can think of for explaining why people get these strange small percentages, I suggest just having a read through the forum when you get the chance... just pick a random topic and dig in, I'm afraid that I don't quite know what to suggest for a starting point.
The individual that got 3% Caucus for example probably doesn't have any ancestral connection to the region.. it just indicates that a small part of their autosomal DNA for whatever reason matched most closely to that population of people in the reference panel. It's a long tunnel which seems to lead to learning about ancient populations and how the modern populations came to be over thousands of years. The different tests don't have the same reference populations and so results vary from test to test, sometimes so much so that the results can be hilarious. I agree with Judith in that 23andme is the best, or... the least bad.

Best of luck

IphonePlus
04-26-2017, 12:03 PM
Thank you Skitbo ! That one image that I posted is from Dubhthach's results, he is a Gaelic user here on Anthrogenic. I hope it wasn't inappropriate me posting it, it was just so similar that I thought it would be essential for a comparison. I suppose that 3% of Person A might as well be "noise" then. If it were .06% Asian on 23andme study then I think I would be more convinced this person had a Central Asian/Overall Asian ancestor from the last 5-6 generations. Thank you for your help ! I love this forum. So enlightening and polite.:angel:

JerryS.
04-26-2017, 01:50 PM
Ancestry DNA .com is one of the worst for actual ethnicity sources. that's is why they call it an "estimation" in their words, not mine. upload you raw data to GEDmatch for the real science of this. they don't care if your feelings are hurt by the results and they aren't trying to sell you much of anything. it will show where your DNA came from, good or bad.

Dubhthach
04-26-2017, 03:33 PM
I should note that in Ancestry that even though they give me 89% Irish my range is 77-100%. As has been pointed out there could be element of noise going on here. However it does somewhat match what I see in FamilyFinder.

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/ftdna-myorigins.png

Now I just have to get my parents to do Ancestry test to see if it's more specific to one line or the other.

Though I note on the new version of My Origins that they've changed this slightly:
http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/myorigins-2.png

IphonePlus
04-26-2017, 05:42 PM
Sorry for the extra post something happened....the next post is the one I intended to post

IphonePlus
04-26-2017, 05:45 PM
I should note that in Ancestry that even though they give me 89% Irish my range is 77-100%. As has been pointed out there could be element of noise going on her. However it does somewhat match what I see in FamilyFinder.

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/ftdna-myorigins.png

Now I just have to get my parents to do Ancestry test to see if it's more specific to one line or the other.

Though I note on the new version of My Origins that they've changed this slightly:
http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/myorigins-2.png
Thank you Dubhthach ! It seems that you have similar results as Person A, but it seems that she had even LESS Asian ancestry than you do. At this point, I am thinking it is most likely noise. It would be really interesting to see if your mum or dad had any ancestors from that area in actuality. What do you think the most likely explanation here ? If you could conjecture, do you think that some one might moved, say, the Middle East to Ireland and had a kid ? I found a paper here about West Asian DNA appearing in Irish people. Perhaps this Asian ancestry has been in Ireland for quite sometime, maybe i.e. older then 900 years. Let me know what you think. I am thinking that the person I know most likely has that ancestry from a longer time ago. She did score 29% Irish afterall. Ultimately I don't know

"Admixture results based on the Dodecad Ancestry Project showed, at K=11, that Irish are mostly "Northwest European" (as we'd expect), also partly "Northeast European" and "Basque", with a small slice of "Sardinian", and a little bit of "West Asian". The Irish are very similar to British, which is also shown by their clustering together in two main groups."


http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/irish.html


Also here is another blogpost about Irish ancestry that I found.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04/genetic-structure-of-west-eurasians.html

sktibo
04-26-2017, 07:08 PM
I should note that in Ancestry that even though they give me 89% Irish my range is 77-100%. As has been pointed out there could be element of noise going on here. However it does somewhat match what I see in FamilyFinder.

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/ftdna-myorigins.png

Now I just have to get my parents to do Ancestry test to see if it's more specific to one line or the other.

Though I note on the new version of My Origins that they've changed this slightly:
http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/DNA/myorigins-2.png

Hi Dubhthach may I have your permission to share your MyOrigins 2.0 in another thread? Thanks

Dubhthach
04-27-2017, 10:29 AM
Hi Dubhthach may I have your permission to share your MyOrigins 2.0 in another thread? Thanks

I just posted it that over in the FTDNA forum.

Dubhthach
04-27-2017, 10:34 AM
Thank you Dubhthach ! It seems that you have similar results as Person A, but it seems that she had even LESS Asian ancestry than you do. At this point, I am thinking it is most likely noise. It would be really interesting to see if your mum or dad had any ancestors from that area in actuality. What do you think the most likely explanation here ? If you could conjecture, do you think that some one might moved, say, the Middle East to Ireland and had a kid ? I found a paper here about West Asian DNA appearing in Irish people. Perhaps this Asian ancestry has been in Ireland for quite sometime, maybe i.e. older then 900 years. Let me know what you think. I am thinking that the person I know most likely has that ancestry from a longer time ago. She did score 29% Irish afterall. Ultimately I don't know

"Admixture results based on the Dodecad Ancestry Project showed, at K=11, that Irish are mostly "Northwest European" (as we'd expect), also partly "Northeast European" and "Basque", with a small slice of "Sardinian", and a little bit of "West Asian". The Irish are very similar to British, which is also shown by their clustering together in two main groups."


http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/irish.html


Also here is another blogpost about Irish ancestry that I found.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04/genetic-structure-of-west-eurasians.html

Well the component called "Irish" in Ancestry is probably a bit older than Irish ethnogensis and probably reflects a broader NW Insular population (in my opinion), thence high levels seen in parts of Britain. It just happens to be modal/peak in modern Irish populations, which given our history shouldn't be that surprising, a Celtic language after all remained the majority language spoken in Ireland until the 1790's, and even today 80%+ of surnames in Ireland are of native origin.

Leaving that aside I know of no Central Asian ancestry within what I know of my genealogy. 7 of my 8 great-grandparents were born in Ireland, 1 was "Liverpool Irish" (her mother was a Cassidy for example). My mother's surname is of probable English origin though present in Ireland since the 16th century.