PDA

View Full Version : Confused by GEDmatch Oceanian



jpb
08-01-2016, 06:05 PM
I tested at ancestry.com. They did not give me any sort of Pacific Islander result. However at GEDmatch, on pretty much every single calculator, I get either Oceanian, Papuan, or Melanesian, and I think they all basically mean the same thing. I am German, Irish, and English; pale as can be. However, much of my family has darker skin than I do. Most of my family lines trace back to 17th century Virginia, Kentucky, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts. I have heard some people saying it may be Romani or Romanichal ancestry, but I don't really have any South Asian. Does anyone have any insight into what this could be? Here are some examples:

Eurogenes K13:
Population
North_Atlantic 41.99
Baltic 28.21
West_Med 13.32
West_Asian 4.67
East_Med 7.61
Red_Sea 2.20
South_Asian 0.24
East_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian 0.41
Oceanian 1.23
Northeast_African 0.12
Sub-Saharan -

Eurogenes K15:
Population
North_Sea 36.14
Atlantic 18.40
Baltic 13.90
Eastern_Euro 10.48
West_Med 11.17
West_Asian 2.60
East_Med 5.07
Red_Sea 1.29
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian 0.94
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

Eurogenes K9b:
Population
Southwest_Asian 8.37
Native_American 1.11
Northeast_Asian 1.09
Mediterranean 17.75
North_European 69.53
Southeast_Asian -
Oceanian 1.32
South_African -
Sub-Saharan_African 0.82

Does anyone have any insights?
Thank you so very much,
J Bower

Mestace
08-01-2016, 06:30 PM
At trace amounts that's pretty much the signals found in ane/whg/neo (+steppe) :

https://i.imgsafe.org/f947b37049.png

jatt2016
08-01-2016, 06:34 PM
1.23 % percentage is nothing. Please note that these calculators are not accurate and are based one sample data bases. It does not necessarily mean that you have ancestry from there.

vettor
08-01-2016, 07:01 PM
I tested at ancestry.com. They did not give me any sort of Pacific Islander result. However at GEDmatch, on pretty much every single calculator, I get either Oceanian, Papuan, or Melanesian, and I think they all basically mean the same thing. I am German, Irish, and English; pale as can be. However, much of my family has darker skin than I do. Most of my family lines trace back to 17th century Virginia, Kentucky, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts. I have heard some people saying it may be Romani or Romanichal ancestry, but I don't really have any South Asian. Does anyone have any insight into what this could be? Here are some examples:

Eurogenes K13:
Population
North_Atlantic 41.99
Baltic 28.21
West_Med 13.32
West_Asian 4.67
East_Med 7.61
Red_Sea 2.20
South_Asian 0.24
East_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian 0.41
Oceanian 1.23
Northeast_African 0.12
Sub-Saharan -

Eurogenes K15:
Population
North_Sea 36.14
Atlantic 18.40
Baltic 13.90
Eastern_Euro 10.48
West_Med 11.17
West_Asian 2.60
East_Med 5.07
Red_Sea 1.29
South_Asian -
Southeast_Asian -
Siberian -
Amerindian -
Oceanian 0.94
Northeast_African -
Sub-Saharan -

Eurogenes K9b:
Population
Southwest_Asian 8.37
Native_American 1.11
Northeast_Asian 1.09
Mediterranean 17.75
North_European 69.53
Southeast_Asian -
Oceanian 1.32
South_African -
Sub-Saharan_African 0.82

Does anyone have any insights?
Thank you so very much,
J Bower

These admixture numbers mean .................your "ancestors" either went to that place or came from that place,......................the under 4% is that some went there , but we do not know from where

jatt2016
08-01-2016, 07:36 PM
These admixture numbers mean .................your "ancestors" either went to that place or came from that place,......................the under 4% is that some went there , but we do not know from where

Hi Vettor :

Just for the sake of discussion : How about a scenario that they never went there or came from there but he just have some similarities ( tested positive SNPS) that the other population in another geographical area also has.

BalkanKiwi
08-01-2016, 08:27 PM
This is an interesting situation. I have known Maori/Polynesian ancestry and get 1.54% on the K13 for example. In your case and specifically due to your ancestry, it's unlikely you had a Polynesian ancestor who was in Europe around that time.

jpb
08-01-2016, 08:31 PM
Thank you, could it be Romany ancestry?

BalkanKiwi
08-01-2016, 08:40 PM
Thank you, could it be Romany ancestry?

Maybe, however I don't know Romany genetics that well. Out of curiosity, do you score any Papuan on the PuntDNAL calculators?

jpb
08-01-2016, 08:52 PM
I do get Oceanian/Papuan on puntDNAL:

Ancient K10:
Oceanian 0.89

Ancient K12:
Oceanian 0.99

Modern K12:
Oceanian 0.99

jpb
08-01-2016, 08:53 PM
So, a little less than Eurogenes, but it is still definitely there. :)

jpb
08-01-2016, 08:56 PM
I just realized that on every single calculator that has Oceanian as an option, I have at least .7% of it...

Sikeliot
08-01-2016, 09:09 PM
Noise levels, or it might be indirect from Romani/Gypsy ancestry. Oceanian components are heavily tied in with the Ancestral South Indian genes that are prevalent in South Asia especially as you move south.

BalkanKiwi
08-01-2016, 09:11 PM
From memory, our member evon (http://www.anthrogenica.com/member.php?9-evon) does quite a bit of stuff regarding Romany. That may be a good way to go. Do you get any East Asian also on the PuntDNAL tests?

jpb
08-01-2016, 09:18 PM
I have 0.84% Siberian but no E-Asian.

jpb
08-01-2016, 09:19 PM
Interesting. I asked one person and they said it may be from Romany transports to Virginia...as much of my ancestry comes from there and there are lots of dead ends!

BalkanKiwi
08-01-2016, 09:46 PM
No East Asian could be the telltale sign. That East Asian sample is Ami from Taiwan. Most Polynesian people score more East Asian than actual Oceanian. If you don't get any of that it probably means your Oceanian has come from somewhere else. The only real way for you to have a Polynesian ancestor would be to have had a 4th-6th great grandfather who was in and around Polynesia, married a Polynesian woman and brought her back to Europe. My 5th great Maori grandmother married a English man in New Zealand, but they both resided there. It's uncommon for someone of that culture to go off by themselves without other family.

jpb
08-01-2016, 09:57 PM
Where do you think it comes from? 😀

BalkanKiwi
08-01-2016, 10:34 PM
It's really hard to say. If you've discovered your 4th-6th great grandparents on every line and none of them are Polynesian, that rules that out. Otherwise it's noise or is attached to something else.

jpb
08-02-2016, 03:38 AM
Ok, thank you.

jpb
08-02-2016, 05:09 AM
I don't know all of my 4th-6th grandparents...could it be a Melanesian ancestor rather than Polynesian (Australian aboriginal brought back to Britain???)

vettor
08-02-2016, 07:11 AM
Hi Vettor :

Just for the sake of discussion : How about a scenario that they never went there or came from there but he just have some similarities ( tested positive SNPS) that the other population in another geographical area also has.

yes, but basically what I am saying is that anything under 4% is useless in finding anything in any admixture test

golbasy
08-27-2016, 10:16 PM
As Melville describes in Moby Dick:


But New Bedford beats all Water street and Wapping. In these last-mentioned haunts you see only sailors; but in New Bedford, actual cannibals stand chatting at street corners; savages outright; many of whom yet carry on their bones unholy flesh. It makes a stranger stare.

But, besides the Feegeeans, Tongatabooarrs, Erromanggoans, Pannangians, and Brighggians, and, besides the wild specimens of the whaling-craft which unheeded reel about the streets, you will see other sights still more curious, certainly more comical.

Could you have a Melanesian ancestor who came to Massachusetts on board a whaler?

Gentleman
06-28-2017, 11:29 AM
LOL. This is so much reminiscent of my thread "Oceanian <1%???" in Oceanian section.

I think the Oceanian result can be a bit of a WTF moment for those of us who are pretty sure we have no ancestry from "Oceania". I have less than the OP but possibly took it more seriously as I'm Australian by birth with two grandparents born here.

On FTDNA I was gobsmacked to see my expected heatmaps in Europe...and then a trace <1% heat map assigned to Australia/PNG zone.

If it's not just background noise, in my case the heatmap is far more appropriate around say India (assuming a Gypsy-type source.)

While on most it gives me some level of Oceanian, on the big Eurogenes K36 Admixture Proportions it gives me none and gives me 100% European groups:



Population

Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Basque 1.68
Central_African -
Central_Euro 5.81
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 6.10
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 12.00
East_Med -
Eastern_Euro 6.92
Fennoscandian 9.09
French 7.30
Iberian 13.20
Indo-Chinese -
Italian 5.94
Malayan -
Near_Eastern -
North_African -
North_Atlantic 9.15
North_Caucasian 2.58
North_Sea 20.23
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural -
West_African -
West_Caucasian -
West_Med -