PDA

View Full Version : Great Britain DNA Category - Is it really Germanic?



sktibo
09-15-2016, 05:06 AM
So my AncestryDNA results came in recently, and I must admit that I'm absolutely crushed. Here they are:

Great Britain - 73% (50-99%)
Ireland - 6% (0-18%).

The rest are trace regions:
Iberian Peninsula 6%, Europe East 4%, Scandinavia 3%, Europe West 2%, Finland/NW Russia 2%, Italy/Greece 1%.

I've wanted to do an Ancestry test for a long time specifically because it has an Irish category. My family history is very much "Celtic". My relatives tell stories about our Welsh speaking ancestors, our and how we're all red haired because we're mostly Scottish blood - a large portion of our paper trail ancestry is rooted in people from Skye, Orkney, and Balquhidder area. One of my grandparents wouldn't stop talking about how proud he was to have red hair and how his people came from County Cork. My idea of my ethnicity up until this point was very Celtic, and through calculations of my paper trail I figured that at the very worst case I'd end up with 20-25% Irish on the AncestryDNA test.
Therefore, these results are worse than I could have possibly imagined. From what I read, the Great Britain samples come from people who are very Anglo Saxon, and people with deep roots in Germany often score high in this category. From my background these results are unimaginably awful, and it's triggered some kind of miniature identity crisis!

I've also tested with 23andme (52% British and Irish, 8% French and German, 4% East Europe), and FTDNA (51% West and Central Europe, 36% British Isles, 11% Scandinavian) in which I found the results more in line with what I would expect given my paper trail. The relative matches on both 23andme and FTDNA are a mix of Gaelic and English Surnames with some French. The Relative matches I was given on Ancestry are almost entirely French surnames (which is a bit weird as I'm only 9% French on my paper trail).

As I can't seem to cope with the idea that I may be 3/4 Germanic (no offense intended) I'm wondering if the Ancestry test could be wrong, or if the British category isn't actually as Germanic as I seem to think it is.

I'm also happy to accept any sympathy or similar stories.

Thank you

-S.

A Norfolk L-M20
09-15-2016, 05:42 AM
1. We are what we are. Not what we wish to be.
2. Not everyone even feels comfortable with concepts such as Celtic or Germanic. Nothing to do with political correctness, just that it isn't clear what they are with regards to biology, culture, ethnicity, or history.
3. British is an inclusive term that includes the English, Scottish, Welsh, and Cornish.
4. Recent studies (including POBI), suggest that the English themselves are an admixed population, that although having a significant North Sea ancestry (if you like, Germanic), have circa 60% ancestry from late prehistoric British populations - if you like, "Celtic". The majority genetic signal for the entire Irish and British Isles corner of NW Europe appears to have originated from late prehistoric populations that settled there during the Early Bronze Age. Yes, even for the English, and more so for many Irish, Scottish, Welsh, etc.

I'm not offended that for some sort of preconceived reasons of personal identity, that you might want to distance yourself from us English. But the old fashioned idea that the English are the descendants only of Anglo-Saxon invaders that committed an act of genocide against the SE British "Celts" has been pretty much debunked now. We appear to have an admixed foot in both camps.

I don't know the reference population of AncestryDNA's "Britain" reference, but I'd be highly surprised if it reflected any common genetic signal other than the shared late prehistoric "British" signal, that appears to be common to Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and to slightly lower percentages, to us English.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
09-15-2016, 06:27 AM
I'm Welsh with a Welsh name and was a initially a bit disappointed to find out my Ydna is U106, probably of Saxon origin but I agree with the post above.
As far as Britain goes, the way I look at it is I'm the product of thousands of years of migration and history, I've got dna from different people from different periods. That's what made Britain what it is. :)
Possibly you might have some Norse ancestry if that makes you feel better. :)

sktibo
09-15-2016, 06:53 AM
Hi A Norfolk L-M20,

I want to thank you for your reply. It makes me very hopeful to learn that recent studies (POBI especially) indicate that the English are largely comprised of prehistoric British populations.

JohnHowellsTyrfro,

Thank you for your response as well, forgive me for asking but have you done any of these autosomal DNA tests? I'm curious as to if a Welsh person would end up in the Irish, the British, or some other category. As for the Norse ancestry, the little bit I may have had from my Orcadian ancestors would probably be long gone.

MacUalraig
09-15-2016, 07:57 AM
I wouldn't worry about it too much, most results I have seen have seemingly too high an Irish figure (including mine). If you havent done so yet upload the raw data to GEDMatch and try some of the free admixture tests there (Eurogenes etc).

L1983
09-15-2016, 08:01 AM
I wouldn't worry too much. My core results were 60% Europe West and 30% Irish. I got >1% Great Britain. As far as I know I'm English with an Irish great grandmother so the tiny GB amount is disappointing.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
09-15-2016, 08:09 AM
Hi A Norfolk L-M20,

I want to thank you for your reply. It makes me very hopeful to learn that recent studies (POBI especially) indicate that the English are largely comprised of prehistoric British populations.

JohnHowellsTyrfro,

Thank you for your response as well, forgive me for asking but have you done any of these autosomal DNA tests? I'm curious as to if a Welsh person would end up in the Irish, the British, or some other category. As for the Norse ancestry, the little bit I may have had from my Orcadian ancestors would probably be long gone.

I was just reading your post again and was going to reply further because I replied in haste earlier. :) I have to admit though I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to understanding dna.
I have no say firstly that I'm a bit wary of the term "British" dna - what does that mean? British dna come from successive migrations of peoples and it all came from somewhere else at some point.There are some genetic influences in relation to Britain which are earlier than others which you could define as "celtic" or earier It may be helpful if you can post more information on your tests as people with more knowledge than me may be able to advise on the origins and time periods relevant to Britain and Ireland.
I tested originally with Cymru/Britain's dna and I think I'm right in saying they don't even use the descriptor "British dna". I would guess that anyone with origins in Great Britain will a fairly broad range of genetic influences although they will vary across the country. It is too simplistic to think of the English just in terms of Anglo/Saxon. :)
I'm doing more tests and waiting for the results of FTDNA "Family Finder" to see where I might get matches either in Britain or elsewhere and I may follow that up with Big Y. I think we have to be very cautious in drawing conclusions from some of these results, because there is an awful lot that still has to be discovered.

A Norfolk L-M20
09-15-2016, 08:41 AM
Mispost duplicate. Deleted

sktibo
09-15-2016, 08:46 AM
I wouldn't worry about it too much, most results I have seen have seemingly too high an Irish figure (including mine). If you havent done so yet upload the raw data to GEDMatch and try some of the free admixture tests there (Eurogenes etc).

Good to know. My gedmatch results seem to differ depending on which kit I use: with the ancestry kit, I'm getting southeast English primarily, with my 23andme kit, it usually has Irish or Orcadian in the top spot. I thank you for your input

09-15-2016, 08:52 AM
So my AncestryDNA results came in recently, and I must admit that I'm absolutely crushed. Here they are:

Great Britain - 73% (50-99%)
Ireland - 6% (0-18%).

The rest are trace regions:
Iberian Peninsula 6%, Europe East 4%, Scandinavia 3%, Europe West 2%, Finland/NW Russia 2%, Italy/Greece 1%.

I've wanted to do an Ancestry test for a long time specifically because it has an Irish category. My family history is very much "Celtic". My relatives tell stories about our Welsh speaking ancestors, our and how we're all red haired because we're mostly Scottish blood - a large portion of our paper trail ancestry is rooted in people from Skye, Orkney, and Balquhidder area. One of my grandparents wouldn't stop talking about how proud he was to have red hair and how his people came from County Cork. My idea of my ethnicity up until this point was very Celtic, and through calculations of my paper trail I figured that at the very worst case I'd end up with 20-25% Irish on the AncestryDNA test.
Therefore, these results are worse than I could have possibly imagined. From what I read, the Great Britain samples come from people who are very Anglo Saxon, and people with deep roots in Germany often score high in this category. From my background these results are unimaginably awful, and it's triggered some kind of miniature identity crisis!

I've also tested with 23andme (52% British and Irish, 8% French and German, 4% East Europe), and FTDNA (51% West and Central Europe, 36% British Isles, 11% Scandinavian) in which I found the results more in line with what I would expect given my paper trail. The relative matches on both 23andme and FTDNA are a mix of Gaelic and English Surnames with some French. The Relative matches I was given on Ancestry are almost entirely French surnames (which is a bit weird as I'm only 9% French on my paper trail).

As I can't seem to cope with the idea that I may be 3/4 Germanic (no offense intended) I'm wondering if the Ancestry test could be wrong, or if the British category isn't actually as Germanic as I seem to think it is.

I'm also happy to accept any sympathy or similar stories.

Thank you

-S.

Hi, Your post did make me smile a bit... as a Welsh person I can say I follow the Welsh/Celtic post a bit more than others, and there does seem antidotel evidence that the Welsh score high with Irish ( on Ancestry DNA), with 23andme they lump British and Irish together, and mine scores 89%, I am not sure how they separate them on Ancestry actually, but I imagine they are very similar, which leads me to suspect that the Irish and West Side of Britain 'minus' the Viking Element was very early Celtic migrations (Halstadt) and the rest of the British mainland, mostly South and South East, was later Celtic Migrations (La Tene)'minus' Romans,Vikings,AS,Normans, etc
hence the simularity, this actually explains allot, and makes more sense that implies that the British on Ancestry is mostly La Tene (Celtic)

A Norfolk L-M20
09-15-2016, 08:53 AM
Our autosomal DNA tests compare our results with modern day reference populations. When we are looking to the distant past, we should be aware that these are modern populations that our results are being compared to. Since ancient times there has been admixture and a degree of genetic drift.

In the case of the Irish and British Isles, what is normally expected to be shared right across that population, including even us admixed English, is the pre admixture base. This in my opinion often reflects the late prehistoric population which if the current trend of thinking is correct, descends from the founders of the Bell Beaker culture, that arrived here circa 4,000 years ago, with an adjustment of shared selective and genetic drift.

Judging by what I have seen on 23andme forums, the Irish and Scottish have the highest percentages of this reference. I would expect Welsh may be similar.

mouse
09-15-2016, 08:55 AM
I'm Welsh with a Welsh name and was a initially a bit disappointed to find out my Ydna is U106, probably of Saxon origin but I agree with the post above.
As far as Britain goes, the way I look at it is I'm the product of thousands of years of migration and history, I've got dna from different people from different periods. That's what made Britain what it is. :)
Possibly you might have some Norse ancestry if that makes you feel better. :)

I have yet to see anyone prove where their ancestral line came from beyond their paper trail and we have not seen one person prove a link to any one of the ancient dna samples. It is how you feel today what is important about your identity and you are not your ancestor. Meanwhile the dna companies will spew out a lot of spin to get you and me to part with our hard earned cash.

sktibo
09-15-2016, 09:17 AM
I was just reading your post again and was going to reply further because I replied in haste earlier. :) I have to admit though I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to understanding dna.
I have no say firstly that I'm a bit wary of the term "British" dna - what does that mean? British dna come from successive migrations of peoples and it all came from somewhere else at some point.There are some genetic influences in relation to Britain which are earlier than others which you could define as "celtic" or earier It may be helpful if you can post more information on your tests as people with more knowledge than me may be able to advise on the origins and time periods relevant to Britain and Ireland.
I tested originally with Cymru/Britain's dna and I think I'm right in saying they don't even use the descriptor "British dna". I would guess that anyone with origins in Great Britain will a fairly broad range of genetic influences although they will vary across the country. It is too simplistic to think of the English just in terms of Anglo/Saxon. :)
I'm doing more tests and waiting for the results of FTDNA "Family Finder" to see where I might get matches either in Britain or elsewhere and I may follow that up with Big Y. I think we have to be very cautious in drawing conclusions from some of these results, because there is an awful lot that still has to be discovered.

I probably should have defined these things previously, but here goes:
So for the purpose of this thread I'm referring to the two categories of British and Irish which are part of Ancestry DNA's ethnicity estimate. I'm using the term "Celtic" to describe populations indigenous to Britain and or Ireland. I'm using the term "Germanic" to describe people who are indigenous to Northern mainland Europe and or Scandinavia... "North Sea" is probably a better term for them. A little research indicated that the British population sample comes from people that are from eastern England, and that the Great Britain category is usually the primary ethnic component for Dutch/ Frisian and German people as well. People from Scotland and Wales generally seem to fall into the Ireland category, and thus a conclusion made by many on the AncestryDNA forum posts is that Irish essentially means "Celtic" and Great Britain means "Germanic". Of course you are correct to point out that this kind of technology is in it's infancy, so I'll be hoping that I'm wrong about much of this!

A Norfolk L-M20
09-15-2016, 09:22 AM
If the British reference for Ancestry DNA comes from Eastern England, that is trite. It would be an English reference, NOT British. But not only that, it's from a population that we know to be rich in admixture over the past few thousand years.

sktibo
09-15-2016, 09:27 AM
If the British reference for Ancestry DNA comes from Eastern England, that is trite. It would be an English reference, NOT British. But not only that, it's from a population that we know to be rich in admixture over the past few thousand years.

I cannot argue with your logic on that. I thank you for sharing your knowledge on this subject

mouse
09-15-2016, 10:22 AM
I probably should have defined these things previously, but here goes:
So for the purpose of this thread I'm referring to the two categories of British and Irish which are part of Ancestry DNA's ethnicity estimate. I'm using the term "Celtic" to describe populations indigenous to Britain and or Ireland. I'm using the term "Germanic" to describe people who are indigenous to Northern mainland Europe and or Scandinavia... "North Sea" is probably a better term for them. A little research indicated that the British population sample comes from people that are from eastern England, and that the Great Britain category is usually the primary ethnic component for Dutch/ Frisian and German people as well. People from Scotland and Wales generally seem to fall into the Ireland category, and thus a conclusion made by many on the AncestryDNA forum posts is that Irish essentially means "Celtic" and Great Britain means "Germanic". Of course you are correct to point out that this kind of technology is in it's infancy, so I'll be hoping that I'm wrong about much of this!

A man who lived and died in Italy 14,000 years ago had the North Sea component, or perhaps the people of the North Sea has his SNPs. Most Scottish ,Irish and Welsh have around 30-40% of this North Sea dna. The Eurogenes K15 calculator is the only one that I know shows it. The dodecad K7b is the best calculator for my ancestry.

Villabruna 14,180 ybp M236020
Eurogenes K15
# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 40.49
2 Baltic 28.24
3 Atlantic 22.57
4 Eastern_Euro 8.69

sktibo
09-16-2016, 03:49 AM
A man who lived and died in Italy 14,000 years ago had the North Sea component, or perhaps the people of the North Sea has his SNPs. Most Scottish ,Irish and Welsh have around 30-40% of this North Sea dna. The Eurogenes K15 calculator is the only one that I know shows it. The dodecad K7b is the best calculator for my ancestry.

Villabruna 14,180 ybp M236020
Eurogenes K15
# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 40.49
2 Baltic 28.24
3 Atlantic 22.57
4 Eastern_Euro 8.69

Very interesting, well then perhaps North Sea is not a suitable term for Germanic.

mouse
09-16-2016, 05:03 AM
Very interesting, well then perhaps North Sea is not a suitable term for Germanic.

Here are the results of three Hunter Gatherers whose dna is found in the modern populations of the North Sea, Atlantic,Baltic and Eastern Europe.
K15
Villabruna 14,180 ybp M236020 found in Italy
Eurogenes K15
# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 40.49
2 Baltic 28.24
3 Atlantic 22.57
4 Eastern_Euro 8.69

Lochsbour F999918 8000 ybp found in Luxembourg
# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 34.51
2 Baltic 33.51
3 Atlantic 23.86
4 Eastern_Euro 7.33

La Brana F999915 7000 ybp found in Spain
# Population Percent
1 Atlantic 30.24
2 North_Sea 29.34
3 Baltic 28.15
4 Eastern_Euro 11.87

JohnHowellsTyrfro
09-16-2016, 06:14 AM
A man who lived and died in Italy 14,000 years ago had the North Sea component, or perhaps the people of the North Sea has his SNPs. Most Scottish ,Irish and Welsh have around 30-40% of this North Sea dna. The Eurogenes K15 calculator is the only one that I know shows it. The dodecad K7b is the best calculator for my ancestry.

Villabruna 14,180 ybp M236020
Eurogenes K15
# Population Percent
1 North_Sea 40.49
2 Baltic 28.24
3 Atlantic 22.57
4 Eastern_Euro 8.69

Some good interesting posts on this thread :) . We tend to look at these things through relatively modern concepts of Nationality and Countries.

Wing Genealogist
09-16-2016, 08:34 AM
I have yet to see anyone prove where their ancestral line came from beyond their paper trail and we have not seen one person prove a link to any one of the ancient dna samples. It is how you feel today what is important about your identity and you are not your ancestor. Meanwhile the dna companies will spew out a lot of spin to get you and me to part with our hard earned cash.

It all depends on what you mean by "prove". In my personal Y-DNA testing, (being a subclade below R-U106), it is basically proven this clade was still in Asia during the LGM (Last Glacial Maximum). Ancient DNA results have so far shown where the parent clade of both R-U106 & R-P312 did not enter Europe until sometime around the Iron Age. We had no way of knowing any of this information prior to DNA testing.

Taking Y-DNA further: I was able to discover from STR testing (confirmed by SNP testing) where my Wing family is fairly closely related to the Howland family of Mayflower fame. Even at 67 STR markers it is difficult (but not impossible) to distinguish between the two families (there are basically only 2 STR differences). These two surnames fall under S10415 clade with a handful of other surnames. Thus far, this clade has only been found in England & Scotland, but their are hints some of the families have Flemish ties. S10415 falls under a subclade of Z8 and long before the Z8 SNP was actually discovered, the STR cluster associated with this clade was found to have a high peak in ancient Frisia (and Flanders can be said to have evolved from Frisia).

Even with mtDNA testing, I have been able to extend my own personal ancestry. My "umbilical" line (mother's mother's mother's etc.) had a paper-trail end due to two contemporary Phebe Lovejoys of Andover, Massachusetts. They were first cousins (as their father's were brothers). I was able to prove which of these two Phebes was my ancestry due to a mtDNA match to a descendant of Phebe's sister, Hannah Lovejoy (who married Jacob Stanley). With this mtDNA "proof" I was able to show where my ancestry came from the area in or near Cransford, Suffolkshire, England.

Wing Genealogist
09-16-2016, 12:04 PM
mouse: In addition, my mtDNA is J1c2g. J1 has been found in the "Fertile Crescent" (where it is believed farming first started) and it is likely my "umbilical" line was among the Neolithic Revolution which brought farming to Western Europe. Again, this evidence was only found with DNA testing.

mouse
09-16-2016, 12:11 PM
It all depends on what you mean by "prove". In my personal Y-DNA testing, (being a subclade below R-U106), it is basically proven this clade was still in Asia during the LGM (Last Glacial Maximum). Ancient DNA results have so far shown where the parent clade of both R-U106 & R-P312 did not enter Europe until sometime around the Iron Age. We had no way of knowing any of this information prior to DNA testing.

Taking Y-DNA further: I was able to discover from STR testing (confirmed by SNP testing) where my Wing family is fairly closely related to the Howland family of Mayflower fame. Even at 67 STR markers it is difficult (but not impossible) to distinguish between the two families (there are basically only 2 STR differences). These two surnames fall under S10415 clade with a handful of other surnames. Thus far, this clade has only been found in England & Scotland, but their are hints some of the families have Flemish ties. S10415 falls under a subclade of Z8 and long before the Z8 SNP was actually discovered, the STR cluster associated with this clade was found to have a high peak in ancient Frisia (and Flanders can be said to have evolved from Frisia).

Even with mtDNA testing, I have been able to extend my own personal ancestry. My "umbilical" line (mother's mother's mother's etc.) had a paper-trail end due to two contemporary Phebe Lovejoys of Andover, Massachusetts. They were first cousins (as their father's were brothers). I was able to prove which of these two Phebes was my ancestry due to a mtDNA match to a descendant of Phebe's sister, Hannah Lovejoy (who married Jacob Stanley). With this mtDNA "proof" I was able to show where my ancestry came from the area in or near Cransford, Suffolkshire, England.

Was R1b-P312 not found in two ancient samples from the Bell Beaker Culture in Germany with radio carbon dates of around 2,600 BC?!!

ArmandoR1b
09-16-2016, 12:29 PM
Dartraighe got bored at Molgen?

Wing Genealogist
09-16-2016, 10:40 PM
Was R1b-P312 not found in two ancient samples from the Bell Beaker Culture in Germany with radio carbon dates of around 2,600 BC?!!

I mis-spoke when I said the Iron Age. I meant the Bronze Age, which preceded the Iron Age but came after the Neolithic & the Farming revolution in Europe. The Corded Ware & Bell Beaker Cultures were in the middle of the Bronze Age.

In any case, R-L51 & its immediate ancestors were not found in Europe during the Neolithic age.

Don Felipe
08-25-2017, 01:07 PM
A little research indicated that the British population sample comes from people that are from eastern England, and that the Great Britain category is usually the primary ethnic component for Dutch/ Frisian and German people as well. People from Scotland and Wales generally seem to fall into the Ireland category, and thus a conclusion made by many on the AncestryDNA forum posts is that Irish essentially means "Celtic" and Great Britain means "Germanic".

From my own limited observation among 10 Dutch results, 2 Belgian ones and 1 German, socalled "Great Britain" was reported as biggest region three times. "Europe West" being more prevalent but indeed going by the Dutch group averages it's fair to say that "Great Britain" seems to be a major genetic component (as it is also on 23andme).

Traditionally the Dutch people are said to descend from the Frisians, the Franks and the Saxons. The Saxons of course also being prominent among the Anglo-Saxon settlers of Great Britain! Obviously simplified historical interpretations are liable to seriously underestimate complicated and messy population genetics ;) However i have also been pondering the question if there is any (rough) correlation between the region “Great Britain” and presumedly Saxon origins for both the Dutch and the English.

Continuing the same line of thought could “Europe West” (very roughly) be indicative of mostly Frankish lineage (atleast for the Dutch)? And socalled "Scandinavian" suggestive of Frisian lineage (again within the Dutch context)? Socalled "Ireland" scores are generally rather subdued for the Dutch sofar (see median) which is in line with "Celtic" influences often being assumed to have been minimal in the Netherlands. Therefore corroborating the predictive accuracy of the Ireland region i suppose. However for a few individuals it did show up with considerable amounts.

Dutch & French AncestryDNA results
(https://tracingafricanroots.wordpress.com/ancestrydna/dutch-french-results/)

https://tracingafricanroots.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/nl-stats-n10o.png

mwauthy
08-25-2017, 02:30 PM
From my own limited observation among 10 Dutch results, 2 Belgian ones and 1 German, socalled "Great Britain" was reported as biggest region three times. "Europe West" being more prevalent but indeed going by the Dutch group averages it's fair to say that "Great Britain" seems to be a major genetic component (as it is also on 23andme).

Traditionally the Dutch people are said to descend from the Frisians, the Franks and the Saxons. The Saxons of course also being prominent among the Anglo-Saxon settlers of Great Britain! Obviously simplified historical interpretations are liable to seriously underestimate complicated and messy population genetics ;) However i have also been pondering the question if there is any (rough) correlation between the regions “Great Britain” and presumedly Saxon origins for both the Dutch and the English.

Continuing the same line of thought could “Europe West” (very roughly) be indicative of mostly Frankish lineage (atleast for the Dutch)? And socalled "Scandinavian" suggestive of Frisian lineage (again within the Dutch context)? Socalled "Ireland" scores are generally rather subdued for the Dutch sofar (see median) which is in line with "Celtic" influences often being assumed to have been minimal in the Netherlands. Therefore corroborating the predictive accuracy of the Ireland region i suppose. However for some individuals it does show up with considerable amounts.

Dutch & French AncestryDNA results
(https://tracingafricanroots.wordpress.com/ancestrydna/dutch-french-results/)

https://tracingafricanroots.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/nl-stats-n10o.png

I agree that Europe West probably has a Frankish or Belgae correlation since it peaks in Belgium.

Nqp15hhu
08-25-2017, 03:52 PM
I'm not convinced it actually means GB at all.

Finn
10-22-2017, 06:19 AM
From my own limited observation among 10 Dutch results, 2 Belgian ones and 1 German, socalled "Great Britain" was reported as biggest region three times. "Europe West" being more prevalent but indeed going by the Dutch group averages it's fair to say that "Great Britain" seems to be a major genetic component (as it is also on 23andme).

Traditionally the Dutch people are said to descend from the Frisians, the Franks and the Saxons. The Saxons of course also being prominent among the Anglo-Saxon settlers of Great Britain! Obviously simplified historical interpretations are liable to seriously underestimate complicated and messy population genetics ;) However i have also been pondering the question if there is any (rough) correlation between the region “Great Britain” and presumedly Saxon origins for both the Dutch and the English.

Continuing the same line of thought could “Europe West” (very roughly) be indicative of mostly Frankish lineage (atleast for the Dutch)? And socalled "Scandinavian" suggestive of Frisian lineage (again within the Dutch context)? Socalled "Ireland" scores are generally rather subdued for the Dutch sofar (see median) which is in line with "Celtic" influences often being assumed to have been minimal in the Netherlands. Therefore corroborating the predictive accuracy of the Ireland region i suppose. However for a few individuals it did show up with considerable amounts.

Dutch & French AncestryDNA results
(https://tracingafricanroots.wordpress.com/ancestrydna/dutch-french-results/)

https://tracingafricanroots.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/nl-stats-n10o.png

Don Felipe it’s the first time I read this, missed this in August, seems perfectly in line with the discussion here;
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10134-Origins-of-Germanic/page41

Celt_??
10-22-2017, 12:55 PM
So my AncestryDNA results came in recently, and I must admit that I'm absolutely crushed. Here they are: Great Britain - 73% (50-99%); Ireland - 6% (0-18%).

The rest are trace regions: Iberian Peninsula 6%, Europe East 4%, Scandinavia 3%, Europe West 2%, Finland/NW Russia 2%, Italy/Greece 1%.

Skitbo, I know that you have done other autosomal "admixture" tests such as Living DNA. Just for the fun of it, would you mind posting all such results for comparison? I think they would be informative regarding admixture tests themselves.

sktibo
10-22-2017, 04:36 PM
Skitbo, I know that you have done other autosomal "admixture" tests such as Living DNA. Just for the fun of it, would you mind posting all such results for comparison? I think they would be informative regarding admixture tests themselves.

This was my very first post on this forum IIRC, I have posted a comparison with my known genealogy and every test I've taken somewhere..
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?11127-Commerical-DNA-testing-VS-Family-tree

I have recently made a couple more discoveries paper trail wise but I don't think anything else has changed since I posted this.

Celt_??
10-23-2017, 08:36 PM
.....subclade of Z8 and long before the Z8 SNP was actually discovered, the STR cluster associated with this clade was found to have a high peak in ancient Frisia (and Flanders can be said to have evolved from Frisia).

Wing Genealogist you may be aware that Jean Manco started a thread on The Frisians with this paragraph from her new book on the AngloSaxons:

"Arch-pirates they may have been, but there is archaeological evidence to suggest that by the end of the fourth century, some Saxon groups were not just raiding but settling westwards along the coast. Terps along the cost of Frisia were mainly abandoned during the 3rd century AD, leaving the area depopulated. New arrivals in the 5th century left behind pottery and burials connecting them with the Saxons. This has been difficult to reconcile with the fact that that both the earlier and later populations were known as Frisians to contemporaries, but it may be that the new arrivals were simply identified by the familiar name of the region.[Nieuwhof 2013.] This would go some way towards explaining the statement by Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea (c. 500 – c. 554) that the Island of Brittia was inhabited by Angles, Frisians and Britons.[Procopius, History of the Wars, 8.20.6-10.] For Frisians, read Saxons.

Such sites have even been found as far west as what is now Ponthieu in France, part of a region shortly to be conquered by Clovis, King of the Franks.[Soulat 2009.] The Franks surged westwards into Gaul as the western (Roman) empire fell, giving their name to modern-day France. The Franks and Saxons were rivals in the pursuit of rich former Roman lands. The Frankish success in conquering Gaul may have been one factor in turning Saxon eyes across the Channel (to Great Britain)." http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?11220-The-Frisians

Further on she writes: "....Modern Frisian and Modern English have both developed from Proto-West-Germanic. But Frisian is the closest Germanic language to English, out of the Western Germanic group. I think it shows the dominance of the West Saxon (Wessex) dialect of Old English, after England was united under the House of Wessex....."

Then GTC adds a link to this video about the The Adventure of English beginning with Saxons from Frisia invading Great Britain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1XQx9pGGd0

It's really a great thread to read through for Jean's latest thinking about early AngloSaxon invasions.

AntG
10-25-2017, 10:45 PM
I think the labels that Ancestry use can cause confusion as people are getting Ireland when it may actually reflect something like Scots heritage. The maps that Ancestry use (attached) are clearer on this. Up until now, I've essentially read the two categories as primarily Celtic or primarily Anglo-Saxon.
19435

I've seen posted elsewhere that some users are recieving the labels 'Ireland/Scotland/Wales' and seperately 'Great Britain' (which doesn't help due to what island Scotland and Wales are on). Interestingly, if you see the screenshot, it is showing a sub-category of Scotland... I wonder if this is actually just an insertion of a Genetic Community rather than any actual refinement of the Ethnicity...
19437

Nqp15hhu
10-26-2017, 12:09 AM
Yeah, that's a Genetic Community, I have Ulster-Ireland and Scotland. I would like to see seperation of Scotland and Ireland within the DNA as I have 88% 'Ireland' and i'm not confident on that figure. Surely Scottish people would want to know their true identity?

Jessie
10-26-2017, 05:13 AM
I think the labels that Ancestry use can cause confusion as people are getting Ireland when it may actually reflect something like Scots heritage. The maps that Ancestry use (attached) are clearer on this. Up until now, I've essentially read the two categories as primarily Celtic or primarily Anglo-Saxon.
19435

I've seen posted elsewhere that some users are recieving the labels 'Ireland/Scotland/Wales' and seperately 'Great Britain' (which doesn't help due to what island Scotland and Wales are on). Interestingly, if you see the screenshot, it is showing a sub-category of Scotland... I wonder if this is actually just an insertion of a Genetic Community rather than any actual refinement of the Ethnicity...
19437

The Ireland category IMO is pre-Anglo-Saxon. The people on both islands were of similar genetic stock so people aren't going to get a neat breakdown of nationalities. There is too much similarity in neighouring populations. At present even LivingDNA has this issue as due to the low amount of Irish samples many Irish are getting a high proportion of categories from Scotland, England and Wales. The sub-category of Scotland is indeed a genetic community on the screenshot.

I think it is a good move for Ancestry to change Ireland to Ireland/Scotland/Wales. I personally think that the Great Britain category should be amalgamated with the Europe West category.

avalon
10-26-2017, 08:58 AM
Does anyone have a link to the reference populations used by ancestry? I haven't tested with them but like all autosomal/ethnicity tests, the results usually come down to the quality of the reference populations.

From what I have read, the GB component appears to peak in British testers who have significant ancestry from southern and eastern England, but that Europe West is also similar to GB, which complicates matters. Irish component here is more of a Celtic component and unlike LivingDNA, Ancestry must have a good Irish reference population, and Irish testers are obviously scoring highly in this component. Would these be fair comments?

The genetic communities look quite good and with ancestry's large customer base they should be, but the ethnicity breakdown should be a lot better imo, given they have such a large database. Although I guess fundamental problem is that modern NW Europeans are generally very admixed, so teasing apart has to be difficult.

MacUalraig
10-26-2017, 10:50 AM
Does anyone have a link to the reference populations used by ancestry? I haven't tested with them but like all autosomal/ethnicity tests, the results usually come down to the quality of the reference populations.



If you mean published data then no, but their construction is described in some detail in the ubiquitous Ethnicity Estimate White Paper. They used the external HGDP set too.

Phoebe Watts
10-26-2017, 04:48 PM
I think the labels that Ancestry use can cause confusion as people are getting Ireland when it may actually reflect something like Scots heritage. The maps that Ancestry use (attached) are clearer on this. Up until now, I've essentially read the two categories as primarily Celtic or primarily Anglo-Saxon.
19435

I've seen posted elsewhere that some users are recieving the labels 'Ireland/Scotland/Wales' and seperately 'Great Britain' (which doesn't help due to what island Scotland and Wales are on). Interestingly, if you see the screenshot, it is showing a sub-category of Scotland... I wonder if this is actually just an insertion of a Genetic Community rather than any actual refinement of the Ethnicity...
19437

I've had my Ancestry results recently and my ethnicity estimate looks a bit odd. I'm Welsh and my ethnicity is identified as:
55% Great Britain (range 35% - 76%) and
36% Ireland (range 20% - 52%).

(Genetic Communities are Wales and the West Midlands, and Southern England)

On that basis, I was going to say that the Great Britain element can't be simply Germanic, it looks like some kind of average of Great Britain including Scotland and Wales. Then I looked back at some GEDmatch admixture analysis for my Ancestry kit they come up as closer to North Germany and North Dutch than to the celtic populations. So the Great Britain element might be Germanic...

Just to confuse things, over at LivingDNA my results show mainly Wales and at GEDmatch, the LivingDNA kit is closest to Irish, Cornish and Scottish populations.

Jessie
10-26-2017, 05:23 PM
I've had my Ancestry results recently and my ethnicity estimate looks a bit odd. I'm Welsh and my ethnicity is identified as:
55% Great Britain (range 35% - 76%) and
36% Ireland (range 20% - 52%).

(Genetic Communities are Wales and the West Midlands, and Southern England)

On that basis, I was going to say that the Great Britain element can't be simply Germanic, it looks like some kind of average of Great Britain including Scotland and Wales. Then I looked back at some GEDmatch admixture analysis for my Ancestry kit they come up as closer to North Germany and North Dutch than to the celtic populations. So the Great Britain element might be Germanic...

Just to confuse things, over at LivingDNA my results show mainly Wales and at GEDmatch, the LivingDNA kit is closest to Irish, Cornish and Scottish populations.

GEDmatch is not great at pinpointing someone's exact ethnicity either. Despite getting 91% Ireland on Ancestry and 94.3% British & Irish on 23andMe I get many Germanic countries in my top 5 and on the Eurogenes K13 my no 1 pop is North Dutch. The K36 tool might do a better job at pinpointing someone's ethnicity but my no 1 on that is Orcadian.

I think the Great Britain category is a more mixed one and similar to Europe West. I think a lot of Wales has quite a lot of English ancestry which might account for a higher Great Britain percentage in some Welsh. I haven't really seen many Welsh results though.

sktibo
10-26-2017, 05:32 PM
I've had my Ancestry results recently and my ethnicity estimate looks a bit odd. I'm Welsh and my ethnicity is identified as:
55% Great Britain (range 35% - 76%) and
36% Ireland (range 20% - 52%).

(Genetic Communities are Wales and the West Midlands, and Southern England)

On that basis, I was going to say that the Great Britain element can't be simply Germanic, it looks like some kind of average of Great Britain including Scotland and Wales. Then I looked back at some GEDmatch admixture analysis for my Ancestry kit they come up as closer to North Germany and North Dutch than to the celtic populations. So the Great Britain element might be Germanic...

Just to confuse things, over at LivingDNA my results show mainly Wales and at GEDmatch, the LivingDNA kit is closest to Irish, Cornish and Scottish populations.

The only other Welsh example I've been able to find was posted to YouTube (it was North Welsh) and it was around (this is off the top of my head) about 50-60% GB and 20-30% Ireland.. so similar to your results. This is one I'm unable to find but have posted the link to it here many months ago and will try to dig this up. It's not the first time I've mentioned this one. There also appears to be more Welsh people taking Ancestry's test and posting them to YouTube.
When people test twice with ancestry who have GB that GB often splits some percentages into both Scandinavian and Irish. In the case of the Welsh, I think the issue is this:
The "Ireland" category (Now being called "Ireland/Scotland/Wales" which I quite strongly disagree with as the reference populations for this category are entirely taken from the Island of Ireland, and the reference pool hasn't changed with the name shift - if you are going to re-brand your category with two other countries include references from them.)

"
Why is the region called Ireland and not, for example, Celtic?
If I do get an Irish estimate, does it reflect heritage from the island of Ireland or something wider?

Taking the first question, why is the region named Ireland? There are a couple of reasons for this. But the simplest explanation has to do with the reference panel that is used to determine your estimate. The AncestryDNA reference panel is the set of DNA samples, representing individuals from particular regions around the world, to which your DNA is compared to obtain your ethnicity estimate. The individuals in the reference panel used for Ireland have deep roots in Ireland going back several generations. "

Much of the data we currently have suggests Wales is a British Isles genetic outlier which isn't similar (this is within the context of the British Isles populations) to Ireland genetically
Therefore the closest match Ancestry's test can get for Wales in many cases appears to be a mixture of Ireland and Great Britain. This does not necessarily mean that the Welsh have a large Germanic genetic component, just that Ireland is not a suitable match in many cases.

I'm disappointed to read a number of posts in which I see people trying to simplify these categories, making claims like Great Britain must be Anglo-Saxon and Ireland must be all things Celtic - it just is not that straightforward, and I'd like to think that here on Anthrogenica we strive to examine the meaning of these tests and categories critically to extract something useful from them. There is a lot of excellent data out there on the populations of the British Isles and from that we have learned that the Celtic populations are not all incredibly similar to one another, and that the more Germanic parts of the British Isles, such as southeastern England, are actually quite mixed rather than homogenous.

I really don't think Ancestry has done a suitable job in selecting its reference populations when it comes to the British Isles, and this has lead to a lot of confusion for its many of its testers.

Sources:
Welsh YouTuber, some English ancestry, claims 44% Great Britain & 30% Ireland [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlNhv6zHCiI]
Ancestry DNA - The Irish Connection: https://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2017/01/25/ancestrydna-the-irish-connection/

Nqp15hhu
10-26-2017, 11:29 PM
The Ireland category IMO is pre-Anglo-Saxon. The people on both islands were of similar genetic stock so people aren't going to get a neat breakdown of nationalities. There is too much similarity in neighouring populations. At present even LivingDNA has this issue as due to the low amount of Irish samples many Irish are getting a high proportion of categories from Scotland, England and Wales. The sub-category of Scotland is indeed a genetic community on the screenshot.

I think it is a good move for Ancestry to change Ireland to Ireland/Scotland/Wales. I personally think that the Great Britain category should be amalgamated with the Europe West category.

So you think Europe West is Anglo Saxon?

Jessie
10-27-2017, 12:15 AM
So you think Europe West is Anglo Saxon?

No I think it is a mixed category with most similarity with Europe West.

Jessie
10-27-2017, 12:30 AM
The only other Welsh example I've been able to find was posted to YouTube (it was North Welsh) and it was around (this is off the top of my head) about 50-60% GB and 20-30% Ireland.. so similar to your results. This is one I'm unable to find but have posted the link to it here many months ago and will try to dig this up. It's not the first time I've mentioned this one. There also appears to be more Welsh people taking Ancestry's test and posting them to YouTube.
When people test twice with ancestry who have GB that GB often splits some percentages into both Scandinavian and Irish. In the case of the Welsh, I think the issue is this:
The "Ireland" category (Now being called "Ireland/Scotland/Wales" which I quite strongly disagree with as the reference populations for this category are entirely taken from the Island of Ireland, and the reference pool hasn't changed with the name shift - if you are going to re-brand your category with two other countries include references from them.)

"
Why is the region called Ireland and not, for example, Celtic?
If I do get an Irish estimate, does it reflect heritage from the island of Ireland or something wider?

Taking the first question, why is the region named Ireland? There are a couple of reasons for this. But the simplest explanation has to do with the reference panel that is used to determine your estimate. The AncestryDNA reference panel is the set of DNA samples, representing individuals from particular regions around the world, to which your DNA is compared to obtain your ethnicity estimate. The individuals in the reference panel used for Ireland have deep roots in Ireland going back several generations. "

Much of the data we currently have suggests Wales is a British Isles genetic outlier which isn't similar (this is within the context of the British Isles populations) to Ireland genetically
Therefore the closest match Ancestry's test can get for Wales in many cases appears to be a mixture of Ireland and Great Britain. This does not necessarily mean that the Welsh have a large Germanic genetic component, just that Ireland is not a suitable match in many cases.

I'm disappointed to read a number of posts in which I see people trying to simplify these categories, making claims like Great Britain must be Anglo-Saxon and Ireland must be all things Celtic - it just is not that straightforward, and I'd like to think that here on Anthrogenica we strive to examine the meaning of these tests and categories critically to extract something useful from them. There is a lot of excellent data out there on the populations of the British Isles and from that we have learned that the Celtic populations are not all incredibly similar to one another, and that the more Germanic parts of the British Isles, such as southeastern England, are actually quite mixed rather than homogenous.

I really don't think Ancestry has done a suitable job in selecting its reference populations when it comes to the British Isles, and this has lead to a lot of confusion for its many of its testers.

Sources:
Welsh YouTuber, some English ancestry, claims 44% Great Britain & 30% Ireland [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlNhv6zHCiI]
Ancestry DNA - The Irish Connection: [https://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2017/01/25/ancestrydna-the-irish-connection/]

The category Ireland whilst it has the highest concentration in Ireland (not surprising if as you say it is based on Irish people) it is not just found there but can have quite high percentages in Britain so I think calling it something other than just Ireland is a good step. The Great Britain category should also be renamed or the best thing would be for it to be amalgamated into Europe West. Always interested into your insights on this sktibo.

Nqp15hhu
10-27-2017, 03:10 AM
Ancestry puts my Scots into Europe West, so that gives food for thought.

AmieLynn101
10-27-2017, 03:41 AM
I got 45% Europe West 38% Great Britain and 7% Ireland so I felt the same way. I have a lot of Scottish surnames in my family so was confused. And my K36 map pinned me in the British isles.

AmieLynn101
10-27-2017, 04:02 AM
Ancestry puts my Scots into Europe West, so that gives food for thought.

Where is your Scottish line from? I know that the very northern scottish tend to be mixed with Norse which is germanic so maybe it is picking that up? I don't know I am new to all this. My dad always told me I was mostly Scottish but I only got 7% Ireland 38% GB and 45% Western Europe. I had my father test with Myheritage and he had 57% Irish/Scottish/Welsh with 0 English.

sktibo
10-27-2017, 04:43 AM
Where is your Scottish line from? I know that the very northern scottish tend to be mixed with Norse which is germanic so maybe it is picking that up? I don't know I am new to all this. My dad always told me I was mostly Scottish but I only got 7% Ireland 38% GB and 45% Western Europe. I had my father test with Myheritage and he had 57% Irish/Scottish/Welsh with 0 English.

Really not that strange for Ancestry if you're of mixed background. See my post # 39 for details relating to your concern
I get 6% Ireland on Ancestry's test and you can see my paper trail in my signature.
Two of my aunts have tested with Ancestry DNA, they are approx. 43% English, 29% Scottish, 6% Welsh the rest being French and Native American:
One gets 66% Great Britain, 21% Europe West, 4% Ireland
The other gets 70% Europe West, 19% Great Britain, 6% Ireland

So when compared with those results yours don't really appear unusual

Jessie
10-27-2017, 05:00 AM
Ancestry puts my Scots into Europe West, so that gives food for thought.

How do you know it puts your Scots into Europe West?

avalon
10-27-2017, 07:28 AM
I've had my Ancestry results recently and my ethnicity estimate looks a bit odd. I'm Welsh and my ethnicity is identified as:
55% Great Britain (range 35% - 76%) and
36% Ireland (range 20% - 52%).

(Genetic Communities are Wales and the West Midlands, and Southern England)

On that basis, I was going to say that the Great Britain element can't be simply Germanic, it looks like some kind of average of Great Britain including Scotland and Wales. Then I looked back at some GEDmatch admixture analysis for my Ancestry kit they come up as closer to North Germany and North Dutch than to the celtic populations. So the Great Britain element might be Germanic...

Just to confuse things, over at LivingDNA my results show mainly Wales and at GEDmatch, the LivingDNA kit is closest to Irish, Cornish and Scottish populations.

If I had to guess I would say that AncestryDNA probably don't have a very good Welsh reference panel. From what I've read, a lot of these DNA testing companies and online admixture calculators usually don't have good Welsh reference points, LivingDNA is the exception but even theirs could be improved. Looking at their "white papers" the Ancestry GB reference panel consists of 111 individuals compared to 138 Ireland, and it doesn't say where in Britain they come from, but in all likelihood the vast majority of these would be England rather than Scotland or Wales, as that is the bulk of the population.

The genetic communities methodology looks very good but the community "Wales and the West Midlands" is a bit too generalised for my liking. At the very least, Ancestry should have been able to separate Wales into north and south, as per POBI. That they didn't probably just means they don't have sufficient data.

sktibo
10-27-2017, 07:32 AM
The category Ireland whilst it has the highest concentration in Ireland (not surprising if as you say it is based on Irish people) it is not just found there but can have quite high percentages in Britain so I think calling it something other than just Ireland is a good step. The Great Britain category should also be renamed or the best thing would be for it to be amalgamated into Europe West. Always interested into your insights on this sktibo.

Previously they were planning to combine the West of Europe West, like France and the Low Countries, and split the Eastern half of their Europe West into a Central Europe category, which IMO would have made a lot of sense. I noticed the link I was posting to the Ancestry DNA article wasn't working so I re-posted it and it seems to work now - in case it doesn't just google search "Ancestry DNA blogs the Irish connection." This was written by Mike Mulligan in Jan 2017, so our ethnicity estimate results for Ancestry haven't changed since then, meaning that this article is applicable to our current situation, and so for the Ireland or the renamed Ireland/Scotland/Wales we know that the reference populations are taken from Ireland, although I'd like to know if this includes Northern Ireland too. To be honest I think it is completely offensive that they have re-branded this category as Ireland, Scotland, and Wales when only one of those regions is represented in the reference population used - it is making a gigantic assumption about the genetic similarities of the Celtic fringe populations of the British Isles and I really don't think it is appropriate to group them together like this.. perhaps one day a study will be released showing a deep similarity between all three but from what the two of us have seen in the POBI and the Irish Traveller PCA graph for example it looks like Wales doesn't fall in with Ireland and Scotland. They're taking old ideas about genetic homogeneity between the Celtic nations and naming their categories based upon that.. I think these companies should be more responsible than that and I'm truly disappointed to see this. Although I haven't created a comprehensive collection on this, it looks to me like Welsh DNA testers do not neatly fall into their Ireland (& Scotland & Wales) category.

Ok, that's my rant! I agree with you that they could do with re-naming Great Britain too, but since it really does seem to be so very very similar to Europe West the best thing would be to re-do or combine those categories.

avalon
10-27-2017, 07:55 AM
I'm disappointed to read a number of posts in which I see people trying to simplify these categories, making claims like Great Britain must be Anglo-Saxon and Ireland must be all things Celtic - it just is not that straightforward, and I'd like to think that here on Anthrogenica we strive to examine the meaning of these tests and categories critically to extract something useful from them. There is a lot of excellent data out there on the populations of the British Isles and from that we have learned that the Celtic populations are not all incredibly similar to one another, and that the more Germanic parts of the British Isles, such as southeastern England, are actually quite mixed rather than homogenous.

I really don't think Ancestry has done a suitable job in selecting its reference populations when it comes to the British Isles, and this has lead to a lot of confusion for its many of its testers.


All good points sktibo. I've had a read through the AncestryDNA white papers and the methodology looks excellent. However, if the reference populations and customer data are not good enough then this will always affect results, no matter how good the methodology.

As others have said, Ancestry's GB component is obviously very mixed and this reflects the fact that modern Brits, particularly modern English are also generally very mixed. There obviously will be a Germanic element to it but in the main it is probably Brythonic because the genetic make up of even the modern English is predominantly Brythonic, but with added mixture and migrations since Roman times.

The Ireland component probably largely shows some sort of Celtic (Gaelic) ancestry but we have to allow for the fact that Ireland has also been impacted by migrations, particularly in historic times, if we think of Norman invasion, Vikings and English/Scottish plantations.

Nqp15hhu
10-27-2017, 01:11 PM
How do you know it puts your Scots into Europe West?
Because, when I open the Europe West Category, it lists "Scots", under Genetic Communities.

Phoebe Watts
10-27-2017, 01:59 PM
duplicate

Phoebe Watts
10-27-2017, 02:05 PM
The genetic communities methodology looks very good but the community "Wales and the West Midlands" is a bit too generalised for my liking. At the very least, Ancestry should have been able to separate Wales into north and south, as per POBI. That they didn't probably just means they don't have sufficient data.

I think they do separate north and south at a lower level. Working through the levels in my results I get:

Great Britain 55%
Wales and West Midlands
Southern England

Ireland/ Scotland/ Wales 36%


5 other regions
[broken down further]

Under Wales and West Midlands it breaks down further:
Places in This Region
Specific places in this region where your family might have lived.
North Wales
South Wales

I think the different levels are saying different things: North Wales and South Wales may be origins; and the "Wales and West Midlands" and "Southern England" may be where people live now.

So it makes sense that people originating in North and South Wales will have moved to these areas - I have traced Welsh relatives who have moved to Merseyside, Manchester, the west Midlands and Southern England.

[Correction - North Wales and South Wales is further stratification. I was confused by terminology and maps]

Nqp15hhu
10-27-2017, 02:37 PM
I think the above is a further stratification of your Genetic Communities into regions of a higher resolution; not present relatives locations.

avalon
10-28-2017, 01:25 PM
Previously they were planning to combine the West of Europe West, like France and the Low Countries, and split the Eastern half of their Europe West into a Central Europe category, which IMO would have made a lot of sense. I noticed the link I was posting to the Ancestry DNA article wasn't working so I re-posted it and it seems to work now - in case it doesn't just google search "Ancestry DNA blogs the Irish connection." This was written by Mike Mulligan in Jan 2017, so our ethnicity estimate results for Ancestry haven't changed since then, meaning that this article is applicable to our current situation, and so for the Ireland or the renamed Ireland/Scotland/Wales we know that the reference populations are taken from Ireland, although I'd like to know if this includes Northern Ireland too. To be honest I think it is completely offensive that they have re-branded this category as Ireland, Scotland, and Wales when only one of those regions is represented in the reference population used - it is making a gigantic assumption about the genetic similarities of the Celtic fringe populations of the British Isles and I really don't think it is appropriate to group them together like this.. perhaps one day a study will be released showing a deep similarity between all three but from what the two of us have seen in the POBI and the Irish Traveller PCA graph for example it looks like Wales doesn't fall in with Ireland and Scotland. They're taking old ideas about genetic homogeneity between the Celtic nations and naming their categories based upon that.. I think these companies should be more responsible than that and I'm truly disappointed to see this. Although I haven't created a comprehensive collection on this, it looks to me like Welsh DNA testers do not neatly fall into their Ireland (& Scotland & Wales) category.

Ok, that's my rant! I agree with you that they could do with re-naming Great Britain too, but since it really does seem to be so very very similar to Europe West the best thing would be to re-do or combine those categories.


I think ultimately we need more ancient genomes from across the Isles covering various points in time since the Bronze Age, as this is an obvious starting point, as massive population change appears to have occurred with arrival of IEs, >90%.

Key questions to me would be; was there any further genetic impact during Later Bronze Age and if so was it the same in Ireland as it was in different parts of Britain. Then again, during the Iron Age what was the genetic impact of migrations from Continental Europe and did it differ in various parts of Britain and was Ireland more or less untouched. At this stage I don't really think anyone knows, and to make it even more complicated, any people that did arrive in Britain during Later Bronze Age or Iron Age were probably already genetically very similar to existing inhabitants.

Main factor I think is also the language difference between Gaelic and Brythonic. I'm no expert but as I understand it Gaelic is the older form and Brythonic shift likely came about due to migration to Britain from France but as yet I don't think we have any genetic evidence of this so at the moment so we don't really know what the genetic differences were between Ireland and different parts of Britain, at say the end of the Iron Age.

Differences between Celtic Fringe areas now might just largely be down to genetic drift, I don't know, but Wales for sure needs further research. It's an obvious case study because a Celtic language is still spoken there by about 20% of the population, and 10% speak it as their mother tongue in daily useage.

Phoebe Watts
10-28-2017, 05:18 PM
The only other Welsh example I've been able to find was posted to YouTube (it was North Welsh) and it was around (this is off the top of my head) about 50-60% GB and 20-30% Ireland.. so similar to your results. This is one I'm unable to find but have posted the link to it here many months ago and will try to dig this up. It's not the first time I've mentioned this one. There also appears to be more Welsh people taking Ancestry's test and posting them to YouTube.
When people test twice with ancestry who have GB that GB often splits some percentages into both Scandinavian and Irish. In the case of the Welsh, I think the issue is this:
The "Ireland" category (Now being called "Ireland/Scotland/Wales" which I quite strongly disagree with as the reference populations for this category are entirely taken from the Island of Ireland, and the reference pool hasn't changed with the name shift - if you are going to re-brand your category with two other countries include references from them.)

"
Why is the region called Ireland and not, for example, Celtic?
If I do get an Irish estimate, does it reflect heritage from the island of Ireland or something wider?

Taking the first question, why is the region named Ireland? There are a couple of reasons for this. But the simplest explanation has to do with the reference panel that is used to determine your estimate. The AncestryDNA reference panel is the set of DNA samples, representing individuals from particular regions around the world, to which your DNA is compared to obtain your ethnicity estimate. The individuals in the reference panel used for Ireland have deep roots in Ireland going back several generations. "

Much of the data we currently have suggests Wales is a British Isles genetic outlier which isn't similar (this is within the context of the British Isles populations) to Ireland genetically
Therefore the closest match Ancestry's test can get for Wales in many cases appears to be a mixture of Ireland and Great Britain. This does not necessarily mean that the Welsh have a large Germanic genetic component, just that Ireland is not a suitable match in many cases.

I'm disappointed to read a number of posts in which I see people trying to simplify these categories, making claims like Great Britain must be Anglo-Saxon and Ireland must be all things Celtic - it just is not that straightforward, and I'd like to think that here on Anthrogenica we strive to examine the meaning of these tests and categories critically to extract something useful from them. There is a lot of excellent data out there on the populations of the British Isles and from that we have learned that the Celtic populations are not all incredibly similar to one another, and that the more Germanic parts of the British Isles, such as southeastern England, are actually quite mixed rather than homogenous.

I really don't think Ancestry has done a suitable job in selecting its reference populations when it comes to the British Isles, and this has lead to a lot of confusion for its many of its testers.

Sources:
Welsh YouTuber, some English ancestry, claims 44% Great Britain & 30% Ireland [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlNhv6zHCiI]
Ancestry DNA - The Irish Connection: https://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2017/01/25/ancestrydna-the-irish-connection/

Thanks for the detailed answer and the links. After reading Ancestry's Ethnicity Estimate White Paper in more detail too, it all helps explain what the ethnicity estimate can do and why Welsh testers get these mixed results. The other Welsh results that I have seen show between about 40% and 70% GB with most of the rest being Ireland.

The change from Ireland to Ireland/ Scotland/ Wales is a bit half-hearted: the initial result still on the DNA home page says Ireland, with the new brand showing on the "DNA story" page. Most of the "history" still relates to Ireland too. It might have better to leave the categories as they were and explain how a Welsh or Scottish tester would look. And perhaps point users at proper histories of all these areas.

The genetic communities - at the most detailed level - has been quite useful to split the matches.

avalon
10-29-2017, 08:27 AM
I think they do separate north and south at a lower level. Working through the levels in my results I get:

Great Britain 55%
Wales and West Midlands
Southern England

Ireland/ Scotland/ Wales 36%


5 other regions
[broken down further]

Under Wales and West Midlands it breaks down further:
Places in This Region
Specific places in this region where your family might have lived.
North Wales
South Wales

I think the different levels are saying different things: North Wales and South Wales may be origins; and the "Wales and West Midlands" and "Southern England" may be where people live now.

So it makes sense that people originating in North and South Wales will have moved to these areas - I have traced Welsh relatives who have moved to Merseyside, Manchester, the west Midlands and Southern England.

[Correction - North Wales and South Wales is further stratification. I was confused by terminology and maps]

Well, I'm considering doing the AncestryDNA test as so far I have only tested with LivingDNA and the genetic communities white paper looks impressive. My known ancestry to 5 generations is roughly 40% North Wales and the other 60% broadly split between Lancashire/Cheshire/Staffordshire/Derbyshire, all counties that border each other so would be interesting to see how mine would break down.

One thing I noticed is that you get the Southern England GC, as did the Welsh youtuber that sktibo linked to, so there might be something in that, not sure.

MacUalraig
10-29-2017, 08:38 AM
Well, I'm considering doing the AncestryDNA test as so far I have only tested with LivingDNA and the genetic communities white paper looks impressive. My known ancestry to 5 generations is roughly 40% North Wales and the other 60% broadly split between Lancashire/Cheshire/Staffordshire/Derbyshire, all counties that border each other so would be interesting to see how mine would break down.

One thing I noticed is that you get the Southern England GC, as did the Welsh youtuber that sktibo linked to, so there might be something in that, not sure.

I have a ggm from Staffs but she is the odd one out geographically so not enough to get in a gc.

Phoebe Watts
10-29-2017, 10:39 AM
One thing I noticed is that you get the Southern England GC, as did the Welsh youtuber that sktibo linked to, so there might be something in that, not sure.

Yes, I was wondering what that means. Southern England does stretch as far as Cardiff though; and one of the DNA Story maps shows an ancestor from west Wales who died in Cardiff as being linked Southern England. It might be picking up South Wales ancestry. It would be interesting to see more Welsh results and your results should be interesting too with a known ancestry in Wales.

There was also a surprising South Wales Borders bias in my LivingDNA results so it could be that there are some more English or Border ancestors.

For me, the benefits of testing with Ancestry, having a detailed paper trail already and having tested with LDNA:
Confirmation of (most of) the paper trail, with matches on Ancestry and GEDmatch to known relatives and to new matches; longstanding brick walls unblocked on three lines already; and this Southern England question.

Perhaps someone with Welsh ancestry has more to gain from the matches. The difficulty of identifying the right ancestors from similarly named families in large parishes means that is really easy to trace the wrong family, so the confirmation of my researchwas really useful. But as others have observed, there seem to be only a few Welsh testers and the opportunity for matches is limited on lines where few relatives emigrated.

Nqp15hhu
10-29-2017, 01:30 PM
Would Genetic Communities be more accurate than ethnicity estimates?

Phoebe Watts
10-29-2017, 03:25 PM
Would Genetic Communities be more accurate than ethnicity estimates?

My Genetic Communities make sense at the detailed level (North Wales and South Wales) - not so sure about Southern England in the first image.

19462

19461

avalon
10-29-2017, 05:58 PM
Yes, I was wondering what that means. Southern England does stretch as far as Cardiff though; and one of the DNA Story maps shows an ancestor from west Wales who died in Cardiff as being linked Southern England. It might be picking up South Wales ancestry. It would be interesting to see more Welsh results and your results should be interesting too with a known ancestry in Wales.

There was also a surprising South Wales Borders bias in my LivingDNA results so it could be that there are some more English or Border ancestors.


It would be useful to see results from other people with South Wales ancestry to see if they also get Southern England GC. I mean, we know there was substantial migration from England to South Wales during industrial times but you would likely have seen evidence of this in your family tree. Going back to medieval times there is also impact of Anglo-Norman and English expansion into Wales, with potential genetic impact from Southern England into Wales. Of course migration went the other way as you have said, particularly in modern times.

Nqp15hhu
10-29-2017, 06:56 PM
My Genetic Communities make sense at the detailed level (North Wales and South Wales) - not so sure about Southern England in the first image.

19462

19461

Similar experiences!

avalon
10-29-2017, 09:34 PM
Would Genetic Communities be more accurate than ethnicity estimates?

I've had a brief read through Ancestry's white papers and as far as I can tell the (Ireland and Great Britain) ethnicity estimates are based on a reference panel that comprises 138 individuals from Ireland and 111 from Britain, and I am not convinced at all that the GB reference panel is good quality. For a start the sample should be much bigger and should be split at the very least into Wales, Scotland and England.

Genetic communities look more accurate in my opinion as they are based on all AncestryDNA customers who have provided family tree information so this dataset is going to be big, which is always better, but one problem with this is that you're generally dealing with very admixed modern populations such as in the case of Britain where there has been a lot of internal migration over recent centuries, so you end up with very generalised GCs like Southern England or Northern England, etc.

sktibo
10-29-2017, 10:19 PM
I've had a brief read through Ancestry's white papers and as far as I can tell the (Ireland and Great Britain) ethnicity estimates are based on a reference panel that comprises 138 individuals from Ireland and 111 from Britain, and I am not convinced at all that the GB reference panel is good quality. For a start the sample should be much bigger and should be split at the very least into Wales, Scotland and England.

Genetic communities look more accurate in my opinion as they are based on all AncestryDNA customers who have provided family tree information so this dataset is going to be big, which is always better, but one problem with this is that you're generally dealing with very admixed modern populations such as in the case of Britain where there has been a lot of internal migration over recent centuries, so you end up with very generalised GCs like Southern England or Northern England, etc.

Avalon nails it

Nqp15hhu
10-29-2017, 11:05 PM
I've had a brief read through Ancestry's white papers and as far as I can tell the (Ireland and Great Britain) ethnicity estimates are based on a reference panel that comprises 138 individuals from Ireland and 111 from Britain, and I am not convinced at all that the GB reference panel is good quality. For a start the sample should be much bigger and should be split at the very least into Wales, Scotland and England.

Genetic communities look more accurate in my opinion as they are based on all AncestryDNA customers who have provided family tree information so this dataset is going to be big, which is always better, but one problem with this is that you're generally dealing with very admixed modern populations such as in the case of Britain where there has been a lot of internal migration over recent centuries, so you end up with very generalised GCs like Southern England or Northern England, etc.

What is the difference in coordinating allocation of the Ethnicity Estimates and Genetic Communities?

avalon
10-30-2017, 03:46 PM
What is the difference in coordinating allocation of the Ethnicity Estimates and Genetic Communities?

Here's a link to the GC white paper, a lot of it is quite technical and I don't understand everything. https://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/dna-help/communities/whitepaper

The starting point is that they analyse the DNA of Ancestry's 2 million customers and this forms clusters of individuals who have shared recent ancestry and where individuals are more close related than to other clusters. They then look at the pedigrees of people in the clusters, which points them towards a specific geographic location, which I guess ultimately becomes the GC. They do all sorts of further analysis too, such as enriched surnames, but I think that's it basically.

Phoebe Watts
10-30-2017, 06:32 PM
Here's a link to the GC white paper, a lot of it is quite technical and I don't understand everything. https://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/dna-help/communities/whitepaper



The current format for genetic communities seems to be quite new and I'm seeing new features for the first time today.

There are no Welsh GCs under Ireland/ Scotland/ Wales - only Irish and Scottish. There are three communities under Wales & the West Midlands and they overlap with other GCs:

19477

The two Scottish GCs also include Nova Scotia. Perhaps I was right to think that my Southern England GC is about people who moved from west Wales to east Wales or England?

Nqp15hhu
10-30-2017, 06:52 PM
Yeah, noticed that about the Nova Scotia thing, a bit weird. They should probably take that out.

avalon
10-31-2017, 04:58 PM
Perhaps I was right to think that my Southern England GC is about people who moved from west Wales to east Wales or England?

You may well be on to something there. I suppose if we think about the recent industrial past of SE Wales then it is the major population hub for all of Wales and also an area that has attracted migrants in recent centuries, both from other parts of Wales, eg West Wales, and from nearby English counties. So SE Wales is a sort of genetic melting pot due to its industrial past.

JKelly
01-28-2018, 02:42 AM
I just received my DNA results from Ancestry. They say my DNA is 49% Great Britain, 38% Ireland/Scotland/Wales, with trace amounts of Scandinavian and West Europe. I was born in the U.S., but other than that I don't know anything about my biological family, as I was adopted at birth. It seems like my genetic profile would be really similar to someone born in the U.K. Can anyone offer me any insight regarding my DNA profile? Thanks.

Nqp15hhu
01-29-2018, 12:46 PM
Look at your Close matches and see what country they're from.

msmarjoribanks
01-29-2018, 03:40 PM
It's really hard to separate out various North-Western European components, and Ancestry in particular seems to be unable to tell English from Scandinavian from other western European in a lot of cases, but it definitely looks like largely western Europe.

I agree with the advice to look at your closer matches and see if you can figure out anything from that. With Ancestry decent bet they will be in the US, but who knows. How close are your closest projected to be?

The circles can be really useful too, and if you get a genetic community (I only got migrations, but I have a bunch of circles).

angscoire
02-01-2018, 08:23 PM
I just received my DNA results from Ancestry. They say my DNA is 49% Great Britain, 38% Ireland/Scotland/Wales, with trace amounts of Scandinavian and West Europe. I was born in the U.S., but other than that I don't know anything about my biological family, as I was adopted at birth. It seems like my genetic profile would be really similar to someone born in the U.K. Can anyone offer me any insight regarding my DNA profile? Thanks.

Brits (ie those with typically British and often Irish paper trails) get varying scores - there is no typical British result it seems . I get Ireland, Europe West and Scandinavia. But yes I would say judging from this you have a lot of UK ancestry. If you are male , get your YDNA tested too .

JohnHowellsTyrfro
02-01-2018, 09:06 PM
Brits (ie those with typically British and often Irish paper trails) get varying scores - there is no typical British result it seems . I get Ireland, Europe West and Scandinavia. But yes I would say judging from this you have a lot of UK ancestry. If you are male , get your YDNA tested too .

Not at "Ancestry" there isn't - "are you a Viking?" is about their limit. :)

angscoire
02-02-2018, 01:47 PM
Not at "Ancestry" there isn't - "are you a Viking?" is about their limit. :)

Indeed . Also ,the UK Ancestry ‘Viking ad’ has been replaced by a new ‘European’ themed ad which you have probably seen . It is even more irritating and misleading than the Viking one.

Researcher212
02-02-2018, 09:09 PM
Here's my long-winded opinion on the subject:
I believe a lot of people who are of Germanic origin do show up as Great Britain like myself. My dad's side was what you would consider Donau Schwaben for centuries but originally came from southern and central Germany and the Alsace region allegedly. Moreover, everyone had a German surname except my grandfather which is closer to an Alsatian type which could be both German or French in respect to adding consonants which I found other's with depending upon who controlled the region. Also, I looked it up and some Swedes have my surname which could be a possible Huegenots association and these distant ancestors could've fled to Northern Germany/Sweden which is interesting since my family is Roman Catholic on both sides. My grandparents also never spoke English until they came here in 1950! Moroever, they only spoke German and my Oma spoke other languages like serbo-Croat, Hungarian, Polish, and Russian since her father was a businessman and she was fairly educated. Further, the only thing close to Great Britain would be my grandfather's paternal side which again allegedly originated from the Alsace region and some records I found online confirmed some settlers went to Slavonia and other DonauSchwaben villages from said place. But my grandfather's mother side was very German as was my Grandmother on both sides. Finally, nmonte 2, and 3 show me as high southern and central German, and nmonte 3 shows DonauSchwaben along with high Saxony and with no regions in what is considered Great Britain; yet Ancestry shows me a 29% Great Briain and only 4% low confidence West Europe! However, Ancestry places me in Germany and the Midwest group and states my family could've come from Southern Germany!!1 Weird! but only 4% western Europe? I find all of this very strange indeed, I'm not the only one either I know other people who trace their genealogy to Bavaria, Baden Wurttemberg, and Saxony, etc who show up more Scandinavian, and Great Britain again with no paper trail to the latter and hardly any Western Europe!Code:
Here's my NMonte 3 proving germanic ethnicity:

[1] "1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCE%"
Saxony Austria Donau_Schwaben Sudetenland Hungary Bayern
8.722373 9.532271 9.648800 9.705315 10.121184 10.835326
Slovenia Thüringen
11.583449 11.675354
[1] "distance%=6.1968"

Researcher

Saxony,45.4
Donau_Schwaben,12.2
Neumark,6.4
Tirol,6.2
Bayern,3.4
former_East_Prussia,3.4
Hungary,1.8
Swiss_German,1.6
Croats_BIH,1.4
Saarland,1.4

FR_North-East,1.2
FR_Central,0.8
FR_South-West,0.4

Dutch_Utrecht,0.8
Dutch_Groningen,0.6
Dutch_Zuid_Holland,0.4

Thüringen,0.4
Rheinland-Pfalz,0.4
Austria,0.2

IT_Veneto,0.8
IT_North,0.4

Serbia,0.8
Western_Serbians,0.4

Scotland,0.6

South-West_Romania,0.6
South_Romania,0.4

Tabassaran,0.6
Georgia_East,0.4
Georgia_Imereti,0.4

Crimean_Tatars_Coast,0.4


Balkars,0.2
Bengali,0.2
Bosniaks,0.2
Brahmin_Bihari,0.2
Brahmin_Himachal_Pradesh,0.2
Brahui,0.2
Chechens,0.2
Crimean_Tatars_Steppe,0.2
GR_Central,0.2
GR_Cyclades,0.2
Hazara_AFG,0.2
Ingrians,0.2
IT_Friuli,0.2
IT_Piedmont,0.2
Kabardinians,0.2
Lezgin,0.2
North_Albania,0.2
Pl_Lublin,0.2
South-East_Romania,0.2
Swiss_Italian,0.2
Tajiks_AFG,0.2
TR_Adana,0.2
TR_Aydin,0.2
TR_Istanbul,0.2
TR_Trabzon,0.2
Turkey_Anatolia,0.2
Ukraine_Chernigov,0.2
Uyghurs,0.2
Western_Georgia,0.2


nMonte2 - certainly much worse

[1] "distance%=4.4512 / distance=0.044512"

Researcher

Saarland 19.85
Neumark 16.55
Lithuanians 16.40
Tirol 13.95
IT_Veneto 13.75
Scotland 8.15
Karachays 4.70
North_Dagestan 2.50
País_Vasco 1.50
Brahui 1.05
East_&_North_Finns 0.60
IT_Piedmont 0.60
Navarra 0.30
Burusho 0.10




21179

Researcher212
02-02-2018, 09:20 PM
Also FTDNA, and MYheritage show me with way higher Scandinavian and low Great Britain.

msmarjoribanks
02-02-2018, 10:14 PM
Finally, nmonte 2, and 3 show me as high southern and central German, and nmonte 3 shows DonauSchwaben along with high Saxony and with no regions in what is considered Great Britain; yet Ancestry shows me a 29% Great Briain and only 4% low confidence West Europe! However, Ancestry places me in Germany and the Midwest group and states my family could've come from Southern Germany!!1 Weird! but only 4% western Europe? I find all of this very strange indeed, I'm not the only one either I know other people who trace their genealogy to Bavaria, Baden Wurttemberg, and Saxony, etc who show up more Scandinavian, and Great Britain again with no paper trail to the latter and hardly any Western Europe!

21179

That's the exact opposite of me (showing how hard it can be to draw any conclusions from these tests beyond some basic ones). On paper, I'm about 25% Welsh, Irish, Scottish, and about 50% English, with about 12.5% (one great grandparent) Swedish, and the rest a combination of German, French, and Dutch. There could be slight variations in that, of course -- a relative in Shropshire married an unknown woman from London named Anna Maria who could have been from another country, I think there's some Scots and Welsh mixed with the English from research into the families back in England, and recently a relative in Sweden told me that that side of the family was partially German (due to immigration from Germany to Sweden), so who knows, but significantly English.

Ancestry gives me only 4% English (FTDNA gives me 83% British Isles, on the other hand). The rest is 42% Western Europe (the component you are missing!), plus 28% Scandinavian, 19% Irish, etc., and some misc others.

JerryS.
02-02-2018, 11:22 PM
I see many are making the mistakes I made in the beginning, and that is taking Ancestry dot com or any other for profit dna company literally..
I'm sure others have already said this; take your raw data and load it to GEDmatch and run it through the various calculating models. look for repeats.

Researcher212
02-02-2018, 11:23 PM
Delete

Researcher212
02-02-2018, 11:30 PM
I see many are making the mistakes I made in the beginning, and that is taking Ancestry dot com or any other for profit dna company literally..
I'm sure others have already said this; take your raw data and load it to GEDmatch and run it through the various calculating models. look for repeats.

Which Gedmatch calculator do you think is most accurate?

Researcher212
02-02-2018, 11:38 PM
That's the exact opposite of me (showing how hard it can be to draw any conclusions from these tests beyond some basic ones). On paper, I'm about 25% Welsh, Irish, Scottish, and about 50% English, with about 12.5% (one great grandparent) Swedish, and the rest a combination of German, French, and Dutch. There could be slight variations in that, of course -- a relative in Shropshire married an unknown woman from London named Anna Maria who could have been from another country, I think there's some Scots and Welsh mixed with the English from research into the families back in England, and recently a relative in Sweden told me that that side of the family was partially German (due to immigration from Germany to Sweden), so who knows, but significantly English.

Ancestry gives me only 4% English (FTDNA gives me 83% British Isles, on the other hand). The rest is 42% Western Europe (the component you are missing!), plus 28% Scandinavian, 19% Irish, etc., and some misc others.
Interesting you have 42% Western Europe but only 4% English! There's something strange going on with Ancestry in respect to English and German populations! maybe they have it as the reverse! You would think other would've alerted ancestry about this major discrepancy! Ancestry give me these for my miscellaneous low confidence:
Low Confidence Regions
Europe West 4%
European Jewish 3%
Scandinavia 3%
Ireland/Scotland/Wales 2%
Asia South 2%
Caucasus 1%
Finland/Northwest Russia < 1%
My NMonte proves the German plus my dad's parents, my Oma and Opa, looked German and spoke it! I also heard that Germans are NOT getting tested in general. FTDNA show's me as 9% Scandinavian, 13% British Isles, Gencove shows me as 13% Scandinavian and 25% Northern and Central Europe, and MYHeritage shows me around 35% Scandinavian, 1.5% Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and 0% Northern and Western Europe and I re-uploaded it 3 times and always receive the same percentage for Scandinavian which might be where the Germanic is hiding?! I always show high Eastern European though on all tests.

msmarjoribanks
02-02-2018, 11:49 PM
I see many are making the mistakes I made in the beginning, and that is taking Ancestry dot com or any other for profit dna company literally..
I'm sure others have already said this; take your raw data and load it to GEDmatch and run it through the various calculating models. look for repeats.

If you were referring to my post, that's why I said "showing how hard it can be to draw any conclusions from these tests beyond some basic ones."

msmarjoribanks
02-02-2018, 11:53 PM
Interesting you have 42% Western Europe but only 4% English! There's something strange going on with Ancestry in respect to English and German populations! maybe they have it as the reverse! You would think other would've alerted ancestry about this major discrepancy!

I think it's super hard to sort out mixed results that are very similar, but I have heard that often Ancestry overestimates Scandinavian and that their English category tends to be extra biased toward more Germanic areas, which would lead to people of German ancestry getting English. Still funny, though.

Check out Eurogenes K36 and K13 on Gedmatch and see what you get.

Researcher212
02-02-2018, 11:57 PM
delete

Researcher212
02-03-2018, 12:00 AM
I think it's super hard to sort out mixed results that are very similar, but I have heard that often Ancestry overestimates Scandinavian and that their English category tends to be extra biased toward more Germanic areas, which would lead to people of German ancestry getting English. Still funny, though.

Check out Eurogenes K36 and K13 on Gedmatch and see what you get.

Yes, I've calculated my K36 ahile ago and it's a good calculator in respect to a mixed world approach. However, I've recently calculated my K47 on this site which I find to be fare more accurate; in respect highlighting my germanic side since my mother side Hungarian is obviously more mixed as Magyars are. The K47 shows scando-germanic and celt-germanic; basically more insular celt. I will look at k13 again. My NMonte 2 and 3 was calculated using My K47 data with a map by Lukasz

JerryS.
02-03-2018, 12:56 AM
Which Gedmatch calculator do you think is most accurate?

well some people have their favorites because it shows them what they believe is best. of course there are some models better suited for different parts of the world so it helps to use the ones designed for their limited ranges or population groups..... all that said, you should see reoccurring ethnicities or regions showing up and in the relative same percentages (though some are slanted more one way or the other and can slight minor ethnicities/regions). keep in mind that DNA does not stop at the border and "ethnicities" can overlap.... English can be Scottish and Scottish can be Norwegian, and Norwegian can be Danish(Denmark) and Demark can be read as German and German can be read as Dutch..... basically that region (N.W. Europe) can have similar overlapping areas.... same for Italy can be read as Greece.....some northern Spanish regions can be read as some French regions....

JerryS.
02-03-2018, 12:57 AM
If you were referring to my post, that's why I said "showing how hard it can be to draw any conclusions from these tests beyond some basic ones."

not at all. I was stating what I see or think others are doing....

JerryS.
02-03-2018, 02:56 AM
I want to add, when using GEDmatch, take some of those readings with a grain of salt as well. for instance, Eurogenes has 5 or so models and each one shows slightly different results. I've yet to have anyone explain why the EUtest isn't any good that they had to make a K13 version, and then a K15 version, and then even another one for Jewish ancestry (Jtest)... same for MDLP has a K23b, has a -22, has a K16, has an K11 but one of the oracles doesn't work..... Dodecad has the V3 but also a K12...

with all of these you should still get something familiar to others.... 20% Eastern Slavic could be 13% Ukrainian on another, just as 14% South Baltic on one could show as 10% Polish or 17% Lithuanian on others...

JohnHowellsTyrfro
02-03-2018, 07:02 AM
Indeed . Also ,the UK Ancestry ‘Viking ad’ has been replaced by a new ‘European’ themed ad which you have probably seen . It is even more irritating and misleading than the Viking one.

I suspect their problem is that they don't have the level of detail to clearly define British and Irish so they tend to go to the nearest similar so we are all "French" "German" or whatever which obviously we probably were geographically at some point over a period of several thousand years but if you extend that argument we would all be back in Africa. :)
I don't mind them telling me a Viking if I thought they could actually prove it but even if you are it would only be a tiny proportion of your ancestry. They also don't seem to have a clue about British History or choose to over-simplify it for commercial reasons.
Perhaps I'm a cynic but they have a big "diversity" thing going on so maybe specific identity indicators and "we are all the same" doesn't reconcile very well but I suspect ironically most people test (of whatever origin) because they are curious about the specific aspects of their identity.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
02-03-2018, 07:15 AM
From my own experience with entirely British ancestry the LivingDNA test has been the most effective in "defining" British ancestry because it tries to look at fine detail data on a regional basis, I think there is an old saying in shooting "aim small, miss small"
If that finer detailed analysis isn't there you might only be able to pick out similarities between British and neighbouring populations. LivingDNA isn't perfect particularly for non-British populations as yet but I'm sure it will improve and I think that general approach is the right way to go.

msmarjoribanks
02-03-2018, 07:32 PM
I did LivingDNA to see if they could peg any of my areas (or the other inputs), but haven't got the results yet. I probably should have had my dad do it instead of me, as he's higher percentage British Isles (and I have much more knowledge about the specific areas his ancestors are from than my mother's British Isles ancestors).

I have good chunks from North Wales, Shropshire, East Anglia, and Ulster, however, so curious if they pick any of those out.

A Norfolk L-M20
02-03-2018, 09:38 PM
Genetic Communities (now Sub Regions) shouldn't be confused by recent immigration into an area. How I understand it, they look at clusters of DNA matches. They then pin that cluster to a geographical sub region, by looking at what locations most commonly pop up on Ancestry family trees of some of the matches in that cluster. The strength is - no poor quality reference panels based on present populations and modern regions. Instead of a reference panel - this is the peer to peer of autosomal ancestry referencing. The weakness is, it seems to work mainly for some pretty recent generations. I don't think that many Americans for example, get GCs / Sub Regions of their European ancestors some 300 - 500 years ago.

For myself, it works incredibly well:

Recorded ancestry:

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19163&d=1507214541

My recorded ancestry by location:

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21214&d=1517693817

Ancestry Sub Regions (GCs):

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19681&d=1510324108

I get the "East Anglia & Essex" Sub Region, and the "Southern England" Sub Region, both were reported with High Confidence, when they still reported the levels.

As an East Anglian and SE English tester, with 440 recorded SE English ancestors, for those interested, on Ethnicity Estimates", I get:

68% Great Britain
16% Europe West

Low Confidence Regions:

4% Ireland/Scotland/Wales
3% Europe South
2% European Jewish
<1% Finland / NW Russia

jshook
02-04-2018, 05:23 PM
I did LivingDNA to see if they could peg any of my areas (or the other inputs), but haven't got the results yet. I probably should have had my dad do it instead of me, as he's higher percentage British Isles (and I have much more knowledge about the specific areas his ancestors are from than my mother's British Isles ancestors).

I have good chunks from North Wales, Shropshire, East Anglia, and Ulster, however, so curious if they pick any of those out.

I was actually quite pleased with Living DNA. From the birthplaces I've been able to verify in my family tree, their predictions mapped it quite well. I think you'll probably see most of your Welsh end up in what they call "South Wales Border" (which they define as "approximately Herefordshire/Worcestershire/Shropshire/W Midlands and surrounding areas"). That's what happened with mine. That said, it missed my northern Ireland/Ulster genes entirely but they're working on that with the Irish update, from what I hear.

JerryS.
02-04-2018, 06:40 PM
getting back to the thread title: Great Britain DNA Category - Is it really Germanic?

I recently loaded my raw data (first received from Ancestry dot com) to MyHeritage. the second loading I did was to see if I would get Nigerian again- I didn't. anyway. they now say I am 100% U.K. ~75-25 English-Irish/Scottish/Welsh.

I am at least 1/4 German, ancestors came from Bremen in the late 1860s. according to MyHeritage I have no German/western European... now, does this mean the reverse of the question? Germanic DNA is really Great Britain? of course not. its just another example of the flaws of the for profit dna companies.

Researcher212
02-05-2018, 05:29 PM
[QUOTE=JerryS.;342330]well some people have their favorites because it shows them what they believe is best. of course there are some models better suited for different parts of the world so it helps to use the ones designed for their limited ranges or population groups..... all that said, you should see reoccurring ethnicities or regions showing up and in the relative same percentages (though some are slanted more one way or the other and can slight minor ethnicities/regions). keep in mind that DNA does not stop at the border and "ethnicities" can overlap.... English can be Scottish and Scottish can be Norwegian, and Norwegian can be Danish(Denmark) and Demark can be read as German and German can be read as Dutch..... basically that region (N.W. Europe) can have similar overlapping areas.... same for Italy can be read as Greece.....some northern Spanish regions can be read as some French regions....[

I agree with you about what you stated about gauging certain ethnicities and their corresponding geographies or locations close to a specific group where a migration could've occurred.In general,I wanted to know what your favorite calculator and corresponding oracle(if any)is on Gematch. Furthermore,I understand what your saying in regard to the ubiquitous confirmation bias inherent within humanity;however, sometimes it's can be difficult to gauge what is accurate or "noise" when dealing with a surprising finding, unless one knows the detailed history of one's family and the migration patterns of a certain ethnic group/tribe.

JerryS.
02-05-2018, 05:52 PM
[QUOTE=JerryS.;342330]well some people have their favorites because it shows them what they believe is best. of course there are some models better suited for different parts of the world so it helps to use the ones designed for their limited ranges or population groups..... all that said, you should see reoccurring ethnicities or regions showing up and in the relative same percentages (though some are slanted more one way or the other and can slight minor ethnicities/regions). keep in mind that DNA does not stop at the border and "ethnicities" can overlap.... English can be Scottish and Scottish can be Norwegian, and Norwegian can be Danish(Denmark) and Demark can be read as German and German can be read as Dutch..... basically that region (N.W. Europe) can have similar overlapping areas.... same for Italy can be read as Greece.....some northern Spanish regions can be read as some French regions....[

I agree with you about what you stated about gauging certain ethnicities and their corresponding geographies or locations close to a specific group where a migration you've occurred.In general,I wanted to know what your favorite calculator and corresponding oracle(if any) on Gematch. Furthermore,I understand I understand what your saying in regard to the ubiquitous confirmation bias inherent within humanity;however, sometimes it's can be difficult to gauge what is accurate or "noise" when dealing with a surprising finding, unless one knows the detailed history of one's family and the migration patterns of a certain ethnic group/tribe.

Dodecad V3 and MDLP K23b, each with the regular oracle.

FionnSneachta
02-05-2018, 06:56 PM
[QUOTE=Researcher212;343703]

Dodecad V3 and MDLP K23b, each with the regular oracle.

Out of them two, I prefer the MDLP K23b (because of my own bias). That one gives my family Irish while the other gives my mum and I Argyll (irish is at 17 for us) while my dad gets Orkney (Irish 15 for him). It is true though, I judge the calculators based on which one gives me Irish as the top result and how close it is. Yet there could be a population that hasn't been sampled too well so another person won't get a result that agrees with what they think they know and therefore think that calculator is useless. I guess as you say though, you have to look at all of the calculators and look at common patterns between them.

Jessie
02-08-2018, 05:14 AM
This is an interesting video. He has mostly Irish ancestry on his paternal side and English, Scottish on his mother's side. He got 69% Great Britain and 18% Ireland. He has other smaller percentages. I really think the Great Britain category should possibly be rejigged or better still removed. This is a very mixed category and I think it has a lot of ancestries thrown into the mix. Anyway this guy is totally baffled. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7SegQH3pOk

Jessie
02-08-2018, 05:16 AM
Out of them two, I prefer the MDLP K23b (because of my own bias). That one gives my family Irish while the other gives my mum and I Argyll (irish is at 17 for us) while my dad gets Orkney (Irish 15 for him). It is true though, I judge the calculators based on which one gives me Irish as the top result and how close it is. Yet there could be a population that hasn't been sampled too well so another person won't get a result that agrees with what they think they know and therefore think that calculator is useless. I guess as you say though, you have to look at all of the calculators and look at common patterns between them.

I was actually one of the samples used for the MDLP K23b Irish category. They really should only use samples with all 4 grandparents from a particularly ethnicity. I'm not sure if they all do because Dodecad is always way off for me.

sktibo
02-08-2018, 05:31 AM
This is an interesting video. He has mostly Irish ancestry on his paternal side and English, Scottish on his mother's side. He got 69% Great Britain and 18% Ireland. He has other smaller percentages. I really think the Great Britain category should possibly be rejigged or better still removed. This is a very mixed category and I think it has a lot of ancestries thrown into the mix. Anyway this guy is totally baffled. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7SegQH3pOk

The Southern English do not make a good reference population for these tests - heck, I'd go as far to say the English as a whole! Norfolk's collection of DNA test results seem to indicate a fair bit of continental and or southern admixture. This Youtuber linked his mother's test results and she got more Ireland (31%) than her son did despite being much more Irish than his mother.
A friend of mine took this test a while ago who is 7/8 British (Mix of English and Scottish) and 1/8 Swedish. He didn't get any Scandinavian percentage and got almost all Great Britain with a tiny bit of Ireland. I suspect the mixed Great Britain category actually "ate" his Scandinavian percentage!

Jessie
02-08-2018, 05:38 AM
The Southern English do not make a good reference population for these tests - heck, I'd go as far to say the English as a whole! Norfolk's collection of DNA test results seem to indicate a fair bit of continental and or southern admixture. This Youtuber linked his mother's test results and she got more Ireland (31%) than her son did despite being much more Irish than his mother.
A friend of mine took this test a while ago who is 7/8 British (Mix of English and Scottish) and 1/8 Swedish. He didn't get any Scandinavian percentage and got almost all Great Britain with a tiny bit of Ireland. I suspect the mixed Great Britain category actually "ate" his Scandinavian percentage!

I wonder why Ancestry didn't have a rejig of the categories like they were going to? That Great Britain category has to be one of the worst though. I know Mike Mullins is sometimes on Facebook.

sktibo
02-08-2018, 07:01 AM
I wonder why Ancestry didn't have a rejig of the categories like they were going to? That Great Britain category has to be one of the worst though. I know Mike Mullins is sometimes on Facebook.

I heard that they ended up deciding not to do it to instead focus on genetic communities.. I'm not sure if that is entirely true though. It doesn't seem like it would be too much effort to re-categorize your reference populations and add a few new samples in

Phoebe Watts
02-08-2018, 12:58 PM
[QUOTE=JerryS.;343709]

Out of them two, I prefer the MDLP K23b (because of my own bias). That one gives my family Irish while the other gives my mum and I Argyll (irish is at 17 for us) while my dad gets Orkney (Irish 15 for him). It is true though, I judge the calculators based on which one gives me Irish as the top result and how close it is. Yet there could be a population that hasn't been sampled too well so another person won't get a result that agrees with what they think they know and therefore think that calculator is useless. I guess as you say though, you have to look at all of the calculators and look at common patterns between them.

I look Irish too in MDLP K23b. Welsh is 12th on my list.

FionnSneachta
02-08-2018, 08:02 PM
I look Irish too in MDLP K23b. Welsh is 12th on my list.

Well there you go. I don't think that there's one perfect calculator. A calculator can seem like it's really good for one population but doesn't give accurate results for another. That's why it's just a matter of looking at patterns that the calculators give you. Most calculators don't give me Irish as my top result.

MDLP K11 Modern: Alberstedt LN @ 2.834574 (#14 Irish BA @ 9.812385)
MDLP K16 Modern: Scottish_Argyll_bute @ 2.297103 (#4 Irish_Connacht @ 3.416888)
MDLP K23b: Irish @ 3.952564
K13: Irish @ 5.314032
Eurogenes EUtest: Irish @ 6.335754
Jtest: Scottish @ 3.400384 (#2 IE @ 3.768578)
EUtest: Scottish @ 3.653167 (#2 IE @ 3.821480)
Dodecad V3: Argyll_1000 Genomes @ 1.440720 (#17 Irish_Dodecad @ 15.577447)
World9: Argyll_1000 Genomes @ 1.893560 (#2 Irish_Dodecad @ 2.864678)
Dodecad K7b: Dutch_Dodecad @ 1.414328 (#6 Irish_Dodecad @ 3.589581)
Dodecad K12b: Dutch_Dodecad @ 2.375188 (#10 Irish_Dodecad @ 5.599683)
puntDNAL K10: German_North @ 2.770461 (#7 Irish @ 5.195530)
puntDNAL K12 Modern: Dutch_North @ 1.622865 (#3 Irish @ 3.938470)
puntDNAL K13: Irish @ 4.029348
puntDNAL K15: North_German @ 1.956827 (#4 Irish @ 3.555010)

Out of 15, 4 give me Irish as my top result. 5 give me a region from Scotland. 9 out of 15 give Scottish or Irish with 6 giving a top population that is way off. I know some people love these calculators and think they're better than the commercial companies but I don't actually have that much faith in them. I'd get quite a shock if a company told me I was Dutch or German.

Phoebe Watts
02-08-2018, 09:15 PM
Well there you go. I don't think that there's one perfect calculator. A calculator can seem like it's really good for one population but doesn't give accurate results for another. That's why it's just a matter of looking at patterns that the calculators give you. Most calculators don't give me Irish as my top result.

MDLP K11 Modern: Alberstedt LN @ 2.834574 (#14 Irish BA @ 9.812385)
MDLP K16 Modern: Scottish_Argyll_bute @ 2.297103 (#4 Irish_Connacht @ 3.416888)
MDLP K23b: Irish @ 3.952564
K13: Irish @ 5.314032
Eurogenes EUtest: Irish @ 6.335754
Jtest: Scottish @ 3.400384 (#2 IE @ 3.768578)
EUtest: Scottish @ 3.653167 (#2 IE @ 3.821480)
Dodecad V3: Argyll_1000 Genomes @ 1.440720 (#17 Irish_Dodecad @ 15.577447)
World9: Argyll_1000 Genomes @ 1.893560 (#2 Irish_Dodecad @ 2.864678)
Dodecad K7b: Dutch_Dodecad @ 1.414328 (#6 Irish_Dodecad @ 3.589581)
Dodecad K12b: Dutch_Dodecad @ 2.375188 (#10 Irish_Dodecad @ 5.599683)
puntDNAL K10: German_North @ 2.770461 (#7 Irish @ 5.195530)
puntDNAL K12 Modern: Dutch_North @ 1.622865 (#3 Irish @ 3.938470)
puntDNAL K13: Irish @ 4.029348
puntDNAL K15: North_German @ 1.956827 (#4 Irish @ 3.555010)

Out of 15, 4 give me Irish as my top result. 5 give me a region from Scotland. 9 out of 15 give Scottish or Irish with 6 giving a top population that is way off. I know some people love these calculators and think they're better than the commercial companies but I don't actually have that much faith in them. I'd get quite a shock if a company told me I was Dutch or German.

Yes, you are right. There isn't a Welsh population in most of these calculators so I gave up after finding such a variety of Dutch and German results. I might have another look! MDLP K23b: Irish @ 1.934071 looks odd for me but looking at the spreadsheet, I can see why.

JerryS.
02-08-2018, 09:45 PM
[QUOTE=FionnSneachta;343732]

I look Irish too in MDLP K23b. Welsh is 12th on my list.

for you, being all UK derived, that makes sense. but for other like myself with a minor ethnicity from a different region, the first population guess is based on what we seems most of, not what we really are. this is why the regular oracle uses two populations and the oracle 4 uses four.

msmarjoribanks
02-08-2018, 11:24 PM
MDLP K23b has me as Frisian, but the distance for Irish (3rd) is only 2.9.

# Population (source) Distance
1 Frisian ( ) 1.69
2 Belgian ( ) 2.48
3 Irish ( ) 2.9
4 English ( ) 3.98
5 Dutch ( ) 4.37

With Oracle-4 (and I have no idea what the difference is, should look it up), two and three change places:

1 Frisian_ @ 2.250245
2 Irish_ @ 2.480961
3 Belgian_ @ 2.903804

Frisian is probably a pretty good average of my various inputs, actually.

JerryS.
02-09-2018, 01:46 AM
MDLP K23b has me as Frisian, but the distance for Irish (3rd) is only 2.9.

# Population (source) Distance
1 Frisian ( ) 1.69
2 Belgian ( ) 2.48
3 Irish ( ) 2.9
4 English ( ) 3.98
5 Dutch ( ) 4.37

With Oracle-4 (and I have no idea what the difference is, should look it up), two and three change places:

1 Frisian_ @ 2.250245
2 Irish_ @ 2.480961
3 Belgian_ @ 2.903804

Frisian is probably a pretty good average of my various inputs, actually.

what is your mixed mode with MDLP K23b? I get Frisian as my primary and that seems correct because it is the regional halfway point from southern England and northern Germany.

msmarjoribanks
02-09-2018, 03:54 AM
what is your mixed mode with MDLP K23b? I get Frisian as my primary and that seems correct because it is the regional halfway point from southern England and northern Germany.

Kind of wacky for the regular Oracle, but Frisian primary:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 97.3% Frisian ( ) + 2.7% Serrano ( ) @ 1.01
2 98.5% Frisian ( ) + 1.5% Bolivian ( ) @ 1.02
3 98.6% Frisian ( ) + 1.4% Bolivian_Cochabamba ( ) @ 1.02
4 98.7% Frisian ( ) + 1.3% Aymara ( ) @ 1.03
5 98.7% Frisian ( ) + 1.3% Karitiana ( ) @ 1.03

On the other, more typical of what I get:

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Belgian_ +50% Irish_ @ 2.016287

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Frisian_ +25% German-Volga_ +25% Irish_ @ 1.932300

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 English_Kent_GBR_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.854819
2 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.870624
3 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Frisian_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ @ 1.882273
4 British_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.891946
5 Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ + Irish_ @ 1.913025

JerryS.
02-10-2018, 01:31 AM
Kind of wacky for the regular Oracle, but Frisian primary:


# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 97.3% Frisian ( ) + 2.7% Serrano ( ) @ 1.01
2 98.5% Frisian ( ) + 1.5% Bolivian ( ) @ 1.02
3 98.6% Frisian ( ) + 1.4% Bolivian_Cochabamba ( ) @ 1.02
4 98.7% Frisian ( ) + 1.3% Aymara ( ) @ 1.03
5 98.7% Frisian ( ) + 1.3% Karitiana ( ) @ 1.03

On the other, more typical of what I get:

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Belgian_ +50% Irish_ @ 2.016287

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Frisian_ +25% German-Volga_ +25% Irish_ @ 1.932300

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 English_Kent_GBR_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.854819
2 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.870624
3 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Frisian_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ @ 1.882273
4 British_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.891946
5 Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ + Irish_ @ 1.913025

fairly consistent N.W. European until you use the oracle 4 which is only good for contributions of 25% or higher and only then in amounts of 25, 50, 75 and 100%.

I am 25% North German, and adding English and Scottish together would be about 62.5% and 12.5% South Italian. these are my mixed mode population sharing (regular oracle).

1 82.4% Frisian ( ) + 17.6% Greek_Thessaloniki ( ) @ 1.89
2 82.1% Frisian ( ) + 17.9% Albanian_Tirana ( ) @ 1.89
3 79.7% Frisian ( ) + 20.3% Kosovar ( ) @ 1.93
4 82% Frisian ( ) + 18% Greek_Thessaly ( ) @ 1.94
5 85.9% Frisian ( ) + 14.1% Italian_South ( ) @ 1.99
6 85.5% Frisian ( ) + 14.5% Greek_Athens ( ) @ 1.99
7 83.8% Frisian ( ) + 16.2% Central_Greek ( ) @ 2
8 84.9% Frisian ( ) + 15.1% Sicilian_Center ( ) @ 2.04
9 79.2% Frisian ( ) + 20.8% Bulgarian ( ) @ 2.05
10 88.5% English_Kent_GBR ( ) + 11.5% Georgian_Tbilisi ( ) @ 2.05
11 83.4% Frisian ( ) + 16.6% Ashkenazi ( ) @ 2.08
12 79.3% Frisian ( ) + 20.7% Greek_Northwest ( ) @ 2.08
13 88.8% English_Kent_GBR ( ) + 11.2% Georgian_Laz ( ) @ 2.08
14 85.4% Frisian ( ) + 14.6% Greek ( ) @ 2.09
15 93.2% Belgian ( ) + 6.8% Georgian_Laz ( ) @ 2.1
16 84.5% Frisian ( ) + 15.5% Romanian_Jew ( ) @ 2.1
17 84.3% Frisian ( ) + 15.7% Gagauz ( ) @ 2.11
18 82.1% Frisian ( ) + 17.9% Greek_Peloponnesos ( ) @ 2.14
19 93% Belgian ( ) + 7% Georgian_Imereti ( ) @ 2.15
20 84.3% English_Kent_GBR ( ) + 15.7% Circassian ( ) @ 2.16

fairly consistent. Frisian seems the happy medium for my N.W. European ethnicities.

msmarjoribanks
02-10-2018, 02:40 AM
I have a thought/question, but it's getting far afield from the topic of this thread, so I will move over to the MDLP K23b one.

Amerijoe
02-10-2018, 10:19 PM
Comparing my maternal aunt and myself to see what could be attributed to my unknown paternal side. I get Frisian as #1 Pop. and she gets Irish. My secondary pops. seem to be Russian which makes more sense than msmajoribanks secondary, strange to say the least. German seems to be the major difference between us coming from my paternal side. My mum’s side goes back to Gaelic Speakers. Researching my maternal side uncovered the fact that my ggggrandfather, after his wife’s death, remarried a MacDonald from the Isle of Eigg, who were both Gaelic Speakers. He had two more children. Here is a story of Scots not playing well together. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-39351813

# Population (source) Distance
1 Frisian ( ) 0.98
2 Belgian ( ) 2.03
3 Irish ( ) 2.85
4 English ( ) 3.66
5 Dutch ( ) 4.03

Mixed Mode

Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 99.4% Frisian ( ) + 0.6% Nganasan ( ) @ 0.8
2 98.7% Frisian ( ) + 1.3% Yukagir_Forest ( ) @ 0.83
3 99.4% Frisian ( ) + 0.6% Nenets_Forest ( ) @ 0.84
4 99.3% Frisian ( ) + 0.7% Nenets ( ) @ 0.84
5 99.4% Frisian ( ) + 0.6% Nenets_Tundra ( ) @ 0.84

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Frisian_ +50% Frisian_ @ 1.384860

Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Frisian_ +25% German-Volga_ +25% Irish_ @ 1.115882

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 British_ + Frisian_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ @ 0.963076
2 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Frisian_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ @ 0.979972
3 CEU_ + Frisian_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ @ 1.041020
4 English_Kent_GBR_ + Frisian_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ @ 1.051214
5 English_Kent_GBR_ + Frisian_ + German-Volga_ + Irish_ @ 1.064150

Maternal Aunt Results

# Population (source) Distance
1 Irish ( ) 2.55
2 English ( ) 2.98
3 Dutch ( ) 3.62
4 Norwegian_East ( ) 3.71
5 Frisian ( ) 3.72

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 73.4% Dutch ( ) + 26.6% Orcadian ( ) @ 1.06
2 70% Dutch ( ) + 30% Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR ( ) @ 1.08
3 65.6% Irish ( ) + 34.4% Swede ( ) @ 1.08
4 90.8% Irish ( ) + 9.2% Finn ( ) @ 1.09
5 67.2% Irish ( ) + 32.8% Dane ( ) @ 1.15

Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Dutch_ + Dutch_ + Icelandic_ + Irish_ @ 0.997407
2 Dutch_ + Dutch_ + Irish_ + Norwegian_West_ @ 1.000724
3 Dane_ + Dutch_ + Frisian_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.006876
4 Dutch_ + Dutch_ + Frisian_ + Icelandic_ @ 1.009104
5 Frisian_ + Frisian_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ + Swede_Saami_ @ 1.034811

Clarke
02-11-2018, 09:19 AM
My Ancestry result is 36% Irish, 28% Western Europe, 27% English. Communities include Munster-Kilkenny, South East-West England. I get very similar results for the other DNA tests that I have completed. I've always wondered about the Western Europe. My MDLP K23b result is as follows;

MDLP K23b Oracle Rev 2014 Sep 16

Admix Results (sorted):


# Population Percent
1 European_Hunters_Gatherers 34.70
2 European_Early_Farmers 30.84
3 Caucasian 19.08
4 South_Central_Asian 8.07
5 Ancestral_Altaic 5.32
6 North_African 1.26


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 English_Cornwall_GBR_ @ 2.188699
2 Welsh_ @ 2.343072
3 CEU_ @ 3.197229
4 British_ @ 3.268977
5 English_Kent_GBR_ @ 3.752799
6 Irish_ @ 3.888551
7 Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 4.011038
8 English_ @ 4.204214
9 Orcadian_ @ 4.543725
10 North_European_ @ 4.854005
11 Frisian_ @ 5.317284
12 Belgian_ @ 5.888227
13 Dutch_ @ 8.280554
14 French_ @ 8.483009
15 Icelandic_ @ 8.716237
16 German-Volga_ @ 8.845261
17 Norwegian_West_ @ 9.079015
18 South_German_ @ 9.100886
19 Norwegian_East_ @ 9.927349
20 Dane_ @ 12.230174

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% English_Cornwall_GBR_ +50% Welsh_ @ 2.118526


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% English_Cornwall_GBR_ +25% Irish_ +25% Welsh_ @ 1.839293


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++
1 French_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.670901
2 French_ + Irish_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.699943
3 French_ + Irish_ + Irish_ + Orcadian_ @ 1.753616
4 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Irish_ + Welsh_ @ 1.839293
5 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Irish_ + Welsh_ + Welsh_ @ 1.840464
6 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + French_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.869519
7 French_ + Frisian_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.891543
8 Italian_North_ + Orcadian_ + Orcadian_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.899507
9 French_ + Irish_ + Orcadian_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.902331
10 English_ + French_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.904677
11 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + English_Cornwall_GBR_ + English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Irish_ @ 1.910393
12 French_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ + Welsh_ @ 1.917809
13 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.921457
14 CEU_ + French_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.940792
15 Irish_ + Welsh_ + Welsh_ + Welsh_ @ 1.943556
16 Italian_North_ + Orcadian_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.950122
17 Italian_North_ + Orcadian_ + Orcadian_ + Orcadian_ @ 1.951504
18 British_ + French_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.961419
19 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Irish_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ + Welsh_ @ 1.975102
20 English_Cornwall_GBR_ + English_Cornwall_GBR_ + English_Cornwall_GBR_ + Scottish_Argyll_Bute_GBR_ @ 1.991728