PDA

View Full Version : What company/tool do you find most accurate according to your known ancestry?



jpb
10-18-2016, 12:24 AM
For me, I would say none have been too accurate but some are more accurate than others.
Known ancestry: 3/4 British Isles 1/4 Western European (Pomeranian/Bavarian/Dutch/Alsatian), with distant Swedish and Native American lines.
Here are my Ancestry results:
12214
Here are my MyOrigins results:
12215
Here are my Eurogenes K13 results:
12216
Here are my DNA.Land results:
12217

What is your favorite company/tool and what fits your known ancestry the best?

Honestly, I'd say MyOrigins is the most accurate due to no region being in there that I don't have ancestry from.

cvolt
10-18-2016, 12:55 AM
I think Dna land is the most accurate for me. It's consistent with most gedmatch caluclators I've done, and it makes sense when compared to what I believe my ancestry to be.

jpb
10-18-2016, 01:02 AM
My DNA.Land results were pretty accurate too. They would be spot on if there was no Finnish or Balkan though.

MatAust21
10-18-2016, 01:36 AM
23andme's Ancestry Composition, and the calculators you can find on GEDmatch and on the "Autosomal (auDNA)" section of the forum.

If I had to pick just one of the GEDmatch calculators, I guess it would be the Eurogenes K15.

AncestryDNA is OK, but not one of the best I've seen.

FTDNA's MyOrigins and DNA.Land are some of the least accurate for me. Not only they don't match what you would expect based on my family history, but my results are also not what you should see based on how my parents score, that is, they are far from being something in between.


Off-topic, but based on your results posted here, it does not seem like you have any Native American DNA.

jpb
10-18-2016, 02:32 AM
Interesting. I have yet to test with 23andme.

I get kind of confused by the GEDmatch Calculators. All of them give me Melanesian noise, with the raw data from both Ancestry and FTDNA, so I have kind of lost faith in it entirely. I would love to have Melanesian ancestry, but it seems very unlikely.

My Native American is 11 generations back (1/2048), so I wasn't expecting any Native DNA. I only include it as a part of my ancestry, because it is my grandmother's direct paternal line and I've done a lot of research on this line of the family.

MitchellSince1893
10-18-2016, 03:07 AM
23andme is most accurate for me. dna.land is least accurate.

On gedmatch Eurogenes K15 is good for me.

firemonkey
10-18-2016, 03:27 PM
Based on my known ancestry; I would say Eurogenes K13 AND K15 are the most accurate. Known ancestry is 100% British.23andMe gives me the most British, whether that makes it the most accurate outside of Gedmatch I don't know. Ancestry gives me 12% less when combining Ireland with Great Britain so might be the least accurate.

ArmandoR1b
10-18-2016, 05:25 PM
23andme is the most accurate for all of the following:

Myself, my family members, my distant relatives, and people from the regions that I have ancestry from. I don't like using just a single person's results, to come to a conclusion of the accuracy of a company or a tool, but rather the results of a multitude of people that have well researched genealogies and that have tested with multiple companies. Even Eurogenes calculators aren't near as good as 23andme for these people. They come in 2nd but not closely. The rest are for grins.

jpb
10-18-2016, 08:53 PM
My closest Eurogenes K13 Oracle 4 (1.74) is Belorussian+French+West_German+West_Scottish, which is very similar to my Ancestry results if you consider the West Scottish Irish.

I actually think that's pretty accurate if the Scottish and French are proxies for my English ancestry. Cool.

A Norfolk L-M20
10-18-2016, 10:44 PM
Check out my signature below - good family history and documentary record, all Southern English, with an emphasis on East Anglian. Now, of course we have that "English problem" we are a mixture of British (akin to Irish and Scottish), but with known North Sea and Continental admixture over the past few thousand years at least, most likely longer. Therefore, most DNA tests for ancestry struggle with us.

My best test? First Place to:

Using an FT-DNA family finder data, and running it through Eurogenes K13. On Oracle, in terms of genetic distance, it gives me:

1 Southeast_English 3.75
2 South_Dutch 4.03
3 West_German 5.42
4 Southwest_English 5.68
5 Orcadian 6.33
6 North_Dutch 7.15
7 Danish 7.36
8 Irish 7.59
9 West_Scottish 7.62
10 North_German 7.7

If I run a 23andMe V4 raw data instead, it's not quite so close - finding South Dutch closer than SE English!

So, my family history and 234 recorded direct ancestors says that I'm 100% English.

Here is what I get - starting with the closest non Gedmatch analysis.

Second place to 23andMe V4 Ancestry Composition. Even though un-phased in spec mode it gave me:

32% British & Irish
22% French & German
7% Scandinavian
2% Southern European
etc. and in phased with one parent:
37% British & Irish
11% French & German
1% Scandinavian
2% Southern European, etc.

I can understand the confusion of the ancient admixture. However, I do admire their British & Irish reference for detecting Irish and Scottish ancestry. After phasing they also get me 96% North-West European which is great. Does it make up though, for calling me 32% British?

I give 3rd Place to Wegene (23andMe data only tried).

Even though it suggests 81% French, and only 19% British, I think that's pretty neat, no silly suggestions, and we English and French are easily confused for each other!

Fourth Place is to DNA.land (used 23andMe data only). Pretty rubbish.

They get me 77% NW European, so maybe I'm being a little hard on them. But...

19% South European, broken into 13% Balkan, and 6% South/Central
2.4% Finnish

In Last Place, although it was a toss up between this and the above DNA.land result. FT-DNA Family Finder My Origins.

36% British
32% Southern European
26% Scandinavian
6% Eastern European

Now its all going haywire though isn't it? Eastern European? 32% Southern European? Rubbish.

I've not put up results for other GEDMATCH calculators, but after Eurogenes K13, Eurogenes K15 works next best.

Kiln
10-18-2016, 11:29 PM
I've had poor results with Ancestry & FTDNA.

DNA.LAND is good, but very general.

http://i.imgur.com/4Ln2AVG.png

jpb
10-18-2016, 11:36 PM
We have very similar Ancestry Results, Kiln. Almost identical.

Kiln
10-19-2016, 04:10 AM
We have very similar Ancestry Results, Kiln. Almost identical.

Similar.

I'm a rather typical colonial American.

3/4 British Isles, 1/4 continental.

jpb
10-19-2016, 05:32 AM
That is basically my exact known ancestry.

sktibo
10-19-2016, 07:36 AM
Well, my paper trail will probably always be a work in progress.. but my most recent (and most accurate) calculation is
21.09% Scotland
19.40% England
18.79% Germany (only discovered I had this quite recently)
12.5% Wales
9.37% Ireland
8.71% France
6.25% Poland
2.00% Native American
1.56% Holland
0.19% Spain
0.09% Norway

Only 23andme comes close to these numbers, and speculative mode gets it the most closely:

12240

52.3 British and Irish, off by around 10%
8.1% French and German.. Off by quite a lot if German is included, but if it's only picking up the French then it's less than 1% off.
4.0% Eastern Europe, not bad when on paper it's 6%
0.2% Iberian is very good when I'm actually 0.19%
1.9% East Asian & Native American, pretty close to 2%.

jpb
10-19-2016, 02:30 PM
I forgot to add my exact paper trail percenages. I am about:
39.3% Germany
37.6% England
12.2% Ireland
7.1% Scotland
1.6% Wales
1.6% Netherlands
0.2% Sweden
0.2% France
0.2% Native American
0.05% Hungary

This actually makes my Ancestry results look pretty accurate.
They give me 51% Europe West, when I am probably actually around 41%.
They give me 24% Irish, when I am 21%.
They give me 7% Scandinavian, which I have way less of.
They give me 5% Great Britain, when I should have 37%, but I think if you use 10% of the Europe West, and add the Scandinavian in, it gets closer.

Little bit
10-19-2016, 03:43 PM
I would say all of mine are essentially accurate in that they all fall within the norms of my ethnic group (except my DNA.Land results using my Ancestry raw data which was a disaster) but because 23andme phases me with my mom, I have the highest level of confidence in 23andme's results. That said, I don't 100% buy that I have 5.6% Scandinavian or .1% Native American, but for my overall ethnic group (American Colonial w/majority UK/Ireland and some German/Swiss), it's definitely within norms. For me, I think the phasing is really important: segregating the parents contributions with certainty means I know that most of the supposed Scandinavia comes from my dad which gives me the direction I need to research it. That said, I pretty much know I don't have a Scandinavian ancestor on my dad's side which can account for that 5.6% so I think there's a algorithm/smoothing issue of assigning too much Scandinavian to some people. But since it's a common issue in my group, I chalk it up to either methodology or it may even hint at the population structure of my dad's ancestors as opposed to my mom's side ancestors.

ArmandoR1b
10-19-2016, 08:29 PM
Well, my paper trail will probably always be a work in progress.. but my most recent (and most accurate) calculation is
21.09% Scotland
19.40% England
18.79% Germany (only discovered I had this quite recently)
12.5% Wales
9.37% Ireland
8.71% France
6.25% Poland
2.00% Native American
1.56% Holland
0.19% Spain
0.09% Norway

Only 23andme comes close to these numbers, and speculative mode gets it the most closely:

12240

52.3 British and Irish, off by around 10%
8.1% French and German.. Off by quite a lot if German is included, but if it's only picking up the French then it's less than 1% off.
4.0% Eastern Europe, not bad when on paper it's 6%
0.2% Iberian is very good when I'm actually 0.19%
1.9% East Asian & Native American, pretty close to 2%.

What do you get with AncestryDNA? I am especially interested in your NA results there.

sktibo
10-19-2016, 08:40 PM
What do you get with AncestryDNA? I am especially interested in your NA results there.

2% native American. Very impressed with them in that regard... The other results with ancestry were 73% great Britain, 6% Ireland, the rest trace regions... Not quite as good there in my opinion.

ArmandoR1b
10-20-2016, 12:38 AM
2% native American. Very impressed with them in that regard...
I was sure that people with a small amount of First Nation ancestry would show Native American at AncestryDNA. I had a long argument with a person in a thread here at Anthrogenica (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7657-Long-lost-Cherokee-ancestor-Yeah-probably-not-Ancestry-com-CEO-says) on that subject. The Native American reference populations being only from southern North America (Mexico) and South America did not cause it to be missed which I knew would be the case since 23andme is able to catch it in Métis people.


The other results with ancestry were 73% great Britain, 6% Ireland, the rest trace regions... Not quite as good there in my opinion.
I am of the same opinion.

sktibo
10-20-2016, 01:14 AM
I was sure that people with a small amount of First Nation ancestry would show Native American at AncestryDNA. I had a long argument with a person in a thread here at Anthrogenica (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7657-Long-lost-Cherokee-ancestor-Yeah-probably-not-Ancestry-com-CEO-says) on that subject. The Native American reference populations being only from southern North America (Mexico) and South America did not cause it to be missed which I knew would be the case since 23andme is able to catch it in Métis people.


I am of the same opinion.

For the record, every single ancestry test or utility that I've taken or used has detected my native American percentage within the range of 1.6-2.1%. Scary accurate compared to the northern European results. Recently, my girlfriend's mother took the ancestrydna test to determine whether or not their family stories of having a Native American ancestor were true, and she got 0%. We looked into their records and discovered that there was a native American in their family, but not in their bloodline. I feel I can say with some certainty that if you don't get Native American on these tests, then you probably don't have any NA ancestry. That said, I think one of our members from England said he got a trace 1% amount of NA on his AncestryDNA test. (His or a relative of his, cannot remember). So it might show up as a trace region for some folks without it but I would sure be interested to dive into their ancestral records and see. In any case, it appears it's much easier for these tests to split Native American from the rest than it is to divide the European ethnicities up.

AnnieD
10-20-2016, 03:31 AM
2% native American. Very impressed with them in that regard... The other results with ancestry were 73% great Britain, 6% Ireland, the rest trace regions... Not quite as good there in my opinion.

Curious if you disclosed your Metis NA heritage at registration with 23andMe? I have my lingering doubts about how unbiased the final test results are when we provide our GP place of origin & other heritage details at major DNA co. registration.

By the way, I have no family lore of NA but score 1% NA in all 3 modes at 23andMe vs. 0% at other co., hence an example of either test inconsistency or a borderline result that falls under 1% reporting threshold utilized by AncestryDNA, FTDNA and various other co.

sktibo
10-20-2016, 03:48 AM
Curious if you disclosed your Metis NA heritage at registration with 23andMe? I have my lingering doubts about how unbiased the final test results are when we provide our GP place of origin & other heritage details at major DNA co. registration.

By the way, I'm have no family lore of NA but score 1% NA in all 3 modes at 23andMe vs. 0% at other co., hence an example of either test inconsistency or a borderline result that falls under 1% reporting threshold utilized by AncestryDNA, FTDNA and various other co.

IIRC I didn't give any company I've tested with any info about my ancestry until after the results were in.
Similarly to you, I got Ashkenazi Jewish on speculative and standard on 23, so I thought maybe I had some Jewish ancestry... But I don't have it on any other test, unlike my NA results which seem pretty consistent in every test

jpb
10-20-2016, 05:52 AM
sktibo, I slightly disagree with your statement that if Native doesn't show up in autosomal DNA then there is no Native ancestry. My great uncle (and therefore my grandmother through proxy) has Haplogroup Q-M3, and a Y-marker, I think, that is specific to Algonquin tribes and I found the Native ancestor. This being said, my mother and I get 0% Native American, but we do have a proven Native ancestor. However my great uncle's sister, my great aunt gets 2% Central Asian, which I think may be her Native, but who knows. Maybe 23andme would give better answers.

sktibo
10-20-2016, 06:54 AM
sktibo, I slightly disagree with your statement that if Native doesn't show up in autosomal DNA then there is no Native ancestry. My great uncle (and therefore my grandmother through proxy) has Haplogroup Q-M3, and a Y-marker, I think, that is specific to Algonquin tribes and I found the Native ancestor. This being said, my mother and I get 0% Native American, but we do have a proven Native ancestor. However my great uncle's sister, my great aunt gets 2% Central Asian, which I think may be her Native, but who knows. Maybe 23andme would give better answers.

Fair enough. I'd be interested to see what you get in the NA category on 23andme. I think there's some crossover between East Asian and Native American sometimes... do you know what test it is in which your great aunt gets the Central Asian and what that Central Asian Category is defined as?
Just to be clear on my earlier statement, I didn't intend to imply that if you don't score Native American on these ancestry tests then you don't have it for sure... I just meant I didn't think it would be very likely.

firemonkey
10-20-2016, 10:01 AM
For me a slight obsession about NA is like an irritating itch that won't go away. Ancestry,FTDNA, and 23andMe give me nothing. Nat gen 2% NA.
Dna land very small amount of Amazonian and ambiguous Native American.
Dna tribes very small amount of Amazonian. GPS origins very small amount of #12 Western South America 1.2%

Origin: Peaks in Peru, Mexico, and North America and declines in Eastern Russia

#13 Pima County: The Sonora 0.4%

Origin: Peaks in Central-North America and declines towards Greenland and Eskimos

ArmandoR1b
10-20-2016, 10:53 AM
Curious if you disclosed your Metis NA heritage at registration with 23andMe? I have my lingering doubts about how unbiased the final test results are when we provide our GP place of origin & other heritage details at major DNA co. registration.If the results were based on self-reported ancestry then there wouldn't be hundreds of people that say they have a Cherokee ancestor but 0% Native American DNA at 23andme.


By the way, I have no family lore of NA but score 1% NA in all 3 modes at 23andMe vs. 0% at other co., hence an example of either test inconsistency or a borderline result that falls under 1% reporting threshold utilized by AncestryDNA, FTDNA and various other co.Unfortunately as it stands you would need an older generation relative to test and get higher than 1% in order to be 100% certain that it is not a false positive. If you are getting <1% then it could be a false positive but exactly 1% or more is less likely to be a false positive.

ArmandoR1b
10-20-2016, 11:01 AM
sktibo, I slightly disagree with your statement that if Native doesn't show up in autosomal DNA then there is no Native ancestry. My great uncle (and therefore my grandmother through proxy) has Haplogroup Q-M3, and a Y-marker, I think, that is specific to Algonquin tribes and I found the Native ancestor. This being said, my mother and I get 0% Native American, but we do have a proven Native ancestor. However my great uncle's sister, my great aunt gets 2% Central Asian, which I think may be her Native, but who knows. Maybe 23andme would give better answers.

Is the Central Asian from FTDNA myOrigins or from AncestryDNA? FTDNA over assigns both Northeast Asian and Central Asian for people without that ancestry in the past 500 years but with Native American ancestry in the past 500 years. This happens to a very large number of people and it also happened to the Clovis Anzick kit that was uploaded to FTDNA. Click on the image in the following page (http://www.fi.id.au/2014/11/clovis-anzick-ethnic-makeup-in-ftdna.html).

ArmandoR1b
10-20-2016, 11:23 AM
For the record, every single ancestry test or utility that I've taken or used has detected my native American percentage within the range of 1.6-2.1%. Scary accurate compared to the northern European results. Recently, my girlfriend's mother took the ancestrydna test to determine whether or not their family stories of having a Native American ancestor were true, and she got 0%. We looked into their records and discovered that there was a native American in their family, but not in their bloodline. I feel I can say with some certainty that if you don't get Native American on these tests, then you probably don't have any NA ancestry. That said, I think one of our members from England said he got a trace 1% amount of NA on his AncestryDNA test. (His or a relative of his, cannot remember). So it might show up as a trace region for some folks without it but I would sure be interested to dive into their ancestral records and see. In any case, it appears it's much easier for these tests to split Native American from the rest than it is to divide the European ethnicities up.
I used to think that AncestryDNA was just as reliable or better than 23andme, and it might be for some cases, but a person from Guadalajara, México posted his 23andme, AncestryDNA,FTDNA, and DNA.Land results in 23andme threads. His Native American result at AncestryDNA was 99% Native American <1% Asia but at 23andme it was 90.0% Native American with some Iberian and West African. The last two components would also be expected for someone from Mexico so at least in his case I would go with the 23andme results.

jpb
10-20-2016, 12:32 PM
Hi-
Sorry, sktibo! Now I understand what you were saying. We haven't tested yet with 23andme but I am planning to test a few relatives on there soon. My g-aunts Central Asian is from Ancestry and it includes like Afghanistan and Pakistan and all the -stans on the map but I saw something with a Mongolian person, and they got 82% Central Asian, so I think it may inckude Mongolia as well, which is why I thought the Asia Central could be Native. If I do 23andme myself and get some sort of Mongolian or Chinese, I wouldn't know if it was possibly from my paternal line (I have an Asian haplogroup) or if it was Native.

lwa714
07-03-2017, 12:40 AM
I'd have to give it to 23andMe, though the MDLP World project from Gedmatch worked pretty good for me too. I thought I was half German and Irish on my mom's side, and half Mexican on my dad's side. Here are my 23andme results:

European 79.6%
Northwestern European 45.9%
French and German 18.8%
British and Irish 14.7%
Scandinavian: 0.9%
Broadly Northwestern European 11.5%
Southern European 28.0%
Iberian 18.5%
Italian 2.9%
Broadly Southern European 6.6%
Ashkenazi Jewish 1.5%
Broadly European 4.2%
East Asian & Native American 16.4%
Native American 15.0%
East Asian <0.1%
Broadly East Asian <0.1%
Broadly East Asian and Native American 1.4%
Sub-Saharan African 1.0%
West African 0.8%
Central and South African 0.2%
Broadly Sub-Saharan African <0.1%
Middle Eastern and North African 0.7%
North African 0.4%
Middle Eastern0.2%
Broadly Middle Eastern and North African 0.2%
South Asian <0.1%
Broadly South Asian <0.1%
Unassigned 2.2%

Note this is after phasing with both parents.

Exosuits
07-11-2017, 01:24 AM
Ancestry and My Heritage were smack bang on the most accurate.
Outside the Gedmatch calculators, the least accurate would be 23andme.
My favourite would be DNA Tribes which seems to go back further than all the others. And being biased, picks up regional groups whose histories I am very much interested in.

JMcB
07-11-2017, 03:44 AM
In my case, Living DNA's complete mode has been the most accurate. Followed by FTDNA and then Ancestry.

Mike_G
07-11-2017, 04:08 AM
In order: 23andme, FTDNA, Living DNA cautious, Ancestry, MyHeritage.

The Eastern to Western European ratios are way out of whack in the last three.

timberwolf
07-11-2017, 04:12 AM
1 LDNA accurately picks I am half Cornish, prefer the cautious mode, as it reflects my paper trail really well.
2 23andme Picks that I am 99% NW European.
3 AncestryDNA Mostly Irish there, which will be Cornwall in my case, have a high C&W European score and a very low GB score.
4 FTDNA Mostly Western European there, not accurate. But FTDNA strengths are Y and Mitochondrial.
5 MyHeritage Terrible just terrible. According to them I am 25% Spanish. Perhaps the test reflects my fondest for Spanish Football. That can be the only explanation for it.

JMcB
07-11-2017, 02:52 PM
In my case, Living DNA's complete mode has been the most accurate. Followed by FTDNA and then Ancestry.

Now that I have a little more time, I would like to elaborate on the above. According to my known ancestry, I am approximately 87.5% English, Scottish & Irish. With the rest be made up of approximately 6.25% Italian and 6.25% German. These numbers are fairly certain keeping in mind the vagaries of recombination. Especially, for the Italian & German which are recent additions.

Living DNA gave me this:

17489

When I consider that their notes on Scandinavia say the region can also include parts of Germany, I would say their numbers are pretty much spot on. Although, the 1.6% Eastern European (Mordovia) is a bit of a mystery. So I'm just going to add that to my Germanic ancestry. Which would bring the numbers right into line.

FTDNA gave me this:

17490

Also not bad. The numbers are a little to high on their Southern and Eastern European regions and a little too low (11%) on the British Isles reading. Nevertheless, I'm not going to complain. I'll just make the adjustments I think are necessary.

Ancestry gave me this:

17491

Now this looks to be a little bit off. However, If I consider it to be ancestry that goes back 2000 years, I can also make sense out of this. Especially, in the light of my BigY results and LDNA's "Through History" maps.

In some respects I think my ancestry is fairly straight forward and perhaps easy for the companies to read. So for the most part, all I have to do is make minor adjustments here and there.

RrNn97
07-11-2017, 02:57 PM
I'd say 23andme IMO. I've tried 23andme, WEGENE, myheritage, DNALand, Geneplaza and I'll get my ftDNA in some weeks so I'll see. Thus far, it's def. 23andme.

Mike_G
07-12-2017, 12:13 AM
When I consider that their notes on Scandinavia say the region can also include parts of Germany, I would say their numbers are pretty much spot on. Although, the 1.6% Eastern European (Mordovia) is a bit of mystery. So I'm just going to add that to my Germanic ancestry. Which would bring the numbers right into line.



My Mordovian brother! :beerchug:

That makes three or four of us on here.

Mine actually could make sense though.

chelle
07-12-2017, 12:42 AM
My Mordovian brother! :beerchug:

That makes three or four of us on here.

Mine actually could make sense though.

Include me in that cool kid club B) with the mysterious Mordovia percentage coming in at 1.1% haha

Simon_W
07-12-2017, 03:02 PM
IMHO 23andme is definitely the best. Their method differs a lot from all other tools and companies, because it takes haplotypic information into account which increases the ancestry analysis power. But make sure to have at least one parent or one of your kids tested as well, in order to get the phasing correct, this is crucial to 23andme's method.

I see just two downsides:
1. 23andme tends to underestimate admixture percentages, because they only classify segments to the most specific level if they are sufficiently certain, and they put the other segments into broader categories. In my case 8% fall into the unspecific "broadly European" category. Hence the different ancestries they report are rather minimum levels than the entire admixture.
2. In case of some ancestries there is a certain overlap with different areas. For instance their Italian category also includes a lot of East Mediterranean, Cypriot-like, possibly ancient Anatolian and Greek admixture. That's because of the ancient geneflow from these areas to Italy. Which means that I don't get my ancient Anatolian admixture reported as MENA, and many Greeks and Cypriots get odd Italian ancestry reported.

But at least I do get 20.5% Italian ancestry reported which is close to my 1/4 paper trail Italian ancestry. Other companies and tools often model my Italian ancestry as Iberian + MENA. This makes sense too, but if you don't know much about ancient DNA research this may be fatally misleading.

But, given the few shortcomings of 23andme, you may want to use other tools and offers as complements.

Family Tree DNA has a nice Central European component, I like that, and it seems to catch all my East European admixture, but it vastly overestimates my British admixture.

The new MyHeritage analysis is still in a beta stadium but makes sense to me. Probably it also overestimates my Insular Celtic ancestry and it got the MENA components somewhat too low. The Baltic admixture seems correct.

Both these companies report my Italian ancestry as mostly Iberian + Anatolian/Middle Eastern.

The Eurogenes EUtest V2 K15 on GedMatch is pretty good as well. I just don't like the Atlantic component too much, I would have preferred a central European one.

For ancient ancestry the Eurogenes Yamnaya K6 was great, but it was never implemented on GedMatch. It's no longer available.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the oracles. A good calculator with meaningful, sensible components should suffice, and a bad calculator doesn't get better using the oracles (garbage in -> garbage out).

1/2finn
07-14-2017, 02:49 PM
I am 50% Finnish - 25% Icelandic (Scandinavian) - 25% British Isles. Both FTDNA and AncestryDNA have it pretty spot on within a few percentages of each other. Myheritage is soooo wrong. They have the Finn DNA at 41% and no Scandinavian at all.

sktibo
07-15-2017, 05:14 AM
I am 50% Finnish - 25% Icelandic (Scandinavian) - 25% British Isles. Both FTDNA and AncestryDNA have it pretty spot on within a few percentages of each other. Myheritage is soooo wrong. They have the Finn DNA at 41% and no Scandinavian at all.

Meanwhile my father, who has no Scandinavian (Nothing German or Dutch either) connections is around 26% Scandinavian according to myheritage. At least myheritage lets us transfer to it for free, so that's about the right price for that level of ethnicity estimate I think.

tomz
07-16-2017, 05:43 PM
As far as commercial testing, the most accurate for me would be My Heritage DNA which surprises me given that they are fairly new in ethnicity testing, but it did seem to accurately provide results that align nicely with my known ancestry over the last 5 to 7 generations. 2nd place would be Ancestry DNA although they underestimated my French an German ancestry a bit. 3rd place would be 23 and Me, which I really did not like because the results for me were just so broad and there was too much unassigned ancestry given. Last place would go to Living DNA which gave me a overwhelming amount of British Iles (and little else)and no French or German which I certainly have in my ancestry. although I am hopeful that their results will improve in the future.

As far as third party tools, I felt that the Dodecad World 9, and Eurogenes K13 calculators aligned the best with my ancestry which is predominately North West European..

Simon_W
07-16-2017, 06:35 PM
As far as commercial testing, the most accurate for me would be My Heritage DNA which surprises me given that they are fairly new in ethnicity testing, but it did seem to accurately provide results that align nicely with my known ancestry over the last 5 to 7 generations. 2nd place would be Ancestry DNA although they underestimated my French an German ancestry a bit. 3rd place would be 23 and Me, which I really did not like because the results for me were just so broad and there was too much unassigned ancestry given. Last place would go to Living DNA which gave me a overwhelming amount of British Iles (and little else)and no French or German which I certainly have in my ancestry. although I am hopeful that their results will improve in the future.

As far as third party tools, I felt that the Dodecad World 9, and Eurogenes K13 calculators aligned the best with my ancestry which is predominately North West European..

Did you test one of your parents or kids on 23andme as well? It really makes a difference. I don't deny that 23andme doesn't excell when they just have your own kit. In my case the difference was huge. As for Dodecad World 9, did you know that it's just an older version of Dodecad K7b? So naturally K7b ought to be more accurate. But that said, the very basic clustering into three West Eurasian components (northern, southern, West Asian) doesn't offer much of value to me. Likewise, Eurogenes K13 still has too few components to me, e.g. the Baltic component isn't specifically Balto-Slavic enough. That said, the Oracle works relatively well with Eurogenes K13. For example the Oracle-4 approximated me best with North_Dutch + North_Italian + Spanish_Extremadura + Swedish @ 1.169131
I do have a North Italian grandfather. I don't have a Swedish grandparent, but my paternal grandmother comes out North Swedish-like in Eurogenes K13, though she is East Prussian German, so at least it's consistent. And then my southwest German & Northwest Swiss ancestry may be approximated as a mix between North Dutch and Spanish-Extremadura, as it's inbetween the two.

tomz
07-17-2017, 12:18 AM
Simon, I have not had anyone else from my family tested with 23 and Me and I am ready to shell out some money to get at least one other tested if this would help improve results. Unfortunately no one else in my family seems that interested at this time which is aggravating, but I must respect their wishes. I did try the Dodecad K7B by the way and it faired the same as World 9 oracle-wise. I still preferred the older world 9 version because it had a specific Native American (Amerindian) component (I have a confirmed 4th GGrandmother who was NA) whereas k7B did not have that; appearing to break down that component between Siberia and East Asia only.

Simon_W
07-20-2017, 11:03 AM
@tomz

In my case, before my kit was phased with my father's kit, I had about 3% Italian and 4% Balkan (roughly, from memory), now I get 20.5% Italian and 1.6% Balkan, which makes more sense, because my maternal grandfather was Italian and I have no recent, known connection to the Balkans. My father also has zero interest in DNA testing, but gladly I managed to convince him to participate by pointing out that the spit collection can be very quickly done, so he doesn't lose much time with it.

I was partly wrong about that Dodecad World 9 BTW. In fact, World 9 and K7b both have Eurasia 7 as their forerunner. World 9 was an extension, because it was not limited to Eurasian components, but also includes, like you said, a Native American component. K7b was again Eurasia-focused and based on a larger collection of samples than Eurasia 7.

Mike_G
07-20-2017, 12:43 PM
As far as commercial testing, the most accurate for me would be My Heritage DNA which surprises me given that they are fairly new in ethnicity testing, but it did seem to accurately provide results that align nicely with my known ancestry over the last 5 to 7 generations. 2nd place would be Ancestry DNA although they underestimated my French an German ancestry a bit. 3rd place would be 23 and Me, which I really did not like because the results for me were just so broad and there was too much unassigned ancestry given. Last place would go to Living DNA which gave me a overwhelming amount of British Iles (and little else)and no French or German which I certainly have in my ancestry. although I am hopeful that their results will improve in the future.

As far as third party tools, I felt that the Dodecad World 9, and Eurogenes K13 calculators aligned the best with my ancestry which is predominately North West European..

As an example for 23andme's phasing here are my results before and after phasing with my daughter.

17630 17631

Simon brings up a good point about phasing.

Before the phasing and before I knew anything about my biological parents I was underwhelmed with the Broadly xxx stuff.

Based on what I've been able to discover about my maternal side, the Western European results are pretty good with the exception of my daughter having more French/German than me. Out of my four great grandparents on my maternal side, two were almost 50/50 English/Dutch, one 50/50 German/British Isles, and the fourth primarily Irish. That was already four generations ago, so I can certainly understand the "Broadly Northwestern European" result. I'm not sure about my other half, and at this point I have no interest in exploring my Lithuanian background.

Their phasing is very useful. Hopefully you'll be able to encourage one of your parents or children to test in the future.

Simon_W
07-21-2017, 03:19 PM
The reason for this importance of phasing is that 23andme classify alignments or sequences of alleles. But the DNA testing always yields two alleles in each tested SNP locus, one from your mother, the other from your father. And hence the initial raw data isn't an alignment of alleles, but a sequence of allele pairs also known as base pairs. And without proper phasing they have to do a pseudo-phasing, that is, they just guess the allele alignment based on statistical data. And this isn't very reliable.

tomz
07-22-2017, 12:58 AM
Thanks Simon and Mike_G. Very helpful info!

wombatofthenorth
07-27-2017, 05:29 AM
from what I've seen for Baltic people:

Geno 2.0 basic ancient components (no longer available for testing)
23 (although it will under report or miss minor non-European ancestries and it's a little harder to be sure whether you are Baltic unless you get are so purely Baltic as to get the 95-99% Eastern European level scores, you can often still tell but it isn't always possible for it to make it clear some is say Latvian/Lithuanian vs. Polish as some Polish have barely any German influence and have some Old Prussian influence and sometimes score pretty high on the Eastern European, a very few Belarusians and Russians score very high on EE too although they often have more than 0.1 Yakkut but since 23 filters a lot sometimes it filters their Asian signal away so much it's hard to really be sure so Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 can actually tend to tell Baltic from other nearby Eastern European a bit better overall; but this is only current test that seems to be able to fairly reliably report if you have Baltic German, Scandinavian and such mixed into your Baltic ancestry)
----------------------------------
then

Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 (although they won't really pick up any of your minor ancestries at all, but at least it gets the bulk right and the high ratio will also pick out Baltic from other Eastern European areas and can usually tell a very highly Baltic person from a very highly Polish or Russian or Hungarian, etc.)
MyHeritage (may or may not pick out your minor (European only) ancestries and will probably not really assign them correctly if it does but at least there is a chance it will pick out that you do have some non-Baltic stuff and the high ratio should be able to distinguish primarily Baltic ancestry from other Eastern European areas, i.e. any sort of 100%,90%,85%,80% Baltic and such would so far as I've seen clearly imply your are largely Baltic and not say largely Polish or Hungarian)

if you want to get a good clue as to whether your mostly Baltic ancestry has a touch Balkan or Baltic German or Scandinavian or such this set probably won't do it and only the top set above might give those hints

---------------------------------
then

MyOrigins 2.0 (it will tell you that you are mostly from somewhere or other in the greater Eastern European area and do that very reliably but won't really give you any other info at all, and as a general note it seems to be very unstable for Western Europeans so you can't even safely read ratios out of it like you often can with Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0)

Volat
07-27-2017, 09:29 AM
23 (although it will under report or miss minor non-European ancestries and it's a little harder to be sure whether you are Baltic unless you get are so purely Baltic as to get the 95-99% Eastern European level scores, you can often still tell but it isn't always possible for it to make it clear some is say Latvian/Lithuanian vs. Polish as some Polish have barely any German influence and have some Old Prussian influence and sometimes score pretty high on the Eastern European, a very few Belarusians and Russians score very high on EE too although they often have more than 0.1 Yakkut but since 23 filters a lot sometimes it filters their Asian signal away so much it's hard to really be sure so Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 can actually tend to tell Baltic from other nearby Eastern European a bit better overall; but this is only current test that seems to be able to fairly reliably report if you have Baltic German, Scandinavian and such mixed into your Baltic ancestry)

A very few Belarusians score high EE at 23andme? As far as I know Belarusians score the highest EE among Slavic populations at 23andme. I've seen about 20-25 samples. I have around 98% of EE and 0.1 east Asian & native American which is noise. Here are my 23andme results.


https://s10.postimg.org/89q23yyzt/index.png

Volat
07-27-2017, 10:08 AM
East European admixture based on 23andme. I don't know what samples were used.





https://s17.postimg.org/jp9qxm0kv/3d255333e19678620a48deca08e90493--the-east-maps.jpg






Maps based on results from Dodecad project.




East European admixture based Dodecad





https://s22.postimg.org/56tiob47l/8b7520086231f58a44ed4008c78bac34--irish.jpg







East Asian admixture based on Dodecad







https://s2.postimg.org/fz0w1cdnt/East-_Asian-admixture.gif

Mike_G
07-27-2017, 12:34 PM
from what I've seen for Baltic people:

Geno 2.0 basic ancient components (no longer available for testing)
23 (although it will under report or miss minor non-European ancestries and it's a little harder to be sure whether you are Baltic unless you get are so purely Baltic as to get the 95-99% Eastern European level scores, you can often still tell but it isn't always possible for it to make it clear some is say Latvian/Lithuanian vs. Polish as some Polish have barely any German influence and have some Old Prussian influence and sometimes score pretty high on the Eastern European, a very few Belarusians and Russians score very high on EE too although they often have more than 0.1 Yakkut but since 23 filters a lot sometimes it filters their Asian signal away so much it's hard to really be sure so Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 can actually tend to tell Baltic from other nearby Eastern European a bit better overall; but this is only current test that seems to be able to fairly reliably report if you have Baltic German, Scandinavian and such mixed into your Baltic ancestry)
----------------------------------
then

Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 (although they won't really pick up any of your minor ancestries at all, but at least it gets the bulk right and the high ratio will also pick out Baltic from other Eastern European areas and can usually tell a very highly Baltic person from a very highly Polish or Russian or Hungarian, etc.)
MyHeritage (may or may not pick out your minor (European only) ancestries and will probably not really assign them correctly if it does but at least there is a chance it will pick out that you do have some non-Baltic stuff and the high ratio should be able to distinguish primarily Baltic ancestry from other Eastern European areas, i.e. any sort of 100%,90%,85%,80% Baltic and such would so far as I've seen clearly imply your are largely Baltic and not say largely Polish or Hungarian)

if you want to get a good clue as to whether your mostly Baltic ancestry has a touch Balkan or Baltic German or Scandinavian or such this set probably won't do it and only the top set above might give those hints

---------------------------------
then

MyOrigins 2.0 (it will tell you that you are mostly from somewhere or other in the greater Eastern European area and do that very reliably but won't really give you any other info at all, and as a general note it seems to be very unstable for Western Europeans so you can't even safely read ratios out of it like you often can with Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0)

LivingDNA also discerns Baltic from Eastern European. My LDNA results were approximately 29% Baltics 5% Mordovia 2% Northeast Europe. 4 great grandparents immigrated from Lithuania, but I have no idea about their backgrounds.

Volat
07-27-2017, 12:59 PM
------

Elizabeth
07-27-2017, 06:43 PM
I tested with 23andMe, FTDNA FF (myOrigins 1.0 & 2.0), and AncestryDNA. None are a perfect fit but the one that comes closest is AncestryDNA.

Robert1
07-27-2017, 07:35 PM
I'm about 94% UK, 5% German/Dutch and probably 1% Scandinavian. Living DNA gives the best ancestry composition and 23&Me phased with my Mother is also good.

For others I've also tested with Ancesty.com is well back in third place and FTDNA MyOrigins 2.0 is a joke at #4 (V1.0 was better, though it just said 80% British and 20% Scandinavian). I haven't tried (nor expect to) MyHeritage, DNALand and WeGene.

GEDmatch Eurogenes V13 is interesting.

wombatofthenorth
07-28-2017, 01:11 AM
A very few Belarusians score high EE at 23andme? As far as I know Belarusians score the highest EE among Slavic populations at 23andme. I've seen about 20-25 samples. I have around 98% of EE and 0.1 east Asian & native American which is noise. Here are my 23andme results.


https://s10.postimg.org/89q23yyzt/index.png

hmm wow that is a lot higher than the very few samples I had seen, until now I think I had only seen one or two non-Baltic people get over 95% EE (one was an unusual Polish test) and very, very few non-Baltic get over 92% EE (handful of Belarusian, Russian, Polish), most in Eastern Europe seem to get more like 80% or less

anyway I guess it is true then that 23 is not as good as letting one find out if they have major Baltic ancestry or not compared to MyOrigins 1.0/Geno 2.0 NG or MyHeritage

it seems then it can't tell Baltic from Belarusian well at all then

it can often but not always tell Baltic from Polish and Russian

it seems like MyHeritage is shaping up to be the best at this and MyOrigins 1.0/Geno 2.0 NG the next best

MyOrigins 2.0 does not seem to be able to do it well at all, since I've already seen good numbers of non-Baltic people get 100% EE on that test

wombatofthenorth
07-28-2017, 01:15 AM
looking at the heatmap above for 23 EE I guess maybe I had only seen mostly central to southeastern Belarusian samples before

wombatofthenorth
07-28-2017, 01:19 AM
I haven't seen enough of LivingDNA yet to have any sense of how that does.
I wonder if it will do it as reliably as MyHeritage or not and if it will do it better for those with small amounts (like under 50%, especially under 35% heritage).

Of course if someone had no clue about their background and just got a bit of something from EE, not sure it is even possible to make a test that could tell someone exactly what it is since the category is probably too hard to make without an overlap into Belarus and far western Russia and far northeastern Poland at the least. But if someone had no clue and also happened to have by far most of their ancestry from the Baltics, MyHeritage should be able to make it clear and MyOrigins 1.0/Geno 2.0 NG somewhat clear.

Volat
07-28-2017, 01:37 AM
hmm wow that is a lot higher than the very few samples I had seen, until now I think I had only seen one or two non-Baltic people get over 95% EE (one was an unusual Polish test) and very, very few non-Baltic get over 92% EE (handful of Belarusian, Russian, Polish), most in Eastern Europe seem to get more like 80% or less

anyway I guess it is true then that 23 is not as good as letting one find out if they have major Baltic ancestry or not compared to MyOrigins 1.0/Geno 2.0 NG or MyHeritage

it seems then it can't tell Baltic from Belarusian well at all then

it can often but not always tell Baltic from Polish and Russian

it seems like MyHeritage is shaping up to be the best at this and MyOrigins 1.0/Geno 2.0 NG the next best

MyOrigins 2.0 does not seem to be able to do it well at all, since I've already seen good numbers of non-Baltic people get 100% EE on that test

EE is not represented by Baltic populations at 23andme. Balts score high EE, because they seem to be an extreme version of 'northern Slavs' so to speak. In general Ukrainians score EE around mid 70% close to 80%. Poles have different scores depending on the region of Poland - southern or northern Poland. There are also samples of Poles of Estonia used in scientific studies , who happen to be genetically similar to Belarusians. Russians are also diverse genetically. There are genetic differences in Belarusian populations. Some are mixed with Russians, Ukrainians. There are also people living in Polesia - border of Ukraine - which is a separate ethnographic region. I can say with certainty profiles of Belarusians I saw scored EE above 90%+ at 23andme .

Volat
07-28-2017, 01:40 AM
IMO MyHeritage separates Slavs and Balts better than 23andme.

wombatofthenorth
07-28-2017, 02:01 AM
IMO MyHeritage separates Slavs and Balts better than 23andme.

yeah that seems very clear now

Volat
07-28-2017, 02:14 AM
yeah that seems very clear now

If you can find genetic profiles of Latgalians, it'd be interesting to see them.

Mike_G
07-28-2017, 04:19 AM
MyHeritage gives me 35% EE 21.5% Baltic and 6% Balkan for 62% Eastern Europe. That's way off. That's as bad as LivingDNA saying I'm 57% British/Irish. Both ratios are wrong based on my paper trail. I know that my maternal side has zero EE/Balt/anything other than Northwestern European going back 10 generations. I'm certainly open to believing that my Lithuanian side isn't pure Baltic based on several distant but not ridiculously distant Russian/Ukrainian/Belorussian matches in FTDNA.

You (wombat and Volat) are correct that MyHeritage does a better job separating Baltic than 23andme and others for that matter. I get 41% EE on 23andme, 43% on FTDNA, and 57% EE on Ancestry. No Baltic. I don't believe any of them have a Baltic category.

Simon_W
07-29-2017, 05:32 PM
yeah that seems very clear now

23andme doesn't even attempt to separate Balts from northern Slavs.

Simon_W
07-29-2017, 05:45 PM
What regards Italian ancestry, out of the three contenders FTDNA, MyHeritage and DNA.Land I found DNA.Land most accurate - just as far as my 25% Italian ancestry is concerned.

FTDNA modeled it as
14% Iberian
6% Anatolian
3% Italian-Southeast European
<2% Levant
<2% Eastern Middle East
<1% North African

MyHeritage modeled it as
20.6% Iberian
4.9% Middle Eastern
3.2% West Asian

DNA.Land modeled it as
12% Italian
12% Mediterranean Islander

And as my Eurogenes Global10 results showed, this makes perfect sense:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9181-Davidski-s-Basal-rick-K7-Global-10-Genetic-Map-Results&p=265385&viewfull=1#post265385

On the other hand the East European component of DNA.Land is still too wide, not specifically Balto-Slavic enough.

But this is very random, for many other people with Italian ancestry, other analyses were more accurate.

wombatofthenorth
07-29-2017, 08:21 PM
23andme doesn't even attempt to separate Balts from northern Slavs.

But you can read clues anyway even from the ones that don't. For instance I'm not sure anyone other than Balts can score 100% Eastern European in Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 and mostly, other than for maybe a few Belarusians and Russians most don't score the super, super high Eastern European scores and Russians often have some Asian component mixed in. Baltic testers mostly get nothing other than Eastern European and Finnish and Northern Siberian. You can read some strong clues that someone is probably largely Baltic using those two tests.

And with 23 you can read some hints, although not as well as with Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0, as other than for some Belarusians, the above 95% EE pretty much doesn't happen (although I have seen one Polish person manage that and maybe a small number of Russians, most of the Russians also get more than 0.1 Yakkut/Broadly East Asian though, but with the heavier 23 filtering you can't be quite sure). So you can't be as sure, in particular it has trouble giving hints of Baltic vs NW and central Belarusian and even here and there the very rare Polish or less common Russian result might cause some confusion as well.

With MyOrigins 2.0 you really don't seem to get much any hints at all as plenty of Polish, Belarusian, Russian and sometimes even a few countries deeper into Eastern Europe away from the Baltics can all easily score as much as 100% EE, in fact, it makes the test not really give much hints at all to Eastern Europeans, some on the farther fringes pick up more other stuff but it's hard to read reliably.

Anyway MyHeritage clearly seems to make it the most clear and then, of the current tests, Geno 2.0 NG makes it the next most clear and then somewhat farther back 23 and then MyOrigins 2.0 just gives out EE far too easily to make it terribly useful for this and it comes in way farther back than even 23. Not yet sure about LivingDNA. Even a score as low as 40% Baltic on MyHeritage would likely hint for sure the person has at least a touch of true, recent Baltic ancestry, not something the others could likely point out and if you are tons Baltic the ratio you get is way vastly higher than anyone else seems to score so it seems very starkly clear with this test.

OTOH, of the current tests, 23 is the only one that seems to fairly reliably pick out Baltic German, Scandinavian, Balkan and other such minor bits of European ancestry for people who are largely Baltic. MyHeritage can sometimes at least recognize some of that is there, but not always, and when it does, it often sticks it in a weird mix of places (oddly though, MyHeritage can't seem to pick out Finnish ancestry for Baltic people and is actually the worst of all the tests for managing to do that/give hints to that (from Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins you can get clues if you see that you score an extra high amount of that component compared to most Baltic people or not and 23 can often directly report the number about what it should be)). Geno 2.0 NG/MyOrigins 1.0 mostly don't pick that out for Baltic people. MyOrigins 2.0 doesn't pick that out at all for any Baltic people unless they have really considerable amounts of Western European and even then the ratio will be underplayed.

The old Geno 2.0 could do things very accurately and precisely with it's basic ancient components.

Volat
07-29-2017, 08:40 PM
-----