PDA

View Full Version : Typical English 23 ancestry composition



A Norfolk L-M20
01-04-2017, 10:18 PM
I thought that I'd take a fresh look at a 10 month long discussion on the 23andMe OE forum. I selected 20 samples listed in the discussion, but rejected two for insufficient data. Finding English samples with no family history of recent admixture was difficult, so this could be said to represent "mostly English", most commonly with some other known British or Irish admixture - Irish, Scottish, Welsh, or Cornish.

This was my finding:

23andMe in Speculative Mode

An Average English Result.


58% British & Irish
12% French & German
4% Scandinavian
22% Broadly NW European



1.1% Southern European
0.4% Eastern European
0.1% Finnish (only two samples)



That adds up to 97.7%. The remainder consists of Broadly European, Unassigned, and "others" at very low percentage: Middle Eastern & North African, East Asian & Native American, Ashkenazi, Yakut, West African, Sub Saharan African, West African.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13453&d=1483567775

A Norfolk L-M20
01-04-2017, 11:39 PM
A few things to note.

It's difficult to find many samples with a researched and recorded English ancestry that does not include some other British or Irish admixture in recent family history.

Most known admixture is indeed Irish or other British. A few mentions of distant German, Huguenot, and French.

All 18 cases had a percentage of French & German, varying from 5.8 to 27% (mine was the highest).

All 18 cases had a percentage of Scandinavian, varying from 0.6 to 12.4%

15 out of 18 of the samples had a small percentage of Southern European.

Finnish turned up in small percentages in four samples.

That appears to be "English" on 23andMe.

sktibo
01-19-2017, 10:11 PM
Thanks for compiling this, is the East Anglian at 36% b&i a relative of yours or one that you found?
It's a bit confusing to see your numbers along with these other samples. I don't think it's uncommon for someone born outside England to fit in close to the average and yet you appear to be on the extremities. Did you draw any new ideas or theories on this? I can't help but think that all roads lead to living DNA results, and that Jan 27 still seems terribly far away

ADW_1981
01-19-2017, 10:23 PM
Maybe the 0.1 Finnish are me and my dad...
If ours are not in the data set, I can happily PM ours to you to compile.

Calas
01-20-2017, 09:44 AM
You'd need more samples but it looks like this could be perceived as how immigrants [Huguenots, Jews, etc.] influenced English regions.

Is it possible to get a geographical idea? Example if a person's ancestry is 80% Midlands. Be interesting if there's much difference.





All 18 cases had a percentage of French & German, varying from 5.8 to 27% (mine was the highest).

But yours is particularly interesting given as you're perceived by 23&me as more French & German than the person with a known German ancestor. Who is the other East Anglian? A relative of yours?

A Norfolk L-M20
01-22-2017, 01:17 PM
36% B&I was indeed my mother. I actually struggled to find English samples with no known family history of Irish, Scottish, etc. Hence I felt justified allowing my own and my mother's results in there.

Judith
01-22-2017, 01:35 PM
Do you want to include mine (see below). I am only a bit Scottish (which bit may be original Irish) but the Shropshire Cheshire is close to Wales.
In spec mode, all in % mostly ignoring decimals
62 B/I
12 French German
4 Scandinavian
0.4 Finn
20 broad NW European
0.1 North African. It is all a bit more about ancient roots of the UK than recent ancestry

edit Tut! I think that might be already in your table, now i have zoomed in. Or i have a cousin?

JohnHowellsTyrfro
01-22-2017, 05:06 PM
I've had Finnish, Ashkenazi and small amounts on Native American on a few tests. In some instances from what I've been told we may need to think of this as "similar to" (shared origins).
I would think in border counties like Herefordshire you would get much more "Welsh" probably reflecting early ancestry as well as recent, but that's "where does England stop and Wales begin"? :)
Difficult to know how accurate terms like "German" and "Scandinavian" are, remembering I had something like 40% Scandinavian on one calculator? John

Calas
01-22-2017, 06:10 PM
I actually struggled to find English samples with no known family history of Irish, Scottish, etc. Hence I felt justified allowing my own and my mother's results in there.

Makes sense though. England, Scotland, Wales & Ireland are but a stone throw away from one another.


I've got quite a bit of English ancestry but at the same time possibly a bit too much Irish, Scottish and a little Welsh for your criteria. However, just in case.


British & Irish - 79.2%
French & German - 3.5%
Scandinavian - 0.3%
Broad NW - 11.7%
South E. - 1.6%
Iberian - 1.4%
Finn - 1.2%
Ashkenazi 0.4%
Broad European 0.5%
North African 0.1%

A Norfolk L-M20
01-22-2017, 06:19 PM
Makes sense though. England, Scotland, Wales & Ireland are but a stone throw away from one another.


I've got quite a bit of English ancestry but at the same time possibly a bit too much Irish, Scottish and a little Welsh for your criteria. However, just in case.


British & Irish - 79.2%
French & German - 3.5%
Scandinavian - 0.3%
Broad NW - 11.7%
South E. - 1.6%
Iberian - 1.4%
Finn - 1.2%
Ashkenazi 0.4%
Broad European 0.5%
North African 0.1%

A lot of movement from Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, into England, over the past 300 years or so. My own kids are "25% Irish", and a large number of English have an Irish, Welsh, or Scottish ancestor within their known family history. The Irish in particular, moved here in large numbers during the 19th and 20th Centuries:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_migration_to_Great_Britain#19th_century_onwa rds

Calas
01-22-2017, 08:21 PM
A lot of movement from Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, into England, over the past 300 years or so. My own kids are "25% Irish", and a large number of English have an Irish, Welsh, or Scottish ancestor within their known family history. The Irish in particular, moved here in large numbers during the 19th and 20th Centuries:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_migration_to_Great_Britain#19th_century_onwa rds

And prior to that it'd have been the reverse. The "Planting" of Ulster, for example, during the 1600s. Cromwell and his followers were well known to have sent English Royalists, the so called "criminals" that opposed him, to Ireland. While those favored by Cromwell, or saw advantages in the turmoil, did take up Irish land where possible.

There is, after all, a number of "Irish" surnames with probable Scottish or English roots.

Oathsworn
01-22-2017, 11:46 PM
I'm certainly not typically English, due to being 7/8ths English and 1/8th Polish but here are my 23andme results.

Standard estimate.

99.5%
European

Northwestern European

18.8%
British & Irish

2.3%
Scandinavian

1.8%
French & German

65.3%
Broadly Northwestern European

1.0%
Eastern European

10.2%
Broadly European

< 0.1%
Middle Eastern & North African

< 0.1%
Broadly Middle Eastern & North African

0.4%
Unassigned

100% Oathsworn

A Norfolk L-M20
03-22-2017, 06:25 PM
My 23 results and others are often described as being atypical for being a Brit with low in British/Irish/British Isles percentages. My B&I before phasing in spec mode was 32%, my mother's 35%, and mine after phasing increased to 37%. I've accepted that my auDNA is atypical, but recently I came across a distant DNA match with another Norfolk / East Anglian tester. We didn't find a paper connection, but I was interested to see their 23 results:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14448&d=1489080454

So similar to mine and my mothers. So perhaps my results are not so atypical for an East Anglian Norfolk tester?

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14666&d=1490207040

Calas
04-03-2017, 11:21 AM
I thought that I'd take a fresh look at a 10 month long discussion on the 23andMe OE forum. I selected 20 samples listed in the discussion, but rejected two for insufficient data. Finding English samples with no family history of recent admixture was difficult, so this could be said to represent "mostly English", most commonly with some other known British or Irish admixture - Irish, Scottish, Welsh, or Cornish.

58% British & Irish
12% French & German
4% Scandinavian
22% Broadly NW European




Though this person isn't entirely English I thought it a good example of how misleading/skewed 23&me's ethnicity results can be. He is American. I found him on another forum. His British ancestry is working, rural & his American ancestry is old settler ancestry, was similarly mostly rural and didn't move around a lot. His ancestry is as follows:

Paternal > Midlander (in & around Sheffield mostly) x French Canadian [one Irish great-grandparent] > includes a little recent mid-1800s French migrants
Maternal > Southern Brit (rural, east & west about even) x New England Settler [predominantly German, Ulster-Scot, Swiss, Swede, Dutch, Austrian, and some Eastern European (Polish)] > includes a little recent mid-1800s Swiss-German migrants


British & Irish 65.1%
French & German 6.6%
Scandinavian 2.7%
Broadly NW European 22.5%



http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13453&d=1483567775

Looking at A Norfolk's chart he falls somewhere in the middle grounds of the average British person. Look at number #6, 7, 8 as well as 3rd and 2nd from bottom.

A Norfolk L-M20
04-03-2017, 11:27 AM
Looking at A Norfolk's chart he falls somewhere in the middle grounds of the average British person. Look at number #6, 7, 8 as well as 3rd and 2nd from bottom.

Steady Calas, you should know better. Typical for English, not British. Include the Scottish, and Welsh and the average B&I would most likely raise, while the Continental and Broadly NW European may well reduce.

Calas
04-15-2017, 12:30 AM
I thought that I'd take a fresh look at a 10 month long discussion on the 23andMe OE forum. I selected 20 samples listed in the discussion, but rejected two for insufficient data.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13453&d=1483567775


Question. Seeing as you have southwest & southeast English would you like southcentral English? A little distant Welsh.

B&I 72.8%
Scan 1.5%
F&G 7.9%
Broad NW 14.2%
S. Europe 0.5%
E. European 0.0%
Finnish 0.0%
Middle Eastern & North African 0.5% > Middle Eastern
South Asian 2.6%

Dorsetshireman
04-22-2017, 09:26 PM
Interesting, my own results line up with this. While I have some known German ancestry, a great grandfather to be exact, 23andme over-predicts my 'French & German' by a full 1/8 on speculative mode, putting me at 25.4% French & German. Your typical English person having about 12% French & German makes up the difference perfect. I score just 40.1% British on speculative mode, 3.1% on conservative!

Judith
04-25-2017, 09:01 PM
Welcome to the forum Dorsetshireman!

Dorsetshireman
04-26-2017, 01:53 PM
Thank you! I found myself lurking enough here that I thought I might as well get it over with and make an account.

raschau
06-09-2017, 05:35 PM
More than half of my ancestry is English and Scottish, at least 60% combined, and my results aren't too far off with German and Croatian in the mix:

British and Irish: 35.0%. French and German: 16.9%. Scandinavian: 1.7%. Broadly Northwestern European: 30.7%.

Eastern European: 2.9%.
Southern European: 2.3%.
Sardinian: 0.4%.

Broadly Southern European: 1.9%.
Broadly European: 10.2%.

Cornella
06-17-2017, 05:43 PM
Could you link me to the discussion, or to somewhere I can see fairly large numbers of British 23andMe results?

NewAlbion
06-17-2017, 11:47 PM
I thought that I'd take a fresh look at a 10 month long discussion on the 23andMe OE forum. I selected 20 samples listed in the discussion, but rejected two for insufficient data. Finding English samples with no family history of recent admixture was difficult, so this could be said to represent "mostly English", most commonly with some other known British or Irish admixture - Irish, Scottish, Welsh, or Cornish.

This was my finding:

23andMe in Speculative Mode

An Average English Result.


58% British & Irish
12% French & German
4% Scandinavian
22% Broadly NW European



1.1% Southern European
0.4% Eastern European
0.1% Finnish (only two samples)



That adds up to 97.7%. The remainder consists of Broadly European, Unassigned, and "others" at very low percentage: Middle Eastern & North African, East Asian & Native American, Ashkenazi, Yakut, West African, Sub Saharan African, West African.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13453&d=1483567775

I think the two samples that have Finnsh are probably northern English or have some Scottish ancestry.

BTW, I think 23andme is probably more accurate than other commercial companies but it comes at the cost of vagueness. French&German and B&I are too vague for me that it is why I won't shell out the cash to get tested with them. They should at least separate Ireland, Wales, and Scotland from England and that should definitely be possible. The only Celtic nation that would be difficult to differentiate would be Cornwall. French and German should be easy to differentiate outside of northeast France too. At least AncestryDNA and myheritage tell me I am 37% British/English and 40% English respectively. Myheritage, once out of beta, may adjust my other results to be more inline with my AncestryDNA results.

sktibo
06-18-2017, 01:17 AM
I think the two samples that have Finnsh are probably northern English or have some Scottish ancestry.

BTW, I think 23andme is probably more accurate than other commercial companies but it comes at the cost of vagueness. French&German and B&I are too vague for me that it is why I won't shell out the cash to get tested with them. They should at least separate Ireland, Wales, and Scotland from England and that should definitely be possible. The only Celtic nation that would be difficult to differentiate would be Cornwall. French and German should be easy to differentiate outside of northeast France too. At least AncestryDNA and myheritage tell me I am 37% British/English and 40% English respectively. Myheritage, once out of beta, may adjust my other results to be more inline with my AncestryDNA results.

It's actually not so simple to separate Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales. First we have the problem of Wales, which despite what many people think actually appears to cluster with England rather than Scotland and Ireland - this can be seen on the Irish traveller DNA PCA graph (well, shows it as separated from Scot and Ire by England.. I suspect Wales should really be its own category altogether, but Wales is closer to England than it is to Scotland and Ireland), and also Living DNA's test places England and Wales in a broad category together while Scotland and Ireland are paired together. Another example of this can be seen in this presentation from the WDYTYA [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGUhMs0Ttls ] where it shows England and Wales sharing a closer genetic connection than Scotland and Ireland. IMO one of the problems with myheritage is that it tries to group Wales in with Scotland and Ireland and I don't think this is correct.. This could be one of the reasons why we see people with primarily English ancestry falling entirely into the I/S/W category on myheritage. Of course, being in beta and having other issues who knows why this might be for sure.
I don't think its correct to say that Cornwall is especially difficult to differentiate from the rest of the British Isles, there have been quite a few DNA samples collected from people with solid heritage from this region and the POBI showed it to be rather distinct. Scotland, for example, might actually be more problematic to differentiate because there's such a variety of genetic regions within it. The Scottish Lowlands are especially problematic as they don't appear to cleanly separate from Northern England. On the other end of the spectrum, the Hebrides and Western Scotland are very close to Ireland.
So to state that "They should at least separate Ireland, Wales, and Scotland from England and that should definitely be possible" isn't really fair. This is an incredibly complex task, especially considering all of these regions have quite a lot of DNA in common. Do you have a living DNA test in the works? They are the specialists when it comes to separating Scotland, Ireland, and Wales from England.
As for 23andme, it can be used to tell apart Scottish, Irish, English, ect, based on the percentage of "Britain and Ireland" it assigns. As we can see from the data Norfolk has collected, English people average in the 50% range. The Irish are often in the range of 90-100%, and from what I've seen the Scottish are often in the 80-90% range. Of course this doesn't help much for people who are highly mixed, but it is a good clean category which can tell an individual around about what their Insular DNA (probably reflective of Bell Beaker if we look far enough down that rabbit hole) is.
Of course for some people, ancestry and myheritage do a good job, but they aren't consistent enough for us to say that they will always do so. 23andme is consistent.
A friend of mine who has tested at ancestry and transferred his results to myheritage makes for an interesting example: he is 12.5% Scandinavian, about 24% Scottish, and the rest (about 63.5%) is English. AncestryDNA gave him 88% Great Britain 6% Ireland and 0% Scandinavian. Myheritage gives him 36% Scandinavian, 21% Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and 20% English. Neither are very good. Ancestry doesn't give him enough "Ireland" or any Scandinavian, but does an OK job on English, while myheritage gives him way too much Scandinavian, nowhere near enough English, but does a pretty good job on his Scottish. I think his results show how these two tests don't do an adequate job of separating his English from his Scottish, one comes close on English, and misses entirely on Scottish, while the other comes close on Scottish and misses entirely on English. The number of good DNA samples needed to reliably separate these two countries is much greater than any DNA test currently on the market has.

16986

16987

Here are two graphs showing the relationship between England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and Orkney. Note how England is in the middle, and Wales is on one side of England while Scotland and Ireland fall on the other.

NewAlbion
06-18-2017, 01:49 AM
It's actually not so simple to separate Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales. First we have the problem of Wales, which despite what many people think actually appears to cluster with England rather than Scotland and Ireland - this can be seen on the Irish traveller DNA PCA graph (well, shows it as separated from Scot and Ire by England.. I suspect Wales should really be its own category altogether, but Wales is closer to England than it is to Scotland and Ireland), and also Living DNA's test places England and Wales in a broad category together while Scotland and Ireland are paired together. Another example of this can be seen in this presentation from the WDYTYA [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGUhMs0Ttls ] where it shows England and Wales sharing a closer genetic connection than Scotland and Ireland. IMO one of the problems with myheritage is that it tries to group Wales in with Scotland and Ireland and I don't think this is correct.. This could be one of the reasons why we see people with primarily English ancestry falling entirely into the I/S/W category on myheritage. Of course, being in beta and having other issues who knows why this might be for sure.
I don't think its correct to say that Cornwall is especially difficult to differentiate from the rest of the British Isles, there have been quite a few DNA samples collected from people with solid heritage from this region and the POBI showed it to be rather distinct. Scotland, for example, might actually be more problematic to differentiate because there's such a variety of genetic regions within it. The Scottish Lowlands are especially problematic as they don't appear to cleanly separate from Northern England. On the other end of the spectrum, the Hebrides and Western Scotland are very close to Ireland.
So to state that "They should at least separate Ireland, Wales, and Scotland from England and that should definitely be possible" isn't really fair. This is an incredibly complex task, especially considering all of these regions have quite a lot of DNA in common. Do you have a living DNA test in the works? They are the specialists when it comes to separating Scotland, Ireland, and Wales from England.
As for 23andme, it can be used to tell apart Scottish, Irish, English, ect, based on the percentage of "Britain and Ireland" it assigns. As we can see from the data Norfolk has collected, English people average in the 50% range. The Irish are often in the range of 90-100%, and from what I've seen the Scottish are often in the 80-90% range. Of course this doesn't help much for people who are highly mixed, but it is a good clean category which can tell an individual around about what their Insular DNA (probably reflective of Bell Beaker if we look far enough down that rabbit hole) is.
Of course for some people, ancestry and myheritage do a good job, but they aren't consistent enough for us to say that they will always do so. 23andme is consistent.
A friend of mine who has tested at ancestry and transferred his results to myheritage makes for an interesting example: he is 12.5% Scandinavian, about 24% Scottish, and the rest (about 63.5%) is English. AncestryDNA gave him 88% Great Britain 6% Ireland and 0% Scandinavian. Myheritage gives him 36% Scandinavian, 21% Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and 20% English. Neither are very good. Ancestry doesn't give him enough "Ireland" or any Scandinavian, but does an OK job on English, while myheritage gives him way too much Scandinavian, nowhere near enough English, but does a pretty good job on his Scottish. I think his results show how these two tests don't do an adequate job of separating his English from his Scottish, one comes close on English, and misses entirely on Scottish, while the other comes close on Scottish and misses entirely on English. The number of good DNA samples needed to reliably separate these two countries is much greater than any DNA test currently on the market has.

16986

16987

I am not sure everything you said is true but I just wanted to point out by differentiate I meant Cornwall clusters closer to England than Wales. In terms of clustering with the English it is probably in this order : 1.) Cornwall 2.) Wales 3.) Scotland etc.... You are probably right about more samples needed but I think it is possible to distinguish the mainland Scots from the English as they are about halfway between the native Welsh/Irish and the English /Germanics. It should be possible to distinguish the Orcadians and northeast Scottish too

Anyway, if AncestryDNA is right I would score 89% B&I which is Scottish range. I don't have a living DNA sample in the mix. I don't think I am too highly mixed I am 75% British isles and 25% Alsace-lorraine ( which similar to the Palatine Germans, in Northern Ireland, or the French Huguenots in the British isles).

sktibo
06-18-2017, 02:16 AM
I am not sure everything you said is true but I just wanted to point out by differentiate I meant Cornwall clusters closer to England than Wales. In terms of clustering with the English it is probably in this order : 1.) Cornwall 2.) Wales 3.) Scotland etc.... You are probably right about more samples needed but I think it is possible to distinguish the mainland Scots from the English as they are about halfway between the native Welsh/Irish and the English /Germanics. It should be possible to distinguish the Orcadians and northeast Scottish too

Anyway, if AncestryDNA is right I would score 89% B&I which is Scottish range. I don't have a living DNA sample in the mix. I don't think I am too highly mixed I am 75% British isles and 25% Alsace-lorraine ( which similar to the Palatine Germans, in Northern Ireland, or the French Huguenots in the British isles).

It is good to be skeptical, but the points I was trying to make to you were that

1. Wales, Ireland, and Scotland together are a bad combination for a single category - as shown in the graphs I attached.
2. myheritage and ancestry don't reliably split "Celtic" from "English" for everyone
3. The British Isles are a complex genetic region, thankfully we have some insight into this with the POBI, which is where I got the information about the Scottish regions I was discussing.
Some of the POBI information is available here: [ http://www.peopleofthebritishisles.org/nl6.pdf ]

Yes I agree that England clusters with 1. Cornwall 2. Wales 3. Scotland in that order (Borders excluded ofc)

These aren't my ideas. This is information I have gathered from studies on the matter (#2 excluded, I went through the myheritage thread and asked people about their British and Irish/Scottish percentages and how it lined up with their known ancestry), so if you do not believe me, perhaps you will consider the original source.

NewAlbion
06-18-2017, 03:18 AM
It is good to be skeptical, but the points I was trying to make to you were that

1. Wales, Ireland, and Scotland together are a bad combination for a single category - as shown in the graphs I attached.
2. myheritage and ancestry don't reliably split "Celtic" from "English" for everyone
3. The British Isles are a complex genetic region, thankfully we have some insight into this with the POBI, which is where I got the information about the Scottish regions I was discussing.
Some of the POBI information is available here: [ http://www.peopleofthebritishisles.org/nl6.pdf ]

Yes I agree that England clusters with 1. Cornwall 2. Wales 3. Scotland in that order

These aren't my ideas. This is information I have gathered from studies on the matter (#2 excluded, I went through the myheritage thread and asked people about their British and Irish/Scottish percentages and how it lined up with their known ancestry), so if you do not believe me, perhaps you will consider the original source.

Actually, sorry to Norfolk, for going off topic here but what I find interesting about the second picture, you attached, is that the Ulster samples cluster with Scotland. Do you know if those samples came from northern Ireland ?

sktibo
06-18-2017, 03:22 AM
Actually, sorry to Norfolk, for going off topic here but what I find interesting about the second picture, you attached, is that the Ulster samples cluster with Scotland. Do you know if those samples came from northern Ireland ?

It's a bit hard to see but there are two categories, Ulster 12 and Ulster 13. Ulster 13 clusters with Scotland, yes I believe those would have come from Northern Ireland

I also want to add about comparing 23andme to ancestry that my combined British and Irish for AncestryDNA is 79% vs 52.7% B&I in 23andme, so they're quite different. While I would encourage you (or anyone I'm able to) to buy 23andme's ancestry test, I'll admit I would be much more interested to see how Living DNA would categorize you.

mnd
03-25-2018, 01:34 AM
Wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll just leave it here - it might be of use to some, or perhaps someone with more knowledge of English results can weigh in.

These results belong to a friend of mine whose paternal line is from Walsall (historically Staffordshire) and maternal line from Nuneaton, Warwickshire. He doesn't know of any recent non-English ancestry, though admittedly can't trace his ancestry back very far. I would say his results looks fairly typical, except for the high Scandinavian and inverted Scandinavian/French-German percentages (most English people seem to have substantially higher percentages of the latter).

22304

Judith
03-25-2018, 02:05 PM
Wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll just leave it here - it might be of use to some, or perhaps someone with more knowledge of English results can weigh in.

These results belong to a friend of mine whose paternal line is from Walsall (historically Staffordshire) and maternal line from Nuneaton, Warwickshire. He doesn't know of any recent non-English ancestry, though admittedly can't trace his ancestry back very far. I would say his results looks fairly typical, except for the high Scandinavian and inverted Scandinavian/French-German percentages (most English people seem to have substantially higher percentages of the latter).

22304
His look very similar to those of my family: Midlands and northern England do seem to have less French German similarities and more Scandinavia not unsurprising given the geography and where the Scandinavian migrants settled compared to the Saxon. Plus there is bidirectional movement across the English Channel between southern England and France in historic (and previous) periods

Barellalee
03-27-2018, 10:02 AM
My dad is from Yorkshire. His father from Yorkshire was of completely English Ancestry, back to the Middle Ages (Yorkshire, Durham, Lancashire, Northumberland, Cumbria). With available records back to the Middle Ages, His Mother was of about 60% English Ancestry (Yorkshire, Durham, Norfolk) with about 40% Anglo-French roots from Medieval Normandy and Picardy and a fraction of Scoto-Norman (Normans of Medieval Scotland). My dad's Y-DNA, through the Ethnic English Brooks line in Yorkshire, is I2a1-L233, a tiny Haplogroup of Northwestern Europe and the Isles, which was carried over by the Anglo-Saxons. His Autosomal results are roughly majority Broadly Northwest European, 35% French German, 22% British Irish, 4% Iberian, and small amounts of Scandinavian and Broadly European. Therein, it appears to me that his ethnically English background was predominantly Anglo Saxon, with a decent amount of native Briton. The iberian shows up on all tests but we don't know why yet. It's in my results as 2%, one huge Segment on my Chromosome # 8. There are three small Autosomal IBD matches to the Amsterdam area of Holland. I don't have any known Dutch Ancestors in my tree, but there assuredly are at least one. My GG Grandfather was from Norwich, England, a Port City that was at least 1/3 Dutch Immigrant several Centuries ago.

JFWinstone
03-27-2018, 01:08 PM
My dad is 7/8 Southern English and 1/8 North Dutch, he got 61.3% British & Irish, 12.7% French and German, 8.3% Scandinavian, 17.2% Broadly Northwestern European and <0.1% West African.

mnd
07-25-2019, 07:03 PM
Wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll just leave it here - it might be of use to some, or perhaps someone with more knowledge of English results can weigh in.

These results belong to a friend of mine whose paternal line is from Walsall (historically Staffordshire) and maternal line from Nuneaton, Warwickshire. He doesn't know of any recent non-English ancestry, though admittedly can't trace his ancestry back very far. I would say his results looks fairly typical, except for the high Scandinavian and inverted Scandinavian/French-German percentages (most English people seem to have substantially higher percentages of the latter).

22304
Any other English people who have results to compare (especially from the Midlands)? These are his results after the beta update:
31994

aafusc2988
07-29-2019, 02:17 PM
I fit right in with these findings based on my new Beta results. American from the Southeast.

32059

Ormsworm
12-08-2019, 10:56 AM
My results seem more northern influenced than most English, which surprised me as I’m Welsh - however , my paternal grandfather is from a small village in Cumbria (with lots of Viking history apparently - there is a church with runic inscriptions from back in the day)

Im also I p109 paternal haplogroup (from this side)

99,9 european
68,4 BI
13,3 FG
6,2 Scan
12,0 Broadly NW
0,1 Central Asian

jadegreg
01-20-2020, 09:19 AM
Any other English people who have results to compare (especially from the Midlands)? These are his results after the beta update:
31994

These are my good friends results. Has over 90% of his ancestry in and around the 'Black Country'.

35964

jadegreg
01-20-2020, 09:37 AM
Haven't looked at my ancestry breakdown on 23&me, since before the Beta update. I was shocked to find my B & I dropped 9.0%. My ancestry, according to paper record, is 100% British (12.5% Welsh), up until my sixth great grandparents (where some French, a Romani and a Sephardic Jewish name comes in), although 75% of my ancestry is from the South East so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised, (although my sister did only drop 4 %)

35965

Anyone else get a big drop or shock increase in ancestry breakdown after the beta update?

Seabass
01-20-2020, 09:55 AM
These are my dad's current results. He had < 1% Spanish and Portuguese before the update like seemingly some other English customers. He is English, half East-Anglian (Suffolk, Cambridgeshire) and half Northern English (Northumberland, Cumbria, Durham, distant Scottish)

35966

jadegreg
01-20-2020, 04:57 PM
.....And here's my sisters. Obviously goes without saying same paper trail as me (75% SE England, 12.5% Devon/Cornwall and 12.5% SW Wales)


35972

JonikW
01-21-2020, 12:04 AM
.....And here's my sisters. Obviously goes without saying same paper trail as me (75% SE England, 12.5% Devon/Cornwall and 12.5% SW Wales)


35972

Your sister's doesn't open for me. Can you take a look?

Ayetooey
01-21-2020, 12:17 AM
SE English relatives of mine seem to score between 50-60% British only; whilst Scottish relatives I've got are like 90+% British/Irish. Seems weird that English especially southern English score less British than other British isles groups and more French/German since theoretically there should be reference pops for each individual nation and region within the British/irish component, so all should score close to 100% assuming there is no recent foreign admixture. But clearly the reference pop is straight up broken if English are scoring as low as 50% British, and Irish/Scottish up to 100%. I'll post my mums results once hers come through hopefully in a few weeks.

JMcB
01-21-2020, 01:03 AM
Haven't looked at my ancestry breakdown on 23&me, since before the Beta update. I was shocked to find my B & I dropped 9.0%. My ancestry, according to paper record, is 100% British (12.5% Welsh), up until my sixth great grandparents (where some French, a Romani and a Sephardic Jewish name comes in), although 75% of my ancestry is from the South East so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised, (although my sister did only drop 4 %)

35965

Anyone else get a big drop or shock increase in ancestry breakdown after the beta update?


My British & Irish dropped about 10% after the beta update. It was already 20% too low to begin with but I see my results are in the same range as some of the others posting here. So I guess it’s par for the course for them.


European 99.7%

Northwestern European
95.6%

British & Irish
55.9%

Greater London, United Kingdom
County Donegal, Ireland
+18 regions

French & German
27.7%

Hamburg, Germany

Scandinavian
6.5%


Broadly Northwestern European
5.5%

Southern European
2.1%

Italian
1.8%

Sicily, Italy
+2 regions

Broadly Southern European
0.3%

Broadly European
2.0%

Trace Ancestry
0.2%


Unassigned
0.1%

jadegreg
01-21-2020, 06:11 PM
Let me try that again. Here are my sisters results.......

35978

Aiden
01-21-2020, 07:47 PM
Seems weird that English especially southern English score less British than other British isles groups and more French/German

Not weird at all

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/18/genetic-study-30-percent-white-british-dna-german-ancestry

JonikW
01-21-2020, 08:01 PM
Let me try that again. Here are my sisters results.......

35978

Interesting that your sister gets actual regions within both France and Germany. Only my Dad gets a location (in France) out of testers in my British family. Otherwise we all just have the typical chunks of French & German.

Ayetooey
01-21-2020, 08:22 PM
Not weird at all

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/18/genetic-study-30-percent-white-british-dna-german-ancestry

You misunderstand me. When 23andme runs your test kit against their data base, they are running you against their reference populations and your ethnic composition is calculated based on IBD (Identity by descent). The British/Irish region has reference populations from Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales, with further reference populations from each county. So someone who is 100% English, from the south east of england, with no recent foreign ancestry (last 300 years I believe 23andme states) should score 95-100% British, since they should match the English reference population for the region of the country they originate from. If people who are 100% English with no recent foreign ancestry are only scoring 50% English, something is wrong with the reference population. It means Said English people are only 50% similar in terms of IBD to the English reference population which is available.

If the intention was to break up our ancestry based on ancient composition, we wouldn't have all of these modern reference populations. Irish have heavy amounts of Norse Scandanavian admix, they have Hallstatt celtic admixture from Iron age settlements, yet it isn't uncommon for Irish to score 95-100% Irish on 23andme, because they actually have a good reference population within the 23andme data bank.

Ruderico
01-21-2020, 08:53 PM
Irish have heavy amounts of Norse Scandanavian admix, they have Hallstatt celtic admixture from Iron age settlements

Isn't this highly speculatory? I'm not aware of any "Hallstatt celtic admixture from Iron age settlements" in Ireland. Not to mention Anglo-Saxons were effectively Scandinavians themselves, and never got to Ireland. Very few populations score 100% something, Iberians regularly score 70% S&P without having any known foreign ancestor themselves. It's really hard to distinguish different NW Europeans because they share so much DNA

JMcB
01-21-2020, 09:25 PM
I wouldn’t say the Irish have heavy amounts of Norse ancestry. According to: The genetic landscape of Scotland and the Isles. They have approximately 7%.

We estimate that Norwegian (as well as Danish/Swedish) ancestry is also markedly low in Ireland (average 7%) compared with previous estimates.

[…]

Our estimates of Norwegian ancestry in Ireland contrast starkly with previous estimates (4, 8, 9) which were much higher. While methodologies overlap and are related, we include British references in our analyses. With British and Scandinavian references, we find agreement across both ADMIXTURE and the haplotype-based methods, which employ subtly different marker information—either allele frequencies or haplotypes. Our estimates are also in better accord with Irish Y-chromosome data, which show little trace of Norse patrilineal ancestry in the modern Irish


https://www.pnas.org/highwire/powerpoint/888840


https://www.pnas.org/content/116/38/19064

Ayetooey
01-21-2020, 10:08 PM
Isn't this highly speculatory? I'm not aware of any "Hallstatt celtic admixture from Iron age settlements" in Ireland. Not to mention Anglo-Saxons were effectively Scandinavians themselves, and never got to Ireland. Very few populations score 100% something, Iberians regularly score 70% S&P without having any known foreign ancestor themselves. It's really hard to distinguish different NW Europeans because they share so much DNA

Irish often score 100% Irish on ancestry dna, and close enough to 100% on 23andme. I'm sure the Irish do have some admix from Continental celts, probably very minor but they didn't begin speaking celtic by magic lamp. Haplogroups like U152 have a small presence in Ireland.

Ayetooey
01-21-2020, 10:12 PM
I wouldn’t say the Irish have heavy amounts of Norse ancestry. According to: The genetic landscape of Scotland and the Isles. They have approximately 7%.

We estimate that Norwegian (as well as Danish/Swedish) ancestry is also markedly low in Ireland (average 7%) compared with previous estimates.

[…]

Our estimates of Norwegian ancestry in Ireland contrast starkly with previous estimates (4, 8, 9) which were much higher. While methodologies overlap and are related, we include British references in our analyses. With British and Scandinavian references, we find agreement across both ADMIXTURE and the haplotype-based methods, which employ subtly different marker information—either allele frequencies or haplotypes. Our estimates are also in better accord with Irish Y-chromosome data, which show little trace of Norse patrilineal ancestry in the modern Irish


https://www.pnas.org/highwire/powerpoint/888840


https://www.pnas.org/content/116/38/19064

Other estimates I've seen place it higher than 7%, like the The Irish DNA Atlas which claims there is an upper limit of 20%. My point was more about the English reference population anyway, I just used Irish as a random example.

JoeyP37
01-22-2020, 12:36 AM
I think it's awesome that I score more British and Irish than people who actually live in England. I am at 61.2%, with the strongest region-that I have actual ancestors from-being Lancashire. Very little of my English comes from the south-eastern quarter where people get less British and Irish and more French and German; it is mostly Midland, Lancashire, Yorkshire, and West Country.

Ruderico
01-22-2020, 09:08 AM
Irish often score 100% Irish on ancestry dna, and close enough to 100% on 23andme. I'm sure the Irish do have some admix from Continental celts, probably very minor but they didn't begin speaking celtic by magic lamp. Haplogroups like U152 have a small presence in Ireland.

No one knows when nor how Celtic got to Ireland - although I'm not aware of Hallstatt settlements there - but the point is that it's pretty hard to disentangle shared DNA in NW Europe. Out of the populations of the British Isles (sorry for the expression, Irishmen) the Irish are the ones who share the least with the continent, so seeing English testers scoring less B&I than the Irish, and more F&G, is what I'd expect to see. In Iberia it's the Basques who score close to 100% S&P, other Spaniards and the Portuguese generally score between 70-80% (higher in the north, although I've seen individuals with ~65%) even those who haven't found a single foreign ancestor in their genealogical tree, the rest is Italian, NW Euro and a bunch of "broadly this, broadly that"

jadegreg
01-22-2020, 10:07 AM
SE English relatives of mine seem to score between 50-60% British only; whilst Scottish relatives I've got are like 90+% British/Irish. Seems weird that English especially southern English score less British than other British isles groups and more French/German since theoretically there should be reference pops for each individual nation and region within the British/irish component, so all should score close to 100% assuming there is no recent foreign admixture. But clearly the reference pop is straight up broken if English are scoring as low as 50% British, and Irish/Scottish up to 100%. I'll post my mums results once hers come through hopefully in a few weeks.

I do know what you mean, but I suppose it all depends on how 23 & me assigns its ethnicity groupings. In my case, my genealogy may well be 100% born in Britain (upto the 10th GG) according to the paper trail, but I must have the 'markers' that 23 & me assign to French & German. This does not preclude the fact that I may have other markers that may suggest that these 'French & German' Markers belong to the British and Irish branch of the family, it's just that 23 & me does not cover or know about these genetic contexts. We really are at the mercy of the chip technology and these limited testing protocols...........

But I generally agree with Ruderico, that there would be a cline from the SE to the NW in Britain, with respect to transitioning to from F & G to B & I.

jadegreg
01-22-2020, 10:10 AM
Interesting that your sister gets actual regions within both France and Germany. Only my Dad gets a location (in France) out of testers in my British family. Otherwise we all just have the typical chunks of French & German.

Yes it is, given that we have no recorded ancestry from these regions. I also had regions in the Netherlands and Brittany until the last update came in

JonikW
01-22-2020, 11:05 AM
Yes it is, given that we have no recorded ancestry from these regions. I also had regions in the Netherlands and Brittany until the last update came in

Thanks for the info. My Dad's region likewise doesn't reflect anything in our recent tree.

Ayetooey
01-22-2020, 06:19 PM
No one knows when nor how Celtic got to Ireland - although I'm not aware of Hallstatt settlements there - but the point is that it's pretty hard to disentangle shared DNA in NW Europe. Out of the populations of the British Isles (sorry for the expression, Irishmen) the Irish are the ones who share the least with the continent, so seeing English testers scoring less B&I than the Irish, and more F&G, is what I'd expect to see. In Iberia it's the Basques who score close to 100% S&P, other Spaniards and the Portuguese generally score between 70-80% (higher in the north, although I've seen individuals with ~65%) even those who haven't found a single foreign ancestor in their genealogical tree, the rest is Italian, NW Euro and a bunch of "broadly this, broadly that"

So why do English relatives of mine on ancestrydna get 90+% English? Or some English I've seen test at FTDNA get 90+% British. Yet on 23andme, 50%. I see no excuses if other companies can manage to crack it, it's a problem with 23andme's reference population/algorithm and 0 to do with the intricacies of English dna IMO. Montenegrins are pretty mixed between diverse populations from the NE and the SE, way more than any other British isles groups who are more or less pure NW, Montenegrins on my relative list get 90+% Balkan etc. I find it very hard to justify the fact that English only score 50% of their own reference population, something is clearly wrong there. Especially since according to 23andme their test goes back "500 years" so it isn't an ancient calc, it's for relatively recent ancestry.

I've seen g25 calcs made in someone's bedroom from home that seem to get it more accurate than a billion dollar company.

Ruderico
01-22-2020, 06:44 PM
That's not a fair point on "being mixed", Montenegrins and Albanians get very high "Balkan" but there's no other reference in 23andme that's as similar (in the sense of having a lot of share DNA) to it than F&G is to B&I. Serbs, etc, get much lower "Balkan" and more "Eastern Euro" for the same reason Brits get "F&G" and Irish basically don't.
On AncestryDNA, I've read about Piedmontese with virtually no Italian. I can't see how anyone could defend that.

G25 is a whole different thing.

Ayetooey
01-22-2020, 06:55 PM
That's not a fair point on "being mixed", Montenegrins and Albanians get very high "Balkan" but there's no other reference in 23andme that's as similar (in the sense of having a lot of share DNA) to it than F&G is to B&I. Serbs, etc, get much lower "Balkan" and more "Eastern Euro" for the same reason Brits get "F&G" and Irish basically don't.
On AncestryDNA, I've read about Piedmontese with virtually no Italian. I can't see how anyone could defend that.

G25 is a whole different thing.

I understand what you're saying. But its more my point that 23andme is referencing us against specific countries in the first place. It's not simply British/irish vs French/German, there's reference populations for individual countries. So an English person from Sussex who matches the English reference population from Sussex should match it well enough to get a high match, certainly higher than "50%". If 23andme advertised itself as an ancient calaculator there'd be no issue, but it's intended for recent ancestry within the last 500 years. I value consistency so to me if someone who is 100% Irish within the last 500 years scores 95%+ British/Irish, the same should go for English. Giving everyone 25% "French/German" when in reality they have no such recent ancestry seems very confusing and makes people look more mixed than they are. They should be scoring that category ideally if they have actual ancestry form there within the last 500 years, which is what is advertised.

Ancestrydna isn't a great test and I do prefer 23andme generally, but it gets the British/Irish reference populations spot on. I've seen Irish score 100% Irish, and English score 90+% English. If an English person scores say 20% French on ancestry, they can know that's probably genuine recent foreign ancestry, the same can't be said for 23andme. Raw data and things like gedmatch/g25 beats all this anyway, but I try and look at things from the perspective of the average customer who isn't as knowledgeable. I know when my mums results come through I'll probably have to really explain she is actually more than 50% British.

Jessie
01-22-2020, 07:04 PM
I agree with Ayetooey and think a lot of this is to do with population panels. I think Irish get such high amounts of British & Irish on 23&Me because they match the reference panel so well. As Ayetooey has said if a Southeastern English is matched against other Southeastern Englishmen why would they not get a high percentage match?

I can compare what my brother and daughter got on 23&M3 compared to LivingDna. Isn't this the result of reference panels?

Daughter's 23&Me Result.

https://i.imgur.com/IdUcwwm.png

LivingDNA Result

https://i.imgur.com/d9QGjIM.png
https://i.imgur.com/5ntQ1Ty.png
https://i.imgur.com/eNKnpNg.png

Brother's 23&Me Result
https://i.imgur.com/pmFq5fB.png

Brother's LivingDNA results
https://i.imgur.com/2zaLntP.png
https://i.imgur.com/Yl66XPj.png

Living DNA had a very small Irish panel and so my relatives obviously didn't match that panel as well as 23&Me's larger panel.

Ruderico
01-22-2020, 07:07 PM
If I'm not mistaken, I think the issue is that 23andme has different reference panels for Ethnic and Regional assignments. If at first you match a certain region, you'll then be matched to its subregions, meaning that if you match B&I your sample will then be matched against their regional references, so someone from Devonshire will get Devonshire first (or not, but let's assume so) however he might only have gotten 65% B&I in the first place. He/she will naturally also match other regions or Britain, presumably regions from which no ancestry is known. This is common for Iberia, and Portugal in specific.

Jessie
01-22-2020, 07:10 PM
If I'm not mistaken, I think the issue is that 23andme has different reference panels for Ethnic and Regional assignments. If at first you match a certain region, you'll then be matched to its subregions, meaning that if you match B&I your sample will then be matched against their regional references, so someone from Devonshire will get Devonshire first (or not, but let's assume so) however he might only have gotten 65% B&I in the first place.

Their regional reference panels are not accurate either. None of my family get the correct Irish regions as our top results and also why do Irish get the British regions as matches in their results also?

Ayetooey
01-22-2020, 07:17 PM
Their regional reference panels are not accurate either. None of my family get the correct Irish regions as our top results and also why do Irish get the British regions as matches in their results also?

On ancestrydna I actually get the two english regions my grandparents are from (Essex, Sussex). On 23andme I get only Essex in my top 10, but ranked number 8 as a weak match and I don't score Sussex at all. I instead get "greater london" as my top match, followed by Glasgow, then a bunch of Northern counties I have no known ancestry from. so I agree something is definitely wrong.

I notice most British seem to score Irish regions also. I don't score any myself but perhaps my mum will.

Jessie
01-22-2020, 07:24 PM
I wouldn’t say the Irish have heavy amounts of Norse ancestry. According to: The genetic landscape of Scotland and the Isles. They have approximately 7%.

We estimate that Norwegian (as well as Danish/Swedish) ancestry is also markedly low in Ireland (average 7%) compared with previous estimates.

[…]

Our estimates of Norwegian ancestry in Ireland contrast starkly with previous estimates (4, 8, 9) which were much higher. While methodologies overlap and are related, we include British references in our analyses. With British and Scandinavian references, we find agreement across both ADMIXTURE and the haplotype-based methods, which employ subtly different marker information—either allele frequencies or haplotypes. Our estimates are also in better accord with Irish Y-chromosome data, which show little trace of Norse patrilineal ancestry in the modern Irish


https://www.pnas.org/highwire/powerpoint/888840


https://www.pnas.org/content/116/38/19064

It does show that these results all depend on their methods and panels. In the IDA they took out all the British and Irish populations to run their admixture whereas in the Scottish study they matched Irish against English, Welsh and Scandinavians. So two different methodologies one without British & Irish populations and one where they just removed the population they were matching. You will naturally get a different breakdown.

msmarjoribanks
01-22-2020, 07:30 PM
So why do English relatives of mine on ancestrydna get 90+% English? Or some English I've seen test at FTDNA get 90+% British. Yet on 23andme, 50%. I see no excuses if other companies can manage to crack it, it's a problem with 23andme's reference population/algorithm and 0 to do with the intricacies of English dna IMO. Montenegrins are pretty mixed between diverse populations from the NE and the SE, way more than any other British isles groups who are more or less pure NW, Montenegrins on my relative list get 90+% Balkan etc. I find it very hard to justify the fact that English only score 50% of their own reference population, something is clearly wrong there. Especially since according to 23andme their test goes back "500 years" so it isn't an ancient calc, it's for relatively recent ancestry.

I've seen g25 calcs made in someone's bedroom from home that seem to get it more accurate than a billion dollar company.

The Ancestry English results are problematic too, just in an opposite way. That's why they had to change the name to England, Wales, and NW Europe. They were including in English too many people with no English ancestry. It's the opposite side of the "can't easily separate people of NW European background" issue that Ruderico was talking about.

Ruderico
01-22-2020, 07:32 PM
Their regional reference panels are not accurate either. None of my family get the correct Irish regions as our top results and also why do Irish get the British regions as matches in their results also?

They are known to be problematic, all Portuguese get Azores first which is naturally silly. 75% of my ancestry is from a region that gets placed 6th, the rest is placed 3rd. But, as far as I know, that's part of a different panel. I don't find the ethnic breakdown silly at all. Not those I'm familiar with, anyway.

jadegreg
01-22-2020, 07:34 PM
If I'm not mistaken, I think the issue is that 23andme has different reference panels for Ethnic and Regional assignments. If at first you match a certain region, you'll then be matched to its subregions, meaning that if you match B&I your sample will then be matched against their regional references, so someone from Devonshire will get Devonshire first (or not, but let's assume so) however he might only have gotten 65% B&I in the first place. He/she will naturally also match other regions or Britain, presumably regions from which no ancestry is known. This is common for Iberia, and Portugal in specific.

I wasn't aware that they actually had reference panels for the subregions. I was under the impression that they represent location density of other users who share aspects of your DNA......I'm probably wrong!


Their regional reference panels are not accurate either. None of my family get the correct Irish regions as our top results and also why do Irish get the British regions as matches in their results also?


Sadly true. No Devon, Wrong part of Wales etc for me. But plenty of locations where I've never had relatives........knowingly

Jessie
01-22-2020, 07:38 PM
They are known to be problematic, all Portuguese get Azores first which is naturally silly. 75% of my ancestry is from a region that gets placed 6th, the rest is placed 3rd. But, as far as I know, that's part of a different panel. I don't find the ethnic breakdown silly at all. Not those I'm familiar with, anyway.

The subregions we have longterm ancestry from are lower on the lists and we all get British regions where we have no known recent ancestry from. So I don't think that can be called accurate. I do however find Ancestry's GC to be surprisingly accurate.

In fact on 23&Me they completely miss the region where my father is from. None of us get it on our list.

msmarjoribanks
01-22-2020, 07:41 PM
On ancestrydna I actually get the two english regions my grandparents are from (Essex, Sussex). On 23andme I get only Essex in my top 10, but ranked number 8 as a weak match and I don't score Sussex at all. I instead get "greater london" as my top match, followed by Glasgow, then a bunch of Northern counties I have no known ancestry from. so I agree something is definitely wrong.

I notice most British seem to score Irish regions also. I don't score any myself but perhaps my mum will.

Maybe someone else knows more, but I thought the specific locations on 23andMe were related to matches somehow.

As I see it there are three levels on 23andMe (beyond the "broadly NW European" types:

Overall region -- for example, B&I or F&G.

Specific subregion -- "highly likely British" or "likely Irish" or "no indication of any other subregion"

Location breakdowns -- Suffolk or Dublin or Berlin or Bavaria.

For me, the regions and subregions aren't perfect (they were slightly better before the update), but are comparable with Ancestry and better than any others.

The location breakdowns (which I am not sure about how they work) are (for me) good for German and (especially) Sweden and terrible (not just for me, but from what I've seen from others) for British and Irish. Part of this could be me (my British ancestry is from all over, including Wales, and my Irish is probably all Ulster and that is weirdly included in British in a breakdown that's political rather than sensible, and so I get a bunch of Irish regions for my "likely Ireland" results but none from Ulster because they are probably outweighed by my other British results). Also, a really high percentage of people seem to get London as their top choice, which is likely because of who moved to London vs where people from London moved.

I don't think 23andMe's location results are anything like as accurate as Ancestry's GCs, but I also don't think they say much about the merits of 23andMe's regional and subregional (as I identified them above) results. I also do think it's cool that they pinpointed where my Swedish gg-grandparents were from, when I don't even get a Swedish GC at Ancestry.

Jessie
01-22-2020, 07:59 PM
Don't people think it is related to the population panels these companies use? I personally think that England needs to be broken down so that people can get better matches. They could have an Irish and West Scottish panel, Eastern Scotland and North English panel, Welsh and Cornish panel and a Southeast English panel on its own. They also should separate places in Europe. Brittany is not similar to Southern France at all. They could have Portugal, Spain and Southern France as one area and Northern France, Belgium and Southern Netherlands possibly as another. I doubt this sort of thing will happen but it is obvious to me that if you have many populations in the one pot then how is someone from Paris going to match a broad category like French & German 100%? Just seems logical to me.

JMcB
01-22-2020, 09:20 PM
It does show that these results all depend on their methods and panels. In the IDA they took out all the British and Irish populations to run their admixture whereas in the Scottish study they matched Irish against English, Welsh and Scandinavians. So two different methodologies one without British & Irish populations and one where they just removed the population they were matching. You will naturally get a different breakdown.

Yes, it certainly does! Which is why I included that part of their explanation in my quotation. The question is which method and which result makes the most sense? Personally, I think the Scottish paper’s numbers are more realistic. Especially, in light of the Y data. Plus, as I recall, there was a lot of skepticism about the IDA’s 20% figure when it first came out. Which I still think is an appropriate response to those numbers. Of course, others may disagree but I’m still skeptical.

Jessie
01-22-2020, 09:24 PM
Yes, it certainly does! Which is why I included that part of their explanation in my quotation. The question is which method and which result makes the most sense? Personally, I think the Scottish paper’s numbers are more realistic. Especially, in light of the Y data. Plus, as I recall, there was a lot of skepticism about the IDA’s 20% figure when it first came out. Which I still think is an appropriate response to those numbers. Of course, others may disagree but I’m still skeptical.

I think both of them are going to be problematic because they are matching modern populations that should have all their admixture as part their present day ethnicity. Not sure how matching Irish against English populations is going to give an accurate result about what happened in the Viking era? I think the only way to solve these questions is getting ancient genomes from all different time periods in a population and comparing them over a period of time and then seeing how the modern day group compares. They should use IBD also. It just doesn't work with comparing populations today against each other.

Robert1
01-23-2020, 06:27 AM
Haven't looked at my ancestry breakdown on 23&me, since before the Beta update. I was shocked to find my B & I dropped 9.0%. My ancestry, according to paper record, is 100% British (12.5% Welsh), up until my sixth great grandparents (where some French, a Romani and a Sephardic Jewish name comes in), although 75% of my ancestry is from the South East so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised, (although my sister did only drop 4 %)

35965

Anyone else get a big drop or shock increase in ancestry breakdown after the beta update?

Yes this happened to me also. The 23andMe V3.0 algorithm and reference panel of mid-2019 was scary accurate, reporting 95.3% British&Irish, 1.9% French&German and 2.8% Broadly NW European which was dead on with my known ancestry of ~96% British&Irish and ~4% Dutch&German.

The update later in 2019 dropped my British&Irish down to 86% and raised my French&German and Broadly NW European

jadegreg
01-23-2020, 10:11 AM
I think both of them are going to be problematic because they are matching modern populations that should have all their admixture as part their present day ethnicity. Not sure how matching Irish against English populations is going to give an accurate result about what happened in the Viking era? I think the only way to solve these questions is getting ancient genomes from all different time periods in a population and comparing them over a period of time and then seeing how the modern day group compares. They should use IBD also. It just doesn't work with comparing populations today against each other.

Agreed. I do think there is a place for comparison of modern NW populations in light of results from ancient population studies, particularly if it allows us to find sets of origin points and track changes in certain groups of genes like the HLA genes. As Jessie says ideally, you need a starting point (starting points) and end points to really see the big picture. I also think the chip array approach is too limited, as it will undoubtedly miss certain contexts or markers that will be informative for assessing gene group origins. To those ends, WGS should be able to shed some light on our ancestry breakdowns. Let's hope Full Genomes steps into the breach with their '1000 reference populations'.