PDA

View Full Version : Living DNA - Siblings



Calas
03-09-2017, 02:33 PM
I was initially not going to post this. However, after some thought (& a bit of debate), decided why not. Let's see what everyone else thinks.

This is my full-blooded sibling by the way. Got to sort of be seeing as we're fraternal twins even if all that means genetically (unlike identical twins) is we're like any other pair of full siblings.



23&me

ME / SIBLING
British & Irish - 79.2% / 80.6%
French & German - 3.5% / 2.1%
Scandinavian - 0.3% / 2.2%
Broad NW - 11.7% / 8.9%
South E. - 1.6% / 3.2%
Iberian - 1.4% / 1.7%
Finn - 1.2% / 0.8%
Ashkenazi 0.4% / 0%
Broad European 0.5% / 0.4%
North African 0.1% / 0%



FTDNA

ME / SIBLING

77% British Isles / 74%
9% Scandinavia / 12%
5% East European / 7%
4% Southern European / 2%

3% Eastern Middle Eastern / 2%
2% Central/South Asian / 3%



Living DNA

SELF / SIBLING

Regional:
82% Great Britain & Ireland / 80.7%
8% Europe (North and West) / 7%
4% Europe (unassigned) / 4%
3% Europe (South) / 2%
2% Asia (South) / 5%
1% Near East / 1%

Sub-regional:

SW Scotland & Northern Ireland - 18.9% / 15.8%
Cumbria - 16.2% / 11.5%
Northwest Scotland - 10.5% / 6.3%
North Wales- 7.8% / 4.5%
Northumbria - 6.2% / 6.3%
Central England - 6.1 / 5.1%
Cornwall - 3.9% / 6.7%
North Yorkshire - 0% / 2.8%
Aberdeenshire - 3.2% / 2.4%
South Wales Border - 1.8% / 1.6%
South Wales - 1.2% / 1.9%
Devon 0% / 1.8%
Orkney - 0% / 1.1%

British Breakdown - 75.8% / 67.8%

6.2% unassigned Great Britain & Ireland / 12.9%


Total - 82% / 80.7%


Europe (South) - Basque - 2% / 0%
Europe (South) - Northern Italy - 1% / 0%
Europe (South) - Iberian Peninsula - 0% / 2%

Europe (North & West) - Scotland and Ireland - 4% / 1%
Europe (North & West) - Scandinavia - 3% / 4%
Europe (North & West) - France - 1% / 0%
Europe (North & West) - Germanic - 0% / 2%

Asia (South) - Sindh - 2% / 1%
Asia (South) - Asia (South) Burusho - 0% / 4%

1% Near East - Levant - 1% / 1%


Europe (unassigned) - 4% / 4%

ollie444
03-14-2017, 11:58 AM
Were you expecting a higher percentage for Aberdeenshire?

03-14-2017, 12:09 PM
Prima facie, seems reasonable, with you both getting slightly varying amounts from the 4 grandparents.

ollie444
03-14-2017, 12:14 PM
Prima facie, seems reasonable, with you both getting slightly varying amounts from the 4 grandparents.

I meant for both of them overall, not compared to eachother ;)

Calas
03-14-2017, 08:01 PM
Were you expecting a higher percentage for Aberdeenshire?

In a way, yes & no.

The Yes

I was expecting more because my grandmother for one was from Aboyne. Over the generations they've mostly stayed around Cairngorms. Most of the recent generations were within the 80 mile [or is it 60 mile?] radius that PoBI/Living DNA covers.



The No.

You see my Scottish ancestry is very well researched. Most of the lines go back to the 1400s. I am sure the Scottish clans seem convoluted and annoying to people not used to them, what with the alliances, intermarriage, adoption of surnames, etc. But to people used to them they're actually very useful. Then there's the clan surnames. It gives you a better idea of who you are looking for, or regions you should be looking at, rather than other families/surnames that don't quite have that connection.

But that means I can tell you with quite a bit of confidence that an ancestor born 1472 Argyll married and died in Fife, that one from 1519 born in Fife died in southern Cumbria, and someone from Lothian in 1589 ended up in Huntly. Is my tree unusual? Not entirely. I have plenty of people who stayed put and I have a number who moved hundreds of miles. Some of the people moved from tiny towns that if you googled the names you won't readily find as they've become ghost towns.

There has, after all, been movement north to south & east to west throughout Scotland for a long, long while. Throughout all of England really. Some people with equally well-researched family trees may see it themselves.


I have said elsewhere, and likely will forever say it, but Scotland isn't what it was 300 years ago. Likely older given the 1500s and the ever-shifting about due to European trade, alliances, etc. I mean in the MDLP 16 post evon & wombatofthenorth brought up something some many not know of - the Scottish in Norway/Scandinavian region and the thousands of Scots who were recorded in Poland in the 1500s. So to think Scottish (or Brits or whatever) people were all sort of stuck on the side of the road, impersonating trees and rocks with no thoughts of ever moving, isn't entirely accurate either.



I'll be interested in seeing if the update - mine is still as it was - changes things. But they'd be hard pressed to get an accurate representation of some areas of Scotland nowadays.

ollie444
03-14-2017, 08:24 PM
In a way, yes & no.

The Yes

I was expecting more because my grandmother for one was from Aboyne. Over the generations they've mostly stayed around Cairngorms. Most of the recent generations were within the 80 mile [or is it 60 mile?] radius that PoBI/Living DNA covers.



The No.

You see my Scottish ancestry is very well researched. Most of the lines go back to the 1400s. I am sure the Scottish clans seem convoluted and annoying to people not used to them, what with the alliances, intermarriage, adoption of surnames, etc. But to people used to them they're actually very useful. Then there's the clan surnames. It gives you a better idea of who you are looking for, or regions you should be looking at, rather than other families/surnames that don't quite have that connection.

But that means I can tell you with quite a bit of confidence that an ancestor born 1472 Argyll married and died in Fife, that one from 1519 born in Fife died in southern Cumbria, and someone from Lothian in 1589 ended up in Huntly. Is my tree unusual? Not entirely. I have plenty of people who stayed put and I have a number who moved hundreds of miles. Some of the people moved from tiny towns that if you googled the names you won't readily find as they've become ghost towns.

There has, after all, been movement north to south & east to west throughout Scotland for a long, long while. Throughout all of England really. Some people with equally well-researched family trees may see it themselves.


I have said elsewhere, and likely will forever say it, but Scotland isn't what it was 300 years ago. Likely older given the 1500s and the ever-shifting about due to European trade, alliances, etc. I mean in the MDLP 16 post evon & wombatofthenorth brought up something some many not know of - the Scottish in Norway/Scandinavian region and the thousands of Scots who were recorded in Poland in the 1500s. So to think Scottish (or Brits or whatever) people were all sort of stuck on the side of the road, impersonating trees and rocks with no thoughts of ever moving, isn't entirely accurate either.



I'll be interested in seeing if the update - mine is still as it was - changes things. But they'd be hard pressed to get an accurate representation of some areas of Scotland nowadays.

So some of my ancestors for Aberdeenshire that I can trace back to the 1500s might have moved to Aberdeenshire from elsewhere just a bit before that? Was expecting 25% Scottish with nearly all of that being Aberdeenshire, but came out with only 4.1%. The other 21% was SWS and NI. Maybe some moved I guess, but since the POBI project seems to have some samples from around Aberdeenshire - I would expect a bit higher than 4.1%. My grandmother was from Tarland, close to Aboyne.

Calas
03-14-2017, 10:09 PM
So some of my ancestors for Aberdeenshire that I can trace back to the 1500s might have moved to Aberdeenshire from elsewhere just a bit before that? Was expecting 25% Scottish with nearly all of that being Aberdeenshire, but came out with only 4.1%. The other 21% was SWS and NI. Maybe some moved I guess, but since the POBI project seems to have some samples from around Aberdeenshire - I would expect a bit higher than 4.1%. My grandmother was from Tarland, close to Aboyne.

Interesting. Scotland is going to be a tough place to categorize it seems.


However, the fact that I have quite a bit of other British ancestry might be throwing me off. My signature is accurate to my whole ancestry but my first name (Gwynfa) is Welsh for good reason. My maternal great-grandmother, mom's father's mother, was Welsh after all.

AnnieD
03-15-2017, 04:07 AM
I was initially not going to post this. However, after some thought (& a bit of debate), decided why not. Let's see what everyone else thinks.

This is my full-blooded sibling by the way. Got to sort of be seeing as we're fraternal twins even if all that means genetically (unlike identical twins) is we're like any other pair of full siblings.

Fraternal twins results with the brand new LivingDNA test? B) How could you have thought of depriving us of this? So there is not slightly or moderately higher chances of fraternal twins sharing greater genetic material than normal siblings? I've learned something today! Some of the variances with your twin are rather striking such as the Asia (South).

Calas
03-15-2017, 12:20 PM
Fraternal twins results with the brand new LivingDNA test? B) How could you have thought of depriving us of this? So there is not slightly or moderately higher chances of fraternal twins sharing greater genetic material than normal siblings? I've learned something today! Some of the variances with your twin are rather striking such as the Asia (South).

Well if this guy is correct


Fraternal twins are really just siblings who share the same womb. Each starts out as a separate egg fertilized by a separate sperm. They don't share any more DNA than do any two siblings. Siblings normally have 50% of their DNA the same.

http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask421


About the variances. Well the Orkney is something I question. I may have extremely distant Orcadian ancestry given as my family was not that far north into Ross & Cromarty. Or it could be old Scandinavian ancestry as I know the family tree has names back down the line which can't be anything but Scandinavian. Then again ficitious claims of Orcadian ancestry abound here & there in Scotland particularly with the Orkney > Viking hype.

The Asian South is actually not something I question. There has always been, a sort of back of the mind, belief that there is Traveller ancestry in the family tree. I thought dad's side but then mom's side is just as reasonable what with her being more Welsh [potential Kale]. Not just because my godfather happens to be from a Sinti Romani family either but due to a) how close one part of the family has been to his & b) location / family names. But Burusho are said to have genetic connection with Sinti so that's interesting.


What I am curious about is the lack of Welsh given a Welsh great-grandmother & the Unassigned. I mean his Unassigned is just a bit more than double mine.

03-15-2017, 12:27 PM
In a way, yes & no.

The Yes

I was expecting more because my grandmother for one was from Aboyne. Over the generations they've mostly stayed around Cairngorms. Most of the recent generations were within the 80 mile [or is it 60 mile?] radius that PoBI/Living DNA covers.



The No.

You see my Scottish ancestry is very well researched. Most of the lines go back to the 1400s. I am sure the Scottish clans seem convoluted and annoying to people not used to them, what with the alliances, intermarriage, adoption of surnames, etc. But to people used to them they're actually very useful. Then there's the clan surnames. It gives you a better idea of who you are looking for, or regions you should be looking at, rather than other families/surnames that don't quite have that connection.

But that means I can tell you with quite a bit of confidence that an ancestor born 1472 Argyll married and died in Fife, that one from 1519 born in Fife died in southern Cumbria, and someone from Lothian in 1589 ended up in Huntly. Is my tree unusual? Not entirely. I have plenty of people who stayed put and I have a number who moved hundreds of miles. Some of the people moved from tiny towns that if you googled the names you won't readily find as they've become ghost towns.

There has, after all, been movement north to south & east to west throughout Scotland for a long, long while. Throughout all of England really. Some people with equally well-researched family trees may see it themselves.


I have said elsewhere, and likely will forever say it, but Scotland isn't what it was 300 years ago. Likely older given the 1500s and the ever-shifting about due to European trade, alliances, etc. I mean in the MDLP 16 post evon & wombatofthenorth brought up something some many not know of - the Scottish in Norway/Scandinavian region and the thousands of Scots who were recorded in Poland in the 1500s. So to think Scottish (or Brits or whatever) people were all sort of stuck on the side of the road, impersonating trees and rocks with no thoughts of ever moving, isn't entirely accurate either.



I'll be interested in seeing if the update - mine is still as it was - changes things. But they'd be hard pressed to get an accurate representation of some areas of Scotland nowadays.

Interesting now you mentioned it, whilst in Sweden working, I rented a apartment from a local Swedish women, who surname was "Campbell", she knew her surname was Scottish in origin, but had no idea how far back, and said there were quite a few people with Scots surnames, also interestingly another common first name is Glen, and very common around the Gothenburg area.
P.S im a "Grant" Mums maiden name, but they were already in Llanelli, 1800s, so might have come to this area around the time of the Jacobites or just after, we dont really know.

Calas
03-15-2017, 01:30 PM
Interesting now you mentioned it, whilst in Sweden working, I rented a apartment from a local Swedish women, who surname was "Campbell", she knew her surname was Scottish in origin, but had no idea how far back, and said there were quite a few people with Scots surnames, also interestingly another common first name is Glen, and very common around the Gothenburg area.
P.S im a "Grant" Mums maiden name, but they were already in Llanelli, 1800s, so might have come to this area around the time of the Jacobites or just after, we dont really know.

Yes, there are a number of Scottish surnames in Norway & Sweden. There's some that are, in a way, disguised as shown when evon mentioned Petter Dass on MDLP 16 as we were talking about Norway. But Dass's original surname was Dundas which became Don Dass and then simply Dass. The Gothenburg Swedes might be Norwegian migrants if they aren't outright Scottish descendants.


Ah, likely. Jacobites went somewhere. But then I have found predominant Aberdeenshire region clan names in and around Cornwall & Devon.

Calas
03-15-2017, 11:10 PM
So decided that an image up to 3rd great-grandparents may help.

https://i.imgsafe.org/9c7406121d.png

Orange > Ireland
Blue > Scotland
Green > Wales

If you're wondering why my signature says a smidge of Irish most of the Irish is Scottish or British descendant. I mean James (Mountnugent) happened to have an English father of Irish ancestry but his mother was Scots-English.

ollie444
03-16-2017, 11:48 AM
So decided that an image up to 3rd great-grandparents may help.

https://i.imgsafe.org/9c7406121d.png

Orange > Ireland
Blue > Scotland
Green > Wales

If you're wondering why my signature says a smidge of Irish most of the Irish is Scottish or British descendant. I mean James (Mountnugent) happened to have an English father of Irish ancestry but his mother was Scots-English.

Love the "Ireland (British Origin) Nobility" ;) - may have to crack out one of these charts myself!

At a glance I'd say I have more ancestry around the Cairngorms. Amazing how mixed your English and Scottish is, I do have one Scottish ancestor who came down to the West Midlands, married and then returned to Inverurie. Was this a common occurrence?

Calas
03-16-2017, 01:51 PM
Love the "Ireland (British Origin) Nobility" ;) - may have to crack out one of these charts myself!

Well, as A Norfolk L-M20 has said a few times my ancestry is a bit more bourgeoisie than the norm on the forums. Almost all of my 3rd great-grandparents were professionals - lawyers, merchants, artisans, military officers, etc. or came from families of such backgrounds.

I mean, I mentioned elsewhere, that dad knew we had Scandinavian relatives long before I got into DNA testing and found them on various sites. It wasn't because he's spent more time in Scandinavia (and Eastern Europe) than he has in England or Western Europe for that matter. Rather when he was younger, he had taken his father's research, and through that had traced some of his Highlands/Northern ancestors' and their relatives to Scandinavia (Denmark, Norway, Sweden). He has, even for that matter, found some of mum's ancestors' relatives in Poland with the thousands of Scots who migrated that way.


But the nobility is quite legitimate. My mother's father's side happens to be related to Lord Edward Fitzgerald through his mother's side. The Buckinghamshire ancestors are likewise of upper class, untitled nobility (gentry) as they were called. My 3rd great-grandfather, however, had the title of Lord, as did his son, and my grandfather (& great-grandfather) happened to be rather revered among that sort of social class.


At a glance I'd say I have more ancestry around the Cairngorms. Amazing how mixed your English and Scottish is, I do have one Scottish ancestor who came down to the West Midlands, married and then returned to Inverurie. Was this a common occurrence?

You likely do. My ancestry has been quite mobile. Some sides, such as the Welsh and the Highlands on Dad's side has been pretty stationary. Others not quite.

Regarding the Scottish ancestor who moved down to the Midlands and then back up to Inverurie - Aberdeenshire has had Lowlanders moving back and forth for generations. So he might have very well have been a Lowlander back in the day who was visiting relatives in the Midlands and brought himself back a wife.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9995-So-where-did-your-ancestors-live-(up-to-3rd-great-grandparents) If you desire to put a chart together.

ollie444
03-16-2017, 03:12 PM
Well, as A Norfolk L-M20 has said a few times my ancestry is a bit more bourgeoisie than the norm on the forums. Almost all of my 3rd great-grandparents were professionals - lawyers, merchants, artisans, military officers, etc. or came from families of such backgrounds.

I mean, I mentioned elsewhere, that dad knew we had Scandinavian relatives long before I got into DNA testing and found them on various sites. It wasn't because he's spent more time in Scandinavia (and Eastern Europe) than he has in England or Western Europe for that matter. Rather when he was younger, he had taken his father's research, and through that had traced some of his Highlands/Northern ancestors' and their relatives to Scandinavia (Denmark, Norway, Sweden). He has, even for that matter, found some of mum's ancestors' relatives in Poland with the thousands of Scots who migrated that way.


But the nobility is quite legitimate. My mother's father's side happens to be related to Lord Edward Fitzgerald through his mother's side. The Buckinghamshire ancestors are likewise of upper class, untitled nobility (gentry) as they were called. My 3rd great-grandfather, however, had the title of Lord, as did his son, and my grandfather (& great-grandfather) happened to be rather revered among that sort of social class.



You likely do. My ancestry has been quite mobile. Some sides, such as the Welsh and the Highlands on Dad's side has been pretty stationary. Others not quite.

Regarding the Scottish ancestor who moved down to the Midlands and then back up to Inverurie - Aberdeenshire has had Lowlanders moving back and forth for generations. So he might have very well have been a Lowlander back in the day who was visiting relatives in the Midlands and brought himself back a wife.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9995-So-where-did-your-ancestors-live-(up-to-3rd-great-grandparents) If you desire to put a chart together.

I have to go back a couple more generations to get my nobility. Maternal grandfather was from a long line of Irish (British) gentry, lots of High Sheriffs and the like. Law, the church, military or family businesses seem to have been the standard occupations.

I'd love to put a similar chart together, unfortunately my excel skills are shameful for one of my generation. Any chance of finding the template?

Calas
03-16-2017, 10:48 PM
I'd love to put a similar chart together, unfortunately my excel skills are shameful for one of my generation. Any chance of finding the template?

http://www.geneaspy.com/2016/03/a-little-thing-that-went-viral.html

Judith
03-17-2017, 09:01 AM
Calas I wonder if your lack of Scotland is due to the blue blood in your veins?
You have a number of nobility lines and they did not generally mix with commoners. Yes the boys exercised their urges on all local poor girls, but few Lords married farm hands. I have researched a local gentry family who went back to even higher social levels. They kept to themselves perhaps a group of less than 10,000 people of the upper classes, (or less). So your Scottish may look like the English or the relevant ruling layer since that was who was given the land back in the day.
PoBI will be sampling the lower orders.
USA guys do not underestimate the social strata of the UK!

Calas
03-17-2017, 09:20 AM
Calas I wonder if your lack of Scotland is due to the blue blood in your veins?
You have a number of nobility lines and they did not generally mix with commoners. Yes the boys exercised their urges on all local poor girls, but few Lords married farm hands. I have researched a local gentry family who went back to even higher social levels. They kept to themselves perhaps a group of less than 10,000 people of the upper classes, (or less). So your Scottish may look like the English or the relevant ruling layer since that was who was given the land back in the day.
PoBI will be sampling the lower orders.
USA guys do not underestimate the social strata of the UK!

Judith,

You've raised an idea that I have been considering since seeing my Living DNA results. Aside from the lack of references from the Highlands. In a way, it may also explain the lack of Welsh; though I am not as Welsh as I am Scottish they were likewise of a bit better social class.

And indeed though those of the upper social classes may have had a few "flings" to put it generously by and large they would have kept within their own social circuit with regards to marriage, serious amounts of offspring, etc. I mean my family is, as I said to A Norfolk elsewhere, still of the bourgeoisie social classes (middle class & up).

One reason why I've been considering asking a close friend, whose family would be more of the farmhand ancestry [no insult to anyone] but whose ancestry is as Scottish from pretty much the same regions, to take the Living DNA test.