PDA

View Full Version : Living DNA Results Interpretation



ajc347
03-15-2017, 05:35 PM
Hi all

I'm new to both this site and genetic testing in general and am in need of a bit of help in respect of some of the results of a test I've recently undertaken with LivingDNA (I hoping that this is the correct section of the forum in which to post the question).

I can grasp the general meaning of the Halpogroups given for both my y-DNA result (R-M269) and my mtDNA result (V) and general theories of migration across Europe but am struggling to make sense of the subclade results (R-L151 and V15a respectively) and cannot seem to find any specific information about them via internet searches etc.

The maps and breakdowns given by LivingDNA would suggest the strongest correlations being with Turkish (17%) and Spanish (10%) populations for the paternal route and Saami (42%) populations for the maternal route.

Whilst my family tree suggests a paternal link to East Anglia dating back to the mid-18th century (and my test overview gives a 90.6% GB & Ireland result), I can understand the Turkish and Spanish links via the migration route suggested by the M269 migration route. I am, though, a bit surprised at the Saami inference given that my recent maternal history originates in Ireland.

Any help and advice anyone can offer in respect of interpreting these results would be most welcome.

Many thanks in advance.

Andy :)

ollie444
03-15-2017, 06:15 PM
Hi,

Both Ydna and mtdna stay fairly unchanged over 1000s of years. The percentages are just the countries where your haplogroups are most commonly found, they do not necessarily mean that you have ancestry from those regions. Your direct male and female ancestors would have come from continental Europe at some point (probably not recently enough to make an impact on your autosomal results) so having a haplogroup found most commonly in a continental European country is not unexpected. The results just focus on the haplogroup, not the subclades. At this point LivingDNA doesn't seem to provide any more information on the subclades.

I have found relatively little out about my subclades too and hope someone else can provide you with more information.

MacUalraig
03-15-2017, 06:23 PM
Well L151 is a very old SNP (5kya+) which is discussed in some of the ancient DNA threads on here (if you use the site search). It dominates the western European genetic landscape. We know quite a bit about some of its sub-branches eg L21.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L151/

Most people who get into SNP testing seriously will have a much younger SNP than that as their 'terminal' or lowest level SNP/haplogroup. For example if you search the above page for my kit number YF01405 you will find it a lot lower down.

Dewsloth
03-15-2017, 06:30 PM
Hi,

Both Ydna and mtdna stay fairly unchanged over 1000s of years. The percentages are just the countries where your haplogroups are most commonly found, they do not necessarily mean that you have ancestry from those regions. Your direct male and female ancestors would have come from continental Europe at some point (probably not recently enough to make an impact on your autosomal results) so having a haplogroup found most commonly in a continental European country is not unexpected. The results just focus on the haplogroup, not the subclades. At this point LivingDNA doesn't seem to provide any more information on the subclades.

I have found relatively little out about my subclades too and hope someone else can provide you with more information.

It would be nice if they also provided some sort of running statistical data. IIRC Nat Geo showed what percentage of testers had that haplotype.
Unfortunately, they didn't show the percentages of any others (or upstream results to the haplogroup level) so the report was sort of a "one hand clapping."

corner
03-15-2017, 06:56 PM
Has anyone who knows they are DF27>ZZ12+ (i.e. DF27+ and negative for Z195) got a correct yDNA result from this test?

The DF27>Z195 section of DF27 usually get recognised in these type of tests but the DF27>ZZ12 part does not. Earlier tests like this one couldn't 'see' DF27 itself or identify DF27>ZZ12 subclades. I vaguely remember unidentified DF27 getting L151 results from such chip-based SNP pack-type tests before.

ajc347
03-15-2017, 09:56 PM
Thanks guys. :)

Would I be right in thinking that there is a potential that I could end up testing positive for another (or number of other) SNP's (such as L11, L52, P310, P311, S127, S128 and/or S129 for example) which are listed on the same line as L151 and that the reason that they may not be showing is a lack of sensitivity in the test that LivingDNA uses?

I'm presuming that DF27 would need a positive test for P312, Z40481, and ZZ11 as well and that these are not included in the LivingDNA test?

Apologies for all of the questions but, as I'm sure you have already realised, I am very, very new to this. :)

ajc347
03-17-2017, 05:48 PM
Following a very helpful discussion with Maciamo on Eupedia.com, I contacted LivingDNA this morning in order to query the Y-DNA result of my test and have just received a very helpful reply back from them.

They confirmed that my test was S21/U106 negative, P312/S116 negative, and CTS4528/S1200 negative.

LivingDNA indicated that they don't test for A8051 or DF100/S1194 (but have confirmed a S1200- result).

Given this, it looks likely that A8051 may be a potential match and would explain why the test reported L151 as the terminal SNP.

I've been really impressed with the customer service offered by LivingDNA in helping deal with this. It took a single email request from me and I had a definitive answer less than 6 hours later.

The last 48 hours have proven to be massive learning curve and have been both enlightening and educational given the overall results from both my Y-DNA and mtDNA tests. :)

Judith
04-08-2017, 08:13 AM
I am sure that you will have already read the Eupedia page on mtDNA V http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_V_mtDNA.shtml#distribution but here is the link in case you haven't?
Maciamo suggests pre Neolithic hunter gatherers and he is probably right in that. MtDNA mutations are a lot slower than Y so are often less geographically focussed, and of course the women did not ride into new areas and conquer it, killing the original men.

AntG
04-08-2017, 11:09 AM
Would I be right in thinking that there is a potential that I could end up testing positive for another (or number of other) SNP's (such as L11, L52, P310, P311, S127, S128 and/or S129 for example) which are listed on the same line as L151 and that the reason that they may not be showing is a lack of sensitivity in the test that LivingDNA uses?


Whilst the LivingDNA test is a good combined test, it does not go that deep in the Y tree to your terminal SNP; it depends on what you want to find out/what your objectives are. A popular choice is Family Tree DNA for dedicated tests on the Y. You have to do an STR test with them first before any SNP testing (thus Y37/Y67/Y111). I went for the Y111 test (as I'm impatient but could have ended up with no DNA matches at that level but thankfully I did). My main objective was to find out what my surname would be and to receive DNA matches on the Y but then became interested in finding out exactly where I am on the Y-Tree. The STR test only predicts a haplogroup (I suspect with you, it will just be R-M269) but also gives STR results for the level you've chosen and matches. By reviewing the haplogroup/sub-clade assignments of my matches, I was then able to identify that I was likely R-L226; I confirmed this by joining a relevant Haplogroup Project at FTDNA and got testing advice (my STR results also had a signature indicating R-L226 also). I then did an R-L226 SNP pack which tested against a number of known SNPs downstream and I now have my terminal SNP of FGC12290, which is as far as I can get on the known tree. By going further down, I found I was in an interesting group called Irish Type III; I could not have found that from my LivingDNA level.

New branches get created when a Next Generation Sequencing test (such as BigY at Family Tree DNA) are done (or Whole Genome Sequencing) and new SNPs are found in 2 or more people (I think!). The tree is expanding every year. Family Tree DNA have different projects you can join based on geography/surname/haplogroup etc, and these are great for comparing results and getting advice. I opted for the Y-Elite 2.1 test from Full Genomes Corporation rather than Family Tree DNA BigY (as it covers more of the Y), so hopefully at some point, I may be in a new branch at some point (I'm still waiting for results - it takes a while). Another company that I have heard of that does NGS is Y-Seq. Here is the ISSOG page on Y-DNA testing with a lot of links to articles that may help? https://isogg.org/wiki/Y_chromosome_DNA_tests. The current ISSOG Y-DNA tree is here: https://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNATreeTrunk.html

Btw, I only did my first Y-DNA test the second half of last year. At first it was like a foreign language but I'm understanding it a bit better now. Good luck!

AntG
04-08-2017, 11:20 AM
I am sure that you will have already read the Eupedia page on mtDNA V http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_V_mtDNA.shtml#distribution but here is the link in case you haven't?
Maciamo suggests pre Neolithic hunter gatherers and he is probably right in that. MtDNA mutations are a lot slower than Y so are often less geographically focussed, and of course the women did not ride into new areas and conquer it, killing the original men.

Am I right by saying mtDNA is also a lot smaller than the Y, so there is less of it to mutate also?

A Norfolk L-M20
04-08-2017, 12:03 PM
Whilst the LivingDNA test is a good combined test, it does not go that deep in the Y tree to your terminal SNP; it depends on what you want to find out/what your objectives are. A popular choice is Family Tree DNA for dedicated tests on the Y. You have to do an STR test with them first before any SNP testing (thus Y37/Y67/Y111). I went for the Y111 test (as I'm impatient but could have ended up with no DNA matches at that level but thankfully I did). My main objective was to find out what my surname would be and to receive DNA matches on the Y but then became interested in finding out exactly where I am on the Y-Tree. The STR test only predicts a haplogroup (I suspect with you, it will just be R-M269) but also gives STR results for the level you've chosen and matches. By reviewing the haplogroup/sub-clade assignments of my matches, I was then able to identify that I was likely R-L226; I confirmed this by joining a relevant Haplogroup Project at FTDNA and got testing advice (my STR results also had a signature indicating R-L226 also). I then did an R-L226 SNP pack which tested against a number of known SNPs downstream and I now have my terminal SNP of FGC12290, which is as far as I can get on the known tree. By going further down, I found I was in an interesting group called Irish Type III; I could not have found that from my LivingDNA level.

New branches get created when a Next Generation Sequencing test (such as BigY at Family Tree DNA) are done (or Whole Genome Sequencing) and new SNPs are found in 2 or more people (I think!). The tree is expanding every year. Family Tree DNA have different projects you can join based on geography/surname/haplogroup etc, and these are great for comparing results and getting advice. I opted for the Y-Elite 2.1 test from Full Genomes Corporation rather than Family Tree DNA BigY (as it covers more of the Y), so hopefully at some point, I may be in a new branch at some point (I'm still waiting for results - it takes a while). Another company that I have heard of that does NGS is Y-Seq. Here is the ISSOG page on Y-DNA testing with a lot of links to articles that may help? https://isogg.org/wiki/Y_chromosome_DNA_tests. The current ISSOG Y-DNA tree is here: https://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNATreeTrunk.html

Btw, I only did my first Y-DNA test the second half of last year. At first it was like a foreign language but I'm understanding it a bit better now. Good luck!

I agree that exploratory full Y tests are the ultimate way to go, above and over any STR or SNP pack test - particularly if your interest is the long term big picture. However, as 3 in 1 SNP chip tests go, the Living DNA tests more than ten times the Y SNPs of for example, the current 23andMe choice. Where FT-DNA have a hold on the haplogroup market is in their projects, project administrators, and customer database. It's going to be difficult for a company to break through the Y market, but the battering ram that could do just that is price, when a cheaper exploratory Y test is developed (which I would predict will happen one day).

razyn
04-08-2017, 12:30 PM
Has anyone who knows they are DF27>ZZ12+ (i.e. DF27+ and negative for Z195) got a correct yDNA result from this test?
As I believe you are aware, I'm on the Z195+ side. But the tree they show me (on the way down to my Z220) has ZZ12 hung out to dry at the right end, while all of the identified branches to the left of Z195 are (I believe) subclades of ZZ12. Their DF27 phylogeny is kind of a work in [need of] progress. But then so is YFull's, and they've been working on a phylogenetic tree display both longer and harder. I'm glad that LivingDNA has at least heard of ZZ12 -- it's been catching on pretty slowly, from my perspective. They don't currently include ZZ11 (as parent of DF27 and U152), nor Z40481 above that. Alex Williamson knows the stuff discovered by himself better than they do -- which one should expect. This is what LivingDNA shows me (it looks faint and ghostly until you click it):
15094

On the other hand, Pille Hallast is on the LivingDNA team, at least in a consulting capacity; and some of her SNP discoveries are going to be found in DF27 tests at LivingDNA, perhaps before their position on the Big Tree has been identified. At this writing there are 21 PH SNPs on Alex's Big Tree below DF27; eleven are under Z195, and the other ten under ZZ12. Some of them are the lead SNP for defining a fairly high (and perhaps more ancient, or anyway closer to "basal") branch. On the Z195 side, I'd point to PH3239 and PH1909. On the ZZ12 side the higher ones are PH2007, PH1011 (and PH4655 at the same level), PH2047, and PH133. Some of these are likely to define significant population blocks -- we just haven't been testing for them long enough to know much about their frequency, or their geographical associations. For reference, here is the url specifically for the DF27 part of the Big Tree: http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=29

MacUalraig
04-08-2017, 01:11 PM
I agree that exploratory full Y tests are the ultimate way to go, above and over any STR or SNP pack test - particularly if your interest is the long term big picture. However, as 3 in 1 SNP chip tests go, the Living DNA tests more than ten times the Y SNPs of for example, the current 23andMe choice. Where FT-DNA have a hold on the haplogroup market is in their projects, project administrators, and customer database. It's going to be difficult for a company to break through the Y market, but the battering ram that could do just that is price, when a cheaper exploratory Y test is developed (which I would predict will happen one day).

I'm surprised someone hasn't done it already given the number of SNPs you can cram onto a chip these days. You could easily get ALL the novel variants discovered by the amateur brigade since 2012/3. You just need some kind of minimum order, I think I read it was 50k at Illumina but I may have got that wrong.

A Norfolk L-M20
04-08-2017, 01:15 PM
Hi all

I'm new to both this site and genetic testing in general and am in need of a bit of help in respect of some of the results of a test I've recently undertaken with LivingDNA (I hoping that this is the correct section of the forum in which to post the question).

I can grasp the general meaning of the Halpogroups given for both my y-DNA result (R-M269) and my mtDNA result (V) and general theories of migration across Europe but am struggling to make sense of the subclade results (R-L151 and V15a respectively) and cannot seem to find any specific information about them via internet searches etc.

The maps and breakdowns given by LivingDNA would suggest the strongest correlations being with Turkish (17%) and Spanish (10%) populations for the paternal route and Saami (42%) populations for the maternal route.

Whilst my family tree suggests a paternal link to East Anglia dating back to the mid-18th century (and my test overview gives a 90.6% GB & Ireland result), I can understand the Turkish and Spanish links via the migration route suggested by the M269 migration route. I am, though, a bit surprised at the Saami inference given that my recent maternal history originates in Ireland.

Any help and advice anyone can offer in respect of interpreting these results would be most welcome.

Many thanks in advance.

Andy :)

How were your autosomal (family ancestry) results in sub regional view, compared to genealogical record? Did you score in East Anglia? You have found the sub regional view haven't you? If not, then in Family Ancestry, click on Explore in Full on the map. This links to a larger regional map showing your relationships globally. Then click on the plus sign, to the right of "regional". This opens up your British sub regions. Apologies if you already know this.

MacUalraig
04-08-2017, 01:17 PM
Am I right by saying mtDNA is also a lot smaller than the Y, so there is less of it to mutate also?

Yes by many orders of magnitude.

AntG
04-09-2017, 08:44 AM
I'm surprised someone hasn't done it already given the number of SNPs you can cram onto a chip these days. You could easily get ALL the novel variants discovered by the amateur brigade since 2012/3. You just need some kind of minimum order, I think I read it was 50k at Illumina but I may have got that wrong.

This ISSOG Facebook thread may be of interest... look out for the comment by David Nicholson... https://www.facebook.com/groups/11416337921?view=permalink&id=10155305875257922

MacUalraig
04-09-2017, 09:23 AM
Yes tx but those numbers are similar to the ones on Chromo2. Not quite sure what the details are of adding custom requests but really we just need the whole lot on a chip of its own, rather than tacked on the end of an autosomal one.

I'm amused at the suggestion that it should be possible to make contact with Y SNP matches and have them pointed in the direction of the ISOGG list of Y hg projects. What that means is point them to buying STRs at FTDNA. I think that is the biggest single reason why ScoDNA didn't allow match contacting. Once you do that you are little more than iGenea (UK). It's like asking your BMW dealer to put flyers for the Audi range in all their new cars.

Bear in mind that DNA Worldwide, the forerunner of LDNA, was FTDNA's UK partner.

REWM
04-09-2017, 02:26 PM
As I believe you are aware, I'm on the Z195+ side. But the tree they show me (on the way down to my Z220) has ZZ12 hung out to dry at the right end, while all of the identified branches to the left of Z195 are (I believe) subclades of ZZ12. Their DF27 phylogeny is kind of a work in [need of] progress. But then so is YFull's, and they've been working on a phylogenetic tree display both longer and harder. I'm glad that LivingDNA has at least heard of ZZ12 -- it's been catching on pretty slowly, from my perspective. They don't currently include ZZ11 (as parent of DF27 and U152), nor Z40481 above that. Alex Williamson knows the stuff discovered by himself better than they do -- which one should expect. This is what LivingDNA shows me (it looks faint and ghostly until you click it):
15094

On the other hand, Pille Hallast is on the LivingDNA team, at least in a consulting capacity; and some of her SNP discoveries are going to be found in DF27 tests at LivingDNA, perhaps before their position on the Big Tree has been identified. At this writing there are 21 PH SNPs on Alex's Big Tree below DF27; eleven are under Z195, and the other ten under ZZ12. Some of them are the lead SNP for defining a fairly high (and perhaps more ancient, or anyway closer to "basal") branch. On the Z195 side, I'd point to PH3239 and PH1909. On the ZZ12 side the higher ones are PH2007, PH1011 (and PH4655 at the same level), PH2047, and PH133. Some of these are likely to define significant population blocks -- we just haven't been testing for them long enough to know much about their frequency, or their geographical associations. For reference, here is the url specifically for the DF27 part of the Big Tree: http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=29
I'm on the ZZ12 side and tested Z2573+ with YSEQ. I see from your attachment they have it listed to the left of Z195 not under ZZ12. Tempting to test with them to see what their results would show for my paternal Irish Z2573 and the rest of my british isles.

ajc347
04-13-2017, 10:11 PM
How were your autosomal (family ancestry) results in sub regional view, compared to genealogical record? Did you score in East Anglia? You have found the sub regional view haven't you? If not, then in Family Ancestry, click on Explore in Full on the map. This links to a larger regional map showing your relationships globally. Then click on the plus sign, to the right of "regional". This opens up your British sub regions. Apologies if you already know this.

They have proven to be pretty accurate for the most part with areas of my known genealogical record showing up quite well (with 70% of the autosomal results having a direct relevance to my known family tree). There were a few surprises (such as a 14.7% combined figure for North Yorkshire, Nortumbria and Northwest England), however there are some clear gaps in my family tree so it is possible that this might reflect some of these gaps.

East Anglia scored the highest (at 26.8%) which makes absolute sense seeing that my earliest paternal relatives were from Norfolk and Suffolk. :)

A Norfolk L-M20
04-13-2017, 10:35 PM
They have proven to be pretty accurate for the most part with areas of my known genealogical record showing up quite well (with 70% of the autosomal results having a direct relevance to my known family tree). There were a few surprises (such as a 14.7% combined figure for North Yorkshire, Nortumbria and Northwest England), however there are some clear gaps in my family tree so it is possible that this might reflect some of these gaps.

East Anglia scored the highest (at 26.8%) which makes absolute sense seeing that my earliest paternal relatives were from Norfolk and Suffolk. :)

I get only 39% East Anglian, and I am an East Anglian with around 80% East Anglian recorded ancestry, so your percentage is strong.

ajc347
04-13-2017, 10:50 PM
I get only 39% East Anglian, and I am an East Anglian with around 80% East Anglian recorded ancestry ...

That doesn't make sense and does lead me to question exactly how such varied results could be possible unless the data the results are being compared to is flawed in some way???

I must admit that whilst I was expecting it to show, I wasn't expecting such a high percentage to have come from East Anglia given that my family tree draws predominantly from the South East on my paternal side and from Ireland and Cornwall on my maternal side, in the most recent generations.