DMXX's Geno 2.0 Results

[DMXX]

Ancestrally, I am fully Iranian (Azeri and Persian) from northwest and northern Iran. My primary motivation in taking Geno 2.0 was to flesh out the phylogenetic depth of my Y-DNA and mtDNA, as they are both rare in Iran (both <3% nationally) and relatively understudied compared to the more populous Eurasian lineages.


Autosomal Results

Geno1.jpgGeno2.jpgGeno3.jpg

Mediterranean - 47%
Southwest Asian - 32%
North European - 12%
Northeast Asian - 5%
Southeast Asian - 2%

The values seen in this portion of my results are somewhat similar to those in open-source projects (Dodecad, Eurogenes, Harappa etc., see below). When comparing those results with the Iranian average, I did anticipate the possibility my top result would not be Iranian. Indeed, it turns out to be Greek, with my Mediterranean (+5%), SW Asian (-10%) and N European (+4%) values relative to Iranians presumably being the justification. Having said this, I've just noticed my scores are actually closer to North Caucasians than any other:



Therefore, according to Geno 2.0, I'm autosomally closer to North Caucasians than to Iranians.

With regard to the non-human hominid results, I'm interested, but these numbers don't mean very much to me without a comparison.

Some of my results from the open-source genome projects.

Dodecad K12b (results, Oracle single population sharing, two population sharing)

 

1	Caucasus	38.37
2	Gedrosia	25.68
3	Southwest_Asian	13.04
4	North_European	8.35
5	Atlantic_Med	5.49
6	South_Asian	4.09
7	East_Asian	2.53
8	Siberian	1.6

1	Iranian (Dodecad)	4.6
2	Kurd (Dodecad)	5.41
3	Kurds (Yunusbayev)	6.17
4	Iranians (Behar)	6.93
5	Uzbekistan_Jews (Behar)	11.09
6	Turks (Behar)	13.3
7	Turkmens (Yunusbayev)	13.31
8	Turkish (Dodecad)	15.76
9	Kumyks (Yunusbayev)	16.67
10	Azerbaijan_Jews (Behar)	16.9

1	 	69.7%	 Uzbekistan_Jews (Behar)	 +	30.3%	 Tajiks (Yunusbayev)	 @	2.58
2	 	59.7%	 Azerbaijan_Jews (Behar)	 +	40.3%	 Tajiks (Yunusbayev)	 @	2.64
3	 	58.7%	 Assyrian (Dodecad)	 +	41.3%	 Tajiks (Yunusbayev)	 @	2.67
4	 	59.6%	 Georgia_Jews (Behar)	 +	40.4%	 Tajiks (Yunusbayev)	 @	2.86
5	 	94.6%	 Iranian (Dodecad)	 +	5.4%	 Ukranians (Yunusbayev)	 @	3.11
6	 	95%	 Iranian (Dodecad)	 +	5%	 Russian_B (Behar)	 @	3.13
7	 	94.9%	 Iranian (Dodecad)	 +	5.1%	 Mixed_Slav (Dodecad)	 @	3.14
8	 	95%	 Iranian (Dodecad)	 +	5%	 Russian (Dodecad)	 @	3.15
9	 	95.1%	 Iranian (Dodecad)	 +	4.9%	 Belorussian (Behar)	 @	3.15
10	 	94.9%	 Iranian (Dodecad)	 +	5.1%	 Polish (Dodecad)	 @	3.16

Eurogenes EUtest (results, Oracle single population sharing, two population sharing)

 

#	Population	Percent
1	EAST_MED	33.06
2	WEST_ASIAN	27.03
3	SOUTH_ASIAN	11.43
4	MIDDLE_EASTERN	8.03
5	EAST_EURO	6.96
6	ATLANTIC	3.06
7	SOUTH_BALTIC	2.8
8	NORTH-CENTRAL_EURO	2.37
9	SIBERIAN	2.04
10	WEST_MED	1.88
11	EAST_ASIAN	1.24

1	IR	3.53
2	Kurdish	5.67
3	TR	10.53
4	Assyrian	13.98
5	Mandean	14.25
6	Armenian	14.65
7	IQ	17.88
8	Lezgin	21.93
9	GR	23.08
10	GE	23.36


#	 	Primary Population (source)	Secondary Population (source)	Distance
1	 	97.6%	 IR	 +	2.4%	 South_Indian	 @	2.95
2	 	94.4%	 IR	 +	5.6%	 RO	 @	2.96
3	 	96.9%	 IR	 +	3.1%	 Bangladeshi	 @	2.97
4	 	95.6%	 IR	 +	4.4%	 HU	 @	3.02
5	 	95.3%	 IR	 +	4.7%	 North_Italian	 @	3.02
6	 	96.2%	 IR	 +	3.8%	 ES	 @	3.05
7	 	96.1%	 IR	 +	3.9%	 PT	 @	3.06
8	 	95.1%	 IR	 +	4.9%	 Serbian	 @	3.06
9	 	93%	 IR	 +	7%	 AJ	 @	3.07
10	 	96.4%	 IR	 +	3.6%	 UA	 @	3.07

Harappa World (results, Oracle single population sharing, two population sharing)

 

#	Population	Percent
1	Caucasian	39.49
2	Baloch	25.66
3	SW-Asian	11.79
4	NE-Euro	6.57
5	Mediterranean	6.54
6	S-Indian	3.87
7	NE-Asian	2.35
8	Siberian	1.37
9	Beringian	1.23

#	Population (source)	Distance
1	iranian (harappa)	7.76
2	kurd (harappa)	7.76
3	kurd (xing)	7.76
4	kurd (yunusbayev)	8.31
5	turkish (harappa)	9.29
6	iranian (behar)	11.88
7	turk (behar)	12.58
8	azeri (harappa)	12.58
9	turk-istanbul (hodoglugil)	12.58

#	 	Primary Population (source)	Secondary Population (source)	Distance
1	 	64.8%	 uzbekistan-jew (behar)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
2	 	64.8%	 armenian (harappa)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
3	 	64.8%	 assyrian (harappa)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
4	 	64.8%	 azerbaijan-jew (behar)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
5	 	64.8%	 georgia-jew (behar)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
6	 	64.8%	 iranian-jew (behar)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
7	 	64.8%	 iraqi-mandaean (harappa)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
8	 	64.8%	 iraq-jew (behar)	 +	35.2%	 tajik (yunusbayev)	 @	3.65
9	 	70%	 kurd (yunusbayev)	 +	30%	 turkmen (yunusbayev)	 @	4.4

Y-Chromosomal and Mitochondrial Results

Geno5.jpgGeno4.jpg

The results state I am Y-DNA R-M124 and mtDNA D4 (no surprises there). A heat map isn't indicated for R-M124 because of insufficient samples. I'm somewhat surprised to hear this, considering thousands of samples have reportedly been taken by the Genographic Project. As expected, very few matches exist in the "Our Story" feature.

As mentioned earlier, I took the Geno 2.0 test to probe into my uniparental markers. Analysis of these will be sought in the raw data. Will update this thread with any new findings concerning this.

[Scarlet Ibis]

Where is the SE Asian coming from? Noise?

[Rain]

Autosomal Results

Geno1.jpgGeno2.jpgGeno3.jpg

Mediterranean - 47%
Southwest Asian - 32%
North European - 12%
Northeast Asian - 5%
Southeast Asian - 2%

Your results are not too dissimilar to mine. Geno 2.0 scored me as being;

Mediterranean - 42%
Northern European - 26%
Southwest Asian - 22%
Northeast Asian - 5%
Southeast Asian - 3%

My ancestry being ethnically Turkish from western Anatolia.

[DMXX]

Your results are not too dissimilar to mine. Geno 2.0 scored me as being;

Mediterranean - 42%
Northern European - 26%
Southwest Asian - 22%
Northeast Asian - 5%
Southeast Asian - 3%

My ancestry being ethnically Turkish from western Anatolia.

This is the score I'd expect for a western Anatolian Turk; relative to someone from the southern Caucasus or Iran, decreased SW Asian and increased Europe-specific components (Mediterranean and N Euro in this case), as well as elevated East Eurasian values. The former reflecting the geographic difference, the latter linguistic. Our East Eurasian scores are likely similar because of our Turkish-speaking backgrounds.

[seferhabahir]

I find it interesting that Geno 2.0 is fond of using Iranian and Sardinian (in that order) as the two reference populations for several Ashkenazi testers, including me, a distant Y-DNA R2 cousin, and Sean Silver (Y-DNA R1b-L584, who posted his Geno results on another board). None of us are really that close to the Iranian reference numbers, but all three have very similar values for Mediterranean, Southwest Asian and Northern European. Then it varies wildly for Northeast Asian, Oceanian, and Sub-Saharan African (probably these have been influenced by a single recent ancestor in each case).

Me
Mediterranean - 58%
Southwest Asian - 21%
Northern European - 17%
Northeast Asian - 3%

Cousin
Mediterranean - 55%
Southwest Asian - 22%
Northern European - 17%
Oceanian - 2%

Silver
Mediterranean - 56%
Southwest Asian - 22%
Northern European - 18%
Sub-Saharan African - 2%

[DMXX]

Those results actually seem closer to Georgians or Greeks than Iranians. There's clearly something wrong with their reference listing service. That's no different to mine; one can clearly observe my results are closest to the North Caucasians than the Greeks.

I'll make an inquiry shortly and will edit in the sent message into this post. Would you be happy with me including those results (yours, your cousin's and Mr. Silver's) as additional examples alongside mine?

[seferhabahir]

Those results actually seem closer to Georgians or Greeks than Iranians. There's clearly something wrong with their reference listing service. That's no different to mine; one can clearly observe my results are closest to the North Caucasians than the Greeks.

I'll make an inquiry shortly and will edit in the sent message into this post. Would you be happy with me including those results (yours, your cousin's and Mr. Silver's) as additional examples alongside mine?

These three sets of values were all put up on a public board, so I have no objection. But I don't know if you will get very far with them. I haven't questioned the way Geno 2.0 does reference populations because they are obviously doing some kind of algorithmic interpolation with the reference data sets they have. I think if they were to do it differently, they might have included some Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Mizrachi reference populations (or just Jewish). The way they did it made them use widely separated populations in order to provide two references in the analysis. I have another cousin who came out Georgian and Iberian (again, two widely separated geographic populations). I'm sure they have good reasons why they did it the way they did (Jewish does not fit neatly into one geographic place), but if we ran those autosomal data through Dr. McDonald's PCA tools, the three of us would have no doubt come out in the middle of a "classic" Jewish cluster (mine did, providing an obvious match between known ancestries and clusters).

[seferhabahir]

I have another cousin who came out Georgian and Iberian (again, two widely separated geographic populations).

This cousin, besides expected Mediterranean, Southwest Asian, and Northern European proportions (pretty similar to the other three), also has 2% Sub-Saharan African and 2% Southeast Asian in his mix. I looked at all of the reference populations again, and they don't really have a good population that fits Mediterranean 54-58%, Southwest Asian 20-22% , and Northern European 17-19%. Both Greek and Tuscan come kind of close but with less Asian and more European (both are Mediterranean 54%, Southwest Asian 17%, Northern European 28%). These two populations (also Sicilian) did show up as reasonably close in my DIYDodecad K12b analysis. There may be specific autosomal markers that are being found in both the Iranian and Sardinian reference populations even though the proportions do not match very well.

[DMXX]

... There may be specific autosomal markers that are being found in both the Iranian and Sardinian reference populations even though the proportions do not match very well.

Highly unlikely; otherwise, one would expect a person of full Iranian heritage to have Iran as the first reference group rather than Greece. To date, I have not seen a shred of evidence I match Greeks to any exceptional degree with regard to shared segments. I have no Greek RF matches, my Dodecad Z-IBD Greek value was unremarkable for an Iranian and have no known ancestors in the direction of Greece beyond Iran's northwestern provinces.

This is precisely the reason why I intend to make an inquiry regarding their matching system. If I've physically observed my results match Iranians and North Caucasians better than Greeks, while the ones you've provided match Greeks and Tuscans better than Iranians, something is clearly amiss.

[rockman]

I find it interesting that Geno 2.0 is fond of using Iranian and Sardinian (in that order) as the two reference populations for several Ashkenazi testers, including me, a distant Y-DNA R2 cousin, and Sean Silver (Y-DNA R1b-L584, who posted his Geno results on another board). None of us are really that close to the Iranian reference numbers, but all three have very similar values for Mediterranean, Southwest Asian and Northern European. Then it varies wildly for Northeast Asian, Oceanian, and Sub-Saharan African (probably these have been influenced by a single recent ancestor in each case).

Me
Mediterranean - 58%
Southwest Asian - 21%
Northern European - 17%
Northeast Asian - 3%

Cousin
Mediterranean - 55%
Southwest Asian - 22%
Northern European - 17%
Oceanian - 2%

Silver
Mediterranean - 56%
Southwest Asian - 22%
Northern European - 18%
Sub-Saharan African - 2%

I think they did the same for me, as Geno 2.0 gave me 2% Native American which is impossible. Seeing as Mongols and Altaians are the only others who have a small percentage of Native American, any ancestry from them would be too diluted by now to show any Native American. I feel like their algorithm just picks the best possible fit for small values it can't discern.