Nat Geno Pop differences

[Claxon]

Thanks Scarlet... Solothurn and Rich R....
Previously I have mentioned that my Geno tests show me as 1 British, and 2, Romanian.
The British was 15 differences from my own, while Romanian was 5 differences.

Rich R mentioned he thought German was closer, but that was 8 differences. Sounded a bit strange

I have just looked at the populations list, including British, Germans and Romanian, and find the separate list is different than the pop graph put up, next to our own graph.

In the LISTED graph, German is 8 differences, while Romanian is 11, the British being 15.

So, apparently we are BOTH right, depending on the pop graph looked at.

I wonder how Nat Geno would explain that, if they ever choose to answer e mails. So, apparently we can choose our strongest population match, depending on what graph we look at.
And Nat Geno was supposed to be the "Be all, end all" of finding our origins ? They can't even get their own pop graphs to match a population.
Rich C

[riya]

I still don't know, how to get access to my results without installing that software.

[Scarlet Ibis]

I think the same thing is going on with my dad, in terms of his averages being closer to a population that isn't listed on his Who Am I? page.

Nat Geno says his top reference populations are: 1) British, and 2) Danish, which is accurate for his known ancestry. However, he seems to be closest to the German average on the populations list.

German: Northern Euro: 46% Mediterranean: 36% Southwest Asian: 17%
My Dad: Northern Euro: 45% Mediterranean: 36% Southwest Asian: 17%

[Sein]

What they're trying to do is place you on a cline. They try to find two reference populations that can be averaged to produce an individual with statistically similar results to you. It is similar to the "two population approximation" you find at GEDMatch for the various Admixture calculators. Also, I think the first reference population they report is supposed to be closer to you than the second (relatively speaking). My first match is the Northern Caucasian reference population, while my second is the West Indian reference population. I'm not particularly similar in terms of percentages, but if you average both of these reference populations (but with a distinct shift towards the Northern Caucasians), you do get results very similar to my own. The averaged location on the map for these two populations is in Eastern Iran, and I guess that's close enough to home. My closest population in terms of percentages is probably the Iranian reference population, followed by the Pamiri Tajiks.

[CelticGerman]

My results: 45% Northern European, 37% Mediterranean, 17% Southwest Asian.

My first reference population is British and the second German. In my opinion it should be other way round (?) ...

[Solothurn]

I got:

1st Ref Pop = German
2nd Ref Pop = Greek

Shows how similar British and Germans really are

My results: 45% Northern European, 37% Mediterranean, 17% Southwest Asian.

My first reference population is British and the second German. In my opinion it should be other way round (?) ...

[Scarlet Ibis]

It's become clear to me that their reference population calculations are "ok," but not even what I'd consider "good" compared to the consumer-driven tools we've had for a few years now, many of which are on gedmatch now. But, of course, most of us got the Geno 2.0 test for the Y-DNA results, and not for the population reference results.

[CelticGerman]

I got:

1st Ref Pop = German
2nd Ref Pop = Greek

Shows how similar British and Germans really are

No doubt. At least Northern Germans and parts of Brits are really close
genetic cousins.

[AJL]

I think by now there are enough doubts about the model for statistical distance that Geno 2 uses, that you are better off comparing your results to the reference populations yourself!

[wombatofthenorth]

My results: 45% Northern European, 37% Mediterranean, 17% Southwest Asian.

My first reference population is British and the second German. In my opinion it should be other way round (?) ...

I don't believe the ordering means anything. I think they just list two matches in alphabetical order. I have not once seen a single person have match #1 begin with a letter that did not come earlier in the alphabet than their match #2. I have seen many people, my mom included, who are clearly a closer match to match #2. So I'm 99.9% convinced that the ordering of the matches has zero meaning. They just list them in alphabetical order.