GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-01 > 1138388585


From: thomas goulde <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] autosomal testing
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:03:05 -0500
References: <43DA63A5.8050307@neyersoftware.com>
In-Reply-To: <43DA63A5.8050307@neyersoftware.com>


Numbers from these two labs ought to be different as they are sampling
different markers - SNP's vs. STR's and interpreting via differing
databases. ABDNA's European category covers a lot of geography and many
populations. DNAF apparently is willing/able to limn some distinctions
within the general category of European.

Add up all the DNAF percentages that pertain to populations covered by
ABDNA's European.

There is still a lot of uncertainty about the attribution of markers to
EA and NA and vice versa and the presence of both among IE.

I was not aware till your post that DNAF gave-out percentage
estimates/conclusions for the autosomal panel.

Can anyone on the list tell me what use may be made of the raw data
results included in DNAF and ABDNA 2.5 - where and how they can be
further researched?

Tom


On Jan 27, 2006, at 1:17 PM, Mary Jo Neyer wrote:

> I just got my results back from AncestrybyDNA, and I am very confused.
> The results are completely different than what I received from
> DNA-Fingerprint. One certificate from AncestrybyDNA states I am 98%
> European, 2% Native American. The other states that I am 76% Northern
> European, 13% Middle eastern, 6% south Asian and 5%southern eastern
> European. We also received my husband's ancestry and his is strange
> too, in that all his ancestors can be shown to have emigrated rather
> recently, according to paper documentation which we have verified,
> from Germany. Yet he is show to be 94%, 6% Native American, or 41 %
> Northern European, 31 % southeastern European, 28% Middle eastern and
> 0% South Asian. We laughed when we saw that his test had a higher
> amount of Native American than mine.
> It is all the more confusing in that a second cousin of mine told
> me some of our mutual relatives had been tested by a company (my
> cousin wasn't sure which company) and had shown subSaharan African
> ancestry.
> Has anybody else had such disparate results?
> Mary Jo
>
>
> ==============================
> Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more.
> Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx
>

This thread: