NatGeo Geno 2.0 DNA tests giving incorrect results???

[Isleño]

I wonder if anyone notices what I have. Upon reviewing results and averages on Europeans from NatGeo's Geno 2.0, it's completely out of line to other tests, genetic calculators and DNA studies concerning SW Asian in Europeans and Mediterranean in Northern Euros.

Please take a second to review the Geno 2.0 European "averages" in the following link:

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/reference-populations/

Obviously it's splitting the European's averages into Mesolithic (calling it Northern Euro) and Neolithic (calling it Mediterranean), rather than telling you how much Northern European or Southern European ancestry you have like 23andme does.

But then we examine the Geno 2.0 averages and.......well......17% SW Asian for a German? By the way, they put Greeks at 17% SW Asian as well, same as the Germans, which seems completely off. 36% Med for a German? 33% Med for a Brit? 17% SW Asian for British???

If we look at Gedmatch calculations such as Dodecad, and studies such as ones from Lazaridis and others, we see a totally different picture.

We would see that British have about 22% Med and 1-1.4% SW Asian, Greeks have 41% Med and 6.8% SW Asian, Germans have 22% Med and 1.5% SW Asian etc. we also see similar results to these on 23andme. But yet Geno 2.0 lists such results as 36% Med and 17% SW Asian for Germans? or 17% SW Asian for a Finn or Brit? or 33% Med for a Brit? or 16% SW Asian for a Dane? lol, a Dane???

It just seems incorrect when compared to Dodecad, Lazaridis, 23andme and others.


Here are percentages for Dodecad which seem more real:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyN nc&authkey=COCa89AJ&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0


Do you guys agree it seems off and incorrect?

[wvwvw]

They just calculate the componments differently that's all. You can e-mail them and ask them to clarify what they mean by West Asian, Mediterranean etc.

[Mn The Loki TA Son]

Yes, it seems out of line the NatGeo Geno 2.0 DNA tests.

[Isleño]

They just calculate the componments differently that's all. You can e-mail them and ask them to clarify what they mean by West Asian, Mediterranean etc.

But calculating them differently is giving the wrong percentages. If a Brit is scoring 1% SW Asian on Dodecad, genetic studies such as the admixture runs by Lazaridis and even 23andme, would it be wrong if they gave a figure of 17% of SW Asian for a Brit or German? They gave both Germans and Greeks the same SW Asian percentage. How's that for odd? I'm sure they are making a mistake somewhere with any West Asian DNA, but comparing West Asian and SW Asian is like comparing an Armenian to a Saudi Bedouin, it's completely different. But then again, one could see it's a breakdown of ancient ancestry into Mesolithic, Neolithic and they are probably combining the West Asian into any small SW Asian there is.

[Mn The Loki TA Son]

But calculating them differently is giving the wrong percentages. If a Brit is scoring 1% SW Asian on Dodecad, genetic studies such as the admixture runs by Lazaridis and even 23andme, would it be wrong if they gave a figure of 17% of SW Asian for a Brit or German? They gave both Germans and Greeks the same SW Asian percentage. How's that for odd? I'm sure they are making a mistake somewhere with any West Asian DNA, but comparing West Asian and SW Asian is like comparing an Armenian to a Saudi Bedouin, it's completely different. But then again, one could see it's a breakdown of ancient ancestry into Mesolithic, Neolithic and they are probably combining the West Asian into any small SW Asian there is.
I agree, that's odd. what they gave for Germans and Greeks having the same SW Asian percentage, sounds off. it don't match up. neither with the average DNA test results given by othr DNA tests.

[Isleño]

I agree, that's odd. what they gave for Germans and Greeks having the same SW Asian percentage, sounds off. it don't match up. neither with the average DNA test results given by othr DNA tests.
I agree. Let's see if others agree that this test is off concerning SW Asian in Europeans and Med in some of the North Euros.

[wvwvw]

Here are the results of a Finnish guy from 23 and me and Geno:


Comparing Admixture Test Results Across Companies (otherwise known as "ethnic" breakdowns): FTDNA, AncestryDNA, 23andMe and Geno 2.0 - My Review

With the recent releases of Geno 2.0 and the new 23andMe Ancestry Composition feature, I thought it would be a good time to review and compare my biogeographical ancestry (BGA) results from each of the major DNA testing companies. (BGA is sometimes referred to as ethnic breakdown or admixture analysis.)

My Known Ancestry
First, let's take a look at what I know of my ancestry:
25% Finnish
12.5% Scandinavian (Norway)
12.5% British (England)
~25% Colonial New England (presumably mostly British)
~15.63% Unknown (due to brick walls and immigrant ancestors of unknown origins)
~9.38% German

http://i60.tinypic.com/qxs80j.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/15xkda1.jpg

http://i60.tinypic.com/4uan2d.jpg

http://i61.tinypic.com/21ms2ky.jpg

http://i57.tinypic.com/2crmxx4.jpg

http://i60.tinypic.com/2yuy64k.jpg

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/12/comparing-admixture-test-results-across.html

[Isleño]

Here are the results of a Finnish guy from 23 and me and Geno:


Comparing Admixture Test Results Across Companies (otherwise known as "ethnic" breakdowns): FTDNA, AncestryDNA, 23andMe and Geno 2.0 - My Review

With the recent releases of Geno 2.0 and the new 23andMe Ancestry Composition feature, I thought it would be a good time to review and compare my biogeographical ancestry (BGA) results from each of the major DNA testing companies. (BGA is sometimes referred to as ethnic breakdown or admixture analysis.)

My Known Ancestry
First, let's take a look at what I know of my ancestry:
25% Finnish
12.5% Scandinavian (Norway)
12.5% British (England)
~25% Colonial New England (presumably mostly British)
~15.63% Unknown (due to brick walls and immigrant ancestors of unknown origins)
~9.38% German

http://i57.tinypic.com/2crmxx4.jpg

http://i60.tinypic.com/2yuy64k.jpg

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/12/comparing-admixture-test-results-across.html

But the point that I was making is the SW Asian seems highly exaggerated in Geno 2.0. Because if you compare it to the what we see in genetic calculators and genetic projects like Dodecad ancestry project and to studies like Lazaridis and others, not to mention other DNA tests such as 23andme and others, the SW Asian in Geno 2.0 seems highly exaggerated.

I think its incorrect. They seem to be making a mistake. If the majority of tests, calculators, studies and projects give much lower SW Asian percentages for Europeans such as 1%-1.4% SW Asian in Brits and 1.5% SW Asian in Germans, it seems obvious that Geno 2.0 is the one making the mistake when most others project similar results. Geno 2.0 gives both Brits and Germans 17% SW Asian and even gives the same 17% SW Asian to Greeks. It just seems way off when compared to the other sources. So I think it's wrong.

[wvwvw]

Even Iberians get less South West Asian (13%) than Finns (17%) :confused:

[Isleño]

Even Iberians get less South West Asian (13%) than Finns (17%) :confused:
Yeah and the autosomal runs by Behar et al. gave Spaniards only 1.8% SW Asian and Dodecad gave Spaniards 1.9% SW Asian. Dodecad also gave Finns 0.2% SW Asian. Less than half a percent!

When most of the other studies, projects, genetic calculators and admixture runs are giving similar SW Asian percentages per population average, that means they are correct and Geno 2.0 is the one that's not. Both Behar et al. and Dodecad gave Spaniards less than 2% SW Asian, not to mention similar percentages for SW Asian are given in other sources. Yet Geno 2.0 gave Spaniards 13% SW Asian? And even more shocking, 17% for Finns when Dodecad gave less than a half percent? Geno 2.0 just seems way off.

[Sikeliot]

Those results do not look very credible.

[Isleño]

Also, notice in the Dodecad chart for Greeks, they have 41.9% Neolithic Mediterranean, a combined total of 24.5% Mesolithic Euro (West and East Euro on the Dodecad V3 spreadsheet is Mesolithic Euro), 25.7% West Asian and 6.8% SW Asian. But on Geno 2.0, Greeks are 54% Neolithic Mediterranean, 28% Mesolithic Euro and 17% SW Asian. What it looks like they did was split the West Asian in half and put almost half of it in the SW Asian category and the rest in the Mediterranean category. This would be a mistake. If they are not going to count West Asian because it's ancient, then why count Neolithic Mediterranean and Mesolithic European (and label Meso Euro as "Northern European") at all? Because all of the categories in Geno 2.0 are ancient. It's not like Geno 2.0 is doing like 23andme and telling someone how much Northern Euro they have and how much Southern Euro they have, not breaking apart Northern Euro and Southern Euro into Meso Euro and Neolithic Med ancient categories. It's two different things.

But with 23andme aside, Dodecad Ancestry Project, Behar et al., Lazaridis et al. and others are showing ancient breakdowns and by comparing their ancient breakdowns to Geno 2.0, it seems like they are all on the same page and NatGeo's Geno 2.0 is not.

[Isleño]

Those results do not look very credible.

No they don't look credible to me either. Read my comment I just posted about Greeks. And by the way, they are giving Germans, Brits and Finns the same 17% SW Asian as they do Greeks! And Dodecad only gives Greeks 6.8% SW Asian and Germans and Brits about 1.5% SW Asian.

I think Dodecad, Behar et al. and Lazaridis et al are right and Geno 2.0 is wrong.