Eurogenes Biogeographic Ancestry Project

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Elizabeth~

When did he tell you that? For this Pagani run? He posted in the other forum (a couple weeks ago?) that he doesn't want to be emailed/pmed and he wants anyone with questions to ask them in the thread on that forum, and he might answer there.

For my African, about a month or two ago via pm in the other forum, he said he I probably had an African-American ancestor.
I asked what he thought of my South Asian and Oceanian (shows up in tiny amounts in the DNA Tribes SNP analysis and Dienekes/McDonald) but he didn't comment

---

Okay, well on McDonald's I score nothing, except Middle-Eastern pertaining to non-European ancestry. I asked him about 3.1% West-African I scored on the 19th chromosome, and he said it was probably real, but was probably rather old, so he was guaranteed it had not entered my bloodlines in the last 500 years.

You can actually make these determinations due to the size, and he also said in some instances where it is located on the chromosome, although its a bit more complex than that.

I would think the South Asian/Oceanic is more archaic in you case, unless you have some Gypsy ancestry somewhere back in the woodpile. It depends on how strong it is, because if its too small its not really worrying about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeistFaust

I PMed him this, and he is usually very quick to answer my replied in a long and detailed manner on PM.

He said for me to send him PMs when I needed a question answered, because he is there to help me out with interpreting the data and information.

I suppose he makes an exception for me, and I am on good terms with him generally speaking, so he told me anything under 1% generally is noise range.

---

So then you're one of the lucky ones then.
He has a good rapport with a handful of people on the other forum, responds quickly and in-depth. He sporadically responds to me, if at all, and it's brief. Sometimes other forum members will chime in to try to help me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Elizabeth~

So then you're one of the lucky ones then.
He has a good rapport with a handful of people on the other forum, responds quickly and in-depth. He sporadically responds to me, if at all, and it's brief. Sometimes other forum members will chime in to try to help me.

---

If you need any help I can pitch in because I have been tutored by someone who has taken many classes in bioinformatics, but I assuredly don't know all the twists and turns. Consistency of information though is critical in determining whether a certain segment is real, and not just this, but also the percentage at which this consistency is showing itself.

In your case it appears to show up quite consistently, so that is why I am noting it, and it seems to me that it is more common than I thought that individuals with some colonial ancestry show up with Amerindian and SSA. I am actually going to be communicating with an individual here soon to see if


I can genealogically locate his distant colonial SSA element, which was picked up by both 23andme and McDonalds. I wish we had more people on here who were rather fluent and well versed in the language of bioinformatics, so when people like Polako and Dienekes did not respond they could get an adequate answer from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeistFaust

Okay, well on McDonald's I score nothing, except Middle-Eastern pertaining to non-European ancestry. I asked him about 3.1% West-African I scored on the 19th chromosome, and he said it was probably real, but was probably rather old, so he was guaranteed it had not entered my bloodlines in the last 500 years.

You can actually make these determinations due to the size, and he also said in some instances where it is located on the chromosome, although its a bit more complex than that.

I would think the South Asian/Oceanic is more archaic in you case, unless you have some Gypsy ancestry somewhere back in the woodpile. It depends on how strong it is, because if its too small its not really worrying about.

---

I have no known South Asian/Oceanian/Gypsy either.

My strongest African bit is on the centromere of my 3rd chromosome. 23and also gave me some on chr 5, while McDonald has 3, 4, and 5, totaling 0.5%. 23andme gave me Asian on 4 & 8, while at McDonald I have no Asian at all but Native American on chr 6 (nothing on 4 & 8) .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeistFaust

If you need any help I can pitch in because I have been tutored by someone who has taken many classes in bioinformatics, but I assuredly don't know all the twists and turns. Consistency of information though is critical in determining whether a certain segment is real, and not just this, but also the percentage at which this consistency is showing itself.

In your case it appears to show up quite consistently, so that is why I am noting it, and it seems to me that it is more common than I thought that individuals with some colonial ancestry show up with Amerindian and SSA. I am actually going to be communicating with an individual here soon to see if


I can genealogically locate his distant colonial SSA element, which was picked up by both 23andme and McDonalds. I wish we had more people on here who were rather fluent and well versed in the language of bioinformatics, so when people like Polako and Dienekes did not respond they could get an adequate answer from them.

---

He did say that since it was consistently showing up that it's real. Or was it you that said that?
Surprisingly the Finns get African too, first it was West African but now they have Northeast African. Jaska on the other forum posted it may be a labeling error, something old and not African. That's with data used in Eurogenes runs.


DNA Tribes SNP gave me Central African (peaks in Khoisan and pygmies) but a man from Korea posted his results and he also has Central Africa, and so does one of Evon's relatives (from Norway). But theirs was under 1% while mine was over 1% (less than 2%).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Elizabeth~

I have no known South Asian/Oceanian/Gypsy either.

My strongest African bit is on the centromere of my 3rd chromosome. 23and also gave me some on chr 5, while McDonald has 3, 4, and 5, totaling 0.5%. 23andme gave me Asian on 4 & 8, while at McDonald I have no Asian at all but Native American on chr 6 (nothing on 4 & 8) .

---

Okay, well if you scored African and Amerindian with 23andme then this definitely seems to show that you actually have such ancestry, which is further validated that they consistently show up on the same chromosomes. The way they calculate it and put it into percentages is a bit different, but generally speaking McDonald's is probably picking up on something that could be found from the time period of the early 17th to early 18th century.


Generally speaking McDonald's probably picks up on things 100% for the first 5-6 generations, and then after that the chances of picking up information slowly but exponentially inclines. This means that if something entered your bloodlines in the early 17th to early 18th century McDonald ought to pick it up, but won't necessarily do so all the time.

I have seen individuals with one Mulatto ancestor back in the late 1600s, who had a very small element show up on McDonalds. There were others of this same family who picked up stronger elements, but because that Mulatto family had intermarried in twice with the same line, which made it more likely that the segment would show itself.


I have known someone who had one Amerindian ancestor back in the early 1600s, who scored .5% on McDonald's test. Also 23andme tends to calculate Amerindian as Asian most of the time, and in McDonald's system it comes up as Amerindian.


I think that your Amerindian is so minor that it is randomly showing itself up different segments in different genetic programs, but I would trust McDonalds analysis over 23andme. 23andme tends to underplay the Amerindian and SSA element at times, and concerning your South Asian/Oceanic element I would say that its quite old, but then again I would need to know the exact percentage you have of it.


P.S. Anything under 1% is either noise or its extremely old material, and generally speaking sometimes anything below 3% could be considered too small to determine or fix appropriately within the context of your ancestry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pallantides

Pagani_K8_results:

European 73.25%
West Asian 12.96%
Middle Eastern 11.27%
North Eurasian 1.33%
East Asian 0.87%
Northeast African 0.3%
West African 0.00%
South Asian 0.00%

---

New results:

European 72.92%
West Asian 13.01%
Middle Eastern 11.52%
North Eurasian 1.3%
East Asian 0.87%
Northeast African 0.25%
West African 0.05%
South Asian 0%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Elizabeth~

He did say that since it was consistently showing up that it's real. Or was it you that said that?
Surprisingly the Finns get African too, first it was West African but now they have Northeast African. Jaska on the other forum posted it may be a labeling error, something old and not African. That's with data used in Eurogenes runs.


DNA Tribes SNP gave me Central African (peaks in Khoisan and pygmies) but a man from Korea posted his results and he also has Central Africa, and so does one of Evon's relatives (from Norway).

---

Yeah it certainly could be an error, and just because you score West-African alleles with Polako and Dienekes does not necessarily mean its real. That is something for them to determine to be honest, and generally speaking you could have those alleles and it just means those alleles peak in West-African populations, but are not mutually exclusive to them.

No, I said that if it is showing up consistently than most likely its real, but whether its more recent or not is something I can't determine, although I can give you possibilities.

Well Pygmies tend to be quite separated from Khoisan, although we are speaking about genetic distance, so relatively speaking they are closer to each other where you will see it peak in both. If McDonald's picked something up, and on the exact chromosomes the 23andme system did I would say its definitely real, and could be more recent.

It varies and is in small amounts (under or around 1%).
With Dienekes by segment I had a couple of NAN_Melanesian, and other Asian segments. I posted all that stuff on dna-forum.org before the forum disappeared.

To be fair, I have a crush on Polako and I had started non-dna conversations via pm, as well as dna conversations, and I think that is why he announced he doesn't want pms anymore. :embarrassed

New Results:

North Eurasian: 0%
West African: .49%
East Asian: 0%
South Asian: .79%
Northeastern African: 0%
European: 56.22%
West Asian: 12.52%
Middle-Eastern: 29.97%