Is my negrito DNA noise?

[Lek]

I see. But it's probably real then. My point is that such results would be a minority among non-colonials, not the rule.

Every Albanian and most Euros score some near east, south west asian, anatolian etc. Some score high natufian, those who dont get some indian, south asian etc.

[Peterski]

The first kit you posted scored about 2% Indian, but no Australian. Me and my dad both scored no Indian, but about 1.5% Australian. He scored 1.25%, while I scored 1.88%

I suggested that your Oceanian admixture could be present in the Americas already in prehistoric times, or something more recent from Pre-Columbian contacts between Polynesia and America. But it could be something Post-Columbian as well. There are several possible scenarios how you could get that admixture.

=====================

There was most likely both Pre- and Post-Columbian gene flow between Polynesia and America:

"Sweet potato DNA indicates early Polynesians traveled to South America":

https://phys.org/news/2013-01-sweet-...lynesians.html

"Polynesians reached South America, picked up sweet potatoes, went home":

https://arstechnica.com/science/2013...oes-went-home/

There was also Amerindian admixture among the Polynesians of Easter Island:

"The Polynesian gene pool: an early contribution by Amerindians to Easter Island":

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3267125/

But also Polynesian slaves were transported to South America in the 1800s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackbirding

Hard to say if these guys came on their own, or were transported as slaves:

"Two ancient human genomes reveal Polynesian ancestry among the indigenous Botocudos of Brazil":

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4370112/

"DNA study links indigenous Brazilians to Polynesians":

http://www.nature.com/news/dna-study...esians-1.12710

There is something about those Botocudos also on this website:

https://dna-explained.com/category/native-american/

Probably prehistoric (?) Negrito-like admixture in some Amazonian tribes:

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...f_the_Americas

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2...ology-science/

[Lucas]

Cranial morphology of early Americans from Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Implications for the settlement of the New World
http://www.pnas.org/content/102/51/18309.full

[B]Comparative morphological studies of the earliest human skeletons of the New World have shown that, whereas late prehistoric, recent, and present Native Americans tend to exhibit a cranial morphology similar to late and modern Northern Asians (short and wide neurocrania; high, orthognatic and broad faces; and relatively high and narrow orbits and noses), the earliest South Americans tend to be more similar to present Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans (narrow and long neurocrania; prognatic, low faces; and relatively low and broad orbits and noses). However, most of the previous studies of early American human remains were based on small cranial samples. Herein we compare the largest sample of early American skulls ever studied (81 skulls of the Lagoa Santa region) with worldwide data sets representing global morphological variation in humans, through three different multivariate analyses. The results obtained from all multivariate analyses confirm a close morphological affinity between SouthAmerican Paleoindians and extant Australo-Melanesians groups, supporting the hypothesis that two distinct biological populations could have colonized the New World in the Pleistocene/Holocene transition.

[Lucas]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirion%C3%B3

Siriono = Hunter-Gatherer Indians form Bolivia

[Annie999]

AncestryDNA is not that good reading native and stuff. In 23andme I scored 1% native american and Ancestry DNA didnt read it at all.

[Lek]

I see. But it's probably real then. My point is that such results would be a minority among non-colonials, not the rule.

It's actually not necessarily a minority. Polish example :

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...=1#post4252389

^ gets 1% south Asian. I didn't get any on this. A lot of Europeans get it.

[Kriptc06]

Some GEDmatch kits of people who seem to be unmixed Amerindians:

M174237
M192137
M637791
M051413
M283662
M221108 - Mayan

good finding mate

[Albannach]

I seem to get Oceanian/Negrito in a lot of calculators to.


K13 Oracle

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 North_Atlantic 54.03
2 Baltic 25.25
3 West_Med 9.71
4 West_Asian 8.06
5 Oceanian 1.26

Dodecad World 9

Admix Results (sorted):

Population
Amerindian 0.96
East_Asian -
African -
Atlantic_Baltic 74.68
Australasian 0.97
Siberian 0.32
Caucasus_Gedrosia 12.06
Southern 10.99
South_Asian -

Eurasia K10 CHG-NAF Oracle

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 WHG 40.83
2 CHG 19.79
3 EHG 17.63
4 Anatolian_Farmers 17.46
5 SW_Asian 2.31
6 Papuan 1.06

[wvwvw]

it's real and it shows on you. shrug:

[jingorex]

On several GedMatch tests, DNA.land and WeGene I score about 1.5% Oceanian/Australoid. How can I figure out if it's noise or not? I'm waiting for my AncestryDNA results. I'd be curious to see if I score pacific islander or I still get similar negrito results on the other calculators. If it does show up on AncestryDNA, where could it come from? Does Latin America have any recent negrito immigration?