Anyone done Family Tree DNA?

[Kathryn]

Did you feel your results were accurate?

 

I just got mine back and am really surprised. I got 100% European which wasn't unexpected. But, the breakdown was strange.

 

42% Scandinavian

30% Southern European

28% Eastern European (totally expected, paternal grandfather is from Ukraine)

 

The top two results I literally have no clue where they could have come from. Literally everyone else besides my paternal grandfather in my paper trail was from the British Isles and Central/Western Europe (France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany). I know these are options because DH got two-thirds British Isles and and one-third Western/Central Europe. My mom has another couple of weeks on hers and now I'm really interested in what hers is going to come back with. Could it be really off? Or are there LOTS of secrets in both sides of my family tree?

[gardenmom5]

people moved around.  you might be surprised how much german dna is in england.  or viking dna (re: scandinavian) in scotland.  a lot of french in england too.   going back centuries.  e.g. the normans were french.

 

some linguistic eytimology indicates russian comes from a corruption of a viking word.  (again - Scandinavian)

 

eta: and then it will vary how the dna carries down the line.   dh is 1/4 armenian.  he's extremely fair, blue-eyed redhead. he got a lot more of the western european dna. his brother was also 1/4 armenian.  he had olive skin, black hair and black eyes.  he got more of the armenian dna.  I guess my point is dh didn't have much armenian to pass along.

and germans did a lot of settling in different places - they were in russia under catherine the great.  (she was german.)

Edited February 8, 2017 by gardenmom5

[LucyStoner]

My friend did. She has the most quintessentially Dutch last name and was told her ancestors were from the Netherlands. Turns out she has just a tiny amount of Dutch heritage. She probably had 1 Dutch male ancestor who was born in the 18th century...about the same proportion that she is Asian.

[Kathryn]

people moved around. you might be surprised how much german dna is in england. or viking dna (re: scandinavian) in scotland. a lot of french in england too. going back centuries. e.g. the normans were french.

 

some linguistic eytimology indicates russian comes from a corruption of a viking word. (again - Scandinavian)

 

eta: and then it will vary how the dna carries down the line. dh is 1/4 armenian. he's extremely fair, blue-eyed redhead. he got a lot more of the western european dna. his brother was also 1/4 armenian. he had olive skin, black hair and black eyes. he got more of the armenian dna. I guess my point is dh didn't have much armenian to pass along.

and germans did a lot of settling in different places - they were in russia under catherine the great. (she was german.)

It just seems weird that of the dozens of *different* lines that I can trace back to the British Isles and Central/Western Europe, none show up, and instead I'm 3/4 other stuff.

[gardenmom5]

It just seems weird that of the dozens of *different* lines that I can trace back to the British Isles and Central/Western Europe, none show up, and instead I'm 3/4 other stuff.

 

and how far back do you go?

 

the normans (french - and where were they before they arrived in france?)  came to the british isles in 1066. the Vikings (Scandinavian) were there by 800 AD.  and before that . . . the romans were there (Mediterranean). and where did the anglos come from?

the thing about invading armies. . . they tend to be men, who want wives/women - and they father children with the local population mingling their dna.

and the frisians were in there too . . . .

 

eta: dna will vary widely according to the geographic area in England (then wales and Scotland are different still) your ancestors come from, as well as their economic class.

Edited February 8, 2017 by gardenmom5

[Lawyer&Mom]

Read the Scandinavian as Germanic. Then remember that there is plenty of Germanic in Western Europe and England. The Anglo-Saxons? From Denmark. The Norman invasion? Vikings who spoke French. France? Named after a Germanic tribe, the Franks. Our modern nation states disguise how blended it all is genetically.

[elegantlion]

My sister did hers and got a large portion of Scandinavian and we also have mostly British heritage. 

 

Scandinavians ruled part of Britain under Danelaw and even when it became England the populations merged, the Scandinavians didn't just up and leave. Also like stated below, the Anglo-Normans arrived in England with Scandinavian blood. So it wouldn't be unusual for a family with a long line of English heritage to have Scandinavian DNA. 

 

 

Did you feel your results were accurate?

 

I just got mine back and am really surprised. I got 100% European which wasn't unexpected. But, the breakdown was strange.

 

42% Scandinavian

30% Southern European

28% Eastern European (totally expected, paternal grandfather is from Ukraine)

 

The top two results I literally have no clue where they could have come from. Literally everyone else besides my paternal grandfather in my paper trail was from the British Isles and Central/Western Europe (France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany). I know these are options because DH got two-thirds British Isles and and one-third Western/Central Europe. My mom has another couple of weeks on hers and now I'm really interested in what hers is going to come back with. Could it be really off? Or are there LOTS of secrets in both sides of my family tree?

 

 

and how far back do you go?

 

the normans (french - and where were they before they arrived in france?)  came to the british isles in 1066. the Vikings (Scandinavian) were there by 800 AD.  and before that . . . the romans were there (Mediterranean). and where did the anglos come from?

the thing about invading armies. . . they tend to be men, who want wives/women - and they father children with the local population mingling their dna.

and the frisians were in there too . . . .

 

eta: dna will vary widely according to the geographic area in England (then wales and Scotland are different still) your ancestors come from, as well as their economic class.

 

:iagree:

[Kathryn]

I guess I assumed that since the matches to other people were like 2nd through 5th cousins and more distant, that it was looking at more recent populations, like the past few hundred years and not 1000+ year migrations.

[gaillardia]

I have not, but plan to, eventually. From what I have read, it would help to have your mother's mother do one as well as your father's father, trying to reach back into the gene pool as far as possible, they say. If you don't have a mother or grandmother but maybe mother's sister or even brother, same for the paternal side. 

 

I also read that the more generations that go by without it testing, the more "watered down" the results get. I'd prefer charts and graphs than reading explanations, with maps, please.

 

Did you try to guess what the results would be before you read your results? 

[Liz CA]

Dh is still waiting for his results.

It is not surprising though because Scandinavia and Eastern Europe were once like Washington and Oregon. People lived in one area, worked and traveled in another area. I have lots of Scandinavian - in fact predominantly but the history that we know most about is that my grandparents were from Tchechoslovakia (now T - Republic) and one great-grandmother from Vienna.

Edited February 8, 2017 by Liz CA

[Kathryn]

I have not, but plan to, eventually. From what I have read, it would help to have your mother's mother do one as well as your father's father, trying to reach back into the gene pool as far as possible, they say. If you don't have a mother or grandmother but maybe mother's sister or even brother, same for the paternal side.

 

I also read that the more generations that go by without it testing, the more "watered down" the results get. I'd prefer charts and graphs than reading explanations, with maps, please.

 

Did you try to guess what the results would be before you read your results?

My mom did one but her results aren't due for another two weeks. Her parents are alive but are very old and confused and 1,000 miles away. My dad's parents died a long time ago. I might ask him to do one depending on my mom's results. I did order a 23andme test last night. I'm interested to see if another company has similar results. I can get on board with the Scandinavian, but the Southern Europe is just so out there.

[maize]

I've read somewhere that 23andMe has the most reliable genetic ancestry results. For best accuracy have a parent tested as well; they will run the two data sets through a program that is then able to determine which SNPS come from which chromosome in a pair; my ancestry report changed after my dad tested. If your dad is willing I'd have him do the test as you have at least one for your mom already.

 

One possibility for unexpected results is undocumented adoption--adoptions have always happened but in the past were frequently kept secret.

Edited February 8, 2017 by maize

[gardenmom5]

I guess I assumed that since the matches to other people were like 2nd through 5th cousins and more distant, that it was looking at more recent populations, like the past few hundred years and not 1000+ year migrations.

 

this is from the advertisement for  the swab -

Haplogroups

Trace parts of your ancestry to a specific group of individuals from 1,000+ years ago.

 

[maize]

this is from the advertisement for the swab - Haplogroups

Trace parts of your ancestry to a specific group of individuals from 1,000+ years ago.

Haplogroups though are for Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA, not the Family Finder autosomal DNA test.

 

Y and mito do not recombine with every generation and have a slow rate of mutation (especially mito) so looking at those is looking much farther back into the past.

[maize]

If you look at this chart you will see that 23andMe has the highest accuracy when it comes to ethnicity estimates, but that within-continent breakdown is still iffy (i.e., it's pretty accurate at recognizing Europe vs. Africa but England vs. Norway not so much):

 

http://isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_testing_comparison_chart

 

Here are my grandmother's results from three different services:

 

Ancestry.com

Great Britain 58%

Scandinavia 18% 

Europe West 14%

Ireland 4%

Italy/Greece 1%

Europe East 1%

Finland/Northwest Russia <1%

 

Asia South 3%

 

FTDNA (transferred data from Ancestry, not FTDNA's own test)

Scandinavia: 62%

British Isles: 30%

Asia Minor: 8%

 

23andMe:

 

British and Irish 43.1%

Scandinavian 14.7%

French and German 6.7%

Broadly Northwestern European 29.2%

Southern European 2.0%

Eastern European 0.8%

Broadly European 2.5%

 

Native American 0.8%

East Asian <0.1 %

Broadly East Asian and Native American <0.1%

 

West Africa 0.1%

 

Broadly Oceanian <0.1%

 

Unassigned 0.1%

 

Note that FTDNA did vastly overestimate Scandinavian ancestry when compared with the other two services. Grandma is 1/4 Swedish so the expected result would be closer to 25%. 

 

[maize]

The goal with autosomal ethnicity analysis is to look back about 500 years, before the frequent immigration and intermixing of the past few centuries.

[Spryte]

DH did Family Tree DNA about 12 years ago. At the time, his adoption was closed, so we had no way of knowing accuracy, but met so many incredibly helpful people. It was a good experience.

 

About 4 years later, his adoption was opened - and the results were right on the money. :)

[gardenmom5]

the subject of ancestry dna testing just came up on another forum. I thought I'd post some very useful links that came up.

 

comparing the different services:

 

http://isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_testing_comparison_chart

 

and getting the biggest bang for your dna buck

 

http://www.legalgenealogist.com/2015/02/02/2015-most-bang-for-the-dna-buck/

 

[SKL]

I did 23andme for all 5 people living in my house.  I found it to be pretty accurate for those of us who know our ancestry to some extent.  I was actually hoping for some surprises, but nope.  :)  My kids' were really interesting as they are from all over the globe.  If I didn't have the 3 adults' to compare to, I might have been a bit suspicious.  :)

[SpreadingtheFeast]

I did one last year, and my Dad's Friesian roots were shown as Scandinavian, British, and Irish, and not as Western European. From my Mum's side I got a near 50% Finnish result.

[Janeway]

My husband is 1% Japanese and I am 1% New Guinea/Papau. That makes no sense. That means a grandparent around the 1700's who was Japanese had a baby with someone who was not and ditto for my side. 

[Lady Florida.]

the normans (french - and where were they before they arrived in france?)

They were Vikings. Normans = Norse men = North men (men from the north). They could have come from Denmark or the Scandanavian mainland.

[gardenmom5]

They were Vikings. Normans = Norse men = North men (men from the north). They could have come from Denmark or the Scandanavian mainland.

 

they were from normandy.

 

this is from the wikipedia summary.:

The Norman conquest of England was the 11th century invasion and occupation of England by an army of Norman, Breton, and French soldiers led by Duke William II of Normandy, later styled as William the Conqueror.

 

 

there had been two invasion forces, from two completely different areas, in two different parts of england.  the first one, in the north, was repelled.  that also meant the english forces were in the north when william came and received very little resistance.

Edited February 9, 2017 by gardenmom5

[Kathryn]

they were from normandy.

 

this is from the wikipedia summary.:

The Norman conquest of England was the 11th century invasion and occupation of England by an army of Norman, Breton, and French soldiers led by Duke William II of Normandy, later styled as William the Conqueror.

 

 

there had been two invasion forces, from two completely different areas, in two different parts of england. the first one, in the north, was repelled. that also meant the english forces were in the north when william came and received very little resistance.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans

 

"The Normans (Norman: Nourmands; French: Normands; Latin: Normanni) were the people who, in the 10th and 11th centuries, gave their name to Normandy, a region in France. They were descended from Norse ("Norman" comes from "Norseman"[1]) raiders and pirates from Denmark, Iceland and Norway who, under their leader Rollo, agreed to swear fealty to King Charles III of West Francia.[2] Through generations of assimilation and mixing with the native Frankish and Gallo-Roman populations, their descendants would gradually adopt the Carolingian-based cultures of West Francia, ultimately resulting in their own assimilation into the Romance society.[3] The distinct cultural and ethnic identity of the Normans emerged initially in the first half of the 10th century, and it continued to evolve over the succeeding centuries.[4]"

[maize]

they were from normandy.

 

The Norman conquest of England was the 11th century invasion and occupation of England by an army of Norman, Breton, and French soldiers led by Duke William II of Normandy, later styled as William the Conqueror.

The Normans had not been in Normandy very long:

 

From Wikipedia

 

The Normans (Norman: Nourmands; French: Normands; Latin: Normanni) were the people who, in the 10th and 11th centuries, gave their name to Normandy, a region in France. They were descended from Norse ("Norman" comes from "Norseman"[1]) raiders and pirates from Denmark, Iceland and Norway who, under their leader Rollo, agreed to swear fealty to King Charles III of West Francia.[2] Through generations of assimilation and mixing with the native Frankish and Gallo-Roman populations, their descendants would gradually adopt the Carolingian-based cultures of West Francia, ultimately resulting in their own assimilation into the Romance society.[3] The distinct cultural and ethnic identity of the Normans emerged initially in the first half of the 10th century, and it continued to evolve over the succeeding centuries.[4]

 

And:

Rollo (Norman: Rou; Old Norse: Hrólfr; French: Rollon; c. 846 – c. 930 AD) was a Viking who became the first ruler of Normandy, a region of France. He is sometimes called the 1st Duke of Normandy. Rollo emerged as the outstanding personality among the Norsemen who had secured a permanent foothold on Frankish soil in the valley of the lower Seine. Charles the Simple, the king of West Francia, ceded them lands between the mouth of the Seine and what is now the city of Rouen in exchange for Rollo agreeing to end his brigandage, and provide the Franks with protection against future Viking raids.[1]

 

 

So, the Normans were Scandinavian Vikings just a few generations before William the Conquerer. Of course the population of Normandy was a mixture of Viking descendants and pre-existing local populations. Though to the extent that that population was made up of ethnic Bretons I would think they were already close relatives of the populations in Britain.

 

Interestingly population DNA studies in England show relatively little Norman impact--except among the nobility. I'll look for a link later when I'm on the computer because I found the studies quite interesting. If memory serves even the Saxon contribution to the gene pool was relatively limited.

Edited February 9, 2017 by maize

[maize]

I cross-posted with Kathryn :) takes me too long to type on my phone.

Edited February 9, 2017 by maize

[Lady Florida.]

they were from normandy.

 

this is from the wikipedia summary.:

The Norman conquest of England was the 11th century invasion and occupation of England by an army of Norman, Breton, and French soldiers led by Duke William II of Normandy, later styled as William the Conqueror.

 

 

there had been two invasion forces, from two completely different areas, in two different parts of england.  the first one, in the north, was repelled.  that also meant the english forces were in the north when william came and received very little resistance.

 

 

Also from Wikipedia:

 

 The fiefdom of Normandy was created for the Norwegian Viking leader Hrólfr Ragnvaldsson, or Rollo (also known as Robert of Normandy). Rollo had besieged Paris but in 911 entered vassalage to the king of the West Franks, Charles the Simple, through the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte. In exchange for his homage and fealty, Rollo legally gained the territory which he and his Viking allies had previously conquered. The name "Normandy" reflects Rollo's Viking (i.e. "Norseman") origins.

[Lady Florida.]

I criss-posted with Kathryn :) takes me too long to type in my phone.

 

And I cross-posted with both of you. :) I was also on Messenger making plans with friends to see Hamilton a year and a half from now.  :lol:

[J-rap]

My parents are both (as far as we know) 100% Scandinavian, but when my dd did 23andme, a big percentage was from what is now Russia.  But actually as we read about it, we learned that a lot people migrated from that area to Scandinavia.  I can't remember how long ago, but it was so long ago that it isn't even in our family history, though it certainly makes sense.

 

I can't remember if I got that information from 23andme, or from another site that lets you upload your results from 23andme and goes into it more extensively.  I kind of think it was the latter.

 

It's all very fascinating!

 

[maize]

Gardenmom5 I hope you don't feel like we were all piling on your post!

 

I know one thing that has proven true on average in genetic population studies is that geographic proximity almost always equates to genetic similarity. So populations in Scandinavia, Britain, France, Germany, etc. have a lot in common genetically. This makes it very hard to distinguish between them in DNA analysis and personal ethnicity analyses are always considered speculative when you get down to distinguishing between nationalities in the same general region.

[maize]

My parents are both (as far as we know) 100% Scandinavian, but when my dd did 23andme, a big percentage was from what is now Russia. But actually as we read about it, we learned that a lot people migrated from that area to Scandinavia. I can't remember how long ago, but it was so long ago that it isn't even in our family history, though it certainly makes sense.

 

I can't remember if I got that information from 23andme, or from another site that lets you upload your results from 23andme and goes into it more extensively. I kind of think it was the latter.

 

It's all very fascinating!

I believe there were also significant movements of Scandinavian peoples into Russia.

[Lady Florida.]

Gardenmom5 I hope you don't feel like we were all piling on your post!

 

 

No, certainly not! We all just happened to not see each other's posts so we all posted.

[Bluegoat]

The Normans had not been in Normandy very long:

 

From Wikipedia

 

The Normans (Norman: Nourmands; French: Normands; Latin: Normanni) were the people who, in the 10th and 11th centuries, gave their name to Normandy, a region in France. They were descended from Norse ("Norman" comes from "Norseman"[1]) raiders and pirates from Denmark, Iceland and Norway who, under their leader Rollo, agreed to swear fealty to King Charles III of West Francia.[2] Through generations of assimilation and mixing with the native Frankish and Gallo-Roman populations, their descendants would gradually adopt the Carolingian-based cultures of West Francia, ultimately resulting in their own assimilation into the Romance society.[3] The distinct cultural and ethnic identity of the Normans emerged initially in the first half of the 10th century, and it continued to evolve over the succeeding centuries.[4]

 

And:

Rollo (Norman: Rou; Old Norse: Hrólfr; French: Rollon; c. 846 – c. 930 AD) was a Viking who became the first ruler of Normandy, a region of France. He is sometimes called the 1st Duke of Normandy. Rollo emerged as the outstanding personality among the Norsemen who had secured a permanent foothold on Frankish soil in the valley of the lower Seine. Charles the Simple, the king of West Francia, ceded them lands between the mouth of the Seine and what is now the city of Rouen in exchange for Rollo agreeing to end his brigandage, and provide the Franks with protection against future Viking raids.[1]

 

 

So, the Normans were Scandinavian Vikings just a few generations before William the Conquerer. Of course the population of Normandy was a mixture of Viking descendants and pre-existing local populations. Though to the extent that that population was made up of ethnic Bretons I would think they were already close relatives of the populations in Britain.

 

Interestingly population DNA studies in England show relatively little Norman impact--except among the nobility. I'll look for a link later when I'm on the computer because I found the studies quite interesting. If memory serves even the Saxon contribution to the gene pool was relatively limited.

 

They've also found that in regional tests in the UK, for most people, they have very similar DNA to what their ancestors did generations ago - their populations have, regionally speaking, remained fairly stable.

 

My mothers cousin managed to trance one line of our family back to a Norman who came over with William the Conqueror.  So, to my great-grandfather and then maternal grandmother.  And you can see even into the 20th century, there is a class effect, although they weren't aristocracy they were of the landowning class.

[Kathryn]

Gardenmom5 I hope you don't feel like we were all piling on your post!

 

I know one thing that has proven true on average in genetic population studies is that geographic proximity almost always equates to genetic similarity. So populations in Scandinavia, Britain, France, Germany, etc. have a lot in common genetically. This makes it very hard to distinguish between them in DNA analysis and personal ethnicity analyses are always considered speculative when you get down to distinguishing between nationalities in the same general region.

Definitely. That's why the Scandinavian in my test wasn't all that, uh, surprising, because I know that he similarities in that region make it hard to distinguish and pinpoint areas. But, the 30% Southern European is a mystery! I'm interested to see what 23andme comes back with. I have a first cousin on my mom's side that did 23andme. He just showed me his results. Northwestern European categories added up to 96.1%, while Southern European was 1.6%. Edited February 9, 2017 by Kathryn

[Bluegoat]

Definitely. That's why the Scandinavian in my test wasn't all that, uh, surprising, because I know that he similarities in that region make it hard to distinguish and pinpoint areas. But, the 30% Southern European is a mystery! I'm interested to see what 23andme comes back with. I have a first cousin on my mom's side that did 23andme. He just showed me his results. Northwestern European categories added up to 96.1%, while Southern European was 1.6%.

 

Well, there is Spanish DnA in Ireland, and maybe further North as well.

[maize]

Well, there is Spanish DnA in Ireland, and maybe further North as well.

The deep roots of the Irish people go back to the Iberian peninsula, but I'm thinking that their modern admixture is primarily represented by FTDNA's British Isles cluster. Kathryn, I hope you come back and report when your 23andMe results come in because I am quite curious :)

 

Here is a description of each of FTDNA's genetic admixture clusters:

https://www.familytreedna.com/learn/ftdna/myorigins-population-clusters/

[Kathryn]

The deep roots of the Irish people go back to the Iberian peninsula, but I'm thinking that their modern admixture is primarily represented by FTDNA's British Isles cluster. Kathryn, I hope you come back and report when your 23andMe results come in because I am quite curious :)

 

Here is a description of each of FTDNA's genetic admixture clusters:

https://www.familytreedna.com/learn/ftdna/myorigins-population-clusters/

I will! I can report that my father will not be getting tested. I emailed to ask him if he'd ever done one or would do one. He apparently is "unimpressed with commercial DNA tests that purport to predict meds for things like depression" so thinks ancestry ones are stupid. Okay. Well, my mom bought the 23andme one as well, so I suppose that will help at least.

[Kathryn]

The deep roots of the Irish people go back to the Iberian peninsula, but I'm thinking that their modern admixture is primarily represented by FTDNA's British Isles cluster. Kathryn, I hope you come back and report when your 23andMe results come in because I am quite curious :)

 

Here is a description of each of FTDNA's genetic admixture clusters:

https://www.familytreedna.com/learn/ftdna/myorigins-population-clusters/

My 23andme results haven't come in yet, but my mom's came in today (and her ftdna ones haven't come back yet). Her 23andme was exactly what you'd expect (97% northwestern European) and she matched as aunt of her nephew and with a second cousin on her dad's side and one on her mom's side. Assuming the Southern European comes back on mine at 23andme also, I guess that would mean it had to come in through my dad's mom since my dad's dad would account for all of my Eastern European.

 

My grandma's mom was born in Japan to missionaries. The dad was of French Huguenot and British background, the mom of old New England families. My grandma's dad was born to a mother whose parents were Belgian and German and a father (who abandoned the family before his birth) from Germany. The mother died of opioid addiction when he was a baby, his older siblings were sent to live with family, and the elderly upstairs neighbors raised him. I assume this is the most likely place for tomfoolery to come into the picture.

Edited March 9, 2017 by Kathryn

[maize]

My 23andme results haven't come in yet, but my mom's came in today (and her ftdna ones haven't come back yet). Her 23andme was exactly what you'd expect (97% northwestern European) and she matched as aunt of her nephew and with a second cousin on her dad's side and one on her mom's side. Assuming the Southern European comes back on mine at 23andme also, I guess that would mean it had to come in through my dad's mom since my dad's dad would account for all of my Eastern European.

 

 

 

Thanks for updating, it will be very interesting to see what your 23andMe results show when they come in.

[Kathryn]

Thanks for updating, it will be very interesting to see what your 23andMe results show when they come in.

I edited and added some background on my grandma's family while you posted.

[Kathryn]

 

 

Thanks for updating, it will be very interesting to see what your 23andMe results show when they come in.

Okay, 23and me results are in for both my mother and me, and I copied them as they were before phasing and again after.

 

Before phasing, my mom:

European 99.7%

-Northwestern European 96.8%

--British and Irish 56.5%

--French and German 9.2%

--Scandinavian 1.6%

--Broadly Northwestern European 29.5%

-Southern European 1.0%

--Iberian 0.6%

--Broadly Southern European 0.4%

-Broadly European 1.9%

Middle Eastern and North Africa 0.3%

-North African <0.1%

-Broadly Middle Eastern and North Africa 0.3%

 

Before phasing, me:

European 99.8%

-Northwestern European 72.8%

--British and Irish 22.9%

--French and German 10.7%

--Scandinavian 0.6%

--Broadly Northwestern European 38.7%

-Eastern European 15.4%

-Southern European 1.4%

--Balkan 0.5%

--Broadly Southern European 0.4%

-Ashkenazi Jewish 1.2%

-Broadly European 0.9%

Middle Eastern and North Africa 0.2%

-North African 0.1%

-Broadly Middle Eastern and North Africa <0.1%

 

After phasing, mom:

European 100%

-Northwestern European 97.2%

--British and Irish 57.9%

--French and German 11.7%

--Scandinavian 3.3%

--Broadly Northwestern European 24.2%

-Eastern European 1.2%

-Broadly European 1.6%

 

After phasing, me:

European 99.8%

-Northwestern European 68.9%

--British and Irish 35.4%

--French and German 7.4%

--Scandinavian 4.5%

--Broadly Northwestern European 21.6%

-Eastern European 22.3%

-Southern European 5.4%

--Balkan 4.7%

--Sardinian 0.5%

--Broadly Southern European 0.3%

-Ashkenazi Jewish 1.2%

-Broadly European 2.%

Middle Eastern and North Africa 0.2%

-North African 0.2%

 

Then for what came from father vs. mother it has this (which makes no sense since her North African and Southern European were taken away after phasing but they say I inherited it from her):

 

Father on left, Mother on right

 

The other anomaly is that she was typed as haplogroup K1a2a with familytreedna and I was typed as that with 23andme, but 23andme typed her as K1a1. Yet, they knew she was my mother. Why do they have her with a different haplogroup?

Edited March 28, 2017 by Kathryn

[umsami]

I did 23 and me and I felt it was accurate (later confirmed by some research.) They also caught some genetic health stuff that was later confirmed.

[gaillardia]

I watched this on Netflix recently. It is airing on pbs April 6th on PBS, but also says premiering on April 4. 

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/vikings-unearthed.html

 

It isn't tracing anyone's ancestry, but it does show how far and vast their exploration and conquest spread. 

 

[Liz CA]

If you look at this chart you will see that 23andMe has the highest accuracy when it comes to ethnicity estimates, but that within-continent breakdown is still iffy (i.e., it's pretty accurate at recognizing Europe vs. Africa but England vs. Norway not so much):

 

http://isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_testing_comparison_chart

 

Here are my grandmother's results from three different services:

 

Ancestry.com

Great Britain 58%

Scandinavia 18% 

Europe West 14%

Ireland 4%

Italy/Greece 1%

Europe East 1%

Finland/Northwest Russia <1%

 

Asia South 3%

 

FTDNA (transferred data from Ancestry, not FTDNA's own test)

Scandinavia: 62%

British Isles: 30%

Asia Minor: 8%

 

23andMe:

 

British and Irish 43.1%

Scandinavian 14.7%

French and German 6.7%

Broadly Northwestern European 29.2%

Southern European 2.0%

Eastern European 0.8%

Broadly European 2.5%

 

Native American 0.8%

East Asian <0.1 %

Broadly East Asian and Native American <0.1%

 

West Africa 0.1%

 

Broadly Oceanian <0.1%

 

Unassigned 0.1%

 

Note that FTDNA did vastly overestimate Scandinavian ancestry when compared with the other two services. Grandma is 1/4 Swedish so the expected result would be closer to 25%.

 

Those are big discrepancies. Dh has only tested with one place so far.

 

 

[Kathryn]

Those are big discrepancies. Dh has only tested with one place so far.

 

 

If you look at my ancestry breakdown from FTDNA in the OP and 23andme and few posts back, they're pretty different. I definitely feel like 23andme had a more accurate breakdown given what I know. However there were the weird discrepancies between my mother and me after phasing that I noted as well as her maternal haplogroup being different from mine and from what she got at FTDNA. I have been happy with the DNA match service at both sites. It's been extremely accurate at predicting relationships with the people I know what our relationships are. The only issue there has been guessing at a closer relationship than is true for people with whom I match on multiple lines, which I would expect to happen.

[jendo0483]

Hey, plz tell me which dna testing kit gives me a absolute result of my family tree. There are many dna testing kit available in market. But, I am very confuse to choose one of them. 

Edited June 30, 2017 by jendo0483

[Janeway]

Did you feel your results were accurate?

 

I just got mine back and am really surprised. I got 100% European which wasn't unexpected. But, the breakdown was strange.

 

42% Scandinavian

30% Southern European

28% Eastern European (totally expected, paternal grandfather is from Ukraine)

 

The top two results I literally have no clue where they could have come from. Literally everyone else besides my paternal grandfather in my paper trail was from the British Isles and Central/Western Europe (France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany). I know these are options because DH got two-thirds British Isles and and one-third Western/Central Europe. My mom has another couple of weeks on hers and now I'm really interested in what hers is going to come back with. Could it be really off? Or are there LOTS of secrets in both sides of my family tree?

My husband did it and his aunt did it, on his mom's side. The results did not really match up completely. According to the results, the aunt is a portion Middle Easterner, like 5%, which is pretty significant. Since this is my husband's mom's sister, 100%, theortically, his mom should have been 5% Middle Easterner, leaving my husband 2.5%. I would not think the Middle Eastern part would have disappeared. But there was none for my husband. Also, there are some youtube videos where people compare their results from various providers.

 

I did 23andme. But what I did do showed some results that made little sense. It claims on my mom's side, there is some Southern European. But I know my family history going back generations on that side and there should not have been this. Oh well. I might do it again some day with another DNA provider.

[PrincessMommy]

My friend did. She has the most quintessentially Dutch last name and was told her ancestors were from the Netherlands. Turns out she has just a tiny amount of Dutch heritage. She probably had 1 Dutch male ancestor who was born in the 18th century...about the same proportion that she is Asian.

 

 

Interesting.  I'm 1/4 Dutch (with a quintessentially Dutch maiden name).

 

The Netherlands is historically a very cosmopolitan country with people coming from all over the world so I've wondered how much of my DNA is actually Dutch.  

 

I also have ancestors who were part of the original settlers from England to So. Maryland.

[maize]

My husband did it and his aunt did it, on his mom's side. The results did not really match up completely. According to the results, the aunt is a portion Middle Easterner, like 5%, which is pretty significant. Since this is my husband's mom's sister, 100%, theortically, his mom should have been 5% Middle Easterner, leaving my husband 2.5%. I would not think the Middle Eastern part would have disappeared. But there was none for my husband.

The heritage results are certainly not entirely accurate (particularly within a continent) but I want to comment on the assumptions you are making here.

 

5% middle eastern is an amount low enough that it may be showing up in just a segment or two, possibly on a single chromosome. It is entirely possible that your husband's aunt could have that portion and his mom not--siblings only share on average 50% of their DNA. And of course children only get 50% of a parent's DNA. The way that works, they don't get half of every segment. They may get all of one chromosome and none of another, they may get the middle segment of chromosome a from a pair and the end segments of chromosome b, etc.

 

So imagine that there was in fact a middle eastern ancestor a few generations ago. Let's say you aunt inherited from her mom an x chromosome that has a segment from that ancestor, but nothing from them on any other chromosome. Her sister may have got an x chromosome without that segment. Or she may have got the middle eastern segment, but passed on to her son a chromosome without it.

 

Because we have tested multiple family members we can actually go in and compare and trace which bits of chromosome we have in common. My kids can see which segments they inherited from each grandparent and a few great grandparents. It is pretty cool! But yes, if there is only a small percentage of something (such as sub-saharan African in my family) one child may get it and not another.

Edited June 30, 2017 by maize

[maize]

Interesting. I'm 1/4 Dutch (with a quintessentially Dutch maiden name).

 

The Netherlands is historically a very cosmopolitan country with people coming from all over the world so I've wondered how much of my DNA is actually Dutch.

 

I also have ancestors who were part of the original settlers from England to So. Maryland.

Part of the problem here too is that Dutch DNA has a lot in common with other northern European DNA; trying to trace it back to particular nationalities is speculative at best. A small percentage showing up as Dutch may mean only that a small percentage has markers that are identifiably most common in that area.