Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ancestry DNA Test

2»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,108 ✭✭✭Jellybaby1


    It seems I'm no longer Polynesian!! :confused::D


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    In 2016 i was:

    85% Irish
    5% Scottish
    5% Northwest Europe (Normandy mostly)
    5% Scandinavian/Viking

    Now September 2018 i'm
    98% Irish/Scottish
    2% British/North Western Europe

    Some posters here seem really erudite on the subject, i'm wondering what you think of, what seem to me to be, major changes. Where has my Scandinavian heritage gone.. is it in the Scottish and British/Western European dna?

    Thanks very much.

    Well you have to remember that the estimates are basically 'software calculators' that use 'reference samples' to infer percentages. In such a case the model is only as good as the data that is fed into it.

    so to take an extreme case, if their calculator only had three sample populations:
    1. Congolese
    2. Japanese
    3. Swedish

    Then in such a scenario an Irish person data fed into it would probably show up as 100% 'Swedish'.

    So obviously the first step is to try and build a sampleset from every and any possible population group.

    Of course if you have small samplesets you run into another "issue", in that neighbouring populations tend to be more closely related to each other then distant ones. So for example your average Irish person and average Swede will have shared more recent common ancestors with each other then either would with someone with origins in say Mongolia. Likewise someone from Mongolia will have more recent shared ancestry with say someone from Northern China or Korea then they do with either Swede or Irish person.

    In such a case you need to have relatively large samplesets for each population. This allows you to
    (a) generate a better picture of what average person in a population looks like when it comes to genetic variation
    (b) push certain components backwards in time to more ancient admixture

    b. above is possibly what happened with Scandinavian bit in your case. You have to remember that tests such as Ancestry been autosomal are really looking for matches in last 200 years.

    Now there's some research that points that modern Irish people appear to have a certain level of 'Norse' admixture in them. RCSI proposed this in their paper on the 'Irish DNA Atlas'. I'm not so sure on their methodolgy for number of reasons:
    1. They use only modern sample populations from both Ireland and Europe
    2. They don't have any ancient DNA from pre-viking Early christian period -- as a result no baseline for level of admixture flow
    3. They have no ancient DNA from Scandinavia to provide a baseline for 'Viking period' population structure. (eg. Nordic Iron age/Early Viking period timeline)



    Anyways to go back linguistic point of view it's worth pointing out that both speakers of Germanic languages (eg. English, Dutch, German, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish etc.) and Celtic language (Irish, Scottish Gáidhlig, Welsh, Breton etc.) would have shared a common language on order of 4-5k years ago in Proto-Indo-european.

    4-5k years isn't a huge period for genetic differenation to build up. In comparison the spilt say between Western Europeans and East Asians is more on order of 30-45k years ago. (leaving aside that there have been levels of admixture back and forth since on smaller scale)


  • Registered Users Posts: 721 ✭✭✭Defaulter1831


    dubhthach wrote: »
    Well you have to remember that the estimates are basically 'software calculators' that use 'reference samples' to infer percentages. In such a case the model is only as good as the data that is fed into it.

    so to take an extreme case, if their calculator only had three sample populations:
    1. Congolese
    2. Japanese
    3. Swedish

    Then in such a scenario an Irish person data fed into it would probably show up as 100% 'Swedish'.

    So obviously the first step is to try and build a sampleset from every and any possible population group.

    Of course if you have small samplesets you run into another "issue", in that neighbouring populations tend to be more closely related to each other then distant ones. So for example your average Irish person and average Swede will have shared more recent common ancestors with each other then either would with someone with origins in say Mongolia. Likewise someone from Mongolia will have more recent shared ancestry with say someone from Northern China or Korea then they do with either Swede or Irish person.

    In such a case you need to have relatively large samplesets for each population. This allows you to
    (a) generate a better picture of what average person in a population looks like when it comes to genetic variation
    (b) push certain components backwards in time to more ancient admixture

    b. above is possibly what happened with Scandinavian bit in your case. You have to remember that tests such as Ancestry been autosomal are really looking for matches in last 200 years.

    Now there's some research that points that modern Irish people appear to have a certain level of 'Norse' admixture in them. RCSI proposed this in their paper on the 'Irish DNA Atlas'. I'm not so sure on their methodolgy for number of reasons:
    1. They use only modern sample populations from both Ireland and Europe
    2. They don't have any ancient DNA from pre-viking Early christian period -- as a result no baseline for level of admixture flow
    3. They have no ancient DNA from Scandinavia to provide a baseline for 'Viking period' population structure. (eg. Nordic Iron age/Early Viking period timeline)



    Anyways to go back linguistic point of view it's worth pointing out that both speakers of Germanic languages (eg. English, Dutch, German, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish etc.) and Celtic language (Irish, Scottish Gáidhlig, Welsh, Breton etc.) would have shared a common language on order of 4-5k years ago in Proto-Indo-european.

    4-5k years isn't a huge period for genetic differenation to build up. In comparison the spilt say between Western Europeans and East Asians is more on order of 30-45k years ago. (leaving aside that there have been levels of admixture back and forth since on smaller scale)

    Thanks very much for this excellent post.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    Jellybaby1 wrote: »
    It seems I'm no longer Polynesian!! :confused::D

    Don't be too disappointed, you can still take a holiday in Polynesia if you wish (and resources permit)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    tabbey wrote: »
    Don't be too disappointed, you can still take a holiday in Polynesia if you wish (and resources permit)
    Perhaps it was not a good idea to wear a Bikini when spitting into the tube?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    Here's a blog post from Ancestry talking about their reference populations and the size of them:
    https://www.ancestry.com/cs/dna-help/ethnicity/reference-panel

    Key bits for us:
    Region Number of Samples
    Northern Africa 41
    Africa South-Central Hunter-Gatherers 34
    Benin & Togo 224
    Cameroon, Congo, & Southern Bantu Peoples 579
    Ivory Coast & Ghana 124
    Eastern Africa 82
    Mali 169
    Nigeria 111
    Senegal 31
    Native American—North, Central, South 146
    Native American—Andean 63
    Central & Northern Asia 186
    Southern Asia 600
    Balochistan 53
    Burusho 23
    China 620
    Southeast Asia–Dai (Thai) 80
    Western & Central India 65
    Japan 592
    Korea & Northern China 261
    Philippines 538
    Southeast Asia–Vietnam 159
    England, Wales & Northwestern Europe 1,519
    Baltic States 194
    Basque 22
    Ireland & Scotland 500
    European Jewish 200
    France 1,407
    Germanic Europe 2,072
    Greece & the Balkans 242
    Italy 1,000
    Norway 367
    Portugal 404
    Sardinia 30
    Eastern Europe & Russia 1,959
    Spain 270
    Sweden 372
    Finland 361
    Middle East 271
    Iran / Persia 459
    Turkey & the Caucasus 101
    Melanesia 49
    Polynesia 58
    Total 16,638

    I bolded some there, but you can see if you follow an arc from Portugal northwards to Norway you see decent size samplesets for the following: Portugal, Spain, France, Ireland ⁊ Scotland, England ⁊ Wales ⁊ NW Europe, Germany, Sweden, Norway

    From a grandscheme of things these are our surrounding populations so if you have any non 'Ireland ⁊ Scotland' ancestry you would expect perhaps one of these (particulary the 'England, Wales ⁊ NW Euro' one).

    Eventually they will probably spilt Ireland and Scotland perhaps when they have at least 500+ samples in reference panel from each country.


Advertisement