PDA

View Full Version : Living DNA - Autosomal results



Ysengrin
14-06-17, 11:32
Hello,

I received yesterday my Living DNA results. I chose this company because i read on different websites that they had very good and detailled results with autosomal DNA.

I have previously tested different companies, all with different results. With Living DNA the results seems strange to me because i have 51.7% of British Isles. With The others companies i found 22% and 5% ! The percentage with Living DNA seems too high. Is it because this company seems to be addressing mainly to the residents of Great Britain ?

My known ancestors are mainly from Switzerland and France and found no trace of these ancestors with my Living DNA results. I don't know why

Is there anyone else who is not British have tested this company? What results have you had ?

Thank you !

I1a3_Young
14-06-17, 15:15
Hello,

I received yesterday my Living DNA results. I chose this company because i read on different websites that they had very good and detailled results with autosomal DNA.

I have previously tested different companies, all with different results. With Living DNA the results seems strange to me because i have 51.7% of British Isles. With The others companies i found 22% and 5% ! The percentage with Living DNA seems too high. Is it because this company seems to be addressing mainly to the residents of Great Britain ?

My known ancestors are mainly from Switzerland and France and found no trace of these ancestors with my Living DNA results. I don't know why

Is there anyone else who is not British have tested this company? What results have you had ?

Thank you !

They are based in Britain and first focused on determining what parts of Britain your ancestors were from. This will cause some bias because Britain was a melting pot of the mainland so they are looking at it from the "British" side.

I do think they are working diligently to add more reference populations though, so a better analysis will be available. Your test results won't change at the data level but they may change the ethnicity estimate.

Promenade
14-06-17, 18:50
Hello,

I received yesterday my Living DNA results. I chose this company because i read on different websites that they had very good and detailled results with autosomal DNA.

I have previously tested different companies, all with different results. With Living DNA the results seems strange to me because i have 51.7% of British Isles. With The others companies i found 22% and 5% ! The percentage with Living DNA seems too high. Is it because this company seems to be addressing mainly to the residents of Great Britain ?

My known ancestors are mainly from Switzerland and France and found no trace of these ancestors with my Living DNA results. I don't know why

Is there anyone else who is not British have tested this company? What results have you had ?

Thank you !

Yes the same thing happened to me. They're based in Britain and seem to be heavily biased towards them if you have North West European ancestry.

I received 96 percent British from LivingDNA, around 20 percent of that is from Scotland and Ireland which is accurate, similar to what I received with other companies but the other 80 percent was from England where I have no ancestry from. AncestryDna determined that I had less than 1 percent English ancestry. 23andme reported around 40 percent of my ancestry as a whole coming from the British isles. I believe LivingDNA just interprets overall North West European ancestry as British because it's what they were traditionally focused on. Perhaps the accuracy will improve in the future

Maciamo
14-06-17, 22:07
At present Living DNA has 20 reference populations in Britain. Soon there will be many more for Ireland and Germany, and later this year there should be many more for other countries. Therefore the current results can be seen as merely a beta version for people of non-British descent.

Sennevini
14-06-17, 22:37
Yes, I had almost 70% British, but all clustering in regions in (South-)East England, the regions most close to the Netherlands.

Ysengrin
15-06-17, 11:25
Thank you for all your answers, I hope LIVING DNA will update soon their results for people who aren't from the British Isles

Ysengrin
20-06-17, 16:08
They updated their results with the two new tabs :-)

https://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/447446Sanstitre.png (https://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=447446Sanstitre.png)

In my case the tab "Cautious" seems to me more accurate than others.But the high level of british isles remains high.

Promenade
20-06-17, 18:16
Yes, it's slightly more accurate in my case as well. Instead of 95 percent British I'm receiving 90 percent now.

Cautious might be more accurate than Standard and Complete. The remaining ten percent is perceived as "North Western Ancestry" (which includes places from Catalonia to Czechia to Wales, so isnt exactly helpful) in cautious, but in Standard/Complete it's interpreted as Scandinavian. They note that "North Western Ancestry" is a confidence for people from England and Wales who have multiple population sources for their ancestry, which is disappointing to me since they are still treating my data as if I'm from the UK.

I'm not sure that Americans should take this test yet if they want accurate autosomal ancestry, it's still highly focused on people from the British isles only.

Promenade
20-06-17, 18:22
They updated their results with the two new tabs :-)

https://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/447446Sanstitre.png (https://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=447446Sanstitre.png)

In my case the tab "Cautious" seems to me more accurate than others.But the high level of british isles remains high.




Also it might be of interest to point out that the "North West European related ancestry" category for you is different than mine.

Mine included everything yours did, but included Germany, the Low countries, Czechia, Denmark, more of Switzerland, Austria and it specifically mentioned the Orkney islands as well.

Perhaps they individualize that

Ysengrin
21-06-17, 11:05
I'm not sure that Americans should take this test yet if they want accurate autosomal ancestry, it's still highly focused on people from the British isles only.

This is the case for any non-British person, i think. For now their results are too focused on the British Isles, but it is quite likely that they will make changes and updates for the other poulations :-)


Also it might be of interest to point out that the "North West European related ancestry" category for you is different than mine.

Mine included everything yours did, but included Germany, the Low countries, Czechia, Denmark, more of Switzerland, Austria and it specifically mentioned the Orkney islands as well.

Perhaps they individualize that

I think they link the different autosomal data together. It is for this reason that what is valid for me is not necessarily for you.

I1a3_Young
21-06-17, 14:31
Or for those Americans with British lineage, it is a good option ;)

I ordered the test specifically due to the British focus.

Ysengrin
21-06-17, 15:37
Or for those Americans with British lineage, it is a good option ;)

I ordered the test specifically due to the British focus.

Ahahah you were right ;-)

So what is the best test for continental Europe with these all mixtures ? If I'm From France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Italy, etc... Actually Gedmatch is for me the best option.

I1a3_Young
21-06-17, 18:32
Ahahah you were right ;-)

So what is the best test for continental Europe with these all mixtures ? If I'm From France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Italy, etc... Actually Gedmatch is for me the best option.

Well, I also ordered it based on the numbers of SNPs tested. It's going to give a huge boost to my raw data for Y-DNA and mtDNA. The "hard data" is what's important for the test, combined with the ability to download the results.

All of the interpretations of results are educated guesses and wildly vary based on factors such as our understanding of populations. New discoveries will change our interpretations of the data. You are right about GEDmatch being a good third party tool.

And as mentioned previously, LivingDNA is new to the game and will get better and better on interpretations once they build good reference populations.

Twilight
21-06-17, 20:08
Or for those Americans with British lineage, it is a good option ;)

I ordered the test specifically due to the British focus.

Just curious, do you know what LivingDNA test is most accurate for American Colonials so far?;Complete, Standard or conservative? Im not sure about you however personally I've not been able to trace some of my Colonial lines back to the United Kingdom. On a side note for me personally, since it looks like East Angelia and SE England is being confused with German apparently, I'm going to be watching out for those 3 population components; when I get my results around the 4th of July festivities. :)
Since LivingDNA is thinking of bringing their work into Schools and the United States was created partly due to Religious persecutions, it might be cool to test the Colonial Americans with Full Blood say Quaker, Puritian, Presbyterian, etc ancestry; all of my Paternal Grandpa Wayne's ancestors were of Quakers. :) Just a thought.

I1a3_Young
21-06-17, 22:02
Just curious, do you know what LivingDNA test is most accurate for American Colonials so far?;Complete, Standard or conservative? Im not sure about you however personally I've not been able to trace some of my Colonial lines back to the United Kingdom. On a side note for me personally, since it looks like East Angelia and SE England is being confused with German apparently, I'm going to be watching out for those 3 population components; when I get my results around the 4th of July festivities. :)
Since LivingDNA is thinking of bringing their work into Schools and the United States was created partly due to Religious persecutions, it might be cool to test the Colonial Americans with Full Blood say Quaker, Puritian, Presbyterian, etc ancestry; all of my Paternal Grandpa Wayne's ancestors were of Quakers. :) Just a thought.

When I get the results, I'll give a detailed report and comparison with Ancestry, MyHeritage, and some GEDmatch calculators.

Ysengrin
22-06-17, 09:27
When I get the results, I'll give a detailed report and comparison with Ancestry, MyHeritage, and some GEDmatch calculators.
It will be very interesting ;-)

Twilight
22-06-17, 16:40
When I get the results, I'll give a detailed report and comparison with Ancestry, MyHeritage, and some GEDmatch calculators.

Thanks, I cannot even begin to tell you how exited my am now that Independence Day is a
round the corner. : D Should be interesting ^_^

Sennevini
27-06-17, 19:18
In general, the only thing bothering me is the lack of Jewish clusters; my 1/16 Jewish is assigned to Kurdish, Iberian and West-Balkan, which to me is in correspondence to a mix of pre-Arab levantine (West-Asian) with Mediterranean and (for Ashkenazi) some Eastern European.

AdeoF
13-09-17, 04:19
Im doing a living DNA test and waiting for my results. I hope they got a bit better for Iberian people. But I do want to see which part is the highest from great britain and ireland.

ruskabajka
25-07-18, 17:37
Hi, here are my livingdna autosomal results
https://preview.ibb.co/e74OYo/MN_autosomal3x3.jpg (https://ibb.co/cZUqDo)

ruskabajka
25-07-18, 17:45
I find this results quite strange, as I would expect much more dispersed results....
how come are my relatives so concentrated in east balkan region for such a long time?
what would be the explanation for this?
I would really like to get some help to interpret this properly, as I have no idea....
I have both Y/mt DNA results done, but I`d rather keep them for now, in order to avoid some bias in interpretation...
offcourse, if these informations are important for explanation, I`ll provide them...
Thanks in advance

Vlad82
25-07-18, 18:12
@ruskabajka, I am not sure that maps above represent your results. You should have maps with regions and percentages.
What part of Serbia are you from?

Vlad82
25-07-18, 18:23
@ruskabajka, I am not sure that maps above represent your results. You should have maps with regions and percentages.
What part of Serbia are you from?
Maps might show some predictions where your ancestor lived in different periods of time, but again there have to be some other maps.

ruskabajka
25-07-18, 19:17
I have no other results, I also wonder why I didn`t got those results like x%A, y%B, z%C etc... but this is all I got from them...
maybe there are some other results which I couldnt find, but these maps are my results from "back in time" feature

ruskabajka
25-07-18, 19:18
I (my parents) are from east/south serbia

kingjohn
25-07-18, 21:07
I (my parents) are from east/south serbia

you have to find your complete mode your results should be fascinating

Vlad82
25-07-18, 21:27
I have no other results, I also wonder why I didn`t got those results like x%A, y%B, z%C etc... but this is all I got from them...
maybe there are some other results which I couldnt find, but these maps are my results from "back in time" feature

I have seen living dna results like this:
https://pp.userapi.com/c845521/v845521718/a2ef7/UZaH0zegusU.jpg

https://pp.userapi.com/c845521/v845521718/a2f01/N4KCT4FAOYw.jpg

https://pp.userapi.com/c845521/v845521718/a2f29/ROek30adMtc.jpg

Vlad82
25-07-18, 21:29
I (my parents) are from east/south serbia

mine, too :)

ruskabajka
26-07-18, 10:41
zemljaci!! :)

hey, just found out there is + to click to get regions/subregions with percentages....
both complete/standard modes look more or less the same:


Europe (East) 63.5%


East Balkans 43.7%
Baltics 8.1%
West Balkans 7.1%
Finland and Western Russia 1.9%
Northeast Europe 1.5%
Pannonia 1.2%


Europe (South) 23.6%


Tuscany 13%
North Italy 4.9%
Aegean 4.7%
Iberian Peninsula 1%


Europe (North and West) 7%


France 4.2%
Scandinavia 2.8%
Great Britain and Ireland 1.9%
England and Wales 1.9%


Near East 4%


North Turkey 2.4%
Levant 1.6%

what puzzles me here is cautious mode, where my baltic component goes high dramaticaly to 53%, and balkan goes down to 13%, wonder how these results are so different

ruskabajka
26-07-18, 11:23
so, these numbers from previous post show ancestry from last 10 generations, which is something like 200-300 years, but this really doesn`t answer my first question related to the maps from previous page, which I extracted from "Your ancestry through history" feature

td120
26-07-18, 13:03
Thanks for sharing ! Here are mine for comparison:


Complete - SubRegions:


East Balkans- 22.4%
West Balkans - 11%
Pannonia - 10.1%
Northeast Europe - 5.6%
Mordovia - 3%
Baltics- 2.4%
South Italy-12.9%
Tuscany-10.9%
North Italy-3.4%
Aegean-3.1%
Germanic-8.4%
Pashtun-4.5%
Kurdish-2.3%
..................


Standard - Sub Regions:


East Balkans- 22.4%
West Balkans - 11%
Pannonia - 10.1%
Northeast Europe - 5.6%
South Italy-12.9%
Tuscany-10.9%
Germanic-8.4%
Europe Unassigned-11.9%
Pashtun-4.5%
World Unassigned-2.3%
............


Cautious - Regional (this is the lowest level in this mode):


Northeast Europe-related ancestry - 49.1%(EastBalkans included)
Tuscany-related ancestry-32.1%
Europe unassigned-11.9%(some WestBalkans...+some of the "Germanic" perhaps...)
Pashtun related ancestry- 4.5%
World unassigned- 2.3%

My "Ancestry through History "charts are exact replica of yours(to be expected). I'd pay no attention to the "10 generations ancestry" claim though...
LDNA decided to pack into "Northeast Europe" a territory from Western Thrace to the Baltic Sea and from Central Austria to the Russian borders+Mordovia(?..yep..)

Vlad82
26-07-18, 17:29
Čestitam zemljak!

I hope there will be more results from south/east Serbia

Wonomyro
26-07-18, 20:47
Hi, here are my livingdna autosomal results
https://preview.ibb.co/e74OYo/MN_autosomal3x3.jpg (https://ibb.co/cZUqDo)


I find this results quite strange, as I would expect much more dispersed results....
how come are my relatives so concentrated in east balkan region for such a long time?
what would be the explanation for this?
I would really like to get some help to interpret this properly, as I have no idea....
I have both Y/mt DNA results done, but I`d rather keep them for now, in order to avoid some bias in interpretation...
offcourse, if these informations are important for explanation, I`ll provide them...
Thanks in advance

That is the area of the initial spread of Orthodox Slavs (Serbs, Bulgarians) including Vlachs who later moved north to the territories of present day Romania.

The borders of Bulgarian Empire:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bulgaria_Simeon_I_(893-927).svg

Here is the division line between Catholic and Orthodox lands in 12th century:

https://cdn.britannica.com/300x300/38/196138-004-982D2CE5.jpg

You can compare these maps with the maps of your ancestry, and, I think, you'll see some similarities.

IMO, the genetic landscape of southeast Europe was formed in the early middle ages and hasn't changed much ever since.

ruskabajka
27-07-18, 00:44
hey Wonomyro, thanks for your opinion...

division between east and west balkan regions goes across middle of Serbia, I`m even not sure where Belgrade falls...my wife got results with strong concentration in west balkans, though not that strong as mine, and she is from western Serbia... now we descend from different regions only because of livingdna`s silly divisions of regions...


I am ortodox slav, but I don`t find this explanation convincing when looking at these maps...
how come do I have relatives with common ancestor in Spain and Italy in 300 BC? that just doesn`t make sense

Wonomyro
27-07-18, 02:04
hey Wonomyro, thanks for your opinion...

division between east and west balkan regions goes across middle of Serbia, I`m even not sure where Belgrade falls...my wife got results with strong concentration in west balkans, though not that strong as mine, and she is from western Serbia... now we descend from different regions only because of livingdna`s silly divisions of regions...

About the division. It seems that they formed regions according to the genetic clustering rather then cultural, political or linguistic one. Data indicate that Serbs from Serbia usually group closer to Bulgarians and Romanians. I don’t know if the western Serbia is included in the western cluster, but it is possible because of recent migrations from Bosnia and Herzegovina into the western parts of Serbia. However the fact is that the genetic gap, between these two regions, is much bigger than the geographical proximity suggests.



I am ortodox slav, but I don`t find this explanation convincing when looking at these maps...how come do I have relatives with common ancestor in Spain and Italy in 300 BC? that just doesn`t make sense

It makes sense, because your ancestors are not only Slavs but also the inhabitants of Roman Empire who lived in present day Serbia. That's probably your “Vlach” part of ancestry. As you can see on the maps that show more recent periods, the quantity of genes, that you share with Italy and Spain, decreases. That is because Roman Empire collapsed and there was no more significant “gene exchange” between those parts and your homeland. Your ancestry shared with other Slavic countries also fades away because the Slav migrations ended and no more gene flow occurs between East Europe and Serbia.

ruskabajka
27-07-18, 14:37
now, this explanation makes more sense, connecting me with pre-slavic balkan population, whatever the tribe is, whether vlachs, thracians, dacians or some other illyrian tribe, that makes those maps more convincible....


As you can see on the maps that show more recent periods, the quantity of genes, that you share with Italy and Spain, decreases.
well....yes and no....shadings on maps do show decrease, but my numbers for Italy are pretty much high, Tuscany alone is 13%, and north Italy is 5%, so it is almost 20% combined, and if you add agean component of 5%, it is almost a quarter of my relatives within last 10 generations....and we are talking about regions that were never the target for balkan people to immigrate....nor did italians migrate to balkans...
so, this is a good point to start speculations, as I can`t resist to speculate about my ancient relation to Tuscany, which is actually ancient Etruscan.....how cool would it be to connect myself to ancient Etruscans :)

ruskabajka
27-07-18, 15:19
now, about livingdna`s divisions....
you might be right about genetic divisions between east and west in periods before last few centuries...but there are some events that happened in last few centuries which had to change entire genetics in Serbia....
first, you have so called "carnojevic migrations" which happened in 18th century, serbs escaped massively from serbian territory into A-H empire, and turks found themselves as rulers of fertile land without population to take taxes from....then turks repopulated these lands with population from Montenegro and BH...now we even have funny saying in Serbia "ako nisi crnogorac, onda mora da si hercegovac" (if you`re not Montenegrian, than you gotta be Herzegovinian")
second, Belgrade is on the edge between these regions, it is not even clear where it belongs.......according to livingdna`s maps, I would say that it belongs to east balkans, but that`s just my guess...
Belgrade, as capital, was center of migration for entire Yugoslavia, and it is still center of migration today, not just for Serbia, but for BH and Montenegro as well....it grew from 20k population 100 years ago, to almost 2mil population today, by receiving people from all over Yugoslavia....how realistic is it to put it in either east or west balkan group?

Wonomyro
27-07-18, 16:07
now, this explanation makes more sense, connecting me with pre-slavic balkan population, whatever the tribe is, whether vlachs, thracians, dacians or some other illyrian tribe, that makes those maps more convincible.... well....yes and no....shadings on maps do show decrease, but my numbers for Italy are pretty much high, Tuscany alone is 13%, and north Italy is 5%, so it is almost 20% combined, and if you add agean component of 5%, it is almost a quarter of my relatives within last 10 generations....and we are talking about regions that were never the target for balkan people to immigrate....nor did italians migrate to balkans...

The links with Italy and Spain may be a signal of Roman colonists. However the shading is much stronger in Greece, Moesia and Macedonia which indicates mostly the local origin. These percentages are probably the cummulative values of all time periods.


so, this is a good point to start speculations, as I can`t resist to speculate about my ancient relation to Tuscany, which is actually ancient Etruscan.....how cool would it be to connect myself to ancient Etruscans :)

Tuscany is here just a proxy. It would be more precise to say "Tuscan like" population. Before the Great Migrations the both side of Adriatic were probably genetically similar, so the "Tuscan like" population could be Moesians or Thracians as well. On the other hand, present day Tuscans do not necessarily represent ancient Ertuscians...

Wonomyro
27-07-18, 17:40
now, about livingdna`s divisions.... you might be right about genetic divisions between east and west in periods before last few centuries...but there are some events that happened in last few centuries which had to change entire genetics in Serbia.... first, you have so called "carnojevic migrations" which happened in 18th century, serbs escaped massively from serbian territory into A-H empire, and turks found themselves as rulers of fertile land without population to take taxes from....then turks repopulated these lands with population from Montenegro and BH...now we even have funny saying in Serbia "ako nisi crnogorac, onda mora da si hercegovac" (if you`re not Montenegrian, than you gotta be Herzegovinian") second, Belgrade is on the edge between these regions, it is not even clear where it belongs.......according to livingdna`s maps, I would say that it belongs to east balkans, but that`s just my guess... Belgrade, as capital, was center of migration for entire Yugoslavia, and it is still center of migration today, not just for Serbia, but for BH and Montenegro as well....it grew from 20k population 100 years ago, to almost 2mil population today, by receiving people from all over Yugoslavia....how realistic is it to put it in either east or west balkan group? That is a good question. I don't know how exactly that regions are formed, but I recognize that the regions pretty much follow the autosomal clustering that I saw in papers. That means that the geographical borders are not that important and the map is not meant to be accurate in that regard.

sunce
19-08-18, 01:58
Vlad82 These links you posted as an example are actually my results. I am from Kozara region in Krajina.

Vlad82
19-08-18, 07:47
Vlad82 These links you posted as an example are actually my results. I am from Kozara region in Krajina.

Yes, they are. I hope you do not mind that I used it to show ruskabajka how results should look.

sunce
19-08-18, 13:59
Yes, they are. I hope you do not mind that I used it to show ruskabajka how results should look.
I don't mind at all. It should serve as a comparison of our regions and contribute to the solution of questions considering our regions. For the same purpose it would be useful if you and ruskabajka would also upload your own results in form of pictures on the poreklo where you found my results.

Vlad82
21-08-18, 06:43
I don't mind at all. It should serve as a comparison of our regions and contribute to the solution of questions considering our regions. For the same purpose it would be useful if you and ruskabajka would also upload your own results in form of pictures on the poreklo where you found my results.

Thank you sunce! Unfortunately, I do not have any autosomal results yet.