FTDNA MyOrigins

ebAmerican

Regular Member
Messages
226
Reaction score
46
Points
0
Ethnic group
German and Swedish
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b- P312
mtDNA haplogroup
T2E2
FTDNA released MyOrigins the other day, and I thought I would post my results for fun. It would be interesting to see other peoples results, but I understand it is a private matter(y)

I have run many admixture tests through Gedmatch, and it's interesting to see the comparison of all the services.

myOriginseb.jpg

The orange dots are paternal matches and the blue dots are maternal matches - Family Finder.
I'm assuming the Anatolian marker found is part of my Neolithic connection, or possibly a more recent admixture - I don't know.

EUtest V2 K15 Admixture

EUtestk15.jpg
 
You should do the Eurogenes K13 test at GEDmatch, and then transfer the results to the EEF-WHG-ANE calculator. You can get an idea who your stone age ancestors were. The EEF reference sample Stuttgart, an ~7,000BP LBK farmer had about 20% WHG ancestry, so do the math and you'll be able to get an accurate idea what your real EEF(just represents middle eastern ancestry), WHG, and ANE percentages are.
 
23andme labeled me overwhelmingly Eastern European with some connection to Scandinavia and Balkans.
 
23andme labeled me overwhelmingly Eastern European with some connection to Scandinavia and Balkans.

Is that accurate, is the R1b from Scandinavia? 23andme was accurate for my uncle, they were able to tell he had British, Norwegian, and Puerto Rican ancestry(Spanish+Native American+West African), and from what i have read it is accurate for most people. Your Balkan connection may be because of Czechslovakian ancestry, since they have more Balkan-like ancestry than Poles.
 
Is that accurate, is the R1b from Scandinavia? 23andme was accurate for my uncle, they were able to tell he had British, Norwegian, and Puerto Rican ancestry(Spanish+Native American+West African), and from what i have read it is accurate for most people. Your Balkan connection may be because of Czechslovakian ancestry, since they have more Balkan-like ancestry than Poles.
Balkan and Sweden are only at 3% level. I'm not sure what is exact subclade of my R1b. I still have about 30-40% of unassigned European. So some mystery is left for the future.
 
upl.php

Eastern branch R1b Z2105+ L277-/L584-
Poland, Silesia:
Father yDNA R1b1a2a1 + mtDNA H2a1
EEF 42.59
WHG 40.4124
ANE 16.99
My results R1b1a2a1 + U5b2a2
EEF 45.15
WHG 38.67
ANE 16.17

JiGlI7W.png
 
You should do the Eurogenes K13 test at GEDmatch, and then transfer the results to the EEF-WHG-ANE calculator. You can get an idea who your stone age ancestors were. The EEF reference sample Stuttgart, an ~7,000BP LBK farmer had about 20% WHG ancestry, so do the math and you'll be able to get an accurate idea what your real EEF(just represents middle eastern ancestry), WHG, and ANE percentages are.

Your making erred statements when you isolate EEF or WHG or ANE on their own. They come in a package and lazaridis has already given the combination in numbers and stated the area of the globe they are from. A statement which states that a High EEF means middle-east is a useless and wrong statement.
EEF in southern france is ~68 ...........is it middle-east!...........
 
Balkan and Sweden are only at 3% level. I'm not sure what is exact subclade of my R1b. I still have about 30-40% of unassigned European. So some mystery is left for the future.

does 23andme count the "borrowed" ( from 1000genomes and other companies) data from the area you are assigned?
 
My result in myOrigin:
myOrigins.jpg
I suspect that the European Coastal Islands result is also Nordic, since I have no UK ancestry, as far as I know. But many in UK have Nordic ancestry (1000 years back or so), so the genes are probably very mixed.
 
FTDNA released MyOrigins the other day, and I thought I would post my results for fun. It would be interesting to see other peoples results, but I understand it is a private matter(y)

I have run many admixture tests through Gedmatch, and it's interesting to see the comparison of all the services.

View attachment 6421

The orange dots are paternal matches and the blue dots are maternal matches - Family Finder.
I'm assuming the Anatolian marker found is part of my Neolithic connection, or possibly a more recent admixture - I don't know.

EUtest V2 K15 Admixture

View attachment 6422

You have about the exact same result as my uncle (100 % Norwegian), but he has 3 % Anatolian. I don't know what that could be either. And also he has about 5 % North Mediterranian. I see that in connection with the Anatolian/Caucasus result (don't know of any North Mediterranean ancestry the last 3-400+ years either).
 
You should do the Eurogenes K13 test at GEDmatch, and then transfer the results to the EEF-WHG-ANE calculator. You can get an idea who your stone age ancestors were. The EEF reference sample Stuttgart, an ~7,000BP LBK farmer had about 20% WHG ancestry, so do the math and you'll be able to get an accurate idea what your real EEF(just represents middle eastern ancestry), WHG, and ANE percentages are.

As far as EEF is concerned, 20% WHG is the upper limit; Lazaridis stated that it could be anywhere from a few percent up to 20%. Until we have some samples from the Near East we won't know.

In my opinion, the results of this very sophisticated study are becoming increasingly misunderstood as they are simplified, and perhaps even slightly distorted to make agenda driven points. It's like that kid's game, where a statement is made, then passed along a chain, and by the time you get to the end, the message is totally garbled, only worse, because some of the players are deliberately twisting the words.

I would concur with Sile's point about EEF being "Middle Eastern". EEF is EEF, a very particular mix that existed at a very particular time. I think it can be most accurately described as the signature of the early European farmers. I don't know how many times certain things need to be repeated before they sink in. The people who came to Europe bringing agriculture with them came from the region of the greater Near East, some perhaps from the Levant, but many from the more northern Near East. Regardless, those people are not identical to the people who currently inhabit the Near East, who now have a large ANE proportion, as well as an additional slice of SSA. They arrived 8-9,000 years ago.

Until we get samples tested from the Italian and southeastern European, including the Aegean, areas, we won't know whether the hunter gatherers in that area were like the hunter gatherers of central and northern Europe, or if perhaps they were not that different from the incoming farmers, meaning that the signature might indeed be Mesolithic and therefore older in Europe than 8,000 years ago, although there still might have been a substantial movement of actual people from, say, the Levant. The distance between Anatolia and the Balkans is the width of the Hellespont, which is only about 1.2 kilometers wide. Could the people have been so very different? Perhaps it was an insurmountable barrier in the Mesolithic. I don't know. I'm not willing to go out on a limb and say they weren't that different, but I think the results coming from the Bean project about the Mesolithic hunter gatherers in Greece having no mtDNA "U", and instead the Mesolithic and Neolithic samples having very small FST distances, and carrying mtDNA signatures X,K,J,H and T, is very suggestive.
See: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/12/talk-by-christina-papageorgopoulou-on.html

Furthermore, if you go back in time, the northern and central European hunter-gatherers arrived in Europe either through the Middle East or Asia. Europe is a destination, not a source.

Finally, I don't know how many times it needs to be said...hunter-gatherers don't form an "ethnic" or even geographic group. All humans were hunter-gatherers until they adopted agriculture... some just did it earlier.
 
Eloquently said Angela ▲▲▲▲▲(y)
 
Grubbe - the more I look into my past the more connection I have to the North lands. I recently learned that my great grandma on my dad's side was born in Malmo Sweden. My grandmother on my dad's side was English, and my mother was Swedish and English. My great grandfather ++++++++ (1645 dad's side) was from Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg. We have tracked down some distant relatives in Germany with our surname and it looks like we have Prussian decent before 1645. This could explain the Baltic levels in my admixture. It's awesome to see everything starting to fall into place, and these new DNA genealogical advances confirming our assumptions.
 
Fire Haired14 - thanks for the EEF/WHG/ANE calculator.

My results -

EEF: 46.61
WHG: 37.45
ANE: 15.93

I don't really know what it means, so I won't infer anything, but it is cool to compare to ancient samples like Otzi.
 
Fire Haired14 - thanks for the EEF/WHG/ANE calculator.

My results -

EEF: 46.61
WHG: 37.45
ANE: 15.93

I don't really know what it means, so I won't infer anything, but it is cool to compare to ancient samples like Otzi.

WHG is based on an ~8,000BP Mesolithic hunter gatherer from Loschbour, Luxmebourg named Loschbour, he belonged to Y DNA pre-I2a1b, mtDNA U5b1a. EEF is based on an ~6,950 year old farmer named Stuttgart from Stuttgart, Germany who was apart of the Neolithic LBK culture and belonged to mtDNA T2c1d1, and ANE is based on an ~24,000 year old Upper Palaeolithic hunter gatherer named MA1 from Mal'ta Siberia who belonged to Y DNA R* and mtDNA U*(his own subclade, not found in modern people). To see what my opinon on the populations these individuals descended from click here.

Laz 2013 created the original EEF-WHG-ANE admixture and Euroegenes created a calculator based on EEF-WHG-ANE results of European populations tested in Laz and their Eurogenes-K13 results, so that Europeans who have Eurogenes-K13 results can get accurate EEF-WHG-ANE results.

Since Stuttgart was probably around 20% WHG and 80% Middle eastern, your WHG percentage is actulley higher and your EEF/Middle eastern percentage is lower.

Davidski aka Polako, at Eurogenes created a Mammouth(MA1 or La Brana-1)-ME(Middle eastern)-ENA(Eastern non African)-SSA(Sub Saharan African) test. There are obviously some inaccuracies but the percentages of Mammouth ancestry for Europeans, west Asians, north Africans, and Siberians are very consistent with Laz. When i took European population's EEF-WHG-ANE results from Laz 2014 and made their EEF percentage 20% WHG, their WHG+ANE percentage was nearly identical to their Mammouth percentage and their EEF nearly identical to the ME percentage in Davidski's admixture.

So this is much closer to your actual EEF-WHG-ANe percentages.

North Eurasian hunter gatherer(WHG+ANE)=62.702%

Middle eastern(EEF)=37.288%

WHG=46.772%

EEF=37.228%

ANE=15.93%

So, if you went back ~9,000-10,000 years ago ~62.702% of your ancestors were hunter gatherers in north Eurasia(WHG was in Europe, and ANE mostly in eastern Europe and central Asia) and ~37.228% of your ancestors were some of the earliest farmers living in the Levant, Anatolia, and the Balkans.
 
As far as EEF is concerned, 20% WHG is the upper limit; Lazaridis stated that it could be anywhere from a few percent up to 20%. Until we have some samples from the Near East we won't know.

In my opinion, the results of this very sophisticated study are becoming increasingly misunderstood as they are simplified, and perhaps even slightly distorted to make agenda driven points. It's like that kid's game, where a statement is made, then passed along a chain, and by the time you get to the end, the message is totally garbled, only worse, because some of the players are deliberately twisting the words.

I would concur with Sile's point about EEF being "Middle Eastern". EEF is EEF, a very particular mix that existed at a very particular time. I think it can be most accurately described as the signature of the early European farmers. I don't know how many times certain things need to be repeated before they sink in. The people who came to Europe bringing agriculture with them came from the region of the greater Near East, some perhaps from the Levant, but many from the more northern Near East. Regardless, those people are not identical to the people who currently inhabit the Near East, who now have a large ANE proportion, as well as an additional slice of SSA. They arrived 8-9,000 years ago.

Until we get samples tested from the Italian and southeastern European, including the Aegean, areas, we won't know whether the hunter gatherers in that area were like the hunter gatherers of central and northern Europe, or if perhaps they were not that different from the incoming farmers, meaning that the signature might indeed be Mesolithic and therefore older in Europe than 8,000 years ago, although there still might have been a substantial movement of actual people from, say, the Levant. The distance between Anatolia and the Balkans is the width of the Hellespont, which is only about 1.2 kilometers wide. Could the people have been so very different? Perhaps it was an insurmountable barrier in the Mesolithic. I don't know. I'm not willing to go out on a limb and say they weren't that different, but I think the results coming from the Bean project about the Mesolithic hunter gatherers in Greece having no mtDNA "U", and instead the Mesolithic and Neolithic samples having very small FST distances, and carrying mtDNA signatures X,K,J,H and T, is very suggestive.
See: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/12/talk-by-christina-papageorgopoulou-on.html

Furthermore, if you go back in time, the northern and central European hunter-gatherers arrived in Europe either through the Middle East or Asia. Europe is a destination, not a source.

Finally, I don't know how many times it needs to be said...hunter-gatherers don't form an "ethnic" or even geographic group. All humans were hunter-gatherers until they adopted agriculture... some just did it earlier.

Actulley near eastern ancestry for Stuttgart was estimated from 55%-over 100%. It seems that there is a such thing as Middle eastern(mixture of west Eurasian and basal Eurasian), it is obvious when looking at PCAs, admixtures, and plenty of other stuff. I never said modern middle easterns are pure middle eastern, but they do come primarily from the same source as did early European farmers, and both have non-middle eastern ancestry. Also, European-specfic subclades of middle eastern mtDNA haplogroups are very distant from middle eastern-specific subclades, suggesting a very distant relationship between early European farmers and modern middle easterns.

I only trust estimates where east Asian is represented by a likely pure east asian population(ie. Onge, han, etc.), and i bet Bedouin have something inbetween 5.1 and 7.3 percent African ancestry, and therefore 80% Middle eastern ancestry for Stuttgart makes sense. When 20% WHG ancestry in Stuttgart is assumed and put than in to get WHG+ANe percentage for Europeans they are nearly identical to Mammouth(La Brana-1 or MA1 as reference) percentages given to Europeans in an admixture created by Davidski aka Polako at Eurogenes. In that admixture Sardinians who have been shown to have slightly more WHG than Stuttgart, score on average 33% WHG. Also, in PCAs Lezgin's who have about almost 30% ANE ancestry are about as shifted up in WHG-ANE direction as Sardinians and Stuttgart are, which is even more evidence Stuttgart had around 20% WHG ancestry.

20% WHG ancestry for Stuttgart is just my guess, i know it must be somewhere inbetween
 
WHG was a single ethnicity it is just some admixed with other populations. It is no big deal if Mesolithic Greeks were practiculley middle easterns, with little genetic differences with incoming farmers, who ever said Greece was a genetic barrier?
 
Your making erred statements when you isolate EEF or WHG or ANE on their own. They come in a package and lazaridis has already given the combination in numbers and stated the area of the globe they are from. A statement which states that a High EEF means middle-east is a useless and wrong statement.
EEF in southern france is ~68 ...........is it middle-east!...........

EEF is based on Stuttgart an ~6,950 year old LBK farmer from Germany. Laz revealed her ancestry and modern middle easterns ancestry primarily come from the same ancient middle eastern source, but they all have sometype of none middle eastern ancestry. All Europeans therefore, have a large amount of middle eastern ancestry, but for most from mainly farmers who left for Europe some 9,000 years ago and who are distantly but still closely related to modern middle easterns.

When looking at pigmentation it may be hard to believe for example that modern Swedes are over 30% middle eastern, but it's true. Alot can change in 9,000 years.
 
WHG was a single ethnicity it is just some admixed with other populations. It is no big deal if Mesolithic Greeks were practiculley middle easterns, with little genetic differences with incoming farmers, who ever said Greece was a genetic barrier?


The terms and concepts have to be kept clear...jumbling everything together leads to sloppy conclusions. (In particular, concepts from the old calculators are no longer very informative in this kind of analysis. They are just later poolings of different migrations.)

The point was that the HG's in Greece and the Balkans, which are in Europe, in case it has escaped your notice, may not have been like the WHG's. The fact that their signature might overlap with that of HG's in Anatolia at that time (which may or may not be true) wouldn't make them any less European HG's, just like the fact that the affinity of ANE's for eastern populations doesn't make ANE's not European.

You are applying geographic and political and indeed ethnic terms to populations which existed thousands and thousands of years before these concepts ever developed. You have to imagine ancient groups converging on Europe from different directions (continents) at different times, two of which, the WHG and the ANE, are outside of modern variation.

Which brings me to the fact that although you are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts.
Please take a look at page 40 of the revised Lazaridis et al paper for the source of these figures. There is no figure given for the Swedes, but one is given for Norwegians. The EEF figure is 41%. The only place in Europe where EEF falls to the 30% level is in the tiny Baltic countries, tiny in square miles, and tiny in population. The EEF average for Europe as a whole is at least 56%.

As for the differences between northern and southern Europeans, the difference is not down to the ANE perhaps brought by the Indo-Europeans. That is contrary to the positions taken by "internet authorities" in the past that Indo-Europeans were a very different population (which more lately they claim to be mostly ANE), and that these people literally wiped out everybody else, at least in central Europe.

In actual fact, the ANE component is a very minor player in Europe. It ranges from about 11% to 17%, with the only exception being southwest France, which has an extraordinarily low number of .13. Nowhere in Europe does the figure for ANE go above 20%. In the Near East it is higher, with some populations in the Caucasus getting 30%.

The difference in Europe is in terms of the WHG percentages. In that regard, the Estonians have .495, the Irish .464, the Scottish and the Norwegians .428 (which I don't think is a coincidence by the way). These are high figures, but they are for low population countries, and they are obviously also the countries where agriculture fared the worst because of climate until the agricultural package was adapted. On the central European highly populated plain, the EEF number is still 55%, and it is still 50% in England.
 

This thread has been viewed 65754 times.

Back
Top