#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am confused...My Ancestry.co.uk said that I am 17% Norweigan..The third biggest part of my DNA after German and East Anglian English.....MyTrueAncestry revealed strong Viking DNA, Norwegian, Swedish and Danish..also Longobards and Medieval Trondheim... DNA in Iceland and Northwest Scotland too. My Genomelink DNA says I have Viking DNA, highlighting Norway and Sweden but my Global Ancestry says that I have no Scandinavian DNA...How can that be?
I am English, my father has a long family line in East Anglia which will have Saxon and Viking DNA too. I was very surprised to find Germanic was the biggest part of my DNA and Norwegian was third, I had no ![]() ![]() So I am really confused and don't know who to ask... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't think I can completely answer everything but there is a myth that Vikings only originate from the Scandinavian region, they were Norse seafarers so were well travelled and would have a lot of mixed DNA.
They got as far as Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, and North America. Someone might correct me but I thought Saxon was Germanic? “A lot of the Vikings are mixed individuals” with ancestry from both Southern Europe and Scandinavia, for example, or even a mix of Sami (Indigenous Scandinavian) and European ancestry." "Researchers also discovered a second-degree family connection between a Viking in a Danish cemetery and another in Oxford, England—proof of how mobile family members were during the era." https://www.nationalgeographic.com/h...-genetic-roots |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Saxon is Germanic, I did not expect German to be the biggest part of my DNA. It is also Vandals, Alemmani, and DNA in Rome. And medieval Germany and The Hanseatic League. England V Germany today in the football, and I am more German than English. I have always been drawn to Germany had no idea why.
I have DNA markers in both of those Viking gravesites...The DNA map on MyTrueAncestry is all over Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, and even Greenland. And North West Scotland. Norwegian DNA goes back to the Longobards, with markers in Scotland, Iceland and also Medieval Norway.. Everytime I think I have got my head around my DNA, something confuses me. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
In twenty years time, I imagine that our ethnicity estimates will be very different to those given today. My DNA matches my tree back to at least 5 generations, with EVERYONE born south of the Wash, but I have 11% Scottish DNA. This is either wrong, or represents lots of vestigial scraps.
Pure racial DNA would depend on finding people whose ancestors NEVER moved. This is nigh impossible. You also have the problem that each DNA testing organisation will describe populations in slightly different ways, and have different sample sizes. Each ethnicity upgrade on Ancestry gives a different mix for me. I have briefly had French and then various Scandanavian ethnicities. I think we have to treat ethnicity as a bit of fun, and certainly the current results are fairly suspect.
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I wouldn't worry too much about the ethnicity estimate, but see whether your DNA matches confirm the ancestors that you have in your family tree or not. I have never heard of Genomelink DNA or Global Ancestry and don't know much about MyTrueAncestry, so I don't know how accurate or reliable they are.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Okay, here is some info about MyTrueAncestry which is worth a read:
https://blog.genomelink.io/posts/mytrueancestry-review It says "there seem to be some serious logical fallacies" but that it "does provide a lot of fun content to read". So, don't take MyTrueAncestry very seriously! Edit - just noticed that link is to Genomelink's blog. But at least the other reviews on that blog do seem to be based in reality. Just Googling for reviews of any of these sites can come up with fake reviews. It does look as though the info in the article about MyTrueAncestry is correct. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Here is an article saying to ignore your results from Genomelink:
https://www.sciencealert.com/dna-tes...ams-here-s-why |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
As for "Global Ancestry", all I can find by Googling is that it is another report that you can get from Genomelink. Is that right?
My advice is not to pay any money to any DNA testing companies apart from the following: Ancestry, 23 And Me, MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA, Living DNA. And you shouldn't need to pay for a DNA test from any of those apart from Ancestry and 23 And Me, since you can usually download your "raw DNA data" from either of those two and upload it to the other three. You may need to pay a relatively small amount to access extra levels of information such as chromosome browsers etc once you have done that. (Or if you are getting an extra test such as Y-DNA.) Neither Ancestry nor 23 and Me will let you upload raw DNA data from another site to theirs. Also, GEDMatch is a legitimate site but make sure to read their terms and conditions carefully. As the article linked to in post #7 above says, there are more and more scam DNA testing companies starting up. One that I know of is CRI Genetics. Do not pay them any money! If you see positive reviews of a DNA testing company, they could be fake reviews originating from the company itself, unless you know that the review site itself is trustworthy. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Hmm, now that I have been Googling for Genomelink, an ad for it is coming up on Facebook: "Get free Viking DNA report; learn who is your closest Viking". So I imagine that they will tell everybody that they have "Viking DNA".
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
If you look at this Ancestry Article, you may find some clarity, if you are looking at Ancestry Ethnicity Estimates -
https://support.ancestry.com/s/artic...eference-Panel but I think the other companies work on similar lines. You will see that of the 44,703 people on the reference panel, 2095 are of long term Germanic background, while 1326 are from Britain and North Western Europe. 1411 are of Scottish background while just 480 are from Wales and 732 from Ireland. I deduce from these figures, that if you have a proportion of DNA from, say, Welsh background, it will not show up unless you share DNA with some of the 480 on the reference panel. Two of DNA profiles I manage have relatively high proportion Scottish ethnicity estimate (39%) but a very small Irish component (2%) Based on the family tree, showing about the same number of ancestral lines back to Scotland and Ireland, I would have expected the percentages to be very similar. The Welsh percentage is 4%. With only one 4xg grandparent from Wales but half a dozen from Ireland, this does not seem to make sense - except that the DNA profiles have Irish DNA roots which are not represented in the panel, but a proportion of the Welsh reference panel share DNA with our profiles. Another DNA sample has a very high proportion of Scottish ethnicity (17%), despite no paper trail to Scotland, or people who moved from Scotland within the last 400 years. When i look closer at this estimate is says it could be 0% to 20%, which makes the 17% very misleading. As the panel is changed and updated, I am sure the estimates will change. The earlier estimates for this sample were more correlated to the paper trail. I am interested in finding about more about the reference panel - how they are chosen, are they regular Ancestry DNA samples, how often is the panel changed or updated, do they know they are on the reference panel? Hope this might help in some small way PS - this article might also help explain https://www.wired.com/story/your-eth...think-it-does/ . Last edited by marquette; 01-07-21 at 01:42. Reason: more info |
![]() |
|
|