Posted on 11/10/2018 2:45:18 PM PST by GeorgiaDawg32
Growing up, my dad always told me we (the kids) were Scots-Irish and Slovak (Eastern European). My older brother did some research and can't find anyone from Scotland or Ireland. Mostly from Wales and England.
Well, he got his test results back (mine are in the works) and it turns out he's 32% Scots-Irish.
My thinking is I have a grandma somewhere in the past who died with a secret that is only now becoming clear.
My question is, how many generations back would one have to go to be 32% (of any background) today?
I'm thinking no more than 4.
I guess so. For as much as these DNA tests can be believed, I'm apparently almost equal parts Irish and Norse with a smattering of other northern European types mixed in.
No wonder I like whiskey and roaming around so much! ;-) But yeah, if reasonably accurate, our branch of the family tree is apparently the byproduct of a raiding party perhaps???
Depends. Mixed background of several ancestors could equal 32%.
I can tell you this much, many such test are concerned with the Y chromosome or mitochondrial DNA.
The Y, if present, comes exclusively from your paternal lineage just as mitochondrial DNA comes exclusive from the maternal. If they are basing their numbers off of these then that just represents your mom’s mom and her mothers in turn and your dad’s dad etc the same.
Thus if you’re a guy for your great grandparents that means just 2 out of 8 are represented. This level of representation halves every generation farther back you go.
With ladies this gives just 1 or 8 grandparents represented.
It somewhat improves if you toss in the X chromosome since these can come by way of paternal influence rather than just maternal.
The problem here is that the X chromosome, like all others besides the Y or mitochondrial DNA mentioned above, mixes things up every generation. Traits are less well defined as belonging to this or that group and people in two populations well dispersed from each other in time and place can still have similar genes even though not especially related in terms of conventional thinking about ancestry.
The uncertainty associated is only enhanced if you’re trying to assert membership in a group underrepresented in DNA material as, for instance, many indigenous Americans are. You may recall this last in relation to Fauxcohontas but here’s the rub ... geneticists don’t have a lot of North American Indian genetics for various reasons and they make up for it with DNA samples from Mexico ... Warren may be barely Native American but the only thing her genes prove is she might be barely Mexican. *bada*boom*kisk*
On a more serious note: I’m very suspicious of these DNA testing folks. With the odds of learning much of real use about our ancestry so easily undermined by our own genes it seems a scam to me ... and worse than a scam I deeply suspect the real underlying motives as this may have more to do with identifying us for the benefit of big government so that everything else we think it’s about is just pretty window dressing for a bait and switch.
Depending upon where the DNA test was done through, You can download the DNA results into a zip file on your computer. It can then be “uploaded” to several other DNA - Ancestry sites and will give more expansive interpolation.. GEDmatch is pretty cool. You can compare your DNA with a number of different research studies of different compiled groups.. DNA worked for me. I found a few half-siblings earlier this year.. https://www.yourdnaguide.com/upload-to-gedmatch/
Easiest way would be 1/4 on one side and 1/16 on the other. That’s pretty close to 32%.
Then, of course, you’re 1/1024th Injun (as is almost every damn body).
That can easily happen and all of your female ancestors been faithful. England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales plus North Western Europe are hard to distinguish between because of all the migrations.
Now if it says you have a sister or brother you do.
Lost siblings, uncles, aunts and cousins are just some of the surprises these tests can spring on the unsuspecting.
The Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome tests are good and I believe reliable. The tests can also point out the degree of “closeness” different individuals can be. The percentage of ethnicity is just a rough guess.
After five generations the odds of inheriting any DNA from any one individual is minuscule.
DNA testing works great, and as the number of people in the world who have done the testing has approximately doubled in the past year or so, the amount of data avaiable has improved the interpretation of the results.
The answer to your question is straightforward -- each kid receives only half of each chromosome of each parent, giving each of us 46 family trees, 23 on each side (naturally, this excludes people with genetic disorders like Turner Syndrome and Downs Syndrome), so by the time your paper trail reaches the great-great-great-great-grandparents, there are 64 spots available, but only 46 chromosomes to go around. A minimum of 18 passed down none at all to you, but they are still your ancestors, obviously.
I uploaded my raw file to an archaic DNA project out of curiousity about my own Neandertal roots, and found those. DNA survival from Scotland and Ireland are a piece of cake by comparison.
“and worse than a scam I deeply suspect the real underlying motives as this may have more to do with identifying us for the benefit of big government so that everything else we think it’s about is just pretty window dressing for a bait and switch.”
Couldn’t agree more. Scary. Big Brother is in our homes watching us, listening to us, and getting our DNA...
I’m pretty good at it. These are my opinions and you will not shake them unless you are equally good.
Forget getting anything meaningful from the DNA test vendors. Read their TOS and you will see that they own your data on the few markers they run, rather scary. If you have traced your ancestry the hard way to some very unique tribes and know the specific marker(s), then it can be meaningful (and expensive).
The hard way - family bibles and similar documents are number one, at least to get started. Next comes online searching, such as ancestry.com and geni.com, who both offer free initially. It’s a good way to get enough to lead you to the census records. Then you search parish records, which is the real deal.
Beware of two things. It’s an addictive pursuit, especially since ancestry gives immediate results (”Hints”). As soon as you leave US and Canada records, you will have to start paying (about $30 per month, but they run discounts frequently). Now about those hints. The addictive part is that you start opening windows into the past, and more and more hints. The bad thing (and you will see yourself doing it) is getting in a rush and becoming a ‘clickophile’. Meaningless tree information abounds, as done by others, needless to say.
So, pick your online place, set your privacy to restrict others from seeing your work, and explore it. If you whack a tree too much, just start a new one. After a year or two, if you are persistent, you might have something you find credible.
In general, you will find records in the US-Canada and England-Scotland-Wales-Ireland-Cornwall very searchable. Occasionally information will have to come from a cemetery or a parish clerk. There are a subscription databases available. When you go to the continent, it gets far harder. The language barriers, borders changing, things blown up and records missing are just a few of the challenges. So you will need more than just “Slovak”. You will want the town, the farm, the church, the river, and name searches (including variants) on your favorite search engine. I usually have ten to thirty tabs open.
I hated history as a student. Now I cannot get enough. Every new name and location makes be look up countless things. So jump in, get your feet wet, and be prepared to make countless mistakes while you discover that ancestral research is the study of life itself,
I trust them. Took all three and they were in essential agreement. I also found I was 15% Native American but mainly Northern European.
Found a first cousin I knew nothing about. Confirmed much of what I suspected.
I trust them.
1/46th is 2.1739130435 (this doesn't account for the fact that the numbering of chromosomes is based on their apparent length, and therefore the number of each of their DNA sequences).
32% is about 15 chromosome halves. The DNA results from the testing companies don't say "precisely X %" they say "about".
Knock off the drunk-dialingup.
Saxons, Vikings, and Celts: The Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland,Dr. Bryan Sykes practically invented the science of DNA ancestry, and is the world expert on the DNA of the British Isles. He is also founder Oxford Ancestors.
ISBN 0393330753. by Bryan Sykes; Norton, 2006
Very broadly speaking, the British Isles can be divided into two main genetic groups. The southeast of England which is trends Germanic, and all the rest of the British Isles which trend Celtic. This is a very broad simplification. Read the book for the details.
Unless your ancestors are from California, in which case you can have powers of three instead of two.
Depends on how pure an ancestor was. As humans moved around in recent centuries, DNA mixed.
Then there is the difference between dna and kinship. It is theoretically possible to get NO dna from one of your grandparents, even without any hanky panky, but you are still kin.
Chances of having little or none of a true relative’s dna increase the further back you go. This is because you don’t get All of Mom’s and Dad’s dna, but half of each.
This is also why siblings can differ so much.
My second cousin subscribed to one of those things and found he was related at the level of "second cousin" to a person who had the same last name as me, but whom he had never heard of. Turns out is was my nephew, who would be his second cousin, once removed.
Also, cops use those services to find relatives of suspects whose DNA they have, so it's not total nonsense. One could easily make genetic profiles of certain ethnic groups and match individuals with these profiles (including means and variances) with a certain amount of rigor. From what I've seen, they are pretty reliable in finding relatives. BTW, by nephew's profile said that he was Scandinavian/Danish. His father was Danish.
Depends on heritage of ancestors
Example grandad 100% Scots. Grandma 100% anything else say Scandinavian Their off spring would be 50 50.
Dad is 50% Scots and mom is 100%anything else Say German. Then off spring would be 25% Scots
DNA for identification of perpetrators and relatives is science.
Using DNA to say you are 0.13% Polynesian is not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.