Disadvantages of Generalized Consumer Information

Recently I was introduced to two sources: Snpedia.com and James Licks haplogroup reader. Originally I began an excel chart looking for a map/result of correlating my major rcrs differences to known markers of each subclade. When I completed my cursory search and had found only some related to the in typed mutation I was quite disappointed. Through a happy coincidence I searched that marker coming across a blog post which indicated James Licks haplogroup reader using phylotree data. Indeed I had found what I was looking for! When I third party transferred and took my mtDNA test with Family Tree DNA they had not yet differentiated the basic and full sequence test so while I thought I was getting a awesome deal I was indeed being short changed. For most people knowing your major haplogroup is probably very helpful. The general information will no doubt apply to at least part of your research and you may choose to look no further. In researching H I began to try and guess which subclade I might be. I began to notice that much of the research on Haplogroup H was inconsistent. When I first looked it up I was told H stood for Helena featuring most women found in the area of Greece and Turkey. More recent clippings will tell you it is actually a young line found in Norway and Scotland....the inconsistency being an east or west haplogroup. 

Running the James Lick emulator for my true subclade has been invaluable to discerning not only my origins but also understanding why information is so distorted suddenly on the topic of line H. The result from inputting my hrv1 and hrv2 differences was H2a2a1g. Major research has been done recently in recovering that haplogroup from the eurocentric viewpoint and possible selection biases. My own upper subclade of H2 is perhaps one of the least European of all the H derivatives with H2a2a1 represented in highest amount among Saudi Arabian women. H2a is also the only of the H2 subclade to have integrated back into Asian phylogeography after initial migration towards Europe. [Correction: As of Fall 2015 that build was replaced for giving false positives related to H2a2a. That is not my haplogroup.]

On advisory from a more seasoned genetic genealogist than I was the idea of charting matches to the most recent common female ancestor in the States. Of course for me this actually means Canada. Indeed my female immigrant ancestor of the mtdna line is Elizabeth 'Betty' Beck (1814-1874) who came from Dumfries-shire, Scotland to settle in Grey, Ontario, Canada with her husband John Swanston (1808-1891). From there I am to work backwards into Europe but I have a feeling the separation between North America and Europe might be better served by a more popular female such as Sebithy Ann Coultis (1857-1951) of Manitoulin Island who married William Henry Bryant (1864-1939).

Conversing on Ancestry.com has become even more limited without a subscription much to my annoyance so it will be hard work to find people matching my MRCA to compare mtdna results. Incidentally I noticed that the interactive genealogy map I made sometime ago has a strange overlay with the known path for the development of the H haplogroup both the predominant Eurasian and European subclades. Heatmaping the sources of my major subclade H2a2a has also been helpful though I intend to revise it further with matching recent populations excluding deep ancestry.

_______________________________________________________

http://dna.jameslick.com/mthap/

Wismer not so Wise...

Something I don't normally do is research areas of my family history that are already overly championed by dedicated people. This would probably include anywhere from 25-45% of my entire tree. That probably seems like a high range to some but these groups are fully vetted at least 5 generations back. Not much left then to research honestly. Recently GEDMatch.com had a server crash and so has been offline or with limited capability for sometime.

The cousins who were in contact with me broke off for the time being so while my inbox is empty I did not have much to do, (not counting graduate school!) It occurred to me after playing around with the repaired website that perhaps I did have something to say on the subject of one of my well researched surnames. I have also been a fan of the show "Lost Girl" for sometime particularly enjoying when Kenzi spoke slavic in a few episodes as I hadn't heard it before.

Looking at Eurogenes w/oracle today and having already recognized much to my father's horror that I have no central European (more than 45% of his composite) it was odd to see a component of projected populations owing to that area. Immediately I was thinking of a small research I did on the Wismer family, my grandmother Lucienna's maiden name, regarding the orientation of that name. Commonly it is assumed to be a amalgamation of anglicized Germanic words meaning "wise-person". I haven't had a reason to doubt this presumption until DNA became available. The two interesting results were, Ukrainian_West 15.33%, Erzya 8.18%, Russian 5.80%, three populations not previously attributed to my admixture. I'll continue here with my previous research...
---------------------------------------------------------
"Wismer Family Morphology"

Two interpretations of the origion of the Wismer clan have existed. Anglo saxonry dictates that the name is a germancised account of a trait name "wise-man". Recent admixture however points to a genetic source outside of the North Sea. The term Wismer is a placename given to the inhabitants of the port town called Wismar in the german state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. The small historical town is formed by a natural harbor to its north from the baltic sea. While Wismar was under Norwegian control for some time and rests in northcenteral germany is was origionally colonized by Palobian Slavs from the eastern Baltic region.

Palobian Slavs are unfortunate to be extinct in language. As a group of Lechtite people their genetic heritage exists still in other members of the same cluster notablly the Polish. The Sorbs of Lusatia remain the only unique cultural descendants of Palobian Slavs still maintaining those language and physical cultural traits such as dress. As a coastal region the town of Wismar was prone to genetic drift from resulting neighbor groups as well as bleed through from its closest relation Poland. Notably Poland itself is a conglomeration of the Lechite tribes assembled under the Duke of Poland, Mieszko I. Therefore the Wismer family heritage represents a north eastern slavic peoples and more recently german adjunct influence not that of Britain.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

...More onto the recent identity of the Wismer descendants as German that is a over simplified fact. Only three of the men born before the immigrant ancestor came from  Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. Hidden inside the older generations is a large amount of Austro-Bavarian, Swedish, and Danish. It is a important reminder to the genealogist, especially any amateurs reading my blog, that birthplace doesn't always convene with genetic population. Obviously this might be the case of African american individuals researching there family who are surprised to find relatives in Spain or the like which was simply a host nation to many generations. A subject I'd love to breech is that of a African cousin in my ancestry.com match maker I did not know I had. Upon my last visit reviewing genealogy with my father he conveyed to me this was not news to him. A great uncle of his had returned to Europe and as a sailor had taken a wife from the north African coast. Somethings are just beautiful discoveries of the amazing global culture we all share.

Graphing FTDNA for Native Blood

It's common for people to find a unsubstantiated family myth regarding a long lost great grandparent of some tribe. It's part of the Rousseau ideal that native culture is somehow noble through its simplicity and to be admired. Indeed looking just at the surface of things at the time of first contact they had more advanced systems of hygiene and significant ecologically-sensitive agriculture. Those of us with genealogical evidence often find it scant due to the nature of the times regarding the personage and citizenship of a native person in the imperial Americas. As a Metis woman I am at a disadvantage that besides the myth and a lucky interview provided by James Sweinhart, a published journalist, that there is no physical connection I can grasp.

Cherokee Nation at Kansas City, 1994

As a anthropologist, I maintain a certain outlook from multicultural perspective but I have found it fails me when working with more traditional native american individuals. Often I am met with hostility which I believe is less to do with how I look, as some might presume, and more to do with the socioeconomics of tribal living. I certainly don't intend to be a bother and the only community I intend to pursue citizenship with would be the Metis peoples in my local Canadian/US sector. Due to the degree of mixture it simply seems idiotic to sequester anything more specific when indeed I am not specific. 

It is that mixture exactly that is the true topic of this post. After my 3rd party transfer to Family Tree DNA completed I uploaded it into GED Matches album to compare with ancestry original interpretation. It is notable to mention that ftdna actually reevaluated the chip itself not just the raw composite to my knowledge. For the most part I saw predictable and minute changes. Side by side I noticed that ftdna cited more africanized Moorish DNA as apart of my Iberian spectrum. When I reviewed MDLP 22 by chromosome it suddenly occurred to me to class out the asian decent populations and revise it for my native american blood. Trycyclic populations including the middle east are often misplaced amounts of plains native which is so intermixed that it more often registers as middle eastern.

On average I found that 20% of each chromosome was Asiatic derivative. Since the middle eastern connection is still debatable I also went a step further in removing the trycyclic and Asian components to search for individualized known samples of native american DNA. On average this left a 10-12% of each chromosome to be confirmed native american source which is above the threshold for founder markers. Each of the remaining populations confirmed in my chromosomes were set in known genetic regions allowing me to percentage out the confirmed strains by region. Of the 10-12% confirmed; 53% was Northern Hemisphere (Inuit derivatives), 38% was Americas proper, & 21% was trace matching aboriginal societies in the eastern hemisphere. Percentage peaks for the northern group rested on chromosomes 7, 16, 18 & 22. The Americas group peaked at 13 & 20, but only 20 was highly above the margin of error. Lastly the trace societies were highest peaked on 8 & 15 but not as impressively as the other groups. Overall it was North Amerindian which received the highest proportion spikes but it was also one of the least spread matches across the 22 chromosomes.

So I may be lucky enough to have numbers but it also comes down to personal experience and identity. Personal experience has always pushed me to look at aboriginal life in a learning capacity much like a child watching their parents. Even now I am writing my final paper for my degree program on Native American Studies. The expectations of that work is for me to be a participant but I've always been a participant even in times where I was so far away from the source. Part of my most loving experience was the short time I spent with the Cherokee Nation in Missouri. Despite outward appearance I was drawn in and allowed to participate culminating in a honorary membership. While it may have just been words it started me off on a journey I am still following now, as a Metis.

DNA Updates and Forthcomings

Well GEDmatch has finally finished with the re-tokenizing of my DNA pack. It seems that some of the simulations had errors which were pinging mostly in unrelated ethnic results but nonetheless gedmatch decided to rerun new editions for errors. This changes my results to a small degree. The smallest changes are to do with my largest portions. My European percentages are now farther east with 47% a solid mix of Fennoscandia and the Slavic countries bordering Russia. At this time my Celtic/British strains are only 6%. I am still left unsure which country provides the dominant amount of my 34% Mediterranean. Northern Italian and Iberian are both cited. The near east populations matches continue to tantalize me if only because I cannot find their source genealogically.  Roughly 10% of my blood is still Persian which I find amazing.

The more drastic changes have come in the form of my smallest amounts. While initially HarappaWorld and MDLP both cited my mesoamerican DNA from the Muscogee it is now something else. In a sense it could be a more accurate result. About 5% of my result is from South Amerindian and Arctic Amerindian. The latter would correspond to my mother's Mi'kmaq heritage. From what I've gathered online the south is most likely representative of Cherokee. I rather guess that does make more sense since there were only small amounts of exogamy in my direct relations. As the Cherokee are fairly wide, the bands can simply interchange children without looking in another region. Eurogenes still says Mayan...Ugh! But it also indicates a southeast Asia portion as well as oceanic which are barely above threshold.

What I do still find strange is my Samoyed and Berinigan DNA. They are very small amounts but I'm not sure which region to classify them under in my processing of this. I gather for the most part I work on a three category system; European, Asiatic & American. If it doesn't fit those groups than it's wasteful knowledge.

I also took a look at the new ancestry ethnicity predictor. I do find it helpful that they separated my Irish and British blood apart. That makes me confused however about whether Scottish is really the same as British. According to their diagrams it is separate and I have none. My new ancestry numbers are: 52% Great Britain, 21% Scandinavian, 15% Irish, 8% Iberian, 2% Grecco-Italian, 1% Eastern European and <1% Western European. At least that is more interesting than my original pie of British, Scandinavian and unknown. Still I find it very odd that Ancestry states my British as high as 50% when all other groups dictate that it is <26%. Consider for one that as of currently all the calculators for gedmatch place me at 6%. I think it makes ancestry look stupid. I still hope however to upload to FTDNA for my maternal test and correspond my admixture there. My tight budget might make it a Christmas gift to myself.

Unzipping My Raw DNA, Part Two

I don't believe that most people are prepared to make the jump in amateur genealogy to that of the intermediate especially with the inclusion of genetics. When the veil is lifted and you see who you are deep in your cells and atoms it can be either encouraging or feel as though all your work has been through colored glasses. Genetic testing is probably a positive for those whose ancestors were static and the acculturated generations match those that actually make up your being. I'm having the rather mirror-house experience where the recent does not match not only who I am as a person, but also is a falsification or at best over-simplification of the real genetic source.

The time it's taken to run the simulators and compile them into a single excel document however has given me enough pause to collect most of my thoughts. I have to remember that the exotic is mostly deep ancestry so it would not be relevant necessarily except for some quirks. Yet the mirror house experience is that, everything is exotic, at least in comparison to the records and beliefs of those still living today. Working first with admixtures there is a varying degree of interpretation still to the amount of 'white' that I am. Ancestry's estimate was 52% British isles/34% Scandinavian, on the whole roughly 80-90% carbon white.

Harrapaworld, Asia map, disputes this number with only a maximum of 48.5% European. 'Africa 9' on Dodecad echo's a similar opinion that I am 67.5% or less European (including Indo-European as strictly white). Dodecad World version 3 places this number closer to 52% with the rest highly africanized Iberian or west/southwest asian. Eurogenes perhaps gave the most honest admixture result due to it's definitive sub sects. North Sea, which includes water bound parts of Scandinavia as well as the British isles rests at only 20%. JTest states that of these European groups only 25.4% is wholly white and inadmissible as Jewish. I am only 3% however above the noise level (2.5%) for Azkenazi Jewish heritage so the direct line there is remote. Yet the large chucks of central and eastern European do echo the ancestry given my fathers genetic test.

Southern heritage is much more pronounced than Ancestry claimed with some rare alleles coming from Cyprus, Lithuania, and East Asia. Spain and Northern Italy are the founders of my southern heritage with only one so far found in the genealogical record. Dodecad World 9, for example places me at 72.5% Atlantic_Baltic, 25.5% Caucusus/Southern European and around 1.5% Amerindian. 1.5 is interpreted over and over as either Asiatic or Amerindian, notably however it is inferred as Mexican/Central American Indian when addressed. It also increases as high as 3-8% given the presence of oceanic, papuan, beringian and east asian derivatives. If this was a test I don't believe that 20-53% is ever a passing grade so why would I ignore the beautiful multicultural heritage I have.

So what about the estimations given by Ancestry.com? Well I think I figured that out partially inspired by a comment by the authors of GEDMatch's algorithms. "It not just the presence of a unique factor but also the presence of that percentage compared to like individuals." Thus unique factors on chromosomes could be viewed as noise and with strict interpretation ignored completely as genetic drift for known populaces. With the wars over centuries of the Germanic tribes then it would be easy to assume a known factor level of 'noise' and thus exclude it altogether. I believe this is how Ancestry.com applies their ethnicity predictor so it is most simplified and accurate for Europeans, no doubt their largest consumer at whole.

So what am I? Very roughly estimated in admixture...

• 26-40% Southern European (Spanish, Italian, Iberian, Sardinian) 
• 18-24% British Isles/North Seas (Great Britain, France, Scandinavia) 
• 12-26% Middle Eastern (Persian, Near East, West Asia)
• 8-10% Eastern European (West Germany, Balkan, Slav)
• 3-8% Asian/Amerindian (Mezoamerican, Beringian; East-South Asia, Oceania)
• 3-5% North African (Mozabite, Morroccan, Byaka)

Unzipping My Raw DNA, Part One

It's no secret that I was wholly unimpressed with the ethnicity finder on Ancestry.com and it's lack of features. So now that the voices of the many have been heard and my raw data is available I've tried to resist the urge to spread it around like jam on the internet. My first stop was GEDMatch who unfortunately are having server issues because of so many new Ancestry submissions. Moving on then I headed over to Interprenome that is headed by Stanford university science department staff/students.

This new emulator took me from too little data to quite substantially too much!

One of the questions that came about for me was the only unique factor on my AncestryDNA page was a small portion of unspecific southern european. I have been racking my brain and looking for any cooralation in my records that could account for that. The only match I made was to the obscure Italian women who married into the FitzAlan royalty quite far back in my tree's centuries. I am of the opinion that I also need a more specific study journal of my findings since I recall while working inside the Aleramici family in my tree I also came across some women of Spain. The non-specificity even lead too some uncomfortable considerations of probable NPE's and adoption excuses. Interprenome has provided me a unexpected answer in the pan-euro scale. I am quite well into Spanish distribution.

The issue remained of my Cryptozoic-Jewish history supposedly among the women of my father's father ancestry. So using the Asia logarithm I found myself well placed among the Pathan, Sindhi, and Hazara. My closest east/central asian is the Miao Zu people of southern china. To be honest I had no expectations of the Asia group so to find myself clearly defined as a Persian descendant I abesolutley had to know whether I placed on the Pan-Judica map.

Yet another surprise lay for me. I do not place close enough for an exact kinship among the Jewish sample studies. My personal opinion on this is then that I don't have actual Jewish ancestry except to such a minor degree. My Persian history however is echo'ed twice over by my closest match being Iranian and Turkish.

The accuracy of this information of course isn't proven until I run the raw data through GEDMatch. I am hoping to learn my MTDNA haplogroup which according to Interprenome is probably (N1 derivative), but that is just a random guess with very little knowledge behind it.

I look forward to my GEDMatch being finished...hopefully sooner than 4-6 weeks... in order to review these findings and demolish any errors or misgivings I have.