I activated my account last Sunday - a process which took two business days. I didn't have access to any functions additional to what I received from the free transfer until Tuesday. This bothered me a little, since I felt I should at least be able to instantly email the 20 free matches they had provided me.
Anyway, once the account was activated, I was able to view FamilyTreeDNA's MyOrigins page, and see how their ethnic breakdown of my DNA compared to Ancestry's. Overall, they're very similar. Which is good to see. Though there are some differences.
FamilyTreeDNA's chart is on the left, Ancestry's is on the right.
FamilyTreeDNA tags a slightly smaller percentage of my European DNA as Jewish. However, when I add Jewish Diaspora + Eastern Europe + Eastern Middle East, I get exactly 75%, corresponding well to what I know of my three Jewish grandparents. On Ancestry, adding European Jewish + Europe East + Caucasus, I got 74%. [Ancestry's definition of 'Caucasus' includes Romania in addition to the Middle East as a possible source of the DNA. FamilyTreeDNA doesn't mention this, but I suspect my Transylvanian ancestry may be responsible, though ultimately, most of my Jewish ancestry should track back to the Middle East.]
The biggest difference might be FamilyTreeDNA says I have 10% Southern Europe DNA - while Ancestry suggested only 2% for Italy/Greece, and less than 1% for the Iberian Peninsula. I haven't traced any of my ancestry back yet to Southern Europe.
Posts
1 comment:
Your supposed trace of Melanesian intrigued me.
My Ancestry.com test contained no huge surprises except for trace amounts from Sweden, Norway, Finland and Northwestern Russia. They claimed I had Iberian Peninsula and Italian/Greek ancestry also, but since those designations they show as overlapping parts of France, where I know I had ancestors, it makes sense. Since the Vikings made inroads into both British Isles, the Scandinavian I guess makes a bit of sense too.
Post a Comment