Mummy of 6 month old boy found in Greenland
It has been a wonderful week for those of us following ancient DNA full genome sequencing, because now we can compare our own results to those of the ancient people found whose DNA has been fully sequenced, including one Native American.
Felix Chandrakumar has uploaded the autosomal files of five ancient DNA specimens that have been fully sequenced to GedMatch. Thanks Felix.
When news of these sequences first hit the academic presses, I was wishing for a way to compare our genomes – and now my wish has come true.
Utilizing GedMatch’s compare one to all function, I ran all of the sequences individually and found, surprisingly, that there are, in some cases, matches to contemporary people today. I dropped the cM measure to 1 for both autosomal and X.
Please note that because these are ancient DNA sequences, they will all have some segments missing and none can be expected to be entirely complete. Still, these sequences are far better than nothing.
1. Montana Anzick at GedMatch
This is the only clearly Native American sample.
http://www.y-str.org/2014/09/clovis-anzick-dna.html
F999912
9-27-2014 – Please note that kit F999912 has been replaced by kit F999913.
10-23-2014 – Please note that kit F999913 has been replaced by kit F999919.
No matches at 1cM in the compare to all. This must be because the SNP count is still at default thresholds, in light of information discovered later in this article.
Update – as it turns out, this kit was not finished processing when I did the one to one compare. After it finished, the results were vastly different. See this article for results.
2. Paleo Eskimo from Greenland at GedMatch
http://www.y-str.org/2013/12/palaeo-eskimo-2000-bc-dna.html
F999906
Thirty-nine matches with segments as large at 3.8. One group of matches appears to be a family. One of these matches is my cousin’s wife. That should lead to some interesting conversation around the table this holiday season! All of these matches, except 1, are on the X chromosome. This must be a function of these segments being passed intact for many generations.
I wrote about some unusual properties of X chromosomal inheritance and this seems to confirm that tendency in the X chromosome, or the matching thresholds are different at GedMatch for the X.
3. Altai Neanderthal at GedMatch
http://www.y-str.org/2013/08/neanderthal-dna.html
F999902
One match to what is obviously another Neaderthal entry.
4. Russian Causasus Neanderthal at GedMatch
Another contribution from the Neanderthal Genome Project.
http://www.y-str.org/2014/09/mezmaiskaya-neanderthal-dna.html
F999909
No matches.
5. Denisova at GedMatch
http://www.y-str.org/2013/08/denisova-dna.html
F999903
Two matches, one to yet another ancient entry and one to a contemporary individual on the X chromosome.
But now, for the fun part.
My Comparison
Before I start this section, I want to take a moment to remind everyone just how old these ancient segments are.
- Anzick – about 12,500 years old
- Paleo-Eskimo – about 4,000 years old
- Altai Neanderthal – about 50,000 years old
- Russian Caucasus Neanderthal – about 29,000 years old
- Denisova – about 30,000 years old
In essence, the only way for these segments to survive intact to today would have been for them to enter the population of certain groups, as a whole, to be present in all of the members of that group, so that segment would no longer be divided and would be passed intact for many generation, until that group interbred with another group who did not carry that segment. This is exactly what we see in endogamous populations today, such as the Askenazi Jewish population who is believed, based on their common shared DNA, to have descended from about 350 ancestors about 700 years ago. Their descendants today number in the millions.
So, let’s see what we find.
I compared by own kit at GedMatch utilizing the one to one comparison feature, beginning with 500 SNPs and 1cM, dropping the SNP values to 400, then 300, then 200, until I obtained a match of some sort, if I obtained a match at all.
Typically in genetic genealogy, we’re looking for genealogy matches, so the default matching thresholds are set relatively high. In this case, I’m looking for deep ancestral connections, if they exist, so I was intentionally forcing the thresholds low. I’m particularly interested in the Anzick comparison, in light of my Native American and First Nations heritage.
The definition of IBS, identical by state, vs IBD, identical by descent segments varies by who is talking and in what context, but in essence, IBD means that there is a genealogy connection in the past several generations.
IBS means that the genealogy connection cannot be found and the IBS match can be a function of coming from a common population at some time in the past, or it can be a match by convergence, meaning that your DNA just happened to mutate to the same state as someone else’s. If this is the case, then you wouldn’t expect to see multiple segments matching the same person and you would expect the matching segments to be quite short. The chances of hundreds of SNPs just happening to align becomes increasingly unlikely the longer the matching SNP run.
So, having said that, here are my match results.
Anzick
I had 2 matches at 400 SNPs, several at 300 and an entire list at 200, shown below.
| Chr | Start Location | End Location | Centimorgans (cM) | SNPs |
| 1 | 6769350 | 7734985 | 1.7 | 232 |
| 1 | 26552555 | 29390880 | 1.9 | 264 |
| 1 | 31145273 | 33730360 | 2.7 | 300 |
| 1 | 55655110 | 57069976 | 1.9 | 204 |
| 1 | 71908934 | 76517614 | 2.8 | 265 |
| 1 | 164064635 | 165878596 | 2.8 | 264 |
| 1 | 167817718 | 171330902 | 3.3 | 466 |
| 1 | 186083870 | 192208998 | 4.2 | 250 |
| 2 | 98606363 | 100815734 | 1.4 | 256 |
| 2 | 171132725 | 173388331 | 2.0 | 229 |
| 2 | 218855489 | 220373983 | 2.5 | 261 |
| 3 | 128892631 | 131141396 | 1.7 | 263 |
| 3 | 141794591 | 143848459 | 2.5 | 207 |
| 4 | 1767539 | 3571907 | 2.7 | 235 |
| 4 | 70345811 | 73405268 | 2.5 | 223 |
| 5 | 2340730 | 2982499 | 2.3 | 200 |
| 5 | 55899022 | 57881001 | 2.3 | 231 |
| 5 | 132734528 | 134538202 | 1.9 | 275 |
| 5 | 137986213 | 140659207 | 1.7 | 241 |
| 6 | 34390761 | 36370969 | 1.8 | 293 |
| 8 | 17594903 | 18464321 | 1.9 | 200 |
| 8 | 23758017 | 25732105 | 1.7 | 240 |
| 8 | 109589884 | 115297391 | 1.9 | 203 |
| 9 | 122177526 | 124032492 | 1.6 | 229 |
| 10 | 101195132 | 102661955 | 1.2 | 264 |
| 10 | 103040561 | 105596277 | 1.3 | 304 |
| 10 | 106135611 | 108371247 | 1.5 | 226 |
| 12 | 38689229 | 41184500 | 1.6 | 247 |
| 13 | 58543514 | 60988948 | 1.6 | 220 |
| 13 | 94528801 | 95252127 | 1.0 | 277 |
| 14 | 60929984 | 62997711 | 1.8 | 255 |
| 14 | 63724184 | 65357663 | 1.7 | 201 |
| 14 | 72345879 | 74206753 | 1.7 | 263 |
| 15 | 36850933 | 38329491 | 2.7 | 238 |
| 16 | 1631282 | 2985328 | 2.5 | 273 |
| 16 | 11917282 | 13220406 | 3.7 | 276 |
| 16 | 15619825 | 17324720 | 3.1 | 305 |
| 16 | 29085336 | 31390250 | 1.3 | 263 |
| 16 | 51215026 | 52902771 | 3.4 | 224 |
| 17 | 52582669 | 56643678 | 4.7 | 438 |
| 19 | 11527683 | 13235913 | 1.7 | 203 |
| 19 | 15613137 | 16316773 | 1.2 | 204 |
| 19 | 46195917 | 49338412 | 3.3 | 397 |
| 20 | 17126434 | 18288231 | 2.1 | 225 |
| 21 | 35367409 | 36969215 | 4.1 | 254 |
| 21 | 42399499 | 42951171 | 1.6 | 233 |
| 22 | 33988022 | 35626259 | 5.0 | 289 |
In my case, I’m particularly fortunate, because my mother tested her DNA as well. By process of elimination, I can figure out which of my matches are through her, and then by inference, which are through my father or are truly IBS by convergence.
I carry Native heritage on both sides, but my mother’s is proven to specific Native ancestors where my father’s is only proven to certain lines and not yet confirmed through genealogy records to specific ancestors.
Because I had so many matches, quite to my surprise, I also compared my mother’s DNA to the Anzick sample, combined the two results and put them in a common spreadsheet, shown below. White are my matches. Pink are Mom’s matches, and the green markers are on the segments where we both match the Anzick sample, confirming that my match is indeed through mother.
We’ll work with this information more in a few minutes.
Paleo
At 200 SNP level, 2 segments.
| 1 | 26535949 | 27884441 | 1.1 | 258 |
| 2 | 127654021 | 128768822 | 1.2 | 228 |
My mother matches on 9 segments, but neither of the two above, so they are either from my father’s side or truly IBS by convergence.
Altai Neanderthal
Russian Neanderthal
Neither my mother nor I have any matches at 100SNPs and 1cM.
Denisovan
I have one match.
| Chr | Start Location | End Location | Centimorgans (cM) | SNPs |
| 4 | 8782230 | 9610959 | 1.2 | 100 |
My mother matches 2 segments at 100 SNPs but neither match is the same as my segment.
Matching to Ancestral Lines
I’ve been mapping my DNA to specific ancestors utilizing the genealogy information of matches and triangulation for some time. This consists of finding common ancestors with your matches. Finding one person who matches you and maps to a common ancestor on a particular segment consists of a hint. Finding two that share the same ancestral line and match you and each other on the same segment is confirmation – hence, the three of you triangulate. More than three is extra gravy:)
I have also recorded other relevant information in my matches file, like the GedMatch Native chromosomal comparisons when I wrote “The Autosomal Me” series about hunting for my Native chromosomal segments.
So, after looking at the information above, it occurred to me that I should add this ancestral match information to my matches spreadsheet, just for fun, if nothing else.
I added these matches, noted the source as GedMatch and then sorted the results, anxious to see what we might find. Would at least one of these segments fall into the proven Native segments or the matches to people who also descend from those lines?
What I found was both astonishing and confusing….and true to form to genealogy, introduced new questions.
I have extracted relevant matching groups from my spreadsheet and will discuss them and why they are relevant. You can click on any of the images to see a larger image.
This first set of matches is intensely interesting, and equally as confusing.
First, these matches are to both me and mother, so they are confirmed through my mother’s lines. In case anyone notices, yes, I did switch my mother’s line color to white and mine to pink to be consistent with my master match spreadsheet coloration.
Second, both mother and I match the Anzick line on the matches I’ve utilized as examples.
Third, both 23andMe and Dr. Doug McDonald confirmed the segments in red as Native which includes the entire Anzick segment.
Fourth, utilizing the Gedmatch admixture tools, mother and I had this range in common. I described this technique in “The Autosomal Me” series.
Fifth, these segments show up for two distinct genealogy lines that do not intersect until my grandparents, the Johann Michael Miller line AND the Acadian Lore line.
Sixth, the Acadian Lore line is the line with proven Native ancestors.
Seventh, the Miller line has no Native ancestors and only one opportunity for a Native ancestor, which is the unknown wife of Philip Jacob Miller who married about 1750 to a women rumored to be Magdalena Rochette, but research shows absolutely no source for that information, nor any Rochette family anyplace in any proximity in the same or surrounding counties to the Miller family. The Miller’s were Brethren. Furthermore, there is no oral history of a Native ancestor in this line, but there have been other hints along the way, such as the matching segments of some of the “cousins” who show as Native as well.
Eighth, this makes my head hurt, because this looks, for all the world, like Philip Jacob Miller who was living in Bedford County, PA when he married about 1750 may have married someone related to the Acadian lines who had intermarried with the Micmac. While this is certainly possible, it’s not a possibility I would ever have suspected.
Let’s see what else the matches show.
In this matching segment Mom and I both match Emma, who descends from Marie, a MicMac woman. Mom’s Anzik match is part of this same segment.
In this matching segment, Mom and I both match cousin Denny who descends from the Lore line who is Acadian and confirmed to have MicMac ancestry. Mom’s Anzik segments all fit in this range as well.
In this matching segment, cousin Herbie’s match to Mom and I falls inside the Anzick segments of both Mom and I.
More matching to the proven Miller line.
This last grouping with Mom is equally as confusing at the first. Mom and I both match cousin Denny on the Lore side, proven Acadian.
Mom and I both match the Miller side too, and the Anzik for both of us falls dead center in these matches.
There are more, several more matches, that also indicate these same families, but I’m not including them because they don’t add anything not shown in these examples. Interestingly enough, there are no pointers to other families, so this isn’t something random. Furthermore, on my father’s side, as frustrating as it is, here are no Anzick matches that correlate with proven family lines. ARGGHHHHHH……
On matches that I don’t share with mother, there is one of particular interest.
You’ll notice that the Anzik and the Paleo-Greenland samples match each other, as well as me. This is my match, and by inference, not through mother. Unfortunately, the other people in this match group don’t know their ancestors or we can’t identify a common ancestor.
Given the genetic genealogy gold standard of checking to see if your autosomal matches match each other, I went back to GedMatch to see if the Paleo-Greenland kit matched the Clovis Anzik kit on this segment, and indeed, they do, plus many more segments as well. So, at some time, in some place, the ancestors of these two people separated by thousands of miles were related to each other. Their common ancestor would have either been in Asia or in the Northern part of Canada if the Paleo people from Greenland entered from that direction.
Regardless, it’s interesting, very interesting.
What Have I Learned?
Always do experiments. You never know what you’ll find.
I’m much more closely related to the Anzick individual than I am to the others. This isn’t surprising given my Native heritage along with the endogamous culture of the Acadians.
My relationship level to these ancient people is as follows:
| Lived Years Ago | Relatedness | Comments | |
| Montana Anzick | 12,500 | 107.4cM at 200 SNP level | Confirmed to Lore (Acadian) and Miller, but not other lines |
| Greenland Paleo | 4,000 | 2.3cM at 200 SNP level | No family line matches, does match to Anzick in one location |
| Altai Neanderthal | 50,000 | 2.1cM at 200 SNP level | No family line matches |
| Russian Neanderthal | 29,000 | 0 | |
| Denisovan | 30,000 | 1.2cM at 200 SNP | No family line matches |
The Lores and the Millers
Looking further at the Lore and Miller lines, there are only two options for how these matching segments could have occurred. There are too many for them all to be convergence, so we’ll have to assume that they are indeed because we shared a common population at some time and place.
The nature of how small the segments are testify that this is not a relatively recent common ancestor, but how “unrecent” is open to debate. Given that Neanderthal and Denisovan ancient segments are found in all Europeans today, it’s certainly possible for these segments to be passed intact, even after thousands of years.
The confirmations to the Lore line come through proven Lore cousins and also through other proven Acadian non-specific matches. This means that the Acadian population is highly endogamous and when I find an Acadian match, it often means that I’m related through many ancestors many times. This, of course, increases the opportunity for the DNA to be passed forward, and decreases the opportunity for it to be lost in transmission, but it also complicates the genealogy greatly and makes determining which ancestor the DNA segment came from almost impossible.
However, I think we are safe to say the segments are from the Acadian population, although my assumption would be that they are from the Native Ancestors and not the French, given the high number of Anzick matches, Anzick being proven to be Native. Having said that, that assumption may not be entirely correct.
The Miller line is relatively well documented and entirely from Germany/Switzerland, immigrating in the early 1700s, with the exception of the one unknown wife in the first generation married in the US. Further examination would have to be done to discover if any of the matches came through Johann Michael Miller’s sons other than Philip Jacob Miller, my ancestor. There are only three confirmed children, all sons. If this segment shows up in Johann Michael Miller’s line not associated with son Philip Jacob Miller, then we would confirm that indeed the segment came from Europe and not a previously unknown Native or mixed wife of Philip Jacob.
Bottom Line
So, what’s the bottom line here? I know far more than I did. The information confirms, yet again, the Acadian Native lines, but it introduces difficult questions about the Miller line. I have even more tantalizing questions for which I have no answers today, but I tell you what, I wouldn’t trade this journey along the genetic pathway with all of its unexpected bumps, rocks, slippery slopes and crevices for anything!! That’s why it’s called an adventure!
______________________________________________________________
Disclosure
I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.
Thank you so much.
DNA Purchases and Free Transfers
- Family Tree DNA
- MyHeritage DNA only
- MyHeritage DNA plus Health
- MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload
- AncestryDNA
- 23andMe Ancestry
- 23andMe Ancestry Plus Health
- LivingDNA
Genealogy Services
Genealogy Research
- Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research
Unbelievable!!! I’m part of the New Mexico DNA project. I am also an n archivist with a deep love of history!! ~~~Felicia
What a suprisingly cool idea for GEDmatch. I hope to see more of this in the future.
How low can one go with SNP and cM settings and safely assume some meaningful connection?
That’s a good question. Since I wasn’t looking for a genealogical connection, I was willing to drop it quite low, much lower than I would normally without some expectation of a connection. It’s the same question as where does IBS and IBD begin/end. It depends on the DNA and what you’re looking for. If you’re looking to see if you share any DNA at all with these ancient specimens, you’ll have to drop it quite low.
Very nice! My best match was to the Clovis Anzick-1 individual at 110.7 cM with many segments at 200 SNPs or greater, including matches on a few segments of Native ancestry. I matched the Paleo-Eskimo individual at 12.3 cM at 200 SNPs. And I matched the Altai Neanderthal individual on only 1 segment of 1.0 cM, 203 SNPs. I didn’t match the others at all.
I hope that they add more ancient DNA samples to Gedmatch.
It’s exciting and fun isn’t it:)
Wow! If it isn’t surprising enough to find recent cousins among your genetic matches, it’s certainly so to find your genes matching up with ones such as these – that are so old! Like you, I’m also lucky that my mother wanted to test — as her results are available to compare with mine when analyzing matches in Gedmatch. Thank you for posting this exercise, Roberta. Great job, Gedmatch! Great job, Felix!
I’d love to see what you find Marie in your matches in this same exercise. Our common ancestors are involved:)
That will be exciting. If mom and I can’t find close cousins in Family Finder or any other system, at least we pair up with ancient ones, right? I will develop this information offline in a spreadsheet and send to you. Thanks!
Hi Roberta,
Did I run this correctly? Here is what I have.
Comparing Kit F179138 (*Fisherman) and F999906 (Palaeo-Eskimo 2000 BC)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 100 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
3 195870680 198146918 4.4 110
6 156900196 158296257 1.4 127
9 1622188 2150105 1.9 108
9 76912087 77780108 1.9 120
12 20794062 21963524 1.9 114
12 53536816 55744226 2.2 106
15 39623526 43635213 1.5 117
16 61224013 63140112 1.6 122
22 25910688 26460072 2.7 118
Largest segment = 4.4 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 19.4 cM
Comparison took 0.05427 seconds.
Regards,
Tia Gray
Yes, you did.
Hi Roberta,
Would we run all of these at 1.0 cM and 100 SNP’s? What would be considered a match. For example when I run these Comparing Kit F176798 (*Lilac) and F999912 (Clovis Anzick-1) I get the largest segment at 5.0 on chromosome 17. Would that be considered a ancient match?
Regards,
Lilac
They are all ancient matches because of what they are. It’s not just the cM size either, but the number of contiguous SNPs.
Hi Robert,
So if the cM is 5.0 and the Snp’s 366 would that be considered a match? Here is some of chromosome 17
17 61637096 62274528 1.0 151
17 64731692 67818836 5.0 366
17 69506206 69959295 1.2 104
Regards,
Lilac
Hi Tia, Just so you know, it’s Roberta, not Robert. And if you get any results at all, it’s a match. Roberta
When I ran one-to-all for Montana-Anzick at standard threshold (7 cM, 700 SNP) it did indeed return a good number of matches. It takes some time for the one-to-all on a given kit to populate.
Hello, I am still confused when it comes to matches. I have several matches that all meet at the same place on the chromosome bar. I am only talking about Family Finder. My Swiss/German lines are all over PA with my immigrants arriving very early. I look Native American, at least that it what everyone tells me but my Halpogroup in my Family Finder is all over the place too. I am H and my son R1b1a2. Family history on his father’s side is suppose to be Native American and I am looking for that link in him also. Is it possible to be Native American and since it was so many generations back it will not show in you but perhaps in further generations show up in a grandchild?
Autosomal DNA is divided, roughly in half, in each generation, so no, a grandchild cannot have more ancestral DNA than a parent or grandparent.
Just for fun, and not expecting any meaningful results, I checked my family kits against Clovis Anzick-1. The autosomal results showed lots of very small segments but the X one to one results were quite interesting. My mum, her-half sister, her paternal-side 3rd cousin, and I all have the exact same matching segment on chromosome X from 152616024 to 154545424, for a segment of 1.9 cM. The SNPs vary slightly between us but are all in the 130 to 133 range. Should I get excited by any of this?
Those are small segments. You may share a common population someplace back in time.
Point taken, so – again just for fun – I decided to compare all of our autosomal segments with yours, which you kindly shared. Here are the results (having deleted all non matching segments):
Chr Start Location End Location (cM) SNPs
1 26552555 29390880 1.9 264 – Roberta
1 26552555 29390880 1.9 266 – Teresa
1 31145273 33730360 2.7 300 – Roberta
1 31462994 33205110 1.5 209 – Nicole
1 71908934 76517614 2.8 265 – Roberta
1 72208277 76804404 3.0 274 – Glenn
1 167817718 171330902 3.3 466 – Roberta
1 167764355 169377975 1.8 229 – Teresa
1 169444714 171330902 1.5 218 – Glenn
1 186083870 192208998 4.2 250 – Roberta
1 188687795 193782054 3.6 223 – Teresa
1 186090160 192208998 4.2 250 – Glenn
2 218855489 220373983 2.5 261 – Roberta
2 218855489 220332459 2.4 249 – Nicole
2 218855489 220332459 2.4 251 – Teresa
3 128892631 131141396 1.7 263 – Roberta
3 129176107 131141396 1.4 214 – Glenn
4 1767539 3571907 2.7 235 – Roberta
4 1504781 3484337 2.9 267 – Teresa
5 137986213 140659207 1.7 241 – Roberta
5 139181248 141281090 2.7 284 – Joanne
6 34390761 36370969 1.8 293 – Roberta
6 34390761 36234628 1.6 271 – Nicole
6 33962794 36234628 2.0 354 – Teresa
6 34390761 36384788 1.8 292 – Glenn
8 23758017 25732105 1.7 240 – Roberta
8 23758017 25541001 1.4 211 – Teresa
10 101195132 102661955 1.2 264 – Roberta
10 101726995 102893276 1.0 207 – Joanne
10 101357305 102617218 1.1 214 – Teresa
10 103040561 105596277 1.3 304 – Roberta
10 104847208 107540200 1.3 343 – Teresa
12 38689229 41184500 1.6 247 – Roberta
12 38963296 41376968 1.6 253 – Joanne
12 38637109 40967935 1.5 236 – Teresa
12 39212545 41376968 1.5 200 – Glenn
13 58543514 60988948 1.6 220 – Roberta
13 58506727 60667281 1.5 208 – Joanne
13 94528801 95252127 1.0 277 – Roberta
13 93949743 95793053 2.6 431 – Nicole
14 60929984 62997711 1.8 255 – Roberta
14 59732372 61963519 2.1 243 – Teresa
14 62025407 65494358 2.8 351 – Nicole
14 63724184 65357663 1.7 201 – Roberta
14 63504041 65494358 1.9 235 – Glenn
14 72345879 74206753 1.7 263 – Roberta
14 73352955 74962649 1.6 222 – Nicole
14 72794520 74851837 1.9 255 – Glenn
15 36850933 38329491 2.7 238 – Roberta
15 37584350 39056793 2.0 244 – Joanne
16 29085336 31390250 1.3 263 – Roberta
16 27847977 30435773 1.7 239 – Joanne
16 27886219 30574532 1.8 256 – Teresa
19 46195917 49338412 3.3 397 – Roberta
19 46430052 48558663 2.0 214 – Nicole
21 35367409 36969215 4.1 254 – Roberta
21 34317573 36234591 4.2 299 – Nicole
21 42399499 42951171 1.6 233 – Roberta
21 42366655 42859024 1.5 222 – Glenn
22 33988022 35626259 5.0 289 – Roberta
22 34071820 35284574 2.9 202 – Glenn
I have no idea what this means – if anything – but it keeps me out of the pub 🙂
Adding to the fun, I decided to compare my results to yours – here are complete or partial matches – with Anzick and you…
Suzanne comparison with Anzick ( settings: 100,1,50) and Roberta/Joanne/Glenn
1 167217765 171533067 4.1 240
2 218789223 220909903 3.6 127
4 178445520 183116926 8.7 248
6 34440157 36450159 1.8 107
12 32216222 41184500 2.9 217
14 70777320 73759397 3.4 185
16 27886219 31383959 2.2 104
21 35007283 36758581 4.5 131
21 42394547 42754127 1.2 116
Largest segment = 8.7 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 450.2 cM
We have to remember that what is being measured is autosomal DNA so what is it we share? The colour of our eyes? Our height? Our ability to metabolize drugs – coffee – alcohol?
What does it all mean? There is a site where someone with patience and time could find out which SNPs are associated with these chromosome regions:
SNP FAQ Archive [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Center for Biotechnology Information (US); 2005-. Locating SNPs in (a) Chromosome(s) Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44454/
This is an older site – there may be something more up to date.
Suzanne
Getting back to the X chromosome for a moment, I realize the segments are very small, but I thought the fact that myself and three members of my family all shared exactly the same segment was significant. No?
After reading your column, I of course tried it too. I too match with Clovis Anzick – At 200 I have much fewer matches, but they are all longer than yours. I am French Canadian with Acadian ancestry – so I know full well what “related several times over” means.
I have 0.2% native ancestry according to 23&Me but no proven line, apart from a Mathurin “born from unknown parents” 6 generations up. He married in Montmagny, on the south shore below Quebec City. That would also be potentially MicMaq country.
Here are my matches to Clovis
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
1 5483999 7645445 4.1 234
1 167217765 171533067 4.1 240
2 49219551 53987248 3.0 202
4 178445520 183116926 8.7 248
8 73978433 81644892 4.3 277
10 30976220 34616095 3.0 206
12 32216222 41184500 2.9 217
12 129198526 131251193 5.9 218
19 8929530 12613425 5.5 223
19 14056892 16704244 4.7 207
My question : how do I find other people with MicMaq ancestry to see if there is a match?
Well, now that’s a good question. Let me send this off to a couple of folks that might have some insight. I don’t know of any projects that address this specifically.
Suzanne I am overjoyed to see your reference to the “related over and over” for the french Canadian. I’m struggling on my french Canadian lines because everyone seem to have “intermarried in Nova Scotia and Quebec”. How did you make it past all that genealogically speaking?
Kim:
Being part of an endogamous population has its advantages! If an ancestor shows up five times, I only have to enter him once in the database… I use Geneanet (geneanet.org) because they have a great tool to find and display these multiple lines, including relationship by marriage. They also have separate lines for aliases – for first names and last names – a great place to put all those “dit” names. The worst part is to keep all the people with the same names in their correct line. I had fun unravelling all my Joseph Lesage (25 of them in my tree – several in a row).
Roberta, I compared my brother-in-law’s autosomal test with Anzick. He’s the one who matches you and has the NA mtDNA, haplogroup C1b-T16311C!. At 200 SNPs and 1 CM, he has more matches than you do and one is 5.7 cM. His maternal line is French Canadian. Could he be Acadian? Could he be MicMaq?
1 8925765 10690489 2.4 297
1 15310107 17349418 3.3 300
1 42128069 43823334 1.3 207
1 48977516 53082395 1.5 206
1 72235847 76325063 2.5 212
1 96311831 98602548 1.5 252
1 150697304 152032023 1.2 234
1 169888457 173324405 2.2 241
1 198824390 199930724 2.6 275
2 31365986 33466906 1.3 205
2 50383684 52713333 1.1 220
2 127631805 129539628 2.2 245
2 136916684 141591980 3.6 379
2 157099980 159725160 2.0 218
2 159847596 163987397 2.4 257
2 168798808 170771707 4.2 273
2 174553113 177636417 3.8 341
2 184382647 191201411 2.9 271
3 2176147 3479270 5.7 252
3 11920930 13320450 1.5 286
4 146482197 149606154 3.2 260
5 158422780 160438570 2.4 262
6 168709387 170195237 2.2 240
7 56845907 67043077 2.5 264
7 93871736 95876999 1.5 230
8 143900465 145817378 2.0 283
9 128812316 130812291 2.8 292
9 138813417 140138244 2.1 241
10 20635684 23434882 2.0 287
10 87292233 89356194 1.5 243
10 99998426 102094511 1.9 301
10 106127216 108956889 2.3 316
10 110588055 112952818 2.2 263
11 115341842 116745567 2.9 261
12 52529539 54301325 2.8 231
12 69126444 71784014 1.6 211
12 100836361 102967595 2.9 247
12 108107358 111757914 2.5 338
13 48414873 50620406 1.7 239
13 76341720 78509398 1.8 209
14 22589815 23617456 3.4 205
14 68580194 70181627 2.5 239
15 61441840 63755841 1.4 229
16 13230842 16067252 2.7 327
17 52963090 56750377 3.8 368
18 22612517 23570812 1.3 215
19 11769397 13734996 2.8 236
19 40892240 43213368 1.2 222
22 18581954 20416373 3.3 200
Largest segment = 5.7 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 116.3 cM
I’m sure I could never explain this to him, but is his result significant??
Hi Janet. I’m still trying to figure all this out, and exactly what it means.
Janet,
The mtDNA haplogroup C1b-T16311C! designation is an OLD & OUTDATED one used by Behar and FTDNA.
As with the FTDNA Y-DNA Tree, the FTDNA mtDNA tree is also OLD & OUTDATED.
FTDNA does not rapidly conform with PhyloTree such as this Feb 2014 one found here: http://www.phylotree.org/what_is_new.htm showinf the NEWER designation of C1b13b.
The NEWEST mtDNA tree has this C1b-T16311C! mutation circa C1b13b and the highest concentration & southern most concentration of this C1b13b Hg is from Southern Chile and it is primarily associated with the NA Huilliche tribe. It is quite old ~13000 to 14000 YBP and is in the Monte Verde era.
See more on Huilliche on Reich’s 2012 paper
http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/2012_Nature_NativeAmericans.pdf
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v488/n7411/extref/nature11258-s1.pdf
The point paper on this C1b13b Hg is:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0043486
Regards,
George
I love that you found these Ancients for us! Using 200 SNPs and 1 cM for each, I got this:
Clovis Anzick, total 246.8, largest 7.9; Paleo-Eskimo total 12.2, 2.6; Altai, total 2.6, 1.3;
Denisovan 1.2, 1.2, Russian, none.
One of my Altai segments is #6 from 31,428,789 to 32,887,974 1.3cM 267 SNPs, which I think matches your mom, and almost matches you.
Thanks, again for sharing this with us.
Pingback: Analyzing the Native American Clovis Anzick Ancient Results | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
I hope I did this correct,
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 100 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Comparing Kit M125740 (*AUGUSTALLEN28) and F999912 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Largest segment = 5.4 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 296.1 cM
Yes, you did.
Another one
Comparing Kit M125740 (*AUGUSTALLEN28) and F999906 (Palaeo-Eskimo 2000 BC)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 100 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Largest segment = 2.8 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 37.9 cM
Roberta, I was looking at the matches to Marie Mi’kmaq and notice that my mom who has many Acadian Ancestors fell in the range illustrated on Ch. 2, hers is 8028682-9270035, 4.1, 163.
I do not have Marie as ancestor so any thoughts what else this may mean on her Acadian lines.
Lots of learning and fun.
Thanks Roberta
Paul
Hi Roberta,
To follow up and to look into this deeper, I compared my mom’s and her brother’s kit to Anzick on Ch 2 using Dodecad Ad-Mix world 9. The results where impressive, They had Amerindian, East Asian and Siberian matches. Since my mom and uncle do not have Marie Mi’kmaq but you all have matching segments, this may be indicating other Mi’kmaq/Acadian admixture in there blood line.
Let me know what you think.
Paul
That could be. There are several Native people who married into the Acadian lines.
When I dropped to 1 cM and 100 SNPs, I matched all those kits except for the Altai Neanderthal. For the Montana Anzick and Paleo Eskimo kits, though, I matched on many chromosomes. So I upped the threshold for Montana Anzick to 2 cM and 300 SNPs and I still matched in several places.
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 300 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 150 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 2.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
1 51577319 54356866 2.9 311
2 86872058 98315832 2.6 343
2 177043537 179466252 2.5 302
3 52132068 54345803 2.3 351
6 34233259 36600748 2.2 334
11 64550536 68354630 2.7 541
16 31302223 48800875 3.1 397
19 46195917 48968877 2.8 350
Largest segment = 3.1 cM
Total of segments > 2 cM = 21.1 cM
I have no known Native American ancestry, but of course that doesn’t rule out the possibility on some of my lines. So I guess my question is, and I am not even sure there’s an answer to this yet, but could this connection really be IBS or is it more likely (not definitive or anywhere near that level of certainty) that I have a Native American ancestor?
I also ran my partner’s kit, and like me he doesn’t know of any Native American ancestors, and he has similar results. So I’m left wondering if this is a false positive or if this is meaningful. Thank you for whatever help you can provide.
I really enjoyed reading this post. Very cool stuff.
These segments may have come from the original Asian population, which also populated some of Europe. We just don’t know. We’re all still learning.
Roberta
You often make the comment that shorter segments mean more ancient – of course then longer mean more recent. Do you know if anyone has been able to correlate segment lengths with number of generations or centuries on a graph somewhere?
No, it’s not that cut and dried because of the random nature of things.
Pingback: New Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups Extrapolated from Anzick Match Results | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Interesting. My father has a “small but real” (in the words of Doug McDonald) Native American stretch on one chromosome. His mtDNA haplotype is x2e1a1. Based on testing of various cousins, we know this NA DNA could be (but is not necessarily) from his matrilineal ancestor.
I ran a one-to-one comparison between my father and the Anzick kit (100-SNP threshold, 50-SNP mismatch-bunching limit, and 1-cM minimum segment length). I got a largest matching segment of 6.3 cM and a total of segments > 1 cM of 715.5 cM. In light of the above information, does this seem significant?
Following up on this… either I’m not running the analysis properly or I’m skeptical: I did the same comparison substituting my mother-in-law and her cousin, both of recent central European ancestry, and got roughly similar results.
We just don’t know yet. These segments could be in the larger Eurasian population as well, because the Native people descended from that population.
I think I’m getting the hang of this now, comparing my son Edwin, #3 on list, M174237.using these:
I need to learn more about what all of this means.
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 500 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 250 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 7.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
2 235075881 240629067 13.8 972
3 11039091 16637492 8.2 967
3 20763585 25992611 7.6 595
4 164740516 173246588 9.4 583
8 26639020 31516339 7.5 716
14 21608501 25424824 8.0 779
19 53647787 56574475 9.9 588
22 18080846 21870414 8.0 560
22 34243922 37993131 8.5 665
I want to upload my data from 23&me into the ancient DNA website. Have they sequenced Onzi the Iceman?
No
Pingback: Ancient DNA Matches – What Do They Mean? | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Pingback: Matching DNA of Living Native Descendants to DNA of Native Ancestors | Native Heritage Project
I was intrigued to see that my mother (whose grandfather is the only ancestor who could have any Native, short of medieval Vikings bringing some back) matches the Clovis Anzick in two places with over 500 SNPs (1.5cM on 3, 4.7 on 6). However, when I tried my brother and me, we shared an over-500 SNP match on 10 instead. Well, we know that our father had no Native (unless from medieval Vikings), and in fact our paternal cousin who matches us on that part of 10 did not share our Anzick match, so that one was definitely IBS.
So while this is fascinating stuff, I’d caution people to check their purported Ancient matches very carefully before assuming they’re meaningful.
Thank you for sharing this information! Montana Anzick at1cM @ 200 Capped limits. Until I was shown no Matches was at 2cM 600. Paleo Eskimo from Greenland was limited 1cM @300 no more matches 1cM @400. The Rest Absolutely Nothing. Guess that kinda throws the “You are 2.9 % Neanderthal” into question. LOVE this DNA stuff! New and Interesting to say the least!
I compared Montana Anzick with my Mom who is mtDNA Haplogroup B and got the following results (not sure I did it right):
GEDmatch.Com Autosomal Comparison
Comparing Kit M145336 (Frances Gregg) and F999912 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 100 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 5.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
4 132794763 139930692 6.2 288
5 36063957 39255372 5.1 373
5 155907842 162683449 5.9 695
7 106254691 112773255 5.7 423
17 52181991 56942634 6.2 546
17 57007070 62320584 5.4 562
18 4239393 5825138 5.6 180
18 69856260 71348765 5.2 278
Largest segment = 6.2 cM
Total of segments > 5 cM = 45.3 cM
Our Native ancestry comes from the Minnesota Territories – Winnebago/Ho-Chunk/Menominee/Dakota/Lakota
Sherril
I have mostly European but also known Cherokee heritage. We know that there was early intermarriage with whites, and the Native American doesn’t always show up, but Dr. McDonald did find real Native American.
When I ran a Gedmatch for Anziac using what you recommended SNP at 200, and set for 1 cM, I came up with with 88.6 cM and the largest segment being 5.5cM. One SNP match at 415, 5 in the 300s, and many in the 200s. Does this most likely point to the Native American?
You would need to map your DNA to ancestors to see if it points to the suspected Cherokee line. You might want to read my last article about this. http://dna-explained.com/2014/09/25/ancient-dna-matches-what-do-they-mean/
And don’t forget to mix in traditional genealogy. Since my native ancestor had been baptized, even with only a given name, I was able to find the baptismal record where his parents and where they lived was mentioned. They were in Sept-Iles, Quebec, where there still exists a native population : Innu – formerly known as Montagnais – those who greeted Champlain – of the Algonquian group (that also includes Cree and Mi’kmaq). So I am very thankful to DNA testing that pointed me in the right direction. It also means that as little as 0.2% NA can be significant (to answer someone who told me it’s noise, why bother). My matches with Anzik were what made me think that my tiny segment was real. A wonderful week indeed… So even Northeastern tribes have some common genes with someone in the Southwest – pointing to a common origin.
Thanks also for pointing out the link to the IGG conference. I recommend highly the presentation by Ugo Perego. “Native American Ancestry through DNA Analysis “. A very learned yet very clear presentation. Also, if you don’t want the whole conference you can purchase individual videos for $4 each – no excuse really.
Thanks Roberta!
Thanks so much.
My matches to Anzick at 500 SNPs (there are many more as I lower the threshold):
Comparing Kit M852064 (Carola D) and F999913 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 500 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
8 31925590 41103217 6.2 576
Largest segment = 6.2 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 6.2 cM
Comparison took 0.05401 seconds.
At 100 Snps, results are:
Largest segment = 9.8 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 920.8 cM
Exciting! So, I don’t know who birth parents are, but I just found a 12,500 year old cousin 🙂
Forgive me, but I think that’s hilarious:)
Hi Roberta! We’ve discussed this before via e-mail, but I’ve found through research that I have a lot of Native American in me (adopted and was unaware), with percentages as high as 85%, in Haplogroup A2, and so I compared with GedMatch and found this with the SNP to 700
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
14 33550265 48917130 10.6 985
Largest segment = 10.6 cM
Total of segments > 7 cM = 10.6 cM
Estimated number of generations to MRCA = 5.2
And when I changed settings to 200, and lowered the CM I have matches on each line, and this being my highest
14 32993674 48917130 12.5 1098
I’m confused as to what this means?!
Any insight?
Oh, my apologizes, this was comparing one on one with Clovis Anzick!
one on one with clovis and you are only 5.2 generations away? That’s really close!
Pingback: Ancient DNA Matching – A Cautionary Tale | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Pingback: More Ancient DNA Samples For Comparison | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Pingback: Anzick (12,707-12,556), Ancient One, 52 Ancestors #42 | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Hi,
Newbie here who would love an expert opinion… I ran this, is it significant to prove Native ancestry?
Comparing Kit A445771 (me) and F999913 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 400 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
10 99564747 102442126 2.8 400
18 25884110 30891937 4.2 415
Largest segment = 4.2 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 7.0 cM
Comparing Kit A445771 (me) and F999913 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 200 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 50 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
1 5713085 6965857 2.5 226
1 8295795 9702632 2.2 209
1 26563761 29017775 1.5 225
1 55611705 57045760 1.9 204
1 96766037 98873811 1.5 229
1 225159944 227248320 1.8 275
1 231750975 232930225 2.7 217
1 243796934 245777490 3.9 293
2 8608610 10074176 3.8 217
2 42544385 43958429 2.2 213
2 53481767 55630297 1.6 283
2 112092434 114147690 1.6 236
2 226499217 228591273 3.1 227
3 10209065 11011624 1.5 222
3 129749192 132050480 1.2 237
4 48031128 54776514 2.8 208
4 183235232 184517689 4.2 207
5 14040061 15977697 2.9 219
5 55601906 57464862 2.2 252
5 90208087 94651360 3.0 210
5 157421605 159912229 2.9 314
6 15002519 16660781 2.7 250
6 24059493 25301043 2.2 213
6 25487905 27363708 1.2 373
6 34051992 36450159 2.2 353
7 29579823 30938320 2.8 217
7 43413286 45159111 2.4 209
7 96945393 99638495 2.6 322
7 105147257 107127147 3.5 216
7 149746116 150700229 2.3 221
8 62813554 65660886 1.2 205
8 75046809 80274449 2.1 295
8 136116909 139185487 5.5 288
9 36856070 38302365 1.9 207
9 114799340 115953538 2.8 206
9 129363306 131035892 2.6 254
10 99564747 102442126 2.8 400
10 105649816 107814413 1.1 255
10 126257749 127339749 2.8 207
11 60300485 61398118 1.5 203
11 123910521 125452108 1.9 283
12 54081243 55520673 1.3 204
12 97326007 99901141 2.3 200
12 108763195 111640806 1.5 226
12 129663572 130761627 3.1 247
13 26284031 27331193 2.8 201
13 27443268 29186990 3.5 253
13 30334668 31784213 3.3 209
13 76304933 78480362 1.8 208
15 37598656 38996538 1.9 230
15 50284225 51760017 1.7 209
15 61971678 64205392 1.9 220
16 28165 975549 3.5 213
16 30740822 47225218 1.1 253
16 49256683 51030764 3.4 268
17 23359608 25596486 1.0 248
17 52528032 53739021 2.8 270
17 58127473 60517472 2.0 228
18 25884110 30908538 4.2 417
19 13633030 14994787 2.8 209
19 16314268 17629818 3.0 243
19 46954731 48985196 2.1 214
Largest segment = 5.5 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 150.0 cM
You can’t really use the Anzick kit to prove Native ancestry. We’re still learning how to interpret these ancient remains. I discussed this, and the values to use in the comparisons, in the articles. For now, just chalk this up to “interesting” and enjoy the journey.
Since I last posted, I got my son tested and of course decided to see how he stacked up against Anzick. I expected to see all of our segments matching, with potentially shorter segments in his and probably some missing. I did a phasing test to see what whas the father’s contribution – and got zero for him (threshold 200/100 for mismatch and 2 cM). I was not surprised since he is Northern Italian whereas I have some documented native ancestry.
Here is what I got. We have no real matching segments and worse, he has some that I don’t have, with supposedly no paternal contribution!
Chr Start end cM SNP
1 5993457 7124777 2.3 204 Son
1 242825235 243700890 3.2 215 Son
1 38332120 39330798 2.0 220 Me
1 161110230 162008708 2.3 230 Me
2 218789223 220500564 2.8 292 Son
2 208077458 211104925 2.0 329 Me
3 14483315 16195356 2.5 354 Me
4 5138454 5836343 2.1 200 Son
4 37963728 39214752 2.0 251Son
4 68820981 72579342 3.1 405 Son
6 16691126 18152751 3.2 268 Son
6 100987417 104182159 2.2 410 Son
6 159015687 160169358 2.2 250 Me
7 44344432 45927170 2.2 221 Me
8 28395310 29835803 2.9 215 Son
8 138087952 139209390 2.6 219 Me
9 4307825 4826566 2.0 203 Son
9 138264677 139370639 2.5 205 Me
10 15573087 16819121 2.7 249 Son
10 116104626 117841308 2.0 238 Me
12 93056896 93901621 2.0 227 Me
12 130188688 131251779 2.3 207 Me
13 30031133 30888805 2.4 215 Me
16 24581399 25777911 2.2 209 Son
17 26952709 28478980 2.6 221 Son
17 53448060 56774017 2.9 280 Son
21 35279222 36615959 3.5 274 Me
22 33696230 35278391 3.8 366 Son
22 25554108 26021026 2.3 213 Me
How could that be? I decided to rerun the list with 100/50/1 as threshold. And there, there are many matches – but he has segments that are sometimes longer than mine. I decided to rerun the phased paternal file with those numbers – and sure enough, there are several matches. I will not copy them here because the list is too long. It just so happens that many of the paternal segments are adjacent to mine resulting in longer “matching” segments in son.
Example
4 5138454 5836343 2.1 200 Son
4 5438304 5803954 1.2 116 Mine
So a tiny father’s contribution between 5138454 and 5438304 with another piece between 5803954 and 5836343 results in a longer segment in my son than mine – but the source of these small segments is highly questionable as being due to Native Ancestry.
I would therefore caution any conclusions drawn from the matches done at 100 SNPs with 1 cM as being really meaningful.
I found that the only real conclusion I could draw from these test was that I was a lot more like Stuttgart than the rest of the ancient DNA. I would not do any very fine analysis with these numbers because at these low threshold everyone can match many.
Pingback: Peopling of Europe 2014 – Identifying the Ghost Population | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
It looks like the Anzick sample is gone (F999913). I tried the old number and it doesn’t work either. Too bad, I was goofing around with F999913 yesterday on GEDmatch.
Anyway, these were the results of my parents and my own comparisons with Anzick. My dad has a consistent Native American reading on all his ethnicity tests (about 1% average) but no story. I suspect either Saami or possibly Greenlander:
Comparing (Christine) and F999913 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 400 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 200 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
1 159281892 161769805 4.1 406
10 103388824 106662110 1.6 419
Largest segment = 4.1 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 5.7 cM
Comparing (Dad) and F999913 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 350 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 175 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
6 104470668 107607740 4.7 354
10 111327250 114051969 2.6 362
Largest segment = 4.7 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 7.3 cM
Comparing (Mom) and F999913 (Clovis Anzick-1)
Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 350 SNPs
Mismatch-bunching Limit = 175 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
1 153063519 155385045 2.3 384
2 88322784 99543207 1.6 374
Largest segment = 2.3 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 3.9 cM
Try F999919. I *think* that is the new kit number. I know Felix was working on it.
Awesome, that worked. Thanks!
Well, I definitely am native American. I thought I trying to match myself with a neanderthal. Sorry about that. I am starting to understand. Thank you anyway
So here are my final results:
Montana Anzick:
Largest segment = 5.2 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 378.3 cM
Palaeo-Eskimo:
Largest segment = 1.8 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 10.1 cM
Altai Neanderthal:
100 SNPs:
Largest segment = 1.3 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 5.8 cM
200 SNPs:
Largest segment = 1.0 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 1.0 cM
Russian Causasus Neanderthal: kit not found
Denisova 100 SNPs:
6 31837904 32912195 1.0 220
22 26500690 27499420 1.3 121
Largest segment = 1.3 cM
Total of segments > 1 cM = 2.4 cM
Please delete my first comment…
Doesn’t the Gedmatch program only consider you a match if you use 700 SNP which is the default and Minimum and you use segment 7 cM which is also the default. Here is a quote on their page “Estimates of ‘generations’ are provided as a relative means of comparison, and should NOT be taken too LITERALLY, especially for more than a couple of generations back.” and “Autosomal results with a largest segment less than 7 cM are usually not considered a ‘match’.
Leave the default values if you are unsure.” and “To qualify as a ‘match’ in the genealogical time frame, results must have a largest Autosomal segment that has at least 700 SNPs and be at least 7 cM. It must have BOTH”
Autosomal DNA cannot predict a relationship with DNA 12,500 years old, Family Tree DNA, 23 and me and Ancestry all state in their information section that Autosomal DNA can only be picked up within the last 5 or 6 generations, at the most 400 or 500 years, not 12,500. Here is a quote from 23 and me “Matches are labeled as “distant cousins” when the degree of relationship is difficult to estimate, due to the small amount of DNA shared. For every degree of separation in a relationship, the average percent DNA shared drops by half, so that the percent DNA shared remaining is quite small when you get to distant cousins. The vast majority of relatives found by DNA Relatives share a common ancestor within the last five to ten generations. A few may be more distantly related.”
I realize that Denise. However, that is not cast in concrete. What they are doing is setting expectation. If you will look at the many results, you will discover that in many, many cases, the DNA reaches back many generation. The most poignant case is that we carry part of the Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA is us today – and that’s reaching back much further than 12,500 years. If you’d like to ready more about that, I wrote about it or you could order the book, “Neanderthal Man, In Search of Lost Genomes” by Svante Paabo, the scientist who made the discovery.
Pingback: Kostenki14 – A New Ancient Siberian DNA Sample | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Pingback: Kostenki14 – A New Ancient Siberian DNA Sample | Native Heritage Project
Comparing Kit A613749 (*jbertmcc) and F999935 (UstIshim, Siberia, 45ky)
Chr Start Location End Location Centimorgans (cM) SNPs
1 102071353 106583135 3.8 743
2 232889163 234575667 3.7 624
4 8156220 10282181 3.8 462
5 11149972 13672926 3.2 451
6 42565984 43909856 3.1 308
6 44405750 46259190 3.4 451
6 135524259 137667613 3.3 389
17 13124198 13941800 3.2 334
Largest segment = 3.8 cM
Total of segments > 3 cM = 27.5 cM
Comparison took 0.07546 seconds.
So, still learning about all this… do these results suggest I have a relatively large amount of 45,000 year old chromosome bits matching with the Siberia F999935 individual?
Thanks,
Jim McCullough A613749 (*jbertmcc)
We’re still learning what all of this means too.
Pingback: 2014 Top Genetic Genealogy Happenings – A Baker’s Dozen +1 | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy
Shé:kon Roberta,
I’ve got quite a few at 3 cM/300 SNP’s. Chr 8 and 10 have the highest SNP’s (bwtn 400-700).
Chr 2: 3.8 cM/ 308
Chr 4: 3.4 cM/ 360
Chr 6: 3.2 cM/ 360 Start Location, 4013334 End Location, 5227949
Chr 6: 3.2 cM/ 384 Start Location, 137420556 End Location, 138736986
Chr 8: 4.3 cM/ 432
Chr 10: 3.6 cM/ 648
Chr 11: 3.6 cM/ 372
Chr 16: 3.4 cM/ 317
gr,
Sebastian
With Ust-Ishim, it appears higher. How can I be a closer cousin to a 45,000 y.o. ancestor than a 12,500 y.o. ancestor (Clovis Montana)?
Ust-Ishim:
Chr 8 5.8 cM/ 878 snp’s
It is important for everyone testing against these kits, that many are not complete, and are partial samples, so you will get varying results.
Shé:kon Roberta,
I’ve got quite a few at 3 cM/300 SNP’s. Chr 8 and 10 have the highest SNP’s (bwtn 400-700).
Chr 2: 3.8 cM/ 308
Chr 4: 3.4 cM/ 360
Chr 6: 3.2 cM/ 360 Start Location, 4013334 End Location, 5227949
Chr 6: 3.2 cM/ 384 Start Location, 137420556 End Location, 138736986
Chr 8: 4.3 cM/ 432
Chr 10: 3.6 cM/ 648
Chr 11: 3.6 cM/ 372
Chr 16: 3.4 cM/ 317
gr,
Sebastian
these results were matched with Clovis Montana
When I leave the cM’s to the lowest number (0.5), it shows matches on all of the archaic dna kits. I guess this is due to me being mixed race?
I matched at 12.67 % on the calculator. That is one old cousin!
Pingback: DNAeXplain Archives – Intermediate DNA Articles | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy