Family Tree DNA myOrigins Ethnicity Update – No April Foolin’

The long-anticipated myOrigins update at Family Tree DNA has happened today. Not only are the ethnicity percentages updated, sometimes significantly, but so are the clusters and the user interface.

Furthermore, because of the new clusters and reference populations, the entire data base has been rerun. In essence, this isn’t just an update, but an entirely new version of myOrigins.

New Population Clusters

The updated version of myOrigins includes 24 reference populations, an increase of 6 from the previous 18 clusters.

The new clusters are:

African

  • East Central Africa
  • West Africa
  • South Central Africa

Central/South Asian

  • South Central Asia
  • Oceania
  • Central Asia

East Asian

  • Northeast Asia
  • Southeast Asia
  • Siberia

Europe

  • West and Central Europe
  • East Europe
  • Iberia
  • Southeast Europe
  • British Isles
  • Finland
  • Scandinavia

Jewish Diaspora

  • Sephardic Diaspora
  • Ashkenazi Diaspora

Middle Eastern

  • East Middle East
  • West Middle East
  • Asia Minor
  • North Africa

New World

  • North and Central America
  • South and Central America

Note that this grouping divides Native American between North and South America and includes the long-awaited Sephardic cluster.

New User Experience

Your experience starts on your home page where you’ll click on myOrigins, like always. That part hasn’t changed.

The next page you’ll see is new.

This myOrigins page shows your major category results, with a down arrow to display your subgroups and trace results.

Now, for the great news! Family Tree DNA is now displaying trace results! Often interpreted to be noise, that’s not always the case. However, Family Tree DNA does provide an annotation for trace amounts of DNA, so everyone is warned about the potential hazard.

It’s now up to you, the genealogist, to make the determination whether your trace amounts are valid or not.

Trace DNA inclusion has been something I’ve wanted for a long time, so THANK YOU Family Tree DNA!

MyOrigins now identifies my North and Central American ancestry, which translates into Native American, proven by haplogroups in those particular family lines.

Clicking on the various subcategories shows the location of the cluster on the map, along with new educational material below the map.

Pressing the down arrow beside any category displays the subcategories.

Clicking on “Show All” displays all of the categories and your ethnicity percentages within those categories.

Clicking on “View myOrigins Map” shows you the entire world map and your cluster locations where your DNA is found in those reference populations.

The color intensity reflects the amount of your DNA found there. In other words, bright blue is my majority ethnicity at 48% in the British Isles.

In the information box in the lower left hand corner, you can now opt to view your shared origins with people you match and share the same major regions, or you can view the regional information.

Accuracy

I’ve already mentioned how pleased I am to find my Native American ancestry accurately reported, but I’m also equally as pleased to see my British Isles and Germanic/Dutch/French much more accurately reflected. My mother’s results are more succinct as well, reflecting her known heritage almost exactly.

The chart below shows my new myOrigins results compared to the older results. I prepared this chart originally as a part of the article, Concepts – Calculating Ethnicity Percentages. The new results are much more reflective of what I know about my genealogy.

Take a look at your new results on your home page at Family Tree DNA.

Summary

All ethnicity estimates, from all sources, are just that…estimates.  There will always be a newer version as reference populations continue to improve.  The new myOrigins version offers a significant improvement for me and the kits I administer.

Ethnicity estimates are more of a beginning than an end.  I hope that no one is taking any ethnicity estimate as hard and fast fact.  They aren’t.  Ethnicity estimates are one of the many tools available to genetic genealogists today.  They really aren’t a shortcut to, or in place of, traditional genealogy.  I hope what they are, for many people, is the enticement that encourages them to jump into the genealogy pool and go for a swim.

For people seeking to know “who they are” utilizing ethnicity testing, they need to understand that while ethnicity results are fun, they aren’t an answer.  Ethnicity results are more of a hint or a road sign, pointing the way to potential answers that may be reaped from traditional genealogical research.

If your results aren’t quite what you were expecting, or even if they are and you’d like to understand more about how ethnicity and DNA works, please read my article, Ethnicity Testing – A Conundrum.

172 thoughts on “Family Tree DNA myOrigins Ethnicity Update – No April Foolin’

  1. I’m pretty happy with the results. I got bumped from 33% British/Irish to 38%, which I feel is closer, as well as a large increase from 16% Scandinavia to 28%. Also saw my Eastern Europe and Southern Europe %s drop, and 6% Sephardic Jewish diaspora was added along with <2% Asia Minor. Much closer to what I feel I really am genetically as I have a way greater connection with my Celtic and Scandinavian ancestors, dating back to 300AD.

    • My results shifted rather dramatically. I was 20-30% scandinavian before and now it’s zero. Was 5-10 Jewish, and now also zero. Had nearly zero German before and now it’s around 30%.

      Honestly the original results never made much sense to me, and the new results are more in line with what I know based on family history and research.

      But… I never bothered to print the original results… and now I don’t remember exactly what they were…

      Is there a way to see the original results? (even if we agree with the changes made in the update)

  2. My my origins test results changed significantly from 91% Azhkenazi Jewish, 6% Western & Central European, and 3% Northern African to 99% Ashkenazi Jewish and > 2% East Central African. Those are pretty significant changes. Can you explain them? All four of my grandparents were Ashkenazi Jews from Poland, Romania, and Ukraine. One grandparent might have had some gypsy ancestry but not sure about that.

  3. Again, I think in this version (and the previous version) Scandinavian, British Isles, and Western Central Europe are all interchangeable, and randomly so. Therefore someone with full British Ancestry on one or both sides of their family will see a random mixture of the three.

    • I wonder if some of this confusion has been created by the USA centric axis of FTDNA, Here in the UK, many of us have a pretty solid idea of where we really come from, even down to specific hamlets 400 or so years ago. We can also grapple with the nitty gritty of British history – from the Huguenots to the Vikings, it’s not so very difficult to gain a good idea of where our roots might lie in mainland Europe.

      But for folks in the USA it’s a much more complex melting pot. Even surnames can be highly misleading. Who’s to say that one’s DNA is British or Scandinavian? Similar DNA is found in both populations.

      • My mother’s father’s family name is Newsom, a derivative of Newsham. They originated in Lancashire, in the area of Preston. My father’s father’s family come from Sporing, Aarhus, Denmark. You ask who’s to say who’s British or Scandinavian? I do. My father’s family name is Nielsen. Answer this….. FTDNA says I am zero % Scandinavian. The average Brit is about 9% Scandinavian. They say I am 86% British Isles. I can’t even get the 9% for the viking invasion of Britain. According to FTDNA, I am more British than the British.

  4. First, my name is Hans Nielsen. My father’s family came directly to the USA from Denmark and Sweden. The new myOrigins results say I am ZERO % Scandinavian, and 86% British Isles. The old results were 59% Scandinavian and 29% British Isles. This makes absolutely no sense. I called familytreedna and was told this is the “latest” scientific research. I asked to speak with a geneticist and was told they don’t have phones. They referred me to this article written by you. So…………….. You are the expert. Please explain how I can show by dna to have zero Scandinavian.

      • Me too, I went from 45% Scandinavian to 8%!! British went from 31% to 73%??
        I have fairly recent Norwegian immigrant ancestors and Swedes.

      • I really wonder what they mean by “British”. The word is often used of the Celtic-speaking inhabitants of the British Isles before the Germanic invasions. Is that what they mean? If you fast-forward to about 1,500 years ago, the British Isles have a mixed population of Celtic-speakers and Anglo-Saxons. The Angles were from southern Jutland so I suppose they are more Scandinavian than German. Maybe that’s why I have suddenly gone from 0% Scandinavian to 33% – some of my West and Central European component being re-classified as Scandinavian. Who knows? Your guess is as good as mine.

        Harry

      • Add one more. I went from 47% Scandinavian (Norway Sweden) to 0%. My British Isles went from 26% to 60% and Central Europe from 26% to 39%. Having worked in scientific discipline my entire 45 year career I find it very difficult to understand how you get that type of shift “based on latest information.” Does not give me a lot of faith in what FTDNA is selling. The explanation I was given was not satisfactory.

    • Hi Hans. This seems to be the most common complaint.

      For myself, I’ve gone from 18% Scandinavian to 0%. Your new percentages are quite absurd in my opinion, I’m not surprised you’d like an explanation.

      From the earliest days of receiving my FF and mtDNA results, I saw many many Scandinavian and Scots/Scandinavian surnames in my matches – Patterson, Peterson, Villumsen, Williamson etc. Matches in the Shetland Isles gave me the real clue to my roots.

      Now I’m 0% Scandinavian and…. 7% South Eastern Europe and Middle Eastern! Yet my face would fit in any Norwegian or Swedish town or village – and look rather out of place in Qatar.

      FTDNA have messed up imo.

    • Same here, my G.Grandfather Ole Astrup was a Danish immigrant as well. Before this update, my results were 36% British, 28 or 29% Scandinavian, 26% Southern European, 6% Middle Eastern and 5% Eastern European. Now it’s saying I have no Scandinavian ancestry or Middle Eastern and that I have trace amounts of Jewish and Oceanic ancestry, which makes no sense at all.

      • Yes, it is that mass migration of lost Polynesians who washed up in Denmark throwing things off! The Origins results are waaaay off known ancestry.

      • As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve had the opposite experience to many people because I’ve lost my former 32% Western and Central Europe, and also my 5% Finland and Northern Siberia, and in their place I’ve gained 33% Scandinavia. I’m assuming this is my Anglian component (as in Anglo-Saxon) which has been redefined as Scandinavian rather than German/West European.

        I also have mtDNA J matches with Norwegians and Norwegian-Americans, which I have put down to migration from Scandinavia to the British Isles in Neolithic times, following Stephen Oppenheim.

        Harry

  5. I went from 52% British to 14%, My father dropped down to 4%. This is impossible. Our last name is Wilson and they came from Scotland in 1852. We match another last name(Coffey) that we could never figure out until recent and they are one of the oldest last names in Ireland. My father supposedly has a half brother that we did not know about and is still up for question. The half brother shows 90% British. My sister tested on ancestry. My Mother side is from England.

    • Sorry I got interrupted while typing this. My sister tested on Ancestry and shows 63% British as well. There is no way me or my father can be that low.

  6. @ Hans S Nielson

    We are 100% British (known anyway) before the update, myself and my two paternal cousins had 20-35% Scandinavian. Now only one remains 24% Scandinavian, ours are now more British or in my case gained 14% West and Central Europe?

    It looks like they have the British ‘invading’ Scandinavia instead of what history suggests 😦

  7. Better? Not so sure. I know from paper trail I have significant German ancestry which was reflected in earlier myOrigins results but has completely disappeared in new results. Likewise new results indicate Iberian and southeast European, neither of which I have found in paper research. On the other hand, the Scandinavian I couldn’t account for in prior myOrigins results has now disappeared. I’m not convinced it’s better, just different.

  8. My daughter and I had a ton of Spanish ancestry that was evident in the previous version, and is now all lumped into Western European. If you look at the amount of Mexican cousins in my results and Mexican and Colombian cousins in her results, it is clear that the new version has issues.

  9. Interesting changes, and different for different family members. My mom went from 94% skandinavian 6% Finn-sibirian to 98% skandinavian and traces of Finland and Southeast Europe rending her a 98% European. My 90% skandinavian 10% Finn-sibirain became 90% skandinavian 7% Finland 3% Brittish Isle and traces of Southeast asia and South central asia. And 100% european.

  10. After 20 plus years researching my English, Irish and Scottish roots, some lines back to the 1500s, the new MyOrigins has me as 0% British Isles, instead of the 28% I was before the update. Am I now looking at where these people came from before they settled in the British Isles? Everything has dramatically changed. On the other hand, my husband’s changed slightly, and now aligns perfectly with what we know about his family, since an area missing has now been added. I am a bit frustrated now with my results, but also slightly fascinated by my diverse background. Surprisingly, although my mother’s family is from Italy, at least back to the mid 1800s, I have 0% Italian. I guess no one stayed in one spot for long.

  11. Hi, I’m wondering if you can give me any insight to my updated autosomal origins please? I’ve gone from being 80 percent British and 20 percent Scandinavian, to 83 percent British and 17 percent Eastern European, it doesn’t make sense to me when both of my parents autosomal is on FTDNA and neither show even a trace of Eastern European. The only thing I can think of at all at a stretch is that I imported my Dad’s results from Ancestry.co.uk which uses the chip, prior to the change, but nowhere on both sites at any time have they been considered Eastern European at all. Thanks so much for any help. I have posed the question to FTDNA and I’m waiting for an answer.

    • I think it’s because they tried to force a larger portion of the giant Eastern European region to be able to score 100% Eastern European so they had to mix in a lot of Western European and Scandinavian and some Southern European and Asian into the base Eastern European component.

      Apparently some Germans are slightly more eastern tilted, some SW tilted and some English tilted in their ancient background and the former now get called Eastern European, the middle get called British & Irish and only the latter West and Central (although I have seen even French people get called mostly Eastern European now).

      So sure now you get more Polish people able to score 100% Eastern European while before many only got 80% and so on instead of just Latvians, Lithuanians (and a few Belarusians and very few Russians) but it comes at an expense that I don’t see as worthwhile and even see as a major step in the wrong direction.

      • I wonder if the expanded Eastern European cluster explains why my 6% Western & Central European component dropped to 0% during the recalculation. If those ancestors were from Germany, western Poland, Austria, or even the eastern part of France, or Switzerland, they might have gotten clumped into Eastern Europe and washed out. (The Ashkenazi Jewish cluster covers roughly the same area as the Eastern Europe cluster.)

  12. The update went the opposite direction I had hoped.
    It gives really boring results for most Eastern Europeans now. In trying to get a larger percentage of the region able to score 100% Eastern European they have mixed in so much Western European, Scandinavian and Asian gene patterns into the category that it totally washes away all hints at other minor ancestries one might have (as it was it already washed much away) and as well it got rid of most of the sub-structure for Eastern Europe, before by seeing how much other stuff mixed in and in what ratios one could often tell (so long as they were largely from the one place) say Latvians from Polish from Russians from Czechs from Romanians but now many of them just score 100% Eastern European. And so almost nobody seems to get any components other than Eastern European and Finnish. But even if the goal was making a category where if you were 100% from the area you could score 100%, while they got closer, it still doesn’t quite work since some far southern Polish people and certain Russians and the odd other can still get only 70-80% at times and a few other can still get outside ancestries showing although most don’t and with no clear reason why.

    People with some German, Dutch, even Oceanian ancestry in addition to mostly Eastern European still get none of that showing. Most in the region seem to be able to only score Eastern European or Finnish.

    • Opps I mean an Eastern European+French+Italian getting nothing but Eastern European (and trace Finnish) plus Iberian?

  13. One story I heard some years ago was about the German family proud of their roots. But it seems there was a French traveling salesman!!!!!

  14. My original results were 60% British Isles, 37% central and western Europe and 3% Finnish/ Siberian. I am now 0% central and western European and I went from 0% to 55% Scandinavian. I have several ancestors from southern Germany and France so the original results made sense. The new results seem wrong. For there to be so much difference they were way off last time or way off this time. I have lost my confidence in FTDNA either way.

  15. My major percentage origins did not change dramatically. The family is still predominately British Isles and Western European. The smaller influences changed dramatically. When the small percentage origins are compared to other family members who tested, and we do not match very well at all, I have to say Family Tree DNA needs to work a bit harder on this.
    We all picked up a small percentage of Spanish and Sephardic Jew. So far my research shows neither, but that might have been back a very long time ago. It is not found in my research. My aunt and I lost all our Scandinavian percentage, which is probably not true. I agree with another person’s comment that the Scandinavian influence is lumped in with the Western European or British Isles. The Vikings muddied the DNA. My son picked up a small trace of South American, East Middle East, and West African. I think I may be looking for a Melungeon woman as one of the unnamed spouses. This definitely calls for using the last remaining Family Finder kit on one of my husband’s family, so the new origins is useful. I am not at all sure how accurate it is.

  16. My results changed quite a bit also,from 41% British Isle and 31% Scandinavian with smaller percentages for Southern Europe and the middle east to 57% Scandinavian,0% British Isle and 27% Iberian Peninsula and small amounts for eastern Europe and south west Europe. This came to 98% European. My question is how can this update go from 41% British Isle to 0% British Isle ? Not likely I surmise.

  17. If a person has mixed Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jewish ancestry, would both results show up in my origins? My mom’s maiden name was Arabic although her parents were Ashkenazi Jewish.

    If a person has Mizrahi Jewish ancestry, how would that display in my origins?

  18. I went from 48% ashkenazi jewish to 56%. That is fascinating because that would mean that I am more than half jewish, which would be quite the revelation because that would mean my father also has some jewish in him? Odd to say the least

  19. I too see a big difference and inaccuracies in this “new” origins – before I was 44% British Isles now I am 13% – and in the New World area 10% says Mexico!!! I have no family members from Mexico!!! Something is off

    • I to am disappointed in these results and would like ftdna to rerun the updated information for new results. My English ancestors must all be Vikings from Scandinavia and married Viking women from Scandinavia while living in the British Isles. My results went from 41% British Isle to 0% and 57% Scandinavian from 31%.

  20. I was excited about the trace results and think they are accurate. However, like others are posting, something is definitely wrong with the British Isles results. From my tests at FTDNA, my brother has 74%, my sister has 35%, I have 9%, our mother has 0%, and my paternal uncle has 56%.

      • Almost everyone is puzzled by their test results, and the DNA forums are buzzing with dissatisfied voices. But we’re the blind leading the blind, so why doesn’t one of the “experts” from FTDNA intervene with a post explaining in simple terms – if that’s possible! – why these latest results are so different from the earlier ones? They can’t answer everyone’s queries individually, but there are definite patterns this time, like so many people losing their Scandinavian component, and many of us acquiring unexpected Jewish diaspora values, and a bit of explanation would be in order. Otherwise they might lose disgruntled customers.

        Harry

      • I agree! Although I’m primarily Jewish, I’m also puzzled by the drastic changes to my results. I lost 6% Western/Central European and 3% Northern Africa (maybe surprise Sephardic ancestry? And gained

  21. These ethnicity tests generally do well at the continental level but seem to fail to varying degrees at the sub-continental level. I would take sub-continental breakdowns with a grain of salt or perhaps with a whole shaker of salt. I would use the results as potential clues.

    To illustrate my point, by genealogy (paper trail), I am at least 43% German but FTDNA gives me less than 2% West and Central Europe yet 40% Scandinavia. By genealogy, my closest Scandinavian ancestor was a Swedish soldier in the Thirty Years War who lived 11 generations ago in the early 1600s.

  22. Hi Roberta,

    I first tested my mtDNA FGS in 2007 with FTDNA. I am H1a1. I am now for the first time ordering Family Finder My Origins 2.0. I won’t get my results until May 15-29th.

    I am wondering if my 4th great grandmother through my father will show up. I was told by my uncle several years ago that my 4th great grandmother was Tuscarora. Other cousins that I came in contact through the years was told hat she was Cherokee. I understand by your blog that it is hard to determine the tribes.

    I was wondering if she will show up on Family Finder.? Her name was Toroda. She is buried 10 miles from where I live. Her tombstone has the dates of . B. 16 Aug 1770- D. 07 Sep 1847. She was married to my 4th great grandfather in North Carolina. My 4th great grandfather is listed in the.1800 Cabarrus County, North Carolina census

      • Toroda is my 4th great grandmother so including myself that makes 6 generations. The paper trail to my 4th great grandfather is proven. He is German/Dutch coming from North Carolina to Illinois in 1823 when his first deed is recorded. Of course that is by the paper tail.

        I understand my H1a1 FGS. Rebekah Canada was at that time over my project and Ann Turner did a report for me. The Family Finder is new to me. I realize it is 50% from my father and 50% from my mother.

  23. change for the better is one thing but the recent update destroys my near term genealogical history (200-400Yrs) previously my family origin indicated 96 european ( 50% french and 46% british isles) now in see i am 81 % british isles and ZERO french ( ie central western europe) . first my near term genealogy ie back to 1600 is essentially all french or french canadian on my maternal side ( one chippewas wife marrying does show in trace now though on GEDMATCh using various algorithms it showed 1-4% when family finder showed zero). what happened? ancestry.com genetic communities shows me in st lawrence waterway ( ie french canadian) . if the new is for 15000 yrs ago, i say you missed the mark. something is not right.

  24. My results are not accurate with my known history. The Ancestry results were far closer.
    FT DNA seems to call my GERMAN as British Isles.
    The MIddle East % are ridiculous…at most a trace from my Italian side.

    • What did you get for your Middle East %? Mine went up from 5% to 6%. Six percent can’t be noise right? I noticed Roberta’s went up to 9%, where does it come from? If she can’t figure it out then I don’t have much hope in myself to figure that out either.

      • Comparison – Ancestry 7% Middle East 5% Caucuses / FTDNA Middle East 17%! No way.
        Ancestry – Italy / Greece 40% (I am 50% Italian) so the other 10% trace does not surprise me.
        FT DNA South East Europe (inc Italy) 34%
        I know I have 37.5% GERMAN origin…yet Ancestry clumps most of it as Scandinavian and
        FT DNA 0!…Instead, it states British Isles 48%…again, no way. I have some Irish and possible UK but as small %. So far, the Origins results are basically garbage. Ancestry is much closer to what I know. People who don’t know their heritage will be very mislead.

  25. Remember, the many of these results reflect OLD populations that originated in the Caucuses or the Middle East before moving into Europe.

  26. I emailed Family Tree and got this as part of the reply:

    “This is where your change in results comes in: previously, the Western & Central Europe and Scandinavian clusters had a lot of overlap; even on the map, you could see that they bled into one another. Now that we have huge Scandinavian and British Isles databases (due to an influx of testing in that region), we’re able to look back on your results and decide on which side of the overlap you really belong – in this case, you have more in common with the British Isles side of the line.”

    Folks, half of my ancestry is from France and Germany. According to their new data, I am 81% British Isles. Admittedly, I have a lot of Irish ancestry, but the map is centered on Britain. I’m still trying to figure out what side of the family contributed 14% from Asia Minor and the 5% Eastern Europe. This is not where my ancestor emigrated from. These results are incorrect.

    • Like you, all of my GERMAN ancestry disappears and is now British Isles. Impossible. The Asia Minor % that a lot of us get on different company results has to reflect old populations that originated in the area and moved into SE Europe – Italy, Greece, Balkans etc. Eastern Europe can mean many things – from Slavic to others. Many Slavic tribes lived in areas that are today Germany and Denmark along Baltic. Plus, people have moved over the centuries. The traces don’t bother me as much as the giant Major Errors. My Middle East % went way up beyond what should be a trace from my Italian side.

    • Yep – I have a very good 350y old paper trial and there are two African, two Indian, and two English ancestors amongst the several thousand names in the family tree. The rest are all from Dutch, German or French areas.

      Despite this I have lost all of my Scandinavian and is now supposedly 67% British Isles and 17% SE Europe. And 7% Central/South Asia + 3% West Africa

      Something is rotten in the State of Denmark – even if they claim I no longer have genetic roots there 🙂

      • Yes, it is rather strange that suddenly FT DNA reads continental ancestry as British Isles. Paper trumps estimation.

      • Do you know why some people have reduced Western & Central European ancestry percentages? Was it because the reference population was moved into the Eastern European cluster?

  27. My complaint- How can I have gone from 81% Scandinavian to 0%. I have five great-grandparents who came to America with their parents; all were born in Sweden. My other three great-grandparents came from the British Isles. I went from 0% British Isles to 75%.
    The reply from my request for an explanation from Family Tree DNA says ” This does not mean that the previously reported percentages were incorrect– they were correct based on the information available at the time. The new ones are also correct based on the information that is now available at this time.”
    (I received my first results in March 2017 and my second results in April 2017) Since the British Isles and Scandinavia are two distinct population clusters- how could they have changed so drastically? I’m still looking for an answer.

  28. I emailed FTDNA with two very specific questions and received only this form letter, which answered neither of them at all. I asked whether some of the data might have been entered by hand, which might account for my being Ashkenazi and my son, who has absolutely no Jewish or even southern European ancestry on his dad’s side, showing up as Sephardic. If a typist was involved, perhaps someone typed the wrong thing or clicked on the wrong button. Very disappointed in the way this whole thing has been handled.

  29. My previous ethnic makeup with FTDNA was compatible to my Ancestry autosomal test from ancestry.com, Ancestry has me at 99% European; 53% Great Brit, 19% Ireland, 14% Europe West, 8% Scandinavian, 5% Iberian, 1% West Asia. My old FTDNA autosomal had me at; 97% European, 49% British Isles, 17% Scandinavian, 14% Southern Europe, 11% Eastern Europe, 6% Western & Central Europe, 3% Middle Eastern.
    My new results from FTDNA have me at 100% European; 37% Scandinavia, 32% Iberia, 20% British Isles, 6% East Europe, 6% Southeast Europe a total of 101%. Something is fishy in Denmark.

  30. I have a list of Jewish matches who only match me on my list. Yet I used to show Middle East now north Africa but no Jewish Ancestry. But I still have a large list of Jewish Cousins on my list. how is this possible ?

  31. You mention that the trace ethnicity may only be background noise. I was actually pleasantly surprised with the results showing that maybe having , even, just a trace of N and C American heritage could prove my grandmother was correct in stating we had Native American ancestors.? I had asked if she knew who they were and she said “Kickapoo”. I thought I would roll on the floor laughing. She surely made this up….then I found there were such people back when you researched using the Encyclopedia. Her fathers family (Pero/Perrow/Pereau/etc) is the only possible connection…. just can not go further than the fact they were from Canada and immigrated to Vassalborough, Maine about 1846. Any hints on where to search further?

    • http://www.tolatsga.org/kick.html “Before contact with Europeans, the Kickapoo lived in northwest Ohio and southern Michigan in the area between Lake Erie and Lake Michigan. Beginning in the 1640s, the Algonquin tribes in this region came under attack from the east, first by the Ottawa and Iroquian-speaking Neutrals, and then the Iroquois. By 1658 the Kickapoo had been forced west into southwest Wisconsin. About 1700 they began to move south into northern Illinois and by 1770 had established themselves in central Illinois (near Peoria) extending southeast into the Wabash Valley on the western border of Indiana. After wars with the Americans and settlement of the Ohio Valley, they signed treaties during 1819 ceding their remaining land east of the Mississippi River and relocated to southern Missouri (1819-24). Initially, most moved to the lands assigned them, but many remained in central Illinois and refused to
      leave until they were forcibly removed by the military in 1834. Fewer than half actually stayed on their Missouri reserve. Several bands wandered south and west until the Kickapoo were spread across Oklahoma and Texas all the way to the Mexican border (and beyond). In 1832 the Missouri Kickapoo exchanged their reserve for lands in northeast Kansas. After the move, factions developed, and in 1852, a large group left and moved to Chihuahua in northern Mexico. Apparently, there were Kickapoo already living there by this time. These Mexican Kickapoo were joined by others between 1857 and 1863. Few remained in Kansas. Between 1873 and 1878, approximately half of the Mexican Kickapoo returned to the United States and were sent to Oklahoma. Currently, there are three federally-recognized Kickapoo tribes: the Kickapoo of Kansas; the Kickapoo of Oklahoma; and the Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas.”

  32. My great grandfather was a Jew from Cracow. In old results I had 6% of Ashkenazi Jews. Other calculators (gedmatch, dna.land) show about 9-10% of Ashkenazi Jews. Everything was fine 6-10% the de facto difference of statistical error. Currently I have only <2% of Ashkenazi Jews. At this time, my mother (the Jew's granddaughter) has 17% Ashkenazi Jews (new results). According to other calculators (ged.match, dna.land) mom has 19-20%. So exactly twice as much as me. I have over 600 common results with my mum (after phasing). In my opinion, the new algorithm incorrectly attributed most of my Jewish genes to other populations especially Eastern Europe. It is extremely unlikely (statistically even impossible) to divide just <2% of the Ashkenazi Jews, with 17% of my mother's genes.

  33. Nice update for me- I have spent a year tracking down matches from the Azores, Puerto Rico, & St.landry Parish Louisiana(all very much linked). I have thought all my life I was 100% east european- the new update has me listed as 77% east european & 21% Italy/Greece- which from what I have found with matches is off as I don’t have Italy/Greece matches. I also have one missing record for a grandfather- so again the 77% is spot-on- its just the Italy/Greece does not match -up with the (60) or so matches I have with Iberian roots.

  34. Hello there. I have also seen several of my percentages change, some becoming zeroed, some others coming from zero to high numbers. I can understand that with new references etc. it was bound to happen. Nevertheless, what really bugs me is seeing my mother’s results.
    Having 3 of her 4 grandparents coming from Europe, documentedly from Portugal, having Portuguese names dating back as far as 1562 (where our researches hit a wall) my mother’s FTDNA report tells us that she has inherited mere 7% of Iberian information, yes, seven percent! whereas she has 30% West and Central Europe, e.g.
    What?! How can I possibly believe the accuracy of that when 3 of her 4 grandparents ARE Portuguese who had Portuguese ancestors up to at least the 16th century? the other grandparent is African-Ameridian.
    Also, she doesn’t have any trace of Brit Isles (mine has gone from 2% to 0%), and, yet, the huge majority of both my and my mother’s matches come from English families – lots of them being British for generations.
    To tell you the truth, although I am thrilled about the new results, I am absolutely bummed out that I cannot match them to the reality my documents show me, I mean, I could think about the possibility of having DNA information from “undocumented” ancestors, but that should be the trace regions, not the main clusters.

  35. How has the new update affected those who are Ashkenazi Jewish?

    My results changed from 91% Ashkenazi, 6% Western and Central Europe, 3% Northern Africa to 99% Ashkenazi, <2% East Central African. At least the African component is still there! I don't know enough about my ancestry beyond my grandparents (except my maternal grandmother's side of the family) to judge the accuracy of the earlier or latter results. My matches correspond with the earlier results except I don't have any from Northern Africa. I have one match from East Central Africa. I wondered if the North African component could indicate some Sephardic ancestry but the new results don't show any.

    One of my ancestors was rumored to have some gypsy ancestry but that didn't show up in the results. So maybe it was just a rumor!

  36. Marcio, I just remembered a book I read about a woman discovering she was Jewish and that she descended from people in Spain or Portugal that had been hiding their religion for centuries.
    Can’t remember the name. But this may be the reason some people have ancestry that doesn’t make sense.

  37. Went from 45% New World to 65% New World, and now it says I have almost no admixture from South America, when that is where all of my native American comes from: instead it is now Central and North American. I’m not exactly sure what they did to the New World population clusters. Also, the amount of Southwestern European I have decreased significantly, and Southeast European increased to match what it used to be.

  38. The update now has me with some intriguing trace origins (specifically, South Central Africa), yet the Share Origins pop up only allows me to sort matches by my two main origins (European and Jewish Diaspora). Would love to see if I share any matches with others of African descent to help figure out if this trace result is just noise or from a distant ancestor.

  39. FTDNA will have my Family Finder results posted 24-72 hours to check back. I do see cousins I know. I am H1a1 by mtDNA FGS testing in 2007 and this is my 1st time to test for Family Finder.

    My Ancient Origins shows up on the map as this.

    It has one in La, Brana, Spain.
    It has 2 in Central Europe.
    It has one in Stuttgart, Germany.
    It has one in Hungary.
    It has one in Corded Ware.

    Is this a hint for things to come. LOL !

    • I should have added on my posting above on Ancient Origins that my results came back as:

      Metal Age Invader 13%
      Farmer 45%
      Hunter Gatherers 43%
      Non European 0%

  40. My results are in today.
    About what I expected…. 100% European
    British Isles 79% and Southeast European 21%.
    I am not sure where the Southeast European comes in

    \My father ‘s surname is French, We did that by DNA testing at FTDNA when we ran out of records. That is in the Dillon group. 35/37 match. He has a lot of German. The 4th great grandmother that is Native American did not show up.

    My mother is almost all British Isles.

  41. Since I posted my results from FTDNA today, I decided to order kits from 23andMe and Ancestry for comparison. My father has a lot of German lineages and that didn’t show up at all.

    My results are in today. from FTDNA
    100% European
    British Isles 79% and Southeast European 21%.

    • My results are in from 23andMe. I haven’t heard from Ancestry yet. 23and Me is more accurate including my French and German than FTDNA did on my origins.

      Ancestry Composition

      European
      99.7%
      Northwestern European
      95.9%
      British & Irish
      53.5%
      French & German
      21.3%
      Scandinavian
      1.3%
      Broadly Northwestern European
      19.8%
      Southern European
      1.4%
      Iberian
      0.2%
      Broadly Southern European
      1.2%
      Broadly European
      2.3%
      Sub-Saharan African
      0.3%
      West African
      0.2%
      Broadly Sub-Saharan African
      0.1%
      Middle Eastern & North African
      Less than 0.1%
      North African
      Less than 0.1%


      Haplogroups

      Maternal
      H1a1

      FTDNA had me at 100% European and British Isles at 79% with Southeastern European at 21%. I have nothing in my research with Italy, Greece or the Balkan States.

  42. I have to say I was completely shocked when I saw the new changes. My paper trail is mostly French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian & Greek. My original Family Tree results were: 56% Western + Central Europe (Which covers the French & North Italian), 29% British Isles (Ancestry has me at 5% English & 18% Irish), 11% Scandinavian (Ancestry has me at 13% Scandinavian), 1% Finland + Northern Siberia (I have a ton of Russian results from other companies 5-22%), and 3% Eastern Middle East. My new results are: 41% Scandinavian, 40% British Isles, 10% Southeast Europe, 4% East Europe and 5% Asia Minor. My entire West +Central Europe has disappeared (This is where most of my paper trail leads), my Scandinavian has jumped up by 30%, my British Isles has jumped up 11%, my Eastern Middle East has completely disappeared only to be replaced with Asia Minor, my Finland + Northern Siberia has completely disappeared I guess replaced with East Europe. Zero trace amounts. I have taken around close to 10 separate tests who all have similar results and this one is all over the map weird. My other tests have me at 6-35% Iberian Peninsula which matches my paper trail. (I have found 2nd & 3rd cousins all Spanish & Native American), Zero Iberia at Family Tree. Other tests have trace amounts of Sephardic & Ashkenazi Jewish, Romani Gypsy, Central & South Asian, North & Sub-Saharan African, South American, and Siberian. Zero trace amounts at Family Tree. The only thing they got right on this new version is 10% Southeast Europe, other tests have me at around 2-15% Italy/Greece (Which again is in my paper trail). I know this is not an exact science but if this new version had been my one and only test without a paper trail, I would have had a very different idea of what my ethnicity was. The only test that was worse than this was 23&Me. They couldn’t even tell me what 30.5% of my dna represented. Just a “Broadly European” Label. For $200 they could take the time to dig a little deeper, especially when free sights like GEDMatch, DNALand, WeGene, Impute Me, & Interpretome have all given much more robust and farther reaching results that consistently match up. I think Family Tree needs to go back to the drawing board and rethink this new version. The last one wasn’t perfect but it was a lot more plausible to me.

    • The cost is not $200 for the Family Finder test. It ranges from $59 to $79 and previously cost $99. You also receive far more than just ethnicity – matches, matching tools, etc. This version is better for some people and worse for others.

      • Tamara Wallace, I’m with you there! FTDNA new references have been really deeply disappointing. As I had said here, my mom, who has 3 grandparents documentedly coming from Portugal (our paper trail dates back as far as 1562 according) only shows 7% Iberia! Also, both mother and I have (now) 0% Brit Islands, nevertheless, the huge majority of our dna matches have a English family name…
        Good thing is that there’s Gedmatch, dna.land, and the other (paid) companies for us to get some notion of our ancestry.

  43. Pingback: LivingDNA Product Review | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

  44. I had my Dna test with Ancestry and My heritage. I think that Ancestry is very accurate and I am very dissapointed with the results from My Heritage.

  45. My Cousins (Male) MyOrigin 1st results are exacly same with his Geno 2.0 NG. He is about 56% Southeast Asian and Oceanian + 44% Eastern Asian. Because i never take the Geno 2.0 NG so i can’t take my Geno 2.0 NG DNA Test and Kit. But, i take my FTDNA Family Finder so do with my Cousins from my Mother’s Side and my Aunt’s from my Father’s side. The DNA Results were:
    – Adrian YP: 100% East Asian = 65% Southeast Asian and 35% Northeast Asian.
    – Clarissa WS: 100% East Asian = 59% Southeast Asian and 41% Northeast Asian.
    – Miss Idawati: 100% East Asian = 68% Southeast Asian + 32% Northeast Asian. Today, i can see MyOrigins 2.0 results with a slightly differents Ethnic Percentages. Not bad at all.
    My question is did the Geno 2.0 NG and FTDNA FF and MyOrigins 1st using an exackly same resolutions to determine our Ethnicity Percentages?

      • From my Geno 2.0 and my FTDNA BigY (Paternal Line) my results are: Geno 2.0: Y DNA Haplogroup O-CTS5492 or O-CTS11856 – Perhaps Y DNA Hg O-M133. But i can’t found the documentary about My Cousins and my Maternal Grandfather’s Y DNA Hg O-CTS4960. I have no idea for this one. Maybe Miss Estes can help me about this part?

  46. Pingback: Which Ethnicity Test is Best? | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s