Sequencing of Neanderthal Toe Bone Reveals Unknown Hominin Line

Posted on December 22, 2013 by Roberta Estes

This week, in the journal Nature, scientists reported on the full sequencing of a Neanderthal toe bone found in the Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains, the location where the Denisovan skeleton found in 2008 and sequenced earlier this year was also found.

The abstract of the paper, which is behind a paywall, says:

We present a high-quality genome sequence of a Neanderthal woman from Siberia. We show that her parents were related at the level of half-siblings and that mating among close relatives was common among her recent ancestors. We also sequenced the genome of a Neanderthal from the Caucasus to low coverage. An analysis of the relationships and population history of available archaic genomes and 25 present-day human genomes shows that several gene flow events occurred among Neanderthals, Denisovans and early modern humans, possibly including gene flow into Denisovans from an unknown archaic group. Thus, interbreeding, albeit of low magnitude, occurred among many hominin groups in the Late Pleistocene. In addition, the high-quality Neanderthal genome allows us to establish a definitive list of substitutions that became fixed in modern humans after their separation from the ancestors of Neanderthals and Denisovans.

The abstract also includes this graphic from the paper

This sequence is significant because of a number of unique findings.

The skeleton showed physical traits of both Neanderthals and modern humans and is thought to be about 50,000 years old.
Genetic sequencing revealed that this bone belonged to a Neanderthal woman, not a Denisovan, although other Denisovan remains, including one previously sequenced, have been found in this cave.
The closest genetic relative is found in the Mezmaiskaya Cave in the Caucasus Mountains, some 2000+ miles distant. Admittedly, we don’t have a lot of sequenced remains for comparison.
Sequencing revealed a heretofore unknown genetic line of archaic humans. This person obtained from between 2.7 to 5.8 percent of their genome from this unknown line. That percentage is equal to someplace between a great-great-great-grandparent and a great-great-great-great-great-grandparent, assuming only one ancestor was involved. If this unknown human lineage was admixed into the population in multiple individuals, then the trace amounts could be passed around forever, just like the Neanderthal and Denisovan lineages are in Europeans today.
This unknown line could be homo erectus.
There is no evidence that this unknown human lineage interbred with either modern humans or Neanderthals. I would presume this means that this unknown line then bred with the Denisovan group which did not manifest itself in contemporary humans.
This individual was inbred with their parents being closely related, possibly half-siblings or an uncle and niece, or an aunt and nephew or a grandfather and granddaughter or grandmother and grandson. Inbreeding was also common among the woman’s recent ancestors. Another article headline this week pronounced that “Neanderthals Liked Incest” which I found to be offensive. Incest is a highly negatively charged cultural word. In the not so recent past, the practice of inbreeding was perfectly acceptable in European royalty. Furthermore, we have no idea how these people felt about inbreeding, hence the word “liked” is misleading. It could well be that they lived in a small nuclear family group and there were no other choices for partners. There could also be other cultural and selection factors at play here of which we are unaware. For example, perhaps males were more protective of mothers and children to whom they were related than ones where they had no family or group ties – increasing the likelihood of survival of offspring of women to whom the males were related.
At least half of a percent of the Denisovan genome came from Neanderthals, but none of the Denisovan genome has yet been detected in Neanderthals. If this holds, it would imply that our ancestors either bred with Neanderthals and Denisovans separately, or with Denisovans who carried Neanderthal DNA. Given that most Europeans carry more Neanderthal DNA than Denisovan, the second scenario alone is unlikely. It’s also possible that we simply haven’t found Neanderthal’s who did carry Denisovan DNA.
More than 31,000 differences were found between modern humans and Neanderthals and Denisovans, many having to do with brain development.

Dienekes discussed this research in his blog as well. Note his “family tree.”

______________________________________________________________

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

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Ancestor of Native Americans in Asia was 30% “Western Eurasian”

Posted on October 25, 2013 by Roberta Estes

The complete genome has recently been sequenced from 4 year old Russian boy who died 24,000 years ago near Lake Baikal in a location called Mal’ta, the area in Asia believed to be the origin of the Native Americans based on Y DNA and mitochondrial chromosome similarities. The map below, from Science News, shows the location.

This represents the oldest complete genome ever sequenced, except for the Neanderthal (38,000 years old) and Denisovan (41,000 years old).

This child’s genome shows that he is related closely to Native Americans, and, surprisingly, to western Asians/eastern Europeans, but not to eastern Asians, to whom Native Americans are closely related. This implies that this child was a member of part of a “tribe” that had not yet merged or intermarried with the Eastern Asians (Japan, China, etc.) that then became the original Native Americans who migrated across the Beringian land bridge between about 15,000 and 20,000 years ago.

One of the most surprising results is that about 30% of this child’s genome is Eurasian, meaning from Europe and western Asia, including his Y haplogroup which was R and his mitochondrial haplogroup which was U, both today considered European.

This does not imply that R and U are Native American haplogroups or that they are found among Native American tribes before European admixture in the past several hundred years. There is still absolutely no evidence in the Americas, in burials, for any haplogroups other than subgroups of Q and C for males and A, B, C, D, X and M (1 instance) for females. However, that doesn’t mean that additional evidence won’t be found in the future.

While this is certainly new information, it’s not unprecedented. Last year, in the journal Genetics, an article titled “Ancient Admixture in Human History” reported something similar, albeit gene flow in a different direction. This paper indicated gene flow from the Lake Baikal area to Europe. It certainly could have been bidirectional, and this new paper certainly suggests that it was.

So in essence, maybe there is a little bit of Native American in Europeans and a little bit of European in Native Americans that occurred in their deep ancestry, not in the past 500-1000 years.

What’s next? Work continues. The team is now attempting to sequence genomes from other skeletons from west of Mal’ta, East Asia and from the Americas as well.

You can read the article in Science Magazine. An academic article presenting their findings in detail will be published shortly in Nature.

A Podcast with Michael Balter can be heard here discussing the recent discovery.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

The Genomics Revolution 13 Years Later – Bennett Greenspan

Posted on March 9, 2013 by Roberta Estes

On April 29, 2013, from 11 AM-12 noon, Bennett Greenspan will be the featured speaker in the CSE Distinguished Lecture Series in the Georgia Tech Auditorium located in the Technology Square Research Building, 85 Fifth Street, Atlanta, Georgia, 30332.

Bennett will be speaking about bridging the gap between traditional genealogy and genetics, and will be discussing the various kinds of testing and when each is important. He will also be talking about new technology, exome and full genome sequencing and how that will be important to individuals.

Always a man with his eye on the horizon, thankfully for genetic genealogists, Bennett says the genomic revolution has just begun.

Bennett is speaking at the Bremen Museum on Sunday, April 28^th at 2PM about using DNA to settle family disputes, connect to long-lost relatives and to garner an appreciation for where your ancestors came from and where they journeyed since our departure from Africa.

For those who have never heard Bennett speak, he is an exceptional speaker and makes genetic genealogy not only understandable, but very attractive to the novice. Being a genealogist before genetic genealogy, a field established by Family Tree DNA, he brings a very powerful personal story to the table. He has a way of speaking and simplifying the complex that resonates with people.

This is also a rare opportunity to hear someone personally who has directly caused a technology revolution. Bennett founded Family Tree DNA in 2000, actually, almost by accident, as a result of the process he went through trying to answer one of his own long-standing genealogy questions.

I hope you’ll have the opportunity to attend one or both of these presentations. Even though I’ve heard Bennett many times, if I were anyplace to close to Atlanta, you can bet I’d be in the audience. Hearing Bennett speak makes me fall in love with genetic genealogy all over again!

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Personal Genetics – Coming out of the Closet – Ostriches, Eagles and Fear

Posted on March 6, 2013 by Roberta Estes

While most of the people subscribing to this blog are here because of genetic genealogy, genetic genealogy is only one piece of the picture of the future of personal genetics. Ironically, it’s genetic genealogy that gave low cost genetics a push into the mainstream, some 7 or 8 years before 23andMe, the first personal health genetics company, launched in 2006.

This week, the magazine, ieee Spectrum, of all places, has an absolutely wonderful article, The Gene Machine and Me, about the future of personal genetics. Many of these types of articles are sensationalized and full of what I call “fear-mongering,” but this one is not only excellently written, it’s accurate and interesting – a triple hitter home run as far as I’m concerned.

I’d like to talk for just a minute or two about the high points in this article, about this emerging technology, what it means to us and about fear. I’ll be sharing my personal journey down this path.

For those who would like to know how next-generation technology works – by the way – that’s the chip technology employed by Family Tree DNA for the Family Finder product, 23andMe for all of their testing and the National Geographic Geno 2.0 project – this article has a very educational description that is understandable by regular air-breathing humans. The next-next generation sequencing, discussed here and offered shortly by Ion Torrent, will certainly revolutionize personal genetics much as the Illlumina genotyping chip technology has today.

The benefit of full genomic and exome sequencing, the new technology on the horizon for consumers, is in the information it will tell us about ourselves. And I’m not referring to genealogy here, although that assuredly will be a big beneficiary of this new world of personal genetics. For genealogists, there is mention of soon-to-be capabilities of sequencing from one single molecule of DNA. For those of us with hair brushes and toothbrushes that we’ve been jealously guarding for years now, waiting for the technology to improve to the point where we can obtain the DNA of our dearly departed loved ones, this is going to be our ticket. As excited as I am about that, that’s not the potential I’m talking about. I’m talking about information about our own bodies and the potential future foretold in those genes. Notice the word potential.

The information in our genes is seldom a death sentence. In rare cases, it is, such as Huntington’s Disease. If this disease runs in your family, you already know it and testing should be done in conjunction with genetic and/or medical counseling. For these people, DNA testing will either confirm that they carry that gene, or relieve their mind that they do not.

For the vast majority of us, the information held in our genes it much less dire. In fact, it’s a good news message, as it will provide us ample warning, an opportunity, to do something differently with our lives to prevent what might otherwise occur. So it’s not a death sentence, more of a life sentence. For me, it was an epiphany. Yes, I took positive action and made dramatic life changes as a result of my DNA test results. In essence, this is my “coming out” story.

I was one of the first people to order the new 23andMe test when it was first offered, mostly for the genealogy aspect, but as you know, it includes health traits and information. When I received the results of that test a few years ago, in black and white, where I could not possibly ignore them, the reports indicated that I was at elevated risk for certain conditions. Those conditions were certainly beginning to manifest themselves in my life. I was on medication for two of them. My weight, at the time, was certainly a contributing factor to the development of those conditions. My sister had died near the age I am now as a result of those conditions. She looked like me, was built like me, was heavy like me, and very probably carried those exact same genetic risk factors. Our grandfather died of the same thing about the same age. Our father had it too, but he died in a car accident – caused by a coronary episode, at age 61. Seeing this, in black and white, and knowing my family history, I decided to do something to prevent that future, or at least to delay or mitigate it as much as possible.

I lost over 100 pounds and yes, for almost 5 years now, I’ve maintained that weight loss, well except for a pesky 10 or 15 pounds that I fight with regularly. But still, the 100 pound loss is far more important than the 10-15 pounds I battle with. I am off of all medication related to those and related conditions. I’ve changed what and how I eat, and a benefit I really didn’t anticipate is how much better I feel. You have no idea how much I hate these old pictures of me when I was heavy. This was taken at National Geographic Headquarters in Washington DC, in 2005, at our DNA Conference.

This next photo is me at one of our Lost Colony archaeology digs about five years later wearing one of my favorite t-shirts that says “Well Behaved Women Seldom Make History.” All of the genealogists should be laughing about now. No one wants well-behaved women because you can’t find them in the records. If my clothes look a bit large, that’s because they are, but that t-shirt was too small before the weight loss. I could never have done the physical work on those digs, or survived the heat, before losing the weight and going from a size 22 to a 12 in the photo below. These kinds of activities were all unforeseen benefits of the weight loss. My sister’s untimely death was not wasted on me, but served as a warning bell, well, more of an unrelenting siren actually, when I saw those DNA results.

I also took my 23andMe results, at least some of them, the ones related to the conditions I was dealing with, to my physician. I really had to think long and hard about this. So now, let’s talk about the fear part of the equation.

Fear of genetic results falls pretty much into two categories. We’ll call these the Ostriches and the Eagles.

My brother was an Ostrich. Yep, he was, head right in the sand. He had cancer, his wife had cancer, twice, his daughter, in her 30s, had cancer, yet their decision when offered free DNA testing was to decline – because they didn’t want to know. Fear of the information itself, fear of knowing, perhaps spurred because of a sense of fate – nothing we can do about it so why know about it. He also refused to discuss it, so I really can’t tell you why, and he died, of cancer, last year, so that opportunity is past. Personally, I think knowing about a genetic proclivity would equate to more vigilant monitoring. And knowing the proclivity didn’t exist would set one’s mind at ease. I would think you would be a winner either way, but my thinking and his were obviously quite different.

The other group are the Eagles. They are vigilant and acutely aware of the fact that health based discrimination does exist. It has been worse in the past than it is now. This is the reason I had to think long and hard about taking any of my results to my physician. Once in your medical record, it’s permanent.

Today, GINA, the Genetics Information Nondiscrimination Act, goes a long way to protecting people, especially in an employment situation, but it does not cover everything.

Anyone who has ever tried to obtain health care insurance individually or through a small business knows all too painfully about pre-existing condition exclusions. Well, the good news is that ObamaCare, love it or hate it, levels that playing field for the “rest of us,” those who either were denied or had to make life and employment decisions based on whether or not they had insurance coverage through a group where discrimination related to pre-existing conditions didn’t exist.

The other good news is that you don’t have to take any of your DNA test results to your doctor. It’s entirely up to you. You can test anonymously, using an alias, if you’re really paranoid. Your results through personal genetic testing are yours and for no one else to see unless you disclose them.

Lastly, let’s talk realistically about the types of insurance that still discriminate – which would be life insurance, extended care insurance, etc. They are in the business of odds-making. They are betting you will live and you are betting you will die sooner than later. As you age, the odds shift, cause let’s face it, eventually, you will die – and they will have to pay out. Now the only way they can make money is if you pay more premiums during your life than they have to pay out in the end, or they make the premiums so expensive you stop paying, letting the policy lapse, before you die, so they never have to pay. Of course, if they think the odds are stacked too far in your favor, they simply won’t insure you. So, if you or your family members have Huntington’s Disease, you’re not likely to be able to get life insurance outside of a group policy, with or without a genetic test. In fact, there is a questionnaire about your family history when you apply for individual life insurance.

I bought individual life insurance about 10 years ago. They sent a nurse to the house to draw my blood. They wanted chain of custody, to know the blood sample was mine, which is not the case with personal DNA testing. I had to provide ID. If the insurance company wanted to run a DNA test, prohibitively expensive then, but not in the next few years, they certainly could do so. Let’s just say it plain and simple – everyone has pre-existing genetic proclivities to something – no one is immune. These results are not generally black or white either, but expressed as a range. For example, 4.2 European women out of 100 will develop Restless Leg Syndrome in thier lifetime. My risk is 5.2, so slightly elevated above the average. I’m only “above average” in 5 areas, and below average in most. And the insurance companies are still going to be in the odds-making business – they can’t deny everyone or they won’t have any business – and they will use this new tool as soon as it becomes economically viable. There is no escaping it.

So yes, the Eagles are right to watch vigilantly – but for now – how much you share and with whom is entirely in your control, so you don’t need to be an Ostrich either. There is a great deal of good that can come from personal genetic testing, in addition to genetic genealogy. Knowledge is power.

So now, if you haven’t already, read this great article, The Gene Machine and Me!!!

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Hackers and Your Genetic Secrets

Posted on January 20, 2013 by Roberta Estes

Did that title get your attention? Well, it was meant to, just like it was meant to in this NBC article titled “Scientists Demonstrate How Hackers Could Unlock Your Genetic Secrets.” Or how about this one in the New York Times, “Web Hunt for DNA Sequences Leaves Privacy Compromised?” Sensationalism sells….and so does fear. Don’t panic, the sky is not falling.

I’ve had several people forward me a variety of links to several articles about this expressing concern. Most people didn’t really understand what was going on…and since “family tree databases” were mentioned in the first paragraph, it frightened them.

This article says that the “security cracking trick relies on the availability of genetic information linked to surnames in a variety of public family-tree databases.” Well, that’s sort of true, but not exactly true. The issue is not the family tree databases, it’s the fact that the researchers in The Thousand Genomes Project, while keeping the names of those 1000 people “anonymous,” provided enough information that these scientific researchers, not hackers, were able to data mine the 1000 Genomes participants information to determine their Y-DNA marker values, then compared those haplotypes (marker values) just like we do in databases such as Ysearch and Sorenson. And yes, they likely had matches to several surnames, like most of us do.

Individuals in the 1000 Genomes Project signed a release indicating that they knew that their data was to be used publicly, although their identity would not be revealed but that researchers could not guarantee their privacy. The 1000 Genomes Project, unfortunately, posted the ages of the participants, which at the time seemed innocuous enough, and it was common knowledge within the scientific community that they all lived in Utah. With these three pieces of information, their age, their location, and from the scientists data mining, a possible surname, the scientists were then able, if the surname wasn’t something like Smith or Jones, to use publicly available Google and “white pages” types of searches to find people in that state, of that age, by that surname, and then using obituaries and such, connect them through online family trees to their more distant families. They did this with Craig Venter, for example.

This technique is nothing new to genealogists, as we’ve been finding cousins that way for years – the difference being of course that we didn’t data mine, otherwise in this case more aptly referred to as “scientific hacking,” the 1000 Genomes Project in order to find their Y-line DNA markers to determine a possible surname for them. That is the issue and the point of this article and ironically, it’s scientists who did it, then published the “how-to” manual.

Any genetic genealogist knows, especially anyone dealing with adoptees, that you can only reveal a biological surname about 30% of the time. In fact the scientists success rate was lower, 12%. But that’s actually irrelevant in the bigger context of the article. Their point was that they succeeded at all.

This is sort of like putting personal information on the internet, except your name, and then being surprised that someone could connect the dots and put the pieces together. No one would be surprised today if that were to happen. In fact, I’m sure we all have received cautions and warnings about putting too much info on Facebook because burglars were robbing homes when people were vacationing. Many people have their hometown, their high school and their birthday and year publicly available on Facebook. Now how many “security questions” does that answer right there? Combine that with your dog’s name and your mother’s maiden name and you’ve got almost all of the common ones.

Aside from the fear-mongering, I have three issues with these reports as a whole.

1. Statements like “they traced those three family tree pedigrees to find other connections between relatives and sensitive genetic data.” Whoa, stop right there. Just because you share a surname or even if you are a direct and immediate relative, that says nothing, absolutely nothing, about whether or not you inherited some genetically disposed health issue. Remember, children inherit half of their DNA from each parent. So unless they are finding identical twins or parents, one cannot infer that an entire family tree of people share frightening health traits. It’s irresponsible to suggest otherwise.

2. “For years, experts have worried that sensitive genetic data could be used to discriminate against patients, potential employees or would-be insurance customers. Such discrimination is illegal when it comes to employment or health insurance, but the law doesn’t’ cover life insurance, disability insurance or long-term care insurance. Theoretically an insurer could search through genetic records and turn you down because you have a genetic predisposition to, say, Alzheimer’s disease.”

Discrimination is an issue, and laws have been put in place to prohibit discrimination in the workplace. But insurers aren’t going to sift through genetic data like a private investigator. Suggesting this is unnecessary fear-mongering. Insurers don’t do that, they simply tell you that a blood test is a pre-requisite of obtaining insurance. I know, I bought life insurance and they sent a nurse to my house to verify my identity and take a blood sample. At that time, they were looking for diabetes, AIDs and probably a whole lot more. Today, they might be looking for genetic pre-dispositions. I don’t know, but I do know they have a direct method of obtaining that information and it’s not spending untold hours sifting through someone else’s data that likely isn’t relevant to you anyway.

3. This “research” project was inspired at Whitehead Institute, an affiliate of MIT, a publicly funded institution. When Yaniv Erlich dreamed up this new hacking technique, he said he couldn’t resist trying it, so instead of simply discovering a potential issue and privately and quietly working with the proper people to resolve the issue, he decided to exploit it publicly, obtaining, I suppose, his 15 minutes of fame. So yes, your tax dollars did indeed likely pay for some or all of this “research.”

In one of the articles, Dr. Jeffrey R. Botkin, associate vice president for research integrity at the University of Utah, which collected the genetic information of some research participants whose identities were breached, cautioned about overreacting. “Genetic data from hundreds of thousands of people have been freely available online,” he said, “yet there has not been a single report of someone being illicitly identified.” He added that “it is hard to imagine what would motivate anyone to undertake this sort of privacy attack in the real world.” But he said he had serious concerns about publishing a formula to breach subjects’ privacy. By publishing, he said, the investigators “exacerbate the very risks they are concerned about.”

Well, it’s obvious that these folks at Whitehead institute don’t live in the real world and clearly don’t have enough real scientific research to do.

So, what is the take home of all of this?

You are not at risk of having anything exposed in this incident unless you are one of the 1000 people in the 1000 Genomes Project. If you are part of the 1000 Genomes Project, and male, there is a 12% risk that they figured out your last name and using other tools, possibly who you are, along with your family. If you are related to someone in the 1000 Genomes Project, the researchers might have figured out that you are related to them. So now the risk is that they’ll do what with that information??? Guaranteed, someone will figure out the same information and much more quickly, without your DNA and without government funding if you simply stop paying your bills.

If you participate in a research project, such as the 1000 Genomes Project, where your full results are made publicly available, you sign a release, and that release indicates that your privacy may not be able to be protected. You are aware of the risks before you begin.

We, as a community, have been warned for years not to put information that might be medically informative on the internet, such as full sequence mitochondrial DNA information. Anyone who does so, does it at their own risk. The people in the 1000 Genomes Project knowingly took that risk.

If you stay within the confines of the genealogy and DTC mainstream testing companies, you are fairly well protected. Having said that, reading the consent forms of any of the companies makes it clear that your identity is never entirely protected. We’re genealogists after all. What good is genealogical testing if you can’t contact people you match?

Inferred health risks are not the issue they are being portrayed to be in these articles. Your cousins health risks are not necessarily yours. Genetic inheritance is a complex and individual event.

Insurers who can use health information to restrict or deny insurance are simply going to request a blood sample. They are not going to act like a blood hound on the scent of a rabbit and sort through tons of information for inferences. Why would they when they can obtain the information they seek, directly and much less expensively?

For those researchers involved with information made publicly available, such at the 1000 Genomes Project, this is a wake-up call that perhaps less information available publicly is better. Some information, such as ages and location should perhaps be available only to legitimate researchers, which would still have included the Whitehead Institute people, but would have taken away much of their thunder. I understand this change has already been implemented, but that doesn’t entirely mitigate the issue of genetic data mining publicly available full genomic sequence information for identity, only makes it a little more difficult and less likely to succeed.

I clearly understand why hackers want my bank account information, and why identity thieves want my personal information, but why, in the real world, not at Whitehead institute, would anyone ever spend the time and effort to do this? The motivation for these researchers was clearly to publish, but I can think of no reason other than that or simply “because they could” to spend the time doing something like this. Who would want to and for what purpose?

The sky is not falling

It’s behind a paywall, but you can access the scientific article here that started all of this hubbub.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

2012 Top 10 Genetic Genealogy Happenings

Posted on December 28, 2012 by Roberta Estes

2012 has been a very busy year for genetic genealogists. There have been lots of discoveries and announcements that affect everyone, now and in the future. The watchwords for 2012 would be “churn” and “explosive growth.” Let’s take a look at the 10 most important events, why they are important and what they mean for the future of genetic genealogy.

These items are in what I think are relatively good order, ranked by their importance, although I had a very difficult time deciding between number 1 and 2.

1. The New Root – Haplogroup A00

At the Family Tree DNA conference in November, Michael Hammer, Bonnie Schrack and Thomas Krahn announced that they had made a monumental discovery in the age of modern man known as Y-line Adam. The discovery of Haplogroup A00 pushes the “birth” of mankind back from about 140,000 years ago to an amazing 338,000 years ago. Utterly amazing. The DNA came from an American family from South Carolina. This discovery highlights the importance of citizen science. Bonnie is a haplogroup administrator who recognized the potential importance of one of her participants’ DNA. Thomas Krahn of course is with Family Tree DNA and ran the WTY test, and Michael Hammer is at the University of Arizona. So you have the perfect blend here of participant, citizen scientist, commercial lab and academia. What was never thought possible a decade or so ago is not only working, it’s working well and changing the face of both science and humanity.

http://dna-explained.com/2012/11/16/the-new-root-haplogroup-a00/

http://www.haplogroup-a.com./

2. Geno 2.0

Geno 2.0 is the Nickname for the National Geographic Society’s Genographic Project version 2.0. That mouthful is why it has a nickname.

This amazing project has leveraged the results of the past 7 years of research from the original Genographic project into a new groundbreaking product. Geno 2.0, utilizing the GenoChip, a sequencing chip created specifically for Nat Geo, offers the most complete Y tree in the world today, expanding the SNP tree from just over 800 SNPs to over 12,000. They are in essence redrawing the Y chromosome tree as I write this. In addition, the person who purchases Geno 2.0 will receive a mitochondrial DNA haplogroup assignment. Over 3300 new mitochondrial mutations were discovered. A brand new anthropological “percentages of ethnicity” report is featured based on over 75,000 Ancestry Informative Markers, many only recently discovered by the Genographic project. Additionally, participants will receive their percentage of both Neanderthal and Denisovan ancestry based on 30,000 SNPs identified that signal interbreeding between the hominids. A new website will also facilitate social networking and uploading information to Family Tree DNA.

The wonderful news is that there is a massive amount of new information here that will change the landscape of genetic genealogy. The difficulty is that we are struggling a bit under the load of that massive amount of information that is just beginning to descend upon us. It’s a great problem to have!

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/25/national-geographic-geno-2-0-announcement-the-human-story/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/26/geno-2-0-qa-with-bennett-greenspan/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/30/geno-2-0-answers-from-spencer-wells/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/31/geno-2-0-wty-mtdna-full-sequence-participants-and-more/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/10/14/what-to-order-geno-2-0-vs-family-tree-dna-products/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/10/16/geno-2-0-the-kit-arrives/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/12/11/geno-2-0-results-first-peek/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/12/12/geno-2-0-results-kicking-the-tires/

3. Reconstructed Sapiens Reference Sequence (RSRS)

In July, Family Tree DNA implemented the RSRS that in effect reconstructs the genetic profile of Mitochondrial Eve and bases the comparison of our DNA today against the RSRS sequence as opposed to the Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS) created in 1981 that is or was the current standard. The RSRS is a result of the watershed paper published in April 2012 by Dr. Doron Behar and 8 other authors titled “A “Copernican” Reassessment of the Human Mitochondrial DNA Tree from its Root.” A complementary research website, www.mtdnacommunity.org, accompanies the paper.

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/14/what-happened-to-my-mitochondrial-dna/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/15/the-crs-and-the-rsrs/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/16/the-mtdna-community/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/12/02/little-a-big-a-mitochondrial-dna/

4. Full Genome and Exome Sequence Offered Commercially by Gene by Gene

It was announced at the November DNA conference that Gene by Gene, the parent company of Family Tree DNA, through their division titled DNA DTC is offering full genomic sequencing for the amazing price of $5495 for the full genome and $695 for the exome. This is a first in the consumer marketspace. Today, this doesn’t have a lot of application for genetic genealogy, but as the price continues to drop, and utilities are built to process the full genomic data, certainly a market and applications will emerge. This is an important step forward in the industry with a product that still cost 3 million dollars in 2007.

http://dna-explained.com/2012/11/30/gene-by-gene-announces-landmark-dna-dtc-full-genome-sequence/

5. Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA

It’s official – they did it. Yep, they interbred and well, they are not them anymore, they are us. Given that everyone in Asia and Europe carries a part of them, but not people from Africa, it would appear that two populations admixed rather thoroughly in Eurasia and/or the populations were small. The amount of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA will continue at approximately the proportions seen today in Europe (2% Neanderthal) and Asia unless a significant amount of admixture from a population (Africa) that does not carry this admixture is introduced. So if you’re European, you carry both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA. They are your ancestors. The good news is that you can find how much of each through the Geno 2.0 test. 23andMe results give you the percentage of Neanderthal, but not Denisovan.

http://dna-explained.com/2012/08/31/denisovan-dna-tells-a-story/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/12/12/geno-2-0-results-kicking-the-tires/

6. Ancestral Genome Reconstruction Begins, Led by Falling Autosomal Prices and the Ability to Fish in Multiple Ponds

2012 has been the year of autosomal testing price reductions and a great deal of churn in this marketspace. Companies are playing leap-frog with one another. However, sometimes things are not all that they seem.

Initially, 23andMe opted for an initial payment plus monthly subscription model, which they abandoned for a one time payment price of $299 in early 2012. Family Tree DNA was slightly less, at $289.

Ancestry led the price war by giving away kits, then selling them for $99, then $129 plus a subscription as an entrance into this market. However, looking at the Ancestry consent form hints at possible reasons why they were selling below the cost of the tests. You are in essence giving them permission to sell your DNA and associated information. In addition, to gain full access to your results and matches, you must maintain some level of subscription to Ancestry.com, increasing the total effective price.

Next came Family Tree DNA’s sale where they dropped their autosomal price to $199, but they were shortly upstaged by 23andMe whose price has now dropped to $99 permanently, apparently, a result of a 50 million dollar investment in order to reach 1 million customers. They currently have about 180,000. 23andMe has always been in the medical/health business, so their clients have always understood what they were consenting to and for.

Not to be outdone, Family Tree DNA introduced the ability earlier in 2012 to upload your data files from 23andMe to FamilyTree DNA for $89, far less than a second test, which allows you to fish in a second pond where genealogists live for matches. The challenge at 23andMe is that most of their clients test for the health traits and either don’t answer inquiries or match requests, or know little about their genealogy if they do. At Family Tree DNA, matches don’t have to answer and allow a match, testers are automatically matched with all participants who take the Family Finder test (or upload their 23andMe results) and testers are provided with their matches’ e-mail address.

Of course, Geno 2.0 was also introduced in the midst of this, in July, for $199 with the additional lollipop of new SNPS, lots of them, that others simply don’t have access to yet.

The good news is that consumers have benefitted from this leapfrogging, I think. Let’s hope that the subsidized tests at Ancestry and 23andMe don’t serve long term to water down the demand to the point where unsubsidized companies (who don’t selling participants genetic results to others) have problems remaining viable.

Personally, I’ve tested at all of these companies. I’ll be evaluating the results shortly in detail on my blog at www.dna-explained.com.

The tools provided by most testing companies, plus GedMatch, and multiple ponds to fish in are allowing the serious genetic genealogist to “reconstruct” their genome, attributing segments to specific ancestors. Conversely, we will also be able to “reconstruct” specific ancestral family lines as well by identifying autosomal segments in multiple descendants. This new vision of autosomal genetic genealogy will allow much more accurate ancestral line matching, and ancestor identification in the not-so-distant future.

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/01/family-tree-dna-now-accepting-23andme.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/05/23andme-eliminates-subscription-model.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/10/clarification-of-what-is-available-to.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/12/23andme-receives-50-million-and-drops.html

http://www.thegeneticgenealogist.com/2012/12/26/23andme-and-labcorp-sued-for-patent-infringement/

7. Ethnicity Tests Mature – Minus 1

The good news is that the various ethnicity tests (known as BGA or biogeographical ancestry tests) that provide participants with their percentages of various world populations are improving. The bad news is that there is currently one bad apple in the card with very misleading percentages – and that is Ancestry.com.

23andMe introduced a new version of their ethnicity product in December, expanding from only 3 geographic categories to several. The Geno 2.0 test results are just beginning to be returned which include ethnicity predictions and references to several base populations.

Family Tree DNA finally has some competition in this arena where for years they have been the only serious player, although opinions differ widely about which of these three organizations results are the most accurate. All four are Illumina chip based, using hundreds of thousands of locations, as compared with the previous CODIS type tests which used between 15 and 300 markers and are now outdated. All companies use different reference populations which, of course, provide somewhat different results to participants. All companies, except Ancestry, have documented and shared their reference population information.

Outside of these companies, Doug McDonald offers a private analysis and Gedmatch offers a series of BGA comparisons written by third parties.

While this industry continues to grow and mature, I’m thinking about just averaging the autosomal ethnic results and calling it good:)

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/21/ethnicity-finders/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/10/24/ancestrys-mythical-admixture-percentages/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/12/07/new-worldview-at-23andme/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/09/09/doug-mcdonald-on-biogeograpical-analysis/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/12/11/geno-2-0-results-first-peek/

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012_12_01_archive.html

8. Finding Your Roots PBS Series with Henry Louis Gates

PBS sponsored a wonderful series in the spring of 2012 hosted by Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, the chair of African American Studies at Harvard. This series followed a lesser known 2010 series. The 2012 inspirational series reached tens of thousands of people and increased awareness of genetic genealogy as well as sparked an interest in genealogy itself, especially for mixed race and African American people. I was disappointed that the series did not pursue the Native American results unexpectedly obtained for one participant. It seemed like a missed opportunity. Series like this bring DNA testing for genealogy into the mainstream, making it less “strange” and frightening and more desirable for the average person. These stories were both inspirational and heartwarming. I hope we can look forward to similar programs in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finding_Your_Roots

CeCe Moore covered this series in March and April on her blog.

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/03/finding-your-roots-with-henry-louis.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/04/finding-your-roots-with-henry-louis.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/04/finding-your-roots-with-henry-louis_09.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/04/finding-your-roots-with-henry-louis_16.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/04/finding-your-roots-with-henry-louis_23.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/04/finding-your-roots-with-henry-louis_30.html

9. Ancestry, GeneTree and Sorenson

GeneTree, a for profit company and Sorenson, a non-profit company were both purchased by Ancestry.com. This was about the same time as Ancestry introduced their autosomal AncestryDNA product. Speculation was that the autosomal results at Sorenson might be the foundation for the new autosomal test comparisons, although there has been no subsequent evidence of this.

Ancestry initially gave away several thousand kits in order to build their data base, then sold thousands more for $99 before raising the price to what appears to be a normalized price of $129 plus an annual ancestry subscription.

While GeneTree was never a major player in the DNA testing marketspace, Sorenson Molecular Genealogical Foundation played an important role for many years as a nonprofit research institute. There was significant distress in the genetic genealogy community related to the DNA contributed to Sorenson for research being absorbed by Ancestry as a “for profit” company. Ancestry is maintaining the www.smgf.org website, but no additional results will be added. Sorenson has been entirely shuttered. Many of the Sorenson/GeneTree employees appear to have moved over to Ancestry.

The initial AncestryDNA autosomal product offering is poor, lacks tools and the ethnicity portion has significant issues. It’s strength is that many people who test are already Ancestry subscribers and have attached their trees. So you can’t see how you connect genetically to your matches (lack of tools), but you can see the trees, if they are attached and not marked as private, of those with whom you match. Ancestry provides “hints” relative to matching individuals or surnames.

Eventually, if Ancestry improves its products, provides tools and releases the raw data to consumers, this may be a good thing. It’s an important event in 2012 because of the massive size of Ancestry, but the product is mediocre at best. Ancestry seems unwilling to acknowledge issues unless their feet are held to the fire publicly as illustrated with a “lab error” erroneous match for an adoptee caught by the consuming public and ignored by Ancestry until CeCe Moore exposed them in her blog. Whether Ancestry ultimately helps or hurts the genetic genealogy industry is a story yet to be told. There is very little positive press in the genetic genealogy community surrounding the Ancestry product, but with their captive audience, they are clearly going to be a player.

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/05/ancestrycom-buys-genetree-and-launches.html

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/12/did-you-test-at-genetree/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/08/30/is-history-repeating-itself-at-ancestry/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/07/18/the-trouble-with-ancestry-com-matches/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/08/14/y-dna-family-tree-dna-vs-ancestry/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/08/16/ancestrys-consent-form-for-ancestrydna-autosomal-test/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/09/10/ancestry-autosomal-results-are-back/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/10/15/ancestrys-dna-survey/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/10/23/ancestry-to-release-array-data-in-2013/

http://dna-explained.com/2012/10/24/ancestrys-mythical-admixture-percentages/

http://www.thegeneticgenealogist.com/2012/06/19/problems-with-ancestrydnas-genetic-ethnicity-prediction/

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/08/ancestrydna-confusing-relationship.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/08/follow-up-on-ancestrydna-and-adoptees.html

http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/09/23andme-says-no-match-for-adoptees.html

10. GedMatch

GedMatch, www.gedmatch.com, created by John Olson and Curtis Rogers, isn’t new in 2012, but it’s maturing into a tool that is becoming the defacto workhorse of the serious autosomal community. People who test at either 23andMe or Family Tree DNA download their raw results and other match information and then use a variety of tools at GedMatch to look at results in different ways and using different thresholds. GedMatch is currently working to accept the newly arriving Geno 2.0 data files. Ancestry does not at this time allow their customers access to their raw data files, so there is nothing to upload. The bad news is that not everyone downloads/uploads their information. Only the most savvy users, and the download/upload is not always a smooth process, often necessitating several attempts, a magic wand and some fairy dust for luck.

GedMatch is a volunteer effort funded by donations on the GedMatch site. The magnitude of this project came to light when they needed new servers this year because the amount of traffic disabled their internet service provider. It may be a volunteer effort, but it has mainstream requirements. Therefore, while occasionally frustrating, it’s easy to understand why it’s light on documentation and one has to poke around a bit to figure things out. I would actually prefer that they make it a subscription site, clean up the bugs, add the documentation and take it to the next level. It would also be very nice if they could arrange something with the major players in terms of a seamless data transfer for clients. All told, it’s an amazing contribution as a volunteer site. Hats off to Curtis and John for their ongoing contribution to genetic genealogists!!!

www.gedmatch.com

http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2012/08/12/gedmatch-a-dna-geeks-dream-site/

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists for genealogy research

Gene by Gene Announces Landmark DNA DTC Full Genome Sequence

Posted on November 30, 2012 by Roberta Estes

Gene by Gene, the parent company of Family Tree DNA, formally announced it’s direct to consumer (DTC) offering of full sequence human genome testing.

Testing will be performed in their state of the art research center, shown above, in Houston, Texas. You can read more about Gene by Gene and their 4 divisions, DNA DTC, Family Tree DNA, DNA Traits and DNA Findings at www.genebygene.com.

Family Tree DNA was established 12 years ago to service the Genetic Genealogy market space, which didn’t yet exist at that time. Family Tree DNA was an innovator in that field, and has brought the same innovative and entrepreneurial spirit to their other companies established since.

This new offering, the first of it’s kind, reaches out to researchers and others in need of “research only” next generation full genomic sequencing.

“Given the explosive demand for accurate, timely, and large-scale next
generation sequencing, we’re pleased to make our Genomics Research Center
available to investigators exploring the cutting edge of research to pioneer and
enhance treatment of disease, enhance quality of life, break new ground in
genealogical inquiry and otherwise advance the science of genomics,” Gene By
Gene President Bennett Greenspan said. “The launch of DNA DTC is the perfect
complement to our other divisions, through which we make genetic testing
advances every day in the fields of ancestry, health and relationship testing.”

Using the Illumina platform, DNA DTC will offer both full genomic sequence and full exome testing, adding these two items to their menu of over 200 types of DNA tests performed. Gene by Gene’s lab has already processed more than 5 million discrete DNA tests for more than 700,000 individual clients. Their institutional clients include the National Geographic Society’s Genographic project and other clients such as France’s Institut Pasteur, Israel’s Rabin Medical Center and the University of Utah.

By bringing full genomic sequencing to the public, they have broken the sound barrier in personal genetics, the veritable X-factor. The full humane genome was first sequenced in 2003 at a cost of about 3 billion dollars.

A full genome sequence still cost about 3 million in 2007, but DNA DTC is offering it today for an amazing $5495.

While consumers will be able to order the full genome (or exome) test, if they want, it comes with no tools, as it is focused at the research community who would be expected to have their own analytical tools. However, genetic genealogists being who and what they are, I don’t expect the research market will outweigh the consumer market for long, especially when the price threshold reaches about $1000. For years the “$1000 genome” has been bantered about, and I expect with the next generation of technology, we may see it sooner than later. The fact that it has dropped from 3 million to $5495 in 5 years is astounding.

Aside from DNA DTC and Family Tree DNA, the other two Gene by Gene divisions are DNA Traits (www.dnatraits.com) which provides CLIA Regulated Diagnostic tests for genetic diseases and DNA Findings (www.dnafindings.com) which provides AABB certified paternity and relationship testing.

Way to go Max and Bennett and everyone at Gene by Gene! Congratulations!

So, who is going to be the first in the genetic genealogy community to order this test???

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers