tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post6252241077963356905..comments2023-07-06T08:55:09.782-07:00Comments on Your Genetic Genealogist: My Geno 2.0 Results: Step-by-StepYour Genetic Genealogisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14696248341534125135noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-44808226557044140472016-05-30T02:30:01.444-07:002016-05-30T02:30:01.444-07:00Geno has not been forthcoming. I'm one of tho...Geno has not been forthcoming. I'm one of those Aussies led astray. Ozziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06037857881937259995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-63347652595725340102016-05-30T02:28:46.449-07:002016-05-30T02:28:46.449-07:00I just wish Geno would come out and say that the D...I just wish Geno would come out and say that the Denisovan part of the test is a waste. I'm one of those Aussies who was excited at first as my result seemed to confirm family history hints. Oh well, back to the hints. I emailed Geno about a year ago but not answer.Ozziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06037857881937259995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-66730907779615153212015-03-29T17:34:50.171-07:002015-03-29T17:34:50.171-07:00Well it seems like they actually may have been ont...Well it seems like they actually may have been onto something after all and that headlines were made. A year and a half after your post came the discovery that the 400,000 year old Spanish 'Neanderthal' actually ended up having Denisovan mtDNA and I guess it is now thought that Denisovans were far more widespread and that the whole Neanderthals to the west and Denisovans to the east was wrong.<br /><br />I'm not 100% sure that means the Geno 2.0 is valid, but it makes it more likely I'd think? Although I'm sure it might still need some refinement.<br /><br />?wombathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16198050755646956399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-45670304025131825622015-03-29T17:34:28.130-07:002015-03-29T17:34:28.130-07:00Well it seems like they actually may have been ont...Well it seems like they actually may have been onto something after all and that headlines were made. A year and a half after your post came the discovery that the 400,000 year old Spanish 'Neanderthal' actually ended up having Denisovan mtDNA and I guess it is now thought that Denisovans were far more widespread and that the whole Neanderthals to the west and Denisovans to the east was wrong.<br /><br />I'm not 100% sure that means the Geno 2.0 is valid, but it makes it more likely I'd think? Although I'm sure it might still need some refinement.<br /><br />?<br />?wombathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16198050755646956399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-72907702299930153602013-11-22T10:46:05.874-08:002013-11-22T10:46:05.874-08:00As far as I know the Denisova cave is in Siberia, ...As far as I know the Denisova cave is in Siberia, far away from Australia or Melanesia, so it seems absurd to me if the Denisovan component should be a clear sign of aboriginal ancestry. By the way, even "Oceanian admixture" is sometimes found in smaller amounts amoung Fennoscandians and other Northeuropeans without Oceanian ancestry. It's probably something very old and hitherto unknown. Look here:<br />http://eurogenes.blogspot.fi/2013/11/first-genome-of-upper-paleolithic-human.htmlAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14151029464746377306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-77316688267782220192013-09-14T02:17:11.498-07:002013-09-14T02:17:11.498-07:00I have gotten two Geno mtdna profiles in the last ...I have gotten two Geno mtdna profiles in the last few months, and the problems still exist. They are apparently mtdna loci in the SNP column, as mentioned, but even assuming RSRS and the complementary value of the RSRS locus as opposed to the values reported by Geno, they both chart out as a peculiar branch of W3a1, which is unlikely and indicates there is no correlation between the results reported and the actual situation (except perhaps at top-level loci down to the Haplogroup level....?? Has anyone at National Geo or FTDNA ever clarified this situation....?The Lost Guidehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02342091296976111253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-3336694094997955832013-06-10T13:17:43.952-07:002013-06-10T13:17:43.952-07:00Hi Regina,
I would recommend 23andMe for detecting...Hi Regina,<br />I would recommend 23andMe for detecting relatively small amounts of Native American. Their Ancestry Composition is considered to be the most accurate "ethnic" breakdown. <br />CeCeYour Genetic Genealogisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14696248341534125135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-37632641689744296342013-06-06T06:00:45.324-07:002013-06-06T06:00:45.324-07:00I would like to say I was thinking of saving up th...I would like to say I was thinking of saving up the $200 to try the testing, but most of my interest is purely recreational. I know I have some Native American, but the amount varies from family member to family member, and I would like to know what my actual ancestry IS. <br /><br />After reading all of you comments about the misinterpretations of the Geno 2.0, I will say I am second-guessing my faith in the test. <br /><br />If anyone has a suggestion for a good test for me to get that would give a relatively accurate reading of my overall ancestry, I would greatly appreciate the help. Reginahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11729602749550081990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-77322536067144153812013-01-20T18:01:31.527-08:002013-01-20T18:01:31.527-08:00Have a good read of the posts Reuben and think car...Have a good read of the posts Reuben and think carefully before you spend your money. <br /><br />Sometimes people who are in opposition to certain products that are being sold on the net put in fake posts in order to give the said products a bad name. But in the case of this product the critical posts have raised legitimate questions based on what can be actually seen and questioned. And so far we have had nobody from Geno, or anybody else for that matter, having written back opposing these posts and defending the Geno procedures or the way they have marketed their product. <br /><br />I don’t have the expertise to defend other critical posts, but I am happy to clarify my criticisms regarding their Denisovan testing procedure and how they have, in my opinion, been misleading in that respect. The Geno folk have been made aware of this forum and the criticisms they have received on it, and the longer they go without posting a defence the worse they look. <br />Dave Wheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10143727854024072871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-14252401675958668852013-01-18T23:06:33.917-08:002013-01-18T23:06:33.917-08:00hmm, I am guessing it doesnt take into considerati...hmm, I am guessing it doesnt take into consideration of migrations from wars or other circumstances in Europe. For Example as far as I know I am Spanish/Colombian/Dutch/German. The Spanish at one time occupied Holland. One of my Dutch ancestors could have been Spanish. Dont quote me on the history, I am not an expert. I guess I'm doing a little research to see if this is worth my 200$. What do you think?Reubenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06639061733584073441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-73387331628908826702013-01-12T20:53:57.933-08:002013-01-12T20:53:57.933-08:00I got 3.3 Neanderthal and 3.6 Denisovan. My ances...I got 3.3 Neanderthal and 3.6 Denisovan. My ancestresses liked their men primal I guess. :)Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15597352292354562232noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-28717523468265676272013-01-09T13:00:32.484-08:002013-01-09T13:00:32.484-08:00Thanks Craig. I have on several posts set out why ...Thanks Craig. I have on several posts set out why I believe the Geno project seems to be doing the wrong thing by us in regard to the Denisovan component. Another poster has argued that the Y component is in a mess and now you have explained some problems, as you see it, within the mtDNA section.<br />So far we have heard nothing from anyone representing the Geno project, and because of this they are looking really bad.<br />I would be grateful if our Genetic Genealogist, whose work I greatly admire, could contact the Geno folk and tell them they are copping a lot of criticism on her forum and that she would love to give them the right of reply. Dave Wheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10143727854024072871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-30367203753403671222013-01-09T12:43:21.832-08:002013-01-09T12:43:21.832-08:00Thanks Craig. The fact that they did not display y...Thanks Craig. The fact that they did not display your Neanderthal and Denisovan percentages and that you had to ask to see them seems to suggest to me that they know they have done the wrong thing by people by not telling them BEFORE they purchased the test that at least the Denisovan component is experimental, and from what I can see, worthless. I have asked them for my money back but have heard nothing from them and I probably won't. <br />I was attracted to Geo 2.0 because it is being run by a non-profit organisation. I would however, be interested in knowing if those who work for them in the lab are paid on the volume of tests they process or whether they are on a fixed wage. <br />If it's the former it would explain a lot of things. Employing a piece worker, such as a fruit-picker, is okay for the farmer because he can see what's in the worker's bucket, but when it comes to something like DNA tests the incentive for a piece worker to do things in a hurry at the expense of doing the right thing by the customer is enormous, and unlike the farmer who can directly view the content of the bucket we cannot oversee or check how the tests are performed. <br />Dave Wheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10143727854024072871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-63234971464644882122013-01-08T17:57:34.098-08:002013-01-08T17:57:34.098-08:00In looking at the results further, it appears that...In looking at the results further, it appears that the seemingly unnecessarily repetitive N,N format for mtDNA is intended to accommodate the diploid autosomal DNA also included in the download file, because genes on the two chromosomes may have different base pairs. For mtDNA, the N,N format could also be used to report heteroplasmy, although this could be also reported using duplicate lines for a position.<br /><br />The apparent intermingling of complementary base pairs, e.g., C & G and A & T from the two mtDNA strands still is confusing, particularly as this does not allow identifying C/G or A/T polymorphism. If Geno is going to report bases from both mtDNA strands, they need to be distinguished, e.g., by specifying formats nnnnn,mt-L,N,N and nnnnn,mt-H,N,N, wherein "mt-L" denotes the so-called "light" strand and "mt-H" denotes the so-called "heavy" strand.<br /><br />For further visibility -- hopefully to the Geno staff, I may post a modified version of these comments on the Yahoo DNA-NEWBIE list.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04142228032141616520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-82212251424825823272013-01-08T17:37:44.479-08:002013-01-08T17:37:44.479-08:00Interestingly, through yesterday, neither my Neand...Interestingly, through yesterday, neither my Neanderthal nor my Denisovan ancestry percentages were displayed. After an email to Geno customer support, now 2.0% Neanderthal and an unexpected 2.4% Denisovan are shown. My ancestors immigrated from the British Isles and Northern Europe, and my mtDNA, Y-DNA and autosomal DNA are all consistent with this origin.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04142228032141616520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-75535194899922589042013-01-08T17:33:44.256-08:002013-01-08T17:33:44.256-08:00Interestngly, through yesterday, percentages were ...Interestngly, through yesterday, percentages were not displayed for either my Neanderthal or Denisovan ancestry. After sending an email to customer support, now 2.0% Neanderthal and 2.4% Denisovan ancestry are displayed. My ancestors immigrated from the British Isles and Northern Europe, as my autosomal, mtDNA and Y-DNA results confirm.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04142228032141616520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-54225733604193230842013-01-07T19:46:52.516-08:002013-01-07T19:46:52.516-08:00Has anyone been able to make sense of the mtDNA da...Has anyone been able to make sense of the mtDNA data downloaded from Geno 2.0?<br /><br />My mtDNA data from 23andMe are understandable. However, at least the mtDNA portion of the data downloaded from Geno does not make much sense. The data is reported in the csv format nnnnn,mt,N,N, wherein nnnnn is an integer up to 16527, and N is a DNA base C, A, T or G. Why (the same) N is duplicated in each entry is not clear. Furthermore, while nnnnn would be presumed to be mtDNA base number, the reported bases often do not match the CRS or my mtDNA according to 23andMe. Finally, many of the nnnnn values are repeated, often with the same N, but sometimes with different N.<br /><br />To provide just one example, 23andMe reports my mtDNA has G at position 750 in contrast to A in the CRS. The data from Geno lists 750 no fewer than 9 times. 6 occurrences are "G,G", and 3 occurrences are "C,C".<br /><br />The Geno results tend to intermingle complementary base pairs, e.g., C & G and A & T, suggesting that bases from both DNA strands are being reported. But then how can one determine, for example, whether a G is merely on the complementary strand rather than a SNP from C to G?<br /><br />Has the Genographics project published a user guide to explain how to interpret downloaded results?Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04142228032141616520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-78457146103069564892012-12-29T23:28:22.709-08:002012-12-29T23:28:22.709-08:00Thanks for that octoberlady; I looked for the info...Thanks for that octoberlady; I looked for the information re the Denisovan tests you just provided prior to paying for the test and could not find it, which would obviously be because I had no results and as such could not get access to the results section. <br /><br />It’s a bit late them telling us the Denisovan test is experimental AFTER we have paid for it. Surely they had a moral if not legal obligation to tell us BEFORE they took our money?<br /><br />Had I have known the info you gave re Denisovans from the results section existed I would not have paid for the test; nor would those other Australians who have done so with the objective of proving they have indigenous Australian or Melanesian ancestry, some of whom have done so upon my recommendation. I feel like I've been ripped off.<br /><br />I’m sick of companies not including as many populations as possible (such as that of Australian Aboriginals) in their reference populations. It’s a form of discrimination which cannot be excused as it would not be difficult for them to get samples; nor would it be too expensive. The only exception is DNA Tribes, but I question their science.<br /><br />Dave Wheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10143727854024072871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-62899231912749865212012-12-26T21:13:20.003-08:002012-12-26T21:13:20.003-08:00Interesting to hear of non-Aboriginal, non-Melanes...Interesting to hear of non-Aboriginal, non-Melanesian peoples with such high Denisovan results. <br /><br />I have no such heritage that I'm aware of, and my Denisovan result was 0.60%. <br /><br />I noticed the following statement in the Denisovan results section of the Geno 2.0 results: <br /><br />"The Denisovan component of your Geno 2.0 results is the most experimental, as we are still working to determine the best way to assess the percentage Denisovan ancestry that you carry. Don’t be surprised if your percentage Denisovan changes over time"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-91172755939723708042012-12-26T21:11:26.864-08:002012-12-26T21:11:26.864-08:00Interesting to hear of non-Aboriginal, non-Melanes...Interesting to hear of non-Aboriginal, non-Melanesian peoples with such high Denisovan results. <br /><br />I have no such heritage that I'm aware of, and my Denisovan result was 0.60%. <br /><br />The blurb on the Geno 2.0 site, in the Denisovan section, clearly states: <br /><br />"The Denisovan component of your Geno 2.0 results is the most experimental, as we are still working to determine the best way to assess the percentage Denisovan ancestry that you carry. Don’t be surprised if your percentage Denisovan changes over time"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-31244060399903142352012-12-20T20:48:07.841-08:002012-12-20T20:48:07.841-08:00Thanks CeCe. I wonder if someone from NatGeo who m...Thanks CeCe. I wonder if someone from NatGeo who may be reading this forum could clear the Denisovan matter up for us by either admitting that their test is inaccurate or announcing they have made a breakthrough and that many populations other than Melanesians and Australian Aboriginals also have Denisovan ancestry. Several people other than myself are having the test done for the sole purpose of proving they have Australian Aboriginal ancestry, and they are doing so as a result of my recommendation. <br />However, because this forum has shown that persons such as yourself and Anonymous, who are without Aboriginal or Melanesian ancestry, also have Denisovan ancestry according to the Geno 2.o test, I now have egg on my face as I have assisted these folk in wasting their hard-earned money. Dave Wheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10143727854024072871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-30369390797868185692012-12-20T08:45:54.215-08:002012-12-20T08:45:54.215-08:00An update 12/2/2012 - the raw results appeared in ...An update 12/2/2012 - the raw results appeared in my profile as of today. Let the fun begin :-) --JimDr. Jimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-86579463467418351302012-12-19T22:56:00.187-08:002012-12-19T22:56:00.187-08:00First of all, I don't think 23andMe is profita...First of all, I don't think 23andMe is profitable yet, so your main supposition is wrong. They aren't "making money off of us". At least, not yet.<br />Secondly, yes I am supportive of crowd sourcing to increase the speed of life-saving discoveries in genetic medicine. Since my father suffered and died of Parkinson's Disease, I fully support and applaud 23andMe's research efforts. The quote that you posted here is all good news to those of us who hope to have more effective treatments for common diseases before we suffer from them. I sincerely wonder how that can be misconstrued as a negative. I, for one, fill out all 23andWe surveys and will continue to do so because that is my small contribution to the cause.<br />Third, if a person chooses to opt out of 23andWe research and to forgo filling out the surveys, then their DNA is useless to 23andMe. As a result, the paranoid among us have options. <br />Fourth, you cite my 23andMe Ambassadorship as if it is an accusation. I am very proud of that title and my relationship with 23andMe.<br />Thank you for your comment,<br />CeCeYour Genetic Genealogisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14696248341534125135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-77338349355758234362012-12-19T22:44:34.610-08:002012-12-19T22:44:34.610-08:00Peter, I was thinking the same thing about the fac...Peter, I was thinking the same thing about the fact that if these numbers are correct, it is quite a discovery on the part of NatGeo! You would think someone would have officially commented on it by now.<br />CeCe<br />Your Genetic Genealogisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14696248341534125135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4773058005679938889.post-62007151419649550722012-12-19T22:43:19.863-08:002012-12-19T22:43:19.863-08:005.6% - WOW! Stranger and stranger...5.6% - WOW! Stranger and stranger...Your Genetic Genealogisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14696248341534125135noreply@blogger.com