Just received by Ancestry DNA results...

[100%Gog]

Yes its just a case of being a little patient.

You my find that ftDNA gives a different result for your origins for perfectly valid reasons as have been discussed in various blogs and in the ftDNA forum (and maybe on the Ancestry forum although I have not looked at that)

At least you could transfer your results. I have just had a reply back from Ancestry saying they do not, presently, allow people to transfer results into them which is disappointing as I wanted to see how their shakey origin tool would have interpreted my autosomal results.
[/quote]

Thanks for the feedback davidft.

I too am interested in what FTDNA come up with compared to Ancestry. I was surprised to see a 53% Ireland ethnicity in my results for Ancestry as I had a previous DNA test done about 7 - 8 years ago with Roots for Real and that showed a fairly strong Iberian Peninsular result. As I have researched my family back 7 generations in NW Wales the Irish connection seems more plausible.

100%Gog

[davidft]

I too am interested in what FTDNA come up with compared to Ancestry. I was surprised to see a 53% Ireland ethnicity in my results for Ancestry as I had a previous DNA test done about 7 - 8 years ago with Roots for Real and that showed a fairly strong Iberian Peninsular result. As I have researched my family back 7 generations in NW Wales the Irish connection seems more plausible.

Yes seeing what various sites give for your "ethnic" inheritance can be interesting. I have uploaded my results to gedmatch.com as they have several analysing tools on there that you can use, all of which give varying results. For example one of the tests on there gives me a large chunk of Basque inheritance whilst that is not mentioned on ftDNA at all - but then they do use broader classifications. (I was aware of the possibility of a Basque influence from previous research on the raw numbers from my tests results and what they allegedly pointed to).

In short all these "ethnic" make up projections are just guesses but as more and more people test hopefully they can become more meaningful.

I wouldn't worry about what the Ancestry results say as they are less reliable than most in my opinion based on what other people say of the science behind them and the very small reference groups they use.

[joboy]

Suggest you also consider gedmatch.com as this is a site where there are uploads from FTDNA, Ancestry and 23andme.

Hi Craclyn,
There is a problem currently with Gedmatch.
I tried two days ago to get a confirmation code and I got one but when I used it it did not work so I emailed Gedmatch and they advised that they were having problems with their hosting company and they are working hard to correct the situation.
Joe

[100%Gog]

I got my results from FTDNA using my uploaded raw data from Ancestry DNA. Comparing the two sets of ethnicity estimates show fairly similar results. I suppose that is to be expected when using the same raw data.

Ancestry DNA Estimates:                          FTDNA Estimates:

Ireland - 53%                                         British Isles - 50%
Europe West - 23%                                Western & Central Europe - 48%
Great Britain - 10%                                Central Asia - 2%
Scandinavian - 8%
Italy/Greece - 4%
Iberian Peninsular - 1%
Caucasus - 1%

However, no Scandinavian, Iberian or Italy/Greece in FTDNA estimates. The interpretation in FTDNA for Central Asia is a bit more east of the Caucasus in Ancestry. The map footprint for Central Asia in FTDNA shows Iran/Afghanistan (Which surprised me), the map footprint for the Caucasus shown in Ancestry gives an area between the Black and Caspian Sea e.g. Armenia, Georgia etc.

I want to upload my raw data to Gedmatch as well, to see if I can do another comparison. Unfortunately as others on this thread have said Gedmatch is still down 

100%Gog                               

[davidft]

When comparing between Ancestry and ftDNA one thing to keep on mind is that ftDNA only uses 15 broad population identifiers whereas Ancestry use 26 so of necessity ftDNA will seem to be less “accurate” than Ancestry. This is actually the wrong way round as it is the Ancestry results that are less “accurate” and based on more spurious assumptions. They are accused of constantly overstating Scandinavian origins, maybe as a result of their very small and unrepresentative comparison database.

Do not be surprised by the Iran/Afghanistan footprint there is an explanation for this which you will see when you use the diagnosis tools on gedmatch and follow up the results there with a little research (won’t spoil it and tell you as you might discover things i missed). When you use gedmatch you will probably also get an answer to your Scandinavian question.

As to gedmatch being down do not despair, i only uploaded by data on Thursday after several abortive attempts – that comes of not reading the upload instructions properly.  The first stages of the upload are completed very quickly and you can use part of the site. However, the completion of full upload takes a while (3 days in my case) before you can compare against the full database. Its worth doing and worth the wait in my experience as i got some interesting results.

[BevStimpson]

I've got mine back from Ancestry, and apart from one person whose names and locations do seem to have a near resemblance to mine, nothing else makes any sort of sense, in fact that person is supposed to be mildly possible, whereas the ones who are extremely likely by ancestry's standards don't seem at all possible in the scheme of things. I've uploaded my results to Gedmatch, but am waiting until the processing as finished, ask for ftDNA, I've just got the following:

European    96%
British Isles    66%
Scandinavia    25%
Western and Central Europe 5%
Middle Eastern 3%
Asia Minor 3%


Ancestry reads
Europe    98%
Great Britain   52%
Ireland      18%
Scandinavia   13%
Europe West   9%
Trace Regions 6%
Iberian Peninsula5%
Asia South   2%
Finland/Northwest Russia1%

[ladyynara]

I got my results this week and have been trying to wrap my head around them.  I'm British born and all ancestors aside from a couple of Irish ones so far have been born and lived in the South of England.  So I was quite surprised to have this as my results:

 Europe 100%
    Europe West 44%
    Ireland 29%
    Scandinavia 15%
   Trace Regions 12%
    Iberian Peninsula 5%
    Great Britain 3%
    Finland/Northwest Russia 2%
    European Jewish < 1%
    Europe East < 1%

I have to say my heart sank at the 3% Great Britain.  3% is all!?! Especially when more obscure regions ranked above it. But then I looked at where their region for West Europe covers, and it basically covers all of the South of England so I guess that makes more sense.  I have absolutely no idea on the 15% Scandinavian.  You certainly wouldn't guess looking at me, I have very dark brown eyes and hair!
No decent matches so far, the nearest one is a 4th - 6th cousin or something.  I don't have ancestry subscription at the moment so I can't really contact any of them.  I'm considering paying the $39 to transfer it to FTDNA but not sure if it's worth it.

[nestagj]

I also received my results from Ancestry recently and they were quite surprising !  As far as I can tell my family is 100% from a very specific area within North West Wales - not far from Gog100 in fact so I can understand the 99% Europe bit although I didn't expect the high 61% Irish; but the one that intrigues me, but I think it is an error is the Pacific Islander ! Again there are a few 4 - 6 cousins but I have not yet looked properly at their trees to see if there are any matches.

Europe 99%
•   Ireland 61%
•   Great Britain 19%
•   Europe West 12%
•   Trace Regions 7%
•   Finland/Northwest Russia 2%
•   European Jewish 2%
•   Iberian Peninsula 2%
•   Europe East 1%
•   Scandinavia < 1%
Pacific Islander < 1%
•   Trace Regions < 1%
•   Melanesia < 1%

[nestagj]

and here are my husband's.  His fathers family hail from around Llangollen and Shropshire but his mother's family are from the Suffolk coastal area .  He is tall, fair haired (reddish) and blue eyed !

Europe 100%
•   Scandinavia 34%
•   Great Britain 27%
•   Ireland 25%
•   Europe West 5%
•   Trace Regions 9%
•   Iberian Peninsula 4%
•   Italy/Greece 3%
•   European Jewish 2%