Ethnicity Updates on Ancestry

[TonyV]

Interestingly Prof. Tori King of Leicester University; Richard 3rd's body fame and lately the guru on BBC2 programme "DNA Family Secrets", sometimes gives the subjects their ethnicity without suggesting that they may be false or even misleading. For example in this week's episode she told a subject that their DNA originated from Africa and then produced a map and pointed out specific countries in central Africa where their DNA was common.

I think that we have to acknowledge that such estimates are not all rubbish. My own for example is 100% correct on my paternal side and for all I know it may also be correct on my maternal side, which is more mixed.

There is a widespread idea that they are pretty accurate on a continent basis but not on regional units such as countries or provinces. However my paternal ethnicity is accurate to within about a 50 mile radius.

Tony

[Biggles50]

Interestingly Prof. Tori King of Leicester University; Richard 3rd's body fame and lately the guru on BBC2 programme "DNA Family Secrets", sometimes gives the subjects their ethnicity without suggesting that they may be false or even misleading. For example in this week's episode she told a subject that their DNA originated from Africa and then produced a map and pointed out specific countries in central Africa where their DNA was common.

I think that we have to acknowledge that such estimates are not all rubbish. My own for example is 100% correct on my paternal side and for all I know it may also be correct on my maternal side, which is more mixed.

There is a widespread idea that they are pretty accurate on a continent basis but not on regional units such as countries or provinces. However my paternal ethnicity is accurate to within about a 50 mile radius.

Tony

I would presume that for these TV programmes the subjects would take the full gamut of DNA tests that are available rather than an Ancestry test which only tests a proportion of the whole genome.

Y and mT tests can be used to trace origins and Haplogroup.

[TonyV]

One of the frustrating things about these programmes is that they cover very little of the science behind DNA testing and matches; so the viewer has no idea whether the subjects give a single specimen (as appears to be the case) or multiple, or whether the saliva is split between the various companies as you suppose. It is however fairly clear that the test or tests are then exposed to many databases, as you might expect.

My own assumption, for what it's worth, is that at least an Ancestry test is used, given that Ancestry has the largest database by far and will not accept test results from other testing companies. 23andme also does not accept uploads so maybe a second sample is taken to submit to them. All pure speculation of course.

[phil57]

Also bear in mind that information is often distorted and manipulated in TV programs for viewer enjoyment, or to enhance interest. Not everything is always wholly as it appears or is claimed.

[jc26red]

Tori King has said several times, but not every programme, that they enter the results into several databases and I have heard her mention Ydna test to at least one man who wanted to know his heritage rather than finding family.

I have noticed she now mentions how they build several trees and see how they overlap to find the common ancestor, the hints are coming….

As Phil57 said, we have to remember it’s a tv programme with a hour slot that has to cover three stories, to include the technical details would be too boring for many viewers.

We also have to remember that it’s sponsored by Ancestry who want more people to take dna tests.

[Biggles50]

One of the frustrating things about these programmes is that they cover very little of the science behind DNA testing and matches; so the viewer has no idea whether the subjects give a single specimen (as appears to be the case) or multiple, or whether the saliva is split between the various companies as you suppose. It is however fairly clear that the test or tests are then exposed to many databases, as you might expect.

My own assumption, for what it's worth, is that at least an Ancestry test is used, given that Ancestry has the largest database by far and will not accept test results from other testing companies. 23andme also does not accept uploads so maybe a second sample is taken to submit to them. All pure speculation of course.

Very true.

I always suggest Ancestry as the Go To for a DNA test:-

1 - It has the largest Database of testees
2 - Its online system is geared towards users who have tested
3 - You can download your data and upload it to other sites (you cannot upload DNA data to Ancestry).

I gave up watching the TV show as its too much Stacey Dooley and her grating accent is not kind on my Northern ears which are more used to Mancunian, Scouse, and Yorkie twang.

[TonyV]

While I wouldn't be surprised, I couldn't see a reference to sponsorship by Ancestry either at the beginning of the show or the end.

I've lived down South for over 50 years and still find a strong Essex accent a bit grating, but I think that Stacey Dooley does a great job of introducing the people and then dealing with the after reveal conversation. She is just the right blend of empathy and TV presentation.

[4b2]

The estimates now seem pretty good for those from the UK, but not good for anywhere else. One thing I have noticed is that they are not able to tell the difference between deep English families in Wales and Welsh. A considerable number of my ancestors who lived in Wales were of English origins, and had been living there since the 16th C. I think what Ancestry are doing is comparing trees to DNA and assigning certain occurrences as a certain ethnicity based on that. Their sample of data is very small beyond that. e.g. I have 0 Scandinavian matches on Ancestry, while about 33% of my MyHeritage matches are from Scandinavia. Despite only having 6.25% Scandinavian ancestry.

I do find ethnicity is somewhat useful. e.g. if I find a match and I see they share a certain ethnicity, I can have a good idea what line it is. Also when researching matches who have limited trees I will often look at the ethnicity. Often they are something like 12 Welsh, which I interpret as probably looking for a Welsh gg-grandparent. That narrowsthings down a little. Further, the ethnicity has allowed me to identify some tests that are only a name. If you have a 70cM match named TimNicholson76 and his ethnicity is 50% Scandinavian, I am expecting something like a Timothy Nicholson 1976 (mother's maiden name Olafson) in the birth index.

And if you happen to not know your ancestry or have rumours of a great-grandfather from another country, it can be useful.

Beside from that, we get a lot more matches to work with, from people buying the tests only for the ethnicity estimate, unaware that they are quite speculative.

[jc26red]

I have a new match (5-8th cousin)... but the young lady (aged 18-20) only has 10 people in her private tree, so being curious I clicked on her ethnicity 

England & Northwestern Europe 19%
Wales 12%
Sweden and Denmark 2%
Norway 2%
Ivory Coast 15%
Cameroon, Congo & Western Bantu 13%
Benin & Togo 13%
Nigeria 6%
Ireland 4%
Bengal 3%
Mali 3%
Germanic Europe 2%
Jewish 2%
Indigenous Americas - Central 1%
Southern India 1%
Northern India 1%
Senegal 1%

Is this a  "mixed" record!   Her profile photo suggested to me she was probably only looking for her ethnicity heritage I bet she was surprised when she got her results.

BTW she lost me after the first 4 regions