I just rechecked for another video and I'm still mindblown: 1,6 Neanderthal and 0,6 Denisovan - at least according to Ancient Calculator (Yvngfinn). That's about the maximum percentage one can inherit from a person 9-10 generations ago... - I mean, I 'know' at least the vague location 2/3rds of my 9th-10th paper-ancestors (blame the Czech and the Italians for improper 17th century record-keeping and two other communities for allowing their churches to burn down without bothering to rescue the papers in the sacristy). That one of them should - at least statistically - qualify as a Neanderthal and let's say: their mother-in-law as a Denisovan is a bit... 🤣🤣🤣 well, rather highly amusing.
@@dramirezg70 Due to the 3 European founder-populations being ALL derived from Neanderthal-mixing there were no non-mixed people around, and the NT inheritance got incorporated in the HS heritage. Since NT seem to have passed on the genes that allow a survival in cold climate, they were positively selected, and the modern african variants that were unhelpful with colder temperatures got all bred out. (But... I still can't find a purpose for those superfluous 'wisdom' molars, them not really fitting in smaller HS jaws. 'Modern Humans' - like Ötzi - have 4 teeth less. The additional teeth only come handy, if a child bites a tooth out while young, but our HS children don't gnaw on bones. We only cook bone-broths... - Yeah... writing that, I just realized: you need pottery for cooking bonebroths, throwing hot stones in a leatherbag, does not cook your left over bones... so... there MIGHT be some reason for additional molars in a pre-cooking-pot population.)
In building my family tree, I discovered that the mother of my paternal grandfather was the product of a marriage between two first cousins. That information continues to blow my mind a little.
My uncle married an orphan girl and they loved each other do much and were a lovely couple who died at a good age. But after they had their five children they discovered that they were cousins from their mother's side. Their eldest son is not right in his head but not badly physically affected in any way. He is a person you can handle only in very small doses. Of course this was by chance and not by design. We are very careful to stay far away from such unions.
Yes. I am nuts about history and because my husband comes from a very auspicious lineage I had to trace mine. I was very surprised how auspicious my own family lineage is. But, when I shared it with my own family they were very critical of my findings and did their own research which confirmed that my results were correct the I'll feelings however made me wish I had kept it to myself. But one or two other people knowing that I did this research also asked me to do it for their families. I agreed but I kept it absolutely confidential and after I gave it to them I deleted any record that I had of their families. One could be traced right back to the time of the Roman empire in Italy. I am fully aware that your family heritage is so personal that it encompasses your personal identity. Because of this people guard it very close to their chest and if anyone tries to find it out it hits a very deep note in their psyche. In South Africa where I live you cannot get any records for any relative who has passed away for 100 years after their demise. This law is to protect any relative of that person who is still alive. After 100 years at least 3 generations should have passed making it safe to uncover any details about them. To show you how relevant this law is I will tell you a true story. When I researched my family tree I found out how my ancestors were cheated out of a substantial amount of revenue and property by another branch of the family. But because this happened about 200 years ago I cannot seek redress for their crime but because of the time lapse it does not worry me or effect my own financial situation. However I have not revealed this to my family because there is a chance that the more greedy ones will try to get back at these long dead relatives and regain the lost wealth. I doubt very much that they will get it right but I dread the thought of how ugly it could get. Sometimes the older people know something which they dont want you to find out. It might taint the honour of the family. You have to respect their wishes. But if it is really your wish to trace your family tree my advice would be to do it incognito but keep it absolutely private and talk to no one about it. If you wish to pass it on to your children and grandchildren at least wait until your parents pass on so that it will not hurt their feelings. You owe it to them.
I traced mine all the way back to Adam.... Took a couple of assholes as teachers who refused to allow previous data to be part of a different project... I had the same roadblock at every pass to contact the master of the archives of the Vatican. So through the help of a friend I did. The pope himself replied back. I was presented with two swords. The one is the sword of the King of Jerusalem(ye the sword made from gold harvested from the bodys of the people of Palestine, the other is the sword High Chieftain of Eurasia Africa and all Islands yes the sword given to the Great Hun High Chieftain when the Holy Roman Empire surrendered. Two of the many heirlooms like outright ownership of Palestine and of all properties of all Christians Jews Gentiles Islamics and of every royal family of every royal house mortal and immortal seen and unseen on every world every people every tribe every speck in creation belongs to me alone and I gift it all to Jesus Nazarite Christ Junior High King of Palestine King of Jerusalem King of the Jews and Hebrews and of all life and all death and hell and the grave and the high heavens and low heavens and the many versions of Earth for this is the way of the truth of it, all is mine to give to whome I will and I give everything to my boi Jesus Christ in whome i am well pleased in the choice to be Palestinian King of the Jews and Gentiles and Hebrews and Christians and Muslims.
My sister got cancer last year so she went for genetic testing boy the doctor was shocked when he came out and looked at my fair-skinned blonde haired blue-eyed sister he actually asked her do you know your ancestry, she's oblivious to these things so I think she told him know but I know our family's history back as far as 2000 years on one side and even further on another. But what the genetic doctor told my sister was interesting to even me not only are there large amounts of denisovan and Neanderthal but we have all three ghost lineages. I had to explain to my sister what a ghost lineage is and where they came from in our family tree. I do not have the skull shape of a modern human, I am far stronger than I should be I've never broken a bone and I have lived a very intense life. Oh and according to the genetic testing my sister shouldn't have cancer I knew this ahead of time because no one else in our family extended family anywhere has ever had cancer,,, she got this fast acting cancer within two years of the shot,, the same shot that killed my fiance 4 days after he took it
Sorry for the cancer diagnosis of your sister. Dna just tells you of your probability but not whether you will get some nasty disease or disorder. I have seen the dna results of many Northern Europeans and phenotypically they are not blond and often not blue eyed.
Further to my DNA testing I am a direct descendent of Birger Jarl of Sweden who lived from 1210 until 1266 making him my 32nd great grandfather . I am I1M253a2b and we all have a common ancestor who lived about 5000 years ago in Southern Sweden ,though some researchers give the lower River Elbe basin as its origin .Time to the most recent common ancestor is about 2600 years .
I complain too much, so I deleted my previous comment here. Only the ambiguity combined with the inexactness of the title falls short of your otherwise excellent work! I look forward to future installments, in this vein, or more on-topic, or otherwise. Thanks!
Here’s what I’m curious about. If you probably don’t have your great great great grandparents or uncles DNA, how were they able to confirm Richard the III’s body with the DNA of his great great whatever nephew in 2012?
If it's an unbroken line of males, or an unbroken line of females, between a descendant and an ancestor, then DNA is traceable further back. The other part this guy is talking about is called autosomal DNA. I'm not great at these concepts, but those two cases are special cases, where you can trace something further back genetically.
The Y-chromosome can't change, because it gets passed from father to son - unchanged! All other chromosomes can be reshuffeled in each generation - but the mitrochondrial DNA is passed via the female line (unchanged too)😅 My aunts did a test once and were told they were "complete opposites" in all the markers that had been observed - although they at least had to own the same X-chromosome they inherited from their father😂
I studied my ancestry, and was surprised to find out how sedentary both my maternal and paternal ancestors were: from the same general regions of Aberdeenshire and Staffordshire - for centuries.
1 brother and I took Ancestry dna test. Have same parents but he looks like Dad and I look like Mom. Ancestry thrulines show some same connections and a few that only match either him or me, not both. Weird but interesting.
Well that is normal. I have 7 siblings, I am the only one dna tested, so I don't have what you have received from dna testing. What I have learnt is that I have a 1st cousin on my father's side and a 2nd cousin on my mother's side. Sounds strange but I don't know either, my parents didn't have anything to do with their families due to immigration.
I have done ancestry dna and the most frustrating part is that you get regions instead of countries. From genealogical research I know a lot of my ancestors were Dutch. But the Dutch are lumped into the England and Northwestern Europe category. I also know I have English ancestry, so the basically fifty percent English and Northwestern category doesn’t tell me how english or dutch I am. I understand because there was so much flow between the Netherlands and England they can’t really distinguish the two, but I wish I could get a more precise breakdown, the way I can between my Swedish and Norwegian ancestry. Admittedly, they are pretty good in other areas. My grandfather was jewish and came from Lithuania when it was part of Russia and they can pinpoint the area in Lithuania and Latvia he came from pretty accurately (he passed long before I was gone, but I have traced him genealogically to a specific place in Lithuania.)
Karin of course brohh are you dumb?? Country's are made by man each 100 Years, wanna Example now?? Russia now have more parts of Ukraina, Also Austria is the size of Portugal Today but In 1888 Austria was Bigger than Germany so can you understand that one day many present country were actually Austria so that's EXACTLY WHY.
That is the problem of coming from closely related ethnic groups. On AncestryDNA my ethnic group can be distinguished from others by greater than 90% accuracy.
In the UK we are fortunate in having surname, some of which go back over a thousand years. Most people in the British Isles have King Edward III as a common ancestor.
I've built my family tree, it wasn't that difficult once you work out your recent relatives I mean grandparents, great grandparents. It might sound odd but many people don't know their grandparents, and definitely don't know their great grandparents. I was born in Malta, and as I said once you get through the recent relatives it's easy to go further via church records that a Mr. Adami recorded by copying church records from each church. The problem of course is missing records, and with Maltese people the habit of naming children after Joseph and Mary, and the many very common surnames. So far, my ancestors are holding up by dna testing. As far as the ethnicity of my ancestors, it's not important to me, and anyway I use G25 coordinates and Yahaduo to work out my ancient ancestry from Neolithic farmers, Steppe herders, HGs ....
I was mind blown to see me as a direct descendant of two distant ancestors who had the same parents, and both of them were direct ancestors of mine. I thought it could be incest. I was born in Mexico and raised in the United States. I also have discovered ancestors born in Spain, Portugal and Italy. I also descend from a few famous ancestors. I have gone far back like 20 generations already to find ancestors. I can't wait to tell stories to my children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Fascinating to see the slide showing all 22+2 chromosomes. I knew Y was small and X larger, but I'd never seen how much variation there is in size between the other 22 pairs. Is mitochondrial DNA separate? I thought it was on the X chromosome.
Mitochondrial DNA is separate. It has nothing to do with chromosomal DNA that is located in the nucleus. Mitochondria are believed to be remnants of bacteria swallowed by our amoeba- like single-cell ancestors.
Complete separate. It is contained inside the mitochondria. That’s also the reason it is always from your mothers side. The male perm only puts his chromosomes into the female egg. No other organelles.
@@sonkeschluter3654 ah. I didn't know that. Cool! I can see why they think mitochondria might have originated as a single celled creature absorbed to generate energy for us.
See your body as a very complex machine, that needs two similar machinescto get started at all: the mitochondria are the batteries, that keep those machines running: they come with the bigger egg of the female part. Sperms just provide information "batteries not included"😅
Specifically, you don't always inherit DNA; genes were discussed about in the abstract long before DNA was discovered; I don't think nucleic acid and the academics who study it should get to monopolise the term with a specialist definition. EDIT: i.e. there are non-physical, non-material components to heritage.
This is fascinating how it all works. Recently I did a DNA test and was a bit surprised that 17% was from Scandinavia, and 6% from Eastern Europe. It was surprising because my family line has been in Alabama for a long time before slavery was ended, and it's not like there were that many slave owners from Scandinavia or Eastern Europe in Alabama lol. I know one of my great grandfathers was mixed race, but pretty much everyone else that I know of for the last 3 or 4 generations or so married other black people, so I really wonder where that DNA came from? Maybe there was some hanky panky going on that no one knew about?
Nearly all descendants of the trans Atlantic slave trade across North & South America have substantial recent European admixture, in the USA, it averages about 24%, so you are well within that range. The European admixture will be coming from all sides, it may be picking up the alleles of Scandinavia via English settlers, who themselves show some admixture from this region, plus the USA has had a large German influx the past 200 years, so there could be admixture there too, introducing Eastern European. It all depends on which company you use and where they have their base samples from and how they chose to label it, plus how many others are in their database to compare too, over time as more people submit, the percentages can change. Also, these DNA companies are not doing a full genome sequence, they "sample" common areas known to have differences to get an overall idea. Think of it like a huge book, they are not sampling every single letter but random words on every other page for comparison.
I've got DNA-linked Quaker Wrights in America by the mid-1600s, Loyalist Wrights in Canada in 1783, both way before my Wright 2ggm left Ireland following the Famine. No links between them. There are more shared lines to Presidents and English aristocracy than to my close family like her. That sucks!
my son looks like his great great grandfather on his mothers side which in turn is my fathers side of the family my daughter has looks of my mothers side of the family so it looks like my 3 kids have more facial features of there mothers side of the family but they all got blond blue eyes and im dark hair green eyes there father blond and blue eye
I had been taking DNA tests with different companies since they were introduced at the beginning of the 2000's. But my ethnicity results on my autosomal DNA tests did not seem to reflect my paternal family tree. This is because on my father's side he had a lot of ancestry from Wales and Ireland, which was too be expected as he was born in Wales himself. But my autosomal DNA results showed me too be English on both sides of my tree. So at the end of 2019 I asked my two siblings to take a test at Ancestry DNA. When the results came back in the spring of 2020 they showed that my younger sister and I are full siblings, but we are both half siblings with our older brother. Cousin matches on Ancestry DNA have confirmed that our older brother is the son of our mother's husband, but my sister and I are a result of a cuckoo in the nest. My sister is eight years younger than me so our mother must have been playing away for at least that amount of time. Confirmed cousin matching on Ancestry DNA has proven that the biological paternal grandparents of my sister and I lived next door to us in the house that I was born in 1954 in Chelsea in London. Subsequent testing on the y-chromosomes of my brother and I have shown that he is downstream of haplogroup E-V13, and that I am downstream of haplogroup R-DF21.
One of my great, great, great, great, great grandmothers was native American, and I just barely inherited any DNA from my native American ancestors. The vast majority of my DNA is White European.
I manage a lot of DNA in my 80,000+ tree and I learn something everyday about how to use it. Bad trees can cause genealogy software like Ancestry to predict the wrong thruline. I sometimes have to get those other DNA testers to fix their trees before the Thruline matches the source record. Sometimes people are missing a generation, or they have attached themselves to the wrong sibling. I have a Fraternal Twin, that just makes him the same as a sibling. He inherited different DNA so his matches are different. I have 5 siblings. Half have brown hair and brown eyes and half blond hair and hazel green eyes.
😮 I'm very curious now because my brother got his done and it was almost all Northern European with 1% Ashkenazi Jewish. But he looks more like our biodad and I look more like our mom and it's my mom's side that likely has the Jewish ancestry as the surname is Germanic Jewish. Huh.
I suspected this, from a difference in Geneology and family tree... People traveled alot more a few hundred years ago than what modern humans imagine. Also people are attracted to both similarities and differences when mating. Basically Nationality means less than people think in many cases, as it can be assumed in a couple generations. And genetics is always mixing and boiling... In my case, the four grand parents were 1. German 2.English/Native American 3.English/Irish 4. Irish. But the genetics said I was over 90% from the Basque Lands/Brittany Coast region a couple three hundred years ago. And it made sense of variations in the family. Both parents look similar, like shorter curly black haired, hazel eyes. With father built like a Neanderthal thick muscle genetics. Gorrilla like... Mother looked Gypsy-esque... Basically two short Basque types attracted to each other. And I turned out like a size small German long walker body type. Thin, plenty of legs for striding. brown hair, red highlights, hazel eyes. Have the bushy eyebrows of Basques and Welsh... And my sister turned out looking Scottish/Irish, and an older half sister almost my twin. Basically you get your genetics from a chian like situation, and siblings can share very few links and be almost entirely different chains with in the same family. Thanks for your video, told me my analysis was likely correct... We all like guessing correctly.
My DNA test said I’m 32% Wales(when I have 1 1st GG that was Welsh equaling 10-12.5%), it said 8% England and NWE(when I have two 1st GG from England which is 20-25%), my achiere grand Pere was from Nouveau Brunswick(my 9th to 10th GG were French to immigrated to Canada in the 17th century and became Arcadians), my 6th GG was from Spain in the 18th century as same as his parents and grandparents(if I were to inherit any DNA from them it would be 2% not 0.4% like theory goes as you can receive an arrange of DNA from any 1st-8th GG), another 6th GG was German and my 8th-10th GG were Dutch which would make sense of the 2% Germanic from the DNA test. It said I am 2% Norway when my family fame from England including Ahropshire from my 5th-7th GG. 8% Ireland when my family was Ukster Scot and 4th-6th GG were Irish. 47% Scorland it said when I have 4th-6th GG from Scotland from dad’s side and mum’s paternal grandma still didn’t found out what my mother paternal grandpa is? I’m most dissatisfied with Andsstey as their estimate or ethnicity are wrong/ wouldn’t recommend them for anyone doing Ancestry as they are inaccurate!
That’s not how those percentages are meant to be understood. They show a percentage of your DNA that matches with people in Wales, not that you’re 32% Welsh.
I just found out my great grandparents on my mother's side came from France, but that didn't show up on my DNA results but did show up on my daughter's (not from her father) could this be why ?
I know very little about this topic, but if my Y DNA is R1b, doesn't that associate with my father's father's father, etc, going back thousands of years to some early population of ancestors?
That is correct. Your y-dna results only represent a very small (but laser-focused) snippet of your total genetic makeup. And yes, it is on your strictly paternal line, as you said. That dna does mutate, but quite gradually. R1b is the most common y haplogroup in western Europe. I have the R1b result on both my father's paternal line as well as my mother's paternal line (I had a maternal Uncle tested for discovering my maternal grandfather's y-dna).
@@philandrews2860 Well its been in Western Europe a long time, from the Bronze Age. It's a Western Steppe Herder haplogroup. R1b exists in Africa as well, among sub Saharan Africans that live around Lake Chad.
This is why Autosomal admixture results are not that interesting to me. They just show you some percentage of what todays people you look like. You don't get much history from that. I find Haplogroups more interesting, because I am more fascinated with history. With Haplogroups you can for instance trace your fathers line of all grandfathers back to distant or close time periods and tell more about their history, where they were, what they might have been part of historically and so on.
I have a rough - unbaked theory that the traits one was picked or selected for - like fairness - or pretty Asian eye's - or tallness or etc etc - would also 'dominate' in the genetic expression - so if there were 4 children - MORE than half would get that selected attribute
@@n30418 Some genes are 'turned on ' or expressed - I don't think it is 100% random - two brown eye's can have a child with blue eye's - Blond hair also tends to dominate contrary to the Mendelian logic
@@TotalFreedomTTT-pk9st brown eyes are dominant alleles so they get expressed more. If two brown eyed parents have a child the child has more of a chance of having brown eyes even if the both parents have blue eye recessive alleles. Nature doesn't look for the most attractive genes and make sure they appear in offspring it's about probability.
@@TotalFreedomTTT-pk9st brown hair is expressed more than blond hair because brown hair is a dominant allele. Brown eyes are expressed more than blue eyes because brown eyes are a dominant allele. If there are two parents and one has blue eyes but the other has brown, it's more likely that their baby will have brown eyes. Nature doesn't select what genes people find attractive, it's all done randomly.
@@n30418 men with many brothers, produce more sons than daughters. I.e for those with THAT particular Y chromosome, Y results more often than X. Or at least survives to birth more often. Despite X surviving to birth more often than Y, in the general population.
Genetic Ancestry And Epigenetics People of a quarrying background have phenomenal physical strength however they tend not to be very academic and as they grow older have an acute problem with obesity and diabetes. This correlates with their ancestors working in quarries for generations potentially going back thousands of years doing backbreaking manual work on a near starvation diet. People of a coal mining background tend to be very athletic with a considerable amount of muscle mass and in these regions rugby is the dominant sport. The physical characteristics for coal mining by hand and rugby overlap. For a long time carts full of coal were pushed down the tunnels by hand and the surface of the floor had been very uneven thus very tough aerobic manual work and this type of physique overlaps with the optimum physique for rugby. Deep mines have only existed since the miners lamp had been developed in 1815. The first miner's safety lamp was developed in 1815 by Sir Humphry Davy, an English scientist and inventor. People who dug the canals and docks by hand. The canals and docks had to be dug by hand as the rock had to stay watertight and explosives would crack the rock thus the water would drain away. There is vast differences in the density of sandstone rock. The sandstone rock had been dug by hand using steel bars and/or steel chisels and ump hammers. This type f work favours those with very strong hands and arms and not having strength in their legs thus a boxing physique. The regions where they recruited people to di the canals their is a culture of boxing with very little rugby if any at all. When I have visited Yorkshire I have always been aware there is a very strong historic culture of rugby but almost zero culture of boxing especially in the rural areas where the mines were located. The type of physique that enabled someone to work in the historic industries of Quarrying and Coal Mining and Digging Canals and Docks before machines were used were very very different. These different physiques for Quarrying, coal mining and navies to dig docks and canals by hand correlates with different sports that are dominate in these regions. This is there the potential for epigenetics to supersede other variables for dominant genetic characteristics depending upon the major industry of the region? Northern Ireland the regions where they recruited people to dig the canals and docks by hand there is a very strong culture of boxing. Above is personal observations and personal opinions however the evidence to support the above is overwhelming. The significance on extreme environmental variables upon the genetics of a region be it Quarrying or Coal Mines or a history of recruiting navies to dig canals or docks. A certain physique and thus specific genetic alleles will dominate and proliferate in a region depending upon the principle economic industry of that region as discussed above. Comments welcome
Agree. Like 80% of Scots, I've got the red hair genes. Like only a fraction of those, I've got it on both sides or dominant, and therefore the red hair that's useful for maximising vitamin D production from daylight. Fortunately, I continue to live in Scotland, where I don't have to negate the benefit by shielding myself from strong sunlight. Unfortunately I only discovered recently, that it correlates with a REDUCED ability to absorb vitamin D from food. So to maintain vitamin D levels, I can't just take the shortcut of a supplement, but really SHOULD be out in all that 'Scotch mist' (rain) more often! 😕 Presumably wearing my see-you-Jimmy hat. 🤣 Unlike Dad (ancestors from Skye), I HAVEN'T got the hemochromatosis 'tendency', that would be as useful for preventing middle-aged woman anaemia, as it was In preventing pre-Agricultural Revolution no-red-meat-or-green-veg-in-winter anaemia, in crofting areas. (Is this why Lewis became known for their black pudding? A very good source of iron that I eat every week.) Based on this, to what extent do you think those wishing to improve their health, or with naturally fragile health, should aim to incorporate the diet and physical habits of their ancestors? It's a no brainer that folk from the far East are best to avoid dairy and minimise alcohol. But, in addition to going out more (even when it's raining), and stocking up on black pudding, what else should I be doing? I'm from a rugby area, but herding-farming-woollen mills, rather than coal. Athletic build, but unfortunately have flat feet (from the fishermen side of the family) limiting my running ability. Logically, I 'should' have the stamina for walking many miles a day looking for sheep. (I certainly lack the physical strength for heavy digging.). Despite the wonky feet, I DID manage a job where I was standing up all day. Which I suppose the mills would have selected for? And despite all shepherding, mill work and joiners being before my time, I love all things woolly, sheep, wood and collie dogs. So I guess the breeding of the previous 750 years hasn't been cancelled out by the contrary education and training of the last 50!
@jonahwhale9047 the posh schools Vs working class, was more rugby Vs football. With the two sports only really diverging 100-150 years ago, I'm not sure how much difference that really represented? Jethart hand/fitba' is as much rugby as it is football. While early rugby players at posh schools weren't loaded up with weight and muscle like modern forwards. As for running up hills after sheep, I saw a Border Leicester sheep get loose at Peebles Show once. It took 7 of the farmers/shepherds/officials to catch it. That beastie had as good an eye for a gap as any 7s player I've seen! The most entertaining five minutes of the Show. It could be a new sport in itself. Lol.
My Dads family tends to be strong when young, and overweight with age. I’ve always thought it was their history of laboring work as farmers down through the generations. Interestingly, I did my DNA and compared it through several sites. Even though most of my family have been in the US since the early 16 and 1700’s, I am 99 percent British and Irish. That’s a bit higher than some Brits I’ve seen tested.
I’m still wondering what the answer is. I mean, I’m a scientist myself. I get the math. 7 generations is where you hit over 100 ancestors, so the amount inherited is less that 1%. BUT we also have more than 100 genes. That’s why the ancestry testing sites can break it down to tenths, albeit with low accuracy. And that accuracy will likely improve over time with further research. So, the REAL question is NOT: “At what point does your ancestor count exceed 100?” (7 generations). The REAL question is, at what point does your ancestor count exceed the unique gene count (excluding genes that all humans have that are the same)? THAT is the point at which genetic DNA inheritance will hit the 50-50 shot, NOT at 7 generations. True, the amount of genetics inherited from any one individual at that point may be minuscule and, indeed, there is an increasing chance, with every generation, that it’s zero. But that point is NOT 7 generations. That’s using the arbitrary 1% threshold. The threshold we need to use is 1% of the genes that vary across humans. One generation beyond that and THEN it’s less than a 50/50 shot that you’ve inherited any genetic material from those ancestors. That’ll be back more than seven generations. But how much more? One more generation? Two more? Three more? Five more? Ten more? I’d honestly like to know the answer, as I have some fascinating genealogical history. Am I actually blood related to these folks or not. At what point does that disappear (or become less than a 50/50 chance). Seven generations is incorrect. That’s 1%. But if we have 200 unique genes then 0.5% would be statistically significant, so eight generations would work. And what if it’s 400 genes? Or 800? Or 1600? Or 3200? I think I read somewhere that it’s about 3000. But I’m absolutely unsure of that. ***IF*** that’s the case, you can go back 12 generations (not seven) and have better than a 50/50 shot of inheriting DNA from them. We need to do the math correctly. 1% isn’t the proper threshold. Seven generations is incorrect. It needs to be based on the number of unique genes that are available to be inherited. If that’s 100 (and I don’t think it is), then seven generations remains correct. But I’m almost certain it’s NOT 100. So…….. what’s the answer? I hope you understand the point I’m raising. The oft-used seven generation explanation is mathematically flawed. So much so that we can even say it’s irrelevant. 1% is just a random number if 1% of the unique genes you inherit is 10 or 20 or 100. 1% is only relevant if we inherit 100 genes. You are more expert than I am. So, hopefully, with this correction on the flawed math, you can answer the question.
So, does this mean we can be somehow distantly related, because there aren’t that many real redheads in the world. We are remarkably rare considering the billions of people in the world.
Me too, i'm not very worried with any pedigree, although i feel respect for true blue bloods like the Swedish guy. It's just the fake ones that brag a lot that i find irritating.
All people are common, it's just a few that get the fickle finger of fate that makes them artificially ennobled. Realistically what does King Charlie have to do with Alfred the great or King Canute. I'll tell you, nothing.
According to Adam Ruherford, all Europeans are descended from First Nation Australians living about 5000 years ago. That means that when Europeans went to Australia, they were literally returning to the lands of their ancestors.
I don't know how he worked that one out. Considering that the ancestos of indigenous Australians have been on the continent of Australia for tens of thousands of years, it seems unlikely. I don't like Mr. Rutherford.
@@Ponto-zv9vfIt's not what Rutherford said. This guy is distorting what was said to spread an agenda. The OP explains the concept of genealogical ancestors and how the further back, everyone alive today in a given area will be related genealogically in someway to those alive who left living descendants in the past, for Europeans it is likely as recently as 1000-1200 years ago, for all humans as recent as 2500-8000 years ago. That doesn't mean "Europeans" descend for Aboriginal Australians or vice versa, just if you went back, there would be at least one (out of perhaps tens/hundreds of thousands of ancestors) who would be in the tree of all the two groups.
Yes we descend from all of our ancestors, we would not exist, had they not existed. No, of course we don’t inherit all of their genetics, we have thousands upon thousands of those
The point is you can say Michale O'Faherty is your 5th great grand father but saying so doesn't mean he is. If you cannot prove a dna connection to the man then it can be seen as conjecture no matter what your paper trail shows.
How then does one inherit a Rare diseases such as Porphyria that only date back to certain types of people get transferred to individuals today?? Im an inhertor of such. Yes my surname is English. Ormond. Would be interesting to understand these diseases as not much is known about it or how to treat it. Its Painful and can drive one almost insane at times. We need Help with this because research...Well. Not many have it. HAD to be passed through genetics. So if not how else?
Sometimes it's the result of an unlikely mutation. Most people have about 100 differences to their parents, spot mutations. Also older parents produce defective dna particularly older men in their sperm.
@@Ponto-zv9vf Thank You...I understand what you are trying to convey. However Family History doesn't lie. There is a linage. A beginning origin. Like other diseases that only congregate around certain peoples and has been passed down through millennials not just the last 2-300 hundred years. Just because it's Easier to accept there was something wrong with my parents. Which there wasn't. But other ancestry I Know and Proves it's hereditary through genetics. Several individuals throughout history helped send the genetics to today's world. I'm Proof. Kind of like Sickle Cell. A passed down hereditary defection by genetics. It started with Someone... leading to many. There's a correlation to this.
There's two basic points here. If you want to look at it in visual terms, it might help. Genealogically - You are the result of all of your ancestors. You are the point 🔽 that all of your ancestors combine to on your family tree. (You are highly likely to have ancestors from multiple continents and countries) Genetically - The DNA that you have inherited from each ancestor gets less and less with each generation that passes 🔼the further back in time you go. (You can't claim to be intellectually or racially superior because your GGGGGGGGGG Granddad was a Viking called Eric) These, of course, are not nice neat broad equilateral triangles, regardless of whether you are speaking genetically or genealogically. Politely put, there's overlap. If there is an attempt to keep bloodlines limited the triangles become narrower (isosceles) both genetically and genealogically, leading to in-bred diseases. The same happens with pockets of populations in outlying areas with limited transport. (Don't sleep with your cousin because her bus is cancelled and she can't get home tonight). What did strike me recently regarding genetic 'rinsing' over seven to ten generations is this might be evolutions way of eliminating debilitating conditions that are passed on from parents to their children, eg If your great great Grandmother had cerebral palsy genes that might not affect your generation of siblings at all. (I'm not medically trained, it just crossed my mind) Reminder - Its the last day of the Para-Olympics today
This sort of makes sense with the caveat that what is seen as "Useful" will change quite rapidly. There will also be some backflow, a link can be lost then return via marriage. The fact your whole genome comes from only two people and a tiny amount of random mutation. Theoretically, all the historical mutations could add up so you have a unique genome to anyone who ever existed before, (Theoretically but unlikely unless you start way back in time)
Why highly likely to have ancestors from multiple continents? I mean, I can see why I might have ancestors, 1,000 years ago, from elsewhere in Europe, but beyond that, no, I'm genetically English with a dash of Welsh 🤷
@@davidsoulsby1102 I read Arthur Koestler's book 'The Act of Creation'. It made me think differently about evolution. Its often three steps forwards and four steps back, with a lot of wasted energy on developing lifeforms that just aren't going anywhere. Random, Irrational and not in any way Intentionally Progressive. Not Gaia, not God , just pure luck and coincidence. Maybe my idea that genetic 'rinsing' is just wanting to see some sort of order in the Universe
Yes, but sometimes a big whopping chunk is recessive in many generations and the lottery hits and two kids inherit those chunks. Like in my family. My parents both appear to be 100 percent white. They are not. They both are tri-racial. The additions were back in the colonial and frontier times of America to the white bloodlines. Me and my little sister both appeared at birth to of mixed ancestry. I appeared more Native American and my sister Black. I only have one white grandparent. All three appear white. Caused my mom problems in her marriage. Its like 6 and 8 generations back. So, DNA testing only showed up some of it. However, the family tree research facilitated by the DNA testing showed up the ancestry. Genes can be inherited and not expressed. We also carry a gene for methemoglobinemia. Yep, If I am not careful I turn bluish.
My girlfriend’s oldest brother had very light blond hair and blue eyes. Her mom’s background was from Sweden. Out of the five kids Rolf was extremely white 😂. Her dad was black.
That's interesting. I see results in mixed Australian Aborigines and they can vary wildly. I once saw a photograph of a Mestizo couple, one pink skinned, the other quite yellow, they had 6 children, the eldest 2 looked black African, the middle 2 Mestizo, and the last light Europeans.
My interest is what in our DNA or gentics cause our physical appearance..like from different countries...I toke a DNA test from ancestrydna and I inherited mostly British DNA but also 10% Swedish/ Danish DNA ...ive been told by many people that i look Scandinavian..i feel i look similar to Fridtjof Nansen at least his eyes and cheekbones... He was a Norwegian explorer .. so I'm interested in how someone looks from the genetics??. Thank you for your videos very interesting
@@Ponto-zv9vfI don't have any greek or Mediterranean dna .. only English and Scandinavian..so its not a luck of a gun for me...do you know anything about the science of genetics,dna ,and phenotypes??
I then wasted an hour and a half reading a scientific paper about 2 hemochromatosis genes coming from (it was proposed) palaeolithic farmers in Spain/Portugal and neolithic or more recent farmers among what became Celtic or Viking populations...
Hemochromatosis is something that comes from the Steppe herder ancestry which unfortunately got passed on almost exclusively to the Celts of Britain and Ireland.
I don't agree with this theory that has been developed, as how come my ancestors from 30 generations ago looked more like me, than a random selection of people elsewhere to wherev they were, and they looking more like the people thirty gens beforehand .I mean they did not just come out of the ground in 1800. Though I am not critical of this guy, it's the experts who have not found out everything about DNA, they are missing something.
Okay, I don't understand what you are trying to say. How do you know what your ancestors 30 generations ago looked like? I have never met or seen my grandparents. I wouldn't have a clue whether they looked like me or Joe Blow down the road.
Well... depends on how far back. In the end all of them were cousins, all offspings to a small african tribe, looking for what was out there on the other side of the Red Sea, so: yes. 🤣
The Vikings were Northern Europeans, they cannot be distinguished from other Northerne Europeans in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. I was told I was 12% Viking of the Scandinavian type for free. I thought it was BS, but then I couldn't of cared either way.
One does indeed descend from every ancestor, but by now one doesn't inherit DNA markers from every ancestor. Enough DNA markers are inherited by close relatives to determine a parent/child relationship & some other close relationships with a high degree of accuracy; however, accuracy diminishes as relationships become more distant; &, since recombination of DNA keeps on occuring & one inherits only half of each parent's DNA - in whatever recombined mix - it's only a matter of time before there's no DNA marker trace of most of one's very-distant ancestors. Digs finding old skeletal remains which in turn are DNA tested can greatly help in determining old ethnic DNA markers that one did inherit (though one's children or grandchildren might not inherit from you should such a marker be skipped over in recombination). Recombination occurs within each parent - in the DNA of every sperm cell & every egg [(an erroneous statement I once had here in this spot was corrected by a comment below, so I removed it)]. If I recall correctly, the recombination in a male produces about a 50/50 split - though the half that his child will receive from him doesn't necessarily contain half of each marker that he has; &, a female's recombination split isn't as equally split as a male's split, as it's closer to a 60/40 split - & again there's a chance that some markers won't be in what her child inherits; so, generally each child of a couple will inherit differently to some degree [& every child can claim the same ancestory of themselves & their full sybling(s) that DNA testing reveals].* * = Note: Ethnicities determined from DNA are mostly guesstimations - & a DNA testing company's guesswork improves as more folk are tested by that company & as more skeletal remains are tested & the results are made available.
In identical twins, one sperm fertilizes one egg, which then divides into two. The twins genetics are 100 percent identical . There have only been 2 recorded cases where 2 sperm have fertilized one egg; called semi-identical twins or sesquizygotic twins.
@@lisajackson1964 Interesting. My memory isn't exactly stellar; so, thank you for the correction(s). 😎👍 DNA testing on identical twins & on triplets, quadruplets, etc. have indeed yielded slightly differing results - but, there may be other factors causing this.
I don't think anyone said you don't descend from your paper trail ancestors or that you may not inherit any dna from them. It is just genealogical ancestors and genetic ancestors. At least with genetic ancestors there is no doubt you descend from them, but with genealogical ancestors there is always doubt.
@@Ponto-zv9vf DNA evidence definitely adds weight & clues - & sometimes absolute proof - to geneaological issues. Paper evidence is most helpful - esp where specific names of individuals are concerned & esp for some distant relationships in which there's no longer any solid DNA evidence available. There will always be folk who doubt - regardless of the types & amounts of evidence. Only YHWH our God knows all & is therefore without any doubts. Note that not all DNA test analyses are equal - nor are inherited markers equal among close kin - so the test results of certain known relatives can be added to one's own results for a more complete picture of one's ancestry - & for more clues (noting that nobody nowadays has a totally complete picture, but rather folk now have a jigsaw-puzzle-like picture with many of the pieces missing - at best).
Ha. I have never heard a Scots accent like that before. Maybe I am too used to my brother in law from Edinburgh. It's not irritating, you have to get used to it.
@Ponto-zv9vf I've tried, believe me😂 because his subject matters are undeniably interesting, but it's not only the accent, it's the way he puts emphasis (or perhaps lack of) on the ends of his sentences. I'm sure he's a canny lad, and as yet, I'm not sure about AI, but in this case it may be of benefit to him😂😂
And sometimes you have people like me who the pedigree collapse starts nearly right out the door. For example my step-great-grandfather is also my paternal first cousin one time removed. Yeah you heard that right. My paternal first cousin wants removed married my maternal great grandmother. And my mom had some sort of relationship with my father that resulted in me. My father is my mother's half second cousin. So it makes for a very very very very very very odd tree
Due to war and other idiocies and the necessity of having children - it probably was not that uncommon or 'odd' with Cousins and all that - I also think if the Mom and Dad were super physically divergent and the kids were also that would also have led to incestuous breeding in times of duress - (I'm not advocating just elucidating)
@@TotalFreedomTTT-pk9st Oh I totes understand. I was born post war and was actually an affair baby, but because my dad is my mom's half second cousin there are lots of questions no one can answer as both are deceased.
Your DNA came from someone. Eventually we have all the same ancestors. Enough with all of the disinformation. Neanderthals are Eurasians and Denisovans are a mix of Eurasians and Sino Canaanite tribe of Sinim with the D y-hg in Asia and or the House of Nimrod with the C y-hg both of which are Hamitic. Evidence shows that Native Americans crossed the Atlantic to Central America from the Mediterranean Sea. There are four or more haplogroup lineages that show this migration route, the A C&D maternal lineages and the Q paternal lineage as well as probably the C paternal lineages made this same crossing. People are ignoring actual known human history. The actual historical records and DNA migrations show that everyone spread out from Mesopotamia. Ancient history is essential for everyone to know, especially the sixteen original civilizations… from the sixteen grandsons of Noah. We should learn ancient history before trying to learn science. 1. The first inhabitants of Italy (K) Tubal 2. Thracians (L) Tiras 3. Greek sea people (T) Javan 4. Siberians & East Asians (NO) Magog 5. Eastern Europeans & East Eurasians (P) Meshek 6. Medes (Q) Madai 7. Western Europeans (R) Gomer 8. Hebrews and Arabic (IJ) Arphaxad 9. Elamites (H) Elam 10. Assyrians (G) Asshur 11. Arameans (F1) Aram 12. Lydians (F2) Lud 13. Cushites (AB, C) Cush 14. Egyptians (E3) Mitzrayim 15. Canaanites (E2, D) Canaan 16. Original North African Phoenicians (E1) Phut The D paternal haplogroup Sino descendants of Canaan migrated from Canaan east to China all the way to Japan and Tibet. The C paternal haplogroup descendants of Nimrod migrated as far as South Asia, Australia, the Pacific, Mongolia and all the way to the Americas accounting for the Olmec civilization in Central America as well as the Q haplogroup descendants of Madai ancestor of the Medes that crossed the Atlantic to Central America. The A maternal mtDNA haplogroup belonging to the Semitic N lineage accompanied the Eurasian Q paternal haplogroup to Central America. The C&D maternal haplogroups belonging to the Eurasian M lineage also accompanied the Atlantic crossing of the Q paternal haplogroup Medes and probably the C paternal haplogroup to Central America. The Semitic B maternal mtDNA haplogroup seems to have crossed the Pacific Ocean to South America. The Mediterranean paternal R1b and the maternal X2a also found in Galilee represent another Atlantic crossing of the Phoenicians in the days of King Solomon considering also the Mediterranean paternal Y chromosome haplogroups of T, G, I1, I2, J1, J2, E and B in addition to the R1b in Native American Populations. J1 and J2 is Arabs and Jews. (I1 is most likely Dan and I2 resembles the movements of the tribe of Asher) Of course there is also the Cohen modal haplotype of J1 P58 as well which identifies the IJ lineage of Hebrews and Arabs that are descended from Arphaxad. J2 M172 is the largest group of descendants probably of the House of the kings David and Solomon. Now you know a lot more of what is verified human history. Neanderthals were Eurasians descended from Japheth and Denisovans are a mix of Eurasians and Canaanites and or Cushites descended from Ham. We know this because people living today have Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA. The mtDNA lineage of the out of Africa claim goes from African to Eurasian and then to Semitic while the Y chromosome lineage goes from African to Semitic and then Eurasian. So according to that Africans produced Semitic males and Eurasian females who then produced Eurasian males and Semitic females. *The reality is that all of these lineages had to have existed simultaneously.*
Thank you for explaining the percentages - it's something most people don't seem to understand. What/who your random ancestor was even 250 years ago is pretty negligible with regards to your DNA. I've gone back a few generations and looked at the etymology of my ancestors' surnames, and they're either English, Welsh, Norman or Germanic 🤷
Though since your ancestors 250 years ago, will have been much less socially, and probably geographically, mobile, they'll likely have reproduced with their own near relatives. So unless the 'random ancestor' was an 'exotic' addition to the family, you likely share more of their DNA than you'd expect statistically. For example, about 250 years ago, a direct ancestor of mine was James Hogg's older brother. That's probably eight generations ago. Statistically I'd share only 1/256 of James Hogg's DNA, and my dad and grandpa only 1/128 and 1/64 of it. Yet it's not that surprising that both Dad and his father had the same distinctive tuft of curly, frizzy hair you see on his portraits. While Dad and I both have/had hair as red or more so than his, and his long-fingered, narrow hands. The surname has been passed on, so likely all down to my Dad shared an almost identical Y chromosome. Perhaps the frizzy 'coo's lick' was on that chromosome? But ALSO, the family on my dad's side have remained living within 15 miles for the generations since, and 550 years before! So despite input from three other areas of Scotland, plus Northern England and Ireland (at least) in the intervening generations, probably three quarters of Dad's ancestors were ALSO closely related to James Hogg, and his brother. Thus James Hogg's portrait doesn't so much show 'James Hogg', as 'an example of one of several dominant Ettrick/Selkirkshire/Teviotdale native types'. Probably a mix of Brittonic, Anglian, Scots and Norse, that had been settled and 'fixed' in the area for a good few centuries by then. Until the Industrial Revolution, most people will have been as 'fixed' types as sheep breeds are today! Probably everyone in the Borders was basically a Blackie or a Cheviot, a Scott or a Kerr. With a few exotic Border Leicesters added in the 1780s! 🤣 I've been mistaken for the brother of another well-known local, who can't have a shared ancestor closer than at least four generations back (if we have one!) - But who is similarly VERY much of the same 'stock'. Another family name that's hung around here for at least three hundred years. And by 'here', I mean within ten miles of here.
@@louisehogg8472 This is true - before the Industrial Revolution most people lived in small rural communities so there will be likely more overlap than you'd expect. I know there is a churchyard in a village in Sussex where half the names are my family name
Yes. That is why my tree stops at my 5th great grandparents. I could go further back but there is no way I could prove real relatedness or just chance because of coming from a certain ethnic group.
Thanks for watching! Please let me know your thoughts below and if you have traced your ancestry and what you found out...
I’ve found that my ancestors were from Normandy, Netherlands, France, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, Ireland, Scotland and Welsh
DNA for Plants, Animals and People comes from God's creation
Sorry you are batting in the junior league
Leave what can't explain correctly
I just rechecked for another video and I'm still mindblown: 1,6 Neanderthal and 0,6 Denisovan - at least according to Ancient Calculator (Yvngfinn).
That's about the maximum percentage one can inherit from a person 9-10 generations ago... - I mean, I 'know' at least the vague location 2/3rds of my 9th-10th paper-ancestors (blame the Czech and the Italians for improper 17th century record-keeping and two other communities for allowing their churches to burn down without bothering to rescue the papers in the sacristy). That one of them should - at least statistically - qualify as a Neanderthal and let's say: their mother-in-law as a Denisovan is a bit... 🤣🤣🤣 well, rather highly amusing.
So if after certain point one loses who is one's ancestor, how do dna archeologist can connect neanderthal dna to modern humans?
@@dramirezg70 Due to the 3 European founder-populations being ALL derived from Neanderthal-mixing there were no non-mixed people around, and the NT inheritance got incorporated in the HS heritage.
Since NT seem to have passed on the genes that allow a survival in cold climate, they were positively selected, and the modern african variants that were unhelpful with colder temperatures got all bred out.
(But... I still can't find a purpose for those superfluous 'wisdom' molars, them not really fitting in smaller HS jaws. 'Modern Humans' - like Ötzi - have 4 teeth less. The additional teeth only come handy, if a child bites a tooth out while young, but our HS children don't gnaw on bones. We only cook bone-broths... - Yeah... writing that, I just realized: you need pottery for cooking bonebroths, throwing hot stones in a leatherbag, does not cook your left over bones... so... there MIGHT be some reason for additional molars in a pre-cooking-pot population.)
In building my family tree, I discovered that the mother of my paternal grandfather was the product of a marriage between two first cousins. That information continues to blow my mind a little.
I'm portuguese, in my family endogamy runs a lot.
It's only when it happens repeatedly that it's an issue
Large families of siblings, living in small, rural communities that weren't very mobile, can easily produce this effect.
@@louisehogg8472 They were rich families who wanted to accumulate even more wealth. Arranged marriages.
My uncle married an orphan girl and they loved each other do much and were a lovely couple who died at a good age. But after they had their five children they discovered that they were cousins from their mother's side. Their eldest son is not right in his head but not badly physically affected in any way. He is a person you can handle only in very small doses.
Of course this was by chance and not by design. We are very careful to stay far away from such unions.
I traced my lineage back as far as my parents, who were livid. Otherwise, I could watch these videos all day. Excellent work yet again, sir.
🤣
Yes. I am nuts about history and because my husband comes from a very auspicious lineage I had to trace mine. I was very surprised how auspicious my own family lineage is. But, when I shared it with my own family they were very critical of my findings and did their own research which confirmed that my results were correct the I'll feelings however made me wish I had kept it to myself.
But one or two other people knowing that I did this research also asked me to do it for their families. I agreed but I kept it absolutely confidential and after I gave it to them I deleted any record that I had of their families. One could be traced right back to the time of the Roman empire in Italy.
I am fully aware that your family heritage is so personal that it encompasses your personal identity. Because of this people guard it very close to their chest and if anyone tries to find it out it hits a very deep note in their psyche.
In South Africa where I live you cannot get any records for any relative who has passed away for 100 years after their demise. This law is to protect any relative of that person who is still alive. After 100 years at least 3 generations should have passed making it safe to uncover any details about them.
To show you how relevant this law is I will tell you a true story.
When I researched my family tree I found out how my ancestors were cheated out of a substantial amount of revenue and property by another branch of the family. But because this happened about 200 years ago I cannot seek redress for their crime but because of the time lapse it does not worry me or effect my own financial situation. However I have not revealed this to my family because there is a chance that the more greedy ones will try to get back at these long dead relatives and regain the lost wealth. I doubt very much that they will get it right but I dread the thought of how ugly it could get.
Sometimes the older people know something which they dont want you to find out. It might taint the honour of the family. You have to respect their wishes. But if it is really your wish to trace your family tree my advice would be to do it incognito but keep it absolutely private and talk to no one about it. If you wish to pass it on to your children and grandchildren at least wait until your parents pass on so that it will not hurt their feelings. You owe it to them.
I traced mine all the way back to Adam.... Took a couple of assholes as teachers who refused to allow previous data to be part of a different project... I had the same roadblock at every pass to contact the master of the archives of the Vatican. So through the help of a friend I did. The pope himself replied back. I was presented with two swords. The one is the sword of the King of Jerusalem(ye the sword made from gold harvested from the bodys of the people of Palestine, the other is the sword High Chieftain of Eurasia Africa and all Islands yes the sword given to the Great Hun High Chieftain when the Holy Roman Empire surrendered. Two of the many heirlooms like outright ownership of Palestine and of all properties of all Christians Jews Gentiles Islamics and of every royal family of every royal house mortal and immortal seen and unseen on every world every people every tribe every speck in creation belongs to me alone and I gift it all to Jesus Nazarite Christ Junior High King of Palestine King of Jerusalem King of the Jews and Hebrews and of all life and all death and hell and the grave and the high heavens and low heavens and the many versions of Earth for this is the way of the truth of it, all is mine to give to whome I will and I give everything to my boi Jesus Christ in whome i am well pleased in the choice to be Palestinian King of the Jews and Gentiles and Hebrews and Christians and Muslims.
I am my own 8th cousin, according to genealogy records. Massachusetts Colony had some wild times! 😂
Omg same 😂 also Massachusetts Colony
I too have Massachusetts colonist ancestors
You're always balanced according to the data, and present it well.
Thanks
Really great explanation of a complex subject! Many thanks!!!!
Thank you
My family traced back to England in 1730. 100% English. But my Ancestry DNA was 100% Irish. You never know what to expect from those tests.
That's odd. Irish people have Irish surnames. AncestryDNA said I was 100% Malta, there is nothing but Maltese surnames in my family.
Good explanation of what can be complicated and confusing subject.
Thanks for the video it explains things More the knowledge more the wisdom cheers
My sister got cancer last year so she went for genetic testing boy the doctor was shocked when he came out and looked at my fair-skinned blonde haired blue-eyed sister he actually asked her do you know your ancestry, she's oblivious to these things so I think she told him know but I know our family's history back as far as 2000 years on one side and even further on another.
But what the genetic doctor told my sister was interesting to even me not only are there large amounts of denisovan and Neanderthal but we have all three ghost lineages. I had to explain to my sister what a ghost lineage is and where they came from in our family tree.
I do not have the skull shape of a modern human, I am far stronger than I should be I've never broken a bone and I have lived a very intense life.
Oh and according to the genetic testing my sister shouldn't have cancer I knew this ahead of time because no one else in our family extended family anywhere has ever had cancer,,, she got this fast acting cancer within two years of the shot,, the same shot that killed my fiance 4 days after he took it
Sorry for the cancer diagnosis of your sister. Dna just tells you of your probability but not whether you will get some nasty disease or disorder. I have seen the dna results of many Northern Europeans and phenotypically they are not blond and often not blue eyed.
Idiot
Further to my DNA testing I am a direct descendent of Birger Jarl of Sweden who lived from 1210 until 1266 making him my 32nd great grandfather . I am I1M253a2b and we all have a common ancestor who lived about 5000 years ago in Southern Sweden ,though some researchers give the lower River Elbe basin as its origin .Time to the most recent common ancestor is about 2600 years .
Descendent, rather than ancestor.
@@louisehogg8472 The words used in the post at present are correct as written,
@@philroberts7238 thanks, Andrew Norrie corrected his comment.
@@louisehogg8472 Ah, I did wonder.
I complain too much, so I deleted my previous comment here. Only the ambiguity combined with the inexactness of the title falls short of your otherwise excellent work! I look forward to future installments, in this vein, or more on-topic, or otherwise. Thanks!
Here’s what I’m curious about. If you probably don’t have your great great great grandparents or uncles DNA, how were they able to confirm Richard the III’s body with the DNA of his great great whatever nephew in 2012?
If it's an unbroken line of males, or an unbroken line of females, between a descendant and an ancestor, then DNA is traceable further back.
The other part this guy is talking about is called autosomal DNA.
I'm not great at these concepts, but those two cases are special cases, where you can trace something further back genetically.
Dr Turi King explains Richard III DNA confirmation....
th-cam.com/video/oyE9sVs_s58/w-d-xo.htmlsi=q0fjwsxeIZ8RqLft
The Y-chromosome can't change, because it gets passed from father to son - unchanged! All other chromosomes can be reshuffeled in each generation - but the mitrochondrial DNA is passed via the female line (unchanged too)😅
My aunts did a test once and were told they were "complete opposites" in all the markers that had been observed - although they at least had to own the same X-chromosome they inherited from their father😂
I studied my ancestry, and was surprised to find out how sedentary both my maternal and paternal ancestors were: from the same general regions of Aberdeenshire and Staffordshire - for centuries.
Thank YOU. Interesting indeed.
1 brother and I took Ancestry dna test. Have same parents but he looks like Dad and I look like Mom. Ancestry thrulines show some same connections and a few that only match either him or me, not both. Weird but interesting.
Well that is normal. I have 7 siblings, I am the only one dna tested, so I don't have what you have received from dna testing. What I have learnt is that I have a 1st cousin on my father's side and a 2nd cousin on my mother's side. Sounds strange but I don't know either, my parents didn't have anything to do with their families due to immigration.
Thank you! First time I am hearing this!
Excellent work, Thank you.
Thank you
I have done ancestry dna and the most frustrating part is that you get regions instead of countries. From genealogical research I know a lot of my ancestors were Dutch. But the Dutch are lumped into the England and Northwestern Europe category. I also know I have English ancestry, so the basically fifty percent English and Northwestern category doesn’t tell me how english or dutch I am. I understand because there was so much flow between the Netherlands and England they can’t really distinguish the two, but I wish I could get a more precise breakdown, the way I can between my Swedish and Norwegian ancestry. Admittedly, they are pretty good in other areas. My grandfather was jewish and came from Lithuania when it was part of Russia and they can pinpoint the area in Lithuania and Latvia he came from pretty accurately (he passed long before I was gone, but I have traced him genealogically to a specific place in Lithuania.)
I'm not sure how accurate those ethnicity charts are. Mine keep changing over the years, and by a lot.
Karin of course brohh are you dumb?? Country's are made by man each 100 Years, wanna Example now?? Russia now have more parts of Ukraina, Also Austria is the size of Portugal Today but In 1888 Austria was Bigger than Germany so can you understand that one day many present country were actually Austria so that's EXACTLY WHY.
That is the problem of coming from closely related ethnic groups. On AncestryDNA my ethnic group can be distinguished from others by greater than 90% accuracy.
In the UK we are fortunate in having surname, some of which go back over a thousand years.
Most people in the British Isles have King Edward III as a common ancestor.
according to 23andme on my mothers side, I share a common female ancestor with King Richard the 3rd
I am not British but I am probably related to those monarchs and so are many other Europeans.
I've built my family tree, it wasn't that difficult once you work out your recent relatives I mean grandparents, great grandparents. It might sound odd but many people don't know their grandparents, and definitely don't know their great grandparents. I was born in Malta, and as I said once you get through the recent relatives it's easy to go further via church records that a Mr. Adami recorded by copying church records from each church. The problem of course is missing records, and with Maltese people the habit of naming children after Joseph and Mary, and the many very common surnames. So far, my ancestors are holding up by dna testing. As far as the ethnicity of my ancestors, it's not important to me, and anyway I use G25 coordinates and Yahaduo to work out my ancient ancestry from Neolithic farmers, Steppe herders, HGs ....
People don't understand how deep time goes.
We wouldn't physically be able to carry DNA from every single ancestor- there's just too many.
I was mind blown to see me as a direct descendant of two distant ancestors who had the same parents, and both of them were direct ancestors of mine. I thought it could be incest. I was born in Mexico and raised in the United States. I also have discovered ancestors born in Spain, Portugal and Italy. I also descend from a few famous ancestors. I have gone far back like 20 generations already to find ancestors. I can't wait to tell stories to my children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Fascinating! Thank you for explaining this.
Fascinating to see the slide showing all 22+2 chromosomes. I knew Y was small and X larger, but I'd never seen how much variation there is in size between the other 22 pairs. Is mitochondrial DNA separate? I thought it was on the X chromosome.
Mitochondrial DNA is separate. It has nothing to do with chromosomal DNA that is located in the nucleus. Mitochondria are believed to be remnants of bacteria swallowed by our amoeba- like single-cell ancestors.
Complete separate. It is contained inside the mitochondria. That’s also the reason it is always from your mothers side. The male perm only puts his chromosomes into the female egg. No other organelles.
@@sonkeschluter3654 ah. I didn't know that. Cool! I can see why they think mitochondria might have originated as a single celled creature absorbed to generate energy for us.
See your body as a very complex machine, that needs two similar machinescto get started at all: the mitochondria are the batteries, that keep those machines running: they come with the bigger egg of the female part. Sperms just provide information "batteries not included"😅
You do. You just don't inherit their genes.
Specifically, you don't always inherit DNA; genes were discussed about in the abstract long before DNA was discovered; I don't think nucleic acid and the academics who study it should get to monopolise the term with a specialist definition.
EDIT: i.e. there are non-physical, non-material components to heritage.
Very good video
Thanks
My sons got very diffent results on their test and I share more centimorgens with my younger son than I do with my older son.
This is fascinating how it all works. Recently I did a DNA test and was a bit surprised that 17% was from Scandinavia, and 6% from Eastern Europe. It was surprising because my family line has been in Alabama for a long time before slavery was ended, and it's not like there were that many slave owners from Scandinavia or Eastern Europe in Alabama lol.
I know one of my great grandfathers was mixed race, but pretty much everyone else that I know of for the last 3 or 4 generations or so married other black people, so I really wonder where that DNA came from? Maybe there was some hanky panky going on that no one knew about?
Nearly all descendants of the trans Atlantic slave trade across North & South America have substantial recent European admixture, in the USA, it averages about 24%, so you are well within that range. The European admixture will be coming from all sides, it may be picking up the alleles of Scandinavia via English settlers, who themselves show some admixture from this region, plus the USA has had a large German influx the past 200 years, so there could be admixture there too, introducing Eastern European.
It all depends on which company you use and where they have their base samples from and how they chose to label it, plus how many others are in their database to compare too, over time as more people submit, the percentages can change.
Also, these DNA companies are not doing a full genome sequence, they "sample" common areas known to have differences to get an overall idea. Think of it like a huge book, they are not sampling every single letter but random words on every other page for comparison.
I've got DNA-linked Quaker Wrights in America by the mid-1600s, Loyalist Wrights in Canada in 1783, both way before my Wright 2ggm left Ireland following the Famine. No links between them. There are more shared lines to Presidents and English aristocracy than to my close family like her. That sucks!
my son looks like his great great grandfather on his mothers side which in turn is my fathers side of the family my daughter has looks of my mothers side of the family so it looks like my 3 kids have more facial features of there mothers side of the family but they all got blond blue eyes and im dark hair green eyes there father blond and blue eye
I had been taking DNA tests with different companies since they were introduced at the beginning of the 2000's. But my ethnicity results on my autosomal DNA tests did not seem to reflect my paternal family tree. This is because on my father's side he had a lot of ancestry from Wales and Ireland, which was too be expected as he was born in Wales himself. But my autosomal DNA results showed me too be English on both sides of my tree. So at the end of 2019 I asked my two siblings to take a test at Ancestry DNA. When the results came back in the spring of 2020 they showed that my younger sister and I are full siblings, but we are both half siblings with our older brother. Cousin matches on Ancestry DNA have confirmed that our older brother is the son of our mother's husband, but my sister and I are a result of a cuckoo in the nest. My sister is eight years younger than me so our mother must have been playing away for at least that amount of time. Confirmed cousin matching on Ancestry DNA has proven that the biological paternal grandparents of my sister and I lived next door to us in the house that I was born in 1954 in Chelsea in London. Subsequent testing on the y-chromosomes of my brother and I have shown that he is downstream of haplogroup E-V13, and that I am downstream of haplogroup R-DF21.
Oh damn, these tests are revealing a lot of family secrets. Hope all is well.
One of my great, great, great, great, great grandmothers was native American, and I just barely inherited any DNA from my native American ancestors. The vast majority of my DNA is White European.
This maybe true for microassay DNA, but it isn't the case for exome sequencing.
I manage a lot of DNA in my 80,000+ tree and I learn something everyday about how to use it. Bad trees can cause genealogy software like Ancestry to predict the wrong thruline. I sometimes have to get those other DNA testers to fix their trees before the Thruline matches the source record. Sometimes people are missing a generation, or they have attached themselves to the wrong sibling. I have a Fraternal Twin, that just makes him the same as a sibling. He inherited different DNA so his matches are different. I have 5 siblings. Half have brown hair and brown eyes and half blond hair and hazel green eyes.
What I have found is that on Ancestry most of my cousins have no tree or a very simple tree, both useless for me. I prefer to ignore predications.
😮 I'm very curious now because my brother got his done and it was almost all Northern European with 1% Ashkenazi Jewish. But he looks more like our biodad and I look more like our mom and it's my mom's side that likely has the Jewish ancestry as the surname is Germanic Jewish. Huh.
I suspected this, from a difference in Geneology and family tree...
People traveled alot more a few hundred years ago than what modern humans imagine.
Also people are attracted to both similarities and differences when mating.
Basically Nationality means less than people think in many cases, as it can be assumed in a couple generations.
And genetics is always mixing and boiling...
In my case, the four grand parents were
1. German
2.English/Native American
3.English/Irish
4. Irish.
But the genetics said I was over 90% from the Basque Lands/Brittany Coast region a couple three hundred years ago.
And it made sense of variations in the family.
Both parents look similar, like shorter curly black haired, hazel eyes. With father built like a Neanderthal thick muscle genetics.
Gorrilla like... Mother looked Gypsy-esque...
Basically two short Basque types attracted to each other.
And I turned out like a size small German long walker body type.
Thin, plenty of legs for striding. brown hair, red highlights, hazel eyes. Have the bushy eyebrows of Basques and Welsh...
And my sister turned out looking Scottish/Irish, and an older half sister almost my twin.
Basically you get your genetics from a chian like situation, and siblings can share very few links and be almost entirely different chains with in the same family.
Thanks for your video, told me my analysis was likely correct...
We all like guessing correctly.
My DNA test said I’m 32% Wales(when I have 1 1st GG that was Welsh equaling 10-12.5%), it said 8% England and NWE(when I have two 1st GG from England which is 20-25%), my achiere grand Pere was from Nouveau Brunswick(my 9th to 10th GG were French to immigrated to Canada in the 17th century and became Arcadians), my 6th GG was from Spain in the 18th century as same as his parents and grandparents(if I were to inherit any DNA from them it would be 2% not 0.4% like theory goes as you can receive an arrange of DNA from any 1st-8th GG), another 6th GG was German and my 8th-10th GG were Dutch which would make sense of the 2% Germanic from the DNA test. It said I am 2% Norway when my family fame from England including Ahropshire from my 5th-7th GG. 8% Ireland when my family was Ukster Scot and 4th-6th GG were Irish. 47% Scorland it said when I have 4th-6th GG from Scotland from dad’s side and mum’s paternal grandma still didn’t found out what my mother paternal grandpa is? I’m most dissatisfied with Andsstey as their estimate or ethnicity are wrong/ wouldn’t recommend them for anyone doing Ancestry as they are inaccurate!
That’s not how those percentages are meant to be understood. They show a percentage of your DNA that matches with people in Wales, not that you’re 32% Welsh.
I just found out my great grandparents on my mother's side came from France, but that didn't show up on my DNA results but did show up on my daughter's (not from her father) could this be why ?
I know very little about this topic, but if my Y DNA is R1b, doesn't that associate with my father's father's father, etc, going back thousands of years to some early population of ancestors?
That is correct. Your y-dna results only represent a very small (but laser-focused) snippet of your total genetic makeup. And yes, it is on your strictly paternal line, as you said. That dna does mutate, but quite gradually. R1b is the most common y haplogroup in western Europe. I have the R1b result on both my father's paternal line as well as my mother's paternal line (I had a maternal Uncle tested for discovering my maternal grandfather's y-dna).
@@philandrews2860 That's really interesting, thank you for the explanation
Very good explanation, thanks.
@@philandrews2860 Well its been in Western Europe a long time, from the Bronze Age. It's a Western Steppe Herder haplogroup. R1b exists in Africa as well, among sub Saharan Africans that live around Lake Chad.
This is why Autosomal admixture results are not that interesting to me. They just show you some percentage of what todays people you look like. You don't get much history from that.
I find Haplogroups more interesting, because I am more fascinated with history. With Haplogroups you can for instance trace your fathers line of all grandfathers back to distant or close time periods and tell more about their history, where they were, what they might have been part of historically and so on.
Damn your Scot accent 😂❤
I wanna know where the gold at
I don't get it
I have a rough - unbaked theory that the traits one was picked or selected for - like fairness - or pretty Asian eye's - or tallness or etc etc - would also 'dominate' in the genetic expression - so if there were 4 children - MORE than half would get that selected attribute
It doesn't work like that because genes are unpredictable. It depends on the combination of genes from both parents.
@@n30418 Some genes are 'turned on ' or expressed - I don't think it is 100% random - two brown eye's can have a child with blue eye's - Blond hair also tends to dominate contrary to the Mendelian logic
@@TotalFreedomTTT-pk9st brown eyes are dominant alleles so they get expressed more. If two brown eyed parents have a child the child has more of a chance of having brown eyes even if the both parents have blue eye recessive alleles. Nature doesn't look for the most attractive genes and make sure they appear in offspring it's about probability.
@@TotalFreedomTTT-pk9st brown hair is expressed more than blond hair because brown hair is a dominant allele. Brown eyes are expressed more than blue eyes because brown eyes are a dominant allele. If there are two parents and one has blue eyes but the other has brown, it's more likely that their baby will have brown eyes. Nature doesn't select what genes people find attractive, it's all done randomly.
@@n30418 men with many brothers, produce more sons than daughters. I.e for those with THAT particular Y chromosome, Y results more often than X. Or at least survives to birth more often. Despite X surviving to birth more often than Y, in the general population.
Genetic Ancestry And Epigenetics
People of a quarrying background have phenomenal physical strength however they tend not to be very academic and as they grow older have an acute problem with obesity and diabetes.
This correlates with their ancestors working in quarries for generations potentially going back thousands of years doing backbreaking manual work on a near starvation diet.
People of a coal mining background tend to be very athletic with a considerable amount of muscle mass and in these regions rugby is the dominant sport.
The physical characteristics for coal mining by hand and rugby overlap.
For a long time carts full of coal were pushed down the tunnels by hand and the surface of the floor had been very uneven thus very tough aerobic manual work and this type of physique overlaps with the optimum physique for rugby.
Deep mines have only existed since the miners lamp had been developed in 1815.
The first miner's safety lamp was developed in 1815 by Sir Humphry Davy, an English scientist and inventor.
People who dug the canals and docks by hand.
The canals and docks had to be dug by hand as the rock had to stay watertight and explosives would crack the rock thus the water would drain away.
There is vast differences in the density of sandstone rock.
The sandstone rock had been dug by hand using steel bars and/or steel chisels and ump hammers.
This type f work favours those with very strong hands and arms and not having strength in their legs thus a boxing physique.
The regions where they recruited people to di the canals their is a culture of boxing with very little rugby if any at all.
When I have visited Yorkshire I have always been aware there is a very strong historic culture of rugby but almost zero culture of boxing especially in the rural areas where the mines were located.
The type of physique that enabled someone to work in the historic industries of Quarrying and Coal Mining and Digging Canals and Docks before machines were used were very very different.
These different physiques for Quarrying, coal mining and navies to dig docks and canals by hand correlates with different sports that are dominate in these regions.
This is there the potential for epigenetics to supersede other variables for dominant genetic characteristics depending upon the major industry of the region?
Northern Ireland the regions where they recruited people to dig the canals and docks by hand there is a very strong culture of boxing.
Above is personal observations and personal opinions however the evidence to support the above is overwhelming.
The significance on extreme environmental variables upon the genetics of a region be it Quarrying or Coal Mines or a history of recruiting navies to dig canals or docks.
A certain physique and thus specific genetic alleles will dominate and proliferate in a region depending upon the principle economic industry of that region as discussed above.
Comments welcome
Agree.
Like 80% of Scots, I've got the red hair genes. Like only a fraction of those, I've got it on both sides or dominant, and therefore the red hair that's useful for maximising vitamin D production from daylight. Fortunately, I continue to live in Scotland, where I don't have to negate the benefit by shielding myself from strong sunlight.
Unfortunately I only discovered recently, that it correlates with a REDUCED ability to absorb vitamin D from food. So to maintain vitamin D levels, I can't just take the shortcut of a supplement, but really SHOULD be out in all that 'Scotch mist' (rain) more often! 😕 Presumably wearing my see-you-Jimmy hat. 🤣
Unlike Dad (ancestors from Skye), I HAVEN'T got the hemochromatosis 'tendency', that would be as useful for preventing middle-aged woman anaemia, as it was In preventing pre-Agricultural Revolution no-red-meat-or-green-veg-in-winter anaemia, in crofting areas. (Is this why Lewis became known for their black pudding? A very good source of iron that I eat every week.)
Based on this, to what extent do you think those wishing to improve their health, or with naturally fragile health, should aim to incorporate the diet and physical habits of their ancestors?
It's a no brainer that folk from the far East are best to avoid dairy and minimise alcohol. But, in addition to going out more (even when it's raining), and stocking up on black pudding, what else should I be doing?
I'm from a rugby area, but herding-farming-woollen mills, rather than coal. Athletic build, but unfortunately have flat feet (from the fishermen side of the family) limiting my running ability. Logically, I 'should' have the stamina for walking many miles a day looking for sheep. (I certainly lack the physical strength for heavy digging.).
Despite the wonky feet, I DID manage a job where I was standing up all day. Which I suppose the mills would have selected for?
And despite all shepherding, mill work and joiners being before my time, I love all things woolly, sheep, wood and collie dogs. So I guess the breeding of the previous 750 years hasn't been cancelled out by the contrary education and training of the last 50!
@jonahwhale9047 the posh schools Vs working class, was more rugby Vs football. With the two sports only really diverging 100-150 years ago, I'm not sure how much difference that really represented? Jethart hand/fitba' is as much rugby as it is football. While early rugby players at posh schools weren't loaded up with weight and muscle like modern forwards.
As for running up hills after sheep, I saw a Border Leicester sheep get loose at Peebles Show once. It took 7 of the farmers/shepherds/officials to catch it. That beastie had as good an eye for a gap as any 7s player I've seen! The most entertaining five minutes of the Show. It could be a new sport in itself. Lol.
@jonahwhale9047 true, I think the OC was referring mainly to Welsh rugby? Or rugby league? I'm in the Scottish Borders.
My Dads family tends to be strong when young, and overweight with age. I’ve always thought it was their history of laboring work as farmers down through the generations. Interestingly, I did my DNA and compared it through several
sites. Even though most of my family have been in the US since the early 16 and 1700’s, I am 99 percent British and Irish. That’s a bit higher than some Brits I’ve seen tested.
I’m still wondering what the answer is. I mean, I’m a scientist myself. I get the math. 7 generations is where you hit over 100 ancestors, so the amount inherited is less that 1%. BUT we also have more than 100 genes. That’s why the ancestry testing sites can break it down to tenths, albeit with low accuracy. And that accuracy will likely improve over time with further research. So, the REAL question is NOT: “At what point does your ancestor count exceed 100?” (7 generations). The REAL question is, at what point does your ancestor count exceed the unique gene count (excluding genes that all humans have that are the same)? THAT is the point at which genetic DNA inheritance will hit the 50-50 shot, NOT at 7 generations. True, the amount of genetics inherited from any one individual at that point may be minuscule and, indeed, there is an increasing chance, with every generation, that it’s zero. But that point is NOT 7 generations. That’s using the arbitrary 1% threshold. The threshold we need to use is 1% of the genes that vary across humans. One generation beyond that and THEN it’s less than a 50/50 shot that you’ve inherited any genetic material from those ancestors. That’ll be back more than seven generations. But how much more? One more generation? Two more? Three more? Five more? Ten more?
I’d honestly like to know the answer, as I have some fascinating genealogical history. Am I actually blood related to these folks or not. At what point does that disappear (or become less than a 50/50 chance). Seven generations is incorrect. That’s 1%. But if we have 200 unique genes then 0.5% would be statistically significant, so eight generations would work. And what if it’s 400 genes? Or 800? Or 1600? Or 3200?
I think I read somewhere that it’s about 3000. But I’m absolutely unsure of that. ***IF*** that’s the case, you can go back 12 generations (not seven) and have better than a 50/50 shot of inheriting DNA from them.
We need to do the math correctly. 1% isn’t the proper threshold. Seven generations is incorrect. It needs to be based on the number of unique genes that are available to be inherited. If that’s 100 (and I don’t think it is), then seven generations remains correct. But I’m almost certain it’s NOT 100. So…….. what’s the answer?
I hope you understand the point I’m raising. The oft-used seven generation explanation is mathematically flawed. So much so that we can even say it’s irrelevant. 1% is just a random number if 1% of the unique genes you inherit is 10 or 20 or 100. 1% is only relevant if we inherit 100 genes.
You are more expert than I am. So, hopefully, with this correction on the flawed math, you can answer the question.
So, does this mean we can be somehow distantly related, because there aren’t that many real redheads in the world. We are remarkably rare considering the billions of people in the world.
I'm just a commoner so my family name means very little
Lots of “commoners” may have well known or noble ancestors.
@@gj1234567899999yes, but that doesn't make you important
Me too, i'm not very worried with any pedigree, although i feel respect for true blue bloods like the Swedish guy. It's just the fake ones that brag a lot that i find irritating.
All people are common, it's just a few that get the fickle finger of fate that makes them artificially ennobled. Realistically what does King Charlie have to do with Alfred the great or King Canute. I'll tell you, nothing.
According to Adam Ruherford, all Europeans are descended from First Nation Australians living about 5000 years ago.
That means that when Europeans went to Australia, they were literally returning to the lands of their ancestors.
I don't know how he worked that one out. Considering that the ancestos of indigenous Australians have been on the continent of Australia for tens of thousands of years, it seems unlikely. I don't like Mr. Rutherford.
@@Ponto-zv9vfIt's not what Rutherford said. This guy is distorting what was said to spread an agenda.
The OP explains the concept of genealogical ancestors and how the further back, everyone alive today in a given area will be related genealogically in someway to those alive who left living descendants in the past, for Europeans it is likely as recently as 1000-1200 years ago, for all humans as recent as 2500-8000 years ago.
That doesn't mean "Europeans" descend for Aboriginal Australians or vice versa, just if you went back, there would be at least one (out of perhaps tens/hundreds of thousands of ancestors) who would be in the tree of all the two groups.
Yes we descend from all of our ancestors, we would not exist, had they not existed. No, of course we don’t inherit all of their genetics, we have thousands upon thousands of those
The point is you can say Michale O'Faherty is your 5th great grand father but saying so doesn't mean he is. If you cannot prove a dna connection to the man then it can be seen as conjecture no matter what your paper trail shows.
Change just 1 egg /sperm combination in your entire ancestor tree and you would not be you. Now consider this for every person who has ever existed.
How then does one inherit a Rare diseases such as Porphyria that only date back to certain types of people get transferred to individuals today?? Im an inhertor of such. Yes my surname is English. Ormond. Would be interesting to understand these diseases as not much is known about it or how to treat it. Its Painful and can drive one almost insane at times. We need Help with this because research...Well. Not many have it. HAD to be passed through genetics. So if not how else?
Sometimes it's the result of an unlikely mutation. Most people have about 100 differences to their parents, spot mutations. Also older parents produce defective dna particularly older men in their sperm.
@@Ponto-zv9vf Thank You...I understand what you are trying to convey. However Family History doesn't lie. There is a linage. A beginning origin. Like other diseases that only congregate around certain peoples and has been passed down through millennials not just the last 2-300 hundred years. Just because it's Easier to accept there was something wrong with my parents. Which there wasn't. But other ancestry I Know and Proves it's hereditary through genetics. Several individuals throughout history helped send the genetics to today's world. I'm Proof. Kind of like Sickle Cell. A passed down hereditary defection by genetics. It started with Someone... leading to many. There's a correlation to this.
Then why does Neanderthal and Denizen DNA show up in modern humans?
Good question!
Because we all have Neanderthal DNA in us, about 2%
There's two basic points here. If you want to look at it in visual terms, it might help.
Genealogically - You are the result of all of your ancestors. You are the point 🔽 that all of your ancestors combine to on your family tree. (You are highly likely to have ancestors from multiple continents and countries)
Genetically - The DNA that you have inherited from each ancestor gets less and less with each generation that passes 🔼the further back in time you go. (You can't claim to be intellectually or racially superior because your GGGGGGGGGG Granddad was a Viking called Eric)
These, of course, are not nice neat broad equilateral triangles, regardless of whether you are speaking genetically or genealogically. Politely put, there's overlap. If there is an attempt to keep bloodlines limited the triangles become narrower (isosceles) both genetically and genealogically, leading to in-bred diseases. The same happens with pockets of populations in outlying areas with limited transport. (Don't sleep with your cousin because her bus is cancelled and she can't get home tonight).
What did strike me recently regarding genetic 'rinsing' over seven to ten generations is this might be evolutions way of eliminating debilitating conditions that are passed on from parents to their children, eg If your great great Grandmother had cerebral palsy genes that might not affect your generation of siblings at all. (I'm not medically trained, it just crossed my mind) Reminder - Its the last day of the Para-Olympics today
This sort of makes sense with the caveat that what is seen as "Useful" will change quite rapidly.
There will also be some backflow, a link can be lost then return via marriage.
The fact your whole genome comes from only two people and a tiny amount of random mutation.
Theoretically, all the historical mutations could add up so you have a unique genome to anyone who ever existed before, (Theoretically but unlikely unless you start way back in time)
Why highly likely to have ancestors from multiple continents? I mean, I can see why I might have ancestors, 1,000 years ago, from elsewhere in Europe, but beyond that, no, I'm genetically English with a dash of Welsh 🤷
@@davidsoulsby1102 I read Arthur Koestler's book 'The Act of Creation'. It made me think differently about evolution. Its often three steps forwards and four steps back, with a lot of wasted energy on developing lifeforms that just aren't going anywhere. Random, Irrational and not in any way Intentionally Progressive. Not Gaia, not God , just pure luck and coincidence.
Maybe my idea that genetic 'rinsing' is just wanting to see some sort of order in the Universe
Very few will mention incest which is obvious.
Not related but I want everyone to know about this, look up James deberty Trudeau tell me who does he look like?
Yes, but sometimes a big whopping chunk is recessive in many generations and the lottery hits and two kids inherit those chunks. Like in my family. My parents both appear to be 100 percent white. They are not. They both are tri-racial. The additions were back in the colonial and frontier times of America to the white bloodlines. Me and my little sister both appeared at birth to of mixed ancestry. I appeared more Native American and my sister Black. I only have one white grandparent. All three appear white. Caused my mom problems in her marriage. Its like 6 and 8 generations back. So, DNA testing only showed up some of it. However, the family tree research facilitated by the DNA testing showed up the ancestry. Genes can be inherited and not expressed. We also carry a gene for methemoglobinemia. Yep, If I am not careful I turn bluish.
My girlfriend’s oldest brother had very light blond hair and blue eyes. Her mom’s background was from Sweden. Out of the five kids Rolf was extremely white 😂. Her dad was black.
That's interesting. I see results in mixed Australian Aborigines and they can vary wildly. I once saw a photograph of a Mestizo couple, one pink skinned, the other quite yellow, they had 6 children, the eldest 2 looked black African, the middle 2 Mestizo, and the last light Europeans.
My dna and family is all messed up, I'm from 6 different countries, and also both my grandfathers were bastards, so it is hard to track their fathers.
We all come from Asu - Oasphe.
My interest is what in our DNA or gentics cause our physical appearance..like from different countries...I toke a DNA test from ancestrydna and I inherited mostly British DNA but also 10% Swedish/ Danish DNA ...ive been told by many people that i look Scandinavian..i feel i look similar to Fridtjof Nansen at least his eyes and cheekbones... He was a Norwegian explorer .. so I'm interested in how someone looks from the genetics??. Thank you for your videos very interesting
I don't know. Someone could look like your Fridjof Nansen and be 100% Greek. It is just the luck of the gun.
@@Ponto-zv9vfI don't have any greek or Mediterranean dna .. only English and Scandinavian..so its not a luck of a gun for me...do you know anything about the science of genetics,dna ,and phenotypes??
That's disappointing, I felt so proud of the 50 percent of genes I share with bananas
I then wasted an hour and a half reading a scientific paper about 2 hemochromatosis genes coming from (it was proposed) palaeolithic farmers in Spain/Portugal and neolithic or more recent farmers among what became Celtic or Viking populations...
Hemochromatosis is something that comes from the Steppe herder ancestry which unfortunately got passed on almost exclusively to the Celts of Britain and Ireland.
I don't agree with this theory that has been developed, as how come my ancestors from 30 generations ago looked more like me, than a random selection of people elsewhere to wherev they were, and they looking more like the people thirty gens beforehand .I mean they did not just come out of the ground in 1800. Though I am not critical of this guy, it's the experts who have not found out everything about DNA, they are missing something.
Okay, I don't understand what you are trying to say. How do you know what your ancestors 30 generations ago looked like? I have never met or seen my grandparents. I wouldn't have a clue whether they looked like me or Joe Blow down the road.
Surnames and family names are the same thing.
I meant first names like John etc
Well... depends on how far back. In the end all of them were cousins, all offspings to a small african tribe, looking for what was out there on the other side of the Red Sea, so: yes. 🤣
I DO
YOU DO NOT!
haha yes tell that crap to my all my grandmother that suffered birth pain, jajaja saludos repeater , you are insane
Well, they should have kept their legs together.
Well duh! You can truly on descend from your FATHER (a direct line). CHILDREN ARE THE SEEDS (bloodline) of their FATHER!
Surname and Family name? Mate, they are the same thing.
Every white guy watching this:
Wait, you mean there's no reliable way to tell if I am a Viking?
I already gave my money to the app!
LOL! and on top of it seems we're just 1% different from each other, this is cracking me up!
@@jackportugge5647 1% of 3 thousand million bases is a lot of differences!
The Vikings were Northern Europeans, they cannot be distinguished from other Northerne Europeans in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. I was told I was 12% Viking of the Scandinavian type for free. I thought it was BS, but then I couldn't of cared either way.
One does indeed descend from every ancestor, but by now one doesn't inherit DNA markers from every ancestor.
Enough DNA markers are inherited by close relatives to determine a parent/child relationship & some other close relationships with a high degree of accuracy; however, accuracy diminishes as relationships become more distant; &, since recombination of DNA keeps on occuring & one inherits only half of each parent's DNA - in whatever recombined mix - it's only a matter of time before there's no DNA marker trace of most of one's very-distant ancestors.
Digs finding old skeletal remains which in turn are DNA tested can greatly help in determining old ethnic DNA markers that one did inherit (though one's children or grandchildren might not inherit from you should such a marker be skipped over in recombination).
Recombination occurs within each parent - in the DNA of every sperm cell & every egg [(an erroneous statement I once had here in this spot was corrected by a comment below, so I removed it)]. If I recall correctly, the recombination in a male produces about a 50/50 split - though the half that his child will receive from him doesn't necessarily contain half of each marker that he has; &, a female's recombination split isn't as equally split as a male's split, as it's closer to a 60/40 split - & again there's a chance that some markers won't be in what her child inherits; so, generally each child of a couple will inherit differently to some degree [& every child can claim the same ancestory of themselves & their full sybling(s) that DNA testing reveals].*
* = Note: Ethnicities determined from DNA are mostly guesstimations - & a DNA testing company's guesswork improves as more folk are tested by that company & as more skeletal remains are tested & the results are made available.
In identical twins, one sperm fertilizes one egg, which then divides into two. The twins genetics are 100 percent identical . There have only been 2 recorded cases where 2 sperm have fertilized one egg; called semi-identical twins or sesquizygotic twins.
@@lisajackson1964
Interesting. My memory isn't exactly stellar; so, thank you for the correction(s).
😎👍
DNA testing on identical twins & on triplets, quadruplets, etc. have indeed yielded slightly differing results - but, there may be other factors causing this.
@@lisajackson1964
I've corrected my error by removing it.
Thanks Again (because truth matters).
😎👍
I don't think anyone said you don't descend from your paper trail ancestors or that you may not inherit any dna from them. It is just genealogical ancestors and genetic ancestors. At least with genetic ancestors there is no doubt you descend from them, but with genealogical ancestors there is always doubt.
@@Ponto-zv9vf
DNA evidence definitely adds weight & clues - & sometimes absolute proof - to geneaological issues.
Paper evidence is most helpful - esp where specific names of individuals are concerned & esp for some distant relationships in which there's no longer any solid DNA evidence available.
There will always be folk who doubt - regardless of the types & amounts of evidence. Only YHWH our God knows all & is therefore without any doubts.
Note that not all DNA test analyses are equal - nor are inherited markers equal among close kin - so the test results of certain known relatives can be added to one's own results for a more complete picture of one's ancestry - & for more clues (noting that nobody nowadays has a totally complete picture, but rather folk now have a jigsaw-puzzle-like picture with many of the pieces missing - at best).
Tried to watch again.....no chance🤣🤣🤣This bloke has THE MOST IRRITATING VOICE on TH-cam. Confirmed 💯%😂😂😂😂
Ha. I have never heard a Scots accent like that before. Maybe I am too used to my brother in law from Edinburgh. It's not irritating, you have to get used to it.
@Ponto-zv9vf I've tried, believe me😂 because his subject matters are undeniably interesting, but it's not only the accent, it's the way he puts emphasis (or perhaps lack of) on the ends of his sentences. I'm sure he's a canny lad, and as yet, I'm not sure about AI, but in this case it may be of benefit to him😂😂
And sometimes you have people like me who the pedigree collapse starts nearly right out the door.
For example my step-great-grandfather is also my paternal first cousin one time removed. Yeah you heard that right. My paternal first cousin wants removed married my maternal great grandmother. And my mom had some sort of relationship with my father that resulted in me. My father is my mother's half second cousin. So it makes for a very very very very very very odd tree
Due to war and other idiocies and the necessity of having children - it probably was not that uncommon or 'odd' with Cousins and all that - I also think if the Mom and Dad were super physically divergent and the kids were also that would also have led to incestuous breeding in times of duress - (I'm not advocating just elucidating)
@@TotalFreedomTTT-pk9st Oh I totes understand. I was born post war and was actually an affair baby, but because my dad is my mom's half second cousin there are lots of questions no one can answer as both are deceased.
@@BonnieDragonKat Oh - I understand
Your DNA came from someone. Eventually we have all the same ancestors. Enough with all of the disinformation. Neanderthals are Eurasians and Denisovans are a mix of Eurasians and Sino Canaanite tribe of Sinim with the D y-hg in Asia and or the House of Nimrod with the C y-hg both of which are Hamitic.
Evidence shows that Native Americans crossed the Atlantic to Central America from the Mediterranean Sea. There are four or more haplogroup lineages that show this migration route, the A C&D maternal lineages and the Q paternal lineage as well as probably the C paternal lineages made this same crossing.
People are ignoring actual known human history. The actual historical records and DNA migrations show that everyone spread out from Mesopotamia. Ancient history is essential for everyone to know, especially the sixteen original civilizations… from the sixteen grandsons of Noah. We should learn ancient history before trying to learn science.
1. The first inhabitants of Italy (K) Tubal
2. Thracians (L) Tiras
3. Greek sea people (T) Javan
4. Siberians & East Asians (NO) Magog
5. Eastern Europeans & East Eurasians (P) Meshek
6. Medes (Q) Madai
7. Western Europeans (R) Gomer
8. Hebrews and Arabic (IJ) Arphaxad
9. Elamites (H) Elam
10. Assyrians (G) Asshur
11. Arameans (F1) Aram
12. Lydians (F2) Lud
13. Cushites (AB, C) Cush
14. Egyptians (E3) Mitzrayim
15. Canaanites (E2, D) Canaan
16. Original North African Phoenicians (E1) Phut
The D paternal haplogroup Sino descendants of Canaan migrated from Canaan east to China all the way to Japan and Tibet. The C paternal haplogroup descendants of Nimrod migrated as far as South Asia, Australia, the Pacific, Mongolia and all the way to the Americas accounting for the Olmec civilization in Central America as well as the Q haplogroup descendants of Madai ancestor of the Medes that crossed the Atlantic to Central America.
The A maternal mtDNA haplogroup belonging to the Semitic N lineage accompanied the Eurasian Q paternal haplogroup to Central America. The C&D maternal haplogroups belonging to the Eurasian M lineage also accompanied the Atlantic crossing of the Q paternal haplogroup Medes and probably the C paternal haplogroup to Central America. The Semitic B maternal mtDNA haplogroup seems to have crossed the Pacific Ocean to South America.
The Mediterranean paternal R1b and the maternal X2a also found in Galilee represent another Atlantic crossing of the Phoenicians in the days of King Solomon considering also the Mediterranean paternal Y chromosome haplogroups of T, G, I1, I2, J1, J2, E and B in addition to the R1b in Native American Populations. J1 and J2 is Arabs and Jews. (I1 is most likely Dan and I2 resembles the movements of the tribe of Asher)
Of course there is also the Cohen modal haplotype of J1 P58 as well which identifies the IJ lineage of Hebrews and Arabs that are descended from Arphaxad. J2 M172 is the largest group of descendants probably of the House of the kings David and Solomon. Now you know a lot more of what is verified human history.
Neanderthals were Eurasians descended from Japheth and Denisovans are a mix of Eurasians and Canaanites and or Cushites descended from Ham. We know this because people living today have Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA.
The mtDNA lineage of the out of Africa claim goes from African to Eurasian and then to Semitic while the Y chromosome lineage goes from African to Semitic and then Eurasian. So according to that Africans produced Semitic males and Eurasian females who then produced Eurasian males and Semitic females. *The reality is that all of these lineages had to have existed simultaneously.*
You do believe in a lot of bull. Good luck to you, and commiserations to your spouse.
@@Ponto-zv9vf It’s clear you have nothing relevant to say. You can’t argue with DNA evidence.
Thank you for explaining the percentages - it's something most people don't seem to understand. What/who your random ancestor was even 250 years ago is pretty negligible with regards to your DNA. I've gone back a few generations and looked at the etymology of my ancestors' surnames, and they're either English, Welsh, Norman or Germanic 🤷
Though since your ancestors 250 years ago, will have been much less socially, and probably geographically, mobile, they'll likely have reproduced with their own near relatives.
So unless the 'random ancestor' was an 'exotic' addition to the family, you likely share more of their DNA than you'd expect statistically.
For example, about 250 years ago, a direct ancestor of mine was James Hogg's older brother. That's probably eight generations ago. Statistically I'd share only 1/256 of James Hogg's DNA, and my dad and grandpa only 1/128 and 1/64 of it.
Yet it's not that surprising that both Dad and his father had the same distinctive tuft of curly, frizzy hair you see on his portraits. While Dad and I both have/had hair as red or more so than his, and his long-fingered, narrow hands.
The surname has been passed on, so likely all down to my Dad shared an almost identical Y chromosome. Perhaps the frizzy 'coo's lick' was on that chromosome?
But ALSO, the family on my dad's side have remained living within 15 miles for the generations since, and 550 years before! So despite input from three other areas of Scotland, plus Northern England and Ireland (at least) in the intervening generations, probably three quarters of Dad's ancestors were ALSO closely related to James Hogg, and his brother.
Thus James Hogg's portrait doesn't so much show 'James Hogg', as 'an example of one of several dominant Ettrick/Selkirkshire/Teviotdale native types'.
Probably a mix of Brittonic, Anglian, Scots and Norse, that had been settled and 'fixed' in the area for a good few centuries by then.
Until the Industrial Revolution, most people will have been as 'fixed' types as sheep breeds are today! Probably everyone in the Borders was basically a Blackie or a Cheviot, a Scott or a Kerr. With a few exotic Border Leicesters added in the 1780s! 🤣
I've been mistaken for the brother of another well-known local, who can't have a shared ancestor closer than at least four generations back (if we have one!) - But who is similarly VERY much of the same 'stock'. Another family name that's hung around here for at least three hundred years. And by 'here', I mean within ten miles of here.
@@louisehogg8472 This is true - before the Industrial Revolution most people lived in small rural communities so there will be likely more overlap than you'd expect. I know there is a churchyard in a village in Sussex where half the names are my family name
Yes. That is why my tree stops at my 5th great grandparents. I could go further back but there is no way I could prove real relatedness or just chance because of coming from a certain ethnic group.
MY GRANPA CAME FROM GREENLAND AND MY GRANDMA FROM ICELAND!
WE ONLY EAT PISTACHE(green) ICECTEAM🎉
Pistachio.