• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

MyTrueAncestry Mytrueancestry.com

Salento said:
From MDLP k11
1 Armenia_MLBA + Bell_Beaker + British_Roman + Tyrolean_Iceman_EN @ 2.321840

maybe he’s the Brits-Roman as above:

Kit F999925 (Hinxton-4, UK, 2ky)

Precision: 30.0
cM threshold: 1.0
Maximum cM: No Limit
Gap threshold: 2.0 cm's
All SNPs used.

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]9,510,150[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]10,484,416[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]162[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.16[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]31.0[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]35,373,374[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]36,789,546[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]166[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.18[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]40.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]148,453,079[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]149,858,734[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]192[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.32[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]18.0[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]219,187,603[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]219,912,758[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]139[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.26[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]17.0[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]239,211,380[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]239,638,300[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]122[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.33[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]25,548,555[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]26,258,075[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]146[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.06[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]16.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]33,116,246[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]34,534,283[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]133[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.05[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]20.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]4,803,549[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5,161,189[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]125[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.30[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]6.0[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]74,328,068[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]74,988,369[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]116[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.24[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]6,213,396[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7,129,858[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]140[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.43[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]6.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]11[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]19,057,767[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]19,427,092[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]141[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.25[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]10.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]12[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]946,878[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1,524,144[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]118[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.48[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]0.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]15[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]65,564,595[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]66,333,100[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]120[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.13[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]7.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]16[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5,628,300[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5,848,496[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]121[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.02[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3.0[/TD]

ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nSNPsCentimorgans (cM)Q

[TD="align: center"]17[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]13,801,591[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]14,110,852[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]125[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.65[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.0[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]17[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]75,761,949[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]76,160,881[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]114[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]1.33[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5.0[/TD]

Total cM: 20.21
Largest segment cM: 1.65
Total segments: 16
Total gap-induced breaks: 0
Top 10 Q scores:
Q-score: 40.00
Q-score: 31.00
Q-score: 20.00
Q-score: 18.00
Q-score: 17.00
Q-score: 16.00
Q-score: 10.00
Q-score: 7.00
Q-score: 6.00
Q-score: 5.00
Click to expand...

There are many match of an ancient British with a modern Italian. It is really possible that this Breton has DNA from the Italian peninsula, or vice versa, it is really possible that you have Breton blood, and this second hypothesis is more plausible if we consider that Romanized Bretons may have gone to Italy in the Roman period.
 
zanipolo said:
Can you remove one of your samples and add another one
Click to expand...

Salento said:
... Who’re you talking to?
Click to expand...

EogjlIQ.jpg
Hello Salento.
I believe zanipolo is referring to the post below, and not to your post :)


Carlos said:
genesis.gedmatch.com_fcgi-bin_onetoone.cgi%2B%25281%2529.png


In this case above is my hidden kit and the old man's kit. In his example are his two kits.
[TABLE="width: 700"]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Size (in SNPs) of Mismatch-Bunching
limit. (Leave blank for default
mismatch eval window / 2)[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
In this box I have put 0.1
Click to expand...
 
Carlos said:
genesis.gedmatch.com_fcgi-bin_onetoone.cgi%2B%25281%2529.png


In this case above is my hidden kit and the old man's kit. In his example are his two kits.
[TABLE="width: 700"]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]Size (in SNPs) of Mismatch-Bunching
limit. (Leave blank for default
mismatch eval window / 2)[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
In this box I have put 0.1
Click to expand...





[TD="align: right"]

[TD="align: right"]Size (in SNPs) of Mismatch-Bunching
limit. (Leave blank for default
mismatch eval window / 2)[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"]0.1[/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]

[TD="colspan: 3"]
[/TD]

[TD="align: right"][/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[/TD]
[TD="width: 15"][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
Do not do it the way above, Carlos:
Field should be blank.
If You do so, the result will be the same highlighted below, my Kit with LBK Stuttgart. Genesis would do the same with any other old sample:

Kit [FTDNA] and F999916 (LBK, Stuttgart, 7ky) [GEDmatch Xfer]

Segment threshold size will be adjusted dynamically between 200 and 400 SNPs
Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 7.0 cM
Mismatch-bunching Limit will be adjusted dynamically to 60 percent of the segment threshold size for any given segment.


ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nCentimorgans (cM)SNPs

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]752,566[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]13,176,463[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]29.1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3,190[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]13,775,122[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]120,526,982[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]120.0[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]24,229[/TD]

[TD="align: center"]1[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]149,815,536[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]249,198,060[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]128.6[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]23,293[/TD]
[SIZE=-2]
(...)
[/SIZE]
ChrB37 Start Pos'nB37 End Pos'nCentimorgans (cM)SNPs

[TD="align: center"]22[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]17,073,066[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]51,181,759[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]79.9[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]8,899[/TD]

Largest segment = 151.8 cM

Total Half-Match segments (HIR) = 3559.7 cM (99.255 Pct)
Estimated number of generations to MRCA = 1.0

46 shared segments found for this comparison.

607322 SNPs used for this comparison.

54.700 Pct SNPs are full identical

Comparison took 0.359 seconds.
CPU time used: 0.060 cpu seconds.
 
Salento said:
... Who’re you talking to?

EogjlIQ.jpg
Click to expand...

can you remove a sample in trueancestry and place another person if you have paid for more than the free test

i have my grandfather and my father......i want to remove my grandfather and test my sample
 
zanipolo said:
can you remove a sample in trueancestry and place another person if you have paid for more than the free test

i have my grandfather and my father......i want to remove my grandfather and test my sample
Click to expand...

Yes you can.

Delete your Grandfather, and upload your Raw-Data. Wait for your results.

After that, if you want, delete your data, and put back your Grandfather again.

Somehow the Site works better with Chrome (browser) on my PC.

i also think they’re updating the site.
 
zanipolo said:
my grandfather's result
.
.
Gaul + Gallo-Roman (4.866)
Gaul + Thracian (5.522)
Gaul (8.086)
Gallo-Roman (8.595)
Thracian (8.85)
.
.
.
Your closest Archaeogenetic matches...
1. Cisalpine Gaul (590 AD) (8.086) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (8.595) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (8.602) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1600 BC) (8.85) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (8.85) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1200 BC) (8.857) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Central Roman (670 AD) (9.77) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. Scythian Moldova (270 BC) (10.44) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Medieval Tyrolian (590 AD) (10.66) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. Medieval Piedmont (670 AD) (10.93) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Central Roman (590 AD) (11.0) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. Central Roman (590 AD) (11.04) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Medieval Hungary / Balkan (1244 AD) (11.32) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. Medieval Iberian (670 AD) (12.1) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Medieval Frank (670 AD) (12.44) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. Central Roman (590 AD) (12.46) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Frankish-Gaul / Lombardy Italy (670 AD) (12.53) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. Roman Soldier Germany (300 BC) (13.59) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Swiss Germanic (670 AD) (13.69) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. Medieval Tyrolian (670 AD) (13.77) - [Upgrade for more details]
21. Medieval Tyrolian (590 AD) (14.48) - [Upgrade for more details]
22. Hellenic Roman (670 AD) (17.72) - [Upgrade for more details]
23. Roman Soldier Freiham-Nord Germany (300 BC) (19.04) - [Upgrade for more details]
24. Frankish / Hungary (590 AD) (19.25) - [Upgrade for more details]
25. Frankish / Hungary (590 AD) (19.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
26. Scythian Moldova (300 BC) (19.34) - [Upgrade for more details]
27. Alemannic Bavaria (450 AD) (19.67) - [Upgrade for more details]
28. Central Roman / Mixed (590 AD) (20.03) - [Upgrade for more details]
29. Gepid / Goth (450 AD) (20.11) - [Upgrade for more details]
30. Hellenic Roman (590 AD) (20.13) - [Upgrade for more details]
31. Celt / Hungary (590 AD) (20.95) - [Upgrade for more details]
32. Gaulic Gladiator York (250 AD) (21.09) - [Upgrade for more details]
33. Halstatt (775 BC) (21.17) - [Upgrade for more details]
34. Czech Velke Prilepy (0 AD) (21.32) - [Upgrade for more details]
35. Bell Beaker Poland (2500 BC) (21.53) - [Upgrade for more details]
36. Mycenaean (1350 BC) (22.21) - [Upgrade for more details]
37. Nordic Lombard (590 AD) (22.42) - [Upgrade for more details]
38. Nordic Lombard (590 AD) (22.5) - [Upgrade for more details]
39. Scythian Ukraine (600 BC) (22.76) - [Upgrade for more details]
40. Germano-Celtic Gladiator York (250 AD) (22.87) - [Upgrade for more details]
.
.
only 1 deep dive
.
Alemannic Bavaria
450 AD
Total cM=29.71
Largest segment=9.05 cM (4 shared)
Click to expand...
grandfather above and mine below
Your closest Archaeogenetic matches...
1. Cisalpine Gaul (590 AD) (8.252) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (8.921) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1200 BC) (9.498) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (9.723) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Medieval Piedmont (670 AD) (9.779) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. Medieval Iberian (670 AD) (10.35) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1600 BC) (11.38) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (11.38) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Central Roman (670 AD) (12.07) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. Medieval Tyrolian (590 AD) (12.14) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Medieval Frank (670 AD) (12.81) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. Central Roman (590 AD) (12.95) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Medieval Tyrolian (670 AD) (13.2) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. Scythian Moldova (270 BC) (13.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Central Roman (590 AD) (13.43) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. Central Roman (590 AD) (13.71) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Medieval Hungary / Balkan (1244 AD) (13.83) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. Frankish-Gaul / Lombardy Italy (670 AD) (14.31) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Swiss Germanic (670 AD) (15.0) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. Roman Soldier Germany (300 BC) (15.09) - [Upgrade for more details]
21. Medieval Tyrolian (590 AD) (15.13) - [Upgrade for more details]
22. Scythian Moldova (300 BC) (17.79) - [Upgrade for more details]
23. Hellenic Roman (670 AD) (18.69) - [Upgrade for more details]
24. Celt / Hungary (590 AD) (19.96) - [Upgrade for more details]
25. Scythian Ukraine (600 BC) (20.01) - [Upgrade for more details]
26. Roman Soldier Freiham-Nord Germany (300 BC) (20.08) - [Upgrade for more details]
27. Alemannic Bavaria (450 AD) (20.16) - [Upgrade for more details]
28. Gaulic Gladiator York (250 AD) (20.24) - [Upgrade for more details]
29. Frankish / Hungary (590 AD) (20.39) - [Upgrade for more details]
30. Frankish / Hungary (590 AD) (20.46) - [Upgrade for more details]
31. Bell Beaker Scotland (2145 BC) (20.69) - [Upgrade for more details]
32. Bell Beaker Poland (2500 BC) (20.79) - [Upgrade for more details]
33. Hungary Iron Age (800 BC) (20.8) - [Upgrade for more details]
34. Czech Velke Prilepy (0 AD) (21.38) - [Upgrade for more details]
35. Gepid / Goth (450 AD) (21.78) - [Upgrade for more details]
36. Germano-Celtic Gladiator York (250 AD) (22.24) - [Upgrade for more details]
37. Halstatt (775 BC) (22.36) - [Upgrade for more details]
38. Celtic Gladiator York (250 AD) (22.38) - [Upgrade for more details]
39. Central Roman / Mixed (590 AD) (23.02) - [Upgrade for more details]
40. Crete Armenoi (1370 BC) (23.32) - [Upgrade for more details]
.
.
deep dive
Alemannic Bavaria
450 AD
Total cM=10.82
Largest segment=5.56 cM (5 shared. Sample quality: 9)
.
.
Illyrian / Dalmatia
1200 BC
Total cM=1.66
Largest segment=1.66 cM (1 shared. Sample quality: 40)

...................................................................................

my father was updated to

Roman + Illyrian (4.913)
Gallo-Roman + Roman (6.367)
Gallo-Roman (7.349)
Illyrian (7.471)
Roman (9.665)

..
Roman Soldier Freiham-Nord Germany
300 BC
Total cM=4.36
Largest segment=4.36 cM (1 shared. Sample quality: 81)
.
Mycenaean
1350 BC
Total cM=1.83
Largest segment=1.83 cM (1 shared. Sample quality: 9)
.
Germano-Celtic Gladiator York
250 AD
Total cM=1.24
Largest segment=1.24 cM (1 shared. Sample quality: 18)
 
For general knowledge:

MyTrueAncestry.com has changed the "Deep Dive" functionality algorithm and the numbers that are now appearing look more realistic. I recommend everyone to review their numbers since they are probably going to be downgraded in "Deep Dive". Look at my case.

Before:

Ku0nVsR.jpg

LpEzC3Y.jpg

PX7DbFU.png

Now:

4z1N8ul.jpg

vQ7Ixdt.jpg

tObolzn.jpg
 
Duarte said:
For general knowledge:

MyTrueAncestry.com has changed the "Deep Dive" functionality algorithm and the numbers that are now appearing look more realistic. I recommend everyone to review their numbers since they are probably going to be downgraded in "Deep Dive". Look at my case.
Click to expand...

So Duarte.... who was right since the begining?:) Even Mytruancestry now finally must reduce cM values and must admit they were utterly wrong:)

But still some of those values are somewhat too big, unless they checked them in lowest treshold on something like Gedmatch one-to-one tool.



Also I'm interested how they explain their total fail with those very high matches? Of course it isn't question to Duarte, but general.
 
mlukas said:
So Duarte.... who was right since the begining?:) Even Mytruancestry now finally must reduce cM values and must admit they were utterly wrong:)

But still some of those values are somewhat too big, unless they checked them in lowest treshold on something like Gedmatch one-to-one tool.



Also I'm interested how they explain their total fail with those very high matches? Of course it isn't question to Duarte, but general.
Click to expand...

Hello mlukas,

I'm not acknowledging that you're 100% correct. As you yourself say, in your understanding, matches are still very high. They have corrected the algorithm and now the results are more consistent with Genesis GEDmach in the default selections. In that sense, if they should explain, Genesis GEDmatch should also :)

Big hug and have a nice weekend :good_job:
 
My case.
MyTrueAncestry.com X Genesis GEDmatch:

c1a958Y.jpg


ubVxWKD.jpg
 
@MLukas,
It would be very nice if you re-uploaded all the Collegno and Szolad samples which you removed. Thanks in advance.

It still remains to be explained by someone at gedmatch why we get such incredibly high matches with really old samples like Loschbour, LBK, NE1, BR2, and others.

The fact that mytrueancestry made such an egregious error is concerning, as is the fact it all seems to be based on work by Eurogenes, which is always suspect until proven otherwise imho. (On the K15 upon which it seems to be based my closest fits are a 5 and a 6, perhaps the worst fits I've ever gotten on any calculator, and I know my ancestry for the last 500 years at least. MDLP is much better.)

I'll stick with my free version even if it's just for fun.
 
There are two new functionalities in MyTrueAncestry.com: The "Deep Dive Euro Map" and the "Deep Dive Asia Map".
Also, data in the Archaelogical Maps (Europe and Asia), was actualizized.
See some of my data below. I recomend that all who payed for the service, do the same.

Rb5kPbA.png

2ZzSGC6.png


Zm5b718.png

SIMrXmQ.png


RJs9BCy.png


yx2xVe1.png

ObfN9AM.png
 
matty74 said:
5tcCeMh.png


Seems to be a slight change from the new update at the bottom:

etZMlCp.png
Click to expand...
In your case the mainly matches are with more recent samples (1600 AD and 1000 AD, high quality: 89). The quality of sample Bell Beaker (2050 BC ) is 35, much more low. Big Hug :)
 
Angela said:
@MLukas,
It would be very nice if you re-uploaded all the Collegno and Szolad samples which you removed. Thanks in advance.
.
Click to expand...

I removed them few months ago because as there didn't have full snps number they were marked as damaged by Gedmatch after migration to Genesis.

Uploading all takes much time. Maybe just upload those which are most popular in people results?
 
E-Mail received now from MyAncestry.com:

2hAEq3w.jpg
 
mlukas said:
I removed them few months ago because as there didn't have full snps number they were marked as damaged by Gedmatch after migration to Genesis.

Uploading all takes much time. Maybe just upload those which are most popular in people results?
Click to expand...

Thank you for your response, MLukas.

Anything you can do would be great. :)
 
Salento said:
Deep-Dive Map:
tazMbeB.jpg


Archaeological Map:
y1VTNBl.jpg


Premium Map:
ny2l6FF.jpg
Click to expand...

ILLYRIAM/DALMATIA 1200 BC - I1333 - Genesis GEDmatch - mine:

ccLPJG0.jpg

H51LqFe.jpg


THRACIAN BULGARIA 450 BC - I5769 - Genesis GEDmatch - mine:

ldzgtpY.jpg

pHBhGl0.jpg
 
9Gvwwwi.jpg


Living DNA still shows the most results, despite having the least SNPs of all the raw data versions I have. While my Superkit in Ancestry format, has the most, and only shows a modest amount of results. Perhaps because the amount of SNPs being used fills out more information, and more correctly shows what my actual results should be with this calculator? I don't think more results on the map necessarily indicate that it is more accurate. Idk But I do know more SNPs should yield more information. It is either the other ones a false matches being assigned to various samples, that is fleshed out more with more SNPs. Many of samples I get were all influenced and overlap with the Anatolian copper-age, so I can see how it (or any calculator really) could mistakenly assign those samples. Or the format in Living DNA just works better this calculator.

Ancestry by itself shows more results on the map, but the Superkit, in the same format shows slightly less. So perhaps that now that it has more SNPs to go by, it more correctly assigns the samples. Nevertheless, in 23andme format, it shows nothing, so format of the raw data is definitely a factor.

Oddly, my brother, and mother's 23andme raw data show about as much on their map, as my Living DNA kit does. They're using the same version as me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top