So I'm new to this

[sayadon]

If for some reason I decide to take a personal DNA test, where should I take it, and what kind of results do you get. Do they just tell you the markers and leave it uninterpreted? Also some tests offer only Y-chromosome and others mtdna. If someone is interested in their ancestry, which test would give more concrete results?

If you've taken a DNA test, what are some of the reasons that made you do it?

[annienormanna]

They make you spend as much money as they can get off of you. For males, you need a 37 marker test to get a meaningful result. For females, you need HSV 1 and 2, which also costs extra. The same lab that does it for Genographic does it commercially.

I did it through National (Geographic) Genographic. I was fascinated that I could trace an ancient lineage of all the mothers who came before me. It's conjuring without the hassle of a shaman or meditation.

[clarimundo]

annienormanna said:

They make you spend as much money as they can get off of you. For males, you need a 37 marker test to get a meaningful result. For females, you need HSV 1 and 2, which also costs extra. The same lab that does it for Genographic does it commercially.

I did it through National (Geographic) Genographic. I was fascinated that I could trace an ancient lineage of all the mothers who came before me. It's conjuring without the hassle of a shaman or meditation.

Eh, but the CD that they hand out it less enticing than the mushrooms used by shamans.

As for the DNA tests, there are two main routes: autosomal or YDNA/mtDNA. They give different results, I'll sumarize it like this (people correct me if I'm wrong)

YDNA/mtDNA:

* Gives you an exact idea on what haplogroup your most ancient relative had. Since this information isn't changed as part of the normal genetic crossover the mtDNA that everybody has is exactly the same has the mother, grandmother, etc. It gives you the most ancient female ancestor. YDNA is also available for men, and does the same by giving you information on your "original" male line ancestor. This is, by itself, cool

* Has no direct relationship with phenotype or even recent "race mixing". A completely Europid european with no african ancestry in the last 2000 years can have an African YDNA, while an Afro-american that is 1/32 white can have the same marker as Eastern Europe.

* It is very precise: what you see is what you get, with the results you will be able to look at the map and see were your original ancestors came from, their position in general human evolution, etc.

Autosomal

* Gives an idea of what you are actually made of, in terms of average gene distribution according to different world regions. It will "detect", for example, different degrees of European, African, Asian, etc. ancestry in people with a recent mixed background.

* From what I have read recently - and it makes some sense in terms of how genetic crossover works - it doesn't give you information older than 3 generations. That is to say that the results will be overwhelmingly a reflection of the last 3 generations in all sides, not older.

* It appears to me to be more prone to interpretation. The genetic distribution is not fixed and companies appear to add a touch of what they think the customers want (think NA ancestry in WASP's).


I would do YDNA/mtDNA. It seems more interesting for me, especially since I have a pretty good idea of what my last 15 generations are. There is something very interesting at being able to identify the part of you that directly links to someone thousands and thosands of years ago.