U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-24-2015, 03:37 PM
 
858 posts, read 747,628 times
Reputation: 1161

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppalachianGumbo View Post
Your point was well stated. You were just expressing on the comment I replied too regarding the DNA.
By "recent" I mean in terms of DNA testing within 6 generations. Within 3-6 gens. is the inevitable cliff were segments fall off. Some hold at 6, many can drop off at 3. If someone "thinks" they have Native American ancestry, I would suggest DNA as well to confirm. With the pool of people claiming ancestry DNA testing is quicker to rule out such ancestry. This particular poster, I would point him in the area of doing genealogy. Many Mohawk people are extremely mixed with European.
David Faux (Davidfaux.org under his section Young-Mohawk) is a descendent of Mohawk people, he tested 100% European but has a documented Mohawk ancestor. He had to test another family member to see it in the DNA.

Trace amounts need to be carefully interpreted as well, anything under 1% can (I say that carefully) be very "iffy." I've seen US White Americans get 0.2 or 0.5 East Asian and claim this is proof of Native American. East Asian at these low levels should never be interpreted as such, not even as genuine East Asian. Doug McDonald has often ruled it out as noise. East Asian mixed with Native American, valid? You bet. I've seen people do this with traces of South Asian = Their phantom Gypsy ancestor. If someone sees 2% East Asian or South Asian on their autosomes (not the X older ancestry) is another story. I've seen 0.5 Native American (specific) with a person with a solid paper trail so it is not always noise but has a high rate of being so under 1%.

It is very easy to jump to conclusions even with DNA testing this needs careful interpretation before drawing any final conclusions.
I think we pretty much agree on everything

I'll add that for me percentages are less important than segments. 1-2% being the results of a bunch of low confidence segments like 7-10cM or smaller is a lot more questionable than 0.5% represented with a bigger 15-20cM segment(s). Much like matching cousins, the segment size is far more important than total shared DNA. This seems to be the biggest difference in 23andme between their 50/70/90% confidence levels. My grandmother has one 5-7 cM segment of SSA (Sub-Saharan African) DNA that comes up on gedmatch painting... but doesn't come up in 23andme under any confidence level, it shows unassigned in all of them at that spot. Ironically her daughter (my mother) paints the same segment at the same size and it comes up at speculative (50% confidence) in hers. Obviously that segment is highly questionable, it could be legitimate and for some reason registers a bit better in my moms but there simply isn't enough data to make a proper claim on it.

On the other hand my grandmother has another SSA segment that is about 11-12 cM that remains in the 90% confidence level in 23andme and paints on all datasets at that size in gedmatch and my mom inherited it and it also remains at the 90% confidence level. Obviously that segment is much more reliable and I'm inclined to believe 23andme and agree it's at least 90% likely. My mother has a 20 cM segment as well she inherited from her father (which unfortunately is dead so I cannot test, but her brother has that same segment), that one definitely is big enough to make me feel it's even more likely (and confirmed by the Eurogenes blog author)... So for me again if someone has 1-2%+ but all segments are 7-10cM or less vs a smaller percentage but with bigger segments the smaller percentage is actually more likely in my opinion... Again this parallels well with cousin matches too, bigger segments are much more reliable indicators.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-24-2015, 05:29 PM
 
269 posts, read 425,965 times
Reputation: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alandros View Post
I think we pretty much agree on everything

I'll add that for me percentages are less important than segments. 1-2% being the results of a bunch of low confidence segments like 7-10cM or smaller is a lot more questionable than 0.5% represented with a bigger 15-20cM segment(s). Much like matching cousins, the segment size is far more important than total shared DNA. This seems to be the biggest difference in 23andme between their 50/70/90% confidence levels. My grandmother has one 5-7 cM segment of SSA (Sub-Saharan African) DNA that comes up on gedmatch painting... but doesn't come up in 23andme under any confidence level, it shows unassigned in all of them at that spot. Ironically her daughter (my mother) paints the same segment at the same size and it comes up at speculative (50% confidence) in hers. Obviously that segment is highly questionable, it could be legitimate and for some reason registers a bit better in my moms but there simply isn't enough data to make a proper claim on it.

On the other hand my grandmother has another SSA segment that is about 11-12 cM that remains in the 90% confidence level in 23andme and paints on all datasets at that size in gedmatch and my mom inherited it and it also remains at the 90% confidence level. Obviously that segment is much more reliable and I'm inclined to believe 23andme and agree it's at least 90% likely. My mother has a 20 cM segment as well she inherited from her father (which unfortunately is dead so I cannot test, but her brother has that same segment), that one definitely is big enough to make me feel it's even more likely (and confirmed by the Eurogenes blog author)... So for me again if someone has 1-2%+ but all segments are 7-10cM or less vs a smaller percentage but with bigger segments the smaller percentage is actually more likely in my opinion... Again this parallels well with cousin matches too, bigger segments are much more reliable indicators.
What is very interesting, in your grandmother, that segment that does not show in 23's AC is not allocated to another geographical population, it is "unassigned." However, it does show with your mom in even if at Speculative. Speculative does not mean not to be trusted, however at the last best call, it was SSA.
She also has another SSA segment that shows up on another chromosome. It's not just one mysterious segment. You can also cross confirm with family members so that is good. Good work.

Sorry to hear about your father.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2015, 05:36 PM
 
7,896 posts, read 3,724,574 times
Reputation: 10385
Quote:
Originally Posted by sp31 View Post
Are you one of those who are 1/8 or 1/16 Native American and get benefits from the state and or government?
I am a full blooded native American, born and bred in this country. Yet as a white male I am not given anything, nor do I expect to.
Now if you are speaking about an American Indian, then maybe through liberal PC protected classification, you may have taxpayers being forced to give you money/benefits just because of your DNA.

`
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 01:34 PM
 
4 posts, read 8,555 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by sp31 View Post
Are you one of those who are 1/8 or 1/16 Native American and get benefits from the state and or government?
1/32th here. Mothers 1/16th. We're sure we're native Americans. We're not sure which tribe. probably mohawk.

Haven't gotten a blood-test or "verification". We don't look Indian at all, but it's there.

Could we get benefits anyone?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 01:47 PM
 
Location: I'm around here someplace :)
3,633 posts, read 4,250,302 times
Reputation: 3980
Quote:
Originally Posted by onesixzero View Post
1/32th here. Mothers 1/16th. We're sure we're native Americans. We're not sure which tribe. probably mohawk.

Haven't gotten a blood-test or "verification". We don't look Indian at all, but it's there.

Could we get benefits anyone?
It's possible that tribes differ, but to the best of my knowledge a person is only eligible for benefits if a direct ancestor signed up for the rolls- regardless of your blood %.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 03:44 PM
 
858 posts, read 747,628 times
Reputation: 1161
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppalachianGumbo View Post
What is very interesting, in your grandmother, that segment that does not show in 23's AC is not allocated to another geographical population, it is "unassigned." However, it does show with your mom in even if at Speculative. Speculative does not mean not to be trusted, however at the last best call, it was SSA.
She also has another SSA segment that shows up on another chromosome. It's not just one mysterious segment. You can also cross confirm with family members so that is good. Good work.

Sorry to hear about your father.
Yeah, it's taken about 2 years of digging into various DNA tests, results, opinions, etc, for me to feel comfortable enough with myself to say I believe now that certain parts of the DNA mean it's far more likely than not I have an SSA ancestor up certain lines. Finding the smaller segments on my grandmother's line has been the newest discovery (while the biggest segment wasn't so much have been up my grandfather's line), which could suggest I have an SSA ancestor on both of my mother's lines. So I completely agree with you that if anyone takes a test and gets less than 1% SSA or Native American then it certainly doesn't mean it's not noise or misattributed. Discovering segment size takes a bit more work that I'm not sure everyone doing the test is willing to do (though with gedmatch it's not too hard, just confusing at first).

Also like you said since it comes up unassigned and then SSA under speculative in my mother (with another segment that remains at 90% confidence) I do suspect that smaller segment might legitimately be SSA. If I can find cousin matches on that segment and they paint the same ethnicity on the same spot (or they have a bigger segment that paints the same in the same spot) then it would lend more credence to that one segment.

But basically though percentage is a good starting point, even with the tools we have no there are some avenues to research < 1% and feel more (or less) confident. I am definitely looking forward to this sort of area of research progressing further so we can get better at identifying smaller segments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 03:46 PM
 
858 posts, read 747,628 times
Reputation: 1161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tia 914 View Post
It's possible that tribes differ, but to the best of my knowledge a person is only eligible for benefits if a direct ancestor signed up for the rolls- regardless of your blood %.
Exactly, any real research for an actual ancestor means looking at all the various rolls. First you really need to find out which specific ancestor was believed to be Native American, where they lived, etc, then you can probably guess at the tribe and look at various sources from there.

I'd also suggest a DNA test, as AppalachianGumbo has pointed out not coming up NA DNA doesn't mean you don't have NA ancestry, but if it does come up that gives you more of a reason to look.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2015, 11:33 AM
 
4,106 posts, read 3,444,432 times
Reputation: 8174
"Benefits" for NAs can vary dramatically from .nation to nation. Most have "per cap" payments that occur to enrolled members monthly, quarterly, or yearly. These payments are made from tribal investment revenues (casinos, mineral & energy, timber, recreation, grazing leases) & the nation determines the dollar amount. Some nations distribute more to individuals while others reinvest in tribal common good.

There have also been large federal lawsuit settlements made regarding past mismanagement of tribal land leases by feds. Each nation handled their proceeds differently--some made lump sum per caps while others kept the proceeds for in common benefit. Some nations have healthy per caps, while others do not. These are tribal council type decisions.

Some western states provide "free" in state college education for qualifying NA students--Montana & South Dakota for example.

All federally recognized NAs are eligible for federally provided health care.

The federal housing assistance in form of federal grants to nations can provide free housing to selected reservation residents determined by nation's criteria of eligibility & conducted by tribal housing authorities.

Federal minority preference for federal contracts can be a benefit to Indian owned or partially owned firms.

In past history the NAs on reservations were "ration Indians", which referred to the beef ration distribution & other $ distributed for sustenance. It was a model set up based on military ration distribution to cavalry members. Reservation Indians were dependents of the US Army.

Last edited by historyfan; 06-27-2015 at 11:35 AM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2015, 02:03 AM
 
1 posts, read 4,274 times
Reputation: 23
I must admit, having a Native American grandfather, and having heard stories about him having to lie about being "dark Irish" to even gain employment, and my father being rather dark himself, it annoys me when blonde and blue eyed people try to claim Native American blood.

I am 1/4 myself, and suffer from a immunological disease common to Native Americans (so that's probably where I got it from...) However, I have only considered taking medical benefits after coming down with a lifelong condition directly related to my heritage.

I never wanted to get any benefits before, because even though I have olive skin and brown hair, I am not dark enough to have ever encountered the prejudice my dad did, or old enough to encounter having to pretend I have a different background just to get a job, like my grandparents. The only reason I am considering medical benefits now is because the only reason I have this condition is because of my heritage.

People who have no idea who in their family actually suffered from being Native American have no business grabbing benefits, IMHO.

If you want to know about where you come from, cool. But trying to grab freebies? Come on now... They are there for people who actually suffered in one way or another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2015, 02:24 PM
 
858 posts, read 747,628 times
Reputation: 1161
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitecoyote View Post
I must admit, having a Native American grandfather, and having heard stories about him having to lie about being "dark Irish" to even gain employment, and my father being rather dark himself, it annoys me when blonde and blue eyed people try to claim Native American blood.

I am 1/4 myself, and suffer from a immunological disease common to Native Americans (so that's probably where I got it from...) However, I have only considered taking medical benefits after coming down with a lifelong condition directly related to my heritage.

I never wanted to get any benefits before, because even though I have olive skin and brown hair, I am not dark enough to have ever encountered the prejudice my dad did, or old enough to encounter having to pretend I have a different background just to get a job, like my grandparents. The only reason I am considering medical benefits now is because the only reason I have this condition is because of my heritage.

People who have no idea who in their family actually suffered from being Native American have no business grabbing benefits, IMHO.

If you want to know about where you come from, cool. But trying to grab freebies? Come on now... They are there for people who actually suffered in one way or another.
Though I pretty much agree with you and am always embarrassed by the white people who are shamelessly looking for freebies because of a story of a potential distant ancestor. I also agree that those who deserve the freebies are those that personally suffered the most.

On a more abstract level I would like to say that the ancestors of anyone who descends from Native Americans suffered in their own ways. The ones that were removed and chose to remain with the relocated tribes (and now qualify for membership and/or were raised within those tribes) obviously suffered. Though the ones who hid, remained, or chose (or were forced/pressured) into intermixing with the white population also suffered in their own way. They lost that heritage and their descendants lost that heritage. Losing a key part of your culture in a means to survive is it's own kind of suffering and some of those blonde hair and blue eyed descendants who may only have a small percentage of actual Native American ancestry basically lost out from knowing or understanding that culture due to it needing to be hidden.

Even if it's small often people in America that identify with a specific culture say Irish, British, Scottish (or especially Scotch-Irish), often the actual ancestors that make up that ethnicity aren't their full ancestry. They are any sort of mix and in some cases maybe even a small portion of that ancestry they identify with. That culture was passed down to them and culture is more than DNA and ancestry, just like people can relocate and embrace an entirely different culture, a child could be adopted by a Native American family in a tribe and raised as that tribe even if not of that DNA. Losing that culture (even if distant and not representative of an entire ancestry) of a Native American ancestry long ago is it's own penalty.

One could even argue that the people who remained embracing that culture paid a hugely large price, but they had the benefit of embracing that culture.

Again I do agree with you, that people who personally suffered is what the benefits are primarily for... but I'll add to a lesser degree that the people who are only a small portion Native American and their ancestors (for whatever reason, for safety or for security) chose to not pass down that culture is it's own loss, definitely to a massively lesser degree, but one nonetheless in my opinion. Of course people who aren't concerned about the culture aspect and just the freebee aspect aren't the people I'm talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top