 |
| National Geographic Geno 2.0 Results. |
Last month, I took advantage of the sale on the National Geographic Geno 2.0 DNA Ancestry kit and sent off my sample for analysis. The results came in today. While I'm not complaining, it is interesting to see the differences between this kit and
the latest update from AncestryDNA's expanded reference sample. I can also compare this new test result with
the 2008 Y-DNA and mtDNA tests conducted through Ancestry.
 |
| National Geographic Geno 2.0 Results. |
The continent results from the Geno 2.0 test have me at 93% European, 4% Americas, 2% Asia. This isn't too far off the latest update from AncestryDNA, which had me at 94% European, 5% Native American, 1% Nigerian. My
2013 AncestryDNA results had 2% Asia, but this region was removed when the reference sample pool size was expanded for the 2018 update. The regional view really stands out though. 44% Southwestern Europe is a lot higher than I would have thought. My reference populations show up as Iberian (Spain) and French. The 8% Jewish Diaspora is a bit of a surprise, but taken with the Spanish descent it makes sense too. There are known Converso Jewish families who settled in Mexico. The
Amado family is
thought to be one example.
 |
| National Geographic Geno 2.0 results. |
The deep ancestry results are also intriguing for their differences from the 2008 Y-DNA and mtDNA tests. In the 2008 test, my paternal line haplogroup came back as R1b. This new test has me at R-U152. In the 2008 test, my maternal line haplogroup was A. The new test shows A2D. A quick look into haplogroup research shows that U152 is a more detailed branch from what had been called R1b back in 2008, so this is not that different from the earlier test results. A2D makes complete sense. I know from prior research that my material line goes through
Pueblo de Seris, Sonora. It is likely that someone on that line was of Native North American descent. For a deeper analysis into Native American haplogroups, see
this article from 2017.
Does this change my view of my prior results? Not really. I think the AncestryDNA test and the Geno 2.0 test are slicing the data differently. Recent news and scientific articles have pointed this out. I find the ancient ancestry from Geno 2.0 intriguing but I also like how AncestryDNA allows you to connect with potential matches. I have been able to uncover some family connections through AncestryDNA, which has been really helpful. The Geno 2.0 test was offered at a relatively reasonable price, and that was a motivation for trying to see the difference from the Ancestry tests.
On this Indigenous Peoples Day, it is also cool to see a genetic link to my Native American ancestry.
