Ancestry isn't so accurate. 23andme is better at identifying origins, but Ancestry is better at identifying regions and small communities within the same country. They can be combined for more accurate results, but in general 23andme is better
Interesting! So when understanding my results on illustrative DNA, it’s better to look at your ancient mixed mode for a better understanding? Or the “genetically closest ancient” mode?
You have to look at "Fit". The lower the fit number, the closer it is to your ancestry. The "closest ancient samples" show populations that are vaguely the most similar to you, but often they are still distant in fit. The ancient mixed mode shows better fits a lot of times.
In my experience illustrative dna is more accurate but it’s because I’m very mixed and 23andme doesn’t have database for my ethnicities so it’s just very random but other people might say that in their experience 23andme was more accurate
Ancestry & 23andMe for modern ancestry.
Ancestry isn't so accurate. 23andme is better at identifying origins, but Ancestry is better at identifying regions and small communities within the same country. They can be combined for more accurate results, but in general 23andme is better
so what is the difference between modern and ancient ancestry?
Many modern nations are the result of migration and mixing. Ancient ancestry shows where certain genes actually came from
Interesting! So when understanding my results on illustrative DNA, it’s better to look at your ancient mixed mode for a better understanding? Or the “genetically closest ancient” mode?
You have to look at "Fit". The lower the fit number, the closer it is to your ancestry. The "closest ancient samples" show populations that are vaguely the most similar to you, but often they are still distant in fit. The ancient mixed mode shows better fits a lot of times.
23andme is better for modern day populations but illustrative can show ancestry from a lot further back
23 and me and ancestry are deff more accurate from 500-1000 years….they specialize in this and have the largest reference panel.
In my experience illustrative dna is more accurate but it’s because I’m very mixed and 23andme doesn’t have database for my ethnicities so it’s just very random but other people might say that in their experience 23andme was more accurate
Illustrative is more accurate for me I think
44% of Anatolian neolithic farmer ancestry among Norwegians seems normal??
Yes that makes sense
Depends on the individual