This is a public Forum  publicRSS


    The newly evolved AncestryDNA
    Question posted October 17, 2013 by CaraLLevel 5, last edited October 21, 2013, tagged AncestryDNA 
    6972 Views, 66 Comments
    The newly evolved AncestryDNA
    More detail means more discoveries

    Have you checked out your new AncestryDNA results yet? What did you think? Let us know by commenting below. 

    Some highlights of the newly evolved AncestryDNA are:

    Newly Evolved AncestryDNA

    • More of the story – not just more detailed regions, but we’ve also included interesting information about each of the ethnicities reported. So, you can learn more about both the genetics and the history of the regions. The history of the people and the places plays a big part in your DNA ethnicity results.  

    • More help along the wayWe’ve included links to helpful information in order to help you understand how the ethnicity estimate is determined. From some more straightforward explanations, all the way down to the algorithms, we’ve shown our work and you have access to it all.

    • No more uncertainty – We’ve even provided the smallest details in your results, showing you where we found just traces of some of the regions/populations in the analysis.

    • Same DNA test – one test for both men and women and still only $99. If you’ve already purchased AncestryDNA, no new DNA sample or testing is required to get these exciting new results.
    • Free update for existing AncestryDNA customers.

    One great part about these advancements is that a new DNA sample wasn’t required to provide the updated results. This is one of the many benefits of being tested with AncestryDNA; as new research become available, we’ll provide you with the latest findings in your DNA results. 

    Comments Are Closed

    • Ty Webb

      I'm loving my new results. It's so detailed. Thank you! I'm going to buy one for my wife!

    • Teresa Lewis

      I like the new breakdown.  However, I would like to have a button on my own profile that allows me to view my page as others would see it.   One of your competing companies has this available smiley

      • Luke R


        This is some great feedback! Please click here for instructions how to submit it to us.


        Luke R.
        Community Moderator

    • Ruthie Brown

      I was notified that I could view the newly evolved DNA information on myself.  I am excited to see it, but every time I go to view it, it states that I am not authorized.  Are others having the same problem?


      • Cindy Day

        Same here -hope this is solved soon- we have already waited a long time just to see what this evolved info is !!

      • Teresa Lewis

        Yes, that is what is showing now.  However, this morning I was able to view my page and also my matches and their ethnicity.  It's probably because maintenance is being done or so many trying to access the  DNA area.

      • Luke R

        Ruthie, Cindy, and Teresa,

        There were some issues going on with people accessing their DNA results not long after this new update was released, but they have now been resolved. Any further issues can be resolved with the steps at this link.


        Luke R.
        Community Moderator

    • Ruthie Brown

      I am assuming it's because everyone is trying to get their info.  Now I have lost my customized home page.  This is like shopping for Christmas at Toys R Us! 


    • Spencer Shelton

      Nicely done, i like this more indepth breakdown. One curious thing with this upgrade, previously I was listed as 55% British Isles, and now it is 5%. That is a HUGE change, and I was wondering what that may be attributed to.


      • Teresa Lewis

        I had 57% Scandinavian for the last 18 months.  Now I only have a trace Scandinavian and the big percentage has changed to British Isles (Scotland and England excluding Ireland).    I think the reason is that  the testing is more precise now.  I was really bewildered initially by the Scandinavian results last year until I read the history/description.   The more exact nature of recent generations in British Isles for me so that makes sense with the ancient less precise results being Scandinavian. 

        • Dee E

          Yes that's exactly what happened to me! I had about 16% Scandinavian and now it's <1%.

          I wish they were more detailed about the Northern African Countries. 

    • Tonua Carano

      At 3:04pm today, I received an email announcing the new AncestryDNA results page. I've been trying to access it ever since, but I keep getting the following error message below. I'm looking forward to this getting  fixed so that I can actually view the new results.

      This site is temporarily unavailable for system maintenance.

      Service should be restored shortly. We apologize for any inconvenience.

      If you'd like to order a DNA test, call 1-800-958-9124.



      • Teresa Lewis

        You are not alone.  Everyone is getting the same response.  It should improve in the next day or so.


      • Dee E

        Yes this happened to me for hours yesterday. I finally got on, but now I can't get back on again. Highly frustrating.

    • Vivian Miller

      I truly believed the accuracy of the DNA results that I received a couple of weeks ago.  Now suddenly today my ethnicity has gone from 57% British Isles, 34% Scandinavian, 7% Western European to 92% Great Britain, 7% Ireland.  This does not seem scientific or historically accurate based on what I know of my family background.  I feel like I wasted $99.  I'm very confused about the discrepancy in results. 

    • Gabriel Elmarek

      very cool update! i am very happy with it. im just curious. what does "trace regions" mean?

      • BG

        I would think it is a references to regions from which they have found traces of ancestry (relatively small amounts). So if you were, say, 45% Eastern European and 45% Western European, but 3% East Asian and similarly small percentages of other things rounding out the 100%, the latter, smaller percentile would be the "trace regions". Then again maybe they just call everything that is not the majority contributing region trace regions. I'm not entirely sure what means by the term but in common parlance, "trace amounts" usually refers to very small amounts (low, single digit percentages). Someone who has, say, 1% East African ancestry would be said to have "traces" of East African ancestry, whereas someone with 25% or more usually would not be said to merely have "traces". They seem to apply the term more broadly in the results they produce however, even to percentages that are fairly significant.

    • Thomas Kelly

      Hey just thought I'd pass along my suggestion. At the Map view I would think just aesthetically that the greater region (for me Europe) should be at the top rather than having the regions listed alphabetically. 

      Thanks! Looks awesome! 

    • BG

      As for the new results,  they are very interesting. But who knows how reliable they are. It's cool that they are refining their interpretation of the data as more of it comes in and and getting more reliable estimates, but at the same time, it kind of leaves you a tad skeptical as to how seriously to take the results. They have changed pretty radically for some over the years, sometimes with dramatic shifts of over 50%. It will probably be a few years before they stabilize their methodology to the extent that your ancestry results don't change radically every six months or so.

      That said, I feel like I got my money's worth. I was interested two things primarily: One, to see how closely their results aligned with what I would expect from what my ancestry is thought to be, and two, to possibly have a surprising and unexpected result. The results correspond reasonably well to where my ancestors are believed to have come from (mostly Europe), but was quite surprised to see they found traces of Pacific Islander/Polynesian ancestry. Now that was truly unexpected. If true, it would be awfully interesting to discover how the heck that happened.

      It will be interesting to see what the next refinement brings.

      • Noi Liang

        Hey - I got unexpected Polynesian ancestry as well.  Do you have any theories about yours? 

        Do you have any other Asian ancestry?  I'm wondering if my Polynesian (3%) comes from my mom's or Dad's side.  My mom is of primarily European descent.  My dad of primarily East Asian.  I'm trying to figure out if the Polynesian represents some people's migration OUT of Polynesia to another region, OR if the Polynesian represents shared history between Polynesians and East Asians...  Guess I could get my parents tested to find out...

    • Cody Phoenix

      Why isn't my page showing up?  There is nothing there at all.

      • Luke R


        There were some issues with the DNA page just after the update, but they have now been resolved. If you are still having problems viewing your results, make sure you are signed into your account then go through the steps at this link if you still can't view your results.


        Luke R.
        Community Moderator

    • Paul Arthur

      I like the new format but I would really like a better understanding of why my results changed so drastically.  I understand the new results are supposed to be more accurate but how could I go from 69% Scandinavian to 0% Scandinavian?  I've seen several comments indicating that the Scandinavian influence had previously been overstated but this seems like just too big of a shift.  Are DNA results previously characterized as Scandinavian now being designated as West Europe?  My new results show 57% West Europe. A better explanation is really needed. 

    • Danielle Harms

      I know a lot of people have been posting about discrepancies in the updated DNA results... but I too am very puzzled. I was adopted, and apparently so was my birth mother (who I have been told with some confidence had Swedish ancestry), so I feel like DNA is the only real chance to find out about my personal ancestry.

      I went from 54% Scandinavian, 24% Central European, 11% Southern European, 8% Finnish/Volga Ural and 3% Uncertain... (and being ecstatic to find out even that much!)...

      To 71% Great Britain, 14% Eastern European, 9% Ireland and 6% Trace (<1% Scandinavian)??

      This seems to be pretty much the total opposite from my previous results, and I'm very discouraged and confused.

      I'm not great at science, but can someone explain how this could be so different? I have nothing to reference these results to, so my entire knowledge of my ancestry is based on this test.

    • A. Murtaugh

      I really like the more descriptive updated results!  I look forward to reading more in the articles ancestry has provided with the results.

    • Ericho Hayes

      Cool for my results: 93% South of the Sahara ancestry 1% North African 3% Irish 3% East Europe. Wow

    • Bill Sheehan

      After being teased all day by this post, an email and the home page banner ad I was finally able to access my results at 2 AM EST, and again this AM. Not a great start, but I will say that it appears to be a big improvement over the last ethnicity results which were seriously flawed. My children's results had previously not reflected my mother-in-law's Polish heritage and now appear to be right on percentage wise. My daughter had previously shown 100% British Isles, now shows 68% Irish, 2% British Isles and the rest mostly split out between East & West Europe. My son went from 99% British Isles to 75% Irish with the rest again mostly split out between East and West Europe. The traces were interesting and varied, particularly my son showing less than1% Central Asian. To sum up, kudos to the DNA team for their efforts in cleaning up what was obviously very flawed predictions on my earlier results, and I would suggest that the marketing and announcing of the new ethnicity results might have been rolled out a little more quietly to avoid the overload that resulted and the frustration with error messages that ensued.

    • Nancy Cordell

      I wish they would resolve their server issues. The DNA area has always been hit and miss as to whether it is working or not, but now it is worse. And the rest of the site seems to be less stable, too.

      I like that there are more detailed results, but I wish they'd show a chromosome view like many of their competitors.


    • Doreen Liberto-Blanck

      The updated DNA results has significantly different ethnic makeup than original results. The previous results showed 33% of one ethnic background and now shows only  6%.  


      Why such a disparity?

    • Ann Burns

      All of you who are wondering about the British Isles issue, read the white papers that ancestry provides.  Its long but you will see towards the bottom some admissions on the difficulty with this issue. 



    • Ann Burns

      Here's my comment:, you've used the catch phrase "No more uncertainty" above.  This is a ridiculous claim to make.  All over your explanations the word "estimate" is used, as it should be. If people take the time to read all the information you provide, they will see that due to many factors, including that you can't use ancient DNA for comparison, that the people used are most probably a good representative of the ethnicity they are representing but not 100%, that DNA strains drop off between generations so that few people are going to have 100% of their true ethnicities....come on....its false advertising to say no more uncertainty.

      I think you provide a good service but I don't think most people understand what their DNA does and does not tell them and the uncertainty with both....which is pretty big, particularly if you hail from migratory populations.  I know you want to bring people in but you must know few of us here are experts and are probably under the misconception that DNA will tell the whole story such as it might when used in a criminal trial for example...that isn't the case here and while you explain that if people truly read all you've written, you aren't all that up front about it.  Doesn't seem right to me.

      • BG
        I agree with you by and large, I just think when they say no more uncertainty, they just mean they give some interpretation (i.e. assign a geographic ancestral location) for all of your results instead of the old "N-percent Uncertain" thing. The wording is misleading as it implies there is no uncertainty in the results as opposed to just saying they no longer label a portion of your ethnicity estimate as "uncertain". It's just as uncertain, they just give the uncertain result a best guess spot on fhe globe.