Posted by Ancestry Team on October 17, 2013 in AncestryDNA

We are pleased to announce a major breakthrough for AncestryDNA™ that provides a deeper level of discovery in your DNA. Utilizing cutting edge science and the massive catalog of DNA samples AncestryDNA has collected from around the world, the newly evolved AncestryDNA is now a more comprehensive DNA test.

  • More detail – 26 regions and populations. Now with six detailed countries/regions within Western Africa and refinements across Europe including Ireland and Great Britain broken out, as well as Southern Europe now being detailed into Italy/Greece and the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal.)


AncestryDNA map
  • 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.
Historical Detail
  • More help along the way – We’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.
learning center
  • More detail – 26 regions and populations. Now with six detailed countries/regions within Western Africa and refinements across Europe including Ireland and Great Britain broken out, as well as Southern Europe now being detailed into Italy/Greece and the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal.)
Very Detailed Results
  • 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.

Interesting in learning more about AncestryDNA? Click here

Where have the biggest breakthroughs in ethnicity results been made?

The new science and massive DNA collection at AncestryDNA have powered groundbreaking detail into the history of where your ancestors came from using only your DNA. With more detail in Europe and Africa, the new AncestryDNA is showing just what is possible when you combine the best of family history with the best in DNA science.

New AncestryDNA detail

African Ancestry

The journey of many African American’s ancestors can be difficult to research using historical records alone, as most lose the paper trail around the 1870s or before. But now thanks to expanded capabilities of AncestryDNA that detail African ethnicity into 10 regions, including six different countries/regions within Western Africa, AncestryDNA will help people of African descent better understand where their ancestors came from and the cultures of those places, in a way never before possible.


British and Irish Ancestry

Previously identified as one ethnicity group, the British Isles is now broken down to expanded regions, divided into Great Britain and Ireland. This development provides additional insight to the approximately 21% of Americans who claim Irish or English heritage.


Southern Europe

Southern Europe is also now separated into two groups including, the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) and Italy/Greece, providing more detail for those with Mediterranean heritage where historical records are less likely to be available.

Already have your AncestryDNA results?

So, you’ve already taken the AncestryDNA test and are wondering what to expect from the new AncestryDNA ethnicity results?  Well, great news, we’ve already updated your DNA results to utilize all the new scientific breakthroughs and your new results are now available. Just log in to you account, click on the DNA tab and open your DNA results to see your newly evolved ethnicity results.

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.

We’d like to thank the small group of people who have been previewing the new experience. You’re feedback has been very helpful and based on the comments; the new AncestryDNA is a big hit.

If you have any questions we haven’t answered about your DNA results, we’ve set up a support forum so you can ask questions and get answers, visit the forum here.

If you haven’t tried AncestryDNA, there has never been a better time to get started. Get your DNA kit.




  1. cheryl brookshire

    I recently had an Ancestry dna test done back about two three months ago, will my results be updated as in the regions I have ancestors from? More pacfic info about actually which country I have the dna from.

  2. Holly

    I love the new results! I love the new information! The results fit what I know about my family tree much more accurately!

    What I am missing are the maps and pie charts for the people I am related to. Where did those go? Now when I click on my brother’s or sister’s results, I just see a list of the countries they are from. I want to SEE it on their map like I can SEE it on mine…I want to compare percentages. While the new results tells me a lot more about my DNA, I want to see how that compares with my siblings DNA. I feel a bit cut off. It makes getting those hints way less exciting.


  3. Brandon

    Great that the new improvement is done but not great that I can’t see it. The DNA portion of the website is terribly slow now and will not bring up my dna results at all. Frustrating!

  4. Trisha

    I’m not sure this will help find my relatives. If I don’t know which Haplogroup I am in, how can I compare to make sure I am related to a match? There is so much wrong information in member trees that you just can’t be sure.

  5. Paul

    It seems that AncestryDNA has made a quantum leap forward. The results now actually fit with the paper trail for me.

    Puzzling, however, that the original estimates were so wrong. Keep working on it, guys. You are making progress.

  6. Terresa Kane

    I received the email today informing me my updated DNA results were available, only I haven’t been able to access due to the site is temporarily under maintenance. Really?? Like ALL day under maintenance?

  7. Greg B

    I am very happy to see my new results! Got them earlier and then when I got back on later, things kept going sluggish… so to everyone having issues like that, just remember that it’s the first real day of what I imagine to be thousands of individual results going out and will likely overload servers for a few days off and on with everyone anxiously trying to log on to see!

  8. Lynn David

    Well, everyone else seems to be happy with the new ethnicity determinations – I’m not (completely). How did I go from 76% Scandanavian to 4%; and then from 0% English/Great Britain to 45%? And I can tell you that going back to 1700 or before on most all my lines I do not have one ancestor identified from either what is Scandanavia or Great Britain. On the other hand kudos for better differentiating some 25% of that into Europe West and also better determining most of the other 30% fraction of my DNA heritage.

    I tend to think AncestryDNA has a Saxon problem. A good quarter of my ancestry, concentrated on my father’s side is from Lower Saxony, northern Germany. My Belgian ancestry on my mother’s side may also be figuring into the Great Britain percentages. I have seen such a bias in American genealogical research as a whole towards Britain. And while that is understandable, I wonder if it somehow that bias has not crept into Ancestry’s determinations of DNA ethnicity.

    Just to let you know – among my 2x great-grandparents my ancestry consists of 1/4th Lower Saxon German; 1/8th Brabant-Wallon Belgian; 1/8th Luxembourg Belgian; 1/8th Lorraine French; 1/8th Baden Germany; 1/16th French/German Swiss; 1/16th undifferentiated French (probably Franche-Comte); 1/16th Prussian German; 1/16th Polish. Most all my ancestors came from agrarian roots which I would assume meant they did not ‘roam’ too much. So even if some few Britains did manage to get back to Belgium, France or Germany, I cannot imagine such ancestors from the 1500s or 1600s effecting the admixture such that they overshadow the native populations of those areas in my DNA.

    You still have a problem. And no I don’t have a disconnect. I have DNA matches all around the branches of my tree most often back to 4th cousin but some out to 7th cousins.

  9. Erin Craig

    I was surprised when I got my results. I think my sample was messed up. It’s too different from the original and even with the scientific information about how it was acquired, it doesn’t make sense that these results are mine. Going from 0% of a place that I have not traced any family to having 29% is crazy. And where did the Asian come from – 9%, that’s as much as I have from France/Germany which is where the Majority of my ancestors immigrated from in the 1600s.

  10. Erin Craig

    Oh also, it would be nice if the Native American part had a sample from the Peoria tribe in Oklahoma. I think many people in the Midwest might link up more accurately to Native American DNA.

  11. Margie

    The new results fit what I know about my family much more accurately. It even shows the 1% Native American that I thought was true.

  12. Donna Willard

    As usual, there are problems with downloading. It seems like every time there is an update it happens . Really wanted to see my DNA results update like everyone else does. I guess we will just wait and wait and wait some more. Thanks !!!!!!

  13. I’m wondering what happened to the “balloons” that show where you ancestors in you tree live. Will that come back?

    I also would like to see folders so the we can work though on families and sort them in categories.
    Can you help.

  14. Lynn David

    I wonder if this is where the Great Britain//Europe West problem (at least the problem I see) may lie.
    Here’s what I found out when I checked into the relative numbers of those Ancestry has in their reference sample when comparing their Ethnicity Regions of: Great Britain, Scandanavia, East Europe, & West Europe.

    The total population of these four ethnic regions is: 450 million. The total reference sample for these four ethnic regions is: 941 persons. The following listing shows:

    1) the reference panel number for each ethnic region;
    2) the reference panel number as a percentage of the total sample for the four ethnic regions;
    3) the population (in millions) in the core of the ethnic region;
    4) the population as a percentage of the population for the four ethnic regions; and
    5) the ratio of the percentage of the reference panel number to the percentage of the population.

    If the ratio of those percentages is less than unity (1) then the representation of that region’s DNA count in the sample may be below par and under-represented in calculations. (Rounding may not allow percentages to add up to exactly 100%)

    Ref # — Ref % — Pop — Pop % — % Ratio
    111 — 11.8% — 63 — 14% — 0.84

    Ref # — Ref % — Pop — Pop % — % Ratio
    232 — 24.6% — 20 — 4.5% — 5.47

    Ref # — Ref % — Pop — Pop % — % Ratio
    432 — 45.9% — 165 — 36.7% — 1.25

    Ref # — Ref % — Pop — Pop % — % Ratio
    166 — 17.6% — 202 — 44.9% — 0.39

    Note that the Scandanavian Reference Panel is grossly over-represented in the Ancestry pool. Is this the reason for the prior “Scandanavian Problem” which Ancestry had in their first determination of ethnicity? Europe East is as well, but close to unity. So to is Great Britain, though below unity the region is well represented in comparison to that of Europe West, which is the source (Saxons) of much of that region’s ethnic heritage. Which brings us to Europe West which is very poorly represented at a ration or only 0.39.

    It seems to me that it is quite probable that the Saxon element in Great Britain is of a greater representation than in its homeland of Germany. Further it may be probable that the Celtic DNA elements of the low countries, The Netherlands and Belgium, do not have the representation needed to discern a differnce between that of Europe West and Great Britain.

    This is perhaps too simplistic an interpretation. However, when looking at Figure 3.6 of Ancestry’s Ethnicity Estimate White Paper, one gets the feeling that too much of what is continental is being lumped in with the Ancestry ethnic region Great Britain. And Figure 3.3 shows just how close and overlapping (if I am reading the colors correctly) the DNA of the two regions (Great Britain & Europe West) can be.

    Maybe what this means is that my German Saxon and Belgian Brabanters are a representative remnant population of those Saxons and Celts which eventually settled in Great Britain. If so, I would rather that those British with similar DNA be identified ethnically as from Europe West, which would be indicative of their deeper ancestry. That would be more acceptable than to have my (and other’s) ancestors, who had no association with the British Isles, be called ethnically “Great Britain.”

    Ancestry received a lot of outcry (and rightly so) about persons with too much Scandanavian ethnicity. It seems that they attempted to correct that, with the thought that the problem had to do with those who are ethnically British. But at the same time, they (apparently) ignored the idea that some (many?) of us with Belgian or NW German ancestry also had a Scandanavian problem (I was listed at 76%).

  15. Sandy Carneiro

    I have been researching a Smith line in Monroe VA / later WV. I did the DNA in hopes of finding my Myers but have found only 2 and both were less then what I have.
    A male cousin who also researches the Smith’s also did a DNA. While I got one hit on Smith who happened to be my male cousin, he said he got several Smith hits and told me to check his DNA – which is private or so it seems.
    My question is why does a male receive so many more hits then a female, especially when his does show up on my DNA?????

  16. David Lynx

    I had the same question as David Lynn. I made dramatic shifts going from 56 Western European to 6 percent. Actually this new one makes a lot more sense to me than the last one.

  17. L

    I’m pleased with my updated results. If could answer me one question, it would be this:
    “What denotes the difference between a region that is 5% and trace regions that are 5%?”

    Thanks for clearing up my 12% uncertain.

  18. Tanya

    I like the new results, I also tested on 23and me and see see similar results between the two comparisons. I like how they expanded the information telling us other regions where are DNA can be found. I am Czech, German,French(Mixed) with Swiss and Beligan. I am also small % of English,Portuguese,Basque some less than 1% in my French tree that dates back to 1550. In my ancestry results I got European Eastern(my Czech) Great Britain( my English, Also Normandy and Britany French) I got Ireland which are family had a rumor about. I think ancestry did great on the update.

  19. Sigrid Merry

    Found my answer, Ancestry has put a a tracker on the page that Ghostery blocks? Whats up, is it not enough that we paid for the test and a monthly fee. Get the tracker removed!

    Not a happy camper, Please explain yourself Ancestry!

  20. Thomas Heavey, Sr

    The “new” data changed my profile from 39% Scandinavian to 6%. The 39% was a surprise to me since my mother’s family is from Norway. I know relatives on both gparents sides and there is no known immigration to Norway in the last 500 years.
    I trust as the sample sizes get larger (only 279 Scandinavians), data will change.
    Any comments?

  21. Donna

    I would like to know what does the 1 percent mean in my dna?Does that mean I have enthincity with that region or not?

  22. Jon Schrader

    I, like David Lynn and David Lynx, am confused – I went from 91% Irish and 9% persian turkish to almost entirely great british (57%) and scandinavian (23%)… were the markers that showed ancestry that I was irish/scottish/welsh and persian/turkish/caucasus mtns. wrong? I am certain of my Irish (O’) Conley ancestry on my mother’s side – she just has no clue who my father was…

  23. evelyn McClure

    Why are the results for my genetic ethnicity that I received in May so
    different from the latest ones I have received? One outstanding difference is that in the May report I have 11% Finnish/Volga-Ural and the latest report says they tested Finland and found 0% Which one of
    these reports am I to believe?

  24. Diane Cooke

    I’ve done my DNA with a couple times and I did the newer version of the test last year. For the most part of the year the results came up as 91% Scandinavian and 9% Persian/Turkish/Caucasus. Then more recently, It’s now showing as 17% Scandinavian and 18% Western European and 55% Irish with <1% South Asian. Is the newer mix reflecting a newer part of the migration patterns in my DNA? By that I mean were the first results correct if you go REALLY far back? My guess was that if my DNA were originally 91% Scandinavian, then LATER, as the Vikings traveled to Ireland and other parts of the UK and they'd mix with those regions, then I'd show up as 55% Irish. I understand you're trying to make these results more accurate, but is there a way to consider the timeline of migrations as these results get modified? The biggest part of my question that I'd REALLY love to know is why I went from 91% Scandinavian to 17% Scandinavian. Were the first results NOT correct at all or does it mean if you go farther back in their migration, I'd show up as 91% Scandinavian (before they mixed with the Irish)? Sorry if you've answered this elsewhere, but I couldn't find an answer. Thanks for your help!

  25. Don

    I just took the test and some of it surprised me and some didn’t. I really don’t understand the Great Britain distinction. It was a place made up of Celts, Romans, Angles/Saxons, and Scandinavians. How can it be made up as one place as a source of DNA? The range I had for the region was from 0 to 58% and it gave me 26%. However, some of it matches with some of my paper lineage. The Italian/Greek percentage was a surprise. Have no paper lineage there, however the historical aspects of the Roman Empire’s location suggests that their genes could have still been in the area. Does the Great Britain region include the Roman genetic contribution? Any thoughts?

Comments are closed.