Tribute Reels from MyHeritage

Mother’s Day was Sunday, and my family was close in heart, but not actually here that day. After I had a nice visit with them, I settled in for a quiet day of writing and quilting. The evening before, I had published, Mom’s Quilt, an article honoring my mother.

Of course, I checked my email and social media from time to time during the day, so imagine my surprise when I saw a video of my mother, MY MOTHER, in someone else’s social media feed on Mother’s Day.

Huh???

Wait!

What?

There’s no mistaking her.

You know there’s a great backstory, right?!.

RootsTech 2026

Every year I’m always front row, center at Gilad Japhet’s keynote session at Rootstech – except when RootsTech schedules our two sessions at the same time. That’s exactly what happened in 2026.

I love to hear first-hand what’s being announced and coming next from MyHeritage. Gilad founded MyHeritage in 2003 as a small startup focused on genealogy research. MyHeritage grew by leaps and bounds, and in 2016 they added DNA testing as a resource. The rest, as they say, is history.

I missed his keynote this year, so imagine my surprise when my friend, Peggy, walked up to me a little later and said, “Oh my gosh, Roberta, I was crying in the session…your mother.”

I paused for a moment, because I had not mentioned my mother in my presentation earlier – which is what I assumed she must be talking about.

I must have looked very confused because Peggy continued, “Half the room was in tears.”

“What?”

“In Gilad’s presentation – you and your mother.”

Suddenly, everything fell into place and made sense. I had given Gilad permission to include pilot videos at RootsTech of something he had been working on if he thought it was appropriate, and if MyHeritage decided to go forward with the project.

Something else suddenly made sense, too. The look of disappointment when I was asked by a MyHeritage team member if I was going to be in Gilad’s session, and I explained that my session had been moved to a slot at the same exact time. “That’s too bad – we saved you a seat right up front.” At the time, I thought, “Well, that’s very nice,” but later, I understood.

Obviously, Gilad had made the decision to show the videos – but which version? There were two – equally as compelling in different ways.

The Backstory

A few weeks earlier, I had received an email from Gilad, asking what I thought about a potential new feature. He included a “demo” version – not even an alpha version because MyHeritage was only considering the possibility of implementing something like this for their customers.

Gilad asked for feedback. Did I like it? How did I think other people would feel if something like this was built for their own family?

Let’s just say that I was not at all prepared for what I saw when I clicked on the attachment. He should have given me a “do not watch in the presence of other people” warning.

I sobbed. I ugly cried so hard I got the hiccups.

My poor husband asked what was wrong.

“Who died?”

Imagine his shock when I slobbered out, “My mother.”

He clearly knew that my mother had died 20 years ago – but I wasn’t answering the question he actually asked. I was trying to explain why I was crying.

I couldn’t talk, so I took him into my office and just played the video – at which point, I wasn’t the only one crying. He claimed he had something in his eye😊- both eyes apparently.

I’m not going to try to explain, because there truly are no words.

At that point, what is now named “Tribute Reels” was being called “Life Tribute,” as you can see in the original video in Gilad’s RootsTech talk, here. There was also a surprise for me that I didn’t know about until I watched the video after RootsTech. This part of the video begins at the 30.25-minute mark and the rest is interspersed over the next 12 minutes.

When I was talking to Peggy at RootsTech, I had not attended Gilad’s session, and the video wasn’t available yet, so I didn’t know exactly what was there, and what might have changed.

I’ll show you how to create your own Tribute Reel in a minute, but first, I’d like to share my experience.

Tribute Reels

Tribute Reels is a series of photos sorted in your preferred order, then combined into a reel using AI animation. When AI photo animation first became available, I was not a fan because it was a technology in its infancy and the results were so unnatural that they were almost frightening. However, the technology has matured very quickly, allowing viewers to focus on the subject and not the underpinnings, and MyHeritage is using cutting-edge technology for Tribute Reels.

This is truly a special gift. Seeing Mom in motion long before I was born reminds me of viewing a decades-old home movie that might have been found in an old trunk discovered in the attic.

Gilad selected these photos at random from those I had uploaded to Mom’s profile at MyHeritage, so there was no “special prep” or me selecting especially relevant photos for the proof-of-concept video.

Here’s my reply to Gilad after viewing the Tribute Reel for my mother contained in his email.

Wow Gilad!

First, before I share my techy evaluation and commentary, let me share my experience.

My habit, when I wake up, is to review my e-mail and social media. Social media to see what has happened overnight, and my e-mail to delete spam and such, and to see if there is anything interesting.

Your email was obviously interesting, so I read it and watched the attached video.

Suffice it to say that I started my day with a good cry. I sat outside with my coffee and thought fondly of Mom. I still miss her incredibly.

Now my thoughts about this new video in a less emotional vein.

One of the things I really like is that each of the brought-to-life photos includes the person smiling. They are happy, even if their life wasn’t entirely happy. That’s the human condition, I guess.

In any case, the photos with the children also include touches of affection.

I think the one that touched me the most in my video was the photo of Mom and me together in our matching dresses that we made. I’m sure I was a lot of “help,” but then again, it introduced the love of sewing which I still do today, albeit mixed with art. I very vaguely remember the day that picture was taken. I was maybe 4 or 5, and my father took the photo. I remember how much fun we had making and wearing those dresses. In the picture, we were holding hands, and in the video, that portion was animated in such a touching way. Until the age of digital recording, we would never have been able to see ourselves in videos or “moving pictures” from this timeframe, so it’s like revisiting the past in such a pleasant manner

I noticed this same aspect in other portions of the video as well. The affection and closeness.

Towards the end, there’s a photo of Mom and my stepfather, whom I called Dad. In that animation, he reaches up and touches his tie, but to me, it seemed like a “touch my heart” message. Yes, I know it’s an animation, and that’s not actually possible, but that’s how it made me feel. A silent but well-understood message from the other side.

In the picture on the farm with Dad, Mom, and her aunt, with Spot, the family dog on Dad’s lap – that was just so quintessentially “home.” Of course, we can’t go back in time to a place that no longer exists, with people and fur-family members who have all passed on – but this image served to do that for me. Time travel in the best of ways.

The original photo is blurry – and I while I know it could be digitally “sharpened,” I actually like that it’s blurry because it suggests a misty memory.

And the laughs. Laughing while crying, actually. That picture with Mom holding the huge chocolate bar. She was so happy, and it was her last holiday season with us. She passed on five months later. I’m so incredibly glad I found that mega-sized Hershey’s bar for her. It was supposed to be a joke. Jim gave her a chisel and a hammer to use on it. She ate every bite!

So, speaking of Jim, I asked him to come into my office, and I just played the video for him with no up-front discussion. I turned around and looked at him, standing behind me, having a sudden allergy attack making his eyes water😊 He said, “How could one NOT cry? She’s not even my mother, but I sure miss her. She was such a card.” Then, for a few minutes, we talked about our shared memories of Mom. Jim only knew her for about a decade before she passed on, but they got along very well.

Mom died just before Mother’s Day in 2006. I cleaned out her apartment that Mother’s Day Sunday. So, given that this Mother’s Day marked the 20th anniversary of Mom’s departure from this plane, it was difficult, to say the least, and I so appreciated this very unexpected gift from MyHeritage.

Kind of like a wink and a nod from Mom. I still feel her with me.

Making Your Own Tribute Reel

The MyHeritage blog article explains more about Tribute Reels and provides additional information, here. You’ll also notice a shortened, color-enhanced version of Mom’s Tribute Reel.

To create your own Tribute Reel, sign in to your MyHeritage account, and select Photos, then Tribute Reel.

Click on “Create Tribute Reel”.

MyHeritage suggests people in your tree for whom there are photos available, showing you how many photos you can choose from for each person. Or you can enter someone’s name.

I’m selecting my father this time.

Click on the photos to select at least 5 but as many as 15 for Tribute Reels to use. I uploaded a few more from my computer.

On the next screen, just drag your selected photos to arrange in your preferred order.

I rearranged these, with his favorite hobby as the cover photo, and me visiting his grave to close. You can also add both cover and closing text.

Next, customize your Reel by selecting music, or no sound.

And last, consent to process.

MyHeritage emails you when your Tribute Reel is ready. Mine only took about 15 minutes, but I’m sure it varies widely based on the server load. If the email doesn’t arrive in a timely manner, check your spam filter.

Here’s my father’s reel, so take a look.

Well, here I am, crying again. The baby between my father’s knees is me. It’s the only photo I have of us together. Remember what I said about the looks of affection?

Create a Tribute Reel for someone you love.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Ancient Connections: Where Archaeology Meets Your Ancestors

Ancient Connections, a report found on FamilyTreeDNA’s Discover platform for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), can be used in multiple ways to enhance your genealogy and unlock secrets.

It’s exciting to examine ancient burials linked to our ancestors and understand how we connect to them. Ancient Connections offer a wealth of information, providing clues that can help unravel long-standing mysteries.

Today, there are more than 12,960 Y-DNA Ancient Connections in Discover, along with more than 25,310 mitochondrial Ancient Connections, and that number increases weekly.

Why the disparity, you ask? Remember, everyone has mitochondrial DNA, but only males have Y-DNA.

In addition to matches, your DNA results hold something even more powerful – evidence of where your ancestors and their cousins lived in the distant past, when they lived, and the cultural context surrounding them. These essential insights are unavailable through any other means. Ancient Connections help us answer the age-old question, “Where did I come from?”

Could These People Be My Ancestors?

I’ll show you how to answer another question, too. Which of these Ancient Connections could potentially be your ancestors, and which ones are your “haplo-cousins”?

Regardless, they all help us understand our ancestors’ past, and that of their descendants.

Discover is for Everyone

FamilyTreeDNA provides a free version of Discover that everyone can use. There’s also an enriched version with additional information for their customers who have purchased Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA tests.

Discover has something to offer for everyone.

Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mothers to all of their children of both sexes – unmixed with the DNA of the father.

Everyone has their mother’s mitochondrial DNA, which is passed intact, except for an occasional mutation, directly down through generations of mothers. It’s not admixed like autosomal DNA, so we don’t lose some portion in each generation. This is exactly why we can track mitochondrial DNA infinitely far back in time and why it’s so crucial for understanding the origins of your mother’s specific line.

Y-DNA is passed from fathers only to their sons, which is what makes males male. Like mitochondrial DNA, Y-DNA is not admixed with any DNA from the mother, so we get a laser line-of-sight view of the direct patrilineal line back in time. The Y-DNA direct paternal line is the male’s surname line in cultures where males carry their father’s surname.

If you’ve tested at or upgraded to either the Big Y-700 level or the mtFull, full mitochondrial sequence test, you will receive the most granular haplogroup possible, meaning the closest in time and most informative. You’ll also match with other testers who have taken the less-refined lower-level tests.

The most informative and precise results occur when both people have taken the premium tests. As more people test and science advances, you may receive a new haplogroup from time to time when you and another tester share a rare mutation – so these tests are evergreen.

Both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA testers at any level have access to Discover on their dashboard for those products, although the results of lower-level tests provide less information.

The Free Version of Discover Compared to the Premium Version for Testers

Here’s a comparison of lower-level Y-DNA tests and the Big Y-700.

Click any image to enlarge

Y-DNA testers who have only taken the 12-111 STR panel tests receive a predicted haplogroup, and when clicking through to Discover, receive up to 10 Ancient Connections.

For example, If your Y-DNA haplogroup is predicted as R-M269, the most common male lineage in Europe that arose some 6450 years ago, your Ancient Connections begin with the closest genetic match to R-M269. Viewing Ancient Connections that are 6500 years ago will certainly be interesting, so please do look, but probably not terribly useful for genealogy.

However, if that same person were to upgrade to the Big Y-700, they would receive a much more recent haplogroup, and along with it, up to 30 Ancient Connections within their major haplogroup lineage, R in this case, plus the oldest sample in the database. For some haplogroups, there may not yet be 30 Ancient Connections, although new ancient samples are added weekly for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA.

All Ancient Connections begin with the matches who are genetically closest to the haplogroup requested.

The same scenario holds true for mitochondrial DNA testers who previously tested at the HVR1/HVR2 level, but not at the full sequence level, which is the only test available today.

This article focuses on testers at the higher levels, meaning the Big Y-700 and the mtFull tests, and how to utilize their 30 closest Ancient Connections. We’ll walk through step-by-step examples using both.

However, before we begin evaluating our Ancient Connections, we need to cover two fundamental concepts.

BCE, CE and Converting to “Years Ago”

It’s helpful to understand date structures and how they are used.

It’s easy to get confused when seeing the dates of CE, current era, and BCE, before current era, which means we misinterpret the information.

For example, the year 100 CE is the year 100 that occurred roughly 1900 years ago. We round 2026 to 2000 for these types of calculations. The year 100 BCE, before current era, occurred approximately 2100 years ago. I often prefer to work in “years ago”, because it equalizes the numbers, meaning you’re less likely to get confused about how long ago someone lived or something happened.

To do the calculations from BCE dates to “years ago,” add 2000, so 2250 BCE equals 4250 years ago.

For CE dates, subtract from 2000. The date 500 CE occurred 1500 years ago.

This can be especially confusing when you’re dealing with the same number on either side of the current era, which began in the year 1. There is no year zero. For example, we need to be vigilant not to confuse 500 BCE, which was 2500 years ago, and 500 CE, which was 1500 years ago.

Now, on to our second concept.

Haplogroup Age and Burial Age Are Not the Same

When viewing Ancient Connections, the genetic age of the haplogroup, meaning when it was formed, and age of the burial are two different things.

Haplogroup R-ZP18 is about 4250 years old, and this Late Iron Age, pre-Roman burial which is also R-ZP18, occurred about between 2337 and 2043 years ago.

Haplogroup ages and the date they emerged, which show on the Timeline, sometimes mature and are refined with additional testers and branching.

Burials are dated using various techniques, and sometimes the ages provided in the academic papers are earlier than the genetic age of the haplogroup, shown on the Timeline at the bottom of the Connections page.

Discover makes no attempt to “fix” this situation, because it’s unclear which age should be changed. It’s not unusual to be unable to fully analyze ancient remains. For example, let’s say a sample is determined to have the SNP for R-ZP18, but simultaneously lacks downstream SNPs and some upstream SNPs, and the burial was dated from surrounding soil or artifacts. In that case, it would be impossible to know what is precisely “accurate”, but the sample is accurate enough to be included in Ancient Connections. This is also why some samples aren’t included in Globetrekker calculations. Some low-quality samples are excluded entirely.

Every ancient sample is individually analyzed by R&D team members before being included in the phylogenetic tree and Ancient Connections. Sometimes, the scientists at FamilyTreeDNA can assign a more specific haplogroup than was available to the paper authors at the time of publication because the tree has since branched.

As you receive new Ancient Connections, your older ones, except your final or oldest connection, will roll off of your list.

That’s one reason I devised a process for analyzing and recording my Ancient Connections, and for determining which ones might be actual ancestors – or at least aren’t precluded from it.

First Peek at Ancient Connections

Sign in to your FamilyTreeDNA account and click on the Discover link on the dashboard for the type of test you wish to view.

In the Y-DNA example, I’m using my male Estes cousins. As a female, I can’t test for the Estes Y chromosome, so I recruited others to represent my line. You can see the results in the Estes DNA project.

After signing in, click on Discover, then on Ancient Connections.

Y-DNA Ancient Connections 

It’s a bonanza!

Your Ancient Connections are displayed at the top of the page, ordered from genetically closest to most distant. These are archaeological samples whose data has been extracted from academic papers and analyzed before being include in Discover.

You’ll see a description of the first sample, or any sample you click on. The Timeline for that sample, along with your haplogroup and your common ancestor’s haplogroup, is displayed at the bottom of the page.

The first, meaning closest, Ancient Connection is highlighted, so let’s take a look.

  • “You” are shown in the dark purple frame (with purple arrows) at right, with your haplogroup, in this case R-ZS3700, which is placed on the Timeline at the bottom of the page in the appropriate location.
  • The Ancient Connection named “North Berwick 16499”, whose name was taken from the academic paper in which it was found, is shown in a red frame and placed on the timeline based on information provided in the paper.

“North Berwick” has been assigned to haplogroup R-ZP18, either in the paper, or by the FamilyTreeDNA R&D team if a more refined haplogroup can be determined, and is this tester’s closest Ancient Connection based on its position on the list.

Note that you may have other Ancient Connections who are genetically equivalent in age, meaning they too would be R-ZP18. In our case, only one sample is assigned to that haplogroup.

  • Your Shared Ancestor, in the green frame, is the first man who carried R-ZP18, which emerged about 2250 BCE, or 4250 years ago.

Notice that I said, “the first man.” That man’s sons, grandsons and so forth were also haplogroup R-ZP18. Some went on to develop new downstream haplogroups, but apparently, North Berwick, by the time he lived, had not. Either that, or a downstream haplogroup cannot yet be determined due to a lack of other testers in that lineage.

Men with downstream SNPs (mutations), meaning downstream haplogroups, also descended from R-ZP18. Those SNP mutations become downstream haplogroups when two or more men who carry the same SNP mutation match each other. For example, our Estes ancestor who carries haplogroup R-ZS3700 descends from R-ZP18 through a distinct series of downstream SNPs (mutations). While we carry R-ZP18 in our lineage, it’s not our most refined haplogroup.

However, for North Berwick, haplogroup R-ZP18 is his most refined haplogroup.

Because of this, we know for sure that North Berwick and the Estes men both descend from the original R-ZP18 man who lived about 4250 years ago, but we can’t tell when they shared a common ancestor between 4250 years ago and 3750 years ago when the next downstream haplogroup R-BY342, was formed in the Estes lineage.

Because North Berwick does not belong to a different downstream haplogroup, it’s genetically possible that the Estes men could descend from him during that 500-year timeframe. There’s nothing to exclude that possibility based on his haplogroup alone, but looking at when North Berwick lived is another matter.

North Berwrock lived between 2337 and 2043 years ago, which is 1400 years LATER than when the first downstream haplogroup, R-BY342 was formed, about 3750 year ago, in the Estes lineage. This precludes North Berwick from being our direct ancestor. Instead, he’s our “haplocousin.” We share a common upstream ancestor.

What we we absolutely CAN confirm, though, is that between 500 and 1300 years earlier than North Berwick lived, between when haplogroups R-BY342 and R-ZP18 were formed, both North Berwick and our Estes ancestor descended from the same man.

This kind of information is like waving a red flag in a genealogist’s face. We immediately need to know more.

This is just the beginning, and we have so many questions!

Revealing More Information

Did our common ancestor live in or near North Berwick, or someplace else? What do we know about the history of North Berwick?

What can we discern about North Berwick?

  • When did this man live, and where?
  • What do we know about him?
  • Who was he?
  • Did he live close to where my earliest known ancestor in this line is found?
  • What can I tell about his culture?
  • Were there grave goods that provide at least a peek into his life?

So many questions!

Discover tells us that he lived between 337 and 43 BCE, so between 2337 and 2043 years ago, during the Late Iron Age, and is associated with the Iron Age Britain cultural group.

The Ancient Connections “Reference” provides information about the paper where the North Berwick sample was found. No links are provided because sometimes the paper is behind a paywall, and you can’t access it without paying, and sometimes it’s a preprint and will appear later elsewhere. Sometimes one paper actually uses data from an earlier paper, and it gets complicated.

The first thing I do is Google the paper – Patterson et al. 2022. Google provides two links – one that’s free, and one that isn’t. Many times, the sample data is found in the supplementary material, which may also be behind a paywall, even if the paper isn’t.

I know you’re going to think it’s a pain, but I strongly encourage you to read every paper, though sometimes they can be challenging to understand, so read them when you’re fresh, not tired, and can concentrate. If nothing else, at least read the abstract. There’s so much great information buried in academic papers, including nice maps and discussions of the burial site. You can also learn more sometimes by Googling the burial site itself.

Let me give you an example from this paper’s abstract. I’ve added the brackets [ ] for clarity, from the body of the paper:

Between 1000 and 875 BC[E], EEF [Early European Farmer] ancestry increased in southern Britain [England and Wales] but not northern Britain [Scotland] due to incorporation of migrants who arrived at this time and over previous centuries, and who were genetically most similar to ancient individuals from France. These migrants contributed about half the ancestry of people of England and Wales from the Iron Age, thereby creating a plausible vector for the spread of early Celtic languages into Britain.

How does this information align with our North Berwick man? He lived between 2337 and 2043 years ago, and the EEF ancestry increased in southern Britain between 3000 and 2875 years ago. The authors do add “over previous centuries” which probably accounts for the 500-year gap and gets closer to when R-ZP18 lived. North Berwick is found in Scotland, not England or Wales, so not part of the group of people most closely aligned with the ancient French migrants from this timeframe. Maps in the paper confirm this as well.

Googling the paper and sample name provided additional sourced information. This paper incorporates samples from earlier papers and performed a different type of analysis.

Ironically, I wrote about this in detail in 2022, here, before Discover was introduced, so I had absolutely no idea that North Berwick 16499, discovered on Law Road in North Berwick, was related to my ancestors, and therefore, to me.

In that article, I researched and mapped the samples. North Berwick 16499 is located on the coast, along the harbour, not far from Edinburgh.

The burial was excavated in the cemetery of the original St. Andrew’s Church in North Berwick, originally built in the 1100s, but now in ruins.

This paper’s supplementary material explains that:

Excavation of a substantial square cist at Law Road, North Berwick, uncovered the remains of four inhumations of Late Iron Age date (Richardson et al. 2005). Two adult males 3603 (Skeletons C46 and C51) and a female around 16–18 years of age at death (Skeleton C50) appeared to have been displaced for the burial of an adult female (Skeleton C47), wearing an iron brooch. One of the males (C46) had been buried with a bone-handled iron knife.

What I wouldn’t give to see that iron brooch and bone-handled knife.

C51 is North Berwick 16499, “our” skeleton. A cist grave is a small, stone-lined burial box, and this one was preserved beneath medieval deposits.

That reference gave the even more precise location of Law Road and St. Andrews Street and informs us that the remains are held by National Museums Scotland. Checking their collections confirms that they hold these items, plus the bones. However, there are no photos shown. Contacting them for images might yield results.

What the paper did not say is that little was known prior to these excavations about early North Berwick.

By Stefan Schäfer, Lich – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=19450589

North Berwick was known to exist as a ferry landing from the 7th century, but an archaeological survey of Berwick Law, a hill that overlooks the town, revealed much earlier information:

The earliest features on North Berwick Law comprise a pair of newly discovered cup-marked rocks and the scanty remains of a prehistoric hilltop fort discovered by RCAHMS (1957, xv), whose outworks appear to be more limited than suggested by previous authorities (Feachem 1963, 119; OS 1975). The lower SW flank of the Law is dotted with the remains of a prehistoric settlement comprising at least 12 hut circles or house platforms and fragments of an associated field system of small cairns and banks.

Unfortunately, the perimeters of Berwick Law have been settled and farmed since, and the hilltop has served recently in the same capacity as it probably served initially – as a lookout across the firth. The residents would have been watching from this highest point for invaders arriving by sea.

It’s about half a mile from the foot of the hill to the burial cist.

The survey also mentioned that they found “stray bronze age finds” that had likely been disrupted by subsequent settlement. The bronze age in Northern Scotland began about 4200 years ago, about the time that R-ZP18 lived, until about 2800 years ago. Whoever North Berwick 16499 was, the man who was buried here some 2400 years ago, he was probably associated with this hilltop fort, perhaps farming at the base, probably living in one of those huts or nearby. His body wouldn’t have been taken far for burial.

We are left to wonder how long his family had lived here, and how they had arrived. Was his cist burial a sign of status? Was he sent to commend the fort, or had his family settled here centuries earlier? Did our ancestor descend from this location, too?

After our analysis, we know that our ancestor did not descend from North Berwick 16499 himself, but North Berwick definitely descended from our ancestor.

If you’re thinking this is a rabbit hole, it definitely is – but what a rabbit hole! There is so much to be gleaned from these Connections.

The Evaluation Process

I needed a process to keep track of these Ancient Connections, my findings, and how they relate to my Estes ancestors. Who begat, or might have begat whom, and where?

I created a spreadsheet as I read and analyzed each Ancient Connection relative to my ancestral line. I include what I know about it, and what I THINK I know about it. Those can be two vastly different things. I follow this same process for every ancestral line where I can find a representative Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA tester.

For example, there’s a persistent rumor that the Estes family line descends from the d’Este family of Italy. That rumor was spun up long before we had genetic proof that our line was found in Kent, England, in records dating back to about 1495. Fortunately, church records, for the most part, and some civil records still exist.

The first known record is the will of our Nycholas Ewstas written on January 1, 1533/1534 in Deal, Kent, England. We confirmed that this is our Estes line by testing the Y-DNA of his descendant who still lives a few miles up the road, compared with the descendants of Abraham Estes (1647-1720), the man who immigrated to Virginia in 1673. We believed that Abraham Estes, who married in 1672, then immigrated 14 months later, was one and the same person.

Based on the details of the d’Este rumor, the Estes line was supposed to descend from one Francesco d’Este (Esteuse), an illegitimate royal son, exiled to France about 1471 after the death of his father, Azzo VI of Este, by a jealous half-brother, complete with a royal allowance. There are mentions of him in the Dutch and French courts, then nothing. Silence.

Apparently, various Estes lines in England liked the idea that he crossed the English Channel and settled in the fishing village of Deal, with his descendants carrying the surname Estes, a derivative of d’Este. King James apparently believed there was a connection and made that suggestion himself in one instance, although it’s unclear if that Estes man was from our Estes line.

It’s difficult to prove a negative, so we need to rely on the evidence we do have, much of which has been discovered and accumulated in more recent years, since the genesis of that rumor which was widely believed.

To begin with, it makes no sense that between 1471 and 1495, the family suddenly went from being a wealthy exiled royal circulating at court in France and the Netherlands, to peasant fishermen on the coast across the channel.

There is a legitimate royal lineage that does descend from the d’Este family in Italy, but until and unless someone who is a descendant of the direct male line of the House of Hanover, which reaches back to the Azzo line of Ferrara, takes the Y-DNA test, there’s no proof positive. Either their Y-DNA would match the Estes line, or not. I’d wager that it does not, but I’d love to find out for sure.

I’m hopeful that some nugget in Ancient Connections might add weight to either side of the argument.

Creating a Spreadsheet

First, I’ll show you the Ancient Connections spreadsheet built for the Estes line, then I’ll demonstrate how to build it.

Here’s the finished spreadsheet. Every haplogroup’s spreadsheet will be different.

I placed the four confirmed Estes haplogroups at the bottom because that’s the base from which the Ancient Connections are built, beginning with the closest Connection first.

“My” haplogroup, meaning for my ancestor’s Estes male line, is R-ZS3700, but there’s one additional downstream haplogroup, which I’ve included for completeness.

Let me alert you now that you WILL receive new Ancient Connections, which means that for every new Connection you receive, one more distant Connection rolls off the end because it’s outside of your 30 genetically closest Connections threshold. I’ve received new Ancient Connections in the past three months, between the time I originally began gathering this information and when I published this article.

The underlying message, in addition to maintaining your spreadsheet, is to set a calendar alert to check your Ancient Connections regularly. One rolled off that was more distant genetically, but was located only 10 miles away from where my Estes ancestors originated in Deal, England.

We’ll build the spreadsheet so you can easily expand it as new Connections are added.

Also, note that you may receive multiple matches from the same archaeological excavation site, which, of course, is highly suggestive of a family. If the multiple burials are in the same exact location and from roughly the same timeframe, I only record them on the spreadsheet once to reduce clutter, but I add a note that there are multiples.

The Build Process

Referencing the image above, haplogroups in the column directly above the originating haplogroup, R-BY154784, then R-ZS3700, colored apricot, are parent haplogroups – meaning that these haplogroups descend from the haplogroups above them. Look at R-ZP18, North Berwick, above R-BY482 as an example. This means two things.

  1. It’s possible that my ancestors could descend from these individuals in this column. However, all things considered, it’s more likely that they are a “cousin” of my ancestor who lived at that time and carried that haplogroup before a new mutation happened and branched into a new downstream haplogroup. That’s exactly what we proved about North Berwick based on when he lived and our downstream haplogroup formation date.
  2. Every man who shares that haplogroup, R-ZP18, absolutely DOES descend from the original man who carried that haplogroup-defining mutation that arose about 2250 BCE or about 4250 years ago. That one man in whom R-ZP18 occurred is noted above North Berwick, in red, indicating that both North Berwick and the Estes men descend from the man whose name is now R-ZP18.

On my spreadsheet, I’ve colored the cells of the haplogroups that I do descend from, and the burials I might descend from, apricot. The common haplogroups that burials and contemporary testers downstream descend from are in bold red text (R-ZP18 and R-DF49).

Burials who carry a different branching haplogroup, meaning they aren’t R-ZP18, but branch FROM from R-ZP18, are shown with their branches in blue. My ancestors cannot descend from blue haplogroups because we are on different branches of R-ZP18. Our branch is apricot.

Let’s add the next Ancient Connection.

Here’s the Time Tree Timeline of the second Ancient Connection, named Mount Pleasant 746, found at All Saints, Cambridgeshire, England, who lived between 940 and 1365 CE.

This shows two things.

  • My R-ZS3700 ancestor cannot descend from the Mount Pleasant burial, since R-ZS3700 doesn’t carry the mutation for R-BY173525, found in the Mount Pleasant burial.
  • However, since R-BY173525 branched from R-ZP18, we DO SHARE a common ancestor who lived about 4250 years ago. This means that between 4250 years ago and 940-1385 CE, the man found in Cambridgeshire, and my ancestor found in Kent around 1495 CE, both migrated in different directions from where their common ancestor, R-ZP18, lived, wherever that was.

The next closest Ancient Connection is Vor Frue Kirkegård 336, buried in the yard of a former monastic church in Vor Frue Kirkegård, Aalborg, Denmark, which dates from the 12th century. This man lived between 1536 and 1806 CE.

Again, my Estes ancestor who carries R-ZS3700 can’t descend directly from this man. Three things preclude Vor Frue Kirkegård 336 from being our ancestor:

  • The fact that Vor Frue Kirkegard 336 carries R-BY203953, but the Estes line does not.
  • Vor Frue Kirkegard 336 does not carry, R-BY342, the next downstream SNP for the Estes line.
  • Vor Frue Kirkegard 336 lived between 1536 and 1806 CE, which is contemporary with or after the earliest documented Estes ancestor was living in Kent, England circa 1495.

In this case, the locations are not in close proximity, over 500 miles apart by a combination of land and water. This distance would be less compelling as an elimination factor if the men were further separated by time.

In this case, any one of the first three pieces of evidence, alone, would preclude Vor Frue Kirkegard from being our ancestor.

Once again, R-ZS3700 shares the common ancestor of R-ZP18 with Vor Frue Kirkegård 336, along with Mount Pleasant 746 and North Berwick 16499. All of those men shared one common ancestor 4250 years ago.

Now, we have the bottom portion of our tree built out – meaning everyone who either carries haplogroup R-ZP18 as their primary haplogroup, or descends from that man.

Moving up the tree in the apricot column, you’ll notice that I’ve left spaces that leave room for the branching haplogroups in blue on the right. You won’t know how many spaces you need or the configuration until you start building the tree in your spreadsheet.

I listed both “5 haplogroups” and “3 haplogroups,” in the apricot column. You can spell those haplogroups out if you wish, but for my Ancient Connections, they didn’t matter. They may matter in the future, though, if you have an Ancient Connection who descends from or branches from one of them.

If you need an easy way to determine your ancestral lineage, the Ancestral Path is just the thing for you adn will help build your spreadsheet.

Your Ancestral Path

It’s easy to view which haplogroups are in your direct ancestral line. Just click on the “Ancestral Path” link in Discover’s sidebar.

Your haplogroup is shown at the top, with the parent haplogroups in order beneath. I’ve boxed the “5 haplogroups” between R-BY482 and R-ZP18 here, and then the “3 haplogroups” between R-ZP18 and R-DF49, which is where we find the next closest Ancient Connections.

One bonus of the Ancestral Path display is that you can see how many Ancient Connections are in the database for each haplogroup, at far right.

As I continue to build out my spreadsheet, the next four burials are all R-DF49, a haplogroup that was formed about 4400 years ago. Three of those burials are in England, and the fourth is in the Orkney Islands. They are all apricot, meaning:

  • They don’t carry any downstream haplogroups
  • They all descend from R-DF49
  • Based on haplogroups alone, nothing precludes the Estes line from descending from any of those men

Evaluating each Ancient Connection in the same way we did for North Berwick, when they lived, as compared to our Estes men, and where, may eliminate some of these burials as possible direct ancestors.

The balance of the Ancient Connections descend from R-DF49 through different branches and are colored blue, removing them as possible ancestors of R-ZS3700.

Regardless, we all share an ancestor, R-DF49, about 4400 years ago, just shortly before R-ZP18 lived some 4250 years ago. It would make sense that R-DF49 and R-ZP18 lived in relatively close proximity, given that they only lived about 200 years apart.

What else can we learn about these Ancient Connections?

Migration Map

To view all of your Ancient Connections on a map, just click on “Migration Map” in Discover’s sidebar.

The haplogroup whose path you are viewing, in this case, R-DF13, is the red dot on the bar at the top and is shown on the map with a red circle, but is mostly obscured here by the blue and red circles with numbers in the British Isles.

That haplogroup’s migration map, and your Ancient Connections, are displayed together. Individual burials not in close proximity to others are shown with individual trowels, and multiple burials are shown with blue and red circles, with the number indicating how many burials are found at that location.

Expanding the map shows more detail. I placed a red star to indicate the Estes lineage in Deal, at the bottom right.

Many of the blue and red circles have expanded, too.

By clicking on the blue circle, you can see which samples are found there. In this case, these 7 matching samples were all found in the same archaeological dig.

By clicking on any sample, you’ll see additional information.

One of my original questions was whether or not there was any indication whatsoever, even a smidgen of possibility that the d’Este rumor might be true. Some Estes researchers are not convinced by other arguments.

Given that our closest Ancient Connection lived about 2000 years ago in the British Isles, as do most, but not all, of the other Ancient Connections, it’s exceptionally unlikely that the progenitor of the Estes lineage was living in Italy in the 1400s, just a generation before our Estes ancestors are found in the records in Deal, and some 2000 years after the parent haplogroups of R-ZS3700 were already well-established in the British Isles.

There’s another place to check for additional information.

Notable Connections

Sometimes Notable Connections includes people who are either “ancient” themselves, and whose haplogroups have been identified through their descendants, or are from burials, or a combination of both. The difference is that their identity is not entirely a mystery.

When evaluating Notable Connections for genealogy, focus on:

  • Their haplogroup
  • Your shared haplogroup
  • When and where they lived
  • Any precluding factors like we found when analyzing North Berwick

Notable Connections are all interesting, but only a few may be relevant to your genealogy or your ancestors’ journey to where you first found them.

Speaking of their journey, Globetrekker shows you the most likely path of your ancestor’s haplogroup over time.

Globetrekker

Globetrekker is currently only available for Y-DNA, and only for those who have taken the Big Y test.

Clicking on Globetrekker through my cousin’s account shows the path of his haplogroup, through Europe, in this case, into England and, if I enable them, includes relevant Ancient Connections. One Ancient Connection, Mount Pleasant 746, at Cambridgeshire, is found on the estimated genetic haplogroup path.

We’ve already determined that the Estes line cannot descend from Mount Pleasant 746, but the locations of the descendants of our common ancestor, R-ZP18 can still provide substantial clues about where our common ancestor might have lived, and his culture.

I’ve also enabled Globetrekker’s “Sibling Lines” which indicate haplogroup siblings with the thinner lines. These display options are easy to toggle on and off.

Note that this is an estimated genetic path. In other words, it’s not exact. Especially, paths of the newer haplogroups can and will change over time as more testers test, and earliest known ancestors (EKAs) are added. I wrote about how to add EKAs in the article, “Earliest Known Ancestors” at FamilyTreeDNA in 3 Easy Steps. Please add yours, along with their location.

Sometimes the most refined haplogroup did not emerge in England, R-ZS3700 in this case, but in America. However, since the descendants have noted their EKA correctly as originating in England, that’s where the most refined haplogroup is also shown.

Furthermore, other than for Native Americans who are indigenous to the Americas, Globetrekker and the Migration Map both stop at the originating land mass for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA.

You can read more about Globetrekker, here.

What About the d’Este Family Story?

Now, about that d’Este family story.

Globetrekker utilizes the “least cost” migration methodology, which means the easiest, least risky, route of passage from place to place for our ancestors. The Strait of Dover is the closest link to the European mainland, and was shallower at that time as well.

There’s absolutely no genetic evidence that points to Italy or anyplace south for the Estes ancestral line. In fact, haplogroup R-S552 emerged about 4650 years ago, and appeared about the time that this lineage crossed from continental Europe into what is today England. There’s no evidence that this line back-migrated to the continent, to then remigrate back to the British Isles after 1471.

Ancient Connections show us that there’s evidence of the Estes ancestral haplogroups in many locations across the British Isles, long before Frencesco d’Este was being exiled from Italy. Multiple Estes family members appear in the earliest records in the Deal area, so it’s certain that they were well established and probably fishing on those same shores hundreds, if not thousands, of years earlier, based on Ancient Connections these various migration maps.

These provide one more very large nail in the coffin of that much-loved but extremely unlikely family story.

The final piece of evidence would be if a proven male descendant of the d’Este line tested and did or didn’t match. I’m not holding my breath.

Mitochondrial DNA

The methodology for building your Ancient Connections spreadsheet is exactly the same for mitochondrial DNA, with one exception.

You immediately know that you cannot descend from any male burial, because men don’t pass their mitochondrial DNA on to their children of either sex. You could, however, potentially be descended from his mother, or sister, or cousin, etc. Otherwise, the guidelines are the same.

Sometimes, Ancient Connections can resolve long-standing conflicts.

The Conflict Surrounding Radegonde Lambert

For a very long time, it was believed that Radegonde Lambert, an early Acadian woman born around 1621, was Native American because there were no known people, other than her, with that surname in Acadia. Based on the birth years of her children, she married Jean Blanchard, a French man, around 1642.

It doesn’t help any that French soldiers arrived in 1632, family settlement began about 1636, but there are virtually no records until the 1671 census, nearly 40 years later. Lots of people perished during that 40 year window.

Radegonde could have married before her arrival in Acadia, and Lambert may not be spelled accurately. We are fortunate that French women are referenced by their birth surnames, not their married surnames, so she is listed as Radegonde Lambert, the wife of Jean Blanchard on the 1671, 1678 and 1686 censuses.

Based on the conflict swirling around her presumed Native American ancestry, plus early mitochondrial DNA HVR1/HVR2 results that pointed to haplogroup “X”, which has both Native American and European branches, Radegonde began to be reported as “DNA confirmed Native”. However, that was incorrect, and she was NOT DNA confirmed as Native. Haplogroup X2a and subclades are Native American, while other haplogroup X AND X2 subclades are European, as can be viewed in the Acadian AmerIndian DNA Project.

By the time full mitochondrial sequence testing became available, that incorrect “confirmation” was firmly entrenched in family trees and among researchers, leading me to pen the article, Haplogroup X2b4 is European, Not Native American.

While ho-hum with a yawn today, it was radical at the time and greeted with quite the kerfluffle. After all, Radegonde was proven Native and HOW DARE ME! 😊

Prior to Mitotree, Radegonde’s haplogroup was X2b4, but now it’s been extended to X2b4t2, which arose about the year 500, or around 1500 years ago.

X2b4 and subclades are quite rare, with only 353 descendants today, including subclades.

X2b4t2 only has 65 members.

Clicking on the “Other Countries” link takes you to the Country Frequency report.

Click on “Table View.”

Note that the 36 “Other Countries” includes people who have listed “Unknown Origin,” who are counted individually. People listing United States often mean they are brick walled here. Some people interpret this as Native American, but there is a separate United States Native American category. Not everyone selects the correct category.

These locations are user-reported in the Earliest Known Ancestor (EKA) information, which is critical for Discover reports. I wrote about how to complete that information in 3 easy steps, here. Please add yours, including location!

One person has reported that Radegonde Lambert is “United States Native American.” She’s not Native, and she never lived in the United States either. During her lifetime, Acadians lived in Nova Scotia, where three censuses accurately reflect her residence.  Perhaps that incorrect information was entered by someone years ago, and never changed. Most people don’t think to update their EKA information.

Unfortunately, when misinformation is provided, or not corrected after we learn more, new testers view that as nuggets of evidence, and the misinformation cycle continues.

One of the benefits of Ancient Connections is that they are NOT based on trees, historical records, or genealogy of any sort. Ancient Connections are based on archaeological digs, and the location of the excavation is not subject to question.

So, let’s take a quick look at Radegonde Lambert’s Ancient Connections and see what we find.

A Quick Sneak Preview

Because I’m interested primarily in a quick view of locations, I’m skipping right to the Migration Map where all of the Ancient Connections are shown.

Radegonde’s Ancient Connections are scattered all over Europe, but there’s absolutely nothing in the Americas.

Given that Native burial excavations are culturally frowned upon in many locations, we might not see any in the US, but we also wouldn’t see any recent burials in Europe, given that the Native people have been in the Americas for well over 10,000 years.

Generally, even when Ancient Connections are missing in the US, we still find some contemporary testers with proven genealogy who carry that haplogroup, and at least a few ancient burials in Canada, Mexico, Central and South America.

The first seven Ancient Connection matches carry haplogroup X2b4, and the rest are European subgroups of X2b4. There are no closer matches as of today, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be eventually.

X2b4 emerged sometime before 5200 years ago, clearly someplace in Europe, possibly central Europe.

Radegonde’s X2b4 match locations are:

  • Malá Ohrada site in Prague – the individual lived 5800-5400 years ago
  • Hetty Peglers Tump, Gloucestershire, England – lived 5639-5383 years ago
  • Sorsum, Hildesheim, Lower Saxony, Germany – lived 5350-5100 years ago
  • Passage Tomb, Carrowkeel, Cairn K, Sligo, Ireland – lived 5100-4600 years ago
  • Kolín I-7b, Bohemia, Czech Republic – lived 4835-4485 years ago
  • De Tuithoorn, Oostwoud, Netherlands – lived 4579-4421 years ago

It’s unquestionable that X2b4 was found across Europe, not in the Americas, 5000 years ago.

This image is NOT from Radegonde Lambert’s Ancient Connections. I’ve included it to illustrate a Native American branch of haplogroup X2.

The descendants of Native American haplogroup X2a, shown above, match Kennewick Man, who is also X2a, as their closest Ancient Connection. He lived between 9250 and 8390 years ago along the river in present-day Kennewick, Washington. Their second-closest Ancient Connection is with an X2a1 burial found in Windsor, Ontario, who lived between 1223 and 1384 CE.

Neither of these unquestionably Native burials are found in the Ancient Connections of Radegonde Lambert’s descendants.

It’s worth noting here that when evaluating rare haplogroups, their Ancient Connections may reach far back in time. For example, if a Native American haplogroup only has a few Ancient Connections within the Americas, the rest of their Ancient Connections, if any, will be found on another continent. Failing to read the results thoroughly and thoughtfully could lead to an inappropriate and incorrect conclusion.

For example, haplogroup X is found in Eurasia prior to the migrated of people across Beringia, the now-submerged landmass connecting Asia with Alaska, to become the indigenous people of the Americas. Therefore, if there are less than 30 closer X2a Ancient Connections, one would expect to find Ancient Connections reflecting that continental Asian, or even Eurasian, heritage far back in time.

Notable Connections

One final tip for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA is to check Notable Connections and selectively add them to your spreadsheet, if appropriate. Sometimes you’ll find people there that are both Notable and Ancient.

Not that we need more evidence about whether Radegonde Lambert’s matrilineal ancestors were Native or European, but Notable Connections provides us with one more corroborating piece of evidence.

Cangrande della Scala was an Italian nobleman who lived around 1300. He and Radegonde share a haplogroup X2b1″79 ancestor in Europe around 9000 years ago, which was after the Native people had crossed Siberia and Beringia to begin settling Canada and the Americas.

If there was any question left about Radegonde Lambert’s origins, Ancient Connections resolved it, with a backup volley from Notable Connections.

Radegonde Lambert was my ancestor, so I’m going to build her Ancient Connections spreadsheet and savor every discovery, but if I were simply seeking confirmation of or the answer to the question of whether Radegonde Lambert was Native American or European, I need look no further.

Mitochondrial DNA Case Study

In the article, Mitochondrial DNA A-Z: A Step-by-Step Guide to Matches, Mitotree and mtDNA Discover, I wrote in detail about utilizing mitochondrial DNA to break through genealogy brick walls.

My goal was to detremine if Catherine LeJeune, Edmee LeJeune and Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard were sisters or at least matrilineal relatives. Fortunately, we had several testers.

As it turned out, Catherine and Edmee were European sisters, but Jeanne did not share a matrilineal ancestor with Catherine and Edmee. Jeanne was Native American.

Next, we wanted to discover as much information about the LeJeune sisters as possible.

I created an Ancient Connections spreadsheet for the LeJeune sisters and included those results in my analysis, so please take a look. Their Ancient Connections were unexpected and simply astounding.

You literally never know who is waiting for you, nor the message they hold, just waiting to be delivered.

Ancient Connections are clues from your ancestors.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Sixteen Unique Trees at FamilyTreeDNA: How and When to Use Each

I love all the various trees at FamilyTreeDNA – and I’m not referring just to traditional genealogy trees with people, names, and dates. I’m talking about phylogenetic or haplogroup trees – the ones you use to understand your Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups, origins – and more. These trees tell you ABOUT your ancestors, those people in the more traditional genealogy tree, and the combination of both is powerful.

This article introduces the various trees available at FamilyTreeDNA, when and where you’ll find them, and what they can do for you.

Haplogroup Trees

Phylogenetic, or haplogroup trees, provide a genetic path from you, or the tester, today, back in time to Y-Line Adam, or Mitochondrial Eve – the first two humans who lived AND have descendants today.

Let’s start by explaining about Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), their inheritance path, and what they mean to you.

Y-DNA

Only men have a Y-chromosome, so only biological males can test their Y-DNA.

Y-Line Adam, Y-DNA haplogroup A-PR2921, lived about 232,000 BCE, or 234,000 years ago.

Is it possible that one day someone will test whose results push that date back somewhat? Yes, of course, as we are always learning, and many testers split branches.

Today, all 711,000+ modern descendants who have tested carry the mutation named A-PR2921 as their oldest SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism), or haplogroup-defining mutation in their Y-DNA. That’s because we all descend from that one man.

If you’re a male, Y-DNA testing tells you about your direct paternal line by matching with other men who have also taken a Y-DNA test, and by revealing valuable information from before the adoption of surnames. There’s no other way to reach that far back in time.

If you’re a female, you can recruit males in your family to test.

The Big Y-700 test provides the deepest-reaching and most refined Y-DNA test available, which is essential for both genealogy and tree-building.

Mitochondrial DNA

All people have mitochondrial DNA, inherited from their mother directly through her matrilineal line – meaning her mother, her mother, her mother, and so forth – directly up your tree through all mothers.

Everyone inherits their mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from their mother, but only females pass it on. Both males and females in the current generation, meaning you, can (and should) test their mitochondrial DNA.

Mitochondrial Eve, mitochondrial DNA haplogroup L, lived about 141,000 BCE, or about 143,000 years ago. All 315,000 testers descend from this one woman.

Like with Y-Line Adam, one day the results of future testers may push this date further back in time. A full sequence mitochondrial DNA test, mtFull, is necessary to test all 16,569 mitochondrial locations.

Test Types

FamilyTreeDNA has been in business for more than 25 years. Technology has advanced dramatically during that time. While they continue to offer new tests and products, they strive to maintain value for their original testers.

Even though some early testers may have joined their ancestors, matching with their test results is still beneficial to us.

Present-day DNA testers can still derive value by matching the earlier, lower-level, lower-resolution tests. Not as much value as if the original tester had taken a higher-level test, but those tests may not have been available at that time.

Matches, surnames, genealogy, locations, and haplogroups provide us with valuable information. The more people who test, the larger the pool becomes, and the better our chances of discovering something that refines our understanding of our ancestors – and identifies who they are.

Before we look at the trees available, let’s take a look at where haplogroups come from. Different level tests assign different levels of haplogroups, based on how much is tested.

Let’s answer two common questions:

  1. Where can you find your haplogroup, and what does it mean?
  2. How can haplogroups be different for people who descend from the same ancestor?

Where Do Haplogroups Come From?

Since the beginning, FamilyTreeDNA has always provided their customers with haplogroup information. Haplogroups are very genealogically useful today, but initially, 25 years ago, they were only able to provide essentially continental-level origin information for your particular line. That too was useful, and helped to identify and eliminate common lineages – just not as useful as today.

Science and testing have both come a long way. Present-day testers still match with people who only tested at a lower level. You never know what you might find at that level – a match to someone who has not taken the current tests, but is still very relevant because they share your ancestor. In fact, they may be the only tester who does.

For Y-DNA testers, you’ll notice several match categories that reflect different testing levels – along with the number of matches at each level. At one time, you could purchase each one of these tests individually, then later upgrade to higher-level tests. Today, only the 37 and 111 marker tests, and the Big Y-700, which scans the entire gold-standard region of the Y chromosome, are available. Higher level tests include the lower-level tests.

Click any image to enlarge

Different types of tests provide either a predicted or a confirmed haplogroup which shows on your match list.

Without getting all sciency on you – the 12-111 marker tests test targeted STRs, or short tandem repeats, which can’t be used for haplogroup assignment and confirmation. They can and are used to compare to other testers for matching because the number of repeats, or stutters, are inherited on the Y chromosome. The Big Y test scans the Y chromosome for SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms, which are stable mutations that define haplogroups. I wrote about this in the article, STRs vs SNPs, Multiple DNA Personalities.

Some haplogroups are much further down the tree, or more current, than others. Your most current haplogroup, only available with the Big Y-700 test, is the best because it brings you the closest to current in time, often placing you within family branches. The Big Y-700 scans about 23 million locations on the Y chromosome, revealing both known and unknown mutations, not just a few markers, making it the most refined and relevant test genealogically.

Each higher-level test includes the lower-level tests. You can see what tests your matches have taken by looking beneath their names on your match list. In this case, these Estes men who match my cousin have taken the Family Finder (or uploaded an autosomal transfer), and taken the mtFull test. One match initially took the Big Y-500 but has since upgraded to the Big Y-700, and the other originally tested at the 111 marker level, and has since upgraded as well.

The Big Y-700 includes all lower-level tests, such as the Big Y-500 (now obsolete), the 111, 67, 37, 25, and 12 marker STR tests. You still match with people who only tested at those levels, plus everyone else who ordered a more refined test.

The haplogroup you receive is more or less refined, based on the test level you take.

Y-DNA Test Type Haplogroup Provided Relevance Upgradable
Y-DNA STR 12-111 marker tests (only 37 and 111 are available today – the rest are obsolete) Predicted based on STRs – very reliable at the level predicted Predicted (not confirmed) haplogroup that was generally formed a couple thousand years ago, or earlier Yes, if enough quality DNA remains. Only 37, 111, and the Big Y-700 tests are available today. Recommend the upgrade to Big Y-700.
Individual SNP test (now obsolete) Confirms a predicted haplogroup or tests a single SNP to confirm a closer haplogroup Relevant at the level tested – either positive or negative result was reported Individual SNP tests have now been replaced by Big Y-700, which covers all individual SNPs that were available to test, plus much more.
Big Y-500 test (now obsolete) Confirmed haplogroup within range of that test’s ability, replaced by much more granular Big Y-700 Big Y-700 is more refined and moves the tester towards more current haplogroups, so more genealogically significant Yes, upgrade to Big Y-700 if enough DNA remains, or tester can re-swab
Big Y-700 – scans the entire gold-standard region of the Y chromosome – approximately 23 million base pairs Top-of-the-line SNP-confirmed test, most granular and refined. Scans for known and previously unknown mutations. Extremely accurate. Generally advances the tester into a genealogical timeframe, and often divides testers into multiple lineages descended from a known common ancestor No more advanced test is available.
Family Finder autosomal test or transfer Confirmed to mid-range level if possible. Not all transfer files have Y-DNA or mtDNA SNPs so you get what you get. Useful in autosomal matching for locating people you may be related to you with that surname. Ask the match if they are willing to take a Y-DNA test, if relevant, or sponsor a testing scholarship for them.

Family Finder haplogroups are relatively new at FamilyTreeDNA. Each chip level that FamilyTreeDNA has used for testing over the years, and the chips that other vendors have used, contain different SNPs (or none at all on the Ancestry test) that can be measured for some level of haplogroup. Other vendors generally don’t quality-control for either Y-DNA or mtDNA SNPs because they don’t use them. This is a “you get what you get” freebie.

That said, most Family Finder haplogroups are closer in time, or “better” than the predicted R-M269, the most common haplogroup in Europe, often reported with STR testing.

Not everyone with a transfer kit receives a haplogroup. Due to quality and reliability issues, you cannot see haplogroups on your autosomal match list for those who only have a haplogroup through an autosomal transfer.

Using our male Estes testers as an example, we find the following haplogroup results at the various testing levels:

Haplogroup Haplogroup Formation Date Ancestor or Haplogroup Formation Location Haplogroup Source
R-M269 4450 BCE (6450 years ago) Between Ukraine and Kazakhstan, north of the Black and Caspian Seas Predicted from 12-111 STR marker tests
R-BY487 700 CE (1300 years ago) UK, Scotland/England Family Finder DNA SNP Confirmed
R-BY482 1550 CE Robert Eastye b 1555 Ringwould, Kent, England Big Y-700
R-BY490 1700 CE Silvester Eastye b 1596 Kent, England Big Y-700
R-ZS3700 1750 CE Moses Estes 1711 VA Big Y-700
R-BY154784 1850 CE Joseph Estes b c 1790 VA or TN Big Y-700

All of these are valid and accurate haplogroups – some are just closer in time and much more useful than others. All of these men have R-M269, because it is a parent haplogroup of all of those downstream haplogroups. The Big-Y tested men beginning with R-BY482 don’t share the haplogroups below them, because they don’t have those mutations that are downstream on the tree. However, the men at the bottom with R-BY154784 have all of the SNPs above them.

Note that all haplogroup formation dates are ranges. I’m showing the midpoint here.

When upgrading, if the original tester is deceased, select the highest-level test available, as there may not be enough DNA to run more than one test. When I offer scholarships now, I always just offer the Big Y-700 test to avoid future issues.

If the tester you need is no longer available, consider the possibility that other people, family members perhaps, might be available to test to represent this same line.

Next, let’s look at mitochondrial test levels and haplogroups.

Mitochondrial DNA Test Type Haplogroup Provided Relevance Upgradable
HVR1 & HVR2 tests (no longer available) Predicted based on around 1000 markers – very reliable at the level predicted Predicted haplogroup, not confirmed, generally formed a couple thousand years ago or earlier Yes, if enough quality DNA remains. Only the mtFull test is available today.
mtFull, full sequence test Tests all 16,569 SNP locations in the entire mitochondria. Most granular and refined. Extremely accurate. Often brings tester into genealogical timeframe, especially with the new Mitotree. Divides testers into multiple haplotype lineages, sometimes descended from known common ancestor. No upgrade needed to receive new Mitotree and mtDNA Discover benefits.
Family Finder autosomal test or transfer Coming soon. Will be the same criteria and caveats as Y-DNA SNPs. May be able to find a similar or upstream haplogroup that might point to a common ancestor. Ask autosomal match if they are willing to take a mtFull test, if relevant, or sponsor a scholarship for them.

Ok, now that we understand more about haplogroups, how they are determined, and where yours came from, let’s look at all of the trees at FamilyTreeDNA.

Trees Within Your Y-DNA and Mitochondrial DNA Account

Let’s start with trees found within your personal account, so sign in.

Each tree has a different purpose and unique benefits.

Tree #1 – Your Matches Genealogy Trees

Each of your matches may have provided links to genealogical trees. They may show trees in multiple places too; at MyHeritage, an archived tree at FamilyTreeDNA, and a WikiTree link. I makes notes about their trees in the comments field, and I also keep a spreadsheet to look for commonalities.

Tree #2 – Haplogroups and SNPs for Y-DNA Testers

Next, for Y-DNA testers, click on the Y-DNA Results and Tools.

You’ll see the Haplotree & SNPs tile on the dashboard.

The Haplotree and SNPs link takes you to a phylogenetic tree that defaults to your haplogroup, where you can view:

  • Variants – SNP mutations that define your haplogroup
  • Surnames with this haplogroup – so long as there are multiple public testers
  • Countries – self-reported for earliest known ancestors (EKA)
  • Recommended Projects – haplogroup projects only – others such as surname projects are found in Discover under Suggested Projects

Tree #3 – The Block Tree for Big Y Testers

People who have taken the Big Y-700 test have a separate section that includes tools for the Big-Y test that aren’t relevant for the 12-111 STR marker tests.

Big Y testers will see the Block Tree tile on their dashboard.

The block tree is an alternative way of displaying matches on a phylogenetic tree. While the Discover Time Tree is viewed left to right, this tree is displayed top to bottom, with each mutation being represented by one grey bar on the scale at left. Each mutation corresponds to approximately 100 years, which is a rough average for the frequency of Y-chromosomal mutations.

People with 30 mutations or fewer are shown as matches, with the goal of reaching back about 1500 years.

Each large block shows the mutation for which the haplogroup is named, such as R-BY482, at the top. The mutations, known as variants, shown below that haplogroup name, are found in the results of each person in that haplogroup, but in the future, people without those mutations, or with additional mutations, will form a new branching haplogroup.

The green “Private Variants” at the bottom of the branches display the average number of mutations of people within that group awaiting another tester to have the same mutations, so a new branch can be formed. I view Private Mutations as “haplogroups in waiting.”

Discover

In addition to the haplogroup trees shown in your account at FamilyTreeDNA, there are several additional trees in Discover for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA. Discover, updated weekly, is a suite of tools for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA that, cumulatively, provides a book about your haplogroup results.

Discover comes in two flavors:

  • The publicly available free version with limited functionality
  • Your private version with expanded functionality available from within your account

You can access Discover, here if you’d like to follow along.

Discover is a publicly available free tool introduced in the fall of 2023 that provides more than a dozen reports, enabling a deeper understanding of all haplogroups.

Just select Y-DNA or mtDNA and enter your haplogroup of choice.

Think of these menu choices, in the sidebar, as chapters in your personal book. Every chapter has something interesting to tell you. Please read them – don’t just scan.

In addition to the free version, if you have taken a Big-Y or mitochondrial DNA full sequence test at FamilyTreeDNA, you’ll have additional information available.

For mitochondrial DNA results, just click on the pink Discover tile.

For Y-DNA results, click on the blue Discover tile.

Within Discover, you’ll find three distinct trees.

Trees #4 and #5 – Y-DNA and Mitochondrial DNA Time Trees

The Time Tree shows your Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA haplogroup displayed on a timeline, along with:

  • A self-reported ancestral country indicator for every person’s DNA in that haplogroup
  • Haplotype groupings indicating exact matches between everyone in that haplotype.

A haplotype is a grouping of people whose DNA matches exactly, including unstable or hypervariable locations too unreliable to use for haplogroup formation. However, those mutations may be relevant for genealogical matching.

I wrote about haplogroups and haplotypes here and here.

Tree #6 and #7 – Y-DNA and Mitochondrial DNA Class Tree View

The Classic Tree is available for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA.

On the Classic Mitotree View, you can display and filter the tree, including haplotypes, in seven ways, as shown in the dropdown “Display Options.”

Tree #8 and #9 – Y-DNA and Mitochondrial DNA Tree Branch Comparison

Have you ever seen two haplogroups and wondered how closely they are related? Compare provides that answer.

Here, I’m comparing my haplogroup to that of a family member. Everyone is related, but how long ago are we related on our matrilineal lines?

Haplogroup J1c2f compared with haplogroup V216a shows that our common ancestor lived a VERY long time ago – about 55,000 years in the past, someplace in the fertile crescent.

For either Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, you can compare two haplogroups. This provides specific information about those two branches of the tree, and where they intersect. To view more about the common ancestor, just pop R+10398 into Discover and learn more about when and where that ancestor lived.

Trees #10 and #11 – Match Time Trees

Match Time Trees are one of the most useful Discover features.

In addition to the Time Trees and Classic Trees provided for everyone in Discover, test takers will also have a Match Time Tree that shows all of your matches, organized genetically.

For mtFull testers, your matches are organized by haplotype cluster. People in your haplotype cluster are your exact matches.

I have over 100 full sequence matches, so I’m only showing the first few in this screenshot. In addition to the match’s name, their EKA (earliest known ancestor) is shown, if provided.

On the Y-DNA Match Time Tree, links are provided to genealogical trees of the tester, which could be an archived FamilyTreeDNA tree, a MyHeritage tree, WikiTree, or some combination.

You can actually see your matches’ WikiTree tree on your Match Time Tree by enabling another feature.

Trees #12 and #13 – WikiTree Tree Integration

While you’re still on the Match Time Tree page for either Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, click on Display Options, above the Time Tree, and enable WikiTree Connections. Unfortunately, the default for this great feature is “off.”

I’ve enabled “Share Mode” at the top to obfuscate the names of the testers, and I’ve adjusted the vertical spacing so you can see more in my examples. You’ll notice the grey lines with dots inside circles. I think of these as beads or maybe knots on a rope, but they actually represent a line of ancestors.

Each tester with one of those grey dot bars has connected themselves to their ancestors at WikiTree, a public one-world tree. Living people are not shown, hence the dash marks to the immediate left of the tester’s name.

By mousing over any of the dots, aka ancestors, you can view information about this ancestor of this Estes tester at WikiTree. Ancestors appear in genealogical order in their relevant place on the Time Tree. How cool is that!!!

WikiTree, like any tree, public or private, can have errors. Always verify any tree using original source documents.

As far as I’m concerned, the Match Time Tree is one of the very best features of both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA testing and matching. There are so many options to select from, so take some time to look around.

Your Personal Version of Discover is Best

Y-DNA Discover and mtDNA Discover can both be useful for any level of haplogroup, but the best results are obtained when clicking through from the tester’s FamilyTreeDNA account. Big Y and full sequence mitochondrial DNA customers receive additional information, not available in the free, public version of Discover, including

  • The Match Time Tree
    • Including WikiTree integration
  • Globetrekker (Y-DNA, mtDNA coming eventually)
  • Up to 30 Ancient Connections, as compared to 3 in the free version
  • Up to 30 Notable Connections, as compared to 3 in the free version

Tree #14 – Group Time Trees

I absolutely love Group Time Trees. They are similar to Match Time Trees, but unlike Match Time Trees, are publicly viewable for Group Projects if the volunteer project administrators have enabled this feature for the project.

There are two ways to access Group Time Trees – through publicly accessible Discover or directly through any project.

In Discover, select Group Project in the dropdown.

Then type the name of the surname project you’re seeking. You’ll be presented with a menu if the surname you’ve entered is found in multiple projects, or administrators have listed it as “of interest” in their project.

I clicked on the Estes project.

Viewing the Estes DNA Project, under DNA Results, you can see the various options.

Selecting Y-DNA Results Overview displays the project results by administrator-defined group. The teal groups all descend through Abraham Estes through various sons.

However, by clicking the Group Time Tree instead, you can view all these testers and their results in a Match Time Tree format, arranged genetically.

Clicking on the Group Time Tree link takes you to the Group Time Tree for this project. A menu is displayed at left, based on how the administrator has grouped the project.

I’ve selected several groups that I know descend from the original Estes ancestor from Kent, England. Testers who have joined the Estes project and granted permission for their results to be displayed publicly are automatically grouped genetically, at right, with their surname and EKA (earliest known ancestor), assuming they have entered that information.

Earliest Known Ancestors (EKA)

You’ve probably noticed that earliest known ancestors, along with their locations, are used in many places.

Please enter both your direct paternal (father, father, to father’s line) and direct matrilineal (mother, mother, to mother’s line) earliest known ancestors, along with their locations. I wrote about how to do that in “Earliest Known Ancestors” at FamilyTreeDNA in 3 Easy Steps, here.

Trees #15 and #16 – Public Trees

In addition to trees within testers’ accounts, Discover trees, Group Time Trees, and WikiTree tree integration, FamilyTreeDNA provides two additional public trees.

FamilyTreeDNA made the Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA haplogroup trees freely available years ago, at the bottom of their main company public page – without signing in.

These trees are still actively maintained today and are free for everyone to use.

To find these trees, scroll all the way to the very bottom of the page, in the footer, to the Community section. Yes, I know, it’s a bit like a scavenger hunt!

You can select to view either the Y-DNA or mtDNA tree. I love this tree, because it shows how many SNP-confirmed people have been tested. That number does not include the thousands of academic and public samples that may be utilized to help define haplogroups, and that you’ll sometimes see in your Ancient and Notable Connections.

So, if you receive a new haplogroup, but you don’t see a new match on your list or on the Block Tree, it’s probably because you match a high-quality academic sample.

The trees display from the root, meaning the oldest haplogroup is shown at the top. In the Y-DNA tree, above, haplogroup A-PR2921 is “Y-Adam”.

You can select any haplogroup on the bar across the top, search by country, or select a specific branch name to view.

The tree itself is viewable by country, as shown above, or by variant, meaning the haplogroup-defining mutations, shown below.

Additionally, for the Y-DNA tree, you can choose to display by surname, so long as there are two or more testers with that identically spelled surname who share this haplogroup and who have given permission for public display.

Please note that these people are all SNP-tested and confirmed at the level reported, but they are NOT all Big-Y testers.

This feature alone can be genealogy-changing because they may be surnames associated with your ancestors in records, or they may just be neighbors. Or maybe you thought they were “just neighbors,” but they are actually related.

At one time, customers could order an individual SNP test for R-M269 to confirm their predicted haplogroup. That test is no longer available, but anyone who took that test to confirm R-M269 and never tested or received results (like Family Finder) at a more granular level will be reported at R-M269. Note that 687 is the number of distinct surnames shown, not the total number of testers.

The three “hamburger dots” on the right side provide options for a user-reported Country Report based on the location of their earliest known ancestor, and a Surname Report. The surname report for R-M269 shows a total of 2448 testers who share those 687 surnames.

It’s a Whole Forest

Who knew there were 16 unique trees available at FamilyTreeDNA!

Each tree has a unique purpose and provides information not available elsewhere.

Take a look and see what kind of information is waiting for you – and don’t forget to check back often.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

RootsTech 2026 – The Wind Beneath Our Wings

I started writing this article on Sunday evening, the day after RootsTech ended, and I’m basking in the afterglow. Also, my back and feet may never forgive me.

As a tongue-in-cheek comment, I think someone coined the word “exhausterwhelmulated” and defined it as being exhausted, overwhelmed, and overstimulated all at once. Yep, that’s me.

However, I need to add another couple of words to this – gratitude and joy.

Gratitude and Joy

I’m going to try to express this without sounding too sappy.

Do you recall the joy you used to feel when you spotted a relative you loved dearly but didn’t get to see often? Think of the unbridled joy as you piled out of your parents’ car and spotted your grandmother coming out of the door because she saw the car pull up. You ran as fast as your little legs could carry you directly into her arms, and got hugged so tightly it nearly squeezed the breath out of you.

I don’t know what the word for that would be, but it’s similar to how RootsTech feels.

Let me explain. Continue reading

MyHeritage Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) Results and Comparison

I’m excited to receive my low-pass whole-genome sequencing test results from MyHeritage. When MyHeritage initially introduced their new test, I wrote about what that means in the article, MyHeritage Introduces a Low-Pass Whole Genome Autosomal DNA Test and Why It Matters.

In that article, I said I was ordering a WGS test and would publish a comparison of the new test with the two tests I’ve previously taken with MyHeritage, plus a test I uploaded to MyHeritage from FamilyTreeDNA in 2016.

Before I review these comparative results with you, I want to properly set expectations.

What To Expect from the MyHeritage Whole Genome Sequence (WGS) Test

From Ran Snir, Vice President of Product Management for MyHeritage DNA:

  1. Those who take a MyHeritage DNA test now are all sequenced with WGS and will receive the same access to features and results as those who have taken a MyHeritage DNA test and were genotyped with an old chip in the past. In fact, all samples processed by the lab in December were already processed with WGS.
  2. The transition to WGS does not introduce new features and capabilities immediately.
  3. The new WGS technology has minor implications when it comes to the ethnicity estimate results and DNA Matches, but people should not expect to get “something completely different”.
  4. The transition to WGS and having more people processed with it opens the door for deeper research and more insights. It will allow MyHeritage to drastically improve its phasing, imputation and matching algorithms. This will take time as MyHeritage needs to amass a lot of data first. In the long run, MyHeritage plans to improve the product, build new features and introduce new capabilities which will be based on learnings from WGS.

Thank you, Ran.

In this article, I am not focusing on ethnicity, but on DNA matches, which I depend on to help me unravel those pesky genealogy puzzles.

Also, please note, some features I’m discussing here are free with the purchase of a DNA test, and others require a subscription at some level. I have a subscription, and I use it nearly every day.

Coupon Code for a $20 DNA Test

That said, if you already know you want to order the WGS test, or you’re a new tester, use this special coupon code at checkout to reduce the test to $20 through the end of February 2026. That’s a great value!

Coupon Code: RobertaFeb26

Now, let’s look at my results when comparing the WGS test to the results of my other three tests at MyHeritage.

How does the new WGS test fare?

My Results

Before ordering my WGS test from MyHeritage, I already had three tests at MyHeritage to choose from.

MyHeritage allows you to select between different tests, including uploads and tests you’ve taken at MyHeritage at different times. There’s absolutely no need to delete older tests there, and in fact, I recommend that you don’t. This article illustrates why.

My four tests include:

  • FamilyTreeDNA (FTDNA) test uploaded to MyHeritage in 2016
  • MyHeritage health test taken in 2019
  • MyHeritage test taken in June 2024
  • MyHeritage low-pass whole genome test (WGS) taken in December 2025
FTDNA 2016 MH Health 2019 MH 2024 MH WGS
Total Matches 19,722 17,179 17,767 17,676
TOFR 128 111 108 Not ready

This chart shows the total number of matches and Theories of Family Relativity for each test in January 2026.

What Are Theories of Family Relativity (TOFR)?

I have several very useful Theories of Family Relativity (TOFR) where MyHeritage uses trees and other documentation, such as census records, to connect you and your DNA matches to common ancestors. TOFR is one of MyHeritage’s most beneficial tools.

In this example, my match only provided their father’s name, but that name was linked to our common ancestors by connecting through a FamilySearch tree. Often, multiple potential relationships and paths are shown. Like with any other tool, each theory needs to be reviewed for accuracy.

Please note that TOFR is only run periodically and has not yet been calculated for the WGS test results. I’m sure that will happen soon.

Evaluating Matches

I wanted to know if (and how) the same people matched me on the different tests, including the new low-pass whole genome (WGS).

  • Are there differences?
  • Are the differences slight or pronounced?
  • Do some people match me on some tests, and not others?
  • Do some people match me on earlier tests, but not the WGS?
  • Do some people match me on the WGS, but not earlier tests?
  • What is the takeaway from all of this?

To compare the results of all four tests, I created a side-by-side comparison spreadsheet.

The Spreadsheet

I created a spreadsheet where I recorded 434 individual matches by entering information in the following columns:

  • A – Match number that I assigned
  • B – Match source (more about this in a minute)
  • C – FTDNA 2016 test matching number of cMs
  • D – MH 2019 matching number of cMs
  • E – MH 2024 Health matching number of cMs
  • F – MH Low Pass Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) matching number of cMs
  • G – Relationship if known
  • H – Common Ancestor if known

I included several other columns in my spreadsheet for my own genealogical research purposes that show my matches’ tree size, and the actual lineage from them to our common ancestor couple. However, for comparing matches and accuracy, I’ve utilized the columns indicated above.

Match Sources

I wanted to compare different types of matches, meaning not just the closest or the most distant, or only the matches I can identify. These are the sources of the matches I compared.

  • Cousin Finder – I actually started a spreadsheet back in October 2025 when I was using Cousin Finder to find cousins, meaning people with common ancestors identified by MyHeritage. Twenty-eight of the 378 people that MyHeritage identified as cousins are DNA matches, so those were the first matches I entered into this comparison spreadsheet, along with our most recent common ancestors.
  • TOFR – All Theories of Family Relativity begin with DNA matches, then connect you and your matches together using trees and/or documents, when possible. Because matches vary with each of the tests, so do the TOFRs. WGS theories aren’t yet calculated, but the matches are, so I’ve included TOFR matches here.
  • Family Kits – These 15 matches are family members’ tests that I manage and match, so I clearly know how we’re related.
  • Top 100/150 – The first group of matches, other than the above categories, were the top 100 matches using the FamilyTreeDNA 2016 kit, which was my first test at MyHeritage. All tests continue to accumulate matches over time, so it just made sense to start here.

However, after I finished transcribing each of those 100 matches into the spreadsheet and started transcribing the top 100 matches for the MyHeritage 2019 test, I quickly realized that the top 100 matches were not the same between tests. Therefore, I used the top 100 matches from all 4 tests. For every name included from any test in the top 100, I included the matching cM amount from all four tests. This means that in total, there are more than 100 in the “Top 100”, so now it’s called the Top 100/150, but all of the top 100 matches from each of the four tests are included in the spreadsheet. In total, there are about 220 in that category.

  • Bottom 100 – Last, I included the bottom 100 matches on the FTDNA 2016 kit, meaning I listed those and searched for them on the other tests. If I had included the bottom 100 from all four tests, it would have been more like the bottom 350.

When I finished listing all of these matches, I had 434 to work with for this comparison. .

Minimum Matching

The minimum MyHeritage reported match is 8 cM, and at that level, a surprising number of tests don’t match either parent, although some clearly match with close relatives on that parent’s side, which means that either:

  • Those tests (either mine or the match’s, or both) were uploaded and imputed
  • Some portion of the parents’ test did not read
  • These are not valid matches, meaning they are identical by chance, not by descent.

About Imputation

Imputation is a widely used technology among vendors to bridge small sections of unread DNA. This is useful when comparing files from different vendors for matching.

Vendors use imputation internally too.

For example, vendors often use different DNA chips in the lab. They sometimes change chips internally, as well, for a variety of reasons. Regardless of why, the same locations aren’t always read, or aren’t read successfully. Imputation levels the playing field, allowing backwards compatibility, and compatibility for matching across platforms. Imputation fills in the blanks to equalize those files, allowing them to be compared for matching.

Let me give you an example. Let’s say you have the letters c_t, where the middle letter between c and t is missing. In English, there are a limited number of letters that can be. To begin with, it must be a vowel. In this case, it has to be either a, o or u. Next, looking at context, if the surrounding words are “the c_t chased a mouse,” the missing word is not cut or cot. It’s almost certainly cat, so the “a” is filled in using imputation.

Imputation usually works well, but occasionally it can extend matching areas improperly. This has always been true, and it’s still true with the new low-pass WGS test. The new WGS test only scans the genome twice to keep the test affordable. Any “no read” area must be imputed. I wrote about imputation here.

Ok, back to the MyHeritage comparison!

Test Comparison Methodology

If you’re recreating this process with your own results:

  • Color-code the column headers for the various tests
  • Label them clearly so you can easily differentiate between tests
  • Freeze your top row

Select the test you want to search for matches, and record the people you want to cross-check. I began the process with my FTDNA test that I uploaded to MyHeritage in 2016.

I entered the matches on my spreadsheet, recording the matching cM amount. Then I selected the other tests, one by one, and searched for the same match name.

In this case, I started with the FTDNA 2016 test. Jane Jones (not her real name) matched me at 744 cM.

Then I selected the MyHeritage 2019 test, searched for Jane’s name, and recorded the match amount – 739 cM. I did the same with the 2024 test, and last, the WGS test.

When searching by surname at MyHeritage, don’t always expect the person to be at the top of the list where you might expect. Be sure to scroll down a bit, even to page two, especially with common names. MyHeritage also displays people with the same surname in their trees.

Match Analysis

As we work through these match results, keep in mind that the comparison percentage numbers only pertain to the 434 people that I’ve selected to compare across all four tests. This is NOT the total amount in any category for all of my matches. There’s no way to make that determination without manually comparing every single match for all four tests – which is why I selected what I felt was a representative sample.

You’ll quickly discover that many people DON’T MATCH you on all the DNA tests. You’ll notice as I give examples that I’ve colored coded some cells for my own use in both interpreting matches as well as sorting them. For example, People who don’t match on that test were labeled “none” and colored bright blue. Eventually, I simply entered “0” instead of the word “none” so I could perform math functions on those cells. I retained the blue so I could filter by cell color. You get the idea.

Using the new WGS test, 16 people (3.7% of 434) match me ONLY on the WGS test, but do NOT match me on any of the other tests.

Interestingly enough, they are all in the Top 100/150 category for the WGS test. Those match results range from 45 cMs to 53 cMs.

That’s NOT a trivial amount of DNA. It’s rather confusing how someone could match at that level on the WGS test, but not at all on the others.

Equally as interesting is that two of those 16 WGS matches don’t match either of my parents.

So, let’s say this another way to be clear – I only see these matches on the WGS test, and none of the other tests.

How Many People Match Me on Only One Test?

Ok, so how many people match me on ONLY one test?

FTDNA 2016 Only Matches MH 2019 Only Matches MH 2024 Only Matches MH WGS Only Matches
44 (10.1%) 3 (0.7%) 3 (0.7%) 16 (3.7%)
  • 44 people match me ONLY on the FamilyTreeDNA 2016 uploaded test.
  • 3 people match me ONLY on the MyHeritage 2019 and 2024 tests, respectively, but not the same three people
  • 16 people match me ONLY on the MyHeritage WGS test

Extrapolating these percentages to the rest of my matches suggests the following number of people would match ONLY on this test in the entire match list for each test.

FTDNA 2016 MH Health 2019 MH 2024 MH WGS
Total Matches 19,722 17,179 17,767 17,676
Extrapolated Matches on Only This Test 10.1% or 1992 matches 0.7% or 120 matches 0.7% or 124 matches 3.7% or 654 matches

 How Many People DON’T Match Me on a Specific Test?

Now, how many people DON’T match me on a specific test?

No FTDNA Match No MH 2019 Match No MH 2024 Match No MH WGS Match
36 (8.3%) 117 (27%) 126 (30%) 96 (22%)
  • 36 people don’t match me on the FamilyTreeDNA test, but do match me on at least one other test at MyHeritage
  • 117 people don’t match on the 2019 MyHeritage test, but do match on at least one other test at MyHeritage
  • 126 people don’t match on the 2024 MyHeritage test, but do match on at least one other test at MyHeritage
  • 96 people don’t match me on the WGS test, but do match me on at least one other test at MyHeritage

Extrapolating these percentages provides an extrapolated number of matches that I don’t match on any specific test, but that I do match on at least one other test.

FTDNA 2016 MH Health 2019 MH 2024 MH WGS
Total Matches 19,722 17,179 17,767 17,676
Extrapolated # That Don’t Match on This Test 8.3% or 1637 matches 27% or 4638 matches 39% or 5330 matches 22% or 3,889 matches

How Many Match Me On All Tests

  • 195 matches, or 44.9%, nearly half of my matches, match on all four tests at some level.
  • Out of those, 68, or 15.7% of the total number of matches match me at exactly the same cM level across all 4 tests. That’s pretty remarkable.

The Largest Differences Between Tests

Another question might be how large the difference is between the various matches.

I calculated the largest differences between the highest and lowest match values between the four tests, and placed that value in column G. This means that I subtracted the lowest value of the four tests on this particular match, from the highest value.

In the first row, that means I subtracted 0, the MH 2019 test value, from 75, the WGS test value. The difference between the lowest and highest values is 75 cMs.

Next, I sorted, highest to lowest in column G, so the largest difference is displayed at the top.

I was VERY surprised to see a difference as high as 75 cM, so let’s evaluate the results where the difference is 50 cM or greater. Thirteen matches fall into this category.

  • Entry 168 – The largest difference at 75 cM. This person matches me at 70, 74 and 75 cM, but not at all on the 2019 test, which caused me to go back and check again. Did I spell the name correctly? Yes, I did. We don’t know why I don’t match this person on the 2019 test, but the other matching cM values are very close so they look to be correct.
  • Entry 183 – I match this person on both the FamilyTreeDNA uploaded test at 71 cMs, and the WGS test at 35 cMs, around half as much on the WGS test as the FamilyTreeDNA test. I don’t match them at all on either the MyHeritage 2019 or 2024 kits. I have no explanation.
  • Entry 186 – Like entry 168, we match on three of four tests at 62, 63 and 67 cMs, with the non-matching test being the 2019 test. I would presume that this match is accurate as well.
  • Entry 191 – This one is interesting because I match this person on the FamilyTreeDNA uploaded test at 64 cMs, but none of the other tests.
  • Entry 192 – We match at 57 cMs on both the WGS and the 2024 tests, but not the 2019 test, where we don’t match at all. The match on the FamilyTreeDNA test is 11 cMs lower, at 46 cMs.
  • Entry 228 – This person is my half 1C1R, and I match them on all the tests, of course. However, there’s a 53 cM difference between the WGS and the FamilyTreeDNA uploaded test. In a relationship this close, 53 cM is a small percentage and won’t affect matching, but it’s not an insignificant amount of DNA.
  • Entries 233, 247, 248 and 283 – I match these people ONLY on the WGS test at 50, 52 and 53 cMs, so if I hadn’t taken the WGS test, I wouldn’t match them at all. Without additional research, we can’t tell if this is a legitimate match or not, but 50-53 cM would be a lot to be imputed or to be identical by chance. These people also match one of my parents’ tests, which eliminates the identical by chance possibility, meaning some of the DNA matches my mother and some matches my father – at least on my end. We can’t determine if this match is identical by chance on their side. I’ve never seen a 50+ cM segment (or even close) that is identical by chance, though.
  • Entry 249 – Matches on the FamilyTreeDNA test at 15 cM, and the MyHeritage 2024 test at 52 cM, but not the others.
  • Entry 250 – Matches at 51 cM on the FamilyTreeDNA test, but not on any of the MyHeritage tests.
  • Entry 279 – Matches only on the MyHeritage 2019 test at 50 cM.

Difference Range

Next, let’s review the entire range of differences, meaning the largest matching difference for any one person across all four tests, by group. I’m including all 434 here so you can judge for yourself.

  • 50-75 cM difference – 13 matches analyzed above

  • 45-49 cM difference – 22 matches

  • 40-44 cM difference – 11 matches

  • 35-39 cM difference – 9 matches

  • 30-34 cM difference – 10 matches

  • 25-29 cM difference – 12 matches

  • 20-24 cM difference – 26 matches

  • 16-19 cM difference – 28 matches

  • 13-15 cM difference – 29 matches

  • 9-12 cM difference – 29 matches

  • 8 cM difference – 78 matches

The 8 cM difference has the most of any value or category because this is the lowest level of matching at MyHeritage. Many tests have a minimum level match on a test or tests, and no others.

  • 6-7 cM match difference – 41 matches

The match differences at 5 cM and below are inconsequential. 57 matches fall into this category.

Commentary

One of the indicators of a valid match is if a parent has tested and also matches,

Of these 434 matches, 35 match neither parent, and most of those are at the smallest match level, meaning 8 cM. Of all the match amounts, that would be the least reliable, and most likely to be a false positive match, or identical by chance.

However, that’s not universally the case. Some WGS results match people at significantly higher levels, but don’t match parents. Two WGS matches match people at 47 and 49 cMs, respectively, and not on any of the other tests. Those two WGS matches don’t match either parent.

After reviewing all 434 selected matches, it appears that both the FamilyTreeDNA 2016 test, and the WGS test produce the most consistent and reliable results of the four tests.

44 people, or 10%, match on BOTH the WGS and the FTDNA tests, but neither of the other two tests. A total of 13.8% match EITHER the FTDNA test OR the WGS test, but not the others.

Conclusions

I think we can draw several conclusions from this comparison.

First, let’s evaluate the number of matches. Looking at the differences between the total number of matches between the various tests, especially the three MyHeritage tests, over time, isn’t that great. That’s exactly why you can’t depend on these numbers as an accurate comparison.

FTDNA 2016 MH Health 2019 MH 2024 MH WGS
Total Matches 19,722 17,179 17,767 17,676

There are only a few hundred differences between the three MyHeritage tests, and about 2000 between the FamilyTreeDNA test uploaded in 2016 and the various MyHeritage tests. That’s a substantial difference.

The difference number of matches between tests may seem irrelevant, especially the MyHeritage tests, until you realize that those who match AREN’T ALL THE SAME PEOPLE. In other words, comparing the MyHeritage 2024 test with the WGS test only shows a difference of 91 matches. This DOES NOT mean that the MyHeritage 2024 test and the WGS test have 17,676 of the same people who match both tests, and that the 2024 test simply has 91 more matches than the WGS test.

As we’ve seen, many people who appear on any one match list don’t appear on other match lists.

Our analysis showed that 44.9% of my 434 matches compared appear on all match lists, which means that more than half of my matches appear on one or more match lists, and not the others. Therefore, just comparing the number of matches isn’t really relevant. You need to compare the people included on all the different tests, which is why I created my spreadsheet and included people from a wide variety of sources.

3.7% of my matches on the WGS test were not on any other test, which extrapolates to approximately 654 of my total WGS matches that I wouldn’t receive any other way.

I care a great deal about those matches, especially since at least some appear to be high value.

Yes, I absolutely, positively want those matches, especially when you consider that some of the matching differences are as high as 75 cM. A 75 cM match can be in the second, third or fourth cousin range.

Realistically, they may or may not be valid or useful matches – but if I don’t have the opportunity to compare them, I’ll never know.

Should You Purchase the WGS Test If You’ve Already Tested?

So, now for the question you’re surely asking yourself.

Truthfully, when I ordered my test back in December, I was ambivalent. I only ordered it to do this comparison for my blog readers – and I really dislike spending money on something that I don’t think will benefit me.

Note the words “don’t think.”

I’ve changed my mind, for several reasons, and I’m glad I ordered the test.

The thing that changed my mind was that I received a nontrivial amount of matches on the WGS test that I didn’t receive on any of the others – even if some of them turn out to be identical by chance.

Since we can’t go back in time and take the earlier tests, and MyHeritage no longer accepts uploads from other vendors, our decision now is whether or not we should take the new WGS test, or not, especially if we already have a DNA test at MyHeritage.

If you’re a new tester, by all means, test at all four of the main vendors. DNA matching is the best thing since sliced bread.

However, the people I’m really speaking to here are those who already have a test of some sort at MyHeritage.

Here’s the bottom line:

  • You will receive WGS matches that you didn’t receive on your other test – and vice versa, so don’t delete your older test at MyHeritage
  • Some of those new WGS matches may well be high-value matches – as was illustrated in the “differences” I discovered.
  • Given the differences in who is included in the match list, your TOFR will be different too – perhaps leading to a brick wall breakthrough. I have two that I’m just itching to solve.
  • Use matches, shared matches and TOFR from ALL of your tests at MyHeritage.

My Biggest Regret

As Ran Snir said, new features and developments at MyHeritage will be based on the WGS test. We don’t know what those developments might be, or when they will become available. But it’s very clear that while testers on the older testing platforms will receive as much as MyHeritage can give them, the MyHeritage DNA future is being build on the WGS platform. I want to be there and benefit from new discoveries.

My biggest regret is that my parents aren’t around to take the new WGS test – and neither are several other family members.

Of the 15 family members whose tests I manage at MyHeritage, 9 are deceased, and I think that four more are as well. Two others are now quite elderly and are no longer able to consent or retest.

Your closest family members are your DNA anchors, identifying lineages and pointing you in specific directions, guiding your research.

The very best thing you can do for your genetic genealogy is to test your grandparents if they are living, and your parents. If they aren’t available, test your closest relatives such as grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles and first cousins.

Preparing for the Future

So, here’s my advice:

  • Take the WGS test yourself in order to glean as much information as possible and to benefit from future developments.
  • Retest any relatives whose tests you manage on the WGS platform, if possible.
  • Test your close family members and anyone you know whose DNA test could help you identify ancestral lineages.

Why is testing your relatives important?

Close relatives will carry some of the DNA from your mutual ancestors that you don’t.

Having the known DNA of your ancestors means that you can evaluate and analyze the trees of the entire group of people who match those identified DNA segments to see if you can break down an upstream brick wall.

I’ve been successful doing this for some time – and am in the process again by combining DNA matches and traditional records research.

Coupon Code for $20 DNA Test

MyHeritage has been kind enough to provide a limited-time coupon code (RobertaFeb26) for my readers which DROPS YOUR PRICE for the DNA test to $20 through February 28th at midnight.

This is the absolute lowest price I’ve ever seen for a DNA test.

You’ll receive the following features that are included with every test:

  • Ethnicity and ethnicity map
  • DNA matches and the ability to contact them
  • Shared ancestral surnames
  • Chromosome browser
  • cM Explainer

In addition, with this code you’ll receive both Shared DNA Matches and Shared Ancestral Places that usually require a subscription.

Normally, a subscription is required to access:

  • Trees of DNA matches
  • Shared DNA Matches (free now with the coupon code)
  • Shared ancestral places (free now with the coupon code)
  • AutoClusters
  • Theory of Family Relativity (TOFR)

If you’re interested in trying a subscription, click here to purchase a MyHeritage subscription with a free trial.

Here’s the link to purchase the DNA test, and here’s the coupon code to enter at checkout: RobertaFeb26

And yes, absolutely feel free to share the coupon code with your family, friends, and anyone else who might benefit.

Let me know how your results compare when you receive them.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

AutoKinship by Genetic Affairs Builds Family Trees from Your Matches at FamilyTreeDNA, and More

Genetic Affairs released a new AutoKinship tool designed for FamilyTreeDNA’s autosomal Family Finder matches, which also incorporates information from other sources. I must have fallen asleep at the wheel, because AutoKinship has been available for more than six months now.

I’ve been testing this tool with my matches, and it’s an immense help to those of us trying to untangle complicated family relationships using DNA evidence. I don’t know about you, but I have a long list of brick well where I could use help!

How to Use This Guide

This article is long and there are many steps involved – but it’s well worth it at the end.

My suggestion for using this article effectively is to read it through, at least once, to see what you’re going to be doing, and why.

Then, after you get things set up at Genetic Affairs, and any files you want to include, come back and use this article as a step-by-step guide to navigate these new tools.

Here’s the bottom line. The Genetic Affairs tools use matches, along with shared and bucketed matches at FamilyTreeDNA, plus their archived trees, in addition to external GEDCOM files and other information that you can provide in order to create customized, focused clusters and potential family trees for your clustered matches.

These tools combine DNA matching with internal and external trees for the composite best of both types of information.

So grab your favorite drink and let’s get started.

FamilyTreeDNA

AutoKinship works in conjunction with FamilyTreeDNA’s tools, such as Shared Matching, the Matrix tool, and Family Matching, also known as bucketing, which assigns parental sides to your matches using linked matches.

Linked matches are your matches whose relationship to you is known. If you haven’t already, link them to their profile card on your tree by clicking on “Link on Family Tree.” This allows FamilyTreeDNA, by using triangulation, to “bucket” your matches either maternally or paternally – meaning if they are related to you on your maternal side, paternal side, or both.

In my cousin Patricia’s case, the little pink icon by her profile picture shows that she has been bucketed maternally. That occurred when I linked my mother’s DNA to my tree because Patricia matches us both, plus other linked maternal cousins, on the same segments. For bucketing to occur, you don’t have to do anything except link known relatives to their proper place in your tree. FamilyTreeDNA does the rest by assigning your matches either maternally or paternally if they match on common segments.

Upload DNA Files to FamilyTreeDNA from Other Vendors

If you have not taken the Family Finder test at FamilyTreeDNA or uploaded your DNA file from 23andMe (Dec 2010 to present), Ancestry (May 2012 to present), or MyHeritage (March 2019 to May 7, 2025) to FamilyTreeDNA, you should do so now to take advantage of their tools, plus AutoKinship at Genetic Affairs.

What is AutoKinship and Why is it Different?

AutoKinship takes traditional clustering and kicks it up several notches. Instead of just showing you which matches cluster together, it actually attempts to build family trees based on the shared DNA amounts between your matches.

AutoKinship looks at how much DNA your matches share with you, and with each other, and uses that information to predict their relationships. Then AutoKinship builds potential family trees showing how everyone might connect. Additionally, you get to provide input in the process.

The timing couldn’t be better, especially since FamilyTreeDNA recently launched their updated Matrix tool, showing how your matches are related to each other. I wrote about that, here.

Two Steps

There are two primary steps in the AutoKinship process that build on each other. However, within these steps, there are many stepping-stones, so I’ve documented each one.

We’re going to use these tools, one at a time, in order.

I suggest that you join the Genetic Affairs User Group on Facebook for additional support and information.

Using AutoKinship with FamilyTreeDNA

The AutoKinship functionality for FamilyTreeDNA provides an automated approach using both AutoCluster and AutoKinship, together, then AutoLineage, where you can refine the information in a number of ways.

🔹 Step 1: Automated AutoKinship via Genetic Affairs

The first step involves running the AutoKinship tool directly from the Genetic Affairs members’ site. This process is fully automated:

  • It starts with the FamilyTreeDNA AutoCluster option, which groups DNA matches into shared clusters based on their connections to each other.
  • AutoKinship is then automatically launched on each cluster, adding the DNA tester and generating relationship hypotheses among the group.
  • Several family tree models are produced, showing how the matches and the tester could be connected based on shared DNA and cluster structure.

This step is ideal for getting quick insights into how groups of matches may relate.

🔹 Step 2: Refined Clustering & Relationship Analysis Using AutoLineage

After the automated run, downloadable files for AutoLineage are generated. These files allow you to re-import the match, shared matches, and tree data into the AutoLineage web application for further analysis.

This second step offers greater control and customization:

  • You can redo the clustering, optionally tweaking parameters to fine-tune how matches are grouped.
  • You can redo the common ancestor analysis, optionally tweaking parameters to fine-tune the discovery of MRCAs
  • The AutoKinship tool within AutoLineage becomes available again, this time with additional functionality:
    • Define known relationships between matches, such as parent-child or cousin relationships
    • Define generational information, for instance, if you know certain matches are not on the same generational level
    • Integrate MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) data from reconstructed trees, e.g., from the Find Common Ancestors module.

This enhanced phase is especially useful for integrating genealogical trees for targeted clusters.

By combining both steps, automated clustering with AutoKinship, and manual refinement with known or tree-derived relationships using AutoLineage – you can leverage your FamilyTreeDNA data for in-depth relationship exploration.

Let’s Take AutoKinship for a Spin

As always, I’ll walk you through this process step by step, using my own DNA results as an example.

Getting Started

First things first – you’ll need to be a member of Genetic Affairs, so sign up for their free membership, here. Genetic Affairs’ customers purchase “credits” to spend on various features and reports, but you receive 200 free to start.

The automated AutoKinship analysis available on the Genetic Affairs website can be run using credits from the free tier – perfect for exploring the tool without any commitment. This allows users to generate relationship trees for FamilyTreeDNA clusters right away.

To access the more advanced features in the AutoLineage desktop application—including refined clustering, manual relationship input, and integration of MRCA data from reconstructed trees – you’ll need an active subscription.

To get started, sign in to the Genetic Affairs member site, here.

Let’s walk through the process step by step.

We’ll begin by registering a FamilyTreeDNA profile at Genetic Affairs. Click on Register a new website to get started.

FamilyTreeDNA account passwords are not stored at Genetic Affairs.

After clicking “Register profile,” you’ll see a message asking you to double-check the credentials for the kit you’re about to use. This is also a good time to log in to your FamilyTreeDNA account directly to make sure there are no pending actions — such as enabling two-factor authentication or accepting updated terms of service.

Once you click “I understand, continue,” you’ll see a list of all registered FamilyTreeDNA profiles at Genetic Affairs.

Locate the kit you want to analyze and click the blue “Start analysis” button.
This opens a guided wizard that walks you through each step of the setup.

First, select AutoKinship and click “Next.”

You’ll then be asked to define several thresholds:

  • Minimum and maximum shared cM
  • Minimum size of the largest segment
  • Minimum cluster size

A quick word of caution here: selecting a very low minimum cM value may actually reduce the number of usable matches. That’s because the system must download shared match data until it either reaches that threshold, or a preset timer expires, which can limit how much data is downloaded. When in doubt, start conservatively. You can always rerun the analysis later and change the parameters. Unfortunately, there’s no way to simoly “get everything” in one run which is, of course, what everyone would do.

Click “Next” to continue.

This section determines which matches will be included in the analysis.
For your first run, I recommend using the top matches within the selected range. This provides a strong foundation and usually produces the clearest results.

Later, once you’re more familiar with the output, you may want to experiment by analyzing only the shared matches of a specific person or group. For now, keep it simple and click “Next.”

Here, you’ll enter your FamilyTreeDNA password (twice) so the system can retrieve the required data.

If you use two-factor authentication, you can enter the 2FA code here, as well. To do that, log in to your FamilyTreeDNA account, retrieve the code from your email, and paste it into the wizard.

Then click “Next.”

You’ll now see a summary of all the settings you’ve chosen. Take a moment to review everything. When you’re ready, click Perform analysis” in the bottom right corner.

At this point, the Genetic Affairs servers take over and begin processing your data.

The Results Arrive

When your report is ready, you’ll receive an email with a download link. You can also access it through the notification panel in the top right corner of the Genetic Affairs site.

Downloading the report will result in a zipped file. Save it in a location on your computer where you can find it.

Critical Step

This step is critical and will save you a great deal of frustration: If you’re using a PC, you MUST extract or unzip the files before you can properly use them. I can’t tell you how many people skip this step and then wonder why they’re receiving error messages. Ask me how I know!

This is your zipped file.

If you try to open the HTML file while it’s still zipped, it might appear to work at first, but when you click on any links within the file, you’ll receive an error.

If this happens to you, close everything, right-click on that yellow zipped folder, select “extract all,” and then try again.

Now you’re set up, so on to the fun part – viewing the results.

Exploring Your Results

Once you have everything properly extracted and open the HTML file, you’ll watch your AutoCluster literally fly into place on your screen. I love this part. It’s like watching my family fly into place. I wish the actual genealogy research was this easy.

The new Genetic Affairs reports include significantly more information than previous versions.

You can change what’s displayed using the dropdown menu.

By default, you’ll see the shared cM amounts between your matches, but you can change this to show paternal or maternal information if you’ve identified those lineages by linking your matches.

In my case, my maternal line has fewer matches because my mother’s ancestry includes both recent Dutch and German immigrants, so the majority of my high cM matches are US-centric on my father’s side. My father’s ancestors have been in this country since colonial times, and a lot of testers in the US are looking back to the old country for their origins.

Therefore, in my first several clusters, I see squares with the symbol P, indicating they are paternal matches – designated as such through linked family matches, aka bucketing.

You can see the faint Ps inside the orange cells.

Here’s a close-up so you can see the “P” for paternal. If you haven’t linked your matches, you won’t have bucketed matches. Your Genetic Affairs results don’t require bucketing – it’s just a really beneficial feature.

You can change your AutoCluster settings in several ways. I tend to start with the defaults and then modify from there.

Genetic Affairs functions based on the amount of server time a particular tool takes, so it’s not possible to just “run everything,” or trust me, I would.

The Common Ancestor Magic

In your report, scroll down several sections, and you’ll find Common Ancestors – my favorite feature.

This section shows you the common ancestors that have been identified between your matches’ trees.

Looking at the Common Ancestors cluster report, you can click on three things for each cluster:

  • FamilyTreeDNA Trees of Cluster #
  • Common Ancestors of Cluster #
  • Common Locations of Cluster #

Let’s examine the reconstructed trees based on the common ancestor analysis. The first cluster shows some of my close DNA matches that are descendants of my Vannoy line.

You can see that there are six testers, in addition to me, who descend from Joel Vannoy.

Next, scroll down to the AutoKinship section of your report.

The AutoKinship Analysis

The real treasure lies in the AutoKinship analysis, which is presented in a small table on the main HTML page. When you click on the AutoKinship results for any cluster, you’ll see reconstructed trees based on the shared DNA amounts between matches, meaning between you and each of them, and between each other.

You can see that I have 10 reports available based on the cluster numbers indicated.

I clicked on Cluster 1, which shows some of my close DNA matches who are Vannoy line descendants. This includes testers both with and without trees.

Since the AutoKinship algorithm doesn’t have access to age information, it sometimes struggles with generational differences – but the relationship predictions are still remarkably useful.

Alternative trees are also provided, giving you multiple hypotheses to investigate.

Some matches may not be integrated because of incompatible relationships.

The Next Step with AutoLineage – Adding Genealogical Trees to the Mix

We’ve seen AutoTree and AutoKinship. The new upgraded AutoLineage adds genealogical tree information to genetic information by allowing the user to:

  • Import other trees
  • Integrate most recent common ancestors (MRCAs) in AutoKinship trees
  • Set known relationships
  • Provide generational information.

AutoLineage, Genetic Affairs’ online clustering and tree-building tool, has been around for several years but was recently upgraded to create trees based on shared DNA and incorporate genealogical evidence.

This is where the proverbial rubber meets the road.

Setting Up AutoLineage

Return to the home page at Genetic Affairs and select AutoLineage.

If you’re new to this tool, you’ll see a simplified workflow on the start page that walks you through the process.

First, create a profile representing the DNA test taker – in my case, that’s me.

After creating the profile, you’ll be redirected to the landing page of the profile. From there, you can register DNA tests linked to the profile. From the home page, you can see the different profiles.

You’ll register a new FamilyTreeDNA test specifically for each user whose kit you manage and who took a test.

FamilyTreeDNA is the only DNA testing company for which Genetic Affairs runs automated analyses on their site.

Additionally, you can:

Importing the Data

After registering a FamilyTreeDNA test, you are redirected to the overview of this DNA page, where matches are imported.

Click on “Import matches” and select the CSV file from Genetic Affairs. Here’s where that AutoKinship report we generated earlier comes in handy. The unzipped report contains match and shared match information that we can import directly into AutoLineage.

Navigate to the gephi folder in your report and select the nodes.csv file to import your matches.

After importing the matches, a short dialog shows how many matches were imported.

After closing the dialog box, the DNA matches pane is opened.

You’ll see your DNA matches that were downloaded.

Next, import the shared match information from the edges.csv file in the same gephi folder.

Once both data sets are imported, you’ll see that the ICW (In Common With) column has populated, showing how many shared matches are available for each DNA match.

Clustering in AutoLineage

Now, with the shared match data loaded, you can perform your own clustering analysis.

The wizard allows you to set parameters for which matches to include based on:

  • The amount of shared cMs
  • Weighted or unweighted clustering
  • How much DNA is shared between shared matches

You can also define the cluster characteristics, from sparse to very dense clusters.

Last, you can select the coloring scheme. After setting the parameters, click on “Start Clustering,” at bottom right.

After clustering is finished, the clustering chart is displayed. It looks fairly similar to the ones obtained automatically from Genetic Affairs, but with some differences.

The first thing I noticed is that the large orange cluster 1 in the automated clustering is now mostly represented by the purple cluster 4.

Let’s zoom in on this cluster. By looking more closely at the numbers contained in each cluster, you can already make an estimated guess about the richness in relationship information for cluster members. This cluster has lots of close relationships. Clusters whose matches only share a small amount of DNA with each other are not the best candidates for an AutoKinship analysis because they most likely share a distant common ancestor. Unless, of course, it’s a distant ancestor you’re searching for. (Hello brick wall.)

Adding and Importing Tree Information

Now that we have the new clusters, we could continue to directly run the tree reconstruction on these clusters using the shared DNA information, but let’s wait  since we want to include the tree information as well to guide this process.

To use common ancestors, we need to import the available trees that are linked to the DNA matches. Luckily, just like (shared) match information, the tree information is provided with the automated analysis as well. Let’s import the data.

First, navigate to the tree management page. As you can see, no trees have been created or imported. Let’s start the wizard by clicking on the “Import Trees” button.

An “Import tree” wizard pops up, providing different ways to import tree information. It’s also possible to import GEDCOM files or tree data from other resources, but for now, I’m only using the archived trees at FamilyTreeDNA.

Click on the last option and select the files.

Navigate to the matches folder and select the HTML files contained in the folder.

Each file represents a DNA match report, some of which have a tree associated with them.

After importing the trees, they are automatically associated with the concerned DNA matches (using the unique identifier present in each file name). The tree overview page shows which tree is linked to a profile or DNA test, and the amount of DNA shared with the linked DNA match.

If you have created trees for your matches based on your own research (like quick and dirty trees), now is the time to import these using the “Import Tree” wizard again. This is a wonderful feature, because it means you’re not entirely dependant on your match having uploaded a tree themselves.

If you don’t import trees from GEDCOMs, you don’t need the linking wizard.

Click on the “Import Tree” wizard and select the GEDCOM option.

Now that we have imported additional trees, we need to associate them with DNA matches.

You can use a wizard to link the unlinked trees to the DNA matches, or link them from each DNA match. The wizard will try to guestimate, based on the content of the tree file name, which DNA match could be associated with the tree. Change the search criteria if it does not provide the correct results.

TIP: Save the GEDCOM files with the name of the linked DNA match as well the shared cM, which speeds up the importing process

Don’t forget to import your own tree. I imported my GEDCOM file from my computer genealogy software and associated it with my profile so it’s included in the common ancestor identification. You can easily upload your GEDCOM from your computer software, or download your tree from either Ancestry or MyHeritage to upload here.

Visit the profile, and select the tree pane. The tree pane only shows a single individual and allows you to add ancestors to it manually. To associate that individual with an existing tree, click on “Link to Existing Tree”.

A wizard will be displayed, which shows all available trees on the left side. Sort by clicking on the “Created” column to display the most recent trees.

Next, you need to select the root person.

I selected my tree.

Next, the right side of the wizard fills with the people in the selected tree. Select the root person, which is me, and click on “Save” in the lower right corner.

Finding Common Ancestors

Now that we have associated a tree with the profile and imported trees for the FamilyTreeDNA matches, it’s time to locate some common ancestors. Fingers crossed!

Go back to the profile and select the profile overview. Scroll down to the “Find common ancestors” section and click on the “Find common ancestors” button.

The “common ancestors” wizard shows trees that are associated with this profile in the table on the left and provides information about the different steps on the right. You can change the settings to make the search more restrictive or more relaxed.

After running the common ancestor identification, a dialog shows the number of trees and tree persons that were used, and the number of common ancestors that were identified.

After the analysis runs, you’ll be able to view all reconstructed trees or filter them based on common ancestors, trees, or linked DNA matches.

Common ancestors, not surprisingly, often align closely with what the automated analysis discovered.

All six testers are now shown descending from our common ancestor, in the approximate location where they will fit in our common tree.

But we aren’t quite finished yet.

The Final AutoKinship Analysis

Finally, we’ve arrived. The earlier steps were necessary to pave the way.

We have the common ancestors and clusters, and it’s time to go back to the clusters to begin the reconstruction of trees using trees combined with DNA.

Click on the profile and go to the clustering results pane. Select the 1x view, which will show the clustering chart.

Now select the matches pane that shows the different matches that are contained in each cluster. Scroll down until you reach your cluster of interest, which is four for me.

After clicking on any cluster, you’ll be redirected to a cluster view with only the information for that particular cluster.

Let’s view purple cluster 4, which looks fairly dense, with only a couple of empty cells, indicating that these shared matches with white cells did not share (enough) DNA with each other to be included in the cluster. Now select the matches pane in the dashboard at the top of this cluster, which displays the matches linked to this specific cluster. As you can see, a button is now available that allows us to run the AutoKinship analysis. Click on the button.

Single cluster matches are displayed.

Now back to the wizard.

The wizard provides several important parameters:

  • Maximum number of generations between DNA matches
  • Number of trees to analyze in each iteration
  • Final number of trees to keep
  • Whether to include known relationships and/or MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) relationships

In this example, MRCA relationships were found because we performed the common ancestor identification that resulted in common ancestors between the matches of this cluster.

If you know specific relationships between matches, you can set those manually. Sometimes you might not know the exact relationship, but if you can estimate that a match is one or more generations older or younger than yourself, you can set that too.

In addition to setting the relationship between the test taker (indicated in green in the table) and the DNA matches, it’s also possible to set the relationship between shared matches, if known.

The Hybrid Results

After the analysis has finished, an overview of the identified trees is presented.

The final result is a blended tree where DNA evidence fills in the blanks for matches who haven’t uploaded trees, or you haven’t provided a tree, and known genealogy supports the structure where it exists. This hybrid approach gives us the best of both worlds – the precision of documented genealogy combined with the discovery power of DNA analysis.

I particularly like this approach, because when I identify how a DNA match is related to me from any vendor, I enter their lineage in my desktop genealogy software. Therefore, using that GEDCOM file is the most complete source of my identified relatives.

Testers 1-6 were shown using the regular AutoTree, without the integrated tree, but an additional 11 matches were placed for consideration using all available tools.

I was using this as an experiment because I know how most people in this cluster are related, and those are all placed accurately. There is one person, located on the branch between 1 and 5, who I had no idea how they fit into this puzzle. Now, at least I know where to look.

I can’t imagine trying to do all of this manually.

Why This Matters

For those of us dealing with unknown parent or grandparent situations, poorly documented lines, non-existent trees, or just plain stubborn brick walls, this combination of tools is nothing short of amazing. You can now explore relationship hypotheses even when traditional documentation is scarce.

The reconstructed trees show how common ancestor information provides the template, while the AutoLineage tool fills gaps using shared DNA information. The updated AutoLineage is the genealogical assistant that never gets tired and can deal with relationship possibilities much more effectively than traditional hand-based methods.

In Summary

If you haven’t explored Genetic Affairs recently, give it a look. The integration between AutoKinship and AutoLineage represents a significant step forward in DNA analysis.

While AutoKinship offers valuable insights on its own, its full potential is truly unlocked when you export the data into AutoLineage. The combination creates a comprehensive analysis that was previously impossible.

For researchers dealing with complex family relationships or challenging genealogical puzzles, this hybrid approach that combines matches at FamilyTreeDNA with DNA evidence and genealogical trees could be the key to breaking through stubborn brick walls that nothing else has budged.

Last but not least, I suggest reading Dr. Patricia Coleman’s blog articles about these tools and her methodologies here and here. Patricia works extensively with these tools, and I often recommend her for private autosomal research consultations. Patricia’s 2026 RootsTech Session, DNA Case Study: Finding an 1877 Birth Father with Genetic Affairs, BanyanDNA, and No Birth Record, details her work solving a long-standing problem for my cousin in the Speaks family.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Marie Josèphe LePrince (1715-after 1787), A Grandmother’s Choice to Preserve Acadian Culture – 52 Ancestors #468

The surnames Prince, Le Prince, and LePrince are used interchangeably in Acadian records and genealogical sources, as are Marie Josèphe and Marie-Josèphe, with or without a hyphen.

Marie Josèphe LePrince was born to Jean LePrince and Jeanne Blanchard on November 3, 1715, in Port Royal and baptized the same day. In her baptism record, her surname is written as simply Prince.

Her maternal half-sister, Marie D’Aigre, about 11, was her godmother, and her mother’s brother, Guillaume Blanchard, born about 1690, who would have been about 24, the son of Marie Josèphe’s grandfather by the same name, was her godfather. The only other Guillaume Blanchard this could have been was Marie’s grandfather, born about 1650, who would have been 65 in 1715. Generally, though not always, a younger person was preferred as a godparent because they were more likely to be available to fulfill the godparental obligations should both parents perish.

Upheaval

Marie Josèphe was born in the midst of upheaval.

In 1713, following the 1710 English conquest of Port Royal, Acadia was ceded by the Treaty of Utrecht to the English. In subsequent years, the English, at first, wanted the French to leave, but reconsidered when they realized they would starve without the Acadian farmers to feed them.

Initially, the Acadians staunchly refused to leave, then they changed their minds and wanted to leave and escape the oppressive English, even going so far as trying to cut a road to walk from Port Royal to Les Mines. However, by 1717 they had tentatively decided to stay and ceased attempting to reach Les Mines by land.

In 1720, when Marie Josèphe was five years old, Port Royal was renamed Annapolis Royal, although I’d bet that the Acadians refused to EVER call it anything but Port Royal. An uneasy peace had been established, allowing the Acadians the freedom to practice Catholicism without interference. They could now leave, if they wished, but they couldn’t take anything with them.

The English and Acadians were constantly at odds with one another.

The primary sticking point in the English/Acadian relationship was, and remained, the requirement that the Acadians sign an unconditional loyalty oath to the British Crown. The Acadians refused, not wanting to ever find themselves in the position of having to fight their own French countrymen, or the Mi’kmaq, not to mention that they felt it was in their best interest to remain neutral.

From time to time, the English renewed the requirement that the Acadians sign an oath, and the Acadians would, once again, refuse. Marie Josèphe would have heard these discussions and incessant bickering about the Acadian relationship with the English – at church, at home, and anyplace Acadians gathered.

By 1725, when Marie Josèphe was 10 years old, a new English governor permitted the Acadians to take a more lenient oath, which alleviated many of their concerns. They agreed, the men signed, and everyone was greatly relieved. However, in 1729, the English decided that the 1725 oath was too lenient and declared it void.

I can hear the Acadian men screaming across the years. They would have felt betrayed and indignant.

Marie Josèphe’s father, Jean LePrince lived on the south side of the river, just above Bloody Creek, so named after a 1711 ambush. In 1729, Marie Josèphe’s husband-to-be, Jacques Forest, son of Rene Forest, who lived on the next farm over, according to this 1733 map, was 22 and probably a strapping, handsome young man.

Marie-Joseph was only 14, but I’d wager that she had already “noticed” Jacques. Many Acadian girls married about that age, but she wouldn’t marry for another five years.

In 1729, the men were required to sign a new, much stricter oath of allegiance, but they refused.

However, Governor Phillips, an earlier governor who returned in 1730, simply wanted this entire ordeal to be over. He had the Acadians sign a new oath. That oath itself was two pages in length, and the language on the first page sounded quite strict:

“I sincerely promise and swear, as a Christian, that I will be utterly faithful and will truly obey His Majesty King George the Second, whom I acknowledge as the sovereign Lord of Nova Scotia and Acadia. So help me God.”

The second page included the concessions that the Acadians wanted:

“… that the inhabitants, when they have sworn hereto, will not be obliged to take up arms against France or against the Savages, and the said Inhabitants have further promised that they will not take up arms against the King of England or against its government.”

The priest and a notary signed as witnesses to the signatures.

Governor Phillips only sent the first page back to England, along with their signatures on a third page. The second page that held the language that made the Acadians happy was never sent. No one on either side of the Atlantic knew the difference, save Phillips, and he certainly wasn’t talking.

All parties probably collectively heaved a sigh of relief. Everyone was happy – because no one but the Governor knew what really happened, how that second page had somehow been “lost.”

Peace in Acadia, at least for a time, had finally arrived, just in time for Marie-Josephe LePrince to marry and start her family.

By the time Jacques Forest had finally proposed to Marie Josèphe, and had asked her father for her hand in marriage, things seemed almost normal again in Acadia.

Salt-marsh dykes were patched, animals fed, crops sewn, and food prepared. One of two churches was attended every Sunday, plus whenever another pressing event, such as a wedding, funeral, or baptism summoned the faithful Acadians.

Funerals were held whenever the need arose, of course, generally the day following the death. Baptisms generally occurred as soon as possible, but marriages could be planned. Marriage celebrations, which often included music and flowers, were avoided during solemn, penitential seasons. Actual marriage vows could be administered anytime by the priest, but any accompanying celebration would have to take place another time. Typically, the entire marriage event was scheduled for a time outside those sacred dates.

Marriage

Perhaps Marie Josèphe LePrince and Jacques DeForest married in the dead of winter because there was less to be done then than during the other three seasons. People would have had more time for celebration. Since marriage was avoided during Advent, Lent, the festivals of Trinity, and other Holy or Feast Days, they wisely chose around those blackout dates and before the planting of spring crops.

The parish registers of St. Jean-Baptiste in Annapolis Royal record that on Friday January 25, 1734, the priest, De St. Poncy de La Vernède, married Jacques Forest, age 25, whose parents were René Forest and Françoise Dugas, to Marie Josèphe Le Prince who was 18. Her parents are given as Jean Le Prince and Jeanne Blanchard.

Witnesses were Claude Granger, Pierre Lanoue, Antoine Beliveau, René Forest, the groom’s father, and Pierre Granger.

The priest had to “dispense 3-3 consanguinity,” indicating that the bride and groom were related in the not too distant past. This article explains about Cannon law, but 3-3 consanguinity means they shared great-grandparents. Sure enough, looking at the pedigree chart for both the bride and groom, they do.

Not counting the bride and groom, their common ancestors are Etienne Hebert and Marie Gaudet, three steps up the tree for both people.

Home

The newlyweds probably lived someplace in or near the Rene Forest village, off of present-day Brickyard Road in Nova Scotia.

You can see on this 1733 map that Jacques’ father, Rene Forest is the neighbor of Marie Josèphe’s father, Jean Prince.

Mapannapolis shows the location using their GIS system.

Overlaid onto an aerial map today, the Forest Village was located along today’s rail trail, with the bend in Brickyard Road showing at right.

The LePrince land was located near Button Brook, across from today’s Bridgetown, about a mile from the Forest land, as the crow flies, or perhaps less.

Back then, the preferred mode of transportation for everyone was canoe.

Life Along the River

By the time Marie Josèphe was born, these families had been living here for four generations. It was the only home they knew. The far-off place called France was simply family lore that their great-grandparents had passed to their grandparents, who told their parents, who, eventually told them.

France seemed like another fairytale world from long ago – completely disconnected from Acadia – because it was.

Marie Josèphe Le Prince’s Children

The first several years of their marriage would have been spent blissfully living along the shore of the beautiful Annapolis River. For generations, Acadians had farmed the salt marshes. Marie Josèphe and Jacques took up the plow and scythe and did the same.

After their 1734 marriage, like typical Acadian couples, Marie Josèphe LePrince and Jacques DeForest settled down and began both farming and a family. They lived on this land, between their families.

Their first baby arrived about 14 months after their wedding.

Victor Forest was born on April 9, 1735. A supplemental baptismal was performed on July 25th of the same year, which means that for some reason, his parents could not have him baptized by the priest when he was born, so he would have been baptized by a neighbor or perhaps the midwife until a proper baptism could take place. Godparents were Jean LePrince, his maternal grandfather, and Francoise Dugas, his paternal grandmother. What a joyful day that must have been!

It was quite a distance, at least 10 miles, not including paddling the bends of the river, from the area where Marie Josèphe Le Prince and Jacques Forest lived to the Catholic church in Annapolis Royal. They probably worshipped at the Mass House, St. Laurent, right across the river, which was very close to where her mother, Jeanne Blanchard, was raised.

The same priest would have performed baptisms in both locations and recorded them together in one parish register. Sometimes the priest indicated that the location was St. Laurent, but often not.

  • Victor, born in 1735 is probably the same Victor Forest found after the Expulsion in Connecticut in 1763, married, with 3 children.
  • Marie Josèphe’s next child, Joseph Forest was born on February 8, 1737 in Annapolis Royal and a supplemental baptism was performed on June 9, 1737. Godparents were Honnoré Le Prince, Marie Josèphe’s brother, and Catherine Joseph Forest, Jacques’ sister. It would have been quite cold in February which is probably why they didn’t brave the river for an immediate baptism.

Some have suggested that this Joseph is the Benoist Forest recorded in Connecticut who petitioned to go to France in 1763.

  • Anne Forest was born and baptized on April 15, 1739, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Joseph Le Prince, Marie Josèphe’s brother, and Anne Forest, Jacques’ sister.
  • Pierre Forest was born and baptized on July 8, 1741, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Pierre Le Prince, Marie Josèphe’s brother, and Elisabeth Godet, sometimes called Isabelle, Marie Josèphe’s second cousin, and Jacques’ third cousin.

These families had lived on both sides of this river for generations, and Godparents who were typically family members or very close friends were one way of assuring that someone was designated, and agreed in front of God and everyone present, to parent orphan children should the unthinkable occur.

  • Marie Josèphe Forest was born and baptized on March 15, 1743, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Jean Forest, brother of Jacques and also the husband of the other godparent, Anne Richard, daughter of Marie Josèphe’s aunt.
  • Félicité Forest was born on November 13, 1745, and baptized two days later on November 15, 1745. Godparents were Pierre Bastarache, who lived just upriver, and Felicité Bourgeois.
  • Marguerite Forest (Laforet) was born and baptized on January 16, 1748, in Annapolis Royal. Marguerite is the only one of Marie Josèphe’s children we conclusively know anything about after the 1755 Expulsion – aside from the fact that this Acadian family was exiled to Connecticut.

Marguerite Forest married Francois LaFay (Lafaille) someplace in New England on November 10, 1767, before a justice of the peace due to the lack of a priest. Their marriage was revalidated on June 23, 1792, at Sainte-Marguerite-de-Blairfindie in Quebec. She died in L’Acadie, Quebec, on February 16, 1819, at age 71.

  • Charles Tranquille Forest was born on February 14, 1750, and baptized the same day in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Joseph Hebert and Marie Beliveau. He may have been the Charles Fores, “about 20 years of age” who died on August 7, 1770 and was buried at Sainte-Geneviève church in Montreal. The witnesses were Joseph Lefebre and Joseph Hetier.
  • Michel Forest was born and baptized on June 9, 1753, in Annapolis Royal. Godparents were Isidore Beliveau and Anne Forest.

Marie Josèphe and Jacques had baptized nine children over a period of 18 years. None of their children had yet married, so we really don’t know if these children survived to adulthood, although we find no burials in the parish records.

Their lives were about to change in a way that they could only have imagined in their worst nightmares.

Given that Marie Josèphe’s last known child was born in June of 1753, and she was only 38, it’s probable that she had at least one if not two or maybe even three or four more children.

The 1755 Expulsion Order

It was in the heat of the summer, July 28, 1755, that the horrific Expulsion order was signed by Governor Charles Lawrence of Nova Scotia, and with the drying of the ink, their fates were sealed.

The order was first read to the horrified Acadian men who had been summoned and gathered in the church at Grand Pré on September 5th, 1755.

The Acadian men were held hostage in the church for around five weeks while the women were rounded up separately, ordered to gather their children, and prepare for departure as soon as the transport ships arrived. More than half of the people herded onto the ships were children.

From the museum at Grand Pré.

The reading was followed by the agonizing deportation itself.

According to John Winslow’s journal, the women were in great distress, carrying their children while others pushed their decrepit parents in their carts towards the ships with all their goods.

Everything, absolutely everything, was stripped away from the Acadians and forfeited to the English.

By December, the same process was being carried out against the Acadians in Port Royal where Marie Josèphe and her family lived.

Walk the Wharf

The Acadians were rounded up like so many cattle, and herded onto English transport ships waiting in the river in Annapolis Royal, formerly Port Royal, at the foot of the fort.

The English wanted the Acadians’ land for much more pliable and cooperative New England settlers – and they extracted it from the Acadians in a horrific, genocidal, clean sweep.

The families were forced to leave their homes and livestock behind. They could hear their pets and livestock, calling to be fed and milked – but there was nothing they could do to save them. They couldn’t even save themselves.

They carried what they could as they walked to the end of the wharf, overseen by English soldiers, but the ships were overcrowded, and they were forced to leave everything they carried beside the wharf.

Forced below deck in cramped quarters, with no provisions for bathroom facilities, many died. Some ships sank during a winter crossing that one could argue was meant to thin the population. The last thing the Acadians saw were their homes and farms burning, and in many cases, their family members being forced to board different ships. Not only did many never find each other again, we have never found them in records since, either.

Poor Marie Josèphe, with however many of her nine children were living, and very probably heavily pregnant. We can only hope that she managed to keep all nine of her children with her, and they weren’t separated onto different ships.

On December 8th, early in the morning, they sailed away from Port Royal, forever, amid incredibly crowded and abhorrent conditions.

God help Marie Josèphe if she delivered a baby on that horrific transport ship, below deck, in the freezing cold, surrounded by filthy frigid seawater and death amid the slurry of human excrement.

I can’t even go there. If she did deliver a child under those circumstances, the baby assuredly perished.

We have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not Marie Josèphe had any children after 1755, or if they survived.

The ship that Marie Josèphe and Jacques were on landed someplace in Connecticut. Let’s hope that they were on the ship, Elizabeth, with her 280 unwilling passengers that arrived on January 21, 1756. Three people had died, so 277 paupers were now totally dependent on the charity of others for their mere existence.

If they weren’t on the ship, Elizabeth, then they may have been among the unfortunate people aboard the ship, Edward, with 278 passengers. The Edward was blown off course by a violent storm. She finally landed at Antigua with gravely ill passengers. Several had already died at sea, and more perished in Antigua. The ship eventually continued on to Connecticut, arriving on May 22, 1756, with only about 180 people. Roughly 100 had been claimed by malaria and other maladies.

Upon arrival, the refugees were forced to burn all of their remaining possessions on the beach before being allowed ashore, in case of contamination. The officials didn’t know what kind of diseases had killed so many, and they certainly didn’t want them sharing whatever they had with people in Connecticut.

There may have been a third ship, Two Sisters, that also departed Annapolis Royal on December 8th, along with the other two, with 280 people aboard, but there is no further record, although one record suggests another ship arrived on January 22nd and another possibly on the 30th.

Yet another vessel reportedly left with between 250 and 280 unwilling passengers, but never arrived. It could have sunk, or may have been replaced by the Elizabeth, but we will never know. Records are very sparse, confusing, and inconclusive.

There is no Port Royal roster of Acadians either before the Expulsion, when boarding ships, or after landing, but some families have been tentatively reconstructed from later records.

The last thing the Acadians saw of Port Royal was smoke as the English burned their homes, barns, and farms so there was no question in their minds that there was nothing left to return “home” to. The English hoped this would prevent the Acadians from trying.

Exile in Connecticut

Fortunately, Jacques and Marie Josèphe, along with their family, wound up in Connecticut. This luck of the draw fell in their favor for a change.

According to Acadie:

“In general, the approximately 1,000 Acadians deported to Connecticut were treated with respect. A law concerning their distribution throughout the settlement was adopted by the colonial Legislature in advance of their arrival, which allowed the citizens to prepare themselves for cohabitation. In some cases, Connecticut citizens made unoccupied homes available to Acadian families. Others funded the trip of Acadians wishing to resettle in Quebec via the Albany, Hudson, and Richelieu rivers through lakes George and Champlain.”

Little is known about the exile of the Forest family in Connecticut after the 1755 Expulsion, although we can piece a little together. The commentary above regarding Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River may be important.

We do know that both Jacques and Marie Josèphe survived, because Jacques eventually signed a petition requesting relocation to France. Under the Treaty of Paris of 1763, Acadian exiles had 19 months to leave British North America for any French colony.

The Acadians quickly signed petitions requesting transportation to Nova Scotia, Quebec, France, or the French West Indies.

Jacques, with 10 family members, petitioned for removal to France.

Also on the list were Victor Forest and Benoist (possibly Joseph) Forest with their families. The petition for transportation to France was denied for all 666 Acadians who signed the petition. Some migrated to Saint Domingue, some to Louisiana, New Brunswick, or Quebec, and others remained in Connecticut.

Reconstructing the Family Using the Petition

The only glimpse we have of Jacques Forest and family in Connecticut is the petition after the 1763 Treaty of Paris. Some have reported that the petition date was actually in 1767, but that doesn’t make sense because it’s outside the 19-month window.

In 1763, Marie Josèphe’s known children would have been:

  • Victor – age 28
  • Joseph – age 26
  • Anne – age 24
  • Pierre – age 22
  • Marie Josèphe – age 20
  • Felicite – age 18
  • Marguerite – age 15
  • Charles – age 13
  • Michel – age 10

Here’s what we do know:

  • Jacques Fourest indicated that his family consisted of 10 people, which one must presume included both he and Marie Josèphe plus 8 children. He was petitioning for passage to France.
  • Adjacent his request is Mathieu Forest with 6 people. Mathieu is probably the son of Rene Forest, so is Jacques’ brother.
  • Marie Josèphe and Jacques’ presumed son, Victor, asks for passage for 5, which would include himself, his wife, and 3 children.
  • Listed beside Victor is Benoist, with 5 persons. Benoist could be Joseph, as there was no baptism for a Benoist or anything similar.
  • Two further down the list is Jean-Pierre Fouret, with 7 persons, who would be another brother of Jacques Forest.

Thus, this leaves us with Jacques Forest and Marie Josèphe LePrince, excluding Victor and Benoist, assuming they are their children. We know of a total of 9 births through 1753, which leaves (at least) 7 children at home, assuming everyone lived and no more were born after arrival in Connecticut. By the way, neither of those assumptions are safe. Therefore, one of three things has occurred:

  • Benoist is not their child, so Joseph, now age 30, is still at home, has died, lives elsewhere, or did not petition for removal to France.
  • Benoist is their child, and they had another child in either 1755 or after, who survived.
  • They are raising someone else’s child or children.

Assuming the Jacque who petitioned for removal with a family of 10 is our Jacque, that tells us that 7 or 8 of their children are still living at home. Other than Victor, their children in 1767 would have been 30, 28, 26, 24, 22, 19, and 14. Of course, we can’t account for any children born after they arrived in Connecticut.

For all nine of their children to survive that hellish winter crossing in the worst possible conditions seems nearly impossible. Yet, on the ship, Elizabeth, only three people are reported to have died. Perhaps they were fortunate, and not only did all of their children survive that passage, they survived everything else too.

The fact that they have that many surviving children suggests strongly that they were NOT on the Edward that was blown off course to Antigua, where more than one third of the passengers perished.

That’s at least some small relief. What they did have to endure was bad enough.

We know almost nothing about what happened to the Forest family after 1763, except for daughter Marguerite, who married Françoise Lafaille (Lafay) and ultimately settled in L’Acadie, Province of Quebec, and possibly Charles Forest, who may have died in the same province in 1770 at age 20.

We don’t know when or where Jacques Forest or deForest died, but it was likely in Connecticut. By 1767, he would have been about 60 years old, and given the one tidbit we know about Marguerite, the family likely remained there for at least the rest of Jacques and Marie Josèphe’s lives.

I can’t help but wonder how many of my unknown autosomal DNA matches that I absolutely cannot place, but cluster with distant Acadian cousins, are due to the displaced family members who “disappeared” in Connecticut and elsewhere.

Marie Josèphe’s Daughter, Marguerite DeForest

Marguerite DeForest, born in 1748, was exiled along with her family to Connecticut. She married Francois Lafay in the colonies in 1767 and had her first 10 children wherever it was that they lived.

Her eldest daughter, Marie Lafay (LaFaille), was born about 1767, so would have known her grandparents, or at least her grandmother, Marie Josèphe, well.

After moving north to L’Acadie, Quebec, along the Richelieu River, about 1788, Marie later told Protestant Missionaries that her elderly grandmother, who would have been Marie Josèphe LePrince, became upset in about 1787 because her grandchildren were losing both their Catholic religion and their culture. Marie had been educated in Protestant schools, given that Catholicism could not be practiced in the colonies.

Therefore, the rest of Marie Josèphe’s children would have been educated in Protestant schools as well. Marie indicated that she was leaning towards the Protestant religion, herself, which would have been her grandmother’s nightmare come true. Especially given how much the Acadians had sacrificed to maintain their freedom to worship as Catholics.

Marie said that her grandmother made the decision to “send the family back to Canada,” which is how they wound up in L’Acadie, south of the St. Lawrence River, across from Montreal.

Marie Josèphe would have been 77 years old in 1787. What we don’t know is whether Marie Josèphe stayed behind in New England or accompanied all or part of her family who relocated.

Either way, by the 1790 census in Connecticut, Marie Josèphe (LePrince) Forest, DeForest, or any similar spelling or recognizable name is not to be found. If she was still living, she was probably residing with someone else, but we have no idea who or where. It’s also possible that she was living in Massachusetts or another location in New England.

Marie Josèphe’s granddaughter, Marie LaFay, was given a Bible by Pliny Moore who was associated first with Sheffield and Spencertown, Massachusetts, then with Vermont and Champlain, New York, which is just down the Richelieu River and across the border from the location in L’Acadie, Quebec where the LaFay family settled.

Pliny Moore, about 8 years older than Marie, may well have been her heartthrob. He was an American military Lieutenant, a Baptist, and then a Congregational Church leader. Marie LaFay cherished that Bible for the rest of her life, even after it was taken away from her and she was forbidden to read it. As an adult, Marie eventually converted away from the Catholic Church.

This connection to Pliny, along with “a fearful disappointment”, described by Marie, was likely the motivating factor for Marie Josèphe to become upset in 1787 because her children were “losing their religion and culture.” That’s when Marie Josèphe decided that her family needed to remove themselves from under the influence of a location where Catholicism could not be freely practiced. Her granddaughter, after all, was at risk, which probably meant the rest of her grandchildren were too.

Marie confessed years later that she had encouraged her father to make the 1788 trip to Canada following that “fearful disappointment.”

I strongly suspect that Marie had marital aspirations towards Pliny, an affection that was not returned in the same way. Pliny married someone else in January 1787, in Vermont.

It’s worth noting here that in 1816,  Marie somehow obtained Bibles for all of her children from Pliny, who was then living in Champlain, New York on Lake Champlain, near the mouth of the Richelieu River, about 60 miles away.

Marie Josèphe’s Final Years

From granddaughter Marie’s information, we know that Marie Josèphe LePrince was living in 1787 and wanted her children to move to Canada. We know that Marie encouraged her father, Francois Lafay (Lafaille), to visit Canada and select a site there. We know that Marie’s family, including both parents and their 10 children relocated to Canada in 1788.

In July 1788, Marie Josèphe’ daughter, Marguerite DeForest and her husband had three of their children baptized into the Catholic Church, and in September, the family rented a farm, clearly settling in permanently.

On January 6th of 1789, Marie and two of her sisters were baptized into the Catholic Church at Ste. Marguerite de Blairfindie at Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, on the Richelieu River, which empties into Lake Champlain.

If Marie Josèphe was lucky, she was present for those baptisms, closing the loop on restoring their Acadian heritage. She never returned home to her beloved Acadia along the river in Nova Scotia, but the new L’Acadie, built by many of the same families, was the next best thing.

All of this information, combined, probably places Marie Josèphe’s death after 1787 and before 1790, although nothing is certain.

Of course, there would be no death records in the States, but if Marie Josèphe went to Quebec with her daughter’s family and died there in 1788 or after, it’s likely that her death and burial would have been recorded in the parish register. Of course, parish registers aren’t necessarily complete, and she may have remained wherever she was living – which I suspect was someplace near enough to Lake Champlain that Marie had the opportunity to meet Pliny.

Marie Josèphe was probably incredibly relieved that her daughter and grandchildren had made it back to a French, Catholic, Acadian environment. Perhaps that relieved her mind enough that she was free to “go on” and meet her maker.

All things considered, it’s amazing that Marie Josèphe overcame so many obstacles to live so long. Given what she faced, before the days of modern medicine, it’s remarkable that she lived to be at least 72.

In the closing days of her life, Marie Josèphe LePrince was able to salvage at least something of her Acadian heritage by returning her daughter, along with her grandchildren, back to an Acadian resettlement region of Canada.

In L’Acadie, Marie Josèphe’s beloved Acadian culture, including their Catholic faith, endured and did not perish!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

A Forest of Fathers: FamilyTreeDNA’s Y-DNA Tree Tops 100,000 Branches

Congratulations to FamilyTreeDNA and all of their customers who contributed to this absolutely monumental milestone. The Y-DNA tree has now reached 100,000 branches.

Chart courtest of FamilyTreeDNA

I knew they were getting close because the official January numbers were 99,777.

Congratulations to the entire team, but especially to Michael Sager, Senior Phylogeneticist, who has been the chief architect of the tree “forever.” This is definitely his baby.

Here’s Michael in 2020 at RootsTech discussing the Y-DNA tree construction methodology.

The Y-DNA tree is built using the results of 698,000 individual Y-DNA testers, plus thousands of both academic and ancient results.

These 100,000 tree branches are built from 857,000 variants, known as SNP mutations. Think of those as a huge 857,000-piece puzzle that Michael Sager has spent the past decade assembling into the Y-DNA tree of mankind, reaching all the way back to Y-DNA Adam.

In the tree today, haplogroup A-PR2021, named for variant or SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) PR2921, is Y-DNA Adam, who lived in Africa about 234,000 years ago.

Click on any image to enlarge

FamilyTreeDNA has made their entire Y-DNA tree public and free, and that’s in addition to the baker’s dozen reports available through Discover for each haplogroup.

Let’s take a look!

The Public Y-DNA Tree by Country

You can view the public Y-DNA tree, here, and can select to view the tree by:

  • Variants (mutations) that define each haplogroup
  • Country
  • Surname

For example, here is the oldest, or top portion of the tree, using “by Country,” the first of three options.

Notice two things at far right:

  • There may be a “+” when there are too many countries to display
  • The 3 dots

Clicking on the three dots provides you with the option for a “Country Report” or “Surname Report” for that specific haplogroup.

The Country Report shows the number of haplogroup members from each country. Remember that countries are self-reported by the testers. The country should be the location where the tester’s earliest known paternal ancestor (EKA) was living or from.

You can see how many people are members of this specific branch, and in the next column, how many people are members of this branch plus all “son” or downstream branches. One column excludes new haplogroup letters (when a different base haplogroup is formed), and the other includes all downstream haplogroups, even if the beginning branch letter changes. The final “Distribution” column shows the percentage of people in that haplogroup who originated from each country.

In this case, 43% are from the US, which probably means that they are brick-walled here, given that the only people originally “from” the United States were Native Americans who fall into specific subclades of haplogroups C and Q.

If you’d like more information about A-V148, or any other haplogroup, you can go to Discover and enter a haplogroup name. I always check the Ancient Connections because archaeological remains anchor haplogroups in a particular place at a particular time. We’ll cover more about Discover in a minute.

The Public Y-DNA Tree by Variant

This haplotree view “by Variant” shows the variants, or SNP mutations, that identify each haplogroup.

You can see that Haplogroup A-PR2921, the granddaddy of the tree, is based on only one mutation, PR2921, which is also the haplogroup name. This means two things:

  • Every haplogroup beneath this branch on the tree also has the mutation, PR2921, which is how we know it’s the “original” founding mutation
  • This haplogroup cannot be split further, because there are no additional variants

For example, look at the branch, A-L1090, the first “child haplogroup” of A-PR2921. A-L1090 has the 26 mutations displayed, plus more, for a total of 695.

This means that as more men test, there are literally more than 695 opportunities for various men to match on a unique subset of those mutations, plus new mutations never discovered before, forming new haplogroups.

Some lines have died out over time, and others may be quite rare. This is the perfect example of why it’s important for every male to take the Big Y test, aside from genealogy.

Looking on down the tree to the next haplogroup “generation,” we can see that haplogroup A-V148 has 21 descendant haplogroups, but its sibling subclade, A-V168 has 99,967 – essentially the rest of the tree.

The Public Y-DNA Tree by Surname

Viewing the tree “by Surname” can be very useful. Surnames are shown beside their haplogroup if there are two or more individuals:

  • With the same spelling of the surname who are assigned to this haplogroup
  • Who are members of a public DNA Group Project
  • Who have given permission for their information to be displayed publicly within the project

You can see that haplogroup A-V148 has one surname showing – Goddard.

Haplogroup A-M31 shows four: Bass, Johnson, Evans and Cruise.

Clicking on the three dots shows the Surname Report.

This report reveals that there are seven men with the Goddard surname and no other surnames are currently lissted for this haplogroup.

You might be a member of this haplogroup even if your surname isn’t Goddard. Surnames were only adopted in the past few hundred years, and many have changed during that time for a wide variety of reasons, including spelling variations. Not everyone who is in the matching database has joined a project, so they may show up on your match list, but not be visible here.

Since we know that several Goddard men are in some project, how do we figure out which project or projects they have joined?

Discover’s Suggested Projects

Go to Discover and enter the haplogroup. Click the big orange “Search” button, which will display the Haplogroup Story page for that haplogroup.  .

From the Discover menu at left, select “Suggested Projects”.

For haplogroup A-V148, 10 projects are listed based on which projects members of this haplogroup have joined or on project administrator settings. Those projects alone may provide ancestral hints. Many people, if not most, join multiple projects, such as haplogroup projects, surname projects, and geographic or ethnic projects.

You can click through to any of the projects listed for any haplogroup to take a look. I use my browser search function to search for specific surnames on project pages.

You may find that someone who descends from your ancestor has tested and is waiting for you to match them – plus other genealogical hints as well.

Is Your Surname in the Database?

How can you tell whether your surname is in the database? That’s a great question!

In the public tree, there’s a “Search by Surname” feature. I searched for Estes, and discovered that Estes appears on 8 different branches of haplogroup R. Next, I need to click on haplogroup R, which is directly beneath the search box.

This doesn’t mean there are only 8 men who have tested, but that they are found on 8 different tree branches.

Remember that men who obtain a Family Finder haplogroup are also included on the free Public Tree, so I’ll probably find some Estes men on higher branches of the tree than they would appear if they had taken a Big Y-700 DNA test. Hopefully, they will upgrade, which will help them and all Estes descendants by piecing together our Estes lineages.

Sure enough, using my browser search to search for “Estes”, I discovered the name included with 500 other surnames in haplogroup R-L21, in R-DF49, in R-1690, and then the goldmine – four haplogroups that have ONLY the surname Estes listed.

These are our Estes twigs on the haplotree’s branches, and define four lines that begin with Silvester Estes born in 1522 in Kent, England. These haplogroups are how we proved where our line originated, and how we place testers who are uncertain about their genealogy on their correct tree branches today.

Don’t forget about both the surname and country reports available to the right when searching by surname in the Public Tree. You can also navigate to Discover to learn more about any of these haplogroups in which your surname appears.

Iff you’re an Estes male, you may or may not land in one of these haplogroups. You might even be a member of a different lineage altogether. The only way you’ll know is to take the Big Y-700 test, or minimally, the introductory 37 and 111 marker tests to view your matches. These entry-level tests provide a predicted haplogroup based on STR markers, but you’ll only be placed in your proper place in the tree with the definitive Big Y-700 test. I wrote about the difference between STRs and SNPs here.

Obviously, Y-DNA is only applicable to biologically male testers who have a Y chromosome, and you’ll only see surnames on the tree if multiple people with that exact surname have tested and joined projects, but there’s one more place to look if you want to see how many people with your surname have tested at FamilyTreeDNA.

Group Projects Search

In the footer of every FamilyTreeDNA page, under Community, you’ll find “Group Projects.” No, I don’t know why they buried this tool here, because I find it very useful, and you’ll never find it if you don’t know where to look. But now you do!

Enter the surname you are seeking and click “Search.”

You’ll see at the bottom of the search results page that 391 people whose surname is spelled exactly “Estes” have taken a DNA test at FamilyTreeDNA.

Clearly, some will be males, and others female, and they may have:

  • Taken the autosomal Family Finder test
  • Uploaded an autosomal test from another vendor
  • Taken the mitochondrial DNA direct matrilineal test (your mother’s mother’s mother’s direct line through all females)
  • Taken a Y-DNA test (males only) for the direct patrilineal (surname) line

Lots of people in the database will be descended from Estes ancestors, but won’t carry the surname. This search is an invaluable resource for genealogists seeking their ancestors’ surnames and lineages. Check it out by entering the surnames of your four grandparents and see what’s there!

I use this search tool, combined with projects to find actual testers who represent my ancestral lines and their haplogroups. Then I search the public tree and use Discover to learn about my ancestors. Which brings me back to why this milestone is so important.

Congratulations on a HUGE Milestone for Mankind

The trip to 100,000 haplotree branches was a long and sometimes challenging road. What an amazing accomplishment! Today, the tree is growing at warp speed, but it began with “horses and buggies” in 2003.

  • In 2003, the YCC Consortium published a paper defining the structure of the Y-DNA tree which, then, consisted of 153 branches based only on 243 SNPs. That’s all that had been discovered in academia at the time. But citizen science was coming into its own and many more haplogroup discoveries would soon follow, thanks to our testing pioneers.
  • In 2006, ISOGG committed to developing and maintaining a public, manually curated haplotree based on SNPs discovered at different labs. The ISOGG tree was published annually, with the final version released in July 2020.
  • In 2006, there were about 250 branches on the Y-DNA tree and SNP discoveries were rare events. Today, with the Big Y-700, new SNP discoveries occur at the rate of several hundred per week, thanks to the testing public.
  • In 2010, the YCC consortium released its final tree that included only 440 branches.
  • In 2013, FamilyTreeDNA introduced the Big Y test, which used the newer NGS (next generation sequencing) scanning technique instead of targeting specific locations on the Y-chromosome. The Big Y-700 test scans millions of locations in the gold standard region of the Y chromosome. It reads known Y-DNA SNP locations for haplogroup placement, but also identifies mutations not previously discovered that are often lineage-specific. That’s the key to identifying new haplogroups. Haplogroups are literally named after their SNP.
  • 2018 was a banner year. There were 17,966 branches on the tree.
  • By 2018, the haplotree was benefiting from what was termed a “SNP tsunami,” which rapidly expanded the tree. In June, 2018, FamilyTreeDNA named their 100,000th SNP. That too was a huge milestone, which I wrote about, here. Not every SNP discovered becomes its own haplogroup, of course, but they all must be placed appropriately on the tree.
  • In September of 2018, FamilyTreeDNA introduced their Public Tree.
  • That avalanche of SNP discovery meant that the volunteer-maintained ISOGG tree was struggling mightily to keep up with the onslaught, publishing one final tree in 2020. The landscape had changed. A yearly, independent tree that compiled information from multiple sources was no longer necessary. Haplogroup and SNP discoveries were being made almost exclusively at FamilyTreeDNA, who publishes and maintains their Y-DNA tree organically as SNPs are discovered and added to the tree.
  • In December 2021, the FamilyTreeDNA Y-DNA haplotree reached 50,000 branches. I wrote about that milestone, here.
  • In just over four years, that has doubled at a rate of about about 1000 new branches per month. That’s mind-boggling!
  • On February 5, 2026, the haplotree reached 100,000 branches! I checked earlier today (Feb. 6th) and there are already 39 more haplogroups. No moss growing under their feet. They’ve reached for the treetops and gone beyond!

Reaching 100,000 branches on the Y-DNA tree is an absolutely amazing achievement, both scientifically and genealogically. Perhaps best of all, reconstructing the lineage and paths of our ancestors is the only way we can reach indefinitely back in time. Beyond surnames and far beyond what autosomal DNA can touch.

Based on that, we can add genetic anthropology to the fields that have benefited immensely from the achievements of the tree. Conversely, genetic anthropology has contributed to the construction of the tree with the sequencing of ancient DNA results, allowing thousands of ancient samples to be incorporated.

Every contemporary haplogroup descends from Y-DNA Adam. Given that Adam lived at least 234,000 years ago, that represents about 9,360 direct-line ancestors (at 25 years per generation) for each one of us. At 20 years per generation, we have 11,700. Wouldn’t Y-line Adam be utterly dumbstruck to learn that he has 8 billion descendants, of which slightly more than half are males who still carry his defining haplogroup mutation, A-PR2021!

Thanks to the FamilyTreeDNA public Y-DNA tree and searches, plus the amazing Discover tools, we can now peel back the curtain of time on both recent and distant ancestors by walking our haplogroups back one at a time until we meet our earliest ancestor of all – Adam

Want to Meet Adam? Here’s How You Can Participate

You can participate in building the Y-DNA tree of humankind and meet Adam by taking a Big Y-700 DNA test, which you can order here. If you’re a female, you can sponsor a Y-DNA test for a male relative, such as a father, uncle, or brother who represents one of your surname lines. But don’t stop with your own paternal line – reach out and make those same discoveries for all of your ancestral lines! Your ancestors are waiting to meet you!!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Getting Ready for RootsTech 2026

RootsTech, March 5-7, 2026, will be here before you know it. Behind the scenes, people are scurrying around like crazy!

Let’s take a peek!

You’d Think January Would Be Quiet…

January seems like it would be a quiet, “down” time, after the holidays, but for many of us, it’s not. It would seem like the holidays would be a time to relax and catch up, but I always get further behind and face a ton of emails in January. (I’m still very behind with those.)

No small part of my January issue is self-imposed, though not all of it.

Let me explain.

  • I’ve always strived for one industry or technical blog article each week. Something about a tool, a product, a how-to article, industry news, something useful and educational. I can’t write an article without using and understanding the tools, so these articles take a substantial amount of time to prepare.
  • I also strive for one “52 Ancestors” article each week, typically published on the weekend. While these articles reconstruct the lives of my ancestors, they include a great deal of genealogy research, instructional content, and a substantial amount of history that affected the lives of anyone who lived in that location or during that time. While the topic is my ancestor, these articles are useful far beyond my own genealogy.

As an aside, many people read these articles as a short-story series. Working on each article draws me close to each ancestor individually. I literally walk through their life beside them – joys, sorrows, deaths, where they lived, what was happening around them – birth to burial.

  • Of course, then there’s “everything else.” Other articles, interviews, my contractual work, collaborating with others, and of course, some smidgen of personal time.

January is Different

But the reason January is different, on steroids, is threefold:

  • It’s the month that speakers begin planning and preparing for sessions they will be giving during the rest of the year.
  • For US business owners, it’s when we begin gathering the information for business taxes, which are due March 15th, a week after RootsTech, which means that we have to get the information to our preparer long before RootsTech. I’m not exaggerating to say this is one of my LEAST favorite activities ever.
  • However, the third challenge is RootsTech itself.

RootsTech 2026

RootsTech, held March 5-7 this year in Salt Lake City, is the granddaddy of all genealogy conferences. I’m fortunate to be able to attend and present – and I’m grateful for that opportunity. But there’s a huge amount of prep, and while some of it happens in December, most of it falls in January.

I’m often asked about what it takes to create a presentation, or put more bluntly, “Why does it take so long? All you have to do is throw together a few Powerpoints.” So, here’s the backstory.

I can’t speak for other presenters, but every 45-minute presentation that I create takes about a week.

If you’re stunned, every one of my slides includes images and often graphics that I create. The slide content needs to be balanced, readable, and not distracting form the point I’m trying to make. It needs to flow smoothly from the prior slide, and to the next one.

It goes without saying that I have to verify everything, sometimes with a vendor, sometimes making sure features still work the way I think they do, or did, the logic is accurate, and that any math maths.

Many screenshots used for articles and presentations need to be blurred, and I need to be sure I don’t accidentally compromise someone’s privacy.

It seems there are 1000 little things. Ok, so maybe only 100!

Syllabus: Oh, you want a syllabus too? Well, that’s another document which often has to be formatted in a specific way, and must be between x and y pages long. Some requirements for different conferences are very specific, down to the font.

The presentation must “fit” into its allocated time, say, generally 45 or 50 minutes, without me talking at 150 MPH with the audience feeling rushed, and provide enough information to be both useful and entertaining. This means that presenters must practice, refine, practice. You get the drift.

Additionally, when working in a tech field, like DNA, vendors change things, often, and you need to review your presentation just before the conference to be sure the screenshots and information are still current. Speakers watch every announcement between presentation creation and the conference with an eye to changes. I swear, it never fails that the night before, I’m always trying to update my presentation because a vendor updated their website. One time it was literally at the podium. That was way too close for comfort.

RootsTech must manage and coordinate hundreds of presenters, their presentations and syllabi, lots of technology, and massive logistics. In order to do so:

  • Pre-recorded sessions are due to RootsTech at the end of December.
  • For other speakers, copies of their PowerPoint presentations and syllabi are due by January 25th so RootsTech can review, check for any issues, and make any last-minute changes. (Hint – you may not see another blog article for the next 10 days.)

All things considered, RootsTech does a great job, but last-minute schedule changes do occur, so be sure to check your planned schedule closer to and daily during RootsTech.

My 2026 RootsTech Sessions

Pre-Recorded Session:

  • X-DNA Basics for Genealogists, a recorded session that will be available in the FamilyTreeDNA virtual booth, which means that everyone will be able to watch. The great news is that the vendor booths and their contents will be visible in the Expo Hall, both in person and virtually, entirely free. You don’t need to register to attend RootsTech to view the vendor booths, but there’s no reason not to, because online registration is free.

Live-Streamed Session:

  • I’ll be presenting Mapping Maternal Connections: Where Science Meets Genealogy on the Updated mtDNA Tree of Humankind for FamilyTreeDNA as a member of the R&D team that developed the new Mitotree. This will be a fun session that explains why mitochondrial DNA matters, covers the latest update, and how the new Mitotree, along with Discover, provides genealogists with new tools to break through brick walls.

The date and time for this session have not yet been confirmed, so check the schedule moving forward.

You must register for RootsTech Online to access live-streamed sessions remotely. They are added to the RootsTech on-demand library for later viewing.

In-Person Sessions

I’m fortunate to have two in-person sessions this year. Neither are being live-streamed or recorded, so I hope to see you in person.

  • Mitochondrial DNA to Z: My Results Are Back, Now What? Everyone is excited when their DNA test results are back, but what do you do next? How do you use them most effectively? What do those numbers means and why are they important? If these questions sound familiar, this is just the class for you. We will take results, step-by-step through all of the reports and tools and help you interpret what they mean and how to use them for genealogy using a case study.

This session is currently scheduled on March 5th, at 4:30 PM, Mountain Time. Please see the Schedule Warning section below.

  • Y-DNA to Z: My Results Are Back, Now What? Would you like to understand how to use your Y-DNA results for genealogy? What do those numbers mean and why are they important? This is just the class for you. We will take Y-DNA results, including the Big Y-700, step-by-step through all of the reports and tools and help you interpret what they mean and how to use them for genealogy. We’ll close with “next steps”, so you have a plan to understand your own Y-DNA message, PLUS how to create a genetic tree to reveal the messages from your other ancestors too. Females don’t have a Y chromosome, but we have fathers, brothers and male family members to test.

This session is currently scheduled on March 6th, at 3 PM, Mountain Time. Please see the Schedule Warning below.

Schedule Warning!!

When viewing sessions on the RootsTech website, the date and time displayed on your computer is the date and time that the event occurs USING YOUR LOCAL TIME!! The RootsTech website uses the time on your computer and adjusts the RootsTech session time displayed to your local time.

That’s fine if you’re attending online, but it’s NOT fine if you’re trying to plan an in-person schedule around travel time and other commitments.

For example, here’s the time displayed for my Y-DNA session. You can see that it says 5 PM, which is GMT-5, and that’s the time where I live, not in Salt Lake City which, during RootsTech, is GMT-7.

This session is NOT available virtually, so anyone who wants to attend will need to do so in person in Salt Lake City. However, the local time, in Salt Lake City, that this session will be taking place is 3 PM, not 5 PM.

In prior years, when I’ve scheduled these sessions in my phone, I wound up having to go back and change the time of every session after arriving in SLC – so that just adds to the confusion. Check your phone after arriving to be sure your sessions are shown in their correct time slot.

One more possible glitch this year is that Salt Lake City time changes at 2 AM on the day following RootsTech. Be sure to factor this time difference into your schedule if you’re planning to fly on Sunday, March 8, the day after RootsTech.

Bottom line – when planning your RootsTech events, be sure to calculate the local time and not your system time, unless you’ll be attending virtually. Also, be sure to check your schedule often in case either schedule or room changes have been made.

Register

Be sure to register for RootsTech. Online is free, and in-person only costs $129 for a 3-day pass, which is a great value for everything that’s offered.

When you register for RootsTech, you’ll be able to use their complimentary conference schedule planning feature which is infinitely helpful. If you’re planning to attend any session, adding it to your RootsTech calendar helps RootsTech with room size planning – getting the right speakers in the right rooms to properly accommodate the audience size.

If you have more questions, here’s the RootsTech FAQ.

Personal Note

On a personal note, RootsTech isn’t just a conference, it’s a clan gathering, a homecoming for genealogists where we meet and mingle with other genealogists. Where we find cousins, both new and old. It’s a place to bask in the genealogy glow with our peeps and discuss historical events, new technology, old maps and common ancestors. It’s a reunion, a place of excited greetings and infinite hugs.

Me with Mags Gaulden in 2018

I know this sounds sappy, but it’s absolutely true. It’s the only place many of us see each other. We have a great deal of fun and cherish every minute!

Come make some priceless memories.

I hope to see you there!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Y-DNA Results at 20 Years: Answers, Lessons, Methods, and Workarounds

Our goal as genealogists is always to learn what we don’t know and reveal anything we should know.

I’m going to share the evolution of four tests, purchased exactly twenty years ago. I haven’t cherry-picked these, so you’re getting the raw story. Successes, challenges and regrets, plus a few hacks to help you out when you’ve hit a roadblock.

I’m also sharing how I work around some issues – like tests that haven’t been (and can’t be) upgraded to Big Y tests.

DNA testing has come a long way from an infant science two decades ago, when we were tentatively establishing a new industry – one that today has evolved into a staple for serious genealogists.

On New Year’s Eve, 2005, exactly 20 years ago, I was doing the same thing I was doing at midnight in 2025 – genealogy.

That was long before the days of social media and chat groups, so some of us geeky types were discussing our genealogy research on the now-obsoleted RootsWeb e-mail list.

I Was Planning for 2006 Travel

I realized that I was going to be traveling during 2006 and would be asking several men to take a Y-DNA test, so I should purchase several kits while they were still on sale.

Then I got a bit giddy when I realized that I could actually celebrate the New Year by making those purchases right at midnight.

And I did too – I hit it right on the dot.

I mean, for a genealogist, what better way to celebrate? Right?

What I didn’t know is that, quite by accident, I managed to score kit 50,000. That seemed like such a milestone!

And now, I can’t believe it’s been 20 years. How is that even possible?

After I went to bed in the wee hours of January 1, 2026, I decided I needed to check in on the kits I purchased on that fateful New Year’s Eve, 2005, and see how they are doing. What were my goals, aspirations and expectations? Did we accomplish them then? Have we now?

What has happened in the past twenty years?

Let’s take a look, beginning with kit 50,000.

Kit 50,000 – Mr. Miller

Mr. Miller is my mother’s second cousin, so the perfect person to represent our Miller line.

Goals and Questions:

  • Do we descend from Johann Michael Miller born in 1692 in Germany? At that time, we did not know his birth location, and only knew that the line was German. Later research would add two additional generations and place his grandfather, Heinsman Mueller in Schwarzenmatt, Switzerland before 1655.
  • Does the Elder Jacob Miller (born about 1710 in Germany), a Brethren minister, match the Johann Michael Miller line? They were both Brethren, clearly knew each other, and were found in some of the same locations. The answer is conclusively no; the lineages are not the same based on both STR and Big Y-700 tests.

2005 – 12-marker test – $99

  • Initial 2006 haplogroup – R-M269 – about 6,500 years old
  • 2025 haplogroup – R-BY56132 – about 350 years old, obtained via DNA match to another Miller tester

That a HUGE difference!

2006 matches – no Y-DNA matches.

Remember, this was early, with less than 50,000 results in the database, compared to just under 700,000 SNP-confirmed testers today, not to mention probably double many more STR-only testers.

Haplogroups for STR testers are predicted based on marker values and are not SNP tested or confirmed. The Big Y tests, SNP tests and SNP packs which are no longer available, and haplogroups assigned through Family Finder are SNP confirmed.

2025 matches – 2 (yes two) 12-marker matches, both Millers. At 25 markers, he has 7 matches, all Millers.

I created the Miller-Brethren Project in September 2006 for any Miller line that was of the Brethren faith, hoping to differentiate between families with the same names in the same place.

2009 – upgraded to 67 markers – $148

In 2009, I upgraded Mr. Miller to 67 markers and recruited two other Miller males from our believed line. They all matched at 25 markers and above, confirming the lineage to our ancestor, Johann Michael Miller/Mueller. Whew! That one was close, because there was a great deal of consternation and confusion about these lineages.

2011 – added Family Finder – $289

Mr. Miller’s haplogroup today, confirmed by Family Finder, is still same as his predicted R-M269 from his STR results. Unfortunately, the kit has never been upgraded to the Big Y test, and I desperately want our personal lineage haplogroup. However, all is not lost because he matches several males from the same lineage who have been assigned to haplogroup R-BY56132 through the Big Y-700 test.

Every haplogroup is publicly viewable in Discover, but testers can see additional information and features when they click through to Discover from their own account – including the Match Time Tree, Globetrekker, and more Ancient and Notable DNA Connections.

Discover provides an informative Haplogroup Story, an overview before viewing the dozen reports available in the left sidebar about that haplogroup’s history and lineage. You can take a look, here.

From Discover, we learn that the Miller haplogroup was born (or branches off from) its parent haplogroup about the year 1650 CE, so when the Millers were still living in either Switzerland or Germany. If we match males from either of those locations, they would probably match us upstream at R-BY115568. Their genealogy would certainly help our genealogy!

Ancient Connections, which are ancient DNA matches, extend beyond surnames, revealing connections to both the Yamnaya and Moros cultures and shared ancestry with Bronze Age Balkan burials.

Viewing the Ancient Connections tab, we learn that remains related to or upstream of our haplogroup were excavated in Albania, Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, the North Banat and Mokrin in Serbia, and Macedonia. The closest genetic connections are shown first.

New Goal: Would love to test and match with Mueller men from Steindwenden, Germany, Schwarzenmatt, Switzerland, or anyplace near either location.

Kit 49,999 – Mr. Estes

Goals and Questions:

  • Do we connect with the Abraham Estes (c1647-1720) lineage?
  • Was there more than one early colonial Estes line?
  • If so, were they related?
  • Did our line come from Kent, England?

2005 – 25-marker test – $150

2006 matches –  54 12-marker matches

2025 matches – 326 12-marker matches

2006 matches – 4 25-marker matches – one to a known cousin, two more to other Estes males

2025 matches – 30 25-marker matches, including several Estes men

Crucial – this tester matched an Eastes male who lived in Kent and whose ancestors never left. This confirmed our oral history and early research suggesting that Abraham Estes’s origins were in Kent.

  • Original 2006 haplogroup – R-M269 – about 6.500 years old
  • Current Haplogroup – R-L151 – about 5,000 years old, SNP confirmed from the Family Finder test
  • Match Haplogroup – R-ZS3700 – about 250 years old obtained from STR match to multiple Big Y testers who shares same ancestor

In 2012, we added the Family Finder test for $199, which answered questions about whether multiple half-siblings were actually descended from a close relative of the tester. Family Finder also allowed people descended from this line, but who don’t carry the Estes Y-DNA to confirm their relationship to the Estes family.

This tester has not upgraded to the Big Y-700, but does match at the STR level with those who have taken that test.

Today, the Eastes male from Kent who subsequently upgraded to the Big Y-700 forms the base of the Estes family genetic tree, and others in the American lines form descendant branches based on the Big Y-700 test!

This includes some men whose genealogy we can’t yet connect vis the paper trail, such as kit 491887, shown in lavender below, but we know where he connects genetically. We were able to place him due to his Big Y-700 test results.

Thanks to the man from Kent whose results appear in the pink column, we know that both the Massachusetts and the Virginia immigrants descend from the Estes line in Kent, based on haplogroup R-BY490.

The Massachusetts line carries only R-BY482, so R-BY490 occurred in the generation between Robert b 1555 and Sylvester b 1600. Because the descendant of Sylvester’s brother Robert, born in 1603, does NOT carry the BY490 SNP, so we know exactly where and when it was introduced.

In Abraham’s lineage, two additional branches have been discovered. R-ZS3700, and within that haplogroup, R-BY154784.

All of this structure was built beginning with kit 9,993, followed by 49,999 (for my line), which is not shown in the chart above because there is no Big Y test, but whose STRs do match with kit 9,993, our very first Estes male to test.

Discover shows that R-ZS3700, the defining haplogroup of the Moses Estes lineage, kit 9,993, was born about 1750, which is within the genetic range of about 1600 to about 1820. Moses Estes, the man in whom this SNP originated, was actually born in 1711. The genetic tree closely matches the genealogy tree.

Ancient Connections reveals that we share distant ancestors from about 4400 years ago with Iron Age burials in Scotland, Cambridgeshire, Denmark, Dorset, Cornwall, Bedfordshire, Oxfordshire, Yorkshire, and Iceland. In other words, the Estes lineage has been in England for a very, very long time.

One of the upstream parent haplogroups, R-S252, dating from about 4500 years ago, was found in an Anglo-Saxon burial at Cliff’s End Farm, a mortuary and ritual Bronze Age site in Kent, England.

Cliffsend is only about 10 miles from Deal, where many Estes family records are found, and about 5 miles from Sandwich where Abraham Estes, the immigrant, was a weaver, next to the village of Worth, where he was married in 1672.

Kit 49,998 – Mr. Moore

Goals and Questions:

  • I was desperate to test a male from my Moore family in Halifax County, VA, and was very fortunate to locate Mr. Moore when I visited in person. I had to work on his genealogy, but once I was able to connect him, he was excited to test.
  • Could we connect our line with other Virginia lines, or eliminate them from consideration?

2005 -12 marker test – $99

2006 matches – 37 12-marker matches, two of whom were Moore men. One was a man I believed to be from my James Moore and William Moore line, and one we suspected, but really didn’t know. Many records from that time period are missing, and people were moving to the next frontier, with no connection to where they came from.

Mr. Moore’s matches, combined with his genealogy, confirmed what we thought we knew, but we still needed more.

  • Original 2006 haplogroup – J-M172 – about 28,000 years old
  • Current Haplogroup – J-M241 – about 8,600 years old, obtained from Family Finder
  • Match Haplogroup – J-Z631 – about 2,950 years old, obtained from matches to other Moore men who took the Family Finder test
  • Big Y Match Haplogroup – J-BY136349 – about 1,300 years old, obtained from a 111-marker Moore match to a non-Moore man who has taken a Big Y test

In 2012, we added Family Finder for $199, which provided invaluable matches to known Moore lineage family members, including Mr. Estes, kit 49,999. That makes perfect sense, since they are 4C1R.

2025 matches – 276 12-marker matches, of which five are Moore men, none of whom have taken the Big Y-DNA test.

One Moore match, who has not responded to emails, shows his paternal Moore ancestor as having been born in Scotland.

Three of Mr. Moore’s matches whose haplogroups were determined by Family Finder are J-Z631, which is closer to the present time than Mr. Moore’s haplogroup.

Why might that be?

Different autosomal DNA testing chips were used by different vendors at different times. Mr. Moore and the three other Moore men all took a Family Finder test at FamilyTreeDNA, but at different times when different chips were in use. That’s probably why the haplogroup assignment is different. The other reason could be that one of the SNP locations was missed in the autosomal DNA test. The haplogroup designation from the Family Finder test is a recent freebie, so was never actually intended to be a feature.

That’s all fine and dandy, but I STILL need a Moore Big Y tester to reveal more information about my line.

Workarounds for No Big Y Testers

Without a Big Y-700 Moore tester, is there something else we can try to obtain at least a somewhat more refined haplogroup?

Perhaps.

Without at least one Big Y-700 test, the next two things can do are:

  • Hope that someone has included at least some genealogy for you to follow.
  • One of the 111 marker matches will help by sharing if they have any Moore matches at that level. Remember, this kit, 49,998, only has 12 marker matches.

In this case, there is one match with a tree, but I hit the same genealogical brick wall that they did.

They, and now I am stuck with John Moore, born between 1851 and 1860, possibly in Sullivan County, TN. He was married to Mary, Polly, Mollie (take your pick based on the census and death certificates) Whitaker, who died between 1900 and 1910. John Moore died on September 25, 1936, in Sullivan County, TN, with several children and a brother named Bob Moore who lived in nearby Bristol listed in a brief obituary. I’m doing the “quick and dirty” tree thing, here, hoping to perhaps track his Moore back further than I have my own so we can connect – but so far – no cigar. I’m not finished yet, but this one is challenging. I’m always hopeful that I’ll find some hint about where James Moore (c1718-c1798) came from before Prince Edward and Amelia County, VA.

Eliminating Other Moore Lines

I certainly don’t have as much information as I want about my own Moore line, but I do have something. How can I use this to eliminate other potential Moore lines?

Checking the Moore Surname Project, I use the browser search and located the group of my James Moore testers.

These six men are candidates for Big Y upgrades.

I can also use the browser search to locate other groups of Moore men that have tested and I know we’re not related to.

For example, here’s another group of Moore men that we aren’t related but – but here’s the catch. This is the “other” James Moore that appears in Halifax County, and whose land is located right across the road from my James Moore. I kid you not. I could have SWORN these two Moore lines were the same, but they are not. This line track back to Thomas Moore born in 1720 and who married Mary Farrar. Using genealogy and projects, combined with what we do know, we can eliminate many possibilties.

Ok, let’s set genealogy aside for a minute.

Working With Alternative Haplogroups

What else can we do if we cannot upgrade either our tester or convince other Moore men to upgrade to the Big Y-700?

If a tester has higher level STR matches, meaning 67 or 111, and they match anyone with a Big Y-700 test, they will likely be in the same area of the genetic tree, but probably not the same branch, and possibly not within hundreds to the low thousands of years. This approach is an extremely poor substitute for the Big Y test and should never be used unless there is absolutely no other alternative. Think of it as sitting proxy at home, watching the Jumbotron on your TV, versus sitting behind home plate in the ballpark. It will do if you have no other choice.

That said, let’s see what we have. Our Moore Family Finder SNP is J-Z631, which is about 2,950 years old.

Our J-Z631 haplogroup story shows that the majority are found in Germany, followed by England, and the Ancient Connections are associated with the Roman era in the Balkans and Sicily. Burials from that era were found in Rome, Montenegro, Hungary, Poland, Serbia, Croatia, and Trapani, Italy.

Next, let’s look at one of the Moore men’s 111 matches, who has been assigned the Big Y-700 haplogroup of J-BY136349.

This is quite interesting, because this haplogroup has few testers, but the Ancient Connections are found in some of the same locations.

Next question – how are these two haplogroups related? Let’s see, using Discover’s Compare feature.

Wow, I didn’t expect to discover that J-BY136349 (111 marker match to a non-Moore man) is a descendant of J-Z631 (Moore haplogroup from Family Finder) and is about 2,200 years closer to the present time. Our Moore men, if we can ever find a Big Y-700 tester, will likely be someplace near J-BY136349.

Goals:

  • To upgrade at least one of Mr. Moore’s matches to the Big Y-700, and for some new Moore male to match so we can figure out which Virginia line, and which European line our Moore family descends from.
  • To break through the John Moore brick wall in Sullivan County, TN to see if we can track that lineage further back in time – informing us of our Moore line.

Kit 49,994 – Mr. Speaks

Goals and Questions:

  • To find and test any Speak/Speaks tester for our line.
  • Were the two Thomas Speaks in Maryland in the 1700s related?
  • Were various Speaks lines, by various spellings, throughout the country, related?
  • Where did we “come from?”

Twenty years ago, we had no Speaks males to test until Joyce, one of our long-time genealogy experts, located one man. She visited him and explained why his DNA was important. I provided a scholarship, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Not long after, another Speaks man tested, but did not match our original tester. Everyone was shocked. No one expected that result, and it only confused matters even more.

We needed tie-breakers, meaning other men from both of the known sons of immigrant, Thomas Speake (1633-1681).

At this point, we had far more questions than answers.

The Speaks Family Association had a whole list of questions, in part due to a lack of early records in Maryland, combined with burned southern states in later generations. That list was growing, not shrinking.

How many Speaks lines were there anyway? Had we stumbled across a descendants from the “other” Thomas Speaks in Maryland? I can’t answer that question now, and the answer is no, we had not accidentally found the other Thomas. That Thomas’s will and estate shows he had no sons other than a son Thomas who is not our Thomas, based on the fact that he died before his father. That also means there are no males from his line to test. You can read more, here, if you’re interested.

Did men with the surname Speak, Speaks and similar spellings all descend from the same Maryland line? Apparently not, or maybe not, based on those early results.

Could we determine through which men various testers descend?

At that time, we didn’t even dream that we’d be able to obtain Y-DNA from various men in the Lancashire villages where we thought our line might have originated. That was still years in the future. Our big breakthrough came after a Speaks man from New Zealand tested, and knew the name of the Lancashire village, Gisburn, where his grandfather was born. Working with local historical societies in England, we made that trip happen in 2014 and learned even more about differing Speaks lines.

In other words, in 2005, we were starting from scratch with pockets of men in various locations across the US who shared the same or similar surnames.

2005 – 25-marker – $150

  • Initial haplogroup – I-M170 – about 28,000 years old
  • Current 2025 haplogroup – I-FTA13986 – about 250 years old, obtained from a Big Y test

2014 – 111-marker upgrade – $184

2024 – Family Finder and the Big Y

2006 matches – Mr. Speaks had no 12 or 25-marker matches, which was discouraging. In fact, Mr. Speaks wouldn’t have any matches until the Family Association began actively recruiting testers a few years later. As it turns out, the Speaks family line has a rather unique DNA signature.

Today, Mr. Speak has 61 12-marker matches, and 54 25-marker matches, but it’s his Big Y results that confirm his placement in the tree as a descendant of John Speake the Innkeeper, son of Thomas Speake the immigrant.

Initially, we did the best we could, placing people in the tree based on STR results, but STRs did not provide the granularity we needed to define lines conclusively. STR mutations tend to back-mutate and aren’t always reliable.

Fast forward to January 2026.

The Speaks DNA project now has 48 Y-DNA testers, of which 32 fall into the Lancashire Speaks line we were seeking.

The Speak Family Association funded several Big Y-700 tests and upgrades for critical men in known lines.

Additionally, we’ve finally placed the elusive Aaron Lucky Speaks line, found in North Carolina, without any connecting documents back to Maryland. DNA connected him!

We’ve also eliminated several lines that were possibly connected to the Lancashire/Maryland line, thanks to DNA testing.

The Speak Family DNA Project Time Tree shows the Big Y testers with their self-identified earliest known ancestors (EKA) placed on branches of the genetic Time Tree.

Shifting to Discover, we see that Lancashire SNP, I-BY14004, which defines our Speak line, is associated with Medieval Britain, the early Slavs, and a historical Romanian culture.

Checking Ancient Connections, our ancestors are associated with burials from Yorkshire, Croatia, Romania, Denmark, Italy, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, and more, dating from about 4500 years ago.

Today, if a Speak/Speaks male takes a Big Y-700 test, we can assign his location in the tree very closely, and can tell him definitively which lines he does not descend from.

The Speaks project also welcomes all Speaks descendants, from any line, who have taken or uploaded autosomal DNA tests.

Regrets

Yes, I have regrets – learned in the school of hard knocks.

  1. My largest regret is that I didn’t test all of “my” kits at the highest level possible initially.
  2. My second regret is that I didn’t reach out to matches much earlier (when they still might answer) to inquire about genealogy and offer scholarships for upgrades. My testers need someone from that same line to match at the Big Y level. In some cases, I need that person to upgrade because my tester cannot. The longer you wait, the less likely you’ll receive a response.

Many tests, especially early tests, cannot be upgraded for various reasons:

  • Deceased tester
  • Lost the ability to contact the tester – obsolete or bounced email
  • Tester does not want to upgrade or does not reply to emails
  • Last vial available was already used and tester cannot provide another
  • Last vial was tested and failed

Solutions

  • Buy the most advanced test immediately. I literally have a kit available at all times.
  • Upgrade to the newest relevant tests as soon as they are introduced. In this case, that would be the Big Y-700 today and the Family Finder when it was introduced.
  • If the tester is deceased and you can contact the family, after offering condolences, ask for brothers, sons, or nephews who would be willing to retest.
  • Offer DNA testing scholarships either personally, through family associations, or through surname projects.
  • Request extra vials be sent to the tester so they can be returned and stored for future use.

There’s one more thing you need to do too.

Permissions

Testers can grant various forms of permission to other people, which allows their tests to be upgraded later. One man even sent me an affidavit stating I could do so after he died. Today, that’s not necessary because FamilyTreeDNA provides a Beneficiary service.

Permissions can be granted under the tester’s Account Settings.

  • Ask the tester to designate a Beneficiary which can be a Group Project Administrator. That means any person who is a group project administrator of a project the tester belongs to, after they are deceased.
  • Ask the tester to assign a Kit Manager who literally manages their kit on their behalf.

Under Project Preferences, project members can grant Advanced Access to individual project administrators by name. Advanced Access provides the ability for that specific administrator to act on behalf of the tester, including ordering upgrades and additional tests, so long as the administrator pays for them, which they often do with project funds.

Looking Back

I have absolutely no regrets about purchasing any of the tests I’ve bought over the years.

I look at it this way – if someone told me that a book about my ancestral line was in a library, and it held the undisputed truth about that one line – I’d spend far more than what I’ve spent on any one DNA test to obtain it. There’s simply no other way to conclusively unravel direct paternal vines, both within a genealogical timeframe, and before.

I want to know everything. Not just since the advent of surnames, but where my ancestors came from before that, and before that, and before that. I want to read about the culture and history of the land where my ancestors lived. What did they survive to travel to the next frontier? And where was that next frontier, and when?

Their own Y-DNA, passed down to their direct male descendants holds those secrets, just waiting to be revealed.

What’s Next?

  • Check your own and any Y-DNA tests that you sponsor or manage to see how they’re doing and what’s new.
  • Check surname projects at FamilyTreeDNA, here, to see if your ancestral surnames are represented any other information, similar to my Moore line.
  • Check your ancestor at WikiTree to see if anyone has entered a haplogroup for that ancestor, which tells you that someone has tested. The haplogroup may not be current, but it gives you a connection and someplace to start.
  • Check your autosomal matches at FamilyTreeDNA and any other vendor to see if you match surnames of interest. If the match is male, reach out and see if they descend from your line, and if they haven’t taken a Y-DNA test, would they be willing. If your match is female, reach out to see if it’s your line, and if so, if they know of males who have tested or would be willing.
  • If you’re a male and have not yet tested your Y-DNA, by all means, order that test now, by clicking here! Then make sure to join your surname project!

Is there something new and wonderful waiting for you?

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research