Category Archives: Genetic Genealogy

Y-DNA Haplogroup O – When and How Did It Get to the Americas?

Posted on by
10

Y-DNA Haplogroup O has been found in male testers descended from a Native American ancestor, or in Native American tribes in the Americas – but sometimes things are more complex than they seem. The story of when and how haplogroup O arrived in the Americas is fascinating – and not at all what you might think.

Introduction

The concept of Native American heritage and indigenous people can be confusing. For example, European Y-DNA haplogroup R is found among some Native American men. Those men may be tribal members based on their mother’s line, or their haplogroup R European Y-DNA may have been introduced either through adoption practices or traders after the arrival of Europeans.

There is unquestionable genetic evidence that the origin of Haplogroup R in the Americas was through colonization, with no evidence of pre-contact indigenous origins.

Y-DNA testing and matching, specifically the Big Y-700 test, with its ability to date the formation of haplogroups very granularly, has successfully identified the genesis of Y-DNA haplogroups and their movement through time.

We’ve spent years trying to unravel several instances of Native American Y-DNA Haplogroup O and their origins. Native American, in this context, means that men with haplogroup O are confirmed to be Native American at some point in documented records. This could include early records, such as court or probate records, or present-day members of tribes. There is no question that these men are recognized as Native American in post-contact records or are tribal members, or their descendants.

What has not been clear is how and when haplogroup O entered the Native American population of these various lineages, groups, or tribes. In other words, are they indigenous? Were they here from the earliest times, before the arrival of colonists, similar to Y-DNA haplogroups C and Q?

This topic has been of great interest for several years, and we have been waiting for additional information to elucidate the matter, which could manifest in several ways:

  1. Ancient pre-contact DNA samples of haplogroup O in the Americas, but none have been found.
  2. Current haplogroup O testers in Native American peoples across the North and South American continents, forming a connecting trail genetically, geographically, and linearly through time. This has not occurred.
  3. Big-Y DNA matches within the Americas between Haplogroup O Native American lines unrelated in a genealogical timeframe whose haplogroup formation pre-dates European contact. This has not occurred.
  4. Big-Y DNA matches between Haplogroup O men whose haplogroups were formed in the Americas after the Beringian migration and expansion that scientists agree occurred at least 12-16K years ago, and possibly began earlier. Earlier human lineages, if they existed, may not have survived. A later Inuit and Na-Dené speaker circumpolar migration occurred 4-7K years ago. This has not occurred.
  5. Big-Y DNA matches with men whose most recent common ancestor haplogroup formation dates connect them with continental populations in other locations, outside of North and South America. This would preclude their presence in the Americas after the migrations that populated the Americas. This has occurred.

The Beringian migration took place across a now-submerged land bridge connecting the Chutkin Peninsula in Russia across the Bering Strait with the Seward Peninsula in Alaska.

By Erika Tamm et al – Tamm E, Kivisild T, Reidla M, Metspalu M, Smith DG, et al. (2007) Beringian Standstill and Spread of Native American Founders. PLoS ONE 2(9): e829. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000829. Also available from PubMed Central., CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16975303

Haplogroup O is clearly Native American in some instances, meaning that it occurs in men who are members of or descend from specific Native American tribes or peoples. One man, James Revels, is confirmed in court records as early as 1656. However, ancestors of James Revels fall into category #5, as their upstream parental haplogroup is found in the Pacific islands outside the Americas after the migration period.

Based on available evidence, the introduction of haplogroup O appears to be post-contact. Therefore, haplogroup O is not indigenous to the Americans in the same sense as haplogroups Q and C that are found widespread throughout the Americas in current testers who are tribal members, descendants of tribal members, and pre-contact ancient DNA as mapped in the book, DNA for Native American Genealogy.

Ancient DNA

Haplogroup C is found in both North and South America today, as are these ancient DNA locations.

Haplogroup Q is more prevalent than Haplogroup C, and ancient DNA remains are found throughout North and South America before colonization.

No ancient DNA for Haplogroup O has been discovered in the Americas. We do find contemporary haplogroup O testers in regional clusters, which we will analyze individually.

Let’s take a look at what we have learned recently.

Wesley Revels’ Lineage

Wesley Revels was the initial Y-DNA tester whose results identified Haplogroup O as Native American, proven by a court record. That documentation was critical, and we are very grateful to Wesley for sharing both his information and results.

Wesley’s ancestor, James Revels, was Native American, born about 1656 and bound to European planter, Edward Revell. James was proven in court to be an Accomack “Indian boy” from “Matomkin,” age 11 in 1667. James was bound, not enslaved, until age 24, at which time he was to be freed and receive corn and clothes.

James had died by 1681 when he was named several times in the Accomack County records as both “James, an Indian” and “James Revell, Indian,” in reference to his estate. James lived near Edward Revell, his greatest creditor and, therefore, administrator of his estate, and interacted with other Indian people near Great Matompkin Neck. Marie Rundquist did an excellent job of documenting that here. Additional information about the Revels family and Matomkin region can be found here.

The location where Edward Revell lived, Manokin Hundred, was on the water directly adjacent the Great Matomkin (now Folly Creek) and Little Matomkin Creeks, inside the Metomkin Inlet. The very early date tells us that James Revels’s paternal ancestor was in the colonies by 1656 and probably born about 1636, or perhaps earlier.

Lewis and Revels men are later associated with the Lumbee Tribe, now found in Robeson and neighboring counties in North Carolina. The Lewis line descends from the Revels lineage, as documented by Marie and Wesley. Other men from this line have tested and match on lower-level STR markers, but have not taken the much more granular and informative Big-Y test.

Until recently, the men who matched Wesley Revels closely on the Big-Y test were connected with the Revels line and/or the Lumbee.

Wesley has a 37-marker STR match to a man with a different surname who had not tested beyond that level, in addition to several 12-marker STR matches to men from various locations. Men who provided known ancestral or current locations include one from Bahrain, two from the Philippines, and three from China. Those men have not taken the Big-Y, and their haplogroups are all predicted from STR results to O-M175 which was formed in Asia about 31,000 years ago.

12-marker matches can reach thousands of years back in time. Unless the matches share ancestors and match at higher levels, 12-marker matches are only useful for geographic history, if that. The Big Y-700 test refines haplogroup results and ages from 10s of thousands of years to (generally) within a genealogically relevant timeframe, often within a couple hundred years.

One of Wesley’s STR matches, Mr. Luo, has taken a Big Y-700 test. Mr. Luo descends directly from Indonesia in the current generation and is haplogroup O-CTS716, originating about 244 BCE, or 2244-ish years ago. Mr. Luo does not match Wesley on the Big-Y test, meaning that Wesley and Mr. Luo have 30 or more SNP differences in their Big-Y results, which equates to about 1,500 years. The common ancestor of Wesley Revels and Mr. Luo existed more than 1,500 years ago in Indonesia. It’s evident that Mr. Luo is not Native American, but his location is relevant in a broader analysis.

There is no question that Wesley’s ancestor, James Revels, was Native American based on the court evidence. There is also no question that the Revels’ paternal lineage was not in the Americas with the Native American migration group 12-16K years ago.

The remaining question is how and when James Revels’ haplogroup O ancestor came to be found on the Atlantic seaboard in the early/mid 1600s, only a few years after the founding of Jamestown.

The results of other Haplogroup O men may help answer this question.

Mr. Lynn

Another haplogroup O man, Mr. Lynn, matches Wesley on STR markers, but not on the Big-Y test.

Mr. Lynn identified his Y-DNA line as Native American, although he did not post detailed genealogy. More specifically, we don’t know if Mr. Lynn identified that he was Native on his paternal line because he matches Wesley, or if the Native history information was passed down within his family, or from genealogical research. Mr. Lynn could also have meant generally that he was Native, or that he was Native “on Dad’s side,” not specifically his direct patrilineal Y-line.

Based on Mr. Lynn’s stated Earliest Known Ancestor (EKA) and additional genealogical research performed, his ancestor was John Wesley Lynn (born approximately 1861, died 1945), whose father was Victor Lynn. John’s death certificate, census, and his family photos on Ancestry indicate that he was African American. According to his death certificate, his father, Victor Lynn, was born in Chatham Co., NC, just west of Durham.

Family members are found in Baldwin Township, shown above.

I did not locate the family in either the 1860 or 1870 census. In 1860, the only Lynn/Linn family in Chatham County was 50-year-old Mary Linn and 17-year-old Jane, living with her, presumably a daughter. Both are listed as “mulatto” (historical term) with the occupation of “domestic.” They may or may not be related to John Wesley Lynn.

In 1870, the only Linn/Lynn in Chatham County is John, black, age 12 or 13 (so born in 1857 or 1858), farm labor, living with a white family. This is probably not John Wesley Lynn given that he is found with his mother in 1880 and the ages don’t match.

In 1880. I find Mary Lynn in Chatham County, age 48, single, black, with daughter Eliza Anne, 20, mulatto, sons John Wesley, 14 so born about 1866, and Charles 12, both black. Additionally, she is living with her nieces and nephews, Cephus, black, 12, Lizzie, 7, mulatto, Malcom, 4, mulatto, William H, 3, mulatto (I think, written over,) and John age 4, mulatto. The children aged 12 and above are farm labor.

In 1880, I also find Jack Lynn, age 28, black, married with 3 children, living beside William Lynn, 25, also married, but with no children.

Trying to find the family in 1870 by using first name searches only, I find no black Mary in 1870 or a mulatto Mary with a child named Jack or any person named Cephus by any surname. I don’t find Jack or any Lynn/Linn family in Chatham County.

The 1890 census does not exist.

In the 1900 census, I find Wesley Lynn in Chatham County, born in January of 1863, age 37, single, a boarder working on the farm of John Harris who lives beside Jack Lynn, age 43, born in April of 1857. Both Lynn men are black. I would assume some connection, given their ages, possibly or probably brothers.

In 1940, John Wesley Lynn, age 74, negro (historical term), is living beside Victor Lynn, age 37, most likely his son.

I could not find Victor Lynn, John Wesley Lynn’s father in any census, so he was likely deceased before 1880 but after 1867, given that Mary’s son Charles Lynn was born in 1868, assuming Mary’s children had the same father. The fact that Mary was listed as single, not married nor widowed suggests enslavement, given that enslaved people were prohibited from legally marrying.

About the only other assumption we can make about Victor Sr. is that he was probably born about 1832 or earlier, probably in Chatham County, NC based on John Wesley’s death certificate, and he was likely enslaved.

Subclades of Haplogroup O

Both the Revels and Lynn men are subclades of haplogroup O and both claim Native heritage – Wesley based on the Revels genealogy and court documents, and Mr. Lynn based on the Native category he selected to represent his earliest known paternal ancestor at FamilyTreeDNA.

Both men have joined various projects, including the American Indian Project, which provides Marie and me, along with our other project co-administrators, the ability to work with and view both of their results at the level they have selected.

How Closely Related Are These Haplogroup O Men?

How closely related are these two men?

By Viajes_de_colon.svg: Phirosiberiaderivative work: Phirosiberia (talk) – Viajes_de_colon.svg, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=8849049

  • Do the haplogroups of the Revels men and Mr. Lynn converge in a common ancestor in a timeframe BEFORE colonialization, meaning before Columbus “discovered” the Caribbean islands when colonization and the slave trade both began?
  • Do the haplogroups converge on North or South American soil or elsewhere?
  • Is there anything in the haplogroup and Time Tree information that precludes haplogroup O from being Native prior to the era of colonization?
  • Is there anything that confirms that a haplogroup O male or males were among the groups of indigenous people that settled the Americas sometime between 12 and 26 thousand years ago? Or even a later panArctic or circumpolar migration wave?

Haplogroup O is well known in East Asia, Indonesia, and the South Pacific.

Another potential source of haplogroup O is via Madagascar and the slave trade.

The Malagasy Roots Project has several haplogroup O individuals, including the Lynn and Revels men, who may have joined to see if they have matches. We don’t know why the various haplogroup O men in the project joined. Other haplogroup O men in the project may or may not have proven Malagasay heritage.

Information provided by the project administrators is as follows:

The people of Madagascar have a fascinating history embedded in their DNA. 17 known slave ships came from Madagascar to North America during the Transatlantic Slave Trade. As a result, we find Malagasy DNA in the African American descendants of enslaved people, often of Southeast Asian origin. One of the goals of this project is to discover the Malagasy roots of African Americans and connect them with their cousins from Madagascar. Please join us in this fascinating endeavor. mtDNA Haplogroups of interest include: B4a1a1b – the “Malagasy Motif”, M23, M7c3c, F3b1, R9 and others Y-DNA Haplogroups include: O1a2 – M50, O2a1 – M95/M88, O3a2c – P164 and others

Resources:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987306/  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1199379/  http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=19535740  http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/15/77  http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/10/605

The Malagasy group only has one other man who is haplogroup O and took the Big-Y test, producing haplogroup O-FTC77008. Of course, we don’t know if he has confirmed Madagascar ancestry, and his haplogroup is quite distant from both Revels and Lynn in terms of when his haplogroup was formed.

Viewing the Malagasy Project’s Group Time Tree, above, the common ancestor between those three men lived about 28K BCE, or 30,000 years ago.

Haplogroup O Project Group Time Tree

The Haplogroup O Project Time Tree provides a better representation of haplogroup O in general given that it has a much wider range of samples.

On this tree, I’ve labeled the haplogroup formation dates, along with the Revels/Lewis line which descends from O-FT45548. This haplogroup includes one additional group member whose surname is locked, as he hasn’t given publication permission. The haplogroup formation date of 1766 occurs approximately 85 years after James Revel’s birth, so is attributable to some, but not all of his descendants. At least one descendant falls into the older Haplogroup O-BY60500.

The common ancestor of all three, meaning Revels, Lewis, and the man whose name is locked and does not know his genealogy, is haplogroup O-BY60500, born about 1741.

Their ancestral haplogroup before that, O-FT11768, is much older.

Two Filipino results are shown on and descending from the parent branch of O-FT11768, formed about 3183 BCE, or about 5183 years ago. This tells us that the ancestors of all these men were in the same place, most likely the Philippines, at that time.

3183 BCE (5180 years ago) is well after the Native American migration into the Americas.

Discover Time Tree

Obviously, not every tester joins a project, so now I’m switching to the Discover Time Tree which includes all Y-DNA haplogroup branches. Their common haplogroup, O-FT11768, has many branches, not all of which are shown below. I’m summarized unseen branch locations at bottom left.

Expanding the Time Tree further to view all of the descendant haplogroups of O-FT11768, we see that this was a major branch with many South Pacific results, including the branch of O-FT22410, bracketed in red, which has three members.

One is Mr. Lynn whose feather indicates Native American as his EKA country selection, one is a man whose ancestor is from Singapore, and one is an unknown individual who did not enter his ancestor’s country of origin.

Geography

Wesley’s STR match list, which can reflect matches further back in time than the Big-Y test, includes islands near Singapore. This geography aligns with what is known about haplogroup O.

The distance between this Asian region and continental America, 9000+ miles distant by air, is remarkable and clearly only navigable at that time by ship, meaning ships with experienced crew, able to navigate long distances with supplies and water.

We know that in 760 CE, about 1240 years ago, Mr. Lynn’s haplogroup O-F24410 was formed someplace in the South Pacific – probably in Malaysia or a nearby island. This region, including the Philippines, is home to many haplogroup O men. The majority of haplogroup O is found in Asia, the South Pacific, and Diaspora regions.

We know that Hawaii was populated by Polynesian people about 1600 years ago, prior to the age of colonization. Hawaii is almost 7000 miles from Singapore.

Here’s the challenge. How did these haplogroup O men get from the South Pacific to Virginia? Mr. Lynn and the Singapore tester share a common ancestor about 1240 years ago, or 760 CE.

There is no known or theorized Native American settlement wave across Beringia as late as 760 CE. We know that the parent haplogroup was someplace near Singapore in approximately 760 CE.

Two Filipino men and the Revels’ ancestors were in the same location in the Pacific Islands 5180 years ago. How did they arrive on the Eastern Shore in Virginia, found in the Native population, either in or before 1656 when James Revels was born?

What happened in the 3500 years between those dates that might explain how James Revel’s ancestor made that journey?

Academic Papers

In recent years, there has been discussion of possible shoreline migration routes along the Russian coast, Island hopping along Alaska, Canada, and what is now the US, known as the Kelp Highway or Coastal Migration Route – but that has yet to be proven.

Even if that is the case, and it’s certainly a possibility, how did this particular group of men get from the Pacific across the continent to the Atlantic shore in such a short time, leaving no telltale signs along the way? The Coastal Migration Theory hypothesis states that this migration occurred from 12-16 thousand years ago, and then expanded inland over the next 3-5K years. They could not have expanded eastward until the glaciers receded. Regardless, the parent haplogroup and associated ancestors are still found in the Philippines and South Pacific 5000 years ago – after that migration and expansion had already occurred.

The conclusion of the paper is that there is no strong evidence for a Pacific shoreline migration. Regardless, that’s still thousands of years before the time range we’re observing.

We know that the Lynn ancestor was with men from Indonesia in 760 CE, and the Revels ancestor was with men from the Pacific Islands, probably the Philippines, 5180 years ago. They couldn’t have been in two places at the same time, so the ancestors of Revels and Lynn were not in the Americas then.

A 2020 paper shows that remains from Easter Island (Rapa Nui) show Native American DNA, and suggests that initial contact occurred between the two cultures about 1200 CE, or about 800 years ago, but there is not yet any pre-contact or post-contact ancient Y-DNA found in the Americas that shows Polynesian DNA. Furthermore, the hypothesis is that the DNA found on Easter Island came from the Americas, not vice versa. The jury is still out, but this does show that trans-Pacific contact between the two cultures was taking place 800 years ago, at least two hundred years pre-European contact.

Australasian migration to South America is also suggested by one set of remains found in Brazil dating from more than 9000 years ago, but there have been no other remains found indicating this heritage, either in Brazil, or elsewhere in the Americas.

Based on the Time Tree dates of the Haplogroup O testers in our samples, we know they were in the Islands of Southeast Asia after this time period. Additionally, there are no Australia/New Zealand matches.

The Spanish

The Spanish established an early trade route between Manila and Acapulco beginning in 1565. Consequently, east Asian men left their genetic signature in Mexico, as described in this paper.

Historians estimate that 40-129K immigrants arrived from Manilla to colonial Mexico between 1565 and 1815, with most being enslaved upon arrival. Approximately one-third of the population in Manilla was already enslaved. Unfortunately, this paper focused only on autosomal genome-wide results and did not include either Y-DNA, nor mitochondrial. However, the paper quantifies the high degree of trade, and indicates that the Philippines and other Asian population haplotypes are still prevalent in the Mexican population.

In 2016, Dr. Miguel Vilar, the lead scientist with the National Geographic Genographic project lectured in Guam about the surprising Native American DNA found in the Guam population and nearby islands. He kindly provided this link to an article about the event.

Guam was colonized by Spain. In the image from the Boxer Codex, above, the local Chamorro people greet the Manila Galleon in the Ladrones Islands, as the Marianas were called by the Spanish, about 1590.

Native Hawaiians descend from Polynesian ancestors who arrived in the islands about 400 CE, or about 1600 years ago. Captain Cook, began the age of European contact in Hawaii in 1778.

Five Possibilities

There are five possible origins of haplogroup O in the Americas.

  • Traditional migration across Beringia with the known migrations, estimated to have occurred about 12-16K years ago.
  • A Kelp Highway Coastal Migration which may have occurred about 12-16K years ago and dispersed over the next 3-5K years.
  • Circumpolar migration – specifically Inuit and Na-Dene speakers, about 4-6K years ago.
  • Post-contact incorporation from the Pacific Islands resulting from shipping trade on colonial era ships sometime after 1565.
  • Post-contact incorporation from Madagascar resulting from the importation of humans who may or may not have been enslaved upon arrival.

Do we have any additional evidence?

Other Haplogroup O DNA

From my book, DNA for Native American Genealogy:

Testers in haplogroup O-BY60500 and subclade O-FT45548 have proven Native American heritage.

We have multiple confirmed men from a common ancestor who is proven to be an enslaved Accomack “Indian boy,” James Revell, born in 1656, “belonging to the Motomkin” village, according to the Accomack County, Virginia court records. These men tested as members of haplogroup O-F3288 initially, after taking the Big Y-500 test. However, upgrading to the Big Y-700 produced more granular results and branches reflecting mutations that occurred since their progenitor was born in 1656.

Unfortunately, other than known descendants, these men have few close Y-DNA or Big Y-700 matches.

Without additional men testing from different unrelated lines, or ancient haplogroup O being discovered, we cannot confirm that this haplogroup O male’s ancestor was not introduced into the Matomkin Tribe in some way post-contact. Today, one descendant from this line is a member of the Lumbee Tribe.

However, that isn’t the end of the haplogroup O story.

The Genographic Project data shows one Haplogroup O Tlingit tribal member from Taku, Alaska, along with several testers from Mexico that indicate their paternal line is indigenous. Some people from Texas identify their paternal line as Hispanic.

Another individual indicates they were born on the Fountain Indian Reserve, in British Columbia and speaks the St’at’imcets language, an interior branch of Coastal Salish.

Haplogroup O has been identified as Native American in other locations as well.

Much of the information about Haplogroup O testers was courtesy of the Genographic Project, meaning we can’t contact those people to request upgraded tests, and we can’t obtain additional information in addition to what they provided when they tested. As an affiliate researcher, I’m very grateful to the National Geographic Society’s Genographic project for providing collaborative data.

When the book was published, the Discover Time Tree had not yet been released. We have additional information available today, including the dates of haplogroup formation.

FamilyTreeDNA Haplotree and Discover

The FamilyTreeDNA Haplotree (not to be confused with the Discover Time Tree) shows 10 people at the O-M175 level in Mexico, 10 people in the US report Native American heritage, 2 in Jamaica, and one each in Peru, Panama, and Cuba. There’s also one tester from Madagascar.

Altogether, this gives us about 35 haplogroup O males in the Americas, several with Native heritage.

Please note that I’ve omitted Hawaii in this analysis and included only North and South America. The one individual selecting Native Hawaiian (Kanaka Maoli) is in haplogroup O-M133.

Let’s look at our three distinct clusters.

Cluster 1 – Pacific Northwest – Alaska and Canada

We have a cluster of three individuals along the Pacific Coast in Alaska and Canada who have self-identified as Native, provided a tribal affiliation, and, in some cases, the spoken language.

How might haplogroup O have arrived in or near Vancouver, Washington? We know that James Cook “discovered” Hawaii in 1778, naming it the Sandwich Islands. By 1787, a female Hawaiian died en route to the Pacific Northwest, and the following year, a male arrived. Hawaii had become a provisioning stop, and the Spanish took Hawaiians onto ships as replacement workers.

Hawaiian seamen, whalers, and laborers began intermarrying with the Native people along the West Coast as early as 1811. Their presence expanded from Oregon to Alaska. Migration and intermarriage along the Pacific coast began slowly, but turned into a steady stream 30 years later when we have confirmed recruitment and migration of Hawaiian people

In 1839, John Sutter recruited a small group of 10 Hawaiians to travel with him to the then-Mexican colony of Alta, California.

By the mid-1800s, hundreds of Hawaiians lived in Canada and California. In 1847, it was reported that 10% of San Francisco’s residents were Hawaiian. Some of those people integrated with the Native American people, particularly the Miwok and Maidu. The village of Verona, California was tri-lingual: Hawaiian, a Native language, and English, and is today the Sacramento-Verona Tribe.

This article provides a history of the British Company who administered Fort Vancouver, near Vancouver, Washington, that included French-Canadians, Native Americans and Hawaiians. In 1845, 119 Hawaiians were employed at the fort. One of the 119, Opunuia, had signed on as an “engagé,” meaning some type of hired hand or employee, with the Hudson Bay Company for three years, after which he would be free to return home to Honolulu or establish himself in the Oregon Country. He married a woman from the Cascade Tribe.

The descendants of the Hawaiian men and Native women were considered tribal members. In most tribes, children took the tribal status and affiliation of the mother.

The Taku and Sitka, Alaska men on the map are Tlingit, and the man from British Columbia is from the Fountain Indian Reserve.

Hawaiian recruitment is the most likely scenario by which haplogroup O arrived in the tribes of the Pacific Northwest. In that sense, haplogroup O is indeed Native American but not indigenous to that region. The origins of haplogorup O in the Pacific Northwest are likely found in Hawaii, where it is indigenous, and before that, Polynesia – not due to a Beringian crossing.

Cluster 2 – Mexico

We find a particularly interesting small cluster of 4 haplogroup O individuals in interior Mexico.

In the 1500s, Spain established a trade route between Mexico and Manilla in the Philippines.

In 1564, four ships left Mexico to cross the Pacific to claim Guam and the Philippines for King Philip II of Spain. The spice trade, back and forth between Mexico and the Philippines began the following year and continued for the next 250.

Landings occurred along the California coast and the western Mexican coastline. The majority of the galleon crews were Malaysian and Filipino who were paid less than the Spanish sailors. Slaves, including people from the Marianas were part of the lucrative cargo.

One individual in Texas reports haplogroup O and indicates their paternal ancestors were Hispanic/Native from Mexico. A haplogroup O cluster claiming Native heritage is found near Zacatecas, Fresnillo and San Luis Potosi in central Mexico. Additionally, mitochondrial haplogroup F, also Asian, is found there as well. Acapulco is the lime green pin.

An additional haplogroup O tester with Native heritage is found in Lima, Peru.

Haplogroup O men are found in Panama, Jamaica and Cuba, but do not indicate the heritage of their paternal ancestral line. None of these men have taken Big-Y tests, and some may well have arrived on the slave ships from Madagascar, especially in the Caribbean. This source attributes some enslaved people in Jamaica to Hawaiian voyages.

I strongly suspect that the Mexican/Peru grouping in close proximity to the Pacific coastline is the result of the Manilla-Mexico 250-year trade route. The Spanish also plied those waters regularly. Big Y testing of those men would help flesh-out their stories – when and how haplogroup O arrived in the local population.

Cluster 3 – East Coast

At first glance, the East Coast grouping of men with a genetic affinity to the people of the Philippines and Indonesia seems more difficult to explain, but perhaps not.

On the East Coast, we have confirmed reports of whalers near Nantucket as early as 1765 utilizing crewmen from Hawaii, known then as the Sandwich Islands, Tahiti, and the Cape Verde Islands off of Africa. A thorough review of early literature might well reveal additional information about early connections with the Sandwich Islands, and in particular, sailors, crew, or enslaved people.

The Spanish and French were the first to colonize the Philippines by the late 1500s. They had discovered the Solomon Islands, Melanesia, and other Polynesian Islands, and by the early 1600s, the Dutch were involved as well.

The Encyclopedia Britanica further reports that Vasco Balboa first sailed into the Pacific in 1513 and seven years later, Ferdinand Magellan rounded the tip of South America. The Spanish followed, establishing a galley trade between Manila, in the Philippines and Acapulco in western Mexico.

While I found nothing specific stating that the earliest voyages brought men from the Philippines and Oceania back to their European home ports with them, we know that early European captains on exploratory voyages took Native people from the east coast of the Americas on their return journey, so there’s nothing to preclude them from doing the same from the Pacific. The early explorers stayed for months among the Oceanic Native peoples. If they were short on sailors for their return voyage, Polynesian men filled the void.

We know that the Spanish took slaves as part of their trade. We know that the ships in the Pacific took sailors from the islands. If the men themselves didn’t stay in the locations they visited, it’s certainly within the realm of possibility that they fathered children with local, Native women. Furthermore, given that the slave trade was lucrative, it’s also possible that some Pacific Island slaves were taken not as crew but with the intention of being sold into bondage. Other men may have escaped the ships and hidden among the Native Tribes along the eastern seaboard.

Fishing in Newfoundland and exploration in what would become the US was occurring by 1500, so it’s certainly possible that some of the indigenous people from Indonesia and the Philippines were either stranded, sold to enslavers, escaped, or chose to join the Native people along the coastline in North America. Ships had to stop to resupply rations and take on fresh water.

We know that by the mid-1600s, James Revels, whose father carried haplogroup O, had been born on the Atlantic coast of Virginia or Maryland, probably on the Delmarva Peninsula, short for Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, where the Accomac people lived.

There are other instances of haplogroup O found along the east coast.

On the eastern portion of the haplogroup O map from the book, DNA for Native American Genealogy, we find the following locations:

  • Hillburn, NY – man identified as “Native American Black.”
  • Chichester County, PA – Genographic tester identified the location of his earliest known ancestor – included here because O is not typically found in the states.
  • Accomack County, VA – Delmarva peninsula – James Revels lineage
  • Robeson County, NC – Lewis and Revels surname associated with the Lumbee
  • Chatham County, NC – Lynn ancestor’s earliest known location
  • Greene County, NC – enslaved Blount ancestor’s EKA in 1849

The genesis of Mr. Blount’s enslaved ancestor is unclear. Fortunately, he took a Big Y-700 test.

Mr. Blount’s only Big-Y match is to a man from the United Arab Emirates (UAE), but the haplogroup history includes Thailand, which is the likely source of both his and his UAE matches’ ancestors at some point in time. Their common ancestor was in Thailand in 336 CE, almost 1700 years ago.

All surrounding branches of haplogroup O on the Time Tree have Asian testers, except for the one UAE gentleman.

The Blount Haplogroup O-FTC77008 does not connect with the common ancestral haplogroup of Lynn and Revels, so these lineages are only related someplace in Oceana prior to O-F265, or more about  30,000 years ago. Their only commonality other than their Asian origins is that they arrived on the East Coast of the Americas.

We know that the Spanish were exploring the Atlantic coastline in the 1500s and were attempting to establish colonies. In 1566, a Spanish expedition reached the Delmarva Peninsula. This spit of land was contested and changed hands several times, belonging variously to the Spanish, Dutch, and British by 1664.

Furthermore, we also know that the ships were utilizing slave labor. One of the Spanish ships wrecked in the waters off North Carolina near Hatteras or Roanoke Island before the Lost Colony was abandoned on Roanoke Island in 1587. The Croatan Indians reported that in memorable history, several men, some of whom were reported to be slaves, had survived the wreck and “disappeared” into the hinterlands – clearly running for their lives.

These men, if they survived, would have been incorporated into the Native population as there were no other settlements at the time. Variations of this scenario may have played out many times.

James Revels’ ancestor could have arrived on any ship, beginning with exploration and colonization in the early 1500s through the mid-1650s.

By the time the chief bound the Indian boy who was given the English name James to Edward Revell, James’s Oceanic paternal ancestor could have been 4, 5 or 6 generations in the past – or could have been his father.

The Accomack was a small tribe, loosely affiliated with the Powhatan Confederacy along the Eastern Shore. By 1700, their population had declined by approximately 90% due to disease. A subgroup, the Gingaskins, intermarried with African Americans living nearby. After Nat Turner’s slave rebellion of 1831, they were expelled from their homelands.

The swamps near Lumberton in Robeson County, NC, became a safe haven for many mixed-race Native, African, and European people. The swamps protected them, and they existed, more or less undisturbed, for decades. Revels and Lewis descendants are both found there.

Many Native Americans were permanently enslaved alongside African people – and within a generation or so, their descendants knew they were Native and African, but lost track of which ancestors descended from which groups. Life was extremely difficult back then. Generations were short, and enslaved people were moved from place to place and sold indiscriminately, severing their family ties entirely, including heritage stories.

Returning to the Discover Time Tree Maps

Wesley Revels has STR matches with several men from Indonesia, China, and the Philippines. It would be very helpful if those men would upgrade to the Big Y-700 so that we can more fully complete the haplogroup O branches of the Time Tree.

The common Revels/Lewis ancestor, accompanied by two descendant men on different genetic branches from the Philippines, was born about 5180 years ago. There is no evidence to suggest Haplogroup O-FT11768 was born anyplace other than in the Philippines.

How did the descendant haplogroups of O-FT45548 (Revels, Lewis, and an unnamed man) and O-F22410 (Lynn) arrive in Virginia or anyplace along the Atlantic seaboard?

Hawaii wasn’t settled until about 1600 years ago. We know Hawaiians integrated with the Pacific Coast Native tribes in the 1800s, but James Revels was in Virginia in 1656..

We know that the Spanish established a mid-1500s trade route between Manila and Acapulco, leaving their genetic signature in western Mexico.

None of these events fit the narrative for the Revels or the Lynn paternal ancestor.

Furthermore, the Revels and Lynn lines do not connect on North American soil, as both descend from the same parent haplogroup, O-FT11768, 5180 years ago in the Philippines. This location and history suggest a connection with the Spanish galleon trade era. The haplogroup formation clearly predates that trade, which means those men were still in the Philippines, not already living on the American continents. Therefore, the descendants of the haplogroup O-FT11768 arrived in Virginia and North Carolina sometime after that haplogroup formation 5100 years ago.

The Lynn ancestor connects with a man from Singapore in 760 CE, or just 1240 years ago. A descendant of haplogroup O-F22410 arrived in North Carolina sometime later.

It does not appear, at least not on the surface, that there is a connection through Madagascar, although we can’t rule that out without additional testers. If the connection is through Madagascar, then their ancestors were likely transported from Indonesia to Madagascar, then as enslaved people from Madagascar to the Atlantic colonies to be sold. However, James Revels was not enslaved. He was clearly Native and bound to a European plantation owner, who did, in fact, free him as agreed and subsequently loaned him money.

Based on the dates involved, and when we know they were in Oceania, an arrival along the west coast, followed by a quick migration across the country to a peninsula of land in the Atlantic, is probably the least likely scenario. There is also no historical or ancient haplogroup O DNA found anyplace between the west and east coasts, nor in the Inuit or Na-Dene speakers. The Navajo, who speak the Na-Dené language, migrated to the Southwest US around 1400 CE, but haplogroup O has not been found among Na-Dené speakers.

It’s a long way from Singapore and the Philippines to Madagascar, so while the coastal migration scenario is not impossible, it’s also not probable, especially given what we know about the Spanish Pacific trade that existed profitably for 250 years.

However, one haplogroup O subgroup arrived in the UAE by some methodology after 336 CE.

It’s entirely possible, indeed probable, that haplogroup O arrived in the Americas for various reasons, on different paths, in different timeframes.

Haplogroup O was found in people in the Americas after colonization had begun. There has been no ancient Haplogroup O DNA discovered, and there’s evidence indicating that these instances of haplogroup O could not have arrived in any of the known Beringia migrations nor the theorized Coastal or Kelp migration. We know the East Coast Cluster is not a result of the West Coast 19th-century migration because James Revels was in court one hundred and fifty years before the Hawaiians were living among the Native people along the Pacific coastline.

There’s nothing to indicate that the Mexican group that likely arrived beginning in the mid-1500s for the next 250 years as a result of the Indonesian trade route migrated to the east coast, or vice versa. That’s also highly unlikely.

The most likely scenario is that Mr. Lynn’s, Mr. Blount’s, and James Revels’ ancestors were brought on trade ships, either as sailors or enslaved men. They may not have stayed, simply visited. They may each have arrived in a completely different scenario, meaning Mr. Blount’s ancestors could have been enslaved arrivals from Madagascar, Mr. Lynn’s from Indonesia, and Mr. Revel’s as a crew member on a Spanish ship. We simply don’t know.

James Revels’ descendants were Native through his mother’s tribe, as confirmed in the 1667 court records. However, the Revels and Lynn lineages weren’t Native as a result of their paternal haplogroup O ancestors crossing Beringia into the Americas with Native American haplogroups Q and C. Instead, the Lynn and Revels migration story is quite different. Their ancestors arrived by ship. The journey was long, perilous, and far more unique than we could have imagined, taking them halfway around the world by water.

Timeline

There’s a lot of information to digest, so I’ve compiled a timeline incorporating both genetic and historical information for easy reference.

  • 30,000 years ago (28,000 BCE) – haplogroup O-F265, common Asian ancestor  of Mr. Blount, the Revels/Lewis group, Mr. Lynn, and an unknown Big-Y tester in the Malagasy group project
  • 12,000-16,000 years ago – Indigenous Americans arrived across now-submerged Beringia
  • 12,000-16,000 years ago – possible Coastal Migration route may have facilitated a secondary source of indigenous arrival along the Pacific coastline of the Americas
  • 4000-7000 years ago – circumpolar migration arrival of Inuit and Na-Dené speakers found in the Arctic polar region and the Navajo in the Southwest who migrated from Alaska/Canada about 1400 CE
  • 5180 years ago (3180 BCE) – haplogroup O-FT11768, the common ancestor of Mr. Lynn and the Revels/Lewis group with many subgroups in the Philippines, Hawaii, Singapore, Brunei, China, Sumatra, and Thailand
  • 2244 years ago (244 BCE) – haplogroup O-CTS716, the common ancestor of Wesley Revels and Mr. Luo from Indonesia
  • The year 336 CE, 1684 years ago – haplogroup O-FTC77008, the common ancestor of Mr. Blount, UAE tester and a man from Thailand
  • 400 CE, 1600 years ago  –  Hawaii populated by Polynesian people
  • 760 CE, 1240 years ago – haplogroup O-F22410, common ancestor of Mr. Lynn with a Singapore man
  • 1492 CE, 528 years ago – Columbus begins his voyages to the “New World,” arriving in the Caribbean
  • By 1504 CE – European fishing began off of Newfoundland
  • 1565 – Spain claimed Guam and the Philippines
  • 1565 – Spanish trade between Manilla and Acapulco begins and continues for 250 years, until 1815, using crews of men from Guam, the Philippines, and enslaved people from the Marianas.
  • 1565 – St. Augustine (Florida) was founded by the Spanish as a base for trade and conquest along the eastern seaboard
  • 1566 – A Spanish expedition reached the Delmarva peninsula intending to establish a colony, but bad weather thwarted that attempt.
  • 1585-1587 – voyages of discovery by the English and the Lost Colony on Roanoke Island, North Carolina
  • 1603 – English first explored the Delmarva Peninsula, home to the Accomac people, now Accomack County, VA, where James Revels’s court record was found in 1667
  • 1607 – Jamestown, Virginia, founded by the English
  • 1608 – Colonists first arrived on the Delmarva Peninsula and allied with Debedeavon, whom they called the “laughing King” of the Accomac people. At that time, the Accomac had 80 warriors. Debedeavon was a close friend to the colonists and saved them from a massacre in 1622. He died in 1657.
  • 1620 – The Mayflower arrived near present-day Provincetown, Massachusetts
  • 1631-1638 – Dutch West India Company established a colony on the Delmarva Peninsula, but after conflicts, it was destroyed by Native Americans in 1638. The Swede’s colony followed, and the region was under Dutch and Swedish control until it shifted to British control in 1664
  • 1656 – Birth of James Revels, confirmed in a 1667 court record stating that he was an Accomack “Indian boy” from “Matomkin,” judged to be age 11, bound to Edward Revell. This location is on the Delmarva Peninsula.
  • 1741 CE –  Haplogroup O-BY60500 formation date that includes all of the Revels and Lewis testers who descend from James Revels born in 1656
  • 1765 – Whalers near Nantucket using crewmen from Hawaii (Sandwich Islands), Tahiti, and the Cape Verde Islands off of Africa
  • 1766 CE – Formation date for haplogroup O-FT45548, child haplogroup of O-BY60500, for some of the Lewis and Revels men who all descend from James Revels born in 1656
  • 1778 – Captain Cook makes contact with Hawaiian people
  • 1787 – The first male arrived in the Pacific Northwest from Hawaii
  • 1811 – Hawaiian seamen begin intermarrying with Native American females along the Pacific shore, eventually expanding their presence from Oregon to Alaska
  • 1839 – John Suter recruits Hawaiian men to travel with him to California
  • 1845 – Hawaiians employed by Fort Vancouver, with some marrying Native American women

Conclusions

It’s without question that James Revels was Native American very early in the settlement of the Delmarva Peninsula, now Accomack County, Virginia, but his common ancestor with Filipino men 5100 years ago precludes his direct paternal ancestor’s presence in the Americas at that time. In other words, his Revel male ancestor did not arrive in the Beringian indigenous migration 12,000-16,000 years ago. His ancestor likely arrived post-contact, based on a combination of both historical and genetic evidence.

Haplogroup O is not found in the Arctic Inuit nor the Na-Dene speakers, precluding a connection with either group, and has never been found in ancient DNA in the Americas.

Haplogroup O in the Revels lineage is most likely connected with the Spanish galleon trade with the Philippines and the early Spanish attempts to colonize the Americas.

The source of Haplogroup O in the Pacific Northwest group is likely found in the recruitment of Hawaiian men in the early/mid-1800s.

The Mexican Haplogroup O group likely originated with the Manilla/Mexico Spanish galleon trade.

The source of the Blount Haplogroup O remains uncertain, other than to say it originated in Thailand thousands of years ago and is also found in the UAE. The common Blount, UAE, and Thailand ancestor’s haplogroup dates to 336 CE, so they were all likely in or near Thailand at that date, about 1687 years ago.

What’s Next?

Science continuously evolves, revealing new details as we learn more, often clarifying or shifting our knowledge. Before the Discover tool provided haplogroup ages based on tests from men around the world, we didn’t have the necessary haplogroup origin and age data to understand the genesis of haplogroup O in the Americas. Now, we do, but there is invariably more to learn.

New evidence is always welcome and builds our knowledge base. Haplogroup O ancient DNA findings would be especially relevant and could further refine what we know, depending on the location, dates of the remains, who they match, and historical context.

Additional Big Y-700 tests of haplogroup O men, especially those with known genealogy or ancestor location, including Madagascar, would be very beneficial and allow the haplogroup formation dates to be further refined.

If you are a male with haplogroup O, please consider upgrading to the Big Y-700 test, here.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

East Coast Genetic Genealogy Conference – In Person and Virtual – October 6-8, 2023

Posted on by
7

There’s a conference focused solely on genetic genealogy, and you’re invited!! Now that’s talking my language!!!

The second annual East Coast Genetic Genealogy Conference (ECGGC) will take place on October 6-8, 2023, at the Maritime Conference Center in Linthicum Heights, Maryland, just outside Baltimore.

This year’s conference is a hybrid affair, with both in-person and virtual speaker sessions and vendor booths.

The in-person conference includes lunch and costs $225, while the virtual conference is $175.

As the name suggests, this conference caters to genetic genealogists. The lineup includes wonderful speakers who I’m sure you’ll recognize, here. I can hardly wait to attend some of these sessions. The great news is that you really don’t have to pick and choose from the more than 40 sessions, because you can view recorded sessions after the conference.

Please note that while my session on Sunday at 11, Wringing Every Drop Out of Mitochondrial DNA, is listed as In-Person, it is not. Due to a change in plans, it’s virtual.

Be sure to check out the DNA Academy on Saturday evening from 6 to 8:30 PM. This event was quite popular last year.

Is there a presentation or a few that you’re particularly looking forward to?

Recorded sessions will be available until December 31st, so even if you can’t join us that weekend, or you’re on the other side of the world and the timing just doesn’t work, you don’t have to miss out. Often, in-person sessions aren’t recorded and available later, but at ECGGC, both in-person and virtual sessions will be recorded so you can watch any session through year-end. Thanks to the fine folks on the ECGGC conference committee for providing this benefit.

You can purchase a ticket, here.

This is a wonderful opportunity, and I hope to see you there.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Which DNA Test Should I Buy? And Why?

Posted on by
18

Which DNA test should I buy, and why?

I receive questions like this often. As a reminder, I don’t take private clients anymore, which means I don’t provide this type of individual consulting or advice. However, I’m doing the next best thing! In this article, I’m sharing the step-by-step process that I utilize to evaluate these questions so you can use the process too.

It’s important to know what questions to ask and how to evaluate each situation to arrive at the best answer for each person.

Here’s the question I received from someone I’ll call John. I’ve modified the wording slightly and changed the names for privacy.

I’m a male, and my mother was born in Charleston, SC. My maternal grandmother’s maiden name was Jones and a paternal surname was Davis. The family was supposed to have been Black, Dutch, Pennsylvania Dutch, and Scots-Irish…only once was I told I was 3/16 Indian, with Davis being 3/4 and Jones being full Indian.

Do I have enough reasonable information to buy a test, and which one?

Please note that it’s common for questions to arrive without all the information you need to provide a sound answer – so it’s up to you to ask those questions and obtain clarification.

Multiple Questions

There are actually multiple questions here, so let me parse this a bit.

  1. John never mentioned what his testing goal was.
  2. He also never exactly said how the paternal line of Davis was connected, so I’ve made an assumption. For educational purposes, it doesn’t matter because we’re going to walk through the evaluation process, which is the same regardless.
  3. John did not include a tree or a link to a tree, so I created a rudimentary tree to sort through this. I need the visuals and normally just sketch it out on paper quickly.
  4. Does John have enough information to purchase a test?
  5. If so, which test?

There is no “one size fits all” answer, so let’s discuss these one by one.

Easy Answers First

The answer to #4 is easy.

Anyone with any amount of information can purchase a DNA test. Adoptees do it all the time, and they have no prior information.

So, yes, John can purchase a test.

The more difficult question is which test, because that answer depends on John’s goals and whether he’s just looking for some quick information or really wants to delve into genealogy and learn. Neither approach is wrong.

Many people think they want a quick answer –  and then quickly figure out that they really want to know much more about their ancestors.

I wrote an article titled DNA Results – First Glances at Ethnicity and Matching for new testers, here.

Goals

Based on what John said, I’m going to presume his goals are probably:

  • To prove or disprove the family oral history of Black, Dutch, Pennsylvania Dutch (which is actually German,) Scots-Irish, and potentially Native American.
  • John didn’t mention actual genealogy, which would include DNA matches and trees, so we will count that as something John is interested in secondarily. However, he may need genealogy records to reach his primary goal.

If you’re thinking, “The process of answering this seemingly easy question is more complex than I thought,” you’d be right.

Ethnicity in General

It sounds like John is interested in ethnicity testing. Lots of people think that “the answer” will be found there – and sometimes they are right. Often not so much. It depends.

The great news is that John really doesn’t need any information at all to take an autosomal DNA test, and it doesn’t matter if the test-taker is male or female.

To calculate each tester’s ethnicity, every testing company compiles their own reference populations, and John will receive different results at each of the major companies. Each company updates their ethnicity results from time to time as well, and they will change.

Additionally, each company provides different tools for their customers.

The ethnicity results at different companies generally won’t match each other exactly, and sometimes the populations look quite different.

Normally, DNA from a specific ancestor can be found for at least 5 or 6 generations. Of course, that means their DNA, along with the DNA from all of your other ancestors is essentially combined in a communal genetic “pot” of your chromosomes, and the DNA testing company needs to sort it out and analyze your DNA for ethnicity.

DNA descended from ancestors, and their populations, further back in people’s trees may not be discerned at all using autosomal DNA tests.

A much more specific “ethnicity” can be obtained for both the Y-DNA line, which is a direct patrilineal line for men (blue arrow,) and the mitochondrial DNA line (pink arrows,) which is a direct matrilineal line for everyone, using those specific tests.

We will discuss both of those tests after we talk about the autosomal tests available from the four major genealogy DNA testing companies. All of these tools can and should be used together.

Let’s Start with Native American

Let’s evaluate the information that John provided.

John was told that he “was 3/16 Indian, with Davis being 3/4 and Jones being full Indian.”

We need to evaluate this part of his question slightly differently.

I discussed this in the article, Ancestral DNA Percentages – How Much of Them is in You?

First, we need to convert generations to 16ths.

You have two ancestors in your parent’s generation, four in your grandparents, and so forth. You have 16 great-great-grandparents. So, if John was 3/16th Native, then three of his great-great-grandparents would have been fully Native, or an equivalent percentage. In other words, six ancestors in that generation could have been half-Native. Based on what John said, they would have come from his mother’s side of the tree. John is fortunate to have that much information to work with.

He told us enough about his tree that we can evaluate the statement that he might be 3/16ths Native.

Here’s the tree I quickly assembled in a spreadsheet based on John’s information.

His father, at left, is not part of the equation based on the information John provided.

On his mother’s side, John said that Grandfather Davis is supposed to be three-quarters Native, which translates to 12/16ths. Please note that it would be extremely beneficial to find a Y-DNA tester from his Davis line, like one of his mother’s brothers, for example.

John said that his Grandmother Jones is supposed to be 100% Native, so 16/16ths.

Added together, those sum to 28/32, which reduces down to 14/16th or 7/8th for John’s mother.

John would have received half of his autosomal DNA from his mother and half from his non-Native father. That means that if John’s father is 100% non-Native, John would be half of 14/16ths or 7/16ths, so just shy of half Native.

Of course, we know that we don’t always receive exactly 50% of each of our ancestors’ DNA (except for our parents,) but we would expect to see something in the ballpark of 40-45% Native for John if his grandmother was 100% Native and his grandfather was 75%.

Using simple logic here, for John’s grandmother to be 100% Native, she would almost assuredly have been a registered tribal member, and the same if his grandfather was 75% Native. I would think that information would be readily available and well-known to the family – so I doubt that this percentage is accurate. It would be easy to check, though, on various census records during their lifetimes where they would likely have been recorded as “Indian.” They might have been in the special “Indian Census” taken and might be living on a reservation.

It should also be relatively easy to find their parents since all family members were listed every ten years in the US beginning with the 1850 census.

The simple answer is that if John’s grandparents had as much Native as reported, he would be more than 3/16th – so both of these factoids cannot simultaneously be accurate. But that does NOT mean neither is accurate.

John could be 7/8th or 40ish%, 3/16th or 18ish%, or some other percentage. Sometimes, where there is smoke, there is fire. And that seems to be the quandary John is seeking to resolve.

Would  Ethnicity/Population Tests Show This Much Native?

Any of the four major testing companies would show Native for someone whose percentage would be in the 40% or 18% ballpark.

The easiest ethnicities to tell apart from one another are continental-level populations. John also stated that he thinks he may also have Black ancestry, plus Dutch, Pennsylvania Dutch (German), and Scots-Irish. It’s certainly possible to verify that using genealogy, but what can DNA testing alone tell us?

How far back can we expect to find ethnicities descending from particular ancestors?

In this table, you can see at each generation how many ancestors you have in that generation, plus the percentage of DNA, on average, you would inherit from each ancestor.

All of the major DNA testing companies can potentially pick up small trace percentages, but they don’t always. Sometimes one company does, and another doesn’t. So, if John has one sixth-generation Native American ancestor, he would carry about 1.56% Native DNA, if any.

  • Sometimes a specific ethnicity is not found because, thanks to random recombination, you didn’t inherit any of that DNA from those ancestors. This is why testing your parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and siblings can be very important. They share your same ancestors and may have inherited DNA that you didn’t that’s very relevant to your search.
  • Sometimes it’s not found because the reference populations and algorithms at that testing company aren’t able to detect that population or identify it accurately, especially at trace levels. Every DNA testing company establishes their own reference populations and writes internal, proprietary ethnicity analysis algorithms.
  • Sometimes it’s not found because your ancestor wasn’t Native or from that specific population.
  • Sometimes it’s there, but your population is called something you don’t expect.

For example, you may find Scandinavian when your ancestor was from England or Ireland. The Vikings raided the British Isles, so while some small amount of Scandinavian is not what you expect, that doesn’t mean it‘s wrong. However, if all of your family is from England, it’s not reasonable to have entirely Scandinavian ethnicity results.

It’s also less likely as each generation passes by that the information about their origins gets handed down accurately to following generations. Most non-genealogists don’t know the names of their great-grandparents, let alone where their ancestors were from.

Using a 25-year average generation length, by the 4th generation, shown in the chart above, you have 16 ancestors who lived approximately 100 years before your parents were born, so someplace in the mid-1800s. It’s unlikely for oral history from that time to survive intact. It’s even less likely from a century years earlier, where in the 7th generation, you have 128 total ancestors.

The best way to validate the accuracy of your ethnicity estimates is by researching your genealogy. Of course, you need to take an ethnicity test, or two, in order to have results to validate.

Ethnicity has a lot more to offer than just percentages.

Best Autosomal Tests for Native Ethnicity

Based on my experience with people who have confirmed Native ancestry, the two best tests to detect Native American ethnicity, especially in smaller percentages, are both FamilyTreeDNA and 23andMe.

Click images to enlarge

In addition to percentages, both 23andMe and FamilyTreeDNA provide chromosome painting for ethnicity, along with segment information in download files. In other words, they literally paint your ethnicity results on your chromosomes.

They then provide you with a file with the “addresses” of those ethnicities on your chromosomes, which means you can figure out which ancestors contributed those ethnicity segments.

The person in the example above, a tester at FamilyTreeDNA, is highly admixed with ancestors from European regions, African regions and Native people from South America.

Trace amounts of Native American with a majority of European heritage would appear more like this.

You can use this information to paint your chromosome segments at DNAPainter, along with your matching segments to other testers where you can identify your common ancestors. This is why providing trees is critically important – DNA plus ancestor identification with our matches is how we confirm our ancestry.

This combination allows you to identify which Native (or another ethnicity) segments descended from which ancestors. I was able to determine which ancestor provided that pink Native American segment on chromosome 1 on my mother’s side.

I’ve provided instructions for painting ethnicity segments to identify their origins in specific ancestors, here.

Autosomal and Genealogy

You may have noticed that we’ve now drifted into the genealogy realm of autosomal DNA testing. Ethnicity is nice, but if you want to know who those segments came from, you’ll need:

  • Autosomal test matching to other people
  • To identify your common ancestor with as many matches as you can
  • To match at a company who provides you with segment information for each match
  • To work with DNAPainter, which is very easy

The great news is that you can do all of that using the autosomal tests you took for ethnicity, except at Ancestry who does not provide segment information.

Best Autosomal Test for Matching Other Testers

The best autosomal test for matching may be different for everyone. Let’s look at some of the differentiators and considerations.

If you’re basing a testing recommendation solely on database size, which will probably correlate to more matches, then the DNA testing vendors fall into this order:

If you’re basing that recommendation on the BEST, generally meaning the closest matches for you, there’s no way of knowing ahead of time. At each of the four DNA testing companies, I have very good matches who have not tested elsewhere. If I weren’t in all four databases, I would have missed many valuable matches.

If you’re basing that recommendation on which vendor began testing earliest, meaning they have many tests from people who are now deceased, so you won’t find their autosomal tests in other databases that don’t accept uploads, the recommended testing company order would be:

If you’re basing that recommendation on matches to people who live in other countries, the order would be:

Ancestry and 23andMe are very distant third/fourth because they did not sell widely outside the US initially and still don’t sell in as many countries as the others, meaning their testers’ geography is more limited. However, Ancestry is also prevalent in the UK.

If you’re basing that recommendation on segment information and advanced tools that allow you to triangulate and confirm your genetic link to specific ancestors, the order would be:

Ancestry does NOT provide any segment information.

If you’re basing that recommendation on unique tools provided by each vendor, every vendor has something very beneficial that the others don’t.

In other words, there’s really no clear-cut answer for which single autosomal DNA test to order. The real answer is to be sure you’re fishing in all the ponds. The fish are not the same. Unique people test at each of those companies daily who will never be found in the other databases.

Test at or upload your DNA to all four DNA testing companies, plus GEDmatch. Step-by-step instructions for downloading your raw data file and uploading it to the DNA testing companies who accept uploads can be found, here.

Test or Upload

Not all testing companies accept uploads of raw autosomal DNA data files from other companies. The good news is that some do, and it’s free to upload and receive matches.

Two major DNA testing companies DO NOT accept uploads from other companies. In other words, you have to test at that company:

Two testing companies DO accept uploads from the other three companies. Uploads and matching are free, and advanced features can be unlocked very cost effectively.

  • FamilyTreeDNA – free matching and $19 unlock for advanced features
  • MyHeritage – free matching and $29 unlock.for advanced features

I recommend testing at both 23andMe and Ancestry and uploading one of those files to both FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage, then purchasing the respective unlocks.

GEDmatch

GEDmatch is a third-party matching site, not a DNA testing company. Consider uploading to GEDmatch because you may find matches from Ancestry who have uploaded to GEDmatch, giving you access to matching segment information.

Other Types of DNA

John provided additional information that may prove to be VERY useful. Both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA can be tested as well and may prove to be more useful than autosomal to positively identify the origins of those two specific lines.

Let’s assume that John takes an autosomal test and discovers that indeed, the 3/16th Native estimate was close. 3/16th equates to about 18% Native which would mean that three of his 16 great-great-grandparents were Native.

John told us that his Grandmother Jones was supposed to be 100% Native.

At the great-great-grandparent level, John has 16 ancestors, so eight on his mother’s side, four from maternal grandmother Jones and four from his maternal grandfather Davis.

John carries the mitochondrial DNA of his mother (red boxes and arrows,) and her mother, through a direct line of females back in time. John also carries the Y-DNA of his father (dark blue box, at left above, and blue arrows below.)

Unlike autosomal DNA which is admixed in every generation, mitochondrial DNA (red arrows) is inherited from that direct matrilineal line ONLY and never combines with the DNA of the father. Mothers give their mitochondrial DNA to both sexes of their children, but men never contribute their mitochondrial DNA to offspring. Everyone has their mother’s mitochondrial DNA.

Because it never recombines with DNA from the father, so is never “watered down,” we can “see” much further back in time, even though we can’t yet identify those ancestors.

However, more importantly, in this situation, John can test his own mitochondrial DNA that he inherited from his mother, who inherited it from her mother, to view her direct matrilineal line.

John’s mitochondrial DNA haplogroup that will be assigned during testing tells us unquestionably whether or not his direct matrilineal ancestor was Native on her mother’s line, or not. If not, it may well tell us where that specific line originated.

You can view the countries around the world where Y-DNA haplogroups are found, here, and mitochondrial haplogroups, here.

If John’s mitochondrial DNA haplogroup is Native, that confirms that one specific line is Native. If he can find other testers in his various lines to test either their Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, John can determine if other ancestors were Native too. If not, those tests will reveal the origins of that line, separate from the rest of his genealogical lines.

Although John didn’t mention his father’s line, if he takes a Y-DNA test, especially at the Big Y-700 level, that will also reveal the origins of his direct paternal line. Y-DNA doesn’t combine with the other parent’s DNA either, so it reaches far back in time too.

Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA tests are laser-focused on one line each, and only one line. You don’t have to try to sort it out of the ethnicity “pot,” wondering which ancestor was or was not Native.

My Recommendation

When putting together a testing strategy, I recommend taking advantage of free uploads and inexpensive unlocks when possible.

  • To confirm Native American ancestry via ethnicity testing, I recommend testing at 23andMe and uploading to FamilyTreeDNA, then purchasing the $19 unlock. The free upload and $19 unlock are less expensive than testing there directly.
  • For matching, I recommend testing at Ancestry and uploading to MyHeritage, then unlocking the MyHeritage advanced features for $29, which is less expensive than retesting. Ancestry does not provide segment information, but MyHeritage (and the others) do.

At this point, John will have taken two DNA tests, but is now in all four databases, plus GEDmatch if he uploads there.

  • For genealogy research on John’s lines to determine whether or not his mother’s lines were Native, I recommend an Ancestry and a MyHeritage records subscription, plus using WikiTree, which is free.
  • To determine if John’s mother’s direct matrilineal female line was Native, I recommend that John order the mitochondrial DNA test at FamilyTreeDNA.
  • When ordering multiple tests, or uploading at FamilyTreeDNA, be sure to upload/order all of one person’s tests on the same DNA kit so that those results can be used in combination with each other.

Both males and females can take autosomal and mitochondrial DNA tests.

  • To discover what he doesn’t know about his direct paternal, meaning John’s surname line – I recommend the Big Y-700 test at FamilyTreeDNA.

Only males can take a Y-DNA test, so women would need to ask their father, brother, or paternal uncle, for example, to test their direct paternal line.

  • If John can find a male Davis from his mother’s line, I recommend that he purchase the Big Y-700 test at FamilyTreeDNA for that person, or check to see if someone from his Davis line may have already tested by viewing the Davis DNA Project. Like with mitochondrial DNA, the Y-DNA haplogroup will tell John the origins of his direct Davis male ancestor – plus matching of course. He will be able to determine if they were Native, and if not, discover the origins of the Davis line.
  • For assigning segments to ancestors and triangulating to confirm descent from a common ancestor, I recommend 23andMe, MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA and GEDmatch, paired with DNAPainter as a tool.

Shopping and Research List

Here are the tests and links recommended above:

More Than He Asked

I realize this answer is way more than John expected or even knew to ask. That’s because there is often no “one” or “one best” answer. There are many ways to approach the question after the goal is defined, and the first “answer” received may be a bit out of context.

For example, let’s say John has 2% Native ancestry and took a test at a vendor who didn’t detect it. John would believe he had none. But a different vendor might find that 2%. If it’s on his mother’s direct matrilineal line, mitochondrial DNA testing will confirm, or refute Native, beyond any doubt, regardless of autosomal ethnicity results – but only for that specific ancestral line.

Autosomal DNA can suggest Native across all your DNA, but Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA confirm it for each individual ancestor.

Even when autosomal testing does NOT show Native American, or African, for example, it’s certainly possible that it’s just too far back in time or has not been passed down during random recombination, but either Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA will unquestionably confirm (or refute) the ancestry in question if the right person is tested.

This is exactly why I attempt to find a cousin who descends appropriately from every ancestor and provide testing scholarships. It’s important to obtain Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA information for each ancestor.

Which Test Should I Order?

What steps will help you decide which test or tests to take?

  1. Define your testing goal.
  2. Determine if your Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA will help answer the question.
  3. Determine if you need to find ancestors another generation or two back in time to get the most benefit from DNA testing. In our example, if John discovered that both of his grandparents were enrolled tribal members, that’s huge, and the tribe might have additional information about his family.
  4. Subscribe to Ancestry and MyHeritage records collections as appropriate to perform genealogical research. Additional information not only provides context for your family, it also provides you with the ability to confirm or better understand your ethnicity results.
  5. Extend your tree so that you can obtain the best results from the three vendors who support trees; Ancestry, FamilyTreeDNA, and MyHeritage. All three use trees combined with DNA tests to provide you with additional information.
  6. Order 23andMe and Ancestry autosomal DNA tests.
  7. Either test at or upload one of those tests to MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA, and GEDmatch.
  8. If a male, order the Big Y-700 DNA test. Or, find a male from your ancestral line who has taken or will take that test. I always offer a testing scholarship and, of course, share the exciting results!
  9. Order a mitochondrial DNA test for yourself and for appropriately descended family members to represent other ancestors. Remember that your father (and his siblings) all carry your paternal grandmother’s mitochondrial DNA. That’s often a good place to start after testing your own DNA.
  10. If your parents or grandparents are alive, or aunts and uncles, test their autosomal DNA too. They are (at least) one generation closer to your ancestors than you are and will carry more of your ancestors’ DNA.
  11. Your siblings will carry some of your ancestors’ DNA that you do not, so test them too if both of your parents aren’t available for testing.

Enjoy!!!

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Comparing DNA Results – Different Tests at the Same Testing Company

Posted on by
28

Several people have asked about different tests at the same DNA testing company. They wondered if matching is affected, meaning whether your matches are different if you have two different tests at the same company. Specifically, they asked if you are better off purchasing a test AT a DNA testing vendor that allows uploads, rather than uploading a test from a different vendor. Does it make a difference to the tester or their matches? Do they have the same matches?

These are great questions, and the answer isn’t conclusive. It varies based on several factors.

Having multiple tests at the same DNA testing company can occur in three ways:

  • The same person tests twice at the same DNA testing company.
  • The same person tests once at the DNA testing company and uploads a test from a different testing company. Only two of the primary four DNA testing companies accept uploads from other vendors – FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage.
  • The same person uploads two different files from other DNA testing companies to the DNA testing company in question. For example, the DNA company could be FamilyTreeDNA and the two uploaded DNA files could be from either MyHeritage, 23andMe or Ancestry.

All DNA testing companies allow users to download their raw DNA data files. This enables the tester to upload their DNA file to the vendors who accept uploaded files. Both FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage provide matching for free, but advanced tools require a small unlock fee of $19 and $29, respectively.

Testing Company Accepts Uploads from Other Companies Download Upload Instructions
23andMe No Instructions here
Ancestry No Instructions here
FamilyTreeDNA Yes, some Instructions here
MyHeritage Yes, some Instructions here

I wrote about developing a DNA testing and transfer/upload strategy, here, and about which companies accept which tests, here.

Not all DNA files are created equal. Therefore, not all files from vendors are compatible with other vendors for various reasons.

Multiple Tests at the Same DNA Testing Company

I have at least two tests at each of the four major vendors. I did this for research purposes, meaning to write articles to share with you.

If you actually test twice at a vendor, meaning purchase two separate tests and take them yourself, you will have two test results at that testing company. At some companies, specifically 23andMe, if you purchase a new test through their “upgrade” procedure, you won’t have two tests, just the newer one.

However, if you’re testing at the DNA testing company, and also uploading, I generally don’t recommend more than one test at each vendor. All it really does is clog up people’s match lists with no or little additional benefit. At 23andMe, with their restrictions on the size of your match list, if everyone had two tests, the effective match limit would be half of their stated limit of about 1500 matches for earlier testers and about 5000 for current testers with subscriptions.

So, in essence, I’m telling you to “do as I say, not as I do.” We all have better things to do with our money rather pay for the same test twice. If you haven’t tested your Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, that’s much more beneficial than two autosomal tests at one vendor.

Chips and Chip Evolution

Before we begin the side-by-side comparison, let’s briefly discuss DNA testing chips and how they work.

Each DNA testing company purchases DNA processing equipment. Illumina is the big dog in this arena. Illumina defines the capacity and structure of each chip. In part, how the testing companies use that capacity, or space on each chip, is up to each company. This means that the different testing companies test many of the same autosomal DNA SNP locations, but not all of the same locations.

Furthermore, the individual testing companies can specify a number of “other” locations to be included on their chip, up to the chip maximum size limit. The testing companies who offer Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA haplogroups from autosomal tests use part of their chip array space for selected known haplogroup-defining SNP locations. This does NOT mean that Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA is autosomal, just that the testing company used part of their chip array space to target these SNPs in your genome. Of course, for your most refined haplogroup and Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA matching, you have to take those specific tests at FamilyTreeDNA .

This means that each testing company includes and reports many of the same, but also some different SNP locations when they scan your DNA.

In the lab, after your DNA is extracted from either your saliva or the cheek swab, it’s placed on this array chip which is then placed in the processing equipment.

There are several steps in processing your DNA. Each DNA location specified on the chip is scanned and read multiple times, and the results are recorded. The final output is the raw DNA results file that you see if/when you download your raw DNA file.

Here’s an example from my file. The RSID is the reference SNP cluster ID which is the naming convention used for specific SNPs. It’s not relevant to you, but it is to the lab, along with the chromosome number and position, which is in essence the address on the chromosome.

In the Result column, your file reports one nucleotide (T, A, C or G) that you inherited from each parent at each tested position. They are not listed in “parent order” because your DNA is not organized in that fashion. There’s no way for the lab to know which nucleotide came from which parent, unless they are the same, of course. You can read about nucleotides, here.

When you upload your raw DNA file to a different DNA testing company (vendor), they have to work with a file that isn’t entirely compatible with the files they generate, or the other files uploaded from other DNA testing companies.

In addition to dealing with different file formats and contents from multiple DNA vendors, companies change their own chips and file structure from time to time. In some cases, it’s a forced change by the chip manufacturer. Other times, the vendors want to include different locations or make improvements. For example, with 23andMe’s focus on health, they probably add new medically related SNP locations regularly. Regardless of why, some DNA files include locations not included in other files and are not 100% compatible.

Looking at the first few entries in my example file above, let’s say that the testing vendor included the first ten positions, but an uploaded file from another company did not. Or perhaps the chip changed, and a different version of the company’s own file contains different positions.

DNA testing companies have to “fill in the blanks” for compatibility, and they do this using a technique called imputation. Illumina forced their customers to adopt imputation in 2017 when they dropped the capacity of their chip. I was initially quite skeptical, but imputation has worked surprisingly well. Some of the matching differences you will see when comparing the results of two different DNA files is a result of imputation.

I wrote about imputation in an early article here. Please note the companies have fixed many issues with imputation and improved matching greatly, but the concepts and imputation processes still apply. The downloaded raw data files are your results BEFORE imputation, meaning that it’s up to any company where you upload to process your raw file in the same way they would process a file that they generated. A lot goes on behind the scenes when you upload a file to a DNA testing company.

At both 23andMe and Ancestry, you know that all of your matches tested there, meaning they did not upload a file from another testing company. You don’t know and can’t tell what chip was utilized when your matches tested. The only way to determine a chip testing version, aside from knowing the date or remembering the chip version from when you tested, is to look at the beginning of the raw data download file, although not all files contain that information.

Ok, now that you understand the landscape, let’s look at my results at each company.

23andMe

I tested twice at 23andMe on two different chip versions, V3 and V4, which tested some different locations of my DNA. Neither of these chips is the current version. I originally tested twice to evaluate the differences between the two test versions which you can read about, here.

23andMe named their ethnicity results Ancestry Composition.

They last updated my V3 test’s Ancestry Composition results on July 28, 2021.

The percentages are shown at left, and the country locations are highlighted at right for my 23andMe V3 test.

Click to enlarge any graphic

The 23andMe V4 test was also updated for the last time on July 28, 2021.

The ethnicity results differ substantially between the two chip versions, even though they were both updated on the same date.

In October of 2020, in an effort to “encourage” their customers to pay for a new test on their V5 chip, 23andMe announced that there would be no ethnicity updates on older tests. So, I really don’t know for sure when my tests were actually updated. Just note how different the results are. It’s also worth mentioning that 23andMe does not show trace amounts on their map, so even though my Indigenous American results were found, they aren’t displayed on the map.

Indigenous is, however, shown in yellow on their DNA Chromosome Painting.

No other testing company restricts updates, penalizing their customers who purchased earlier versions of tests.

Matches at 23andMe

23andMe limits your matches to about 1500 unless you have purchased the current test, including health AND pay for an annual $69 subscription which buys you about 5000 matches. I have not purchased this test.

Your number of actual matches displayed/retained is also affected by how many people you have communicated with, or at least initiated communications with. 23andMe does not roll those people off of your match list.

I have 1803 matches on both of my tests, meaning I’ve reached out to about 300 people who would have otherwise been removed from my match list. 23andMe retains your highest matches, deleting lower matches after you reach the maximum match threshold.

I’ve randomly evaluated several of the same matches at each vendor, at least five maternal and five paternal, separated by a blank row. I wanted to determine whether they match me on the same number of centimorgans, meaning the same amount of DNA, on both tests, and the same number of segments.

Match 23and Me V3 23and Me V4
Patricia 292 cM – 12 segments Same as V3
Joe 148 cM, 8 segments Same
Emily 73 cM, 4 segs 72 cM, 4 seg
Roland 27 cM, 1 seg Same
Ian 62 cM, 4 seg Same
Stacy 469 cM, 16 segments 482 cM, 16 segments
Harold 134 cM, 6 segments Same
Dean 69 cM, 3 seg Same
Carl 95 cM, 4 seg Same
Debbie 83 cM, 4 seg 84 cM, 4 seg

As you can see, the matches are either exact or xclose.

Please note that bolded matches are also found at another company. I will include a summary table at the end comparing the same match across multiple vendors.

23and Me Summary

The 23andMe V3 and V4 match results are very close. Since the match limit is the same, and the results are so close between tests, they are essentially identical in terms of matching.

The ethnicity results are similar, but the V4 test reflects a broader region. Italian baffles me in both versions.

Ethnicity should never be taken at face value at any DNA testing company, especially with smaller percentages which could be noise or a combination of other regions which just happens to resemble Italy, in my case.

I don’t know what type of comparison the current chip would yield since I suspect it has more medical and less genealogical SNPs on board.

Reprocessing Tests

This is probably a good place to note that it’s very expensive for any company to update their customer’s ethnicity results because every single customer’s DNA results file must be completely rerun. Note that this does not mean their DNA itself is retested. The output raw data file is reprocessed using a new algorithm.

Rerunning means reprocessing that specific portion of every test, meaning the vendors must rent “time in the cloud.” We are talking millions of dollars for each run. I don’t know how much it costs per test, but think about the expense if it takes $1 to rerun each test in the vendor’s database. Ancestry has more than 20 million tests.

While we, as consumers, are always chomping at the bit for new and better ethnicity results – the testing companies need to be sure it really is “better,” not just different before they invest the money to reprocess and update results.

This is probably why 23andMe decided to cease updating older kits. The newer tests require a subscription which is recurring revenue.

The same is true when DNA testing companies need to rematch their entire user base. This happens when the criteria for matching changes. For example, Ancestry purged a large number of matches for all of their customers back in 2020. While match algorithm changes necessitate rematching, with associated costs, this change also provided Ancestry with the huge benefit of eliminating approximately half of their customer’s matches. This freed up storage space, either physically in their data center or space rented in the cloud, representing substantial cost-savings.

How long can a DNA testing company reasonably be expected to continue investing in a product which never generates additional revenue but for which the maintenance and reinvestment costs never end?

Ancestry and MyHeritage both hope to offset the expenses of maintaining their customer’s DNA tests and providing free updates by selling subscriptions to their record services. 23andMe wants you to purchase a new test and a yearly subscription. FamilyTreeDNA wants you to purchase a Big Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA test.

OK, now let’s look at my matches at Ancestry.

Ancestry

I’ve taken two Ancestry tests, V1 and V2. There were some differences, which I wrote about here and here. V2 is no longer the current chip.

Except for 23andMe who wants their customers to purchase their most current test, the other companies no longer routinely announce new chip versions. They just go about their business. The only way you know that a vendor actually changed something is when the other companies who accept uploads suddenly encounter an issue with file formats. It always takes a few weeks to sort that out.

My Ancestry V1 test’s ethnicity results don’t show my Native American ethnicity.

Ancestry results were updated in June 2022

However, my V2 results do include Native American ethnicity.

Matches at Ancestry

I have many more matches on my V1 test at Ancestry because I took steps to preserve my smaller matches when Ancestry initiated its massive purge in 2020. I wrote about that here and here.

Ancestry’s SideView breaks matches down into maternal, paternal, and unassigned based on your side selection. You tell Ancestry which side is which. You may be able to determine which “side” is maternal or paternal either by your ethnicity or shared matches. While SideView is not always accurate, it’s a good place to begin.

Match Category Ancestry V1 Test Ancestry V2 Test
Maternal 15,587 15,116
Paternal 42,247 41,870
Both 2 2
Unassigned 48,999 4,127
Total 106,835 61,115

Ancestry either displays all your matches or your matches by side, which I used to compile the table above. I suspect that Ancestry is not assigning any of the smaller preserved matches to “sides” based on the numbers above.

Ancestry implemented a process called Timber that removes DNA that they feel is “too matchy,” meaning you match enough people in this region that they think it’s a pileup region for you personally, and therefore not useful. In some cases, enough DNA is removed causing that person to no longer be considered a match because they fall beneath the match threshold. I am not a fan of Timber.

Your match amount shown is AFTER Timber has removed those segments. Unweighted shared DNA is your pre-Timber match amount.

You can view the Unweighted shared DNA by clicking on the amount of shared DNA on your match list.

You can read Ancestry’s Matching White Paper, here.

Let’s take a look at my matches. I’ve listed both weighted and unweighted where they are different.

Match Ancestry V1 Ancestry V2
Michael 755 cM, 35 seg 737 cM, 33 seg
Edward 66 cM, 4 seg (unweighted 86 cM) 65 cM, 4 seg (unweighted 86 cM)
Tom 59 cM, 3 seg (unweighted 63) Same
Jonathon 43 cM, 4 seg, (unweighted 52 cM) Same
Matthew 20 cM, 2 seg (unweighted 35 cM) Same
Harold 132 cM, 7 seg 135 cM, 6 seg
Dean 67 cM, 4 seg (unweighted 78 cM) 66 cM, 4 seg (unweighted 78 cM)
Debbie 93 cM, 5 seg Same
Valli 142 cM, 3 seg Same
Jared 20 cM, 1 seg (unweighted 22 cM) Same

Timber only removes DNA when the match is under 90 cM. Almost every match under 90 cM has some DNA removed.

Ancestry Summary

The results of the two Ancestry tests are very close.

In some circumstances, no DNA is removed by Timber, so the unweighted is the same as the weighted. However, in other cases, a significant amount is removed. 15 cM of Matthew’s 35 cM was removed by Timber, reducing his total to 20 cM.

Remember that Ancestry does not show shared matches unless they are greater than 20 cM, which is different than any other DNA testing company.

At one point, Ancestry was selling a health test that was also a genealogy test. That test utilized a different chip that is not accepted for uploads by other vendors. The results of that test might well be different that the “normal” Ancestry tests focused on genealogy. The Ancestry health test is no longer offered.

Companies that Accept Uploads

DNA testing companies that accept uploaded DNA files from other DNA testing companies need to process the uploaded file, just like a file that is generated in their own lab. Of course, they must deal with the differences between uploaded files and their own file format. The processing includes imputation and formulates the uploaded file so that it works with the tools that they provide for their customers, including ethnicity (by whatever name they use) matching, family matching (bucketing), advanced matching, the match matrix, triangulation, AutoClusters, Theories of Family Relativity, and other advanced tools.

Of course, the testing company accepting uploads can only work with the DNA locations provided by the original DNA testing company in the uploaded file.

Matching and some additional tools are free to uploaders, but advanced tools require an inexpensive unlock.

FamilyTreeDNA

I took a test at FamilyTreeDNA, plus uploaded a copy of both of my Ancestry DNA files.

FamilyTreeDNA named their population (ethnicity) test myOrigins and the current version is V3. I wrote about the rollout and comparison in September of 2020, here.

My DNA test taken at FamilyTreeDNA, above, reveals Native American segments that match reference populations found both in North and South America and the Caribbean Islands.

At FamilyTreeDNA, my Ancestry V1 uploaded file results show Native American population matches only in North America.

Interestingly, my Ancestry V1 file processed AT Ancestry did not reveal Native American ancestry, but the same file uploaded to and processed at FamilyTreeDNA did show Native American results, reflecting the difference between the vendors’ internal algorithms and reference populations utilized.

My myOrigins results from my Ancestry V2 uploaded file at FamilyTreeDNA also include my North American Native American segments. The V2 test also showed Native American ethnicity at Ancestry, so clearly something changed in Ancestry’s algorithm, locations tested, and/or reference populations between V1 and V2.

Fortunately, FamilyTreeDNA provides both chromosome painting and a population download file so I can match those Native segments with my autosomal matches to identify which of my ancestors contributed those specific segments.

One of my Native segments is shown in pink on Chromosome1. My mother has a Native segment in exactly the same location, so I know that this segment originated with my mother’s ancestors.

I downloaded the myOrigins population segment file and painted my results at DNAPainter, along with the matches where I can identify our common ancestor. This allowed me to pinpoint the ancestral line that contributed this Native segment in my maternal line. You can read about using DNAPainter, here.

FamilyTreeDNA Matches

I have significantly more matches at FamilyTreeDNA on their test than on either of my Ancestry tests that I uploaded. However, nearly the same number are maternally or paternally assigned through Family Matching, with the remainder unassigned. You can read about Family Matching here.

Match Category FamilyTreeDNA Test Ancestry V1 at FamilyTreeDNA Ancestry V2 at FamilyTreeDNA
Paternal 3,479 3,572 3,422
Maternal 1,549 1,536 1,477
Both 3 3 3
All 8,154 6,397 6,579

Family matching, aka bucketing, automatically assigns my matches as maternal and paternal by linking known relatives to their place in my tree.

I completed the following match chart using my original test taken at FamilyTreeDNA, plus the same match at FamilyTreeDNA for both of my Ancestry tests.

In other words, Cheryl matched me at 467 cM on 21 segments on the original test taken at FamilyTreeDNA. She matched me on 473 cM and 21 segments on my Ancestry V1 test uploaded to FamilyTreeDNA and on 483 cM and 22 segments on the Ancestry V2 test uploaded to FamilyTreeDNA.

Match FamilyTreeDNA Ancestry V1 at FTDNA Ancestry V2 at FTDNA
Cheryl 467 cM, 21 seg 473 cM, 21 seg 483 cM, 22 seg
Patricia 195 cM, 11 seg 189 cM, 11 seg 188 cM, 11 seg
Tom 77 cM, 4 seg 71 cM, 4 seg 76 cM, 4 seg
Thomas 72 cM, 3 seg 71 cM, 3 seg 74 cM, 3 seg
Roland 29 cM, 1 seg 35 cM, 2 seg 35 cM, 2 seg
Rex 62 cM, 4 seg 55 cM, 3 seg 57 cM, 3 seg
Don 395 cM, 18 seg 362 cM, 15 seg 398 cM, 18 seg
Ian 64 cM, 4 seg 56 cM, 4 seg 64 cM, 4 seg
Stacy 490 cM, 18 seg 494 cM, 15 seg 489 cM, 14 seg
Harold 127 cM, 5 cM 133 cM, 6 seg 143 cM, 6 seg
Dean 81 cM, 4 seg 75 cM, 3 seg 83 cM, 4 seg
Carl 103 cM, 4 seg 101 cM, 4 seg 102 cM, 4 seg
Debbie 99 cM, 5 seg 97 cM, 5 seg 99 cM, 5 seg
David 373 cM, 16 seg 435 cM, 19 seg 417 cM, 18 seg
Amos 176 cM, 7 seg 177 cM. 8 seg 177 cM, 7 seg
Buster 387 cM, 15 seg 396 cM, 16 seg 402 cM, 17 seg
Charlene 461 cM, 21 seg 450 cM, 21 seg 448 cM, 20 seg
Carol 65 cM, 6 seg 64 cM, 6 seg 65 cM, 6 seg

I have tested many of my cousins at FamilyTreeDNA and encouraged others to test or upload. I’ve attempted to include enough people so that I can have common matches at least at one other DNA testing company for comparison.

FamilyTreeDNA Summary

The matches are relatively close, with a few being exact.

Interestingly, some of the segment counts are different. In most cases, this results from one segment being broken into multiple segments by one or more of the tests, but not always. In the couple that I checked, the entire segment seems to descend from the same ancestral couple, so the break is likely a result of not all of the same DNA locations being tested, plus the limits of imputation.

MyHeritage

I have two tests at MyHeritage. One taken at MyHeritage, and an uploaded file from FamilyTreeDNA.

MyHeritage displays both ethnicity results and Genetic Groups which maps groups of people that you match. I left the Genetic Groups setting at the highest confidence level. Shifting it to lower displays additional Genetic Groups, some of which overlap with or are within ethnicity regions.

My test taken at MyHeritage, above, shows several ethnicities and Genetic Groups, but no Native American.

My FamilyTreeDNA kit processed at MyHeritage shows the same ethnicity regions, one additional Genetic Group, plus Native American heritage in the Amazon which is rather surprising given that I don’t show Native in North American regions where I’m positive my Native ancestors lived.

MyHeritage Matching

At MyHeritage, I compared the results of the test I took with MyHeritage, and a test I uploaded from FamilyTreeDNA. Fewer than half of my matches can be assigned to a parent via shared matching.

Matches MyHeritage Test FamilyTreeDNA at MyHeritage
Paternal 4,422 6,501
Maternal 2,660 3,655
Total 13,233 16,147

I have rounded my matches at MyHeritage to the closest cM.

Match MyHeritage Test FamilyTreeDNA at MyHeritage
Michael 801 cM, 32 seg 823 cM, 31 segments
Cheryl 467 cM, 23 seg 477 cM, 23 seg
Roland No match 28 cM, 1 seg
Patty 156 cM, 9 seg 151 cM, 9 seg
Rex 43 cM, 4 seg 53 cM, 3 seg
Don 369 cM, 16 seg 382 cM, 17 seg
 
David 449 cM, 17 seg 460 cM, 17 seg
Charlene 454 cM, 23 seg 477 cM, 24 seg
Buster 408 cM, 15 seg 410 cM, 16 seg
Amos 183 cM, 8 seg Same
Carol 78 cM, 6 seg 87 cM, 7 seg

MyHeritage Summary

I was surprised to discover that Roland had no match with the MyHeritage test, but did with the FamilyTreeDNA test. I wonder if this is a searching or matching glitch, especially since both companies use the same chip. 28 cM in one segment is a reasonably large match, and even if it was divided in two, it would still be over the matching threshold. I know this is a valid match because Roland triangulates with me and several cousins, I’m positive of our common ancestor, and he also matches me at both FamilyTreeDNA and 23andMe.

Other than that, the matches are reasonably close, with one being exact.

Your Matches Aren’t Everyplace

I unsuccessfully searched for someone who was a match to me in all four databases. Ancestry does not permit match downloads, so I had to search manually. People don’t always use the same names in different databases.

Surprisingly, I was unable to find one match who is in all of the databases. Many people only suggest testing at Ancestry because they have the largest database, but if you look at the following comparison chart that I’ve created, you’ll see that 16 of 26 people, or 62% were not at Ancestry. Conversely, many people were at Ancestry and not elsewhere. I could not find five maternal and five paternal matches at Ancestry that I could identify as matches in another database. 40% were not elsewhere.

If you think for one minute that it doesn’t matter for genealogy if you’re in all four major databases, please reconsider. It surely does matter.

Every single vendor has matches that the others don’t. Substantial, important matches. I have found first and second-cousin matches in every database that weren’t elsewhere.

Many of the original testers have passed away and can’t test again. My mother can never test at either 23andMe or Ancestry, but she is at both FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage because I could upgrade her kit at FamilyTreeDNA after she died. I uploaded her to MyHeritage. Of course, because she is a generation closer to our ancestors, she has many valuable matches that I don’t.

Each vendor provides either an email address or a messaging platform for you to contact your matches. Don’t be discouraged if they don’t answer. Just today, I received a reply that was years in the making.

Genealogists hope for immediate gratification, but we are actually in this for the long game. Play it with every tool at your disposal.

The Answer

Does it matter if you test at a DNA testing company, or upload a file?

I know this was a very long answer to what my readers hoped was a simple yes or no question.

There is no consistent answer at either FamilyTreeDNA or MyHeritage, the two DNA testing companies that accept uploads. Be sure you’re in both databases. My closest two matches that I did not test were found at MyHeritage. Here’s a direct link to upload at MyHeritage.

Of the vendors, those two should be the closest to each other because they are both processed in the GenebyGene lab, but again, the actual chip version, when the test was originally taken, and each vendor’s internal processing will result in differences. Neither the original test at the DNA testing company nor the uploaded files have consistently higher or lower matches. Neither type of test or upload appears to be universally more or less accurate. Differences in either direction seem to occur on a match-by-match basis. Many are so close as to be virtually equivalent, with a few seemingly random exceptions. Of course, we always have to consider Timber.

If you upload, unlock the advanced features at both FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage.

If you upload to a DNA testing company, you may discover in the future that some features and functions will only be available to original testers.

Personally, if I had the option, I would test at the company directly simply because it eliminates or at least reduces the possibility of future incompatibilities – with the exception of 23andMe which has chosen to not provide consistent updates to older tests. I’m incredibly grateful I didn’t test my mother or now deceased family members at 23andMe, and only there. I would be heartsick, heartbroken, and furious.

Our DNA is an extremely valuable resource for our genealogy. It’s the gift that truly keeps on giving, day after day, even when other records don’t exist. Be sure you and your family members are in each database one way or another, and test your Y-DNA (for males) and mitochondrial DNA (for everyone) to have a complete arsenal at your disposal.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

DNA: In Search Of…Your Grandparents

Posted on by
15

Are you searching for an unknown relative or trying to unravel and understand unexpected results? Maybe you discovered that one or both of your parents is not your biological parent. Maybe one of your siblings might be a half-sibling instead. Or maybe you suddenly have an unexpected match that looks to be an unknown close relative, possibly a half-sibling. Perhaps there’s a close match you can’t place.

Or, are you searching for the identity of your grandparent or grandparents? If you’re searching for your parent or parents, often identifying your grandparents is a necessary step to narrow the parent-candidates.

I’ve written an entire series of “In Search of Unknown Family” articles, permanently listed together, here. They will step you through the search process and help you understand how to unravel your results. If you’re new, reading these, in order, before proceeding, would be a good idea.

Identifying a Grandparent

I saved this “grandparents” article for later in the series because you will need the tools and techniques I’ve introduced in the earlier articles. Identifying grandparents is often the most challenging of any of the relationships we’ve covered so far. In part because each of those four individuals occupies a different place in your tree, meaning their X, Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA is carried by different, and not all, descendants. This means we sometimes have to utilize different tools and techniques.

If you’re trying to identify any of your four grandparents, females are sometimes more challenging than males.

Why?

Women don’t have a Y chromosome to test. This can be a double handicap. Female testers can’t test a Y chromosome, and maternal ancestors don’t have a Y chromosome to match.

Of course, every circumstance differs. You may not have a male to test for paternal lines either.

The maternal grandfather can be uniquely challenging, because two types of DNA, Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA matching are immediately eliminated for all testers.

While I’ve focused on the maternal grandfather in this example, these techniques can be utilized for all four grandparents as well as for parents. At the end, I’ll review other grandparent relationships and additional tools you might be able to utilize for each one.

In addition to autosomal DNA, we can also utilize mitochondrial DNA, Y-DNA and sometimes X DNA in certain situations.

Testing, Tests and Vendors

As you recall, only men have a Y chromosome (blue arrow), so only genetic males can take a Y-DNA test. Men pass their Y chromosome from father to son in each generation. Daughters don’t receive a Y chromosome.

Everyone has their mother’s mitochondrial DNA (pink arrow.) Women pass their mitochondrial DNA to both sexes of their children, but only females pass it on. In the current generation, represented by the son and daughter, above, the mother’s yellow heart-shaped mitochondrial DNA is inherited by both sexes of her children. In the current generation, males and females can both test for their mother’s mitochondrial DNA.

Of course, everyone has autosomal DNA, inherited from all of their ancestral lines through at least the 5th or 6th generation, and often further back in time. Autosomal DNA is divided in half in each generation, as children inherit half of each parents’ autosomal DNA (with the exception of the X chromosome, which males only inherit from their mother.)

The four major vendors, Ancestry, 23andMe, FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage sell autosomal DNA tests, but only FamilyTreeDNA sells Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA tests.

Only 23andMe and FamilyTreeDNA report X matching.

All vendors except Ancestry provide segment location information along with a chromosome browser.

You can read about the vendor’s strengths and weaknesses in the third article, here.

Ordering Y and Mitochondrial DNA Tests

If you’re seeking the identities of grandparents, the children and parents, above, can test for the following types of DNA in addition to autosomal:

Person in Pedigree Y-DNA Mitochondrial
Son His father’s blue star His mother’s pink heart
Daughter None Her mother’s pink heart
Father His father’s blue star His mother’s gold heart
Mother None Her mother’s pink heart

Note that none of the people shown above in the direct pedigree line carry the Y-DNA of the green maternal grandfather. However, if the mother has a full sibling, the green “Male Child,” he will carry the Y-DNA of the maternal grandfather. Just be sure the mother and her brother are full siblings, because otherwise, the brother’s Y-DNA may not have been inherited from your mother’s father. I wrote about full vs half sibling determination, here.

Let’s view this from a slightly different perspective. For each grandparent in the tree, which of the two testers, son or daughter, if either, carry that ancestor’s DNA of the types listed in the columns.

Ancestor in Tree Y-DNA Mitochondrial DNA Autosomal DNA X DNA
Paternal Grandfather Son Neither Son, daughter Neither
Paternal Grandmother Has no Y chromosome None (father has it, doesn’t pass it on to son or daughter) Son, daughter Daughter (son does not receive father’s X chromosome)
Maternal Grandfather Neither Neither Son, daughter Son, daughter (potentially)
Maternal Grandmother Has no Y chromosome Son, daughter Son, daughter Son, daughter (potentially)

Obtaining the Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA of those grandparents from their descendants will provide hints and may be instrumental in identifying the grandparent.

FamilyTreeDNA

You’ll need to order Y-DNA (males only) and mitochondrial DNA tests separately from autosomal DNA tests. They are three completely different tests.

At FamilyTreeDNA, the autosomal DNA test is called Family Finder to differentiate it from their Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA tests.

Their autosomal test is called Family Finder whether you order a test from FamilyTreeDNA, or upload your results to their site from another vendor (instructions here.)

I recommend ordering the Big Y-700 Y-DNA test if possible, and if not, the highest resolution Y-DNA test you can afford. The Big Y-700 is the most refined Y-DNA test available, includes multiple tools and places Big Y-700 testers on the Time Tree through the Discover tool, providing relatively precise estimates of when those men shared a common ancestor. If you’ve already purchased a lower-precision Y-DNA test at FamilyTreeDNA, you can easily upgrade.

I wrote about using the Discover tool here. The recently added Group Time Tree draws a genetic Y-DNA tree of Big-Y testers in common projects, showing earliest known ancestors and the date of the most recent common ancestor.

You need to make sure your Family Finder, mitochondrial DNA and Y-DNA (if you’re a male) tests are ordered from the same account at FamilyTreeDNA.

You want all 3 of your tests on the same account (called a kit number) so that you can use the advanced search features that display people who match you on combinations of multiple kinds of tests. For example, if you’re a male, do your Y-DNA matches also match you on the autosomal Family Finder test, and if so, how closely? Advanced matching also provides X matching tools.

X DNA is included in autosomal tests. X DNA has a distinct matching pattern for males and females which makes it uniquely useful for genealogy. I wrote about X DNA matching here.

If you upload your autosomal results to FamilyTreeDNA from another company, you’re only uploading a raw DNA file, not the DNA itself, so FamilyTreeDNA will need to send you a swab kit to test your Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA. If you upload your autosomal DNA, simply sign in to your kit, purchase the Y-DNA and/or mitochondrial DNA tests and they will send you a swab kit.

If you test directly at FamilyTreeDNA, you can add any test easily by simply signing in and placing an order. They will use your archived DNA from your swab sample, as long as there’s enough left and it’s of sufficient quality.

Fish In All Ponds

The first important thing to do in your grandparent search is to be sure you’re fishing in all ponds. In other words, be sure you’ve tested at all 4 vendors, or uploaded files to FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage.

When you upload files to those vendors, be sure to purchase the unlock for their advanced tools, because you’re going to utilize everything possible.

If you have relatively close matches at other vendors, ask if they will upload their files too. The upload is free. Not only will they receive additional matches, and another set of ethnicity results, their results will help you by associating your matches with specific sides of your family.

Why Order Multiple Tests Now Instead of Waiting?

I encourage testers to order their tests at the beginning of their journey, not one at a time. Each new test from a vendor takes about 6-8 weeks from the time you initially order – they send the test, you swab or spit, return it, and they process your DNA. Of course, uploading takes far less time.

If you’re adding elapsed time, two autosomal tests (Ancestry and 23andMe), two uploads (FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage,) a Y-DNA and a mitochondrial DNA test, if all purchased serially, one after the other, means you’ll be waiting about 6-8 months.

Do you want to wait 6-8 months? Can you afford to?

Part of that answer has to do with what, exactly, you’re seeking.

A Name or Information?

Are you seeking the name of a person, or are you seeking information about that person? With grandparents, you may be hoping to meet them, and time may be of the essence. Time delayed may not be able to be recovered or regained.

Most people don’t just want to put a name to the person they are seeking – they want to learn about them. You will have different matches at each company. Even after you identify the person you seek, the people you match at each company may have information about them, their photos, know about their life, family, and their ancestors. They may be able and willing to facilitate an introduction if that’s what you seek.

One cousin that I assisted discovered that his father had died just 6 weeks before he made the connection. He was heartsick.

Having data from all vendors simultaneously will allow you to compile that data and work with it together as well as separately. Using your “best” matches at each company, augmented by both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA can make MUCH shorter work of this search.

Your Y-DNA, if you’re a male will give you insights into your surname line, and the Big-Y test now comes with estimates of how far in the past you share a common ancestor with other men that have taken the Big-Y test. This can be a HUGE boon to a male trying to figure out his surname line.

Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA, respectively, will eliminate many people from being your mother or father, or your direct paternal or direct maternal line ancestor. Both provide insights into which population and where that population originated as well. In other words, it provides you lineage-specific information not available elsewhere.

Your Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA can also provide critically important information about whether that direct line ancestor belonged to an endogamous population, and where they came from.

Strategies

You may be tempted to think that you only need to test at one vendor, or at the vendor with the largest database, but that’s not necessarily true.

Here’s a table of my closest matches at the 4 vendors.

Vendor Closest Maternal Closest Paternal Comments
Ancestry 1C, 1C1R Half 1C, 2C I recognized both of the maternal and neither of the paternal.
23andMe 2C, 2C 1C1R, half-gr-niece Recognized both maternal, one paternal
MyHeritage Mother uploaded, 1C Half-niece, half 1C Recognized both maternal, one paternal
FamilyTreeDNA Mother tested, 1C1R Parent/child, half-gr-niece Recognized all 4

To be clear, I tested my mother at FamilyTreeDNA before she passed away, but if I was an adoptee searching for my mother, that’s the first database she would be in. As her family, we were able to order the Family Finder test from her archived DNA after she had passed away. I then uploaded her DNA file to MyHeritage, but she’ll never be at either 23andMe or Ancestry because they don’t accept uploads and she clearly can’t test.

Additionally, being able to identify maternal matches by viewing shared matches with my mother separates out close matches from my paternal side.

Let’s put this another way, I stand a MUCH BETTER chance of unraveling this mystery with the combined closest matches of all 4 databases instead of the top ones from just one database.

I’m providing analysis methodologies for working with results from all of the vendors together, in case your answer is not immediately obvious. Taking multiple tests facilitates using all of these tools immediately, not months later. Solving the puzzle sooner means you may not miss valuable connection opportunities.

You may also discover that the door slams shut with some people, but another match may be unbelievably helpful. Don’t unnecessarily limit your possibilities.

Here’s the testing and upload strategy I recommend.

What When Ancestry 23andMe MyHeritage FamilyTreeDNA GEDmatch
Order autosomal test Initially Yes Yes Upload Upload Upload
Order Big-Y DNA test if male Initially Yes
Order mitochondrial DNA test Initially Yes
Upload free autosomal file From Ancestry or 23andMe Yes Yes Yes
Unlock Advanced Tools When upload file $29 $19 $9.95 month
Includes X Matching No Yes No Yes Yes
Chromosome Browser, segment location information No Yes Yes Yes Yes

When you upload a DNA file to a vendor site, only upload one file per site, per tester. Otherwise, multiple tests simply glom up everyone’s match list with multiple matches to the same person and can be very confusing.

  • One person took an autosomal test at a company that accepts uploads, forgot about it, uploaded a file from another vendor later, and immediately thought she had found her parent. She had not. She “found” herself.
  • Another person though she had found two sisters, but one person had uploaded their own file from two different vendors.

Multiple vendor sites reveal multiple close matches to different people which increase your opportunity to discover INFORMATION about your family, not just the identity of the person.

Match Ranges

Given that we are searching for an unknown maternal grandfather, your mother may not have had any (known) full siblings. The “best” match would be to a full or half siblings to your parents, or their descendants, depending on how old your grandparents would be.

Let’s take the “worst case” scenario, meaning there are no full siblings AND there are many possible generations between you and the people you may match.

Now, let’s look at DNAPainter’s Shared cM tool.

You’re going to be looking for someone who is either your mother’s half sibling on her father’s side, or who is a full sibling.

If your mother is adopted, it’s possible that she has or had full siblings. If your mother was born circa 1920, it’s likely that you will be matching the next generation, or two, or three.

However, if your mother was born later, you could be matching her siblings directly.

I’m going to assume half siblings for this example, because they are more difficult than full siblings.

Full sibling relationships for your mother’s siblings are listed at right. Your full aunt or uncle at top, then their descendant generations below.

At left, in red, are the half-sibling relationships and the matching amounts.

You can see that if you’re dealing with half 1C3R (half first cousin three times removed,) you may not match.

Therefore, in order to isolate matches, it’s imperative to test every relevant relative possible.

Who’s Relevant for DNA Testing?

Who is relevant to test If you’re attempting to identify your maternal grandfather?

The goal is to be able to assign matches to the most refined ancestor possible. In other words, if you can assign someone to either your grandmother’s line, or your grandfather’s line, that’s better than assigning the person to your grandparents jointly.

Always utilize the tests of the people furthest up the tree, meaning the oldest generations. Their DNA is less-diluted, meaning it has been divided fewer times. Think about who is living and might be willing to test.

You need to be able to divide your matches between your parents, and then between your grandparents on your mother’s side.

  • Test your parents, of course, and any of their known siblings, half or full.
  • If those siblings have passed away, test as many of their children as you can.
  • If any of your grandparents are living, test them
  • If BOTH of your grandparents on the same side aren’t available to test, test any, preferably all, living aunts or uncles.
  • If your maternal grandmother had siblings, test them or their descendants if they are deceased.
  • If your parents are deceased, test your aunts, uncles, full siblings and half-siblings on your mother’s side. (Personally, I’d test all half-siblings, not just maternal.)
  • Half-siblings are particularly valuable because there is no question which “side” your shared DNA came from. They will match people you don’t because they received part of your parent’s DNA that you did not.

Furthermore, shared matches to half-siblings unquestionably identify which parent those matches are through.

Essentially, you’re trying to account for all matches that can be assigned to your grandparents whose identities you know – leaving only people who descend from your unknown maternal grandfather.

Testing your own descendants will not aid your quest. There is no need to test them for this purpose, given that they received half of your DNA.

I wrote about why testing close relatives is important in the article Superpower: Your Aunts’ and Uncles’ DNA is Your DNA Too – Maximize Those Matches!

Create or Upload a Tree

Three of the four major vendors, plus GEDMatch, support and utilize family trees.

You’ll want to either upload or create a tree at each of the vendor sites.

You can either upload a GEDCOM file from your home computer genealogy software, or you can create a tree at one of the vendors, download it, and upload to the others. I described that process at Ancestry, here.

Goal

Your goal is to work with your highest matches first to determine how they are related to you, thereby eliminating matches to known lineages.

Assuming you’re only searching for the identity of one grandparent, it’s beneficial to have done enough of your genealogy on your three known grandparents to be able to assign matches from those lines to those sides.

Step 1 is to check each vendor for close matches that might fall into that category.

The Top 15 at Each Vendor

Your closest several autosomal matches are the most important and insightful. I begin with the top 15 autosomal results at each vendor, initially, which provides me with the best chance of meaningful close relationship discoveries.

Create a Spreadsheet or Chart

I hate to use that S word (spreadsheet), because I don’t want non-technical people to be discouraged. So, I’m going to show you how I set up a spreadsheet and you can simply create a chart or even draw this out on paper if you wish.

I’ve color-coded columns for each of my 4 grandparents. The green column is the target Maternal Grandfather whose identity I’m seeking.

I match our first example; Erik, at 417 cM. Based on various pieces of information, taken together, I’ve determined that I’m Erik’s half 1C1R. His 8 great-grandparent surnames, or the ones he has provided, indicate that I’m related to Eric on my paternal grandfather’s line.

You’ll want to record your closest matches in this fashion.

Let’s look at how to find this information and work with the tools at the individual vendors.

23andMe

Let’s start at 23andMe, because they create a potential genetic tree for you, which may or may not be accurate.

I have two separate tests at 23andMe. One is a V3 and one is a V4 test. I keep one in its pristine state, and I work with the second one. You’ll see two of “me” in the tree, and that’s why.

23andMe makes it easy to see estimated relationships, although they are not always correct. Generally, they are close, and they can be quite valuable.

Click on any image to enlarge

The maternal and paternal “sides” may not be positioned where genealogists are used to seeing them. Remember, 23andMe has no genealogy trees, so they are attempting to construct a genetic tree based on how people are related to you and to each other, with no prior knowledge. They do sometimes have issues with half-relationships, so I’d encourage you to use this tree to isolate people to the three grandparents you know.

In my case, I was able to determine the maternal and paternal sides easily based on known cousins. This is the perfect example of why it’s important to test known relatives from both sides of your family.

My paternal side, at right, in blue, was easy because I recognized my half-sister’s family, and because of known cousins who I recognized from having tested elsewhere. I’ve worked with them for years. The blue stars show people I could identify, mostly second cousins.

My maternal side is at left, in red. Normally, for genealogists, the maternal side is at right, and the paternal at left, so don’t make assumptions, and don’t let this positioning throw you.

I’m pretending I don’t know who my maternal grandfather is. I was able to identify my maternal grandmother’s side based on a known second cousin.

That leaves my target – my maternal grandfather’s line.

All of the matches to the left of the red circle would, by process of elimination, be on my maternal grandfather’s side.

The next step would be to figure out how the 5 people descending from my maternal grandfather’s line are related to each other – through which of their ancestors.

On the DNA Relatives match list, here’s what needs to be checked:

  • Do your matches share surnames with you or your ancestors?
  • Do they show surnames in common with each other?
  • Is there a common location?
  • Birth year which helps you understand their potential generation.
  • Did they list their grandparents’ birthplaces?
  • Did they provide a family tree link?
  • Do they also match each other using the Relatives in Common feature?
  • Do they triangulate, indicated by “DNA Overlap” in Relatives in Common?
  • Who else is on the Relatives in Common list, and what do they have in common with each other?
  • Looking at your Ancestry Composition compared with theirs, what are your shared populations, and are they relevant? If you are both 100% European, then shared populations aren’t useful, but if both people share the same minority ancestry, especially on the same segments, it may indeed be relevant – especially if it can’t be accounted for on the known sides of the family.

Reach out to these people and see what they know about their genealogy, if they have tested elsewhere, and if they have a genealogy tree someplace that you can view.

If they can tell you their grandparents’ names, birth and death dates and locations, you can check public sources like WikiTree, FamilySearch and Geni, or build trees for them. You can also use Newspaper resources, like Newspapers.com, NewspaperArchive and the newspapers at MyHeritage.

I added the top 15 23andMe matches into the spreadsheet I created.

You’ll notice that not many people at 23andMe enter surnames. However, if you can identify individuals from your 3 known lines, you can piggyback the rest by using Relatives in Common in conjunction with the genetic tree placement.

Be sure to check all the people that are connected to the target line in your genetic tree.

You’ll want to harvest your DNA segments to paint at DNAPainter if you don’t solve this mystery with initial reviews at each vendor.

Ancestry

Let’s move to Ancestry next.

At Ancestry, you’ll want to start with your closest matches on your match list.

Ancestry classifies “Close Matches” as anyone 200 cM or greater, which probably won’t reach as far down as the matches we’ll want to include.

Some of the categories in the Shared cM Chart from DNAPainter, above, don’t work based on ages, so I’ve eliminated those. I also know, for example, that someone who could fall in the grandparent/grandchild category (blue star,) in my case, does not, so must be a different relationship.

Second cousins, who share great-grandparents, can be expected to share about 229 cM of DNA on average, or between 41 and 592 cM. First cousins share 866 cM, and half first cousins share 449 cM on average.

I have 13 close matches (over 200 cM), but I’m including my top 15 at each vendor, so I added two more. You can always go back and add more matches if necessary. Just keep in mind that the smaller the match, the greater the probability that it came from increasingly distant generations before your grandparents. Your sweet spot to identify grandparents is between 1C and 2C.

I need to divide my close matches into 4 groups, each one equating to a grandparent. Record this on your spreadsheet.

You can group your matches at Ancestry using colored dots, which means you can sort by those groups.

You can also select a “side” for a match by clicking on “Yes” under the question, “Do you recognize them?”

Initially, you want to determine if this person is related to you on your mother’s or father side, and hopefully, through which grandparent.

Recently, Ancestry added a feature called SideView which allows testers to indicate, based on ethnicity, which side is “parent 1” and which side is “parent 2.” I wrote about that, here.

Make your selection, assuming you can tell which “side” of you descends from which parent based on ethnicity and/or shared matches. How you label “parent 1,” meaning either maternal or paternal, determines how Ancestry assigns your matches, when possible.

Using these tools, which may not be completely accurate, plus shared matches with people you can identify, divide your matches among your three known grandparents, meaning that the people you cannot assign will be placed in the fourth “unknown” column.

On my spreadsheet, I assign all of my closest matches to one of my grandparents. Michael is my first cousin (1C) and we share both maternal grandparents, so he’s not helpful in the division because he can’t be assigned to only one grandparent.

The green maternal grandfather is who I’m attempting to identify.

There are 4 people, highlighted in yellow, who don’t fall into the other three grandparent lines, so they get added to the green column and will be my focus.

I would be inclined to continue adding matches using a process known as the Leeds Method, until I had several people in each category. Looking back at the DNAPainter cM chart, at this point, we don’t have anyone below 200 cM and the matches we need might be below that threshold. The more matches you have to work with, the better.

At Ancestry, you cannot download your matches into a spreadsheet, nor can you work with other clustering tools such as Genetic Affairs, so you’ll have to build out your spreadsheet manually.

Check for the same types of information that I reviewed at 23andMe:

  • Review trees, if your matches have them, minimally recording the surnames of their 8 great-grandparents.
  • Review shared matches, looking for common names in the trees in recent generations.
  • View shared matches with people with whom you have a “Common Ancestor” indication, which means a ThruLine. You won’t have Thrulines with your target grandparent, of course, but Thrulines will allow you to place the match in one of the other columns. I wrote about ThruLines here, here and here.
  • ThruLines sometimes suggests ancestors based on other people’s trees, so be EXCEEDINGLY careful with potential ancestor suggestions. That’s not to say you should discount those suggestions. Just treat them as tree hints that may have been copy/pasted hundreds of times, because that’s what they are.

I make notes on each match so I can easily see the connection by scanning without opening the match.

Now, I have a total of 30 entries on my spreadsheet, 15 from 23and Me and 15 from Ancestry.

Why Not Use Autosclusters?

Even with vendors who allow or provide cluster tools, I don’t use an automated autocluster tool at this point. Autocluster tools often omit your closest matches because your closest matches would be in nearly half of all your clusters, which isn’t exactly informative. However, for this purpose, those are the very matches we need to evaluate.

After identifying groups of people that represent the missing grandparent, using our spreadsheet methodology, autoclusters could be useful to identify common surnames and even to compare the trees of our matches using AutoTree, AutoPedigree and AutoKinship. AutoClusters cannot be utilized at Ancestry, but is available through MyHeritage and at GEDmatch, or through Genetic Affairs for 23andMe and FamilyTreeDNA.

Next, let’s move to FamilyTreeDNA.

FamilyTreeDNA

FamilyTreeDNA is the only vendor that provides Family Matching, also known as “bucketing.” FamilyTreeDNA assigns your matches to either a paternal or maternal bucket, or both, based on triangulated matches with someone you’ve linked to a profile in your tree.

The key to Family Matching is to link known Family Finder matches to their profile cards in your tree.

Clicking on the Family Tree link at the top of your personal page allows you to link your matches to the profile cards of your matches.

FamilyTreeDNA utilizes these linked matches to assign those people, and matches who match you and those people, both, on at least one common segment, to the maternal or paternal tabs on your match list.

Always link as many known people as possible (red stars) which will result in more matches being bucketed and assigned to parents’ sides for you, even if neither parent is available to test.

I wrote about Triangulation in Action at FamilyTreeDNA, here.

You can see at the top of my match list that I have a total of 8000 matches of which 3422 are paternal, 1517 are maternal and 3 match on both sides. Full siblings, their (and my) children and their descendants will always match on both sides. People with endogamy across both parents may have several matches on both sides.

If your relevant parent has tested, always work from their test.

Because we are searching for the maternal grandfather, in this case, we can ignore all tests that are bucketed as paternal matches.

Given that we are searching for my maternal grandfather, I probably have not been able to link as many maternal matches, other than possibly ones from my maternal grandmother. This means that the maternal grandfather’s matches are not bucketed because there are no identified matches to link on that side of my tree.

If you sort by maternal and paternal tabs, you’ll miss people who aren’t bucketed, meaning they have no maternal or paternal icon, so I recommend simply scanning down the list and processing maternal matches and non-bucketed matches.

By being able to confidently ignore paternally bucketed matches and only processing maternal and non-assigned matches, this is equivalent to processing the first 48 total matches. If I were to only look at the first 15 matches, 12 were paternal and only 3 are maternal.

Using bucketing at FamilyTreeDNA is very efficient and saves a lot of work.

Omitting paternal matches also means we are including smaller matches which could potentially be from common ancestors further back in the tree. Or, they could be younger testers. Or simply smaller by the randomness of recombination.

FamilyTreeDNA is a goldmine, with 16 of 20 maternal matches being from the unknown maternal grandfather.

Next, let’s see what’s waiting at MyHeritage.

MyHeritage

MyHeritage is particularly useful if your lineage happens to be from Europe. Of course, if you’re searching for an unknown person, you probably have no idea where they or their ancestors are from. Two of my best matches first appeared at MyHeritage.

Of course, your matches with people who descend from your unknown maternal grandfather won’t have any Theories of Family Relativity, as that tool is based on BOTH a DNA match plus a tree or document match. However, Theories is wonderful to group your matches to your other three grandparents.

MyHeritage provides a great deal of information for each match, including common surnames with your tree. If you recognize the surnames (and shared matches) as paternal or maternal, then you can assign the match. However, the matches you’re most interested in are the highest matches without any surnames in common with you – which likely point to the missing maternal grandfather.

However, those people may, and probably do, have surnames in common with each other.

Of the matches who aren’t attributed to the other three grandparents, the name Ferverda arises again and again. So does Miller, which suggests the grandparent or great-grandparent couple may well be Ferverda/Miller.

Let’s continue working through the process with our spreadsheet and see what we can discover about those surnames.

Our 60 Results

Of the 60 total results, 15 from each vendor, a total of 24 cannot be assigned to other columns through bucketing or shared matches, so are associated with the maternal grandfather. Of course, Michael who descends from both of my maternal grandparents won’t be helpful initially.

Cheryl, Donald and Michael are duplicates at different vendors, but the rest are not.

Of the relevant matches, the majority, 12 are from FamilyTreeDNA, four each are from Ancestry and MyHeritage, and three are from 23andMe.

Of the names provided in the surname fields of matches, in matches’ trees in the first few generations, and the testers’ surnames, Ferverda is repeated 12 times, for 50% of the time. Miller is repeated 9 times, so it’s likely that either of those are the missing grandfather’s surname. Of course, if we had Y-DNA, we’d know the answer to that immediately.

Comparing trees of my matches, we find John Ferverda as the common ancestor between two different matches. John is the son of Hiram Ferverda and Eva Miller who are found in several trees.

That’s a great hint. But is this the breakthrough I need?

What’s Next?

The next step is to look for connections between the maternal grandmother, Edith Lore, who is known in our example, and a Ferverda male. He is probably one of the sons of Hiram Ferverda and Eva Miller. Do they lived in the same area? In close proximity? Do they attend the same church or school? Are they neighbors or live close to the family or some of their relatives? Does she have connections with Ferverda family members? We are narrowing in.

Some of Hiram and Eva’s sons might be able to be eliminated based on age or other factors, or at least be less likely candidates. Any of their children who had moved out of state when the child was conceived would be less likely candidates. Age would be a factor, as would opportunity.

Target testing of the Ferverda sons’ children, or the descendants of their children would (probably) be able to pinpoint which of their sons is more closely related to me (or my mother) than the rest.

In our case, indeed, John Ferverda is the son we are searching for and his descendant, Michael is the highest match on the list. Cheryl and Donald descend from John’s brother, which eliminates him as a candidate. Another tester descends from a third Ferverda son, which eliminates that son as well.

Michael, my actual first cousin with a 755 cM match at one vendor, and 822 cM at a second vendor, is shown by the MyHeritage cM Explainer with an 88% probability that he is my first cousin.

However, when I’m trying to identify the maternal grandfather, which is half of that couple, I need to focus one generation further back in time to eliminate other candidates.

The second and third closest matches are both Donald at 395 cM and Cheryl at 467 cM who also share the same Ferverda/Miller lineage and are the children of my maternal grandfather’s brother.

On the spreadsheet, I need to look at the trees of people who have both Ferverda and Miller, which brought me to both Cheryl and Donald, then Michael, which allowed me to identify John Ferverda, unquestionably, as my grandfather based on the cM match amounts.

Cheryl and Donald, who are confirmed full siblings, and my mother either have to be first cousins, or half siblings. Their match with mother is NOT in the half-sibling range for one sibling, and on the lower edge with the other. Mother also matches Michael as a nephew, not more distantly as she would if he were a first cousin once removed (1C1R) instead of a nephew.

Evaluating these matches combined confirms that my maternal grandfather is indeed John Ferverda.

What About X DNA?

The X chromosome has a unique inheritance path which is sometimes helpful in this circumstance, especially to males.

Women inherit an X chromosome from both parents, but males inherit an X chromosome from ONLY their mother. A male inherits a Y chromosome from his father which is what makes him male. Women inherit two X chromosomes, one from each parent, and no Y, which is what makes them female.

Therefore, if you are a male and are struggling with which side of your tree matches are associated with, the X chromosome may be of help.

Your mother passed her X chromosome to you, which could be:

  • Her entire maternal X, meaning your maternal grandmother’s X chromosome
  • Her entire paternal X, meaning your maternal grandfather’s X chromosome (which descends from his mother)
  • Some combination of your maternal grandmother and maternal grandfather’s chromosomes

One thing we know positively is that a male’s X matches are ALWAYS from their maternal side only, so that should help when dividing a male’s matches maternally or paternally. Note – be aware of potential pedigree collapse, endogamy and identical-by-chance matches if it looks like a male has a X match on his father’s side.

Unfortunately, the X chromosome cannot assist females in the same way, because females inherit an X from both parents. Therefore, they can match people in the same was as a male, but also in additional ways.

  • Females will match their paternal grandmother on her entire X chromosome, and will match one or both of their maternal grandparents on the X chromosome.
  • Females will NEVER match their paternal grandfather’s X chromosome because their father did not inherit an X chromosome from his father.
  • Males will match one or both of their maternal grandparents on their X chromosome.
  • Males will NEVER match their paternal grandparents, because males do not receive an X chromosome from their father.

The usefulness of X DNA matching depends on the inheritance path of both the tester AND their match.

When Can Y-DNA or Mitochondrial DNA Help with Grandparent Identification?

If you recall, I selected the maternal grandfather as the person to seek because no tester carries either the Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA of their maternal grandfather. In other words, this was the most difficult identification, meaning that any of the other three grandparents would be, or at least could be, easier with the benefit of Y-DNA and/or mitochondrial DNA testing.

In addition to matching, both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA will provide testers with location origins, both continental and often much more specific locations based on where other testers and matches are from.

Y-DNA often provides a surname.

Let’s see how these tests, matches and results can assist us.

  • Paternal grandfather – If I was a male descended from John Ferverda paternally, I could have tested both my autosomal DNA PLUS my Y-DNA, which would have immediately revealed the Ferverda surname via Y-DNA. Two Ferverda men are shown in the Ferverda surname DNA project, above.

That revelation would have confirmed the Ferverda surname when combined with the high frequency of Ferverda found among autosomal matches on the spreadsheet.

  • Maternal grandmother – If we were searching for a maternal grandmother, both the male and female sibling testers (as shown in the pedigree chart) would have her mitochondrial DNA which could provide matches to relevant descendants. Mitochondrial DNA at both FamilyTreeDNA and 23andMe could also eliminate anyone who does not match on a common haplogroup, when comparing 23andMe results to 23andMe results, and FamilyTreeDNA to FamilyTreeDNA results at the same level.

At 23andMe, only base level haplogroups are provided, but they are enough to rule out a direct matrilineal line ancestor.

At FamilyTreeDNA, the earlier HVR1 and HVR2 tests provide base level haplogroups, while full sequence testing provides granular, specific haplogroups. Full sequence is the recommended testing level.

  • Paternal grandmother – If we were searching for a paternal grandmother, testers would, of course, need either their father to test his mitochondrial DNA, or for one of his siblings to test which could be used in the same way as described for maternal grandmother matching.

Summary

Successfully identifying a grandparent is dependent on many factors. Before you make that identification, it’s very difficult to know which are more or less important.

For example, if the grandparent is from a part of the world with few testers, you will have far fewer matches, potentially, than other lines from more highly tested regions. In my case, two of my four grandparents’ families, including Ferverda, immigrated in the 1850s, so they had fewer matches than families that have been producing large families in the US for generations.

Endogamy may be a factor.

Family size in past and current generations may be a factor.

Simple luck may be a factor.

Therefore, it’s always wise to test your DNA, and that of your parents and close relatives if possible, and upload to all of the autosomal databases. Then construct an analysis plan based on:

  • How you descend from the grandparent in question, meaning do you carry their X DNA, Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA.
  • Who else is available to test their autosomal DNA to assist with shared matches and the process of elimination.
  • Who else is available to test for Y-DNA and/or mitochondrial DNA of the ancestor in question.

If you don’t find the answer initially, schedule a revisit of your matches periodically and update your spreadsheet. Sometimes DNA and genealogy is a waiting same.

Just remember, luck always favors the prepared!

Resources

You may find the following resource articles beneficial in addition to the links provided throughout this article.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

X Chromosome Master Class

Posted on by
15

The X chromosome can be especially useful to genetic genealogists because it has a unique inheritance path. Thanks to that characteristic, some of the work of identifying your common ancestor is done just by simply HAVING an X match.

Unfortunately, X-DNA and X matching is both underutilized and somewhat misunderstood – in part because not all vendors utilize the X chromosome for matching.

The X chromosome has the capability of reaching further back in time and breaking down brick walls that might fall no other way.

Hopefully, you will read this article, follow along with your own DNA results and make important discoveries.

Let’s get started!

Who Uses the X Chromosome?

The X chromosome is autosomal in nature, meaning it recombines under some circumstances, but you only inherit your X chromosome from certain ancestors.

It’s important to understand why, and how to utilize the X chromosome for matching. In this article, I’ve presented this information in a variety of ways, including case studies, because people learn differently.

Of the four major testing vendors, only two provide X-DNA match results.

  • FamilyTreeDNA – provides X chromosome results and advanced matching capabilities including filtered X matching
  • 23andMe – provides X chromosome results, but not filtered X matching without downloading your results in spreadsheet format
  • Ancestry and MyHeritage do not provide X-DNA results but do include the X in your raw DNA file so you can upload to vendors who do provide X matching
  • GEDmatch – not a DNA testing vendor but a third-party matching database that provides X matching in addition to other tools

It’s worth noting at this point that X-DNA and mitochondrial DNA is not the same thing. I wrote about that, here. The source of this confusion is that the X chromosome and mitochondrial DNA are both associated in some way with descent from females – but they are very different and so is their inheritance path.

So, what is X-DNA and how does it work?

What is X-DNA?

Everyone inherits two copies of each of chromosomes 1-22, one copy of each chromosome from each of your parents.

That’s why DNA matching works and each match can be identified as “maternal” or “paternal,” depending on how your match is related to you. Each valid match (excluding identical by chance matches) will be related either maternally, or paternally, or sometimes, both.

Your 23rd chromosome is your sex determination chromosome and is inherited differently. Chromosome 23 is comprised of X and Y DNA.

Everyone inherits one copy of chromosome 23 from each parent.

  • Males inherit a Y chromosome from their father, which is what makes males male. They do not inherit an X chromosome from their father.
  • Males always inherit an X chromosome from their mother.
  • Females inherit an X chromosome from both parents, which is what makes them female. Females have two X chromosomes, and no Y chromosome.
Chromosome 23 Father Contributes Mother Contributes
Male Child Y chromosome X chromosome
Female Child X chromosome X chromosome

X-DNA and mitochondrial DNA are often confused, but they are not the same thing. In fact, they are completely different.

Mitochondrial DNA, in BOTH males and females is always inherited from only the mother and only descends from the direct matrilineal line, so only the mother’s mother’s mother’s direct line. X DNA can be inherited from a number of ancestors based on a specific inheritance path.

Everyone has both X-DNA AND mitochondrial DNA.

Because males don’t inherit an X chromosome from their father, X chromosome matching has a unique and specific pattern of descent which allows testers who match to immediately eliminate some potential common ancestors.

  • Males only inherit an X chromosome from their mother, which means they can only have legitimate X matches on their mother’s side of their tree.
  • Females, on the other hand, inherit an X chromosome from both their mother and father. Their father only has one X chromosome to contribute, so his daughter receives her paternal grandmother’s X chromosome intact.
  • Both males and females inherit their mother’s X chromosome just like any of the other 22 autosomes. I wrote about chromosomes, here.

However, the unique X chromosome inheritance path provides us with a fourth very useful type of DNA for genealogy, in addition to Y-DNA, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA.

For the vendors who provide X-matching, it’s included with your autosomal test and does not need to be purchased separately.

The Unique X Chromosome

The X chromosome, even though it is autosomal in nature, meaning it does recombine and divide in certain circumstances, is really its own distinct tool that is not equivalent to autosomal matching in the way we’re accustomed. We just need to learn about the message it’s delivering and how to interpret X matches.

FamilyTreeDNA is one of two vendors who utilizes X chromosome matching, along with 23andMe, which is another good reason to encourage your matches at other vendors to upload their DNA file to FamilyTreeDNA for free matching.

The four major vendors do include X-DNA results in their raw DNA download file, even if they don’t provide X-matching themselves. This means you can upload the results to either FamilyTreeDNA or GEDmatch where you can obtain X matches. I provided step-by-step download/upload instructions for each vendor here.

Let’s look how X matching is both different, and beneficial.

My X Chromosome Family Tree

We are going to build a simple case study. A case study truly is worth 1000 descriptions.

This fan chart of my family tree colorizes the X chromosome inheritance path. In this chart, males are colored blue and females pink, but the salient point is that I can inherit some portion of (or all of) a copy of my X chromosome from the colorized ancestors, and only those ancestors.

Because males don’t inherit an X chromosome from their father, they CANNOT inherit any portion of an X chromosome from their father’s ancestors.

Looking at my father’s half of the chart, at left, you see that I inherited an X chromosome from both of my parents, but my father only inherited an X chromosome from his mother, Ollie Bolton. His father’s portion of the tree is uncolored, so no X chromosome could have descended from his paternal ancestors to him. Therefore he could not pass any X chromosome segments to me from his paternal side – because he doesn’t have X DNA from his father.

Hence, I didn’t inherit an X chromosome from any of the people whose positions in the chart are uncolored, meaning I can only inherit an X chromosome from the pink or blue people.

Essentially any generational male to male, meaning father/son relationship is an X-DNA blocker.

I know positively that I inherited my paternal grandmother, Ollie Bolton’s entire X chromosome, because hers is the only X chromosome my father, in the fan chart above, had to give me. His entire paternal side of the fan chart is uncolored.

Men only ever inherit their X chromosome from their mother. The only exception to this is if a male has the rare genetic condition of Klinefelter Syndrome, also known as XXY. If you are an adult male, it’s likely that you’ll already know if you have Klinefelters, so that’s probably the last possibility you should consider if you appear to have paternal X matches, not the first.

Sometimes, men appear to have X matches on their father’s side, but (barring Klinefelter’s) this is impossible. Those matches must either be identical by chance, or somehow related in an unknown way on their mother’s side.

Everyone inherits an X chromosome from their mother that is some combination of the X from her father and mother. It’s possible to inherit all of your maternal grandmother or maternal grandfather’s X chromosome, meaning they did not recombine during meiosis.

Using DNA Painter as an X Tool

I use DNAPainter to track my matches and correlate segments with ancestors.

I paint my DNA segments for all my chromosomes at DNAPainter which provides me with a central tracking mechanism that is visual in nature and allows me to combine matches from multiple vendors who provide segment information. I provide step-by-step instructions for using DNAPainter, here.

This is my maternal X chromosome with my matches painted. I’ve omitted my matches’ names for privacy.

On the left side of the shaded grey column, those matches are from my maternal grandmother’s ancestors. On the right side, those matches are from my maternal grandfather’s ancestors.

The person in the grey column descends from unknown ancestors. In other words, I can tell that they descend from my maternal line, but I can’t (yet) determine through which of my two maternal grandparents.

There’s also an area to the right of the grey column where there are no matches painted, so I don’t know yet whether I inherited this portion of my X chromosome from my maternal grandmother or maternal grandfather.

The small darker pink columnar band is simply marking the centromere of the chromosome and does not concern us for this discussion.

Click on any image to enlarge

In this summary view of my paternal X chromosome, above, it appears that I may well have inherited my entire X chromosome from my paternal great-grandmother. We know, based on our inheritance rules that I clearly received my paternal grandmother’s X chromosome, because that’s all my father had to give me.

However, by painting my matches based on their ancestors, and selecting the summary view, you can see that most of my paternal X chromosome can be accounted for, with the exception of rather small regions with the red arrows.

It’s not terribly unusual for either a male or female to inherit their entire maternal X chromosome from one grandparent, or in this case, great-grandparent.

Of course, a male doesn’t inherit an X chromosome from their father, but a female can inherit her paternal X chromosome from either or both paternal grandparents.

Does Size Matter?

Generally speaking, an X match needs to be larger than a match on the other chromosomes to be considered genealogically equivalent in the same timeframe as other autosomal matches. This is due to:

  • The unique inheritance pattern, meaning fewer recombination events occurred.
  • The fact that X-DNA is NOT inherited from several lines.
  • The X chromosome has lower SNP density, meaning it contains fewer SNPs, so there are fewer possible locations to match when compared to the other chromosomes.

I know this equivalency requirement sounds negative, but it’s actually not. It means 7 cM (centimorgans) of DNA on the X chromosome will reach back further in time, so you may carry the DNA of an ancestor on the X chromosome that you no longer carry on other chromosomes. It may also mean that older segments remain larger. It’s actually a golden opportunity.

It sounds much more positive to say that a 16 cM X match for a female, or a 13 cM X match for a male is about the same as a 7 cM match for any other autosomal match in the same generation.

Of course, if the 7 cM match gets divided in the following generation, it has slipped below the matching threshold. If a 16 or 13 cM X match gets divided, it’s still a match. Plus, in some generations, if passed from father to daughter, it’s not divided or recombined. So a 7 cM X match may well be descended from ancestors further back in time.

X Chromosome Differences are Important!

Working with our great-great grandparent’s generation, we have 16 direct ancestors as illustrated in the earlier fan chart.

Given that females inherit from 8 X-chromosome ancestors in total, they are going to inherit an average of 45.25 cM of X-DNA from each of those ancestors. Females have two X chromosomes for a total length of 362 cM of X-DNA from both parents.

A male only has one X chromosome, 181 cM in length, so he will receive an average of 36.2 cM from each of 5 ancestors, and it’s all from his mother’s side.

In this chart, I’ve shown the total number of cMs for all of the autosomes, meaning chromosomes 1-22 and, separately, the X for males and females.

  • The average total cM for chromosomes 1-22 individually is 304 cM. (Yes, each chromosome is a different length, but that doesn’t matter for averages.)
  • That 304 cM can be inherited from any of 16 ancestors (in your great-grandparent’s generation)
  • The total number of cM on the X chromosomes for both parents for females totals 362
  • The total cM of X-DNA for males is 181 cM
  • The calculated average cM inherited for the X chromosome in the same generation is significantly different, shown in the bottom row.

The actual average for males and females for any ancestor on any random non-X chromosome (in the gg-grandparent generation) is still 19 cM. Due to the inheritance pattern of the X chromosome, the female X-chromosome average inheritance is 45.25 cM and the male average is 36.2 cM, significantly higher than the average of 19 cM that genetic genealogists have come to expect at this relationship distance on the other chromosomes, combined.

How Do I Interpret an X Match?

It’s important to remember when looking at X matching that you’re only looking at the amount of DNA from one chromosome. When you’re looking at any other matching amount, you’re looking at a total match across all chromosomes, as reported by that vendor. Vendors report total matching DNA differently.

  • The total amount of matching autosomal DNA does not include the X chromosome cMs at FamilyTreeDNA. X-DNA matching cMs are reported separately.
  • The total amount of matching autosomal DNA does include the X chromosome cMs in the total cM match at 23andMe
  • X-DNA is not used for matching or included in the match amount at either MyHeritage or Ancestry, but is included in the raw DNA data download files for all four vendors.
  • The total match amount shows the total for 22 (or 23) chromosomes, NOT just the X chromosome(s). That’s not apples to apples.

Therefore, an X match of 45 cM for a female or 36 for a male is NOT (necessarily) equivalent to a 19 cM non-X match. That 19 cM is the total for 22 chromosomes, while the X match amount is just for one chromosome.

You might consider a 20 cM match on the regular autosomes significant, but a 20 cM X-only match *could* be only roughly equivalent to a 10ish cM match on chromosomes 1-22 in the same generation. That’s the dog-leg inheritance pattern at work.

This is why FamilyTreeDNA does not report an X-only match if there is no other autosomal match. A 19 cM X match is not equivalent to a 19cM match on chromosomes 1-22. Not to mention, calculating relationships based on cM ranges becomes more difficult when the X is included.

However, the flip side is that because of the inheritance pattern of the X chromosome, that 19 cM match, if valid and not IBC, may well reach significantly further back in time than a regular autosomal matches. This can be particularly important for people seeking either Native or enslaved African ancestors for whom traditional records are elusive if they exist at all.

Critical Take-Away Messages

Here are the critical take-away messages:

  1. Because there are fewer ancestral lineages contributing to the tester’s X chromosome, the amount of X chromosomal DNA that a tester inherits from the ancestors who contribute to their X chromosome is increased substantially.
  2. The DNA of the contributing ancestors is more likely to be inherited, because there are fewer other possible contributing ancestors, meaning fewer recombination events or DNA divisions/recombinations.
  3. X-DNA is also more likely to be inherited because when passed from mother to son, it’s passed intact and not admixed with the DNA of the father.
  4. X matches cannot be compared equally to either percentages or cM amounts on any of the other chromosomes, or autosomal DNA in total, because X matching only reports the amount on one single chromosome, while your total cM match amount reports the amount of DNA that matches from all chromosomes (which includes the X at 23andMe).
  5. If you have X matches at 23andMe and/or FamilyTreeDNA, you can expect your total matching to be higher at 23andMe because they include the X matching cM in the total amount of shared DNA. FamilyTreeDNA provides the amount of X matching DNA separately, but not included in the total. MyHeritage and Ancestry do not include X matching DNA.

For clarity, at FamilyTreeDNA, you can see my shared DNA match with my mother. Of course, I match her on the total length of all my chromosomes, which is 3563 cM, the total Shared DNA for chromosomes 1-22. This includes all chromosomes except for the X chromosome which is reported separately at 181 cM. The longest contiguous block of shared DNA is 284 cM, the entire length of chromosome 1, the longest chromosome.

Because I’m a female, I match both parents on the full length of all 23 chromosomes, including 181 cM on both X chromosomes, respectively. Males will only match their mother on their X chromosome, meaning their total autosomal DNA match to their father, because the X is excluded, is 181 cM less than to their mother.

This difference in the amount of shared DNA with each parent, plus the differences in how DNA totals are reported by various vendors is also challenging for tools like DNAPainter’s Shared cM Tool which is based on the crowd sourced Shared cM Project that averages shared DNA numbers for known relationships at various vendors and translates those numbers into possible relationships for unknown matches.

Not all vendors report their total amount of shared DNA the same way. This is true for both X-DNA and half identical (HIR) versus fully identical (FIR) segments at 23andMe. This isn’t to say either approach is right or wrong, just to alert you to the differences.

Said Another Way

Let’s look at this another way.

If the average on any individual chromosome is 19 cMs for a relationship that’s 5 generations back in time. The average X-DNA for the same distance relationship is substantially more, which means that:

  • The X-DNA probably reaches further back in time than an equivalent relationship on any other autosome.
  • The X-DNA will have (probably) divided fewer times, and more DNA will descend from individual ancestors.
  • The inheritance path, meaning potential ancestors who contributed the X chromosomal DNA, is reduced significantly.

It’s challenging to draw equivalences when comparing X-DNA matching to the other chromosomes due to several variables that make interpretation difficult.

Based on the X-match size in comparison to the expected 19 cM single chromosome match at this genealogical distance, what is the comparable X-DNA segment size to the minimum 7 cM size generally accepted as valid on other chromosomes? What would be equal to a 7 cM segment on any other single random autosomal match, even though we know the inheritance probabilities are different and this isn’t apples to apples? Let’s pretend that it is.

This calculation presumes at the great-great-grandparent level that the 19 cM is in one single segment on a single chromosome. Now let’s divide 19 cM by 7 cM, which is 2.7, then divide the X amounts by the same number for the 7 cM equivalent of 16.75 cM for a female and 13.4 cM for a male.

When people say that you need a “larger X match to be equivalent to a regular autosomal match,” this is the phenomenon being referenced. Clearly a 7 cM X match is less relevant, meaning not equivalent, in the same generation as a 7 cM regular autosomal match.

Still, X matching compared to match amounts shown on the other chromosomes is never exact;u apples to apples because:

  • You’re comparing one X chromosome to the combined DNA amounts of many chromosomes.
  • The limited recombination path.
  • DNA from the other autosomes is less likely to be inherited from a specific ancestor.
  • The X chromosome has a lower SNP density than the other chromosomes, meaning fewer SNPs per cM.
  • The X-DNA may well reach further back in time because it has been divided less frequently.

Bottom Line

The X chromosome is different and holds clues that the other autosomes can’t provide.

Don’t dismiss X matches even if you can’t identify a common ancestor. Given the inheritance path, and the reduced number of divisions, your X-DNA may descend from an ancestor further back in time. I certainly would NOT dismiss X matches with smaller cMs than the 13 and 16 shown above, even though they are considered “equivalent” in the same generation.

X chromosome matching can’t really be equated to matching on the other chromosomes. They are two distinct tools, so they can’t be interpreted identically.

Different vendors treat the X chromosome differently, making comparison challenging.

  • 23andMe includes not only the X chromosome in their cM total, but doubles the Fully Identical Regions (FIR) when people, such as full siblings, share the same DNA from both parents. I wrote about that here.
  • Ancestry does not include the X in their cM match calculations.
  • Neither does MyHeritage.
  • FamilyTreeDNA shows an X match only when it’s accompanied by a match on another chromosome.

The Shared cM Project provides an average of all of the data input by crowdsourcing from all vendors, by relationship, which means that the cM values for some relationships are elevated when compared to the same relationship or even same match were it to be reported from a different vendor.

The Best Part!

The X chromosome inheritance pattern means that you’re much more likely to carry some amount of a contributing ancestor’s X-DNA than on any other chromosome.

  • X-DNA may well be “older” because it’s not nearly as likely to be divided, given that there are fewer opportunities for recombination.
  • When you’re tracking your X-DNA back in your tree, whenever you hit a male, you get an automatic “bump” back a generation to his mother. It’s like the free bingo X-DNA square!
  • You can immediately eliminate many ancestors as your most recent common ancestor (MRCA) with an X-DNA match.
  • Because X-DNA reaches further back in time, sometimes you match people who descend from common ancestors further back in time as well.

If you match someone on multiple segments, if one of those matching segments is X-DNA, that segment is more likely to descend from a different ancestor than the segments on chromosomes 1-22. I’ve found many instances where an X match descends from a different ancestor than matching DNA segments on the autosomes. Always evaluate X matches carefully.

Sometimes X-DNA is exactly what you need to solve a mystery.

Ok, now let’s step through how to use X-DNA in a real-life example.

Using X DNA to Solve a Mystery

Let’s say that I have a 30 cM X match with a male.

  • I know immediately that our most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is on HIS mother’s side.
  • I know, based on my fan chart, which ancestral lines are eliminated in my tree. I’ve immediately narrowed the ancestors from 16 to 5 on his side and 16 to 8 on my side.
  • Two matching males is even easier, because you know immediately that the common ancestor must be on both of their mother’s sides, with only 5 candidate lines each at the great-great-grandparent generation.

Female to female matches are slightly more complex, but there are still several immediately eliminated lines each. That means you’ve already eliminated roughly half of the possible relationships by matching another female on their X chromosome.

In this match with a female second cousin, I was able to identify who she was via our common ancestor based on the X chromosome path. In this chart, I’m showing the relevant halves of her chart at left (paternal), and mine (maternal), side by side.

I added blockers on her chart and mine too.

As it turns out, we both inherited most of our X chromosome from our great-grandparents, marked above with the black stars.

Several lines are blocked, and my grandfather’s X chromosome is not a possibility because the common ancestor is my maternal grandmother’s parents. My grandfather is not one of her ancestors.

Having identified this match as my closest relative (other than my mother) to descend on my mother’s maternal side, I was able to map that portion of my X chromosome to my great-grandparents Nora Kirsch and Curtis Benjamin Lore.

My X Chromosome at DNA Painter

Here’s my maternal X chromosome at DNAPainter and how I utilized chromosome painting to push the identification of the ancestors whose X chromosome I inherited back an additional two generations.

Using that initial X chromosome match with my second cousin, shown by the arrow at bottom of the graphic, I mapped a large segment of my maternal X chromosome to my maternal great-grandparents.

By viewing the trees of subsequent X maternal matches, I was then able to push those common segments, shown painted directly above that match with the same color, back another two generations, to Joseph Hill, born in 1790, and Nabby Hall. I was able to do that based on the fact that other matches descend from Joseph and Nabby through different children, meaning we all triangulate on that common segment. I wrote about triangulation at DNAPainter, here.

I received no known X-DNA from my great-grandmother, Nora Kirsch, although a small portion of my X chromosome is still unassigned in yellow as “Uncertain.”

I received a small portion of my maternal X chromosome, in magenta, at left, from my maternal great-great-grandparents, John David Miller and Margaret Lentz.

The X chromosome is a powerful tool and can reach far back in time.

In some cases, the X, and other chromosomes can be inherited intact from one grandparent. I could have inherited my mother’s entire copy of her mother’s, or her father’s X chromosome based on random recombination, or not. As it turns out, I didn’t, and I know that because I’ve mapped my chromosomes to identify my ancestors based on common ancestors with my matches.

X-DNA Advanced Matches at FamilyTreeDNA

At FamilyTreeDNA, the Advanced Matches tab includes the ability to search for X matches, either within the entire database, or within specific projects. I find the project selection to be particularly useful.

For example, within the Claxton project, my father’s maternal grandmother’s line, I recognize my match, Joy, which provides me an important clue as to the possible common ancestor(s) of our shared segments.

Joy’s tree shows that her 4-times great-grandparents are my 3-times great-grandparents, meaning we are 4th cousins once removed and share 17 cM of DNA on our X chromosome across two segments.

Don’t be deceived by the physical appearance of “size” on your chromosomes. The first segment that spans the centromere, or “waist” of the chromosome, above, is 10.29 cM, and the smaller segment at right is 7.02 cM. SNPs are not necessarily evenly distributed along chromosomes.

Remember, an X or other autosomal match doesn’t necessarily mean the entire match is contained in one segment so long as it’s large enough to be divided in two parts and survive the match threshold.

It’s worth noting that Joy and I actually share at least two different, unrelated ancestral lines, so I need to look at Joy’s blocked lines to see if one of those common ancestral lines is not a possibility for our X match. It’s important to evaluate all possible ancestors, plus the inheritance path to eliminate any lineage that involves a father to son inheritance on the X chromosome.

Last but not least, you may match on your X chromosome through a different ancestor than on other chromosomes. Every matching segment has its own individual history. It’s not safe to assume.

Now, take a look at your X chromosome matches at FamilyTreeDNA, 23andMe, and GedMatch. What will you discover?

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

DNAExplain Blog to be Preserved for Future Generations in the Library of Congress

Posted on by
68

Yes, indeed, this is definitely a red-letter event!!!

Not only is having my blog archived in the Library of Congress an incredible honor, but it solves a long-standing problem. Let’s start at the beginning.

In the Beginning…

I started this blog, www.dna-explained.com, also www.dnaexplain.com, for three primary reasons:

  • To educate the public, specifically genetic genealogists, about effectively using DNA for genealogy.
  • To share my own and other relevant vendor and non-vendor research and advancements in the field.
  • To provide a timeline and cumulative progressive history of this emerging field, recorded as it occurred. Essentially an industry diary.

My first blog article was published in July of 2012. The direct-to-consumer genetics industry was about 12 years old at that time. Today, the industry is roughly 23 years old and my blog is approaching its 11th anniversary. I’ve covered nearly half of the life of the genetic genealogy industry.

I recently crossed the threshold of 1600 published articles which equates to about 2.5 articles each week. Those articles total over 4 million words, or more than 15,000 pages of text, plus 20,000 images. That’s about half the size of the Encyclopedia Brittanica. That level of writing and publishing is almost a full-time job, alone, without anything else. Yet, I need to perform the research and do the work to create the content of each article. Not to mention the rest of my activities that pay the bills.

Anyone who writes, specifically, those who write to publish regularly, such as a blog, know that blogging isn’t exactly easy and requires an incredible amount of investmented time. The majority of blogs are abandoned shortly after creation. I fully understand why. You have to love both the process of writing and the subject – and be willing to contribute. Not to mention monitoring and approving the more than 50,000 comments and such.

As you know, this blog is free. I don’t charge for a subscription. I don’t accept paid content, guest articles or write articles for pay. I do have affiliate links at the bottom, but consider those cumulative purchases equivalent to buying me a cup of coffee. (Thank you to those who purchase through those links.)

There is some recurring financial investment in blogging too, but the biggest commitment, by far, is time. Hours and days that can’t be spent elsewhere, like on genealogy, for example – which leads me to my 52 Ancestors articles.

52 Ancestors

Of those slightly more than 1600 articles, 465 are in my 52 Ancestors series. I’m “blaming,” or crediting, Amy Johnson Crow for this, because in January of 2014, she challenged genealogists to write something about one ancestor a week and share or publish it someplace, somehow. I really liked that idea, and came to discover that focusing on one ancestor at a time, not a couple, and not their parents or children, allowed me to live with them for a bit and view their life through their eyes alone. So many times we know very little about our ancestor’s lives, and even less about the women. Interweaving Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA results and matches, relationships and the history of what was happening around them provides an invaluable tool to connect with their lives.

I wasn’t sure I could maintain that one article per week pace, but I wanted to try. The 52 Ancestors challenge was just for one year, right? I could stop anytime, right? But how would I share? I didn’t really think any of you would be interested in MY ancestors, so I very nearly didn’t publish these stories on my blog. I’m INCREDIBLY glad that I did, because I use both genealogy and genetic tools at multiple vendors to confirm those ancestors, to find and identify their descendants, and to break though next-generation brick walls. Plus, I’ve discovered innumerable wonderful cousins!

Having committed, I jumped into 52 Ancestors with both feet and immediately addressed a very long-standing mystery about my father’s missing son. What I didn’t expect to happen was for you, my readers, to help solve it, but you did!!! Two weeks later, Lee was identified, had a name and a history! Wow we were off and running at breakneck speed. To this day, the 52 Ancestors articles remain some of my favorites, along with the process of bringing those ancestors back to life, even if just through words.

Sometimes I don’t write about ancestors specifically, but memorable events in our lifetimes that we’ve shared, like the 1969 moon landing, Y2K and more recently, the anniversary of the space shuttle Challenger explosion. Don’t you wish someone had written or journaled about contemporary milestones in our ancestor’s lives? What I wouldn’t give for that!

Preservation and Perpetuity

One of the reasons I write about my ancestors and genetic genealogy more broadly is because I very much want to share with other researchers, now and in the future.

In some cases, I’m the contributor, but often others contribute invaluable information to me. I firmly believe that a rising tide lifts all ships.

My goal is twofold:

  • To educate others and share methodologies so they can find and confirm their ancestors.
  • To complete the painting of my ancestor’s lives, or as much as I can in my lifetime.

Both of these are foundations upon which others can build.

A few years ago, I began to be concerned with preservation in perpetuity. How might I preserve those stories and the rest of my blog? I realize that in time, the technical aspects of my blog articles will be dated, but the educational basics remain firm. Better research methodologies will be developed. New information, both paper trail and genetic, will, hopefully, be unearthed about my ancestors, but I want the information I’ve provided to remain accessible over time.

I’ve been a technologist long enough to know that nothing is forever. Web sites disappear every day. The Internet Archive is wonderful, but it too may go poof, not to mention that you need to know the website url to access the archived website.

I reached out to WordPress, my blogging platform a few years ago. I asked if I could pay in advance for a “permanent” website, but they said that after payment stopped for the domain name and my subscription for the “non-free” platform, that my articles would revert to a free WordPress site “forever.” That means the url would change. Of course, none of the original links would work, and its value would be much dimished given that the articles would not appear in search engines. Furthermore, “forever” in technology days could be very short indeed.

Resources like FamilySearch aren’t meant for publications like my blog, and neither is WikiTree, especially “someday” after the blog link is no longer valid. I’ve posted links to articles on my blog on the ancestors’ profiles at WikiTree and in my personal trees at MyHeritage and Ancestry, but once the link is gone, effectively, so is the information.

I could copy the articles to word/pdf documents and attach those files to the trees, but we really don’t know what will and will not have longevity in today’s technical genealogical environment. Plus, I don’t want my articles behind a paywall anyplace, especially since I’ve made them available for free.

However, the Library of Congress has now solved that quandary for me and I’m both elated and honored.

The Invitation  

In the crazy days leading up to RootsTech, a gem of an email landed in my inbox. It was supposedly the Library of Congress (LOC) requesting to archive this blog and make this website available for all perpetuity as part of a collection of historically and culturally significant websites designated for preservation.

That’s quite a compliment.

I wasn’t quite sure I believed it. In fact, I was pretty sure that I didn’t.

Of course, the first thing I thought was that these were really brilliant scammers.

I contacted the LOC and discovered that this email was, indeed, genuine. I was both shocked and humbled.

To Whom It May Concern:

The United States Library of Congress requests permission to include your website in the Local History and Genealogy Web Archive, which is part of a larger collection of historically and culturally significant websites that have been designated for preservation. The following URL has been selected for archiving: https://dna-explained.com/.

The Library hopes that you share its vision of preserving digital content and making it available to current and future generations of researchers. As the internet has become an increasingly important and influential part of our lives, we believe the historical record would be incomplete if websites like yours are not preserved and made a part of it. We also believe that expanding access to the Library’s collections is one of the best ways we can increase opportunities for education and scholarship around the world. Please provide the Library with permission to archive your website and provide public access to archived versions of your website by filling out the form available here: <link redacted.>

With your permission, the Library of Congress or its agent will engage in the collection of content from your website at regular intervals over time. In order to properly archive the above URL, we may archive other portions of the website and public content that your page links to on third party sites such as social media platforms. In addition to the aforementioned collection, archived content from your website may be added to other relevant collections in the future. This content would be available to researchers only at Library facilities or by special arrangement, unless you additionally grant the Library permission for the content to become more broadly available through hosting on the Library’s public website, which would be done no sooner than one year after it was collected. For more information on the web archiving process, please read our frequently asked questions.

We encourage you to learn more about the Library’s Web Archiving program and explore our collections to see examples of how we archive websites. If you have any questions, comments, or recommendations concerning the archiving of your website, please email the Library’s Web Archiving Team at webcapture@loc.gov.

Thank you.

Library of Congress Web Archiving Team

It would be an understatement to say I was incredibly excited. There were no balloons or jubilant noisemakers though, and the cats were unimpressed as I clicked and agreed for my collective body of work to succeed me “forever.” Who knew milestones like this were so quiet, with only me winking to Mom and Dad who I’m positive were watching and silently cheering!

Here’s the confirmation of my acceptance.

So, in another hundred years, just like I can search for, say, Estes photos from a century or more ago at the Library of Congress, people living four or five generations in the future will be able to search for and read about the very early days of genetic genealogy and find those ancestor stories. They will also be able to learn something about the time in which we live today.

I can stop worrying about more than a decade’s worth of work disappearing after I join my ancestors, hopefully to obtain the answers that have eluded me here.

I’m incredibly, incredibly humbled and grateful to the Library of Congress for this amazing opportunity to contribute to our collective heritage. Thanks to each and every one of you for joining me on our journey into the history books.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

cM Explainer™ – New MyHeritage Relationship Prediction Tool

Posted on by
14

At RootsTech, MyHeritage introduced cM Explainer, a new tool for all of their DNA customers that utilizes both the total matching cMs (centimorgans) plus the ages of the people involved, if provided by the customers, to estimate the relationship possibilities between two matches.

According to the MyHeritage blog article, here:

DNA Matches are characterized by the amount of DNA shared between two individuals, measured using a unit of genetic distance called centimorgans (cM). cM Explainer™ is unique in the way it uses both the centimorgan value as well as the ages of the two individuals (if known) to fine-tune its predictions, making MyHeritage the only major genealogy company to offer relationship prediction at this level of granularity and accuracy.

cM Explainer™ is fully integrated into the MyHeritage platform to shed light on any DNA Match found on MyHeritage, and is also available as a free standalone tool to benefit individuals who have tested with other DNA services.

Using cM Explainer

cM Explainer is automatically implemented for all MyHeritage DNA customers, so there’s nothing to do except utilize the tool in conjunction with the additional DNA tools already provided by MyHeritage.

Just click on DNA Matches if you’re a DNA customer, or under DNA Tools if you want to use the cM Explainer standalone tool.

Let’s look at my matches.

As you can see, two of my matches have provided their ages which appear in their match information.

The new cM Explainer probable relationship is listed as well. In Charlene’s case, she’s predicted to be a half first cousin, and Cheryl is predicted to be either a half first cousin, or a parent’s 1st cousin, which is another way of saying first cousin once removed.

Recall that “once removed” means one side of the descendant tree is one generation longer than the other. Cheryl and my Mom are first cousins (1C) and Cheryl and I are first cousins once removed (1C1R) or, said another way, I’m Cheryl’s first cousin’s daughter.

Probable Relationships

Some matches receive two listed “Probable Relationships,” but everyone can view additional estimates.

Click on the purple “Review DNA Match” button to view detail information.

My match’s segment information is provided, in addition to the possible relationships, in order of most probable first. To see additional information, click on the “show more relationships” link.

Charlene has a total of 5 possible relationships listed, each with its own probability calculated. One of my matches has a total of 8 possible relationships displayed.

Next, you’ll see the diagram of possible relationships.

Don’t forget to click on the “Relationships” dropdown in the upper right corner of the diagram.

You can click on Full relationships, Half relationships, or All Relationships.

I clicked on “all” which displays everything together.

Clicking the “Show probabilities for MRCA” box in the upper left-hand corner adds the probability that you and your match descend from a specific generation, or MRCA (most recent common ancestor.)

The highest or best probable relationship for cousin Charlene is calculated as 51.8% half first cousin.

The other possibilities are less likely. The second most likely is “Parent’s first cousin,” at 24.3%.

Charlene is my first cousin once removed (1C1R,) at the bottom. Stated another way, Charlene is my first cousin’s child, calculated at 4.5%, which should be genetically equivalent to a half first cousin at 51.8%. As you can see in the chart above, there’s VERY large probability difference between those two, which may be because of the expected comparative ages of the people in those positions involved.

Let’s take a minute to look at how half and “removed” relationships work genetically.

Half and “Removed” Relationships

In this example, John was married twice, to Mary and Sue. John had son Jim with Mary, and both daughters, Anna and Bonnie, with Sue. Their descendants took DNA tests.

In this chart, you can see that half-relationships of any kind carry half the average expected shared DNA as the full version of the same relationship. The yellow people, descendants of John and Mary, are half relationships to the green people because John was married to both Mary and Sue, having children with both wives.

The green people descend from full siblings, Anna and Bonnie, the children of Sue.

In the first generation, Jim and Anna are half siblings and share about 25% of their DNA. Anna and Bonnie are full siblings and share about 50% of their DNA. By extension, of course, Jim and Bonnie are half siblings too, sharing approximately 25% of their DNA, but not the exact same DNA as Jim and Anna share.

In the next generation, Jordan and Andrew are half first cousins and share about 6.25% of their DNA, while Andrew and Brad are full first cousins and share about 12.5% of their DNA.

Below the second cousin level, some cousins won’t match each other, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t cousins. It only means they didn’t happen to inherit a common segment of DNA from their common ancestors.

At the fourth-generation level, Jeremy and Abraham are half third cousins and share less than 1% or about 26.56 cM of their DNA, while Abraham and Betty are full third cousins and share about 53.13 cM of their DNA.

That half division of DNA occurred several generations earlier because Jim and Anna are half siblings which means that they only share half as much DNA as full siblings Anna and Bonnie. Of course, each subsequent generation will be a half relationship, and share roughly half as much as the full equivalent of that same relationship.

Once Removed

However, when the generations are offset by one, or once removed (1R,) the DNA is halved again. Looking at the chart again, half third cousins (3C,) Jeremy and Abraham share about 0.39% or about 25.56 cM of their DNA. Abraham and Beverly, who are 3C1R (third cousins once removed) are ALSO expected to share about 25.56 cM, the same amount of their DNA. In this comparison, the halving occurs in the last generation by the generational offset, when comparing Abraham with Beverly.

Of course, Jeremy and Beverly share the smallest percentage of all, because they are Half third cousins once removed, so they would be expected to share only about 13.28 cM of their DNA, assuming they share any at all.

I wrote about the various percentages expected of each relationship level and compiled a comprehensive chart in this article.

Of course, MyHeritage has included the factor of age to attempt to refine the relationship more succinctly.

How Accurate is cM Explainer?

I created a chart of my closest matches who are known, proven relatives.

Results where My Heritage has provided exact, accurate predictions are shown in red.

My first thought when I saw this new tool was that all of the people with whom I shared a Theory of Family Relativity (TOFR), especially relationships I had confirmed (or at least not rejected) would be predicted in cM Explainer to be that same relationship. Well, I was wrong.

Of the 8 matches with whom I have an accurate TOFR, the relationships of 4, or 50%, are correct, but the other 4 are not, so clearly, MyHeritage is not relying on TOFRs for cM Explainer, at least not solely, if at all.

Person Total cM # Segments Actual Relationship TOFR MyHeritage cM Explainer
Michael 822.8 31 1C Y 1C
Alberta 744.2 25 Half niece *1 (2nd on list) Y 1C
Dana 521.8 17 Half 1C1R (not on list) N 1st C dau, half 1C
Charlene 477.5 24 1C1R *2 (4th on list) N Half 1C
Cheryl 477.2 23 Parent’s 1C (2nd on list) N Half 1C, parent’s 1C
David 460.4 17 2C (3rd on list) N Half 1C
Buster 409.9 16 1C1R *3 N Parent’s 1C
Donald 381.7 17 1C1R (3rd on list) N 2C
Kurt 378.9 16 Half great-nephew (not on list) N 2C
Teresa 330.4 13 Half great-nephew (not on list) Y 2C
Shirley 223.3 8 2C1R (2nd on list) Y 2C
Sydney 217.8 10 Half great-nephew (not on list) N 2C dau, 1C dau
Buzz 212.7 9 2C Y 2C
Amos 182.7 8 1C2R (8th on list) N 2C son
Denny 166.9 6 3C (2nd on list) N 2C
Thomas 156.4 7 2C Y 2C
Patty 150.6 9 2C Y 2C
Cathy 102.9 5 3C Y 3C
Carol 87 7 2C1R (2nd on list) N 3C

*1 – Half aunt/uncle is equivalent to half niece/nephew – it’s simply a matter of perspective.

*2 – 1C1R (first cousin once removed) is the same relationship as a first cousin’s child, just said differently.

*3 – Your parent’s first cousin in your first cousin once removed (1C1R.)

In the Actual Relationship column, I’ve indicated the actual relationship, then if the actual relationship is shown on the chart of possibilities provided by MyHeritage, and if so, at which position.

For example, I’ve listed Alberta’s “Actual Relationship” as my half-niece. Additionally, there’s a comment at *1 below the chart. MyHeritage predicted Alberta as my first cousin, but the correct half-niece designation is shown second on the list.

In this case, I’m fairly sure I know exactly why the relationship miscalculation occurred. Alberta’s mother, my half-sister, was born to my father’s first wife. My mother was 22 years younger than my father, so my mother is roughly the same age as my half-sister. I am the same age as my half-sister’s oldest children. Therefore, we have an unusual generational difference where ages might be misleading.

In the second position, MyHeritage estimated Alberta as half-aunt, which is the same as half niece, depending on whose perspective you’re speaking from, so cM Explainer was close. In normal circumstances, 1st Cousin is probably the most likely relationship although having children separated by two decades certainly is not unheard of.

MyHeritage correctly predicted 6 of 19 relationships, for 31.6% accuracy.

The correct relationship was on the relationship list most of the time, but was omitted entirely 4 times. The common factor in the entirely missing relationships is that they are all half-relationships. While they were not all from the same family line, they did all involve long generations, meaning children born over a very long period. That’s not uncommon with half-siblings, and half relationships are notoriously difficult to sort from other candidate relationships. These situations might possibly be considered statistical outliers.

Equivalent Relationships

A half first cousin should be genetically equivalent to a first cousin, once removed, based on the amount of expected DNA for those relationships.

However, in at least one case, these two relationships are calculated with different resulting probabilities. Half first cousin is 41.5%, and 1st cousins child (aka 1C1R or 1st cousin once removed) is 43.8%.

Keep in mind, though that MyHeritage is using the age of the two individuals in their calculations, which could alter the results based on the combination of factors calculated into the probabilities. It’s 85% likely that the match is one of those two relationships.

Your Thoughts?

I’m interested in your thoughts on this new tool. How does it work for you? What about endogamy or pedigree collapse? Do you find it useful? How are you utilizing it in your research?

Shortly, I’ll do a comparison article with other tools to see how the publicly available cM Explainer tool stacks up against the rest.

Thanks to MyHeritage for making this tool free for all to use, here.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

The Best of 2022

Posted on by
12

It’s that time of year where we look both backward and forward.

Thank you for your continued readership! Another year under our belts!

I always find it interesting to review the articles you found most interesting this past year.

In total, I published 97 articles in 2022, of which 56 were directly instructional about genetic genealogy. I say “directly instructional,” because, as you know, the 52 Ancestors series of articles are instructional too, but told through the lives of my ancestors. That leaves 41 articles that were either 52 Ancestors articles, or general in nature.

It has been quite a year.

2022 Highlights

In a way, writing these articles serves as a journal for the genetic genealogy community. I never realized that until I began scanning titles a year at a time.

Highlights of 2022 include:

Which articles were your favorites that were published in 2022, and why?

Your Favorites

Often, the topics I select for articles are directly related to your comments, questions and suggestions, especially if I haven’t covered the topic previously, or it needs to be featured again. Things change in this industry, often. That’s a good thing!

However, some articles become forever favorites. Current articles don’t have enough time to amass the number of views accumulated over years for articles published earlier, so recently published articles are often NOT found in the all-time favorites list.

Based on views, what are my readers’ favorites and what do they find most useful?

In the chart below, the 2022 ranking is not just the ranking of articles published in 2022, but the ranking of all articles based on 2022 views alone. Not surprisingly, six of the 15 favorite 2022 articles were published in 2022.

The All-Time Ranking is the ranking for those 2022 favorites IF they fell within the top 15 in the forever ranking, over the entire decade+ that this blog has existed.

Drum roll please!!!

Article Title Publication Date 2022 Ranking All-Time Ranking
Concepts – Calculating Ethnicity Percentages January 2017 1 2
Proving Native American Ancestry Using DNA December 2012 2 1
Ancestral DNA Percentages – How Much of Them in in You? June 2017 3 5
AutoKinship at GEDmatch by Genetic Affairs February 2022 4
442 Ancient Viking Skeletons Hold DNA Surprises – Does Your Y or Mitochondrial DNA Match? Daily Updates Here September 2020 5
The Origins of Zana of Abkhazia July 2021 6
Full or Half Siblings April 2019 7 15
Ancestry Rearranged the Furniture January 2022 8
DNA from 459 Ancient British Isles Burials Reveals Relationships – Does Yours Match? February 2022 9
DNA Inherited from Grandparents and Great-Grandparents January 2020 10
Ancestry Only Shows Shared Matches of 20 cM and Greater – What That Means & Why It Matters May 2022 11
How Much Indian Do I Have in Me??? June 2015 12 8
Top Ten RootsTech 2022 DNA Sessions + All DNA Session Links March 2022 13
FamilyTreeDNA DISCOVER Launches – Including Y DNA Haplogroup Ages June 2022 14
Ancient Ireland’s Y and Mitochondrial DNA – Do You Match??? November 2020 15

2023 Suggestions

I have a few articles already in the works for 2023, including some surprises. I’ll unveil one very soon.

We will be starting out with:

  • Information about RootsTech where I’ll be giving at least 7 presentations, in person, and probably doing a book signing too. Yes, I know, 7 sessions – what was I thinking? I’ve just missed everyone so very much.
  • An article about how accurately Ancestry’s ThruLines predicts Potential Ancestors and a few ways to prove, or disprove, accuracy.
  • The continuation of the “In Search Of” series.

As always, I’m open for 2023 suggestions.

In the comments, let me know what topics you’d like to see.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Concepts: Your Matches on the Same Segment are NOT Necessarily Related to Each Other

Posted on by
11

Just because two (or more) people match you on the same segment does NOT mean they are related to each other.

This is a fundamental concept of DNA matching and of using a chromosome browser.

I want to make this concept crystal clear.

This past week, I’ve had two people contact me with the same question that’s based up on a critical misunderstanding, or maybe just lack of understanding.

It’s not intuitive – in fact, it’s counter-intuitive. I understand why they don’t understand.

It seems logical that if two or more people show up as a match to you on the chromosome browser, on the same segment, you’ve hit a home run and all you need to do is to identify their common ancestor who will also be your common ancestor, or at least related. Right?

NOT SO FAST!

Let’s walk through this, step-by-step. Once you “get it,” you’ll never forget it, and you can use this to help other people understand too. Please notice there are lots of links here to other articles I’ve written if you need refreshers or help with terms.

Yay! – I’ve Got Matches

OK, so you’ve just discovered that you have a close match with three people, on the same segment. You’re thrilled! Maybe you’re trying to identify your grandparent, so first or second cousin matches are VERY exciting for you.

They are also close enough matches with large enough segments that you don’t need to worry about false positive matches, meaning identical by chance.

Let’s take a look. I’m using FamilyTreeDNA because that’s where the majority of my family has tested, plus they have a nice chromosome browser and their unique matrix tool.

We have three nice-sized matches to people estimated to be my first or second cousins. I’ve selected all three and compared them in the chromosome browser. The large red match is 87 cM and the blue and teal matches are 39 cM each, and completely within the 87 cM segment, so completely overlapping.

I’ve hit the mother-lode, right?

All I need to do is identify THEIR common ancestor and I’ll surely find mine.

Right???

Nope

Just because they all three match ME on this same segment does NOT mean they all match each other and are from the same side of my family. All three people DO NOT NECESSARILY have the same ancestor. From this information alone, we cannot tell.

I know this seems counterintuitive, especially since you’re seeing them all on MY chromosomes – which are the background pallet.

However, remember that I have two chromosomes. One from my father and one from my mother.

These matches are ALWAYS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE TESTER.

So, I’m going to see matches in exactly the same location – matches on my mother’s chromosome and matches on my father’s chromosomes – painted on the same segment locations of my chromosome.

Let’s prove that in the simplest of ways.

Mom and Dad

This is my kit, compared with my Dad and Mom.

I only took a screen shot of my first several chromosomes, but you can see that I match both of my parents on the full length of each chromosome – on the same exact segments.

I am the background – the pallet upon which my matches are painted.

First, my father is painted, then my mother – their match to me displayed on my chromosomes.

I assure you, my father and mother are NOT related to each other. I’ll prove it.

I could simply select one parent, then look for the other parent on the shared matches list.

Or, I could use the Matrix tool, especially if I wanted to see if a group of people are related to me and also to each other.

The Matrix

The Matrix tool is available under “See More,” in the Autosomal DNA Results & Tools section.

The Matrix allows you to select 10 or fewer matches to see if they are matches to each other. We already know they are matches to you.

I added my parents into the matrix.

My parents do not match each other, meaning they are not genetically related, because their intersecting cell is not blue.

Next, let’s select those three other people I match and see if they match each other.

Yes indeed, we can see that Cheryl and Donald match each other, but Amos matches NEITHER Cheryl nor Don. Yet, the segments of Cheryl and Donald, who had the 39 cM blue and teal segments on the chromosome browser fall entirely within Amos’s 87 cM segment.

Therefore, if Cheryl and Donald do not match Amos, that means that Cheryl and Donald are from one side of my family, and Amos is from the other. This is absolutely true in this instance because we are comparing the exact same segment on my DNA, so everyone has to match me maternally or paternally, or by chance (IBC.) The segment size alone removes the possibility of IBC.

Each parent gave me one copy of chromosome 4, so everyone who matches me on chromosome 4 must match one or the other parent on that chromosome segment.

I’ve added my parents back into the comparison, at the bottom, with the three matches on chromosome 4. Now you can see that same segment again, and everyone matches me, parents included, of course.

There’s no way to tell the difference whether the blue, red and teal match is on my mother’s or father’s side without additional information.

Again, let’s prove it.

Everybody, Let’s Dance

I added my Mom and Dad back into the matrix.

You can see that Mom and Cheryl and Donald all match each other, plus me of course, by inference because these are my matches.

You can see that Amos and my Dad match each other, and me of course, but not the other people.

Settled

So, we’ve settled that, right.

In my case, I could provide this great example, because I do in fact have parental tests to use for comparison.

You can see when I remove my Dad and Amos that Cheryl and Donald and my Mom all match each other. If I were to remove my Mom, Cheryl and Donald would match each other.

If I remove Mom, Donald and Cheryl, Dad and Amos match each other.

Of course, you may not have either of your parents’ DNA to use as an anchor for matching. You may, in fact, be searching for a parent or close relative.

If you do have “anchor people,” by all means, use them. In fact, upload or create a tree, link your anchor people and as many others as possible to their profiles in your tree at FamilyTreeDNA so your matches will be automatically bucketed, meaning assigned maternally or paternally. FamilyTreeDNA is the only company that offers linking and triangulated bucketing.

But, if you’re searching for your parents or know nothing about your family, you won’t have an anchor point, so what’s next?

What’s Next?

Using a combination of matching, shared matches and the matrix, you can create your own grouping of matches.

My suggestion is to start with your 10 closest matches.

Pull all 10 into the matrix.

Remember, you will match these people across your chromosomes. The only question the matrix answers is “do my matches match each other,” and a “yes” doesn’t’ necessarily mean they match each other on the same line you match either or both of them on.

I’ve noted how each person is related to me.

You can see that there’s a large block of matches on my paternal side. Some are labeled “Father- both.” These people are related both maternally and paternally to my father, because either the families intermarried, or they are descendants of my paternal grandparents.

Three, Donald, Dennis and Cheryl are related on my mother’s side, but it’s worth noting that Dennis doesn’t match Cheryl or Donald. That doesn’t mean he’s not on my mother’s side, it simply means he descends through her maternal line, not the paternal line like Donald and Cheryl. Remember, we’re not comparing people who match on the same chromosome this time – we’re comparing my closest matches across all chromosomes, so it makes sense that my mother’s maternal matches won’t match her paternal matches, but they would both match Mom if she were in the matrix. Clearly they all match me or they would not be in my match list in the first place.

You could also run a Genetic Affairs AutoCluster or AutoTree to cluster your matches for you into groups, although you can’t select specifically which individuals to include, except by upper and lower thresholds.

Regardless of the method you select, you still need to do the homework to figure out the common ancestors, but it’s a lot easier knowing who also match each other.

Circling Back to the Beginning

Now, when you see those two or three or more people all matching you on the same segment on the chromosome browser, you KNOW that you can’t immediately assume they match you and therefore are all related to each other. It’s possible, and even probable that some of them will match you because they match your mother’s chromosome and some will match your father’s chromosome – so they are from different sides of your family.

The Matrix tool shows you, for groups of 10 or less, who also matches each other.

What you are doing by determining if multiple people share common segments and match each other is triangulation. I wrote about triangulation at each company in the articles below:

Unfortunately, Ancestry does not provide a chromosome browser, so triangulation is not possible, but Ancestry does provide shared matching with some caveats. However, some Ancestry customers do upload their DNA file to FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage or GEDmatch. You can find step-by-step download/upload instructions for all vendors, here.

Additional Resources

You’ve probably noticed there are lots of links in this article to other articles that I’ve written. You might want to go back and take a look at those if you’re in the process of educating yourself or need help wrapping your head around the “same segment address – two parents – your matches are not created equal” phenomenon.

Here are a couple of additional articles that will help you understand matching on both parents’ sides, and how to get the most out of matching, segments, triangulation and chromosome browsers.

I prepared a triangulation resource summary article, here:

Enjoy!!
____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here or follow me on Twitter, here.

Share the Love!

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

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an email whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the 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 Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research