Mitochondrial DNA A–Z: A Step-by-Step Guide to Matches, Mitotree, and mtDNA Discover

Posted on September 2, 2025 by Roberta Estes

People have been asking for a step-by-step guide for mitochondrial DNA, and here it is!

This article steps testers through all their results, page by page, including a dozen Discover reports, explaining what the information in each tool means. There’s SO MUCH great content provided, and you’ll want to absorb every tidbit.

This is meant to be a roadmap for you – a recipe card to follow to get the most out of your results.

You can either read through this article once, then sign on to your own account, or sign on now and follow along. Yes, this article is long, but it’s also a one-stop shop when you want information about any page or feature. Refer back to this article as needed, and feel free to forward it to others when they receive their results.

I’ve also provided additional resources for you at each step of the way, along with many tips and suggestions to help you help yourself.

I’m using the LeJeune sisters of Acadia as my example – in part because there were several questions about their heritage – including whether they were actually sisters, whether they were Native American, and if a third woman was also a sister.

Think about why you tested, and what you hope to learn so you know where to focus.

Everyone has their own motivation for testing, and we all want to extract as much information as possible. Some answers are genetic – thanks to mitochondrial, Y-DNA, and autosomal testing. Some answers are historical and genealogical. All of them need to mesh nicely together and confirm each other.

When they don’t, if they don’t, we need to understand how to discern the truth.

Every Ancestor Has a Mitochondrial DNA Story to Tell You

Sometimes it’s not our own results we’re analyzing, but the results of another tester – a cousin whose mitochondrial DNA represents a particular shared ancestor. We aren’t restricted to just our own mitochondrial DNA to decipher our ancestors’ stories.

What messages and secrets do those ancestors have to tell us? Our results read like the very best mystery novel ever – except it’s not a novel – it’s fact. And it’s ours!

Mitochondrial DNA is only passed from mothers to their children, never admixed or combined with the DNA of the father, so your mitochondrial DNA today is either exactly the same as that of your ancestors a few generations ago, or very close if a mutation has occurred between when they lived and today’s tester.

One of mitochondrial DNA’s strengths is that it can reach far back in time, it’s message undiluted and uninterrupted by recombination.

The messages from our ancestors are very clear. We just need to understand how to hear what they are telling us.

Step-by-Step Soup to Nuts

We will analyze the mitochondrial DNA results of multiple testers who descend from the LeJeune sisters, Edmee and Catherine, born in 1624 and 1633, respectively, to see what they have to tell their descendants. For a very long time, rumors abounded that their mother was Native American, so we will keep that in mind as we review all matching, Mitotree and mtDNA Discover tools provided by FamilyTreeDNA.

We will also learn how to evaluate seemingly conflicting information.

Soup to nuts – we will incorporate every sliver of information along the way and extract every morsel that can help you. Think of this article as your recipe and the reports and information as ingredients!

To be clear, you don’t HAVE to read all of this or decipher anything if you don’t want to. You can just glance at the matches and be on your way – but if you do – you’re leaving an incredible amount of useful information on the table, along with MANY hints that you can’t find elsewhere.

If there was an out-of-print book about this ancestral line in a rare book collection someplace, as a genealogist, you would drive half-way across the country to access that information. This is your rare book, that updates itself, and you don’t have to do anything other than take a mitochondrial DNA test, or find a cousin to take one for lines you don’t carry..

Come along and join the fun! Your ancestors are waiting!

The LeJeune Question

Recently, I wrote about my ancestor Catherine LeJeune, who was born about 1633, probably in France before her family settled in Acadia, present-day Nova Scotia.

The identity of her parents has been hotly contested and widely debated for a long time.

I intentionally did not address her DNA results in that article because I wanted to establish the historical facts about her life and address her mitochondrial DNA separately. The process we are following to analyze her DNA results is the same process everyone should follow, which is why we are taking this step-by-step approach, complete with detailed explanations.

Often, when people hit a brick wall with an ancestor, especially during European colonization of the Americas, someone suggests that the person surely “must be” Native American. Lack of records is interpreted to add layers of evidence, when, in fact, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

For example, for many of the earliest French Acadians, birth and baptism records have NOT been located in France, where massive record loss has been experienced.

Additionally, not all records that do exist have been indexed, transcribed, or digitized. Many are damaged and/or nearly impossible to read. Lack of records does NOT mean that those settlers weren’t French, or in this case, it does NOT indicate that they were Native American. It simply means we are lacking that piece of evidence.

Enter mitochondrial DNA.

This article is focused on how to use mitochondrial DNA to decode these messages from our ancestors. I’m providing a very short summary of the relevant historical factors about the LeJeune sisters so readers can keep this in mind as we review the 17+ tools waiting for us when mitochondrial DNA results are ready.

The First Acadian Settlers

The Acadians were French settlers in what is today Nova Scotia. The first Acadians arrived in LaHeve (LaHave), on the southern coast of Acadia, in 1632 after Acadia was returned to France from English control. There may or may not have been any French families in the original group, but if so, very few. In 1636, another group of settlers arrived, but no LeJeune is on the roster.

At the end of 1636, the fledgling Acadian colony was moved from LaHeve, on the southern coast, to Port Royal, a more protected environment.

While we don’t know exactly when the family of Catherine and Edmee LeJeune arrived, we can bracket the dates. We know that Catherine’s sister, Edmee LeJeune, born about 1624, married another settler, Francois Gautrot, about 1644 in Port Royal, so they had arrived by that time.

Edmee’s 1624 birth year is important for two reasons. First, there were no French settlers in the part of Acadia that became Nova Scotia in 1624, so that clearly demonstrates that Edmee was born in France.

It’s unlikely that Catherine was born in Acadia in 1633 given that the first known families arrived in 1636, and we have their names from the ship roster. Pierre Martin was on the 1636 ship, and Acadian history tells us that his son, Mathieu Martin, was the first French child born in Acadia, about 1636, based on the 1671 census.

We also know that there was an early Acadian man, Jean LeJeune, who was granted land at BelleIsle, near Port Royal, among other Acadian families, but he was deceased before the first Acadian census in 1671. Acadia was under English control again from 1654 to 1670, so Jean LeJeune’s land grant had to have occurred after 1636 and prior to 1654, and is where Catherine LeJeune is found as an adult.

Another source of confusion is that there is a third LeJeune woman, Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard, born about 1659. Her daughter, Catherine Joseph’s 1720 marriage record in Port Royal refers to her mother, Jeanne, as being “d’un nation sauvagé”, giving her parents’ names as Francois Joseph and Jeanne LeJeune “of the Indian Nation.” Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard lived with her first husband in Port Royal, but had relocated to LaHeve by 1708.

You can see why this led to confusion about LeJeune females.

Another male, Pierre LeJeune was associated with LaHeve, which suggests he may have been awarded land there, possibly before the colony moved to Port Royal. One of the reasons that the rumor that Catherine LeJeune had a Native mother is so persistent is the belief that Pierre came over early, as a laborer or soldier, and married a Native woman because there weren’t any European women available.

Pierre may well have arrived as a single man, but there is no shred of evidence to suggest Pierre is the father of the sisters, Catherine LeJeune and Edmee LeJeune. In fact, given that Jeanne was born about 1659, Pierre, if he was her father, may have been born as late as 1627, which makes it impossible for him to have been Catherine and Edmee’s father.

That speculation was before the advent of DNA testing, and before Stephen White discovered that there was also a Jean LeJeune who was awarded land exactly where Catherine is known to have been living a few years later.

While it would be nice to unravel this entire cat’s cradle of confusion, the questions we are seeking to answer definitively here are:

Are Catherine LeJeune (born 1633) and Edmee LeJeune (born 1624) actually sisters?
Is the mother of Catherine LeJeune and her sister, Edmee LeJeune, Native American or European?
Is Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard, born about 1659, “d’un nation sauvagé” another sister of the LeJeune sisters?
What else is revealed about the LeJeune sisters and their ancestors? Is there something else we should know?

I’ll provide a summary of the combined evidence after our step-by-step mitochondrial analysis.

Testing for Sisters

Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mothers to all of their children, but only females pass it on.

Since we have two LeJeune females, believed to be sisters, we need mitochondrial DNA from direct matrilineal testers for each woman. This is particularly important because we know unquestionably that Edmee was born in France in 1624, prior to Acadian settlement in New France, so her DNA should be European. If they match, it means that Catherine was born to the same mother who was not Native. If they don’t match, there’s a different message.

In some cases, a match might mean that they were born to females related on the matrilineal line, like first cousins, for example. But in the early days of Acadia, there were no European females other than the handful, less than a dozen, who arrived on the Saint-Jehan in 1636.

Fortunately, we have multiple testers for each woman in two DNA projects at FamilyTreeDNA, the only DNA testing company that provides mitochondrial DNA testing and matching. Testers can join special interest projects, and both the Mothers of Acadia Project, and the Acadian AmerIndian Project have testers who descend from the LeJeune sisters.

I’ve identified 28 descendants of Catherine, and 25 from Edmee, giving us a total of 53 known matrilineal descendants to work with. Not all are shown publicly, in projects. Catherine has a known total of 14 testers, and Edmee has 17 that are shown publicly. All testers are members of haplogroup U6a7a1a.

The fact that the descendants of these women match each other, often exactly, combined with Catholic parish register dispensations for their descendants, when taken together, prove conclusively that Catherine and Edmee were sisters, not paternal half-sisters.

Let’s look at each piece of evidence.

Mitochondrial DNA Results

When the lab finishes processing the mtFull test, the results are posted to the account of the test taker.

Click on any image to enlarge

You’ll see the Maternal Line Ancestry section which displays your mitochondrial mtDNA Results.

The three tabs we will be primarily working with are:

mtDNA Matches
Matches Maps
Discover Haplogroup Reports, which includes another dozen+ reports and an updated Migration Map
Advanced Matching

At the bottom right of your page, you’ll see two haplogroup badges.

The one at right is called the “Legacy” haplogroup, which means the haplogroup you were assigned prior to the release of the new Mitotree.

The Mitotree mtDNA Haplogroup, with the green “Beta” at the bottom, is the new Mitotree haplogroup, which I wrote about in a series of articles:

Your old Legacy haplogroup will never change, because it’s the 2016 version that was not updated by the previous tree-keepers. That’s why the FamilyTreeDNA R&D team, me included, developed and birthed the new Mitotree. There were thousands of new haplogroups that could be defined to kick-start our genealogy, so we did.

The mitochondrial tree went from about 5000 branches to over 40,000 in the new Mitotree, each providing additional information to testers.

Not everyone received a new haplogroup, but about 75% of testers did, and another new Mitotree version will be released soon. In order to receive a new haplogroup, testers needed to:

Have at least one qualifying, stable mutation that had not been previously used to define a haplogroup
Match at least one other person in the same haplogroup branch with the same mutation(s)

In the case of the LeJeune sisters, there were no mutations that met all of the qualifications, so their known descendants did not receive a new haplogroup. That’s fine, though, because it’s not the name but the messages held by the information that’s important – and there’s a LOT to work with.

Let’s start with matches.

Matches

Of course, the first thing everyone does is click to see their matches.

The default is Detail View, but I prefer Table View (top left) because you can see more matches on the same page.

Catherine’s descendant whose matches are shown here has 108 Full Sequence matches, which are labeled as the “Coding Region.” The Coding Regions is the mtFULL test and includes both the HVR1 and HVR2 regions. Viewing Coding Region matches means they have taken the mtFull test, which sequences all 16,569 locations of the mitochondria.

When you click on the “Coding Region”, you are seeing matches to people who took all three test levels, not just the first one or two.

There are three test levels to view:

HVR1
HVR1+HVR2 both
Coding Region, which is in addition to the HVR1+HVR2 regions

You can no longer order three different test levels today, although at one time you could. As costs decreased, it no longer made sense to offer multiple testing levels, and often the HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 results, which only tested about 500 locations each, would confuse people.

People at the lower HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 levels, known as mtPlus, can upgrade to the complete mtFull level, and should.

However, because some people only tested at those lower levels, matches are still shown at three levels, with different match thresholds for each level.

Matches at the HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 levels *might* be entirely irrelevant, reaching back thousands of years. They could also be much more current, and critical to your genealogy, so don’t assume. Just one unstable mutation can cause a mismatch though, and at lower levels, cause you not to match someone with the same ancestor, which is why the full sequence test is so critically important.

For some testers, matches at lower levels sometimes provide the ONLY match to your known ancestor. So don’t skip over them. If you find a critical match there, you can email the tester to see if they will upgrade to the mtFull test.

People who test only at the HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 level receive a more refined haplogroup after they upgrade, so the haplogroups between the HVR1/HVR2 testers and the full sequence test won’t match exactly. For the LeJeune sisters, the haplogroup for HVR1/HVR2-only testers is U6a and for full sequence testers, it’s U6a7a1a.

While full sequence matches are wonderful, if you’re searching for a particular ancestor and the ONLY place they appear is the HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 testing levels, you’ll want to pursue the match. You may also want to evaluate lower level matches if their ancestors are from a specific location – like France – even if their earliest known ancestor (EKA) is not your ancestor.

To view your HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 matches, just click on either of those links. You’ll see ALL of the results, including everyone who took the full sequence test. In this case, that means that the 217 HVR1 (hypervariable region 1) results will include the 120 coding region (full sequence) tests. I’ve already looked through the full sequence matches, so that’s not what I want.

If you ONLY want to see testers who did NOT take the Full Sequence test, use the Filter option. Select Filter, then the features you seek.

Fortunately, the LeJeune sisters have lots of known descendants at the mtFull level to work with, so we will focus on their full sequence matches.

Your Focus

On the matches page, you’ll be immediately interested in two fields:

Maternal Earliest Known Ancestor (EKA) – the direct matrilineal ancestor of your match – unless they got confused and entered someone else
Their Tree

Viewing the first several matches only produced one match to someone whose earliest known ancestor (EKA) is listed as Catherine or Edmee LeJeune, but perhaps the next group will be more productive. Note that females’ EKAs, earliest known ancestors, are sometimes challenging, given surname changes. So unfamiliar EKAs could represent generational differences and sometimes offer other hints based on their information.

Shifting to the detail view for a minute, you’ll want to review the genetic distance, meaning whether you’re an exact match or not.

If you’re not an exact match, a genetic distance of “1 step” means that you match except for one mutation at a specific location.

If you have a genetic distance greater than 3, meaning 4 mutations or more, you won’t be shown as a match on this match list. However, you can still be a haplogroup match, which we’ll discuss in the Discover section.

Essentially, with more than 3 mutations difference, it’s unlikely (but not impossible) that your match is genealogically relevant – meaning you probably won’t be able to identify your most recent common ancestor (MRCA).

However, that doesn’t mean that haplogroup-only matches can’t provide important clues, and we will look under every rock!

A Slight Detour – Confirmation Bias

This is a good place to mention that both ancestors and their location (country) of origin are provided by (some) testers to the best of their ability and understanding.

This tester selected “United States Native American” as the location for their earliest known ancestor. We don’t know why they entered that information. It could be that:

The tester did not understand that the maternal country of origin means the direct MATRILINEAL line, not just someplace on the maternal side
Selina Sinott was Native on her father’s side, or any line OTHER than her direct matrilineal line.
They relied on oral history or made a guess
They found the information in someone else’s tree
They found all of the LeJeune information confusing (because it is)

The tester has provided no tree, so we can’t do any sleuthing here, but an Ancestry search shows a woman by that name born in 1855 in Starksboro, VT to Louis Senott and Victoria Reya. A further search on Victoria leads me to Marie Lussier who leads me to Marguerite Michel who leads me to Marie Anne Lord (Lore, Laure), who lived in Acadia, whose ancestor is…drum roll…Catherine LeJeune. You get the idea.

Yes, you may need to extend other people’s trees.

The Point

However, and this is the point – if you’re looking for confirmation that the LeJeune sisters were Native American, this ONE tester who entered Native American for an unknown reason is NOT the confirmation you’re looking for. Don’t get sucked into confirmation bias, or into categorically believing what someone else entered without additional information.

You need haplogroup confirmation, but, in this case, you don’t have it. However, if you’re new to genetic genealogy, you don’t know that yet, so hold on. We’re still getting there. This is why we need to review all of the reports.

And trust me, I’m not being critical because there isn’t a single seasoned genealogist who has NOT fallen down the rathole of excited confirmation bias or accepting information without further analysis – me included. We all need to actively guard against it, all the time. Confirm and weigh all of the evidence we do have, and seek missing evidence.

Let’s go back to the match results.

Matches – Haplogroups and Haplotypes

Scrolling down the Table View, the next group of matches shows many more matches to descendants of both Catherine and Edmee LeJeune.

Next, you’ll notice that there’s a Mitotree haplogroup, U6a7a1a, AND an F number. In this case, they are both checked in blue, which means you share the exact same haplogroup with that tester, and the exact same haplotype cluster, which is the F number.

I wrote about haplotype clusters, here.

If NEITHER box is checked, you don’t share either the haplogroup nor the haplotype cluster.

You can match the haplogroup, but not the haplotype cluster, which means the haplogroup box will be checked, but the haplotype cluster will not. If you share the same haplotype cluster, you WILL share the same haplogroup, but the reverse is not true.

What is a Haplotype Cluster, and why do they matter?

Haplotype Clusters

We need to talk about exact matches and what they mean. Yes, I know it seems intuitive, but it isn’t.

There are three types of matches

Matching and Genetic Distance on your Match List
Haplotype matching
Haplogroup matching

Without getting (too much) into the weeds, an Exact Match in the Genetic Distance column on your match list excludes locations 309 and 315 because they are too unstable to be considered reliable for matching. So, 309 and 315 are EXCLUDED from this type of matching. In other words, you may or may not match at either or both of those locations. They are ignored for matching on your match list.

Locations 309 and 315 are also EXCLUDED from haplogroup definitions.

A haplotype F cluster match indicates that everyone in that cluster is an exact match, taking into consideration EVERY mutation, INCLUDING 309 and 315.

	309 and 315	Why
Matching and Genetic Distance	Excluded	Unstable, probably not genealogically relevant and may be deceptive, leading you down a rathole
Haplogroup Definition	Excluded	Too unstable for tree branching and definition
Haplotype F Clusters	Included	Might be genealogically useful, so everyone can evaluate the rathole for themselves

Some people think that if they don’t match someone exactly, they can’t have the same ancestor as people who do match exactly, but that’s not true. “Mutations happen” whenever they darned well please. Downstream mutations in stable locations that match between two or more testers will form their own haplogroup branch.

The most distant matches are shown on the last match page, and as you can see below, some descendants of Catherine and Edmee LeJeune have a 1-step difference with our tester, meaning a genetic distance of one, or one mutation (disregarding 309 and 315). One match has a 2-step mutation.

The fact that their F numbers are not the same tells you that their mutations are different from each other, too. If two of those people also matched each other, their F# would be identical.

The mutations that do not (yet) form a haplogroup, and are included in your haplotype cluster, are called Private Variants, and you cannot see the private variants of other people. Clearly, you and anyone in your haplotype cluster share all of the same mutations, including Private Variants.

Evaluating Trees and EKAs

By reviewing the matches, their EKAs, and the trees for the matches of Catherine’s descendants, I was able to create a little mini-tree of sorts. Keep in mind that not everyone with an EKA has a tree, and certainly not everyone who uploaded a tree listed an EKA. So be sure to check both resources. Here’s how to add your EKA, and a one-minute video, here.

The good news is that if your match has a WikiTree link when you click on their tree icon, you know their tree actually reaches back to either Edmee or Catherine if that’s their ancestor, and you’re not dealing with a frustrating, truncated two or three-generation tree, or a private tree. You can add your WikiTree link at FamilyTreeDNA here, in addition to any other tree you’ve linked.

Takeaways from Matches

You can identify your common ancestor with other testers. By viewing people’s trees and emailing other testers, you can often reconstruct the trees from the tester back through either Catherine or Edmee LeJeune.
Your primary focus should be on the people in your haplotype cluster, but don’t neglect other clusters where you may find descendants of your ancestor.
If you see a male EKA name, or something other than a female name in the EKA field, like a location, the tester was confused. Only females pass their mitochondrial DNA to their descendants.
If you’re searching for an ancestor whose mitochondrial DNA you don’t carry, use projects and WikiTree to see if you can determine if someone has tested from that line. From viewing the project results, I already knew that the LeJeune sisters had several descendants who had tested.
If you’re searching for your ancestor on your match list, and you don’t find them in the full sequence results, use the filter to view people who ONLY took the HVR1 and HVR1+HVR2 tests to see if the results you seek are there. They won’t be on your full sequence match list because they didn’t test at that level. Testers at the lower levels will only have a partial, estimated haplogroup – in this case, U6a.
For Edmee and Catherine LeJeune, we have enough testers to ensure that we don’t have just one or two people with the same erroneous genealogy. If you do find someone in a project or at WikiTree claiming descent from the same ancestor, but with a different haplogroup, you’ll need to focus on additional research to verify each step for all testers.

Resources:

Matches Maps

The Matches Map is a great visual resource. That “picture is worth 1000 words” tidbit of wisdom definitely applies here.

Clicking on the Matches Maps displays the locations that your matches entered for their EKA.

In the upper left-hand corner, select “Full Sequence,” and only the full sequence matches will be displayed on the map. All full sequence testers also have HVR1/HVR2 results, so those results will be displayed under that selection, along with people who ONLY took the HVR1 or HVR1/HVR2 tests.

We know that the Acadians originally came from France, and their descendants were forcibly expelled from Nova Scotia in 1755. Families found themselves scattered to various locations along the eastern seaboard, culminating with settlements in Louisiana, Quebec, and in some cases, back in France, so this match distribution makes sense in that context.

Be sure to enlarge the map in case pins are on top of or obscuring each other.

Some people from other locations may be a match, too. Reviewing their information may assist with breaking down the next brick wall. Sometimes, additional analysis reveals that the tester providing the information was confused about what to complete, e.g., male names, and you should disregard that pin.

Takeaways from the Matches Map

These results make sense for the LeJeune sisters. I would specifically look for testers with other French EKAs, just in case their information can provide a (desperately needed) clue as to where the LeJeune family was from in France.

Reviewing other matches in unexpected locations may provide clues about where ancestors of your ancestor came from, or in this case, where descendants of the LeJeune sisters wound up – such as Marie Josephe Surette in Salem, Massachusetts, Catherine LeJeune’s great-granddaughter.
Finding large clusters of pins in an unexpected location suggests a story waiting to be uncovered. My matrilineal ancestor was confirmed in church records in Wirbenz, Germany, in 1647 when she married, but the fact that almost all of my full sequence matches are in Scandinavia, clustered in Sweden and Norway, suggests an untold story, probably involving the 30 Years War in Germany that saw Swedish troop movement in the area where my ancestor lived.
For my own mitochondrial DNA test, by viewing trees, EKAs, and other hints, including email addresses, I was able to identify at least a country for 30 of 36 full sequence matches and created my own Google map.
You can often add to the locations by creating your own map and including everyone’s results.

Resources:

Mitochondrial DNA Part 4 – Techniques for Doubling Your Useful Matches

Mitochondrial DNA Myth – Mitochondrial DNA is not Useful because the Haplogroups are “Too Old”

Before we move to the Discover Reports, I’m going to dispel a myth about haplogroups, ages, genealogical usefulness, and most recent common ancestors known as MRCAs.

Let me start by saying this out loud. YES, MITOCHONDRIAL DNA IS USEFUL FOR GENEALOGY and NO, OLDER HAPLOGROUPS DO NOT PREVENT MITOCHONDRIAL DNA FROM BEING USEFUL.

Here’s why.

The most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is the person who is the closest common ancestor of any two people.

For example, the mitochondrial DNA MRCA of you and your sibling is your mother.

For your mother and her first cousin, the mitochondrial MRCA is their grandmother on the same side, assuming they both descend from a different daughter. Both daughters carry their mother’s undiluted mitochondrial DNA.

A common complaint about mitochondrial DNA is that “it’s not genealogically useful because the haplogroups are so old” – which is absolutely untrue.

Let’s unravel this a bit more.

The MRCA of a GROUP of people is the first common ancestor of EVERY person in the group with each other.

So, if you’re looking at your tree, the MRCA of you, your sibling, and your mother’s 1C in the example above is also your mother’s grandmother, because your mother’s grandmother is the first person in your tree that ALL of the people in the comparison group descend from.

Taking this even further back in time, your mother’s GGG-grandmother is the MRCA for these five people bolded, and maybe a lot more descendants, too.

At that distance in your tree, you may or may not know the name of the GGG-grandmother and you probably don’t know all of her descendants either.

Eventually, you will hit a genealogical brick wall, but the descendants of that unknown “grandmother” will still match. You have NOT hit a genetic brick wall.

A haplogroup name is assigned to the woman who had a mutation that forms a new haplogroup branch, and she is the MRCA of every person in that haplogroup and all descendant haplogroups.

However, and this is important, the MRCA of any two people, or a group of people may very well be downstream, in your tree, of that haplogroup mother.

As you can clearly see from our example, there are four different MRCAs, depending on who you are comparing with each other.

Mom – MRCA of you and your sibling
Grandmother – MRCA of you, your sibling, your mom and your mom’s 1C
GGG-Grandmother – MRCA of all five bolded descendants
Haplogroup formation – MRCA of ALL tested descendants, and all downstream haplogroups, many of whom are not pictured

Many of the testers may, and probably do, form haplotype clusters beneath this haplogroup.

When you are seeking a common ancestor, you really don’t care when everyone in that haplogroup was related, what you seek is the common ancestor between you and another person, or group of people.

If the haplogroup is formed more recently in time, it may define a specific lineage, and in that case, you will care because that haplogroup equates to a woman you can identify genealogically. For example, let’s say that one of Catherine LeJeune’s children formed a specific haplogroup. That would be important because it would be easy to assign testers with that haplogroup to their appropriate lineage. That may well be the case for the two people in haplogroup U6a7a1a2, but lack of a more recent haplogroup for the other testers does not hinder our analysis or reduce mitochondrial DNA’s benefits.

That said, the more people who test, the more possibilities for downstream haplogroup formation. Currently, haplogroup U6a7a1a has 34 unnamed lineages, just waiting for more testers.

Haplogroup ages are useful in a number of ways, but haplogroup usefulness is IN NO WAY DEPRICATED BY THEIR AGE. The haplogroup age is when every single person in that haplogroup shares a common ancestor. That might be useful to know, but it’s not a barrier to genealogy. Unfortunately, hearing that persistent myth causes people to become discouraged, give up and not even bother to test, which is clearly self-defeating behavior. You’ll never know what you don’t know, and you won’t know if you don’t test. That’s my mantra!

The LeJeune sisters provide a clear example.

OK, now on to Discover.

mtDNA Discover

Next, we are going to click through from the mtDNA Results and Tools area on your personal page to Discover Haplogroup Reports. These reports are chapters in your own personal book, handed down from your ancestors.

Discover is also a freely available public tool, but you’ll receive additional and personalized information by clicking through when you are signed into your page at FamilyTreeDNA. Only a subset is available publicly.

mtDNA Discover was released with the new Mitotree and provides fresh information weekly.

Think of Discover as a set of a dozen reports just for your results, with one more, Globetrekker, an interactive haplogroup map, coming soon.

Resources:

When you click through to Discover from your results, Discover defaults to your haplogroup. In this case, that’s U6a7a1a for the LeJeune sisters.

Let’s begin with the first report, Haplogroup Story.

Haplogroup Story

The Haplogroup Story is a landing page that summarizes information about your ancestor’s haplogroup relevant to understanding your ancestor’s history. Please take the time to actually READ the Discover reports, including the information buttons, not just skim them.

Think of Discover as your own personalized book about your ancestors – so you don’t want to miss a word.

You’ll see facts on the left, each one with a little “i” button. Click there or mouse over for more information about how that fact was determined.

When we’re talking about haplogroup U6a7a1a, it sounds impersonal, but we’re really talking about an actual person whose name, in this case, we will never know. We can determine the ancestor of some haplogroups that formed within a genealogical timeframe. The LeJeune ancestor in question is the person in whose generation the final mutation in a long string of mutations created the final “a” in haplogroup U6a7a1a.

Think of these as a long line of breadcrumbs. By following them backwards in time and determining when and where those breadcrumbs were dropped, meaning when and where the mutation occurred, we begin to understand the history of our ancestor – where she was, when, and which cultures and events shaped her life.

U6a7a1a was formed, meaning this ancestor was born, about 50 CE, so about 1950 years ago. This means that the ancestor of ANY ONE PERSON with this haplogroup could have lived anytime between the year 50 CE and the year of their mother’s birth.

This is VERY important, because there is an incredible amount of misunderstanding about haplogroup ages and what they mean to you.

The year 50 CE is the year that the common ancestor of EVERY PERSON in the haplogroup was born, NOT the year that the common ancestor of any two or more people was born.

By way of illustration, the LeJeune sisters were born in about 1624 and 1633, respectively, not 50 CE, and their most recent common ancestor (MRCA) is their mother, who would have been born between about 1590 and 1608, based on their birth years.

For reference, I’ve created this genealogical tree from individuals who took the mitochondrial DNA test and have identified their mitochondrial lineage on the LeJeune mother’s profile at Wikitree

You can see that both Edmee and Catherine have mitochondrial DNA testers through multiple daughters. I’ve color coded the MRCA individuals within each group, and of course their mother is the MRCA between any two people who each descend from Edmee and Catherine.

Mitochondrial DNA matches to the LeJeune sisters’ descendants could be related to each other anywhere from the current generation (parent/child) to when the haplogroup formed, about 50 CE.

You can easily see that all of these testers, even compared with their most distant relatives in the group, share a common ancestor born between 1590 and about 1608. Other people when compared within the group share MCRAs born about 1717 (blue), 1778 (peach), 1752 (green), 1684 (pink), 1658 (mustard), and 1633 (red).

Soooooo…a haplogroup born in 50 CE does NOT mean that you won’t be able to find any genealogical connection because your common ancestor with another tester was born more than 1900 years ago. It means that the common ancestor of EVERYONE who is a member of haplogroup U6a7a1a (and downstream haplogroups) was born about 50 CE.

The parent haplogroup of U6a7a1a is haplogroup U6a7a1, which was born about 1450 BCE, or about 3450 years ago.

In the graphic, I’ve shown other unknown genealogical lineages from U6a7a1 and also downstream haplogroups.

Haplogroup U6a7a1 is the MRCA, or most recent common ancestor of haplogroup U6a7a1a, and anyone who descends from haplogroup U6a7a1 or any of the 23 downstream lineages from U6a7a1, including 5 descendant haplogroups and 18 unnamed lineages.

The LeJeune haplogroup, U6a7a1a, has 35 descendant lineages. One downstream haplogroup has already been identified – U6a7a1a2 – which means two or more people share at least one common, stable, mutation, in addition to the mutations that form U6a7a1a. Thirty-four other lineages are as yet unnamed.

The fact that there are 34 unnamed lineages means that people with one or more private variants, or unique mutations, are candidates for a new branch to form when someone else tests and matches them, including those variants.

You’re a candidate for a new haplogroup in the future if no one else matches your haplotype cluster number, or, potentially, as the tree splits and branches upstream.

When a second person in a lineage tests, those two people will not only share a common haplotype cluster F#, they will share a new haplogroup too if their common mutation is not excluded because it’s unstable and therefore unreliable.

There are 127 members of haplogroup U6a7a1a today, and their EKAs are noted as being from France, Canada, the US, and other countries that we’ll view on other pages.

Haplogroup U6a7a1a has been assigned two Discover badges:

Imperial Age – “an age noted for the formation and global impact of expansive empires in many parts of the world.” In other words, colonization, which is certainly true of the French who battled with the English to colonize New England, Acadia, and New France.
mtFull Confirmed (for testers only)

Additionally, the LeJeune sisters have one Rare Notable Connection, and three Rare Ancient Connections, all of which may shed light on their history.

Takeaways from the Haplogroup Story

The Haplogroup Story provides an overview of the haplogroup
You can easily see how many testers fall into this haplogroup and where they have indicated as the origin of their matrilineal line.
The haplogroup may have several new haplogroup seeds – 34 in this case – the number of unnamed lineages
You can share this or other Discover pages with others by using the “share page” link in the upper right-hand corner.
Don’t be discouraged by the age of the haplogroup, whether it’s recent or older.

Next, let’s look at Country Frequency.

Country Frequency

Country Frequency shows the locations where testers in haplogroup U6a7a1a indicate that their EKA, or earliest known matrilineal ancestor, is found. The Country Frequency information is NOT limited to just your matches, but all testers in haplogroup U6a7a1a, some of whom may not be on your match list. Remember, only people with 3 mutations difference, or fewer, are on your match list.

Haplogroup distribution around the world is very informative as to where your ancestors came from.

There are two tabs under Country Frequency, and I’d like to start with the second one – Table View.

Table View displays all of the user-provided country locations. Note that the Haplogroup Frequency is the percentage of total testers in which this haplogroup is found in this particular country. These frequencies are almost always quite small and are location-based, NOT haplogroup based.

There are now 40,000 haplogroups, and in haplogroup U, the LeJeune sisters are 6 branches down the tree with U6a7a1a.

In total, 127 testers are members of haplogroup U6a7a1a, and 42 of those claim that their ancestor is from France, which comprises 1% of the people who have taken the full sequence mitochondrial DNA test whose ancestor is from that location.

Let’s do the math so you can see how this is calculated and why it’s typically so small. For our example, let’s say that 8000 people in the database have said their matrilineal ancestor is from France. Of the 127 haplogroup U6a7a1a members, 42 say their ancestor is from France. Divide 42 by 8,000, which is 0.00525, and round to the nearest percentage – which is 1%.

The best aspect of this page is that you can see a nice summary of the locations where people indicate that their earliest known U6a7a1a ancestor was found.

Please note that the last entry, “Unknown Origins,” is the bucket that everyone who doesn’t provide a location falls into. That row is not a total but includes everyone who didn’t provide location information.

These location results make sense for the LeJeune sisters – maybe except for Ireland and Belgium. Some people don’t understand the directions, meaning that a matrilineal ancestor or direct maternal ancestor is NOT your literal “oldest” ancestor on your mother’s side of the tree who lived to be 105, but your mother-to-mother-to-mother-to-mother ancestor, so check to see if these people with unusual locations are in your match list and view their tree or reach out to them.

We don’t know why the person who selected Native American made that choice, but I’d bet it has to do with confusion about the “other” LeJeune female, Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard. Based on Catherine and her sister, Edmee LeJeune’s haplogroup through more than 50 testers, U6a7a1a, Native is incorrect.

Of course, that tester wouldn’t have known that if they completed their EKA information before they tested. Perhaps they entered information based on the stories they had heard, or flawed genealogy, and didn’t think to go back and correct it when their results were ready, indicating that Native was mistaken.

On the “Map View” tab, the locations are shown using a heat map, where the highest percentages are the darkest. Here, both France and Canada are the darkest because that’s the most common selection for this haplogroup with 1% each, while the rest of the countries registered with less <1%.

These colors are comparative to each other, meaning that there is no hard and fast line in the sand that says some percentage or greater is always red.

To summarize these two tables, because this is important:

The Table View shows you how many people selected a specific country for their ancestor’s location, but the frequency is almost always very low because it’s based on the total number of testers in the entire database, comprised of all haplogroups, with ancestors from that country.
The Map View shows you a heat map for how frequently a particular location was selected, as compared to other locations, for this haplogroup.

To view the difference between adjacent haplogroups, I always compare at least one haplogroup upstream. In this case, that’s the parent haplogroup, U6a7a1.

The Parent Haplogroup

If you look at haplogroup U6a7a1, just one haplogroup upstream, you’ll see that for Mauritania, the total number of U6a7a1 descendants tested is only “1”, but the haplogroup frequency in Mauritania is 10% which means that there are only 10 people who have been tested in the database altogether from Mauritania – and one person is haplogroup U6a7a1.

However, due to substantial under-sampling of the Mauritania population, the frequency for Mauritania, 10%, is higher than any other location.

Also, remember, these are user-reported ancestor locations, and we have no idea if or how these people determined that their ancestor is actually from Mauritania.

Please only enter actual known locations. For example, we don’t want haplogroup U6a7a1 members to look at this informatoin, then add Mauritania as their location because now they “know” that their ancestor is from Mauritania.

On the Map View, Mauritania is dark red because the percentage is so high – never mind that there are only 10 testers who report matrilineal ancestors from there, and only one was U6a7a1.

This map illustrates one reason why taking the full sequence test is important. Viewing partial haplogroups can be deceiving.

Catherine and Edmee LeJeune’s matrilineal descendants who only tested at the HVR1 or HVR1+HVR2 level receive a predicted haplogroup of U6a, born about 21,000 years ago. That’s because the full 16,569 locations of the mitochondria need to be tested in order to obtain a full haplogroup, as opposed to about 500 locations in the HVR1 and HVR1/2, each, respectively.

U6a – The Result for HVR1/HVR2-Only Testers

So, let’s look at what haplogroup U6a reveals, given that it’s what early LeJeune descendants who ordered the lower-level tests will see.

In the Table View for U6a, below, you see that the top 5 counties listed by haplogroup frequency are five North African countries.

A total of 801 people are assigned to haplogroup U6a, meaning the majority, 757, report their ancestors to be from someplace else. If two people from the Western Sahara (Sahrawi) comprise 67% of the people who tested, we know there are only three people who have tested and selected that location for their ancestors.

If you didn’t understand how the display works, you’d look at this report and see that the “top 5” countries are North African, and it would be easy to interpret this to mean that’s where Catherine and Edmee’s ancestors are from. That’s exactly how some people have interpreted their results.

Scrolling on down the Table View, 50 testers report France, and 10 report the US, respectively, with France showing a Haplogroup Frequency of 1% and the US <1%.

The balance of U6a testers’ ancestors are from a total of 57 other countries, plus another 366 who did not select a location. Not to mention that U6a was born 21,000 years ago, and a lot has happened between then and the 1620/1630s when Catherine and Edmee were born to a French mother.

The real “problem” of course is that haplogroup U6a is only a partial haplogroup.

The U6a map shows the highest frequency based on the number of testers per country, which is why it’s dark red, but the Table View reports that the actual number of U6a testers reporting any specific country. France has 50. Next is the US, also with 50, which often means people are brick-walled here. You can view the U6a table for yourself, here.

Why is this relevant for Catherine and Edmee LeJeune? It’s very easy to misinterpret the map, and for anyone viewing U6a results instead of U6a7a1a results, it’s potentially genealogically misleading.

Use Country Frequency with discretion and a full understanding of what you’re viewing, especially for partial haplogroups from HVR1/HVR2 results or autosomal results from any vendor.

If someone tells you that the LeJeune sisters are from someplace other than France, ask where they found the information. If they mention Africa, Morocco or Portugal, you’ll know precisely where they derived the information.

This information is also available on your Maternal Line Ancestry page, under “See More,” just beneath the Matches tab. Haplogroup Origins and Ancestral Origins present the same information in a different format.

Discover is a significant improvement over those reports, but you’ll still need to read carefully, understand the message, and digest the information.

Takeaways from Country Frequency

Evaluate the results carefully and be sure to understand how the reports work.
Use complete, not partial haplogroups when possible.
The Haplogroup Frequency is the number of people assigned to this haplogroup divided by the entire number of people in the database who report that country location for their matrilineal ancestor. It is NOT the percentage of people in ONLY haplogroup U6a7a1a from a specific country.
Table view shows the number of testers with this haplogroup, with the percentage calculated per the number of people who have tested in that country location.
The Map shows the highest frequency based on the number of testers per country.
Use the map in conjunction with the haplogroup age to better understand the context of the message.

Globetrekker, which has not yet been released, will help by tracking your ancestors’ paths from their genesis in Africa to where you initially find that lineage.

Before we move on to the Mitotree, let’s take a minute to understand genetic trees.

About Genetic Trees

The Mitotree is a genetic tree, also called a phylogenetic tree, that generally correlates relatively closely with a genealogical tree. The more testers in a particular haplogroup, the more accurate the tree.

FamilyTreeDNA provides this disclaimer information about the genetic tree. The Mitotree you see is a nice and neat published tree. The process of building the tree is somewhat like making sausage – messy. In this case, the more ingredients, the better the result.

The more people that test, the more genetic information is available to build and expand the tree, and the more accurate it becomes.

The recent Mitotree releases have moved the haplogroup “dates” for the LeJeune sisters from about 21,000 years ago for HVR1/HVR2 U6a testers to 50 CE for full sequence testers, and this may well be refined in future tree releases.

Mutations

Mutations and how to interpret them can be tricky – and this short section is meant to be general, not specific.

Sometimes mutations occur, then reverse themselves, forming a “back mutation”, which is usually counted as a branch defining a new haplogroup. If a back mutation happens repeatedly in the same haplogroup, like a drunken sailor staggering back and forth, that mutation is then omitted from haplogroup branch formation, but is still counted as a mismatch between two testers.

A heteroplasmy is the presence of two or more distinct results for a specific location in different mitochondria in our bodies. Heteroplasmy readings often “come and go” in results for different family members, because they are found at varying threshold levels in different family members, causing mismatches. Heteroplasmies are currently counted only if any person has 20% or greater of two different nucleotides. So, if you have a 19% heteroplasmy read for a particular location, and your sister has 21%, you will “not” have a heteroplasmic condition reported, but she will, and the location will be reported as a mismatch.

If you have a heteroplasmy and another family member does not, or vice versa, it’s counted as as a “mismatch,” meaning you and that family member will find yourselves in different haplotype clusters. Hetroplasmies do not presently define new tree branches. I wrote about heteroplasmies, here.

Takeaways from the Genetic Tree Disclaimer

DNA is fluid, mutations happen, and all mutations are not created equal.
Thankfully, you really don’t need to understand the nitty-gritty underpinnings of this because the scientists at FamilyTreeDNA have translated your results into reports and features that take all of this into consideration.
Testing more people helps refine the tree, which fills in the genetic blanks, refining the dates, and expanding branches of the tree.

Resources:

Mitochondrial DNA Resource Page
What is a Heteroplasmy and Why Do I Care?
Understanding mtDNA Haplogroups
I covered the basics of DNA, including the different types of mutations in my book, The Complete Guide To FamilyTreeDNA: Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autoisomal and X-DNA

Ok, now let’s look at the Time Tree

Time Tree

The Time Tree displays your haplogroup on the Mitotree timeline. In other words, it shows us how old the haplogroup is in relation to other haplogroups, and testers.

The Time Tree displays the country locations of the ancestors of testers who are members of that and descendant or nearby haplogroups. You can view the haplogroup U6a7a1a Time Tree, here, and follow along if you wish. Of course, keep in mind that the tree is a living, evolving entity and will change and evolve over time as updated tree versions are released.

Mousing over the little black profile image, which is the person in whom this haplogroup was born, pops up information about the haplogroup. Additionally, you’ll see black bars with a hashed line between them. This is the range of the haplogroup formation date. Additional details about the range can be found on the Scientific Details tab, which we’ll visit shortly.

On your Matches tab, remember that each match has both a haplogroup and a haplogroup cluster F# listed.

On the Time Tree, individual testers are shown at right, with their selected country of origin. In this case, you’ll see the person who selected “Native American” at the top, followed by France, Canada, the US, and other flags.

Haplogroup U6a7a1a includes several haplotype clusters, designated by the rounded red brackets. In this view, we can see several people who have haplotype cluster matches. Everyone has a haplotype assignment, but a haplotype cluster is not formed until two people match exactly.

In the Time Tree view, above, you can see two clusters with two members each, and the top of a third cluster at the bottom.

In case you’re wondering why some of the globes are offset a bit, they positionally reflect the birth era of the tester, rounded to the closest 25 years, if the birth year is provided under Account Settings. If not, the current tester position defaults to 1950.

Scrolling down to the next portion of the window shows that the third cluster is VERY large. Inside the cluster, we see Belgium, Canada, and France, but we aren’t even halfway through the cluster yet.

Continuing to scroll, we see the cluster number, F7753329, in the middle of the cluster, along with the French flag, two from Ireland, four from the US, and the beginning of the large unknown group.

In this fourth screenshot, at the bottom of the display, we see the balance of haplotype cluster #F7753329, along with eight more people who are not members of that haplotype cluster, nor any other haplotype cluster.

Finally, at the bottom, we find haplogroup U6a7a1a2, a descendant haplogroup of U6a7a1a. Are they descendants of the LeJeune sisters?

Looking back at our tester’s match list, the two people who belong to the new haplogroup U6a7a1a2 haven’t provided any genealogical information. No EKA or tree, unfortunately. The haplogroup formation date is estimated as about 1483, but the range extends from about 1244-1679 at the 95^th percentile. In other words, these two people could be descendants of:

Either Catherine or Edmee LeJeune, but not both, since all of their descendants would be in U6a7a1a2.
An unknown sister to Catherine and Edmee.
A descendant line of an ancestor upstream of Catherine and Edmee.

Takeaways from the Time Tree

The visualization of the matches and haplotype clusters illustrates that the majority of the haplogroup members are in the same haplogroup cluster.
Given that two women, sisters, are involved, we can infer that all of the mutations in this haplotype cluster were common to their mother as well.
Haplotype cluster #F7753329 includes 19 testers from Catherine and 17 from Edmee.
Downstream haplogroup U6a7a1a2 was born in a daughter of haplogroup U6a7a1a, as early as 1244 or as late as 1679. Genealogy information from the two testers could potentially tell us who the mutation arose in, and when.
As more haplogroup U6a7a1a2 testers provide information, the better the information about the haplogroup will become, and the formation date can be further refined.

Smaller haplotype clusters have a story to tell too, but for those, we’ll move to the Match Time Tree.

Match Time Tree

The Match Time Tree is one of my favorite reports and displays your matches on the Time Tree. This feature is only available for testers, and you must be signed in to view your Match Time Tree.

By selecting “Share Mode”, the system obfuscates first names and photos so you can share without revealing the identity of your matches. I wrote about using “Share Mode” here. I have further blurred surnames for this article.

The Match Time Tree incorporates the tree view, with time, the names of your matches PLUS their EKA name and country, assuming they have entered that information. This is one of the reasons why the EKA information is so important.

This display is slightly different than the Time Tree, because it’s one of the features you only receive if you’ve taken the mtFull test and click through to Discover from your account.

The Time Tree view is the same for everyone, but the Match Time Tree is customized for each tester.

Your result is shown first, along with your haplotype cluster if you are a member of one.

You can easily see the names of the EKAs below the obfuscated testers’ names.

While we immediately know that descendants of both Catherine and Edmee are found in the large cluster #F7753329, we don’t yet know which ancestors are included in other haplotype clusters.

Haplogroup U6a7a1a includes two smaller haplotype clusters with 2 people each.

We know a few things about each of these clusters:

The people in each cluster have mutations that separate them from everyone else except the other person in their cluster
The results are identical matches to the other person in the cluster, including less reliable locations such as 309 and 315
There are other locations that are excluded from haplogroup formation, but are included in matching, unlike 309 and 315.
Given that they match only each other exactly, AND they did not form a new haplogroup, we know that their common unique mutation that causes them to match only each other exactly is unreliable or unstable, regardless of whether it’s 309, 315, a heteroplasmy, or another marker on the list of filtered or excluded variants.

Only the tester can see their own mutations. By inference, they know the mutations of the people in their haplotype cluster, because they match exactly.

If you’re a member of a cluster and you’re seeking to determine your common ancestor, you’ll want to analyze each cluster. I’ve provided two examples, below, one each for the red and purple clusters.

Red Haplotype Cluster #F3714849

Only one person in the red cluster has included their EKA, and the tree of the second person only reaches to three generations. Tracking that line backwards was not straightforward due to the 1755 expulsion of the Acadians from Nova Scotia.

The second person listed their EKA as Edmee LeJeune, but they have a private tree at MyHeritage, so their matches can’t see anything. I wonder if they realize that their matches can’t view their tree.

We are left to wonder if both people descend from Edmee LeJeune, and more specifically, a common ancestor more recently – or if the unstable mutation that they share with each other is simply happenstance.

E-mailing these testers would be a good idea.

Purple Haplotype Cluster #F2149611

Evaluating the purple cluster reveals that the common ancestor is Catherine LeJeune. The question is twofold – how are these two people related downstream from Catherine, and how unstable is their common mutation or mutations.

Fortunately, both people have nice trees that track all the way back to Catherine.

Unfortunately, their MRCA is Francoise, the daughter of Catherine. I say unfortunately, because two additional testers also descend from Francoise, and they don’t have the haplotype cluster mutation. This tells us that the cluster mutation is unreliable and probably not genealogically relevant because it occurred in two of Francoise’s children’s lines independently, but not all four.

In other words, that specific mutation just happened to occur in those two people.

This is exactly why some mutations are not relied upon for haplogroup definition.

Takeaways from the Match Time Tree

The time tree is a wonderful visualization tool that shows all of your matches, their EKAs and countries, if provided, in haplotype clusters, on the Time Tree. This makes it easy to see how closely people are related and groups them together.
On your match page, you can easily click through to view your matches’ trees.
You can use both haplotype clusters (sometimes reliable) and downstream haplogroups (reliable) to identify and define lineages on your family tree. For example, if a third person matches the two in haplogroup U6a7a1a2, the child haplogroup of U6a7a1a, and you could determine the common ancestor of any two of the three, you have a good idea of the genealogical placement of the third person as well.
You know that if people form a haplotype cluster, but not a new haplogroup, that their common haplotype cluster-defining mutation is less reliable and may not be genealogically relevant.
On the other hand, those less reliable mutations may not be reliable enough for haplogroup definition, but may be relevant to your genealogy and could possibly define lineage splits. Notice all my weasel words like “may,” “may not” and “possibly.” Also, remember our purple cluster example where we know that the mutation in question probably formed independently and is simply chance.
I can’t unravel the ancestors of the red cluster – and if I were one of those two people, especially if I didn’t know who my ancestor was, I’d care a lot that the other person didn’t provide a useful tree. Don’t forget that you can always reach out via email, offer to collaborate, and ask nicely for information.
We need EKAs, so please encourage your matches to enter their EKA, upload a tree or link to a MyHeritage tree, and enter a Wikitree ID in their FamilyTreeDNA profile, all of which help to identify common ancestors.

Resources:

Classic Tree

FamilyTreeDNA invented the Time Tree and Match Time Tree to display your results in a genealogically friendly way, but there is important information to be gleaned from other tree formats as well.

The Classic Tree presents the Mitotree, haplogroup and haplotype information in the more traditional format of viewing phylogenetic trees, combining their beneficial features. There’s a lot packed in here.

In this default view, all of the Display Options are enabled. We are viewing the LeJeune haplogroup, U6a7a1a, with additional information that lots of people miss.

The countries identified as the location of testers’ earliest known ancestors (EKA) are shown.

Listed just beneath the haplogroup name, five people are members of this haplogroup and are NOT in a haplotype cluster with anyone else, meaning they have unique mutations. When someone else tests and matches them, depending on their mutation(s), a new haplogroup may be formed. If they match exactly, then at least a new haplotype cluster will be formed.

Portions of three haplotype clusters are shown in this screenshot, designated by the F numbers in the little boxes.

Additional information is available by mousing over the images to the right of the haplogroup name.

Mousing over the badge explains the era in which the haplogroup was born. Rapid expansion was taking place, meaning that people were moving into new areas.

Mousing over the date explains that the scientists behind the Mitotree are 95% certain about the date range of the birth of this haplogroup, rounded to 50 CE. Remember, your common ancestor with ALL haplogroup members reaches back to this approximate date, but your common ancestor with any one, or a group, of testers is sometime between the haplogroup formation date, 50 CE, and the present day.

Mousing over the year shows the confidence level, and the date range at that level. These dates will probably be refined somewhat in the future.

If haplogroup members have private variants, it’s likely or at least possible that a new branch will split from this one as more people test

Mousing over the star displays the confidence level of the structure of this portion of the Mitotree based on what could be either confusing or conflicting mutations in the tree. For haplogroup U6a7a1a, there’s no question about the topology, because it has a 10 of 10 confidence rating. In other words, this branch is very stable and not going to fall off the tree.

Every haplogroup is defined by at least one mutation that is absent in upstream branches of the tree. Mutations are called variants, because they define how this sample, or branch, varies from the rest of the branches in the Mitotree.

These two mutations, A2672G and T11929C, are the haplogroup-defining mutations for U6a7a1a. Everyone in haplogroup U6a7a1a will have these two mutations in addition to all of the mutations that define directly upstream haplogroups (with extremely rare exceptions). Haplogroup-defining mutations are additive.

There may be more haplogroup-defining mutations than are displayed, so click on the little paper icons to copy to your clipboard.

You can view upstream haplogroups and downstream haplogroups, if there are any, by following the back arrows to upstream haplogroups, and lines to downstream haplogroups.

For example, I clicked on the arrow beside haplogroup U6a7a1a to view its parent haplogroup, U6a7a1, and a second time to view its parent, haplogroup U6a7a. If I click on the back arrow for U6a7a, I’ll continue to climb up the tree.

Beneath U6a7a, you can see the haplogroup branches, U6a7a1a and U6a7a2.

Beneath U6a7a1, you’ll notice:

People who don’t share haplotype clusters with anyone
Three haplotype clusters
Five descendant haplogroups from U6a7a1, including the LeJeune sister’s haplogroup U6a7a1a.

To expand any haplogroup, just click on the “+”.

You may see icons that are unfamiliar. Mouse over the image or click on the “Show Legend” slider at upper right to reveal the decoder ring, I mean, legend.

You can read more about the symbols and how haplogroups are named, here, and see more about types of mutations in the Scientific Details section.

Takeaways from the Classic Tree

The Classic Tree provides a quick summary that includes important aspects of a haplogroup, including when it was formed, which mutations caused it’s formation, and each branch’s confidence level.
It’s easy to back your way up the tree to see where your ancestor’s founding haplogroups were located, which speaks to your ancestor’s history. Patterns, paths, and consistency are the key.
Ancient DNA locations in your tree can provide a very specific location where a haplogroup was found at a given point in time, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s where the haplogroup was born, or that they are your ancestor. We will get to that shortly.
You can share this page with others using the “Share Page” function at the top right.

Ancestral Path

The Ancestral Path is a stepping-stone chart where you can view essential information about each haplogroup in one row, including:

Age and era
Number of years between haplogroups
Number of subclades
Number of modern-day testers who belong to this haplogroup
Number of Ancient Connections that belong to this haplogroup, including all downstream haplogroups

This “at a glance” history of your haplogroup is the “at a glance” history of your ancestors.

The number in the column titled “Immediate Descendants”, which is the number of descendant haplogroups, tells a story.

If you see a large, or “larger” number there, that indicates that several “child” haplogroups have been identified. Translated, this means that nothing universally terrible has occurred to wipe most of the line out, like a volcano erupting, or a famine or plague that would constitute a constraining bottleneck event. Your ancestors’ children survived and apparently thrived, creating many descendant downstream haplogroups, known as an expansion event.

If you see a smaller number, such as rows 5, 7, 8, 9, and 13, each of which have only two surviving branches, yours and another, several branches probably didn’t survive to the present day. This may reflect a bottleneck where only a few people survived or the lines became extinct over time, having no descendants today. Either that, or the right people haven’t yet tested. Perhaps they are living in a particularly undersampled region of the world, a tiny village someplace, or there aren’t many left.

The two most recent haplogroups have the most subclades, indicating that your ancestors were successfully reproducing in the not-too-distant past. Mutations occurred because they randomly do, creating new haplogroups, and several haplogroup members have tested today. Hopefully, genealogy can connect us further.

The next column, “Tested Modern Descendants,” tallies the total number of testers as it rolls up the tree. So, each haplogroup includes the testers in its downstream (child) haplogroups. The 127 people in haplogroup U6a7a1a include the two people in haplogroup U6a7a1a2, and the 226 people in haplogroup U6a7a1 include the 127 people in haplogroup U6a7a1a.

Looking at other types of trees and resources for each haplogroup can suggest where our ancestors were at that time, perhaps correlating with world or regional history that pertains to the lives of those ancestors.

In our case, the LeJeune sisters’ ancestors did well between 3450 years ago through the formation of U6a7a1a, about 1950 years ago. 3500 years ago, in Europe, settlements were being fortified, leadership was emerging as complex social patterns formed, and trade networks developed that spanned the continent and beyond.

Between 20,000 and 3,450 years ago, not so much. This correlates to the time when early European farmers were moving from Anatolia, bringing agriculture to Europe en masse. However, they were not the first people in Europe. Early modern humans arrived and lived in small groups about 50,000 years ago.

And they very nearly didn’t survive. Many lines perished.

Takeaways from the Ancestral Path

The Ancestral Path shows the stepping stones back to Mitochondrial Eve, dropping hints along the way where expansions occurred, meaning that your ancestors were particularly successful, or conversely, where a bottleneck occurred and the lineage was in jeopardy of extinction.
In some cases, where a lot of time has passed between haplogroups, such as 8,000 years between U and U6, we’re seeing the effect of lineages dying out. However, with each new tester, there’s the possibility of a previously undiscovered branch split being discovered. That’s precisely what happened with haplogroup L7.

Migration Map

The Discover Migration Map shows the path that your ancestor took out of Africa, and where your base ancestral haplogroup was formed.

Mousing over the little red circle displays the haplogroup, and the area where it originated. Based on this location where U6 was found some 31,000 years ago, we would expect to find U6 and subgroups scattered across North Africa, the Levant, and of course, parts of Eurasia and Europe.

It’s interesting that, based on what we know using multiple tools, it appears that haplogroup U initially crossed between the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, at the present-day Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. Today, that crossing is about 15 nautical miles, but the sea level was much lower during earlier times in history, including the last glacial maximum. Humans would have seen land across the water, and could potentially have swum, drifted, or perhaps used early boats.

Over the next 10,000+ years, haplogroup U trekked across the Arabian peninsula into what is present-day Iran, probably moving slowly, generation by generation, then turning back westward, likely in a small group of hunter-gatherers, crossing the Nile Delta into North Africa, present-day Egypt.

They probably fished along the Nile. Food would have been plentiful along rivers and the sea.

It’s exciting to know that the ancestors of the LeJeune sisters lived right here, perhaps for millennia.

There’s more, however.

The Migration Map shows the location of the genetically closest Ancient DNA results to your haplogroup, obtained from archaeological excavations. This mapped information essentially anchors haplogroup branches in locations in both space and time.

Ancient DNA samples are represented by tiny brown trowels. Clicking on each trowel provides summary information about the associated sample(s) in that location.

Takeaways from the Migration Map

Scientists have estimated the location where your base haplogroup originated. For the LeJeune sisters, that’s haplogroup U6 in North Africa along the Mediterranean Sea.
The trowels show the locations of the genetically closest archaeological samples, aka Ancient Connections, in the FamilyTreeDNA data base.
These Ancient Connections displayed on the map may change. New samples are added regularly, so your older samples, except for the oldest two, which remain in place for each tester, will roll off your list when genetically closer Ancient Connections become available.
There are no Ancient Connections for the LeJeune sisters in France today, but keep in mind that Europe is closely connected. Today’s French border is only about 25 miles as the crow flies from Goyet, Belgium. France, sea to sea, is only about 500 miles across, and at its closest two points, less than 250 miles.
Samples found at these locations span a large timeframe.

There’s a LOT more information to be found in the Ancient Connections.

Ancient Connections

Ancient Connections is one of my favorite Discover features. This information would never have been available, nor synthesized into a usable format, prior to the introduction of Mitotree and mtDNA Discover. Ancient Connections unite archaeology with genealogy.

The first thing I need to say about Ancient Connections is that it’s unlikely that these individuals are YOUR direct ancestors. Unlikely does not mean impossible, but several factors, such as location and timeframe need to be considered.
What is certain is that, based on their mitochondrial haplogroup, you SHARE a common ancestor at some point in time.
Ancient samples can be degraded, with missing genetic location coverage. That means that not every mutation or variant may be able to be read.
Different labs maintain different quality criteria, and location alignments may vary, at least somewhat, lab to lab. While this is always true, it’s particularly relevant when comparing ancient DNA results which are already degraded.
Samples are dated by archaeologists using a variety of methodologies. FamilyTreeDNA relies on the dates and historical eras provided in the academic papers, but those dates may be a range, or contain errors.
Obtaining information from ancient DNA samples isn’t as easy or straightforward as testing living people.

However, the resulting information is still VERY useful and incredibly interesting – filling in blanks with data that could never be discerned otherwise.

Many people mistakenly assume that these Ancient Connections are their ancestors, and most of the time, not only is that not the case, it’s also impossible. For example, a woman who lived in 1725 cannot be the ancestor of two sisters who were born in 1624 and 1633, respectively.

When you click on Ancient Connections, you see a maximum of about 30 Ancient Connections. Information about the genetically closest burial is displayed first, with the most distant last on the list.

Please note that the final two are the oldest and will (likely) never change, or “roll off” your list, unless an even older sample is discovered. When new samples become available and are genetically closer, the oldest other samples, other than the oldest two, do roll off to make space for the closer haplogroups and their corresponding samples.

Obviously, you’ll want to read every word about these burials, because nuggets are buried there. I strongly encourage you to read the associated papers, because these publications reveal snippets of the lives of your haplogroup ancestors and their descendants.

The small pedigree at right illustrates the relationship between the ancient sample and the haplogroup of the tester. Three things are listed:

El Agujero 8, the name assigned by the authors of the paper that published the information about this ancient sample
The haplogroup of the LeJeune descendant who tested
The haplogroup of their common ancestor.

If no haplogroup is specifically stated for the ancient sample, the sample is the same haplogroup as the common shared ancestor (MRCA), meaning the tester and the ancient sample share the same haplogroup.

The Time Tree beneath the description shows the tester’s haplogroup, (or the haplogroup being queried), the ancient sample, and their common ancestral haplogroup.

Let’s analyze this first sample, El Agujero 8.

The person whose remains were sampled lived about 1375 years ago (I’ve averaged the range), in the Canary Islands, and is part of the Guanche culture.
The Guanche are the indigenous people of the Canary Islands, already established there before the arrival of Europeans and the Spanish conquest of the 1400s.
The Guanche people are believed to have arrived in the Canaries sometime in the first millennium BCE (2000-3000 years ago) and were related to the Berbers of North Africa.
This makes sense if you consider the Migration map and geographic proximity.
Haplogroup U6a7a1, the haplogroup of El Agujero 8, is the shared ancestral haplogroup with the LeJeune sisters.
That woman, U6a7a1, lived around 1450 BCE, or 3450 years ago, probably someplace in North Africa, the Mediterranean basin, or even in the Nile Delta region, given the correlation between the Canary Islands settlement, the Berbers, and the Migration Map.
This does NOT mean that the ancestor of the LeJeune sisters lived in the Canary Islands. It means that a descendant of their MRCA, haplogroup U6a6a1, the shared common ancestor with the LeJeune sisters, lived in the Canary Islands.

Ancient Connections Chart Analysis Methodology

I create an Ancient Connection chart for each haplogroup I’m dealing with. We’re analyzing the LeJeune sisters today, but I track and analyze the haplogroup for every ancestor whose haplogroup I can find, or for whom I can find a descendant to test.

In this chart, YA=years ago and is based on the year 2000. KYA=thousand years ago, so 10 KYA is 10,000 years ago.

Name	Person Lived	Location & Culture	Haplogroup, Date & Age	Shared (MRCA) Haplogroup, Date & Age	Note
LeJeune Sisters	Born 1624 & 1633	French Acadian	U6a7a1a, 50 CE, 1950 YA	U6a7a1a, 50 CE, 1950 YA	In Acadia by 1643/44
El Agujero 8	1375 CE	Canary Islands, Guanche	U6a7a1 1450 BCE, 3450 YA	U6a7a1 1450 BCE, 3450 YA	Guanche arrived in Canaries in 1^st millennium BCE, related to Berbers
Djebba 20824	6000 BCE	Jebba, Bājah, Tunisia, Neolithic	U6a3f3’4’5 c 5000 BCE, 7000 YA	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	This archaeology site is on the northernmost point of North Africa
Djebba 20825	5900 BCE	Djebba, Bājah, Tunisia, Neolithic	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	This archaeology site is on the northernmost point of North Africa
Egyptian Mummy 2973	200 BCE	Abusir el-Meleq, Giza, Egypt, Ptolemaic Kingdom	U6a3h^, 1450 BCE, 3450 YA	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	Nile Delta probably, paper says they share ancestry with near easterners
Egyptian Mummy 2888	100 BCE	Abusir el-Meleq, Giza, Egypt, Ptolemaic Kingdom	U6a2a’c, 11,000 BCE, 13,000 YA	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	Nile Delta probably, paper says they share ancestry with near easterners
Segorbe Giant (6’3”)	1050 CE	Plaza del Almudín, Valencia, Spain, Islamic necropolis burial	U6a1a1, 14,000 BCE, 16,000 YA	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	Paper says his genetic makeup is Berber and Islamic Spain, buried in Islamic style on right side facing Mecca.
Sweden Skara	1050 CE	Varnhem, Skara, Sweden, Viking Swedish culture	U6a1a3a, 7350 BCE, 9350 YA,	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	Viking burial
Chapelfield 696	1180 CE	Chapelfield, Norwich, England, Ashkenazi Jewish Medieval age	U6a1b1b. 400 BCE, 2400 YA	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000KYA	Possibly the 1190 antisemitic Norwich massacre
Montana Mina 38	1200 CE	Montana Mina, Lanzarote, Spain (Canary Islands), Guanche culture	U6a1a1b1	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	Guanche arrived in Canaries in 1^st millennium BCE, related to Berbers
Amina	1725 CE	Gaillard Center, Charleston, South Carolina, Enslaved African American burials	U6a5b’f’g, 9550 BCE, 11,550 YA,	U6a1”9 19,000 BCE, 21,000 YA	Remains of pre-Civil War enslaved Africans unearthed in Charleston, SC
Doukanet el Khoutifa 22577	4400 BCE	Doukanet el Khoutifa, Mars, Tunisia, Maghrebi cultural group	U6b, 6500 BCE, 8500 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Late Stone Age, shows some admixture with European Hunter-Gatherers, possibly back and forth from Sicily
Guanche 12	625 CE	Tenerife, Spain (Canary Islands), Guanche, Medieval	U6b1a1’6’8’9, 1 BCE, 2100 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Guanche arrived in the Canaries in 1^st millennium BCE, related to Berbers
Guanche 14	775 CE	Tenerife, Spain (Canary Islands), Guanche, Medieval	U6b1a1’6’8’9, 1 BCE, 2100 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Ditto above
Antocojo 27	875 CE	Antocojo, La Gomera, Spain (Canary Islands)	U6b1a1’6’8’9, 1 BCE, 2100 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Ditto above
Guanche 13	900 CE	Cave, Tenerife, Spain (Canary Islands), Medieval	U6b1a1’6’8’9, 1 BCE, 2100 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Ditto above
Guanche 1	1090 CE	Cave, Tenerife, Spain (Canary Islands), Medieval	U6b1a1’6’8’9, 1 BCE, 2100 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Ditto above
Barranco Majona 30	1325 CE	Barranco Majona, La Gomera, Spain (Canary Islands), Guanche late Medieval	U6b1a1’6’8’9, 1 BCE, 2100 YA	U6a’b’d’e, 23,000 BCE, 25,000 YA	Ditto above
Kostenki 14	36,000 BCE	Markina Gora, Kostyonki, Voronezh Oblast, Russia	U2, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	European/Asian steppe earliest hunter-gatherers. Farming didn’t arrive until 10 KYA. Admixture from Asia as well.
Kostenki 12	31,000 BCE	Volkovskaya, Voronezh region, Russian Federation.	U2c’e, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Early hunter-gatherer
Krems 3	29,000 BCE	Wachtberg in Krems, Lower Austria, Austria, Gravettian culture	U5, 32,000 BCE, 34,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Endured the ice age, sophisticated toolmaking, Venus figures, mobile lifestyle, mammoth hunters
Krems Twin 1	28,800 BCE	Left bank of the Danube, Krems-Wachtberg, Austria, Gravettian culture	U5, 32,000 BCE, 34,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Double grave for twins, 1 newborn, one age about 50 days
Krems Twin 2	28,800 BCE	Left bank of the Danube, Krems-Wachtberg, Austria, Gravettian culture	U5, 32,000 BCE, 34,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Ditto above
Vestonice 13	28,900 BCE	Pavlovské Hills, South Moravia, Czech Republic, Grevettian culture	U8b^, 37,000 BCE, 39,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Ice Age Europe, few samples before farming introduced. Believe these Gravettian individuals are from a single founder population before being displaced across a wide European region.
Vestonice 14	28,900 BCE	Dolni Vestonice, Brezi, Czech Republic, Gravettian culture	U5, 32,000 BCE, 34,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Ditto above
Vestonice 16	28,900 BCE	Dolni Vestonice, Brezi, Czech Republic, Gravettian culture	U5, 32,000 BCE, 34,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Ditto above
Grotta delle Mura child	15,100 BCE	Grotta delle Mura, Bari, Italy, Paleolithic Italian culture	U2”10, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	This baby, interred in a small shoreline cave, was less than 9 months old and had blue eyes
Goyette Q2	13,100 BCE	Troisième Caverne, Goyet, Belgium, Magdaleian culture named after the La Madeleine rock shelter in France	U8a, 10,000 BCE, 12,000 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	These hunter-gatherer people may have been responsible for the repopulation of Northern Europe. Cave art, such as that at Altamira, in Northern Spain is attributed to the Magdalenian culture.
Villabruna 1	12,000 BCE	Villabruna, Italy, Paleolithic culture	U5b2b, 9700 BCE, 11,700 YA	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Rock shelter in northern Italy where this man was buried with grave goods typical of a hunter and covered in painted stones with drawings. The walls were painted in red ochre.
Oberkasel 998	12,000 BCE	Oberkassel , Bonn, Germany, Western Hunter-Gatherer culture	U5b1	U, 43,000 BCE, 45,000 YA	Double burial found in a quarry with 2 domesticated dogs and grave goods. Genis classification was uncertain initially as they were deemed, “close to Neanderthals.”

Creating a chart serves multiple functions.

First, it allows you to track connections methodically. As more become available, older ones fall off the list, but not off your chart.
Second, it allows you to analyze the results more carefully.
Third, it “encourages” you to spend enough time with these ancient humans to understand and absorb information about their lives, travels, and migrations – all of which relate in some way to your ancestors.

When creating this chart, I looked up every shared haplogroup to determine their location and what could be discerned about each one, because their story is the history of the LeJeune sisters, and my history too.

Ok, so I can’t help myself for a minute here. Bear with me while we go on a little Ancient Connections tour. After all, history dovetails with genetics.

How cool is it that the LeJeune sisters’ ancestor, around 20,000 years ago, who lived someplace in the Nile Delta, gave birth to the next 1000 (or so) generations?

Of course, the Great Pyramids weren’t there yet. They were built abotu 4600 years ago.

Those women gave birth to two women about 2200 years ago whose mummified remains were found in the Pyramids at Giza. The associated paper described Egypt in this timeframe as a cultural crossroads which both suffered and benefitted from foreign trade, conquest and immigration from both the Greeks and Romans.

You can read more about burials from this timeframe in The Beautiful Burial in Roman Egypt, here. A crossroads is not exactly what I was expecting, but reading the papers is critically important in understanding the context of the remains. This book is but one of 70 references provided in the paper.

Some burials have already been excavated, and work continues in the expansive pyramid complex.

The Egyptian sun is unforgiving, but Giza eventually gives up her secrets. Will more distant cousins of the LeJeune sisters be discovered as burial chambers continue to be excavated?

We know little about the lives of the women interred at Giza, but the life of another Ancient Connection, Amina, strikes chords much closer to home.

Amina, an enslaved woman, is another descendant of that woman who lived 20,000 years ago. She too is related to the Giza mummies.

Amina was discovered in a previously unknown burial ground in downtown Charleston, SC, that held the remains of enslaved people who had been brought, shackled, from Africa to be sold. Amina’s remains convey her story – that she was kidnapped, forced into the Middle Passage, and miraculously survived. She succumbed around 1725 in Charleston, SC, near the wharf, probably where her prison ship docked.

Charleston was a seaport where more than a quarter million enslaved people disembarked at Gadsden’s Wharf, awaiting their fate on the auction block. The location where Amina’s burial was found is only about 1000 feet from the wharf and is now, appropriately, considered sacred ground. Ohhh, how I’d like to share this information with Amina.

A hundred years earlier, a different ancestor of that women who lived 20,000 years ago gave birth to the mother of the LeJeune sisters, someplace in France.

Moving further back in time, another distant cousin was unearthed at the Kostyonki–Borshchyovo archaeological complex near the Don River in Russia.

Photographed by Andreas Franzkowiak (User:Bullenwächter) – Archäologisches Museum Hamburg und Stadtmuseum Harburg, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58260865

Markina Gora is an incredibly famous location yielding both specimens included here, as well as this famous Venus figurine from the Gravettian culture, dating from about 27,000 years ago.

Bust of Kostenki 14 reconstructed from the burial.

The earliest of these hunter-gatherers in Europe, believed to be a small group of humans, interbred with Neanderthals. Kostenki 14 carried Neanderthal introgression dating back to about 54,000 years ago.

A layer of volcanic ash, thought to be from a volcano near Naples that erupted about 39,000 years ago, is found above the remains, speaking to events that our ancestors survived after this man lived.

I know we’ve traveled far back in history from the LeJeune sisters, but these ancient humans, the MRCA of each upstream haplogroup, are our ancestors, too.

What does all this mean?

At first glance, it’s easy to assume that all of the locations are relevant to our direct ancestors. Not only that, many people assume that all of these people ARE our ancestors. They aren’t.

Creating the Ancient Conenctions Chart should help you gain perspective about how these people are related to you, your ancestors, and each other.

Each individual person is connected to you and your ancestors in various ways – and their stories weave into yours.

Discover provides everyone has a mini-Timeline for each Ancient Connection. It’s easy to see that the tester, who tested in the modern era, since the year 1950, is not descended from El Agujaro 8, who lived in the 1300s and whose common (shared) haplogroup with the tester, U6a7a1, was born between 2100 BCE and 900 BCE, or between 4100 and 2900 years ago. The most probable date is about 3450 years ago.

The Timeline for each ancient sample includes:

Your haplogroup’s mean birth year
Ancient Connection’s birth year
Ancient Connection’s haplogroup mean birth year, if different from the common haplogroup (in the example above, 3 and 4 are the same)
Birth year of your common ancestor (MRCA), which is your common haplogroup

It’s easy to see the relevant information for each sample, but it’s not easy to visualize the trees together, so I’m creating a “rough” tree in Excel to help visualize the “big picture”, meaning all of the Ancient Connections.

How Do I Know Which Ancient Connections Even MIGHT Be My Ancestors and How We Are All Related?

That’s a great question and is exactly why I created this chart in an ancient haplogroup spreadsheet.

Click on any image to enlarge

In this chart, you can see the LeJeune sisters, in red, at the bottom, and their direct line hereditary haplogroups, in purple, descending from haplogroup U at the top.

Branching to the left and right from intersections with their purple hereditary haplogroups are other branches that the LeJeune sisters don’t share directly. However, the ancient remains that carry those haplogroups are “haplocousins” at a distant point in time, with our LeJeune sisters.

There only two burials that carry the same ancestral haplogroup as the LeJeune sisters:

El Agujero 8, haplogroup U6a7a1 who lived in the Canary Islands in the year 1275
Djebba 20825, who lived in Tunisia about 6,100 years ago

Clearly, Djebba, with a common haplogroup that lived about 21,000 years ago cannot be the ancestor of the LeJeune sisters, but they share a common ancestor. If Djebba was an ancestor of the LeJeune sisters, then Djebba would also descend from haplogroup U6a7, born about 20,600 years ago, like the LeJeune sisters do.

A cursory glance might suggest that since the sample, El Agujero 8 lived in the Canary Islands about 1275, haplogroup U6a7a1 was born there. However, if you read the papers associated with all of the samples found in the Canaries, Tunisia, Spain and other locations, you’ll discover that these populations moved back and forth across the Mediterranean. You’ll also discover that the earliest European haplogroup U samples found in Europe are believed to be the founders of haplogroup U in Europe. It’s possible that U6 dispersed into Italy and Spain, regions with significant exchange with North Africa.

It’s extremely unlikely that El Agujero 8, who lived about the year 1275 CE, was the ancestor of the LeJeune sisters, but it’s not entirely impossible. What’s more likely is that they descended from a common population that moved between Spain, the Canaries, and North Africa where other similar burials are found, like Tunisia. We know that Rome largely conquered France during the Gallic Wars (56-50 BCE), so it’s not terribly surprising that we find haplogroup U6a7a1 and descendants scattered throughout Europe, the Iberian peninsula, the Roman empire, and North Africa.

Sometime between the birth of haplogroup U6a7a1, about 3450 years ago, the descendants of that woman found their way both to France before the 1600s and also to the Canaries before 1275.

Takeaways from Ancient Connections

I recommend that you read the associated academic papers and publications that provide the Ancient Connections mitochondrial haplogroups. Those publications are chock full of important cultural information.
Globetrekker, which won’t be released until some time after the next release of the Mitotree, will help with tracking the path of your ancestors, especially where it’s complex and uncertain.
The “haplosisters” and “haplocousins” of the French LeJeune sisters are quite diverse, including Egyptian pyramid burials in Giza, a Muslim necropolis burial in Spain, a Viking in Sweden, indigenous Canary Islanders, a Tunisian site on the Northern-most tip of Africa, a Jewish burial in England, an enslaved woman in South Carolina, the Markina Gora site in Russia, caves in Austria, the Czech Republic, Belgium, Germany and Italy.
Ancient Connections are more than just interesting. On another genealogical line, I found a necropolis burial with my ancestor’s haplogroup located about 9 km from where my ancestor is believed to have lived, dating from just a few hundred years earlier.
FamilyTreeDNA adds more Ancient Connections weekly.

Resources

Notable Connections

Notable Connections are similar to Ancient Connections, except they are generally based on modern-day or relatively contemporary testers and associated genealogy. Some samples are included in both categories.

Three Notable Connections are included with the public version of Discover, and additional Notable Connections are provided, when available, for testers who click through from their account.

Some Notable Connections may be close enough in time to be useful for genealogy based on their haplogroup, their haplogroup history, and the tester’s history as well.

In this case, the closest two Notable Connections are both included in Ancient Connections, so we know that the rest won’t be closer in time.

The common ancestor, meaning common haplogroup, of Cheddar Man and the rest, reaches all the way back to haplogroup U, born about 45,000 years ago, so these particular Notable Connections can be considered “fun facts.”

However, if the first (closest) notable connection was a famous person who lived in France in the 1600s, and was the same or a close haplogroup, that could be VERY beneficial information.

Takeaways from Notable Connections

Mostly, Notable Connections are just for fun – a way to meet your haplocousins.
Notable Connections are a nice way to emphasize that we are all connected – it’s only a matter of how far back in time.
That said, based on the haplogroup, location and date, you may find Notable Connections that hold hints relevant to your ancestry.

Scientific Details

Scientific Details includes two pages: Age Estimates and Variants.

Scientific Details Age Estimates

Haplogroup ages are calculated using a molecular clock that estimates when the mutation defining a particular haplogroup first arose in a woman.

Since we can’t go back in time, test everyone, and count every single generation between then and now – scientists have to reconstruct the phylogenetic tree.

The more people who test, the more actual samples available to use to construct and refine the Mitotree.

The “mean” is the date calculated as the most likely haplogroup formation date.

The next most likely haplogroup formation range is the 68% band. As you can see, it’s closest to the center.

The 95% and 99% likelihood bands are most distant.

I know that 99% sounds “better” than 68%, but in this case, it isn’t. In fact, it’s just the opposite – 99% takes in the widest range, so it includes nearly all possibile dates, but the center of the range is the location most likely to be accurate.

The full certainty range is the entire 100% range, but is extremely broad. The mean is the date I normally use, UNLESS WE ARE DEALING WITH CONTEMPORARY DATES.

For example, if the LeJeune sisters’ haplogroup was formed in 1550 CE at the mean, I’d be looking at the entire range. Do their approximate birth years of 1624 and 1633 fall into the 68% range, or the 95% range, and what are the years that define those ranges?

Scientific Details Variants

Next, click on the Variants tab.

To view your haplotype cluster, the F#, and your private variants, slide “Show private variants” at upper right above the black bar to “on.” This feature is only available for testers who sign in and click through to mtDNA Discover from their page.

The Variants tab provides lots of information, beginning with a summary of your:

Haplotype cluster F number, which I’ve blurred
Private variants, if any
End-of-branch haplogroup information

The most granular information is shown first.

Your haplotype cluster number is listed along with any private variants available to form a new haplogroup. In this case, there are no private variants for these haplotype cluster members. Every cluster is different.

Just beneath that, listed individually, are the variants, aka SNPs, aka mutations that identify each haplogroup. The haplogroup with the red square is yours.

Everyone in this haplogroup shares these two mutations: A2672G and T11929C. Because two variants define this haplogroup, it’s possible that one day it will split if future testers have one but not the other variant.

Information in the following columns provides details about each mutation. For example, the first mutation shown for haplogroup U6a7a1a is a transition type SNP mutation in the coding region, meaning it’s only reported in the full sequence test, where the A (Adenine) nucleotide, which is ancestral, mutated to a G (Guanine) nucleotide which is derived. This is essentially before (reference) and after (derived).

If you mouse over the Weight column, you’ll see a brief explanation of how each mutation is ranked. Essentially, rarer mutation types and locations are given more weight than common or less stable mutation types and/or locations.

Mutations with orange and red colors are less stable than green mutations.

Following this list from top to bottom essentially moves you back in time from the most recently born haplogroup, yours, to haplogroup L1”7, the first haplogroup in this line to branch from Mitochondrial Eve, our common ancestor who lived about 143,000 years ago in Africa.

View More

Clicking on the “View More” dropdown exposes additional information about the various types of mutations and Filtered Variants. Filtered Variants, in the current version of the Mitotree, are locations combined with specific mutation types that are excluded from branch formation.

Please note that this list may change from time to time as the tree is updated.

Takeaways from Scientific Details

Based on the Age Estimate for haplogroup U6a7a1a, it’s most likely to have formed about the year 29, but could have formed anytime between about 186 BCE and 230 CE. While this range may not be terribly relevant for older haplogroups, ranges are very important for haplogroups formed in a genealogical era.
People who are members of this example haplotype cluster do not have any private variants, so they are not candidates to receive a new haplogroup unless the upstream tree structure itself changes, which is always possible.
A significant amount of additional scientific information is available on these two tabs.
A list of locations currently excluded from haplogroup formation is displayed by clicking on the “View more” dropdown, along with information about various types of mutations. This list will probably change from time to time as the tree is refined.

Compare

Compare is a feature that allows you to compare two haplogroups side by side.

Let’s say we have an additional woman named LeJeune in Acadia, aside from Catherine and Edmee. As it happens, we do, and for a very long time, assumptions were made that these three women were all sisters.

Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard was born about 1659 and died after 1708. She is the daughter of unknown parents, but her father is purported to be Pierre LeJeune born about 1656, but there’s no conclusive evidence about any of that.

Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard married twice, first to Francois Joseph. Their daughter, Catherine Joseph’s marriage record in 1720 lists Jeanne, Catherine’s mother, as “of the Indian Nation.”

Several direct matrilineal descendants of Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard have joined the Acadian AmerIndian DNA Project, revealing her new Mitotree haplogroup as haplogroup A2f1a4+12092, which is Native American.

If Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard born about 1659, and Edmee and Catherine LeJeune, born about 1624 and 1633, respectively, are full or matrilineal half-siblings, their mitochondrial DNA haplogroups would match, or very closely if a new branch had formed in a descendant since they lived.

Let’s use the Compare feature to see if these two haplogroups are even remotely close to each other.

Click on “Compare.”

The first haplogroup is the one you’re searching from, and you’ll choose the one to compare to.

Click on “Search a haplogroup” and either select or type a haplogroup.

The two haplogroups are shown in the little pedigree chart. The origin dates of both haplogroups are shown, with their common shared ancestor (MRCA) positioned at the top. The most recent common, or shared, ancestor between Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard, who was “of the Indian Nation” and Catherine and Edmee LeJeune is haplogroup N+8701, a woman born about 53,000 years ago.

There is absolutely NO QUESTION that these three women DO NOT share the same mother.

Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard is matrilineally Native, and sisters Caterine and Edmee LeJeune are matrilineally European.

Takeaways from Compare

The MRCA between Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard and sisters, Edmee and Catherine LeJeune is about 53,000 years ago.
Jeanne was clearly not their full or maternal sister.
Compare provides an easy way to compare two haplogroups.

Suggested Projects

Projects at FamilyTreeDNA are run by volunteer project administrators. Some projects are publicly viewable, and some are not. Some project results pages are only visible to project members or are completely private, based on settings selected by the administrator.

When testers join projects, they can elect to include or exclude their results from the public project display pages, along with other options.

The “Suggested Projects” report in Discover provides a compilation of projects that others with the haplogroup you’re viewing have joined. Keep in mind that they might NOT have joined due to their mitochondrial DNA. They may have joined because of other genealogical lines.

While these projects aren’t actually “suggested”, per se, for you to join, they may be quite relevant. Viewing projects that other people with this haplogroup have joined can sometimes provide clues about the history of the haplogroup, or their ancestors, and therefore, your ancestors’ journey.

Remember, you (probably) won’t match everyone in your haplogroup on your matches page, or the Match Time Tree, so projects are another avenue to view information about the ancestors and locations of other people in this haplogroup. The projects themselves may provide clues. The haplogroup projects will be relevant to either your haplogroup, or a partial upstream haplogroup.

The haplogroup U6 project includes multiple U6 daughter haplogroups, not just U6a7a1a, and includes testers whose ancestors are from many locations.

The U6 project has labeled one group of 38 members the “Acadian cluster.” Of course, we find many descendants of Catherine and Edmee LeJeune here, along with testers who list their earliest known ancestor (EKA) as a non-Acadian woman from a different location.

The ancestors of Martha Hughes, who lived in Lynn, Massachusetts, and Mary Grant from Bathhurst, New Brunswick may well be descendants of Edmee or Catherine.

Or, perhaps they are a descendant of another person who might be a connection back to France. If you’re the Hughes or Grant tester, you may just have tested your way through a brick wall – and found your way to your LeJeune ancestors. If you’re a LeJeune descendant, you might have found a link through one of those women to France. Clearly, in either case, additional research is warranted.

For descendants of Catherine and Edmee, you’re looking for other testers, probably from France, whose ancestors are unknown or different from Edmee and Catherine. That doesn’t mean their genealogy is accurate, but it does merit investigation.

Check to see if someone with that EKA is on your match list, then check their tree.

For Catherine and Edmee LeJeune, other than Martha and Mary, above, there was only one EKA name of interest – a name of royalty born in 1606. However, research on Marie Bourbon shows that she was not the mother of the LeJeune sisters, so that tester is either incorrect, or confused about what was supposed to be entered in the EKA field – the earliest known direct matrilineal ancestor.

You may also find people in these projects who share your ancestor, but have not upgraded to the full sequence test. They will have a shorter version of the haplogroup – in this case, just U6a. If they are on your match list and their results are important to your research, you can reach out to them and ask if they will upgrade.

If you’re working on an ancestor whose mitochondrial DNA you don’t carry, you can contact the project administrator and ask them to contact that person, offering an upgrade.

Takeaways from Suggested Projects

Suggested Projects is a compilation of projects that other people with this haplogroup have joined. Haplogroup-specific projects will be relevant, but others may or may not be.
Testers may have joined other projects based on different lineages that are not related to their mitochondrial line.

We’re finished reviewing the 12 Discover reports, but we aren’t finished yet with the LeJeune analysis.

Another wonderful feature offered by FamilyTreeDNA is Advanced Matching, which allows you to search using combinations of tests and criteria. You’ll find Advanced Matching on your dashboard.

Advanced Matching

Advanced Matching, found under “Additional Tests and Tools,” is a matching tool for mitochondrial DNA and other tests that is often overlooked.

You select any combination of tests to view people who match you on ALL of the combined tests or criteria.

Be sure to select “yes” for “show only people I match in all selected tests,” which means BOTH tests. Let’s say you match 10 people on both the mitochondrial DNA and Family Finder tests. By selecting “Yes,” you’ll see only those 10 people. Otherwise you’ll get the list of everyone who matches you on both tests individually. If you have 100 mitochondrial matches, and 2000 autosomal matches, you’ll see all 2100 people – which is not at all what you want. You wanted ONLY the people who match you on both tests – so be sure to select “yes.”

The combination of the FMS, full sequence test, plus Family Finder displays just the people you match on both tests – but keep in mind that it’s certainly possible that you match those people because of different ancestors. This does NOT mean you match on both tests thanks to the LeJeune sisters. You could match another tester because of a different Acadian, or other, ancestor.

This is especially true in endogamous populations, or groups, like the Acadians, with a significant degree of pedigree collapse.

Advanced Matching Tip

You can also select to match within specific projects. This may be especially useful for people who don’t carry the mitochondrial DNA of the LeJeune sisters, but descend from them.

Switching to my own test, I’ve selected Family Finder, and the Acadian AmerIndian Project, which means I’ll see everyone who matches me on the Family Finder test AND is a member of that project.

Given that I’ve already identified the haplogroup of Catherine LeJeune, I can use known haplogroups to filter autosomal matches, especially in focused projects such as the Acadian AmerIndian Project. This helps immensely to identify at least one way you’re related to other testers.

By clicking on the match’s name, I can see their EKA information. By clicking on their trees, I can verify the ancestral line of descent.

Of course, in Acadian genealogy, I’m probably related to these cousins through more than one ancestor, but using Advanced Matching, then sorting by haplogroup is a great way to identify at least one common ancestor!

Takeaways from Advanced Matching

Advanced Matching is a wonderful tool, but make sure you’re using it correctly. Click “Yes” to “Show only people I match in all selected tests.” Please note that if you select all three levels of mtDNA test, and you don’t match at the HVR1 level due to a mutation, that person won’t be shown as a match because you don’t match them on all test levels selected. I only select “FMS” and then my second test.
You may match someone on either Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA and the autosomal Family Finder through different ancestral lines.
Advanced Matching is a great way to see who you match within a project of specific interest – like the Acadian AmerIndian Project for the LeJeune sisters.
You will match people outside of projects, so don’t limit your analysis.

Drum Roll – LeJeune Analysis

It’s finally time to wrap up our analysis.

The original questions we wanted to answer were:

Were Edmee and Catherine LeJeune actually sisters?
Was their mother Native American?
Was the third woman, Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard, also their sister?
Are there any other surprises we need to know about?

We now have answers, so let’s review our evidence.

Based on the haplogroup of Edmee and Catherine LeJeune both, U6a7a1a, which is clearly NOT of Native American origin, we can conclude that they are NOT Native American through their matrilineal side.
Native American haplogroups are subsets of five base haplogroups, and U is not one of them.

There’s other information to be gleaned as well.

Based on the haplogroup of Jeanne LeJeune dit Briard, A2f1a4+12092, plus her daughter’s marriage record, we can conclude that (at least) her mother was Native American.
Based on Jeanne’s Native American haplogroup alone, we can conclude that she is not the full sister of the Catherine and Edmee LeJeune.
Based on Jeanne’s birth date, about 1659, it’s clear that she cannot be the full sibling of Catherine born about 1633, and Edmee LeJeune, born about 1624, and was probably a generation too late to be their paternal half sister. Later lack of dispensations also suggests that they were not half-siblings.
Based on the known Acadian history, confirmed by contemporaneous records, we can state conclusively that Edmee LeJeune was born in France and Catherine probably was as well. The first Acadian settlement did not occur until 1632, and the first known families arrived in 1636.
Based on the fact that Catherine and Edmee’s haplogroups match, and many of their descendants’ mitochondrial DNA matches exactly, combined with later dispensations, we can conclude that Catherine and Edmee were sisters.
We can conclusively determine that Catherine and Edmee were NOT Native on their matrilineal side, and given that they were born in France, their father would have been European as well. However, we cannot determine whether their descendants married someone who was either Native or partially Native.
We know that information for partial haplogroup U6a, provided for HVR1 and HVR1+HVR2-only testers is not necessarily relevant for full sequence haplogroup U6a7a1a.
The recent Mitotree release has moved the haplogroup “dates” for the LeJeune sisters from about 21,000 years ago for HVR1/HVR2 U6a testers to 50 CE for full sequence testers,. These dates may well be refined in future tree releases.
Having multiple testers has provided us with an avenue to garner a massive amount of information about the LeJeune sisters, in spite of the fact that their haplogroup was born about 50 CE.
The LeJeune sisters are related to, but not descended from many very interesting Ancient Connections. Using our Ancient Connections spreadsheet, we can rule out all but one Ancient Connection as being a direct ancestor of the LeJeune sisters, but they are all “haplocousins,” and share common ancestors with the sisters.
While we cannot rule out the genetically closest Ancient Connection, El Agujero 8, who lived about 1275 CE in the Canary Islands as their direct ancestor, it’s very unlikely. It’s more probable that they share a common ancestor in haplogroup U6a7a1 who lived about 3450 years ago, whose descendants spread both into France by the 1600s and the Canary Islands by the 1200s.

By now, you’re probably thinking to yourself that you know more about my ancestors than your own. The good news is that mitochodnrial DNA testing and mtDNA Discover is available for everyone – so you can learn as much or more about your own ancestors.

Spread Encouragement – Be a Positive Nellie!

Unfortunately, sometimes people are discouraged from mitochondrial DNA testing because they are told that mitochondrial haplogroups are “too old,” and matches “are too distant.” Remember that the MRCA of any two people, or groups of people is sometime between the haplogroup formation date, and the current generation – and that’s the information we seek for genealogy.

Furthermore, it’s those distant matches, beyond the reach of autosomal matching, that we need to break down many brick walls – especially for female ancstors. I offer testing scholarships for ancestors whose mitochondrial DNA is not yet represented. It’s information I can’t obtain any other way, and I’ve broken through many brick walls!

We don’t know what we don’t know, and we’ll never know unless we take the test.

Imagine how much could be gained and how many brick walls would fall if everyone who has tested their autosomal DNA would also take a mitochondrial DNA test.

Which ancestors mitochodrial DNA do you need? The best place to start is with your own, plus your father’s, which gives you both grandmother’s mtDNA and directly up those lines until you hit that brick wall that needs to fall.

Additional Resources

Roberta’s Books:

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail 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 your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
MyHeritage Omni comprehensive “everything included” subscription plan
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

Wherefore Art Thou, Oh Ancestor? – New Generation Tree Chart Suggests Where to Look in Your Matches’ Trees

Posted on August 2, 2025 by Roberta Estes

When you see a DNA match, do you wonder how far back in your trees your common ancestors live? How do you know where to search?

I’ve been working through my DNA match list person by person, reviewing the information and trees for each match, searching for common ancestors.

Whether you’re looking at individual matches, shared matches, clusters or triangulation groups, trees are essential for finding common ancestors.

My favorite vendor-provided tree is my MyHeritage tree. They’ve done a great job, so I’m using their tree for my examples today.

Here’s the question I’m trying to answer – based on how much DNA I share with someone, how far up that person’s tree, roughly, do I need to look for our most recent common ancestor? And, is there something else I can tell?

Tree Size Matters aka How Far Up the Tree Do I Need to Look?

So, if you click on your matches’ trees, how far up their tree do you need to look for a common ancestor? How many times will you need to click to expand their tree beyond the 4 (Ancestry) or 5 (MyHeritage) generations initially displayed, assuming your match has a tree that size? How far out, meaning how many generations do you need to hope and pray they have extended their tree?

Conversely, how many generations do YOU need to include for your tree to be useful for:

Other testers to find common ancestors with you
Theories of Family Relativity provided by MyHeritage, suggesting common ancestors with other testers
ThruLines at Ancestry
Family Matching (bucketing) at FamilyTreeDNA which assigns your matches either maternally or paternally. (Note – FamilyTreeDNA is transitioning their trees to the MyHeritage platform.)

If you’re thinking that the size of YOUR tree doesn’t matter, think again.

Not only can the vendors not help you effectively without a tree – genealogy is a collaborative sport. Other people NEED the generations in your tree to locate your common ancestors, just like you NEED to see as many generations in their tree as possible. The vendors NEED as complete a tree as you can provide to help you further.

DNA+Trees Bulldoze Brick Walls

But maybe the most important aspect is that you NEED trees to break through brick walls – especially in conjunction with DNA and tools like clustering that show you visual images of genetic commonality.

We all need to be team players when we have that option – meaning we know who are ancestors are. Our brick walls can be solved, and you can be a puzzle piece of solving brick walls for others too.

Some of my closest friends and cousins are a direct result of DNA matches and genealogy collaboration over the years. (You know who you are!) I’ve even discovered that several friends are cousins too – which I would never have happened without DNA and trees.

Guidelines for What’s Reasonable

What is a reasonable number of generations to peruse for common ancestors?

The answer is – it depends! (I’m sorry…)

Let’s sort through this.

Given that, on AVERAGE, inherited autosomal DNA from a particular ancestor is halved in each successive generation during recombination between the parents, we can calculate the expected average. However, in reality – DNA isn’t always halved. Sometimes segments are passed intact, divided but not in half, or not inherited at all. That’s why you may not match some third cousins, but match some 7^th cousins. Random recombination is, in fact, random.

Every segment has its own individual history.

That’s part of the reason we use triangulation, to confirm that a specific segment originated with a particular couple or ancestral line.

Here are a few rules of thumb, with links to articles that explain the various terms and concepts:

There are no known instances of second cousins or closer NOT matching.
Some (but not all) people find their common ancestor in the first 5 or 6 generations.
Many people have proven, triangulated matches to the 10^th generation, but those are more difficult to prove, often due to incomplete trees (brick walls) at that distance on either your side, your match’s side, or both. I have no brick walls at 5 generations, counting my parents as generation 1, but I have 6 female brick walls in the 6th generation.
If you’re lucky, you can spot your common ancestral surname on the first page of your match’s tree – and follow that line back. Note that there may be additional common ancestors, so view each of their lines to the end. The MyHeritage tree makes this super easy!
Pedigree collapse, where you, and/or the other person share multiple lines, known or unknown, is a complicating factor. Pedigree collapse often means you share more DNA than would be expected for a specific relationship.
Endogamy, which is pedigree collapse on steroids, is real and will cause many smaller matches.
Based on the number of distant versus close cousins you have, you will have MANY more smaller matches than larger ones.
And last, but not least, some matches, especially smaller ones, are identical by chance (IBC), not identical by descent (IBD).

All of that said, we can estimate the number of generations back in our matches’ trees where we might need to look for that common ancestor.

As I’ve been reviewing all of my matches, I realized that I can look at the match cM size and mentally size up just about where in their tree I will find our common ancestor. In essence, I’ve “bottled that” for you, here.

Using Trees Effectively

One of the reasons I love the MyHeritage tree is that as you need to click further back in trees beyond the generations initially displayed, which occurs often – the next generations open to the right, the earlier generations just shift left and they all remain visible.

I know that might not sound important, but it is – incredibly – especially when you’re evaluating several matches. Otherwise, it’s easy to lose track of where you are in someone’s tree. I have 9 generations open, above, and I can just keep going – with the more recent generations just shifting left.

But there’s more!

When viewing matches’ trees, I can also click on anyone in their tree, and a profile box opens to the left with additional information about that person, leaving the tree open so I don’t lose my place and have to click around to find it again. I can’t even begin to tell you how wonderful this is, and it’s unique to MyHeritage. You can tell the MyHeritage tree was designed by actual genealogists.

This feature is incredibly useful because many, if not most, of the common ancestors with your matches will be beyond the first page displayed.

Thank you, thank you, MyHeritage!!!

Estimating the Number of Generations by the Amount of Shared DNA

How far up the tree you’ll need to look can be estimated by the amount of DNA that you share with a particular match.

Vendors estimate the relationship of DNA matches by either the percentage of shared DNA or the number of shared centimorgans (cMs), but there’s no quick reference to show you, generationally, where to focus in you and your matches’ trees for your common ancestor.

That’s the handy reference Generation Tree Chart that I’ve created here.

In the article, Shared cM Project 2020 Analysis, Comparison and Handy Reference Charts, I compiled information from multiple sources into one chart detailing HOW MUCH DNA can be expected to be shared at various relationship levels. Shared cM Project information is also visualized at DNAPainter

What I need to know now, though, isn’t an estimate of how closely we are related, but how many generations back to look for our common ancestor in my and their trees.

As I’m clicking through my matches, the majority, by far, are smaller than larger. That makes sense, of course, because we have many more distant relatives than close relatives.

At FamilyTreeDNA, I have 8758 matches who are not immediate or close family.

Number of Matches	Relationship Range	cM Range
10	Half-1C and 1C1R	318-637 cM
4	2C and equivalent	159-318 cM
7	Between 2C-3C, such as half-2C	80-159 cM
79	3C and equivalent	40-80 cM
814	3C-4C and equivalent	20-40 cM
7548	4C and equivalent	9-20 cM
293	Below 4C and equivalent	7-9 cM

I know the people in the first two categories and some of the people in the third category, but the genetic/ancestral scavenger hunt begins there.

All Cousins Are Not Equivalent

You’re probably wondering about the word “equivalent.” Genetically, people of different relationships carry the same amount of expected DNA. We not only have 5^th cousins (5C), for example, we have:

Half-fifth-cousins
Fifth-cousins-once-removed (5C1R)
Fifth-cousins-twice-removed (5C2R)
And so forth

I wrote about determining cousin relationships, meaning halves and removed,here.

Genetically speaking, a 5C2R carries the same expected amount of shared DNA as a 6C, so they are functional equivalents. How do we resolve this and where do we look in our trees for our common ancestors?

I’m so glad you asked!

Where Do Various Cousin Levels Fall in My Tree?

We know that first cousins share grandparents, but as we get further back in our tree, it’s difficult to remember or calculate how many generations back a 6^th cousin is in our tree.

I’ve used my MyHeritage tree to display 1st through 10th cousins, labeled in red, and the generation number they represent, in black. So, my common ancestors with my second cousins are found 3 generations out in my tree.

Making things more challenging, however, is that unless we know the match already, we’re trying to figure out how closely the match is actually related to us based on their DNA. Not all cousins of any level share the same amount of DNA, so the best vendors can do is provide an estimate or relationship range.

To determine our actual relationship, we need to find our most recent common ancestor.

Where, approximately, in my tree would I look for each category of match, especially that huge group of 7548 people?

Good question!

The Generation Tree Chart is Born

I needed a quick reference for approximately how many generations back in time our common ancestors existed by how much DNA we share, so I know how far back in someone’s tree I need to look.

I’ve reorganized the data from my earlier articles and created a new resource.

The Generation Tree Chart

The Generation Tree Chart:

Is not meant to identify parents or close relatives.
Does not include parents or grandparents.
Counts your parents as generation 1. Some people count themselves as generation 1. If you’re discussing this table, keep in mind that you may be one generation “off” in your discussions with someone who counts differently.
This chart clusters the relationships according to color, based on how much DNA people of that relationship are expected to share. For example, a first-cousin-twice-removed (1C2R) shares the same expected amount of DNA with you as a second-cousin (2C).
All cousin relationships that are expected to share the same amount of DNA are in the same color band.
If you’re using this chart with Ancestry’s numbers, use the unweighted (pre-Timber) amount of DNA.

The colored bands correlate to shared DNA, but the shared ancestor isn’t necessarily the same generation back in time.

This is my “show your work” chart. You’ll notice a few things.

The “Avg % Shared” column is the amount of shared DNA expected based on a 50% division (recombination) in each generation, which almost never happens exactly.
The “Expected cM” column is the expected cM amount based a 50% division in each generation.
I’ve incorporated the DNAPainter mean, low and high range for each relationship.
The expected number of shared cMs, in the “Expected cM” column is almost always smaller than the “cM Mean” from DNAPainter. The mean is the midpoint reported in the Shared cM Project for all respondents of that relationship who reported their shared DNA – minus the outliers.

This fact that reported is often significantly higher than expected is particularly interesting. In the closer generations, it doesn’t really matter, but beginning about the 6^th blue band and the 7^th red band in the chart, the mean is often twice the expected amount.

Remember that DNAPainter numbers are based on the Shared cM Project which relies on user-reported relationships and their associated cM match amounts. You can view Blaine Bettinger’s paper about the most recent Shared cM Project version (2020) and his methodologies here.

My theory is that the more distantly people match, the less likely they are to report the relationship accurately. They may be reporting the relationship they believe to be accurate, life a full versus a half cousin, but that’s not actually the case. It’s also possible that there are multiple unknown relationships or pedigree collapse, or both.

Furthermore, from the red band to the end of the chart, the reported amounts are significantly higher than expected, which is probably a function, in part, of “all or nothing” segment transmission. In other words, if someone’s parent carries a 10 cM segment, you’re probably going to inherit all of it or none of it. If it’s actually divided to 5 and 5 cM, you’re not going to see it on any match list.

In my case, I have several 8 cM triangulated matches who descend from common Dodson ancestors whose descendants intermarried a couple of generations later. Therefore, these matches are, respectively, both my 6C2R and 7C3R from the same line (20 cM total match), two matches at 6C1R (66 cM and 19 cM), and one 6C (51 cM). These people also triangulate on multiple segments. Given the high amount of shared DNA for this relationship level, I suspect additional pedigree collapse someplace. At least one person also matches on an unrelated line that I never realized before doing this match-by-match analysis, which opens up new possibilities.

Next, the meat of this chart.

The “Generations Back in Tree” column shows where your common ancestor with someone in that cousin generation would be expected. For example, in the first three bands, all of the first cousin variants are found two generations back, and your grandparents are your common ancestors.

All of the 2C variants descend through great-grandparents, which are 3 generations back in your tree.

Plase note that you can easily find the amount of DNA that you share with a match in the “Expected cM” and “Mean” Columns, and look to the right to see the Generations Back in Tree.

For example, if I have a match where I share 20 cM of DNA, I’m going to be looking between the red band and the second white band. The generations back in tree range from 4-6, or the common ancestor could potentially be further back. In other words, if I’m lucky, I’ll spot common ancestors on the first tree page displayed, but I may well need to display additional generations.

The “Common Ancestors” column displays the common ancestor with anyone in that cousin generation. So, anyone in any variation of 3C shares great-great-grandparents with you.
“How Many” shows how many great-great-grandparents you have – 8.

Color Bands and Generations

Color bands represent the same amount of expected DNA, but the various relationships that are included in those bands represent at least two different “Generations Back in Tree.”

For example, looking at the green band, the half 1C3R will be found in the grandparents generation, or generation 2, the 2C2R and half 2C1R are in the great-grandparents, or generation 3, and the 3C is found in the great-great-grandparents, or generation 4.

Where I really needed this chart, though, was in the more distant generations. While we are clearly dealing with a range, if I see a match with 11 or 12 cM, our common ancestor is nearly always at least 6 generations out, and often more.

The Net-Net of This Exercise

The majority of my matches, 7548, fall into the red band of 9-20 cM, which should be the 4^th or 5^th generation, either great-great or GGG-grandparents, but in reality, common ancestors will often be found more distantly in matches’ trees.

Most of your matches will be 20 cM or below, meaning they are at least 4/5 generations distant, or further – which translates to NOT the first tree page displayed. This why using the MyHeritage tree is so convenient, because when you click to the next generations, they just open and it’s VERY easy to quickly click and expand every generation with no back-clicking needed. Tip – when viewing profile cards for their ancestors, be sure to note locations which are important hints too. You can also click to “research this person.”

If your match doesn’t have a tree developed to at least 5 generations, it’s unlikely that you will be able to find a common ancestor for someone with less than a 20 cM match. However, all is not lost because you may recognize a surname, and if you build out the tree for your match, you may find your common ancestor. I build out my matches’ trees often! (Yes, it’s painful and irritating, but just do it! After all, we’re genealogists. We got this.)

For people with smaller cM matches, you may be looking even further out. I have some solid triangulated matches with multiple people at 6 and 7 generations..

The further out in time, the more triangulated people you need to be confident that your common ancestor who contributed that segment is identified correctly. At that distance, most people will have dead end lines and brick walls, probably yourself included.

However, my research methodology has the potential to break through brick walls.

Brick Walls Breakers

When I’m working on match and triangulation clusters, not only am I looking for MY known ancestors, I’m also looking for common surnames, or more specifically, common ancestors between my matches trees.

In some cases, common ancestors only mean that I’m viewing first cousins to each other, but in other cases, those common ancestors between my matches, but not me, MAY POINT DIRECTLY TO A MISSING BRICK WALL ancestor of mine.

Another hint that this might be the case is when the shared cMs seem high relative to how far back your common identified ancestor is in your tree – which is the case with my Dodson cluster. There may be a second relationship obscured there, especially if they match each other more “normally” and it’s only my matches that are higher than expected with multiple people in this cluster.

Research Methodology

If you’re wondering how I approach this process, I use a spreadsheet organized by triangulation cluster because everyone in a triangulation cluster matches each other on a particular segment. This means that the triangulated segment comes from a common ancestor (or is idencal by chance.) Each match has it’s own row in the cluster on my spreadsheet.

This spreadsheet could also be organized by shared match or matrix cluster, but I prefer smaller triangulation clusters where everyone matches each other and me on the same segment – because it points to ONE shared souce of the DNA – meaning one ancestor or ancestral couple.

I downloaded my match list at FamilyTreeDNA where I can see which matches are assigned either maternally or paternally based on identified, linked relationships, and who matches on the same segments. I used that spreadsheet as the foundation of this spreadsheet, but I could also add people who match on that segment and triangulate from other vendors who provide matching segment information, such as MyHeritage.

Using my Dodson example group, this group of people above, on my father’s side, hence the blue color, also triangulates on other segments. Other clusters are significantly larger, with around 50 cluster members.

One person, JA, descends from Dodson cousins who intermarried, which is pedigree collapse, so they may carry more Dodson/Durham DNA than they would otherwise.

If someone has a small tree, I often use traditional genealogy resources to expand their tree if I recognize a surname.

I track my other ancestors’ surnames that I notice in their trees, which provides a clue for additional ancestors. Of course, common surnames sometimes aren’t useful. However, one match, JC, found in this group is a proven Crumley line cousin who has colonial Virginia ancestors, but no prior knowledge of a Dodson/Durham line – so this could be a HUGE hint for one of JC’s brick walls.

This example cluster from my mother’s side includes my mother, who I haven’t listed, and also RM, a known second cousin who I tested. Based on his known common ancestors with me, I know immediately that these segment matches all track to John David Miller and Margaret Elizabeth Lentz, or beyond. Sure enough DW has a tree where our common ancestor is David Miller, father of John David Miller, and TK is related to DW based on an obituary. So far, we know this segment originated with David Miller and his wife, Catherine Schaeffer, but we don’t know if the segment originated with the Miller or Schaeffer parent.

One additional cluster member shows a Cyrus Miller out of Pennsylvania and my initial attempt at extending their tree using WikiTree, MyHeritage and Ancestry to find a common ancestor was not fruitful, but a deep dive might well produce more, or the common ancestor could reach back into Europe.

As new people test and match, I can add them to the spreadsheet in the clusters where they fit.

Summary Generation Tree Chart

Here’s a summary version of the Generation Tree Chart for you to use, without the cM high and low ranges, and without the red boxes. This is the one I use the most.

Here’s the full chart, including the ranges, but with no red boxes.

The Bottom Line

To derive the most benefit, we all need to develop our trees as far as possible, and share with others. A rising tide lifts all ships!

It’s impossible to identify common ancestors without trees, which means it’s also impossible to use genetic genealogy to break through brick walls.

Please check your trees at the various vendors, if you have multiple trees, and at WikiTree, to be sure you’ve added your most distant known ancestor in each line.

Link your known relatives to their position in your tree at FamilyTreeDNA, which allows them to triangulate behind the scenes and assign (bucket) your matches either maternally or paternally on your match list.

What new information is waiting for you in your matches? Do you have brick walls that need to fall?

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
MyHeritage Omni comprehensive “everything included” subscription plan
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

FamilyTreeDNA and WikiTree Collaboration – In Two Easy Steps!!

Posted on June 25, 2025 by Roberta Estes

I’m thrilled to see that FamilyTreeDNA and WikiTree have joined genealogical forces!

FamilyTreeDNA has announced a second option for tree connections for their customers – WikiTree. If you’ve been a blog subscriber for long, you know that I love WikiTree and use it almost daily.

A few months ago, FamilyTreeDNA obsoleted their own family trees and encouraged their customers to migrate their family trees to MyHeritage. Now there’s an additional option for FamilyTreeDNA customers.

This is NOT an either/or decision, because you can easily choose both. You can link to your MyHeritage tree, or you can link to your WikiTree profile, or both. I’m doing both because I want the maximum reach for my testing dollar!

Katy Rowe at FamilyTreeDNA has done a wonderful job of providing examples of how to use the various WikiTree DNA features, here, in her blog article, so I’m not replowing that field.

I do want to show you how to implement the new WikiTree connection in two easy steps.

But first, let me tell you why I love WikiTree so much, and why you will too.

Why I Love WikiTree

Let me confess – in general, I don’t care for one-world-trees, but WikiTree is the exception because WikiTree has built a platform that incorporates a collaborative community.

I will always maintain my detailed genealogy information in my desktop computer program, and I will also maintain my trees at both Ancestry and MyHeritage, which are subscription sites that facilitate records searching. Both have different strengths and weaknesses, but WikiTree is free, and everyone can participate.

I think of WikiTree as an “ancestor information aggregator” or maybe a “data repository” that’s available to everyone.

People often ask, “How can I preserve my research for future generations?” and WikiTree is certainly an excellent answer.

Here’s the link to my profile at WikiTree so you can take a look.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Estes-2153

Click on any image to enlarge

I’ve made this much of my profile information public, but just so you know, you’re in charge of what information is private and what is not by clicking on the little lock at the top right of your profile page.

You can see that there’s a lot of information available to help with just about everything WikiTree, including privacy selections.

On my profile, you might notice that I’m fairly active.

At right, I’ve entered the DNA tests that I’ve taken, except I need to update this to include both Ancestry and MyHeritage.

WikiTree shows other testers who have tested and may match people related to this ancestor, populating the information up and down the tree appropriately.

WikiTree also populates Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA information up the tree to the appropriate ancestors. I can’t tell you how much I LOVE THIS!! As you know, I encourage everyone to “collect” the Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups of their ancestors because they not only are genealogically relevant, but haplogroups also reach back before surnames where no other tests can reach – and let’s face it, you don’t know what you don’t know.

Here’s the DNA section of my mother’s profile, with my mtDNA test showing for her, because I’m her direct matrilineal descendant and received my mitochondrial DNA from her.

In the autosomal section, you’ll find other people who might share some of her DNA, and where they tested.

Wait! What??? There’s a new person, Helene, that I don’t know. I need to run right over and take a look at Helene’s profile. Because I can just click on these tester’s name to see their tree, I immediately know how they are related to my mom.

My Tree

You can also see my tree easily from my profile by clicking on the “Ancestors” tab.

And you know what, I didn’t have to build the entire thing. I only had to build the part that is unique to me, until I connected with a WikiTree profile that already exists.

Step 1 – Getting Started at WikiTree

WikiTree has provided a series of instructional pages to help you get started, here.

This article tells you very specifically how to begin to set up your profile and find your ancestors.

You can approach this one of two ways:

You can search to see if your grandparents or great grandparents are already at WikiTree. Mine were, so all I had to do was add the profiles that don’t already exist down to me.
Or, you can upload a 5000-person or less GEDCOM file and use the GEDCOMpare report which shows you which profiles already in WikiTree might be your ancestors.

My recommendation is to try searching for your grandparents and great-grandparents first because you only need to provide information until you connect with a profile that already exists.

And yes, after you get started and “settled in,” you absolutely will want to review the profiles of each ancestor, add sourced information, and make corrections, if needed. If there’s a conflict, the comments serve as a discussion area, there’s a profile manager, and if needed, there are moderators with specialties to help. That’s what WikiTree is all about – jointly beneficial collaboration.

Once you’ve set up your profile at WikiTree, you just provide a link at FamilyTreeDNA to your WikiTree profile. That’s it. Seriously, just this easy.

Step 2 – Entering Your WikiTree ID at FamilyTreeDNA

Sign on to your account at FamilyTreeDNA.

On your personal page, in the upper right-hand corner, click the down arrow, then “Account Settings.”

Then select “Genealogy” and “Family Tree” and scroll to the WikiTree section at the bottom.

You’ll just copy and paste your WikiTree profile ID.

You can find your WikiTree profile ID in two places. The URL is shown at the top of your profile page, or you can click the link button, which copies the link for you. Be sure you’re on the profile of the page you want to enter into the account at FamilyTreeDNA . I manage several accounts, so don’t forget whose profile you’re viewing.

Back at FamilyTreeDNA, just paste your WikiTree profile ID link into that field at the bottom of the page, and click “Save.” That’s it!!

It takes effect immediately, so now your matches can choose to view any tree you have made available at FamilyTreeDNA.

Viewing WikiTree Trees of Your Matches

I’m signing on to my Mom’s account at FamilyTreeDNA, which I manage, to show you how WikiTree availability appears to your matches.

On my Mom’s match with me, if you click on the little tree icon at far right, you’ll see that you can now select from both trees that I have available, MyHeritage and WikiTree.

If you click on WikiTree, you will see my profile page. Just click on the “Ancestors” tab to view my tree!

That’s it.

I’m signing in right now to every FamilyTreeDNA kit that I manage and adding their WikiTree profile link. This is SO EASY, and FamilyTreeDNA says that more collaborative features are on the way!

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail 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 your price but helps me 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

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
MyHeritage Omni comprehensive “everything included” subscription plan
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

The Mystery of the Blue Fugates and Smiths: A Study in Blue Genes and Pedigree Collapse

Posted on May 19, 2025 by Roberta Estes

The story of the Blue Fugates, an Appalachian family, is quite interesting, from a genetic perspective, a genealogical perspective, and a genetic genealogy perspective.

Who Are the Blue Fugates?

Martin Fugate, supposedly an orphan from France, and his bride, Elizabeth Smith, who had married by 1840, have long been attributed as the progenitors of the Blue Fugate Family of Troublesome Creek, in and around Perry County, Kentucky.

Their descendants were known as “The Blue Fugates” and also “The Blue People of Kentucky” because some of their children and descendants carried a recessive autosomal genetic trait, Methemoglobinemia.

Methemoglobinemia causes the skin to appear blue due to an oxygen deficiency in the red blood cells. Some people only exhibit this characteristic, or even just blue tinges in their fingernails and lips, when they are cold or agitated, such as when infants cry. Yet others are very, very blue.

Inheritance

In order for someone to exhibit the autosomal recessive trait of blueness due to Methemoglobinemia, they must inherit a copy of the gene from BOTH PARENTS. That’s why this trait is so rare.

If the parents have only one copy each, they are carriers and will not have the condition themselves.
If one parent carries either one or two copies, and the other parent does NOT carry a copy, their offspring CANNOT carry two copies of the mutation and will not be blue.
If both parents carry a copy, and both parents pass their copy on to their offspring, the offspring will probably exhibit some level of blueness – from just a tinge when they are cold, ill or or upset, to very, very blue.

I’m not a physician, so I’m not delving into the medical specifics of Methemoglobinemia, but suffice it to say that levels of 10-20% of methemoglobin in the blood produce blue skin, higher levels can produce more severe medical conditions, and levels beneath that may not be visually detectible.

What’s important for the genealogy aspect of this story is that both parents must carry a copy AND pass their copy on for the condition to express in their offspring.

We’ve learned a lot since the 1800s when this was first observed in various members of the Fugate family in Perry County, KY, and since the 1960s when this phenomenon was first studied in the Fugate family and their descendants. To be clear, there are also references to the blue Combs and blue Ritchies in and around Perry County – but the common factor is that they have ancestors that descend from the Fugate family AND the Smith family ancestors, both.

During my research, I’ve proven some of what was initially accepted as fact was incorrect – and I’d like to correct the record. Bonus points too, because it’s just such a great genealogy story!

My Interest

I’ve been inordinately interested in the Fugate family for a long time – but not because of their famous blueness.

The Fugate family has been found for more than 225 years alongside my Cook, Claxton, Campbell, and Dobkins families. First, in Russell County, VA, where Josiah Fugate was granted land along Sword’s Creek in 1801 that adjoined Harry Smith, Richard Smith, and others, including my brick-wall ancestor, Joel Cook. Keep in mind that we have never discovered the birth surname of Joel’s wife or Joel’s parents.

Joel’s daughter, Sarah, married James Claxton about 1799 or 1800 in Russell County, and in February of 1802, James Claxton and Zachariah Fugate, among others, were ordered to view and lay out a new road. They were clearly neighbors, living on the same road, and knew each other well. We don’t know who James’ parents were either.

The Fugates first lived adjacent to the Cook, Riley, Stephens, and Claxton families on Mockason Creek in Russell County, then later migrated with the same group of families to Claiborne County where they lived along the Powell River near the Lee County, VA line, and are very closely associated with the Dobkins and Campbell lines.

Sometime between 1802 and 1805, several Russell County families moved 110 miles down the mountain range and settled together on the Powell River in Claiborne County, TN. About the same time, others from the same cluster moved to what would eventually become Perry County, KY.

In 1805, the Fugates were ordered as road hands on the north side of Wallen’s Ridge in Claiborne County, the part that would become Hancock County in the 1840s, along with James Claxton and several Smiths.

In 1808, James Claxton witnessed a deed to Henley Fugate and John Riley.

The unsubstantiated family rumor, repeated as fact but with no source, has always been that William Fugate married the sister of my John Campbell. If that were true, tracking the Fugates would help me track my Campbells – yet another brick wall. Hence, my early interest in the Fugate family. Until now, I’ve never solved any part of that puzzle.

In 1827, in Claiborne County, Henry Cook, road overseer, is assigned John Riley, Henly Fugate, William Fugate, Fairwick Claxton (son of James who had died in 1815), and others. These families continued to be allied, living close to each other.

In 1842, William Fugate (1799-1855), born to William Fugate and Sarah Jane Stephens in Russell County, is involved in the estate of John Campbell, born about 1772, who had died in 1838. John Campbell was the husband of Jane “Jenny” Dobkins, daughter of Jacob Dobkins (1751-1835).

William Fugate of Claiborne County signed a deposition in 1851 saying he came to Claiborne County, TN, in 1826. Claiborne County is rugged terrain, located on the south side of the Cumberland Gap, where Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky intersect.

In 1853, both William Fugate and Jehiel Fugate are neck-deep in lawsuits surrounding the estate of Jacob Dobkins, who died in 1835, lived on Powell River, and whose daughters married John Campbell and his brother George Campbell

I recently discovered that this William Fugate was born about 1799 in Russell County, VA, and according to his son’s death certificate, William’s wife was Nancy Riley, which makes a lot of sense, given the proximity of these families. I must admit, I’m glad to solve this, but I’m also disappointed that he wasn’t married to John Campbell’s sister.

So, why does any of this matter in the Blue Fugate story?

In part, because I knew decades ago that Martin Fugate, of the Kentucky Blue Fugates, was not an orphan from France who had somehow made his way to the eastern shores of Maryland, then to Perry County, KY by 1820 when he supposedly received a land grant. That land grant date doesn’t square with Martin’s birth year of 1820 either, nor his marriage about 1840, both of which are substantiated by the census.

You can see from the information gleaned from Russell County that the Fugate family was there well before 1800. In fact, a Martin Fugate is shown on the 1789 tax list and other Fugates were there earlier, as early as 1771, according to extracted Russell County records in the book “The Fugate Family of Russell County, Virginia” by David Faris. The Fugate descendants continued to press on westward from there. Fugate, unlike Smith, Cook, and even Campbell, is not a common surname.

“Orphan” stories are often early ways that people said “I don’t know”, without saying, “I don’t know where he came from”, so they speculated and said “maybe he was an orphan.” Then that speculation was eventually passed on as fact.

That might have been happening in Perry County in the 1960s, but in Claiborne County in the 1980s, family members were telling me, “Martin waren’t no orphan,” and would roll their eyes and sigh with great exasperation. You could tell this was far from the first time they had had to combat that story. To be clear, the Fugate family lived down along Little Sycamore Creek with my Estes, Campbell and other ancestral families. In the 1980s, I was finding the oldest people possible and talking to them.

Some records in Russell County, where the Fugates of Perry County, KY, and the Fugates of Claiborne County, TN, originated, did and do exist, so could have been researched in the 1960s, but you would have had to know where to look. No one back then knew that the Perry County Fugates originated in Russell County, so they wouldn’t have known to look there. Research wasn’t easy. If they had known to look in Russell County, they would have had to travel there in person to review records. Early records exist in Perry County, too, but in the 1960s, not even the census was available, and people simply didn’t remember back to the early to mid-1800s.

Truthfully, no one would ever have doubted those early stories that had been handed down. They were revered, in all families, and treated as gospel. Those stories were the only connection they had to their ancestors – and the generations inbetween who passed them on. Nope, no one was going to question what Grandpa or Uncle Joe said.

So, in the 1960s, when the Blue Fugates in Perry and adjacent Breathitt County, KY were first studied by Dr. Cawein and his nurse, Ruth Pendergrass, they gathered oral family history and constructed a family pedigree from that information. They documented who was blue from first-hand eye-witness accounts – which would only have stretched back into the late 1800s, best case.

It probably never occurred to anyone to validate or verify earlier information that was provided. Plus, it would have been considered rude. After all, they weren’t genealogists, and they were trying to solve a medical mystery. The information they collected did not conflict with what was known about the disease and how it was transmitted, so they had no reason to doubt its historical accuracy.

The Mystery of the Blue Fugates?

The Blue Fugates were a family renowned for their blue skin – at least some of them had blue skin. That’s part of what makes this story so interesting.

Originally, it was believed that only one progenitor couple was involved, Martin Fugate and his wife, Elizabeth Smith, but now we know there were two. Maybe I should say “at least two.”

Martin Fugate and his bride, Elizabeth Smith, whose first known child was born in 1841, according to the 1850 census, are progenitors of the Blue Fugate Family of Troublesome Creek, but they aren’t the only progenitors.

Martin was not shown in the Perry County, KY 1840 census, but two Zachariah Fugates are present, 8 Fugate families are found in neighboring Breathitt County, more than a dozen in Russell County and surrounding counties in Virginia, and four, including two William Fugates, in Claiborne County, TN. The younger of the two lived next door to John Dobkins, son of deceased Jacob Dobkins.

Martin Fugate (c1820-1899) of Perry County and his second cousin, Zachariah Fugate (1816-1864), who each married a Smith sister, are both progenitors of the Blue Fugates through their common ancestor, their great-grandfather, Martin Fugate, who was born in 1725 and died in 1803 in Russell County, VA.

Obviously, if Martin (c1820-1899) had a Fugate second cousin who also lived in Perry County, Martin wasn’t an orphan. That knowledge is due to more recently available information, like census and other data – and that’s part of what I want to correct.

In 1948, Luke Combs, from Perry County, KY, took his sick wife to the hospital, but Luke’s blueness caused the medical staff to focus on him instead, thinking he was experiencing a medical emergency. He wasn’t. His skin was just blue. In 1974, Dr Charles H. Behlen II said, ‘Luke was just as blue as Lake Louise on a cool summer day.’ The Blue Fugates were “discovered” by the rest of the world, thanks to Luke, but they were nothing new to local people, many of whom did not welcome the notoriety.

In the 1960s, hematologist Madison Cawein III, with the assistance of Ruth Pendergrass, studied 189 members of the extended Fugate family, treated their symptoms, and published his findings. He included a pedigree chart, but not everyone was keen on cooperating with Dr. Cawein’s research project.

The Fugate family history collected for the study was based on two things:

Personal knowledge of who respondents knew was blue
Remembered oral history beyond the reach of personal knowledge.

That remembered oral history reported that Martin Fugate and Elizabeth Smith’s youngest son, Zachariah Fugate (born in 1871), married his mother’s (older) sister, Mary Smith, (born about 1820), and had a family. I’ve added the dates and information in parentheses, or they would have immediately known that marriage was impossible. Or, more directly, even if they married when Zachariah was 14, Mary would have been 70 years old, and they were certainly not going to produce offspring. This is the second piece of information I want to correct. That marriage never happened, although people were accurate that:

Martin Fugate and his wife, Elizabeth Smith, did have a son named Zachariah Fugate
One Zachariah Fugate did marry Mary Smith, sister of Elizabeth Smith

It’s just that they were two different Zachariah Fugates, born 75 years apart. Same name confusion strikes again.

I constructed this census table of Martin Fugate with Elizabeth Smith, and Zachariah Fugate with Mary Smith. They lived next door to each other in Perry County – and it seemed that every family reused the same “honoring” names for their children – and had been doing such for generations.

In the 1960s, when the information was being compiled for Dr. Cawein, the census and other documents that genealogists rely on today were not readily available.

Furthermore, genetically, for the mystery Dr. Cawein was attempting to solve, it didn’t really matter, because it was still a Smith female marrying a Fugate male. I know that it made no difference today, but he wouldn’t have known that then. To track down the source of the blueness, he needed to identify who was blue and as much about their ancestors as possible.

The Zachariah Fugate (1816-1864) who married Elizabeth Smith’s sister, Mary Smith, was Martin Fugate’s second cousin by the same name, Zachariah. Both Martin (c1820-1899) and his second cousin, Zachariah (c1816-1864), married to Smith sisters, had blue children, which helps cement the fact that the responsible genes were passed down through BOTH the Fugate and Smith lines, and weren’t just random mutations or caused by environmental or other factors.

Proof

In case you’re wondering exactly how I confirmed that Martin and Zachariah did indeed marry Elizabeth and Mary Smith – their children’s birth and death records confirmed it. These records correlate with the census.

Unlike most states, Kentucky has some pre-1900 birth and death records.

Wilson Fugate’s birth in February, 1855 was recorded, naming both of his parents, Martin Fugate and Elizabeth Smith.

Martin Fugate and Elizabeth Smith’s son, Henley or Hendley, died in 1920, and his death certificate gave the names of both parents. Betty is a nickname for Elizabeth.

On the same page with Wilson Fugate’s birth, we find a birth for Zachariah Fugate and Mary Smith, too.

Hannah Fugate was born in December 1855.

Zachariah Fugate and Mary Smith’s son, Zachariah died in 1921, and his death certificate gives his parents as Zach Fugate and Polly Smith, a nickname for Mary.

There are more death records for children of both sets of parents.

Both couples, Martin Fugate and Elizabeth Smith, and Zachariah Fugate and Mary Smith, are progenitors of the Blue Fugate family.

Of Martin’s 10 known children, 4 were noticeably “blue” and lived long, healthy lives. At least two of Zachariah’s children were blue as well.

Some people reported that Martin, himself, had deep blue skin. If so, then both of his parents would have carried that genetic mutation and passed it to him.

Unfortunately, color photography didn’t exist when Martin (c1820-1899), lived, so we don’t know for sure. For Martin’s children to exhibit blue skin, they would have had to inherit a copy of the gene from both parents, so we know that Martin’s wife, Elizabeth, also inherited the mutation from one of her parents. Ditto for Zachariah Fugate and Mary Smith. The chances of two families who both carry such a rare mutation meeting AND having two of their family members marry are infinitesimally small.

Dr. Cawein’s Paper

In 1964, Dr. Cawein published his findings, but only with a pedigree chart with no names. What was included was an explanation about how remote and deep the hills and hollows were, and that out-migration was almost impossible, explaining the propensity to marry cousins.

Legend:

Measured – Found to have elevated methemoglobin
Measured – Found to have decreased methemoglobin
Not measured – Reported to be “blue”
Measured – Found to be normal

Cawein further stated that data was collected by interviewing family members who personally knew the individual in question and could say if they were actually blue.

Cawein erroneously reported that “Martin Fugate was an orphan born about 1800, landed in Maryland, obtained a land grant in Perry County, KY in 1820, and married a local gal. From 1820 to about 1930, the population consisted of small, isolated groups living in creek valleys and intermarriage was quite common.” Bless his heart.

Later, geneticist Ricky Lewis wrote about the Blue Fugates, sharing, among other things, the provenance of that “blue” family photo that circulates on the internet, revealing that it is a composite that was assembled and colorized back in 1982. She also erroneously stated that, “after extensive inbreeding in the isolated community—their son married his aunt, for example—a large pedigree of “blue people” of both sexes arose.” Bless her heart too.

Dr. Lewis is incorrect that their son married his aunt – but she’s right that intermarriage between the families is responsible for the blue descendants. In colonial America, and elsewhere, cousin marriages were fairly common – everyplace. You married who you saw and knew. You saw your family and neighbors, who were generally your extended family. No left-handed apology needed.

Pedigree collapse, sharing the same ancestors in multiple places in your tree, is quite common in genealogy, as is endogamy among isolated populations.

Today, things have changed somewhat. People move into and out of an area. The younger generation moves away a lot more and has for the past 100+ years. Most people know their first cousins, but you could easily meet a second or third cousin and never know you were related.

While early stories reported that Martin Fugate (c1820-1899) was an orphan from France, mysteriously appearing in Kentucky around 1820, later genealogical evidence as well as genetic research proves that Martin Fugate was actually born about 1820, in Russell County, VA and his ancestors, over several generations, had followed the typical migration path across Virginia into Kentucky.

We’ve also proven that Martin’s son, Zachariah (born 1871) was not the Zachariah who married Elizabeth Smith’s sister, Mary, who was 50 years old when Zachariah was born.

What else do we know about these families?

The Back Story

Compared to the Smith story, the Fugate story was “easy.”

Don’t laugh, but I spent several days compiling information and charting this in a way I could see and understand in one view.

I hesitate to share this, but I’m going to because it’s how I think. I also put together a very basic Fugate tree at Ancestry, here. Many children and siblings are missing. I was just trying to get this straight in my mind.

Click to enlarge any image

This spreadsheet is color-coded:

The text of each lineage has a specific color. For example, Fugates are blue.
Some people (or couples) are found in multiple descendants’ lines and are duplicated in the tree. Duplicated people also have a cell background color. For example, Mahala Richey (Ritchey, Ritchie) is highlighted yellow. James and Alexander Richey have green text and apricot background because they are duplicated.
The generation of parents who had blue children is marked with black boxes and the label “Blue Kids.”
Only the blue kids for this discussion are listed below those couples.
The bluest person was Luna Fugate (1886-1964).
While Luna’s husband, John Stacey, also descended from the Smith/Combs line, only one of their children expressed the blue trait. That child’s lips turned blue when they cried. John and Luna were actually related in three ways. Yes, my head hurts.
The last known “blue” person was Luna Fugate’s great-grandchild, whose name I’ve obfuscated.

Ok, let’s start with the blue Fugates on our spreadsheet. You’ll probably want to follow along on the chart.

Martin Fugate (1725-1803) and wife Sarah, had several children, but only two, the ones whose grandchildren married Smith sisters are known to have had blue children.

On our chart, you can see that Martin (1725-1803) is blue, and so is Son 1, William Fugate and Sarah Stephens, along with Son 2, Benjamin Fugate and Hannah Devers. Both William and Benjamin are mentioned in Martin’s estate in 1803 in Russell County, VA.

Two generations later, Martin Fugate (c1820-1899) and Elizabeth Smith had four blue children, and Zachariah Fugate (c1816-1864) and Mary Smith had at least two blue children. Furthermore, Zachariah Fugate’s sister, Hannah (1811-1877), married James Monroe Richie.

The Richey’s are green, and you can see them on both the left and right of the chart. Hannah’s husband descended from the same Richey line that Elizabeth Smith did. It was no surprise when their child, Mahala Ritchie (1854-1922), married Levi Fugate, to whom she was related three ways, they became the parents of a blue child. Their daughter, Luna Fugate, was known as “the Bluest of the Blue Fugates.”

Mahala Ritchie (1854-1922) could have inherited her blue gene (or genes) from either her mother Hannah Fugate, or her father, James Monroe Ritchie, or both. We don’t know if Hannah was blue or not.

We do know that Mahala married Levi Fugate, her third cousin through the Fugate line, and her third and fourth cousin also through the Richie and Grigsby lines, respectively. This is the perfect example of pedigree collapse.

You can see the purple Grigsby lines in the center and to the right of the pedigree chart too, with Benjamin Grigsby, highlighted in blue, being common to both lineages.

Zachariah Fugate (1816-1864) and Mary Smith had at least two blue sons, but I am not tracking them further. Suffice it to say that Blue John married Letha Smith, his first cousin, the granddaughter of Richard Smith and Nancy Elitia Combs. Lorenzo, “Blue Anze”, married a Fugate cousin, so it’s no surprise that Zachariah and Mary were also progenitor couples of the Blue Fugates.

Martin’s son, Levi Fugate, married Mahala Ritchie, mentioned above, and had Luna Fugate who would have been personally known to Dr. Cawein. Luna, pictured above, at left, was known as the bluest of the Blue Fugates.

Luna married John Stacey who some thought wasn’t related to Luna, so it was confusing why they had one child that was slightly blue. However, John turns out to be Luna’s second cousin, third cousin once removed and first cousin once removed through three different lines. His great-grandparents were Richard Smith and Nancy Combes. Since one of their children had a slight blue tinge, John, while not visibly blue himself, clearly carried the blue gene.

Where Did the Blue Gene Come From?

The parents of Elizabeth Smith and Mary Smith were Richard Smith and Nancy (Eletia) Combs. His Smith ancestors include both the Richeys and Caldwells.

James Richey (1724-1888) married Margaret Caldwell (1729-1802) and his father, Alexander Richey (1690-1749) married Jeanne Caldwell (1689-1785). While the Caldwell females weren’t closely related, Jeanne was the daughter of Joseph Alexander Caldwell (1657-1730) and Jane McGhie, and Margaret Caldwell (1729-1802) was the great-granddaughter of that couple. The Caldwells are shown in magenta, with both Richey/Caldwell couples shown as duplicates. The Richey are highlighted in apricot, and the Caldwell’s with a light grey background. It was difficult to show how these lines connect, so that’s at the very top of the pedigree chart.

When just viewing the Smith-Combs line, it’s easier to view in the Ancestry pedigree.

The Smith, Richey, Combs, Grigsby, and Caldwell lines are all repeated in different locations in the trees, such as with Hannah Fugate’s husband. These repeated ancestors make it almost impossible for us to determine where in the Smith ancestral tree that blue gene originated.

We don’t know which of these ancestral lines actually contributed the blue gene.

Can We Figure Out Where the Blue Gene Came From?

How could we potentially unravel this mystery?

We know for sure that the blue gene in the Fugate side actually descends from Martin Fugate who was born in 1725, or his wife, Sarah, whose surname is unknown, because their two great-grandchildren, Martin (c1820-1899) and Zachariah (1816-1864) who both married Smith sisters had blue children. For those two intervening generations between Martin Fugate (1725-1803) and those two great-grandsons, that blue gene was quietly being passed along, just waiting for a blue Fugate gene carrier to meet another blue gene carrier. They found them in the Smith sisters.

None of Martin (1725-1803) and Sarah’s other children were known to have had any blue children or descendants. So either they didn’t carry the blue gene, or they didn’t marry someone else who did – that we know of.

We can’t tell on the Smith side if the blue gene descends from the Smith, Richey, Grigsby or Caldwell ancestors, or maybe even an unknown ancestor.

How can we narrow this down?

If a Fugate in another geographic location married someone from one of these lineages, say Grigsby, for example, and they had blue offspring, and neither of them shared any of the other lineages, then we could narrow the blue gene in the Smith line to the Grigsby ancestor.

Unfortunately, in Perry and surrounding counties in Kentucky, that would be almost impossible due to intermarriage and pedigree collapse. Even if you “think you know” that there’s no connection through a third line, given the deep history and close proximity of the families, the possibility of unknown ancestry or an unexpected parent is always a possibility.

Discover

While the blue gene is not connected to either Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, we do have the Fugate’s Y-DNA haplogroup and the Smith sisters’ mitochondrial DNA.

Y-DNA

The Big Y-700 haplogroup for the Martin Fugate (c1820-1899) line is R-FTA50432, which you can see, here..

You can see the Blue Fugate Family by clicking on Notable Connections.

If you’re a male Fugate descendant who descends from anyone other than Martin Fugate (c1820-c1899), and you take a Big Y test, you may well discover a new haplogroup upstream of Martin (c1820-1899) that represents your common Fugate ancestor.

If you descend from Martin, you may find youself in either of the two haplogroups shown for Martin’s descendants, or you could split the line to form a new haplogroup.

We don’t have the mitochondrial DNA of Martin Fugate (c1820-1899), which would be the mitochondrial DNA of his mother, Nancy Noble. We also don’t have the the mtDNA of Mary (Polly) Wells, the mother of Zachariah Fugate (c1816-1864). If you descend from either of these women in a direct matrilineal line, through all women, please take a mitochondrial DNA test and reach out. FamilyTreeDNA will add it as a Notable Connection.

We do, however, have the mitochondrial DNA of Elizabeth and Mary Smith

Mitochondrial DNA of Elizabeth and Mary Smith

The mitochondrial DNA of both Elizabeth and Mary Smith follows their mother’s line – Nancy Combs through Nancy (Eletia?) Grigsby. Nancy’s mother is unknown, other than the possible first name of Margaret.

Nancy Grigsby’s descendant is haplogroup K1a61a1, which you can see here.

The Blue Fugates show under Notable Connections.

The Smith sisters’ haplogroup, K1a61a1, tells us immediately that their ancestor is European, eliminating other possibilities.

The time tree on Discover is quite interesting

Haplogroup K1a61a1 was formed about the year 1400. Descendants of this haplogroup are found in the UK, Scotland, England, several unknown locations, and one person who selected Native American, which is clearly in error. Haplogroup K is not Native American.

By focusing on the haplotype clusters, identified by the F numbers in the elongated ovals, our tester may be able to identify the mother of Nancy Grigsby, or upstream lineages that they can work back downstream to find someone who married Thomas Grigsby.

This story is far from over. In fact, a new chapter may just be beginning.

If you’re a Fugate, or a Fugate descendant, there’s still lots to learn, even if autosomal DNA is “challenging,” to say the least, thanks to pedigree collapse. Testing known females lineages can help us sort which lines are which, and reveal their hidden stories.

Other resources if you want to read more about the Fugates: The Blue People of Troublesome Creek, Fugates of Kentucky: Skin Bluer than Lake Louise, Those Old Kentucky Blues: An Interrupted Case Study, and Finding the Famous Paintings of the Blue People of Kentucky.

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail 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 your price but helps me 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

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
MyHeritage Omni comprehensive “everything included” subscription plan
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

New Mitotree Haplogroups and How to Utilize Them for Genealogy

Posted on April 23, 2025 by Roberta Estes

Have you received a new Mitotree haplogroup? Or maybe you didn’t? Are you wondering why you might not have received a new haplogroup? How do the new haplogroups work anyway? And how do you work with them?

Great questions!

Approximately 75% of full sequence testers received a new haplogroup with the Mitotree Beta release, which means that about 25% did not. Keep in mind that new sequences are being added to the database, so the tree will be sprouting new haplogroups with each subsequent release.

Check For Your New Haplogroup

Click on any image to enlarge

Your Beta haplogroup is your new Mitotree haplogroup, and your Legacy haplogroup is your old one – prior to Mitotree. They may be the same. My haplogroup, shown above, did not change.

This is a good place to note that the tree is not “done,” yet, nor will it ever be. New samples are added daily as more people test and as academic samples from published papers are added to the database as well. Additionally, FamilyTreeDNA is tweaking the algorithm, so the tree branching structure may change from time to time.

When your haplogroup changes, you’ll receive a notification email.

Some people’s haplogroup will remain the same. There can be several reasons why you might not have received a new haplogroup.

Before we discuss that, I’d like to stress that your haplogroup remaining the same isn’t exactly a bad thing because there is SO MUCH new content for everyone. It’s like receiving a whole new book about your mother’s direct matrilineal line.

mtDNA Discover Offers 13 New Reports for Everyone

MtDNA Discover was released with the new Mitotree, and it includes a dozen new reports for EVERY haplogroup.

Discover is available publicly, and also through your FamilyTreeDNA dashboard which provides a customized experience for mtFull testers with additional information that is not available in the free version.

Think of these Discover reports as chapters in your personal book – all about you and your matrilineal ancestors.

The Discover reports are provided in addition to the tools in the mtDNA Results and Tools section of your dashboard on FamilyTreeDNA.

There’s something for everyone, even if you don’t have a new haplogroup. There’s certainly new information that will help with your genealogy and with understanding the history and ancestral journey of your mother’s direct line maternal ancestors.

Three Reasons Why You Might Not Receive a New Haplogroup

Ok, so why might you not have received a new haplogroup?

The first reason that you might not have received a new haplogroup assignment is the simplest. The new tree is only updated periodically.

After your results are returned, and before the next Mitotree version is available, your Mitotree haplogroup Badge will show as “Analyzing.”

If one of your matches is waiting for a new haplogroup, their Mitotree Haplogroup will show as “Pending Analysis.”

There is no published tree-update schedule, but you’ll receive your new haplogroup soon.

However, you can probably determine your new haplogroup quite easily. If you have any exact matches on your mtDNA Match page, their haplogroup will be your haplogroup as well, so check your full sequence mtDNA Matches on your dashboard for a hint.

For, example, here’s one of my exact matches with their haplogroup.

The second reason you might not have a new haplogroup assignment is that you may not have taken the full sequence mitochondrial DNA test – mtFull.

Only testers with full sequence test results can receive an updated haplogroup, because the full mitochondria needs to be tested. The older HVR1/HVR2 Plus tests only tested a fraction of the full sequence – around 1000 locations of the 16,569 locations tested in the full sequence test.

If you have only taken the HVR1 or HVR1/HVR2 level test, you will only have one badge, and it will say “Predicted.”

The haplogroup for the Plus test is predicted at a high level based on those 1000 locations, while the full sequence test tests the entire mitochondria and uses all locations to confirm your most granular and detailed haplogroup possible.

On your dashboard, if both the Plus and Full icons are pink, you have taken the mtFull test. If the “Full” is grey, you have not. You can click on that grey button to upgrade.

You can also navigating to on Add Ons and Upgrades in the top bar to upgrade to the full sequence test.

The third reason why someone might not have received a new haplogroup assignment is if they didn’t match with anyone else who has the same mutations, or variants, for a particular haplogroup.

In other words, if my mitochondrial DNA has had a mutation or two since my assigned haplogroup was formed and no one else has tested that has those exact same mutations, there’s no one else to form a new haplogroup with, but there might be in the future as additional people test and the tree continues to grow.

Think of those additional mutations, called Private Variants, as foundation blocks, or haplogroup seeds since they are still private to you, and not yet used for a haplogroup.

It’s easy to see if you have any Private Variants by clicking on Discover on your mitochondrial dashboard.

Scientific Details – Private Variants, Building Blocks, Haplogroup Seeds

If you have taken the full sequence test, click through to mtDNA Discover from your dashboard. If you aren’t signed in and click through from your dashboard, you won’t be able to see your variants or other information customized for you.

Navigate to Scientific Details, then click on the Variants tab.

Click on image to enlarge

Be sure that “Show private variants” is toggled to “on,” which is blue with a checkmark.

At the very top, you’ll see two things:

Your haplogroup, which is indicated by the solid pink square.
An F number followed by your private variants, if any, and if so, which ones.

I have no private variants or haplogroup seeds available to form a new haplogroup, so I have no ability to receive a more refined haplogroup.

Haplotype Clusters

However, I’m NOT out of luck, because I have something else – a Haplotype Cluster, indicated by having an F#. My Haplotype Cluster is F1752176 and is indicated by the pink outlined box.

I wrote about haplotype clusters in the article, Mitochondrial DNA: What is a Haplotype Cluster and How Do I Find and Use Mine?.

In a nutshell, haplogroups are only formed around reliable, relatively stable mutations, meaning those that are reliable and don’t tend to randomly mutate back and forth.

You may match exactly with a group of other people who share the same haplogroup, PLUS the same unstable mutations that don’t qualify to become haplogroup-defining.

Those groups of two or more people who match exactly on all mutations are members of the same Haplotype Cluster – and Haplotype Clusters can be INCREDIBLY genealogically useful. In fact, let me go out on a limb here and say that I think they are even more genealogical useful than haplogroups, although both have their strengths. Let’s look at a good example.

Using Haplogroups and Haplotype Clusters Together

My family member, Jim, had a surprise waiting for him in his mitochondrial DNA. When he received his new haplogroup, I took a look to see what new information might be forthcoming.

His legacy haplogroup was V, and his new Mitotree haplogroup is V216a2 which is significantly more refined.

Before Mitotree and Haplotype Clusters, there wasn’t much to differentiate him from his other matches.

Let’s take a look at JUST his genetic information before adding genealogy.

If I click on the Time Tree for haplogroup V216a2, I see two testers with no cluster, meaning no one matches them exactly, and Jim’s cluster number F9712482.

Keep in mind that Jim might not match everyone in his haplogroup – only people at or beneath the matching threshold.

Jim’s new haplogroup, V216a2 was formed about 1056 CE, or about 975 years ago. Note that as the tree changes and becomes more refined, haplogroup formation dates change too. A haplogroup’s birth date is an approximate year when the mutations occurred that define that haplogroup, based on surrounding mutations and mutation rates.

Many people look at a haplogroup, especially one with a birth date of, say, 1056 CE, which is long before the formation of surnames, shrug their shoulders, and give up.

Don’t. Do. That.

So, let me say this as loudly as possible.

A haplogroup’s most recent common ancestor is NOT the EKA (earliest known ancestor) with any individual match. It’s the approximate date when ALL of the people with this haplogroup share a common ancestor.

When looking at haplogroups, don’t let locations thrown you. Keep in mind that country boundaries are fluid. What was at one time Hungary could be Germany or Romania or something else just a few years earlier or later. So don’t discount that information either. Think regions and take into consideration that people move around – and some people enter incorrect genealogy/location information.

Your common ancestor with the people, individually, who share your haplogroup, is sometime between the haplogroup formation date and today. Everything else is a clue.

Think about it this way. You share a haplogroup with your mother, and while you are both descended from the woman who lived when your haplogroup was formed – your most recent ancestor with that haplogroup is your mother – not the woman 975 years ago. Your most recent common ancestor (MRCA) with your mother and her sister is your grandmother – a lot closer in time than 1056 CE. 1056 CE the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) date for everyone in the haplogroup, not between you and any one person in particular. The MRCA date for you plus another person is sometime between now and 1056 CE.

So, let’s take a look at Jim’s results.

Finding Jim’s Gold Nugget

Jim has 27 coding region matches, of which six share both his new haplogroup, V216a2, AND Haplotype Cluster F9712482. His other matches are split between three related haplogroups, and multiple haplotype clusters.

Most of his family, meaning three of his grandparents, were from eastern Europe, meaning Germany, Hungary or the Austro-Hungarian empire as it was recorded in American records. Many genealogical records no longer exist in that region, or if they do, you have to know exactly where to look.

We were brick-walled with Jim’s matrilineal great-grandmother, Sophia Smith, who was born about 1877 and seemed to appear out of thin air.

Thanks to the new haplogroups, combined with Haplogroup Clusters, I knew to focus on his matches in this order:

Same haplogroup plus same Haplotype Cluster
Same haplogroup plus different Haplotype Cluster, because clusters are built around identical but less reliable mutations
Related haplogroup – this is unlikely to yield direct genealogical results, but can be very useful in terms of origins

Of Jim’s exact matches with the same Haplotype Cluster, three showed an earliest known ancestor (EKA) and three did not. Three provided a tree, and three did not. Of the trees, one was private and the other two provided no useful insight.

Of the people who provided EKA information, one EKA matches their tree information, one conflicts with their tree. After viewing their tree, it appears that they did not understand that the mitochondrial EKA is the most distant ancestor in your mother’s direct maternal line. They listed someone in their grandmother’s paternal line.

I find this easiest to deal with if I organize the research in a chart for each match.

Match #	Earliest Known Ancestor	EKA Location	Tree	Comment
#1	No	No	No
#2	No	No	No
#3	No	No	Yes – Private
#4	Yes – only one name “Egan” with brith and death dates	Ireland	Yes – Egan is surname of their grandmother	EKA person listed tracks up wrong line in tree
#5	Yes	Hungary	No	Elizabeth Schmidt Hornung b1888 d 1930
#6	Yes	No	Yes – matches EKA	Ancestor born NC in 1811, no common names or location

Match #5 provided an EKA, but no tree, showed a country of origin as Hungary, and the identity of her EKA as “Elizabeth Schmidt Hornung b.1888 and d.1930.”

Hmmm…three things of interest here:

The location of Hungary, even though the oral history in Jim’s family said his great-grandmother was a Smith from the US, maybe New York. Jim’s family, including Sophia’s husband, was Eastern European. Remember, I couldn’t find any early records for Sophia Smith.
Smith is the anglicized version of Schmidt.
Hornung may be a married name.

I’m a genealogist, and Jim’s match had provided enough information that I was able to identify her ancestor, Elizabeth Schmidt, and find additional information.

Sure enough, Elizabeth Schmidt immigrated as an adult by herself, married Karl Hornung in Richland County, Ohio, the same location where Jim’s family was living. That information led me to another record, identifying a brother whose marriage license application provided their parents. Elizabeth’s parents were Ignatius Schmidt and Catherine Schlowe, and her sister was Sophia Schmidt, Jim’s great-grandmother. Deeper digging suggests that Ignatius and Catherine were from Timisoara in what is now Romania. I have been unable to confirm with birth, death or marriage records, but that part of Romania was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire during that timeframe.

Immigration of siblings, alone, at different times after the 1910 census, without their parents, made this particularly difficult, as did cultural and language barriers – but mitochondrial DNA, and Jim’s Haplotype Cluster in particular, provided the key I needed.

Jim’s common ancestor with his Schmidt match is the birth date of Catherine Schlowe, which was probably about 1850 – NOT 1056 CE, which is the haplogroup formation date.

Don’t get discouraged by misinterpreting haplogroup origin information or missing genealogy information. All you need is that one good match. That gold nugget. Don’t forget that you can email your matches and ask for more information.

The Match Time Tree makes all of this easier.

Match Time Tree

The Match Time Tree shows match, haplogroup, location and Haplotype Cluster information all in one place.

It’s easy to use the Match Time Tree to view how all of your matches are grouped, along with their EKA, displayed together in one place.

Here are all of Jim’s matches. They were all originally haplogroup V, but now his matches have been divided into V216, V216a, V216a1, and V216a2 (Jim’s haplogroup).

I’ve obfuscated the names of his matches, but the EKA, when provided, is there. Each person is grouped into their haplotype cluster of exact matches, and the user-provided country of origin for their ancestor is shown by their profile photo.

Jim’s match with the descendant of Elizabeth Schmidt is indicated in the red boxes, and Jim has updated his own EKA and her country of origin.

Who is waiting for you in your match list?

Will extending and building out trees help?

Have you emailed your matches to see what additional information they can provide?

Female ancestors are sometimes the MOST difficult to find, often due to name changes – so be sure to mine every possible avenue and don’t become discouraged if you don’t immediately see something “familiar.”

Every generation in a female lineage will probably carry a different surname and the match you need may not have researched as far back as your ancestor, or vice versa.

Don’t forget that autosomal matching can play an important role in confirming relationships.

But wait – there’s STILL more about Jim’s ancestors…

There’s Even More to Discover

There’s more to discover about Jim’s ancestors.

Jim’s Discover Ancient Connections tells me that 5200 years ago, Jim shared a common mitochondrial DNA ancestor with two Hungarian and a Slovakian Yamnaya cultural burial whose remains date to about 2800 BCE, or about 4800 years ago.

To be clear, the common haplogroup between Jim and all three burials dates to 5200 years ago, when their common haplogroup was formed, but the remains themselves are from about 4800 years ago – so only about 400 years difference between the haplogroup birth date and when those people lived, died and were buried.

How close are the remains to the location of Jim’s ancestor in Timisoara?

Using Google Maps, I placed the three Yamnaya burial locations (blue pins), plus Timisoara.

The two most distant points, Timisoara to Lesne, Slovakia, walking, is 393 km or 245 miles. The closest burial to Timisoara, located in Sárrétudvari, Hungary, is 157 km or 119 miles.

So Jim’s ancestors remained in the same general area for someplace between 4,800 and 5,200 years. And, his great-grandmother was born not far from those burials. That alone is an INCREDIBLE find!

So, what happened to the people of the Yamnaya culture? I think we might have gained some insight into that question.

So, there’s even more to discover using Discover.

You don’t know what you don’t know about your matrilineal ancestors, so test your mitochondrial DNA at FamilyTreeDNA and break through those brick walls. I’ve already solved multiple long-standing mysteries and added generations to my own tree.

Plus, I really, REALLY want to know where every single ancestor “came from,” what culture they were a part of, and when. History is part of genealogy – and a part of our ancestral journey that we can’t reach any other way.

Fortunately, your matches, Scientific Details, Time Tree, Match Time Tree, and Ancient Connections help you visualize all of these various situations and aspects of your ancestor’s history, and evaluate your results.

Both haplogroups and Haplotype Clusters provide very fine degrees of granularity that were not previously available. MtDNA Discover adds a dozen new reports, and Ancient Connections allow you to time travel.

Let me know what you discover!

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail 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 your price but helps me 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

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
MyHeritage Omni comprehensive “everything included” subscription plan
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

RootsTech 2025 – The Year of Discover and the New Mitotree

Posted on March 15, 2025 by Roberta Estes

Last week, RootsTech was a whirlwind and full of discoveries – which, ironically, was the 2025 theme.

I always take you along with me and share the RootsTech experience, start to finish, so here’s my 2025 “feet on the ground” report.

I might, just might, have overcommitted myself. I taught the half-day DNA Academy, three more sessions, plus several other commitments such as book signings, get-togethers, and interviews.

One class, “DNA for Native American Genealogy,” was a live webinar from the floor of the expo hall. You can watch that here for free, if you’re interested.

Unfortunately, none of my other sessions were recorded, but I’ll see what other alternative options may be available to bring those to you.

Additionally, I did two book signings at the GenealogyBank booth, along with two other authors, Drew Smith and Sunny Morton. I’m sorry, I don’t have any pictures. I should have asked someone to take some.

There were long lines and books sold out. Still, you can order either of my books, The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA or DNA for Native American Genealogy, at Genealogical.com. Thank you to GenealogyBank for being so welcoming.

The book signing was particularly fun because people shared their success stories or their hopes of what they want to achieve. I met a couple of new cousins too! Even people waiting in line were helping each other with information about research resources.

I had created my “RootsTech plan” for sessions I wanted to attend, but I was only able to actually attend one of those. Several were happening at the same time as mine, or directly before or after. As a presenter, you arrive early to get set up and make sure everything is working correctly.

Then, after your session, attendees have questions and are interested in your topic, which is a good thing. So essentially, you can’t attend sessions either before or after your session either.

Before I share photos, I’d like to share something else.

It’s About the People

I have never attended RootsTech for the classes, although there are wonderful offerings – and I have enjoyed them immensely.

Having said that, for me, the best part of RootsTech is the people. People I know and love but never get to see – many of whom I met in-person at RootsTech initially. I get to meet my blog followers. I meet with or reconnect with friends and cousins from around the world. I am privileged to talk with people about their challenges and their victories – when they’ve broken through a brick wall using DNA that they could never have otherwise achieved. People collaborating and helping each other. It’s all beautiful.

The reason I started blogging in the first place, and the reason all 1750 articles are free, is because I wanted to help people do just that – confirm ancestors, find ancestors, and connect with their fsmily.

My cousins that I’ve met through genealogy are some of my closest friends and closest family members. Outliving everyone is a mixed blessing but it makes me extremely grateful for my various cousins since all of my siblings and close family, with the exception of the next generation, have transitioned to the land of the ancestors.

So, yea, for me, RootsTech is about connecting and reconnecting with the people.

That’s also why I never get anything done because I’m always talking with someone.

Additionally, this particular RootsTech was a celebration.

Mitotree Release

Just a few days before RootsTech, the Million Mito Team at FamilyTreeDNA released the brand new Mitotree, 5 years in the making, reconstructing the tree of humankind to reflect our combined heritage more accurately.

At RootsTech 2020, I was honored to announce the Million Mito Project, and the new Mitotree initiative was born.

At some point, I will write about the deep, personal significance of the Mitotree for me, but for now, suffice it to say that there is something profoundly moving about rewriting the tree of humankind and in doing so, giving a voice to our ancestors from long ago. Yes, I know many of them are thousands or even tens of thousands of years old, but had they not survived, we would not be here today. Now we can identify who they are and that they lived.

Million Mito Team, left to right, Goran Runfeldt, Dr. Paul Maier, me, Dr. Miguel Vilar, Bennett Greenspan, John Detsikas

Our amazing Dream Team has given life to our ancestors and said their names once again, even if their name is a mitochondrial DNA haplogroup. Four team members, Goran, Paul, me and Bennett were at RootsTech. Where else can you actually approach and speak with the actual scientists?

When I say RootsTech is about the people, I know that I am related to every single individual at RootsTech, it’s just a matter of how far back in time. So are you.

Just think about the significance of that for a minute.

Every. Single. Person.

The other end of the mitochondrial DNA spectrum is genealogy, of course, and the new Mitotree with it’s haplotype clusters brings mitochondrial DNA results into the genealogical timeframe. In future articles, I’ll be writing about each one of the new tools, what they mean, and how to use them.

Dr. Paul Maier, lead scientist doing most of the hard science behind Mitotree, had the much-deserved honor of introducing the Mitotree to genealogists at RootsTech.

I’m not sure the audience understood they were witnessing history unfold, but they clearly were. We needed a drum roll and some balloons!

This wasn’t like most vendor announcements of a new product or feature – this was a major scientific achievement that led to genealogical benefits.

In celebration, I asked my friend to make double helix zipper pulls so that I could give them to colleagues, friends and cousins that I ran into at RootsTech. It’s my way of celebrating and sharing the joy!

Five years is a very long time to work on a project. The Mitotree is a massive accomplishment. Every customer at FamilyTreeDNA who has taken the full sequence test received their new haplogroup either the week before or during RootsTech, AND, the second updated version of the tree was released too.

While this is truly wonderful, the true highlight is the testimonials – seeing how Mitotree is actually helping people break through their brick walls.

Here’s just one.

Breathless Testimonial

I’m going to try to convey this exactly as it happened.

A lady that I don’t know literally runs up to me in the hallway. This isn’t unusual. She was so excited that what she said was one long breathless sentence, which I’m going to try to reconstruct here, although I’m adding a bit of punctuation. I also can’t remember how many “greats” were attached to the “grandmother,” but you’ll get the idea.

Roberta, Roberta, I’m so excited – I just wanted to let you know – I found my ancestor using mitochondrial DNA. I got my new haplogroup and I had like 47 matches before but now they are clustered together so I could focus…and there were three matches in my cluster…and one of them had an EKA but the other didn’t…so I built out the EKA matches’ tree and guess what??? They were from the same place and then I found that her great-great-grandmother’s sister is my great-great-grandmother but she had her surname so now I have more generations too. OMG I ‘m so excited I could never have broken through this wall without mtDNA because I had no surname. This is THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL DNA TEST I’VE EVER TAKEN, and I’ve taken them all. Thank you, thank you!

And with that she quickly hugged me and ran off to something she was obviously late for.

I never got to say one word, which was fine, but I stood there with tears in my eyes, thinking to myself, “This – this is what it’s all about.”

It doesn’t get better than this!

I want to hear your stories too. I just scaled my fourth brick wall last night using the new Mitotree and mtDNA Discover features.

RootsTech Week

RootsTech week started early for me – as in leaving the house at 3 AM Sunday. I fly on Sunday because the flights are cheaper and because the pre-conference meetings and events begin on Monday.

We took off into the dawn, jetting our way westward through the azure blue sky.

I have never gotten over the majesty and beauty of the Rocky Mountains.

And then, of course, the Great Salt Lake, for which Salt Lake City is named.

Looking at the Salt Palace across the street from the Marriott hotel. The silver building is the new Hyatt which is attached to the conference center behind the windmills which extends another very long block to the right, out of view. The mountain range is visible in the distance, and the beautiful sunset.

Speaking of the Marriott hotel, several people have asked if it was any better this year, and if I got trapped in the fire exit again, like last year.

No, I didn’t get stuck because I didn’t tempt fate again. It looked just the same though, so I’m presuming nothing has changed. Furthermore, there was no heat in my room, so they gave me a space heater and a pass to the concierge level – which they did not do last year.

That was kind of them, but food ran out, and there was only one poor server in the restaurant. I’m not even going to mention the nauseating thing that happened with my food. Let’s just say I’m not picky, but I will NEVER eat there again, and that makes it particularly difficult because there’s very little close by, especially when you’re exhausted.

I’m hoping that RootsTech will negotiate someplace different for speakers in the future. I’ve stayed in a lot of Marriotts and most of them are just fine. I have never had issues like this with any of them, let alone repeat issues year after year.

The good news is that we’re not there for the hotel, and the fun began on Monday.

Monday

My interviews began on Monday morning with “Mondays with Myrt” at the FamilySearch Library, which you can view here beginning about 16 minutes.

Mondays with Myrt is a RootsTech tradition and Myrt incorporates people present in person and tuning in virtually as well. Left to right, Kirsty Gray from England, John Tracy Cunningham, me and Myrt. Kirsty had a huge breakthrough that she shared with us just a few minutes after it happened.

I met John at the ECGGS Conference last October. He’s one of the few people I know whose 8 great-grandparents were born in the same county. I’m so jealous. Mine were either born in or first generation immigrants from four countries.

Sometimes the broadcast waiting area is just as much fun as the actual broadcast – in part because it’s the first day of RootsTech week and everyone is so excited to see their friends that they haven’t seen in forever. Call is a reunion!

Do Kirsty Gray and I look like we’re about to get into mischief?

Behind me is the first group of folks to be interviewed.

Pat Richley-Erickson, aka Myrt, Cheryl Hudson Passey, Laura Wilkinson Hedgecock, and Jenny Horner Hawran.

This is the livestream room at the FamilySearch Library. The waiting area for the next group is to the right, and the three presently being interviewed are sitting on the left beside Myrt.

For those who know Gordon, aka Mr. Myrt, he’s coordinating interviewees outside the livestream room. His job is herding cats and he’s the nicest cat-herder you’ll ever meet!

Pre-RootsTech Library Research

I love the FamilySearch Library. It feels like coming home to me.

So many passionate genealogists at every level – learning and searching. Lots of volunteer helpers available, too.

Normally, I create a research plan for the library, but I had been so utterly slammed between preparing my several RootsTech sessions and the Mitotree release that I hadn’t really been able to prepare anything.

I did, however, have a group of ancestors in mind that settled in the Oley Valley in Pennsylvania, so I decided to focus on the Berks County books.

I won’t bore you with the details, but among other things, I found confirmation that the Hoch surname is also the same as High and Hoy, which explains some very confusing Y-DNA results. So even though I didn’t get much productive time there, I did find something very useful in the land records.

I also ran into cousins and friends, of course, which is why I didn’t get more actual research done.

I knew Judy Nimer Muhn, at left, was going to be at RootsTech as a speaker, and I knew we connected through Acadian lines, but we never took the time to really piece together that puzzle.

My cousins, Mark and Manny were also coming for RootsTech, and to visit the library, for the first time. Mark, Manny and I visited Nova Scotia together in the summer of 2024, chasing our ancestors.

You know, fate is a funny thing.

We all descend from Acadian, Francois Savoie who was born about 1621 in France, but settled in Acadia, today’s Nova Scotia. Mark, Manny and I knew that we are cousins through Francois, but Judy and I did not. Mark, Manny and I ran into a local historian, Charlie Thibodeau, the Acadian Peasant, last year, outside of Port Royal. It just so happened that he was taking another couple to see the remains of the Savoie homestead deep in the salt marshes at BelleIsle.

We asked if we could join them, and Charlie was kind enough to include us. It was a long, brutally hot, tick-infested hike through the swamp, but oh so worth it!

We also found the well, located between three homesteads.

The year before, Judy had been in the same place in Nova Scotia, found the same man, Charlie, at the BelleIsle Hall Acadian Cultural Centre, and he had taken her to the remains of the same homestead.

And here we all four are in Utah.

What are the chances?

Needless to say, we had a LOT to talk about, and still do. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to get to Judy’s talk, but Mark and Manny attended.

I ran into Katy Rowe-Schurwanz, the FamilyTreeDNA Product Manager at the library too, and look what she’s wearing – a mitochondrial DNA scarf. How cool is that!

The rest of Tuesday and most of Wednesday morning were spent trying to update my several presentations to reflect newly released information by various vendors and practicing the timing of the presentations. I had another interview, and more people were arriving.

I found time to visit Eva’s Bakery about 3 blocks from the Salt Palace. If you’re ever in Salt Lake City, Eva’s is a must! Lunch is wonderful, and so are their French pastries.

Wednesday is “tech prep” day at RootsTech, along with speaker instructions and then the Speaker Dinner.

Steve Rockwood, President and CEO of FamilySearch always delivers an inspirational message and this year did not disappoint.

If you’ve wondered about RootsTech conference stats, they provided this information. I can’t even imagine trying to coordinate all of this – and that’s not including the vendors, expo hall, technology in the presentation rooms, food, security and so much more.

Last year, in 2024, the final attendance numbers were more than 16,000 people in person and 4 million virtual attendees. I noticed a few days ago that there were more than half a million people participating in Relatives at RootsTech, which is still live until April 12^th.

On Wednesday evening, after the Speaker’s Dinner, vendors in the Expo Hall were putting the final touches on their booths and preparing for the thousands of excited genealogists who would descend Thursday morning.

Discover

This year’s RootsTech theme was “discover” and attendees were greeted with this display just inside the door.

Attendees listed their discoveries on Post-its and could either post them on the board or plastic boxes, or on the green tree.

I placed my discovery from the day before at the library on the Rootstech tree.

Some people place their wishes here, kind of like a technology wishing well.

I couldn’t help but think of the new Mitotree, now forever green and growing, so I posted a second discovery, “Mitotree.”

Thursday – Opening Day

For those who don’t know, the Salt Palace Convention Center is two lengthy blocks long, a block wide, and two or three stories high, depending on whether you are in the front or rear portion. In other words, it’s massive and you need a map!

The huge Expo Hall with vendors is located in the center on the first floor and vendors have aisle addresses. The show floor is always very busy, and this year was no exception. One of the things I love is that spontaneous conversations just spring up between people who often find commonalities – common ancestors, common locations, and more. People compliment each other and join others at tables. It’s like a big family gathering of sorts.

I always try to walk the entire Expo Hall, because I really enjoy seeing the vendors and their wares, but this year, I never actually had enough time to traverse all the aisles. I took several pictures as I was passing through and running into people, but not nearly enough. I know I missed a lot, but there just wasn’t enough time and I arrived at RootsTech already tired.

However, the energy of RootsTech is like no place else and just infects you.

It’s like you can’t drink from the genealogy firehose fast enough!

Let’s Take a Walk

Ok, come along on a walk with me.

Left to right, Lianne Kruger, a speaker, and Courtney, in the FamilyTreeDNA booth. I believe they said they are cousins.

Daniel Horowitz, genealogist extraordinaire, in the MyHeritage booth. More about MyHeritage’s announcements shortly.

Geoff Rasmussen in the Legacy Family Tree Webinars booth. For those who don’t know, there’s lots of good material at Legacy, and the freshly recorded webinars are always free for a week.

Several vendors offer booth talks, including MyHeritage. I love their photo tools and use their site in some capacity almost daily.

One of the RootsTech traditions is ribbons. Collect one, collect ‘em all. Liv’s ribbons almost reach the floor. I think she wins!

Selfies are also a RootsTech tradition. Me, here with Jonny Perl of DNAPainter fame. I owe Jonny an apology as he asked me if I had a minute, and I had to say no because I was on the way to one of my own classes. I never got back to his booth to view his new features. Sorry Jonny – don’t take it personally!

Jonny released a new Ancestral tree version titled Places, so take a look here at his blog. I need to go look at my ancestors Places.

You’ll find this new feature under Ancestral Trees, Places. These are my most recent 8 generations. Just think of all those brave souls who climbed on a ship and sailed for the unknown. Check this feature out and have fun.

In a booth talk, Dave Vance, Executive Vice-President and General Manager at FamilyTreeDNA is speaking about the three types of DNA, which are, of course, Y-DNA, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA – all useful for genealogy in different ways.

Dave is explaining how in-common-with matches, also known as shared matches, operate with the chromosome browser. You can use the chromosome browser, shared matches, the new Matrix Tool, and download your match segment information at FamilyTreeDNA, a combination of features not available at any other vendor.

WikiTree, a free a moderated one-world-tree is one of my favorite genealogy tools. One of their best features is that you find your ancestor, and in addition to lots of sources, their Y-DNA, mitochondrial DNA, and those who are related autosomally are listed. Here’s my grandfather, for example.

Several DNA connections are listed. The further back in my tree, the more DNA connections are found, becuase those ancestors have more descendants.

WikiTree volunteers were wandering around taking pictures of “WikiTreers” holding fun signs.

Paul Woodbury, a long time researcher with Legacy Tree Genealogists, who specializes in DNA. I don’t take private clients anymore, and regularly refer people to Legacy Tree.

Me with Janine Cloud taking our annual RootsTech selfie. Janine, the Group Projects Manager at FamilyTreeDNA and I co-administer one of those projects and accidentally discovered a few years ago that we are cousins too. How fun is this!!!

I wanted this shirt, but by the time I got back to the booth, it was too late. I’m going to order it online from Carlisle Creations, in case you want one too. This is so me.

Land records are critically important to genealogists. Rebecca Whitman’s class was about plotting land plats. What she’s holding is a surveyor’s chain. You’ve read about chain carriers? This is what they carried to measure land boundaries – literally metes and bounds. Some of my best discoveries have been thanks to land records.

The only session I actually got to attend was Gilad Japhet’s “What’s New and Exciting at MyHeritage.” For those who don’t know, Gilad is the founder and CEO of MyHeritage and it’s always great to hear about the new features straight from the top executive who is, himself, a seasoned genealogist. That’s why he started MyHeritage in the first place – 22 years ago in his living room.

Gilad had several wonderful announcements, but the one I’m most excited about is their new Cousin Finder. Cousin Finder finds and reveals cousins who are DNA candidates if they have not yet taken a DNA test.

I’ll be writing more about the MyHeritage announcements soon, but you can read their blog about Cousin Finder now, here, and their Roundup here about the rest of their announcements!

My Last Class – Reveal Your Maternal Ancestors & Their Stories

My last class at the end of the final day of RootsTech was “Reveal Your Maternal Ancestors & Their Stories – Solving Mitochondrial DNA Puzzles.”

Had I tried to coordinate this presentation with International Women’s Day, I could never have done it, but fate winked and here I was.

I’m often asked what it’s like from the presenters’ perspective. This is one of the smaller ballrooms. My earlier sessions were in larger rooms, maybe 3 times this size. I took this picture about 15 minutes before the session started as people were beginning to drift in.

The amazing RootsTech techs had me wired up to microphones and had verified that the audio and video equipment was working correctly, so now it was just waiting.

My cousin, John Payne, who co-administers the Speaks surname project with me, came by and took this great picture of the two of us. We’ve made huge inroads connecting the various Speake(s) lines in America, plus finally proving our home village in England, thanks to the Big Y-700 test, followed by church records. All is takes, sometimes, is that one critical match.

As I sat there, waiting to begin the mitochondrial DNA session, I couldn’t help but reflect upon all of the women who came before me and how fortunate I was to have been in the right place at the right time to be a member of the Million Mito team.

These are my direct matrilineal ancestors who give me, and my daughter, pictured at left, their mitochondrial DNA. I felt them with me as I sat there, waiting.

The woman at furthest right, Barbara Drechsel (1848-1930), immigrated to Indiana from Germany as a child with her parents in the 1850s. Before her came thousands of generations of women with no photos, of course, and no names before Barbara Freiberger, another eight generations earlier, born about 1621 in Germany.

Before that, which was before church and other records, prior to the 30 Years War, this lineage came from Scandinavia where some of my exact matches are still found today.

Before beginning, I said a positive affirmation and thanked my ancestors – so very honored to introduce them. I know they were proud of me, a member of the team that opened the door to the distant past. I wouldn’t be here if not for every one of their lives.

In this session, I would discuss, for the first time ever, the new Mitotree and my/our connection to all of humanity some 7000 generations ago, more or less.

The mutations we carry over those generations form an unbroken chain of breadcrumbs, connecting us to mitochondrial Eve who lived about 145,000 years ago. We revealed that breakthrough finding in the Haplogroup L7 paper, published in 2022.

I’m still in absolute awe that we have been able to both reach that far back in time AND, at the same time, make the newest haplogroups and haplotype clusters genealogically relevant. I will write more about that soon, but for now, I wrote about the Mitotree release here and you can find articles by Katy Rowe-Schurwanz here and here.

I’m very excited about my new mitochondrial DNA results for my ancestral lines that I track and have already made headway on several.

I’m not the only one.

Not only was I excited about my results, many other people have had breakthroughs too, including Mark Thompson, one of our genealogy AI experts who also spoke at RootsTech. I particularly love his AI generated image.

If you haven’t yet, check your mitochondrial DNA results.

It’s a Wrap

Another year done, another RootsTech under our belts. Hopefully everyone is over the “conference crud” by now and are busily applying their newfound knowledge.

You can view either live-cast sessions or RootsTech webinars, here.

I saw a meme posted sometime during the conference that coined the term “exhausterwhelmulated,” a combination of exhausted, overwhelmed and overstimulated at the same time.

I added exhilarated and elated to the mix and asked ChatGPT to draw me a picture of someone at a genealogy conference feeling those simultaneous emotions.

ChatGPT titled this request “Genealogy Conference Overload,” which made me laugh.

The first two attempts looked like the person had a headache, which I fully understood, so I asked ChatGPT to make the person look happy to be there.

This person, carrying a coffee like I often do, looks like they have just discovered the great irony that they have chased the wrong ancestor for some 20 years – with “laugh or I’ll cry” mania being their overwhelm “go to” in that minute.

This one made me laugh too!

Yes, indeed, I think every single one of us, especially at RootsTech, has experienced this exact adrenaline-fueled emotion.

We leave with a VERY long to-do list, exhausted but full of anticipation and buoyed by excitement. Filled with so much gratitude for our cousins and fellow genealogists, the speakers, vendors, DNA to solve thorny problems, new tools and records, FamilySearch who sponsors RootsTech itself and their amazing employees, plus the legions of the volunteers who make it all work.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail 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 your price but helps me 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

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
MyHeritage Omni comprehensive “everything included” subscription plan
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA – for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA for those ordering the paperback from outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

Genealogy Proof Series – Creating Genealogy Proof Tables

Posted on November 11, 2024 by Roberta Estes

This is the fifth article in the Genealogy Proof Series.

For maximum advantage, I recommend reading these articles in publication order.

In earlier articles, we’ve detailed how to gather resources for specific locations, how and where to search for surnames and the process of extracting and recording information from those sources.

Now, it’s time to use that information and assemble it in a logical way to provide “proof” that the person by the name of “John Smith,” or whoever you’re seeking, is actually YOUR John Smith.

I use a technique that I call Genealogy Proof Tables. We will cover two types here. You’ll need the first one to complete the second one.

Genealogy Proof Tables

Genealogy proof tables have two purposes:

Individual Proof Tables – For an individual ancestor, to compile the various pieces of evidence to prove a connection to their parent or parents and their child or children.
Lineage Proof Table – Evidence for an entire lineage, proving connections between all of the individuals in the lineage, one by one in both directions. For a lineage proof table we prove a connection to the parent and also to the descendant that is your ancestor for each generation.

Please note that sometimes you actually wind up disproving a relationship, or realizing you need more information, but that’s equally as important. Nothing worse than wasting time by barking up the wrong tree.

A genealogy proof table is a working document that can be used to focus on each ancestor in every ancestral line. What’s included in a proof table varies by which records are available, the timeframe and circumstances.

You may want to prepare proof tables to help yourself focus and evaluate your data. Proof tables can be sent to someone who asks questions like:

How do you know that?
What is your proof?
What are your sources to identify John as the son of George?

People should be asking those questions, and researchers should be able to answer them. You need to answer them for yourself for your own ancestors, even if no one asks.

The answer to these questions may well be that you’re still working on “proof,” but you’ll at least want to have documented everything available to date. For me, doing these exercises helps me think about what’s still missing and looking for additional sources if I actually don’t have “proof.”

Generally, I create a proof table for a specific ancestor, which I then roll up into a comprehensive proof table for the line. This approach helps me identify which pieces of evidence are conclusive and which ones are not.

The purpose of a proof table is to compile and rank information about that ancestor’s connection to their parents, including negative evidence. It’s not meant to be “everything I know” about that ancestor, just the things that relate to proving that this ancestor is in FACT the child of his parent or parents.

What is Proof?

Isn’t this the question of the ages for genealogists? I wrote an article, Ancestors: What Constitutes Proof?, here. In that article, I’ve provided a list of what isn’t proof and some challenges you may face.

Aside from what I’ll term normal genealogy roadblocks to be overcome, there are other challenges as well.

For example, you can have a birth certificate, a death certificate, a will, and personal knowledge that a person lived with their parents – but that child could have been adopted, or the father might not have been the biological father.

In this case, paper proof, no matter how compelling, isn’t actual proof. It can prove the identity of the person, but alone, cannot prove a biological relationship connection.

Sometimes, DNA evidence outweighs everything else, but without DNA evidence, paper proof is the closest we can get. The BCG defines the Genealogical Proof Standard, here.

We need our evidence to be as conclusive as possible.

What does Conclusive Mean?

Conclusive evidence means that any other evidence cannot reliably contradict it, or it’s so strong that it overbears any other evidence. (Thank you Bar Prep Hero.)

In a nutshell, that’s your goal – and all evidence is not created equal.

Evidence is Weighted

Some evidence is better or more solid than other evidence.

Furthermore, sometimes one single piece of evidence isn’t conclusive, but multiple pieces of evidence, taken together, create a body of work and are considered a “preponderance of evidence.” Having said that, I often cringe when I hear that term because sometimes it means there really isn’t good evidence or not enough research has been done.

How good is good enough? You can only work with what’s available and what you have. Unfortunately, one cannot unburn the courthouse!

Sometimes, you’ll need to use DNA evidence. From my perspective, you ALWAYS need to utilize DNA evidence to confirm at least the closest generations.

By closest, I mean that second cousins or closer always match, and you can often reliably use autosomal DNA within, minimally, 5 or 6 generations, but circumstances vary.

Many times I have solid matches to descendants of ancestors 9 or 10 generations in the past, but as you can see in this graphic created by Dr. Paul Maier at FamilyTreeDNA, beginning at eight generations, you may not inherit any DNA from a particular ancestor. Of course, to match someone else, you both need to have inherited the same DNA segment(s) from that ancestor.

You can almost always use Y-DNA to establish relationships beyond what autosomal can confirm, but with both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA, you need someone who is appropriately descended from the ancestor in question, as illustrated in this three-generation chart. Sometimes, you need two people descended from that ancestor, preferably through different children, because their Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA needs to match.

Every situation is different.

How Much Evidence is Enough?

It depends.

Enough for what?

Enough to prove that your parent is the child of their parents?
Enough to prove to yourself that you’re searching in the right ancestral line?
Enough to prove that this John Doe is the same John Doe that moved from Virginia to someplace else, or conversely, the John Doe in Missouri is the one who moved from Virginia?
Enough to quality for a lineage society?

Again, from my perspective, enough is not enough until you have looked at every piece of evidence that even MIGHT be relevant for that ancestor.

Essentially, all of this is a bit fluid, so let’s look at an example.

Individual Proof Table

Let’s begin with a proof table for one person.

I’m going to create a proof table to attempt to prove that my paternal grandfather, William George Estes, is the son of Lazarus Estes and Elizabeth Vannoy.

I’ll be using actual documents and information from my files.

If you want to read my 52 Ancestors articles about these people, you can find William George Estes, here, Lazarus Estes, here, and Elizabeth Vannoy, here. I’m not specifically trying to prove that my father, William Sterling Estes, is the son of William George Estes, but some documents cover both men – plus, there’s the possibility of same-name confusion, given that both of their first names are William. I swear, every generation in this family has both Johns and Williams.

To begin, there are a few mandatory categories on every chart. For example, I always use the census when it’s available. You should include these categories even if you don’t have evidence for them, because it reminds you if you’ve searched and the search came up with nothing.

Some categories would be expanded, such as Organizational Societies. For example, if there’s a separate History and Genealogy Society for that county, you would want to check both, as well as the local library and regional or state organizations.

You’ll notice that I’ve assigned a weight to each piece of evidence. Weighting is subjective. Aunt Margaret was the daughter of Wiliam George Estes, so she should know – but often, she didn’t provide any source, like a document or Bible, and she was a bit “eccentric.” In some circumstances, I might weigh what she provided as a 5, but in the first item, I only gave it a 4 because she provided other dates that I found to be erroneous. Memories do fail people.

Red items are direct, confirming evidence of the relationship and that the William George Estes, my grandfather, is the same William George Estes who is the son of Lazarus Estes. Names are spelled or misspelled the way they are in the original source.

William George Estes	Information	Source	Weight (1-5)	Comments
Birth	March 30, 1873	Aunt Margaret	4	Birth certificates not available in 1873
Father	Lazarus Estes
Mother	Elizabeth Vannoy
Identity of Parents	From letters and discussions 1980s, 1990s	Aunt Margaret, Aunt Minnie, children and grandchildren of William G. Estes	5	They knew their grandparents
1880 Census	Wm. G. Estis age 7, listed with parents Lazarus and Elisibeth Estis, and siblings, including sister Cornie	Claiborne County, TN Dist 8, page 107 on Ancestry	5	Family lives between William G.’s future wife’s uncles
1890 Census destroyed
Marriage	Ollie Bolton, Sept 26, 1892.	Claiborne County Marriage Index, page 382	5	No parents given
1900 census	William G. age 27, with wife, Ollie, and two children	Claiborne County, TN Dist 8, page 113	5	Lives next door to Lazarus and Elizabeth Estes and next to his sister Cornie and her husband
1910 census	Age 38, with Ollie and two children, Estle and Robert	Claiborne County, Civil Dist 4	5	Lives beside sister Cornie and her husband, three houses from Lazarus
Home Location – 1913	Family photos taken in 1913 and labeled “Fowler”	Provided by Margaret	5	Written on the back of the family pictures
Home Location	Fowler, Indiana Sept 1915	Newspaper article	5	Sons Wm. and Joe ran away and were returned to parents in Fowler
William G. Estes’s divorce from Ollie	Fowler, Indiana	Aunt Margaret	3	Ollie caught him cheating with her cousin Joyce Hatfield, who was visiting them in Indiana
Divorce from Ollie	Unknown, maybe 1916 or 1917			Inferred
Children William S. and Joe “run away” to their grandparents	1915/1916 Fowler, Indiana to Claiborne County, TN	Aunt Margaret’s letter, Uncle George, 1915 newspaper articles stated that they tried to run away but got caught	5	Margaret said that when William G. and Ollie divorced, neither wanted sons Wm. and Joe, 13 and 11, and the boys jumped trains to make their way back to their grandparents, Lazarus and Elizabeth
William George returned to Claiborne County	1916/1917 ish	Uncle George Estes, family historian	5	Lazarus was furious when William G. returned after cheating on Ollie and abandoning the boys and threw William G. out of Estes Holler
Move to Harlan County, KY	After being thrown out of Estes Holler when he and Ollie divorced	Uncle George, Aunt Margaret, Estel’s daughter	5	Settled in Harlan County, KY, just over the border from Claiborne Co., TN
Divorce from Ollie	Unknown, about 1916/1917ish	Fowler, Ind newspaper August 30, 1917	2	Ollie listed without Wm G and as visiting where she used to live
Marriage	Joyce Hatfield, unknown if or when/where married	Census, daughter Virginia’s birth Nov. 1918.	3	Inferred, no document found
~~Child Irene’s~~ Death*	August 1, 1916 – Irene Estes, mother Joyce Fury	Shawnee, Claiborne Co., TN		~~Informant of the death of daughter, Irenia.~~ *Please note that this has since been disproven. This William B. Estes who married Josie Fury is not our William G. Estes who married Joicie Hatfield.
Military/draft Registration – signed	Sept. 12, 1918, gives birthdate as March 30, 1873	Tazewell, Claiborne County, TN	5	Wife is listed Joisce Estes.
1920 census	Age 47, lives with Joise and daughter Virginia	Claiborne Civil District 4	5	Future third wife, Crosha Brewer, and her child are living with them as lodgers
Divorce Joice Hatfield	Unknown, approx 1921 or 1922		inferred	Based on Crosha’s children’s ages
Son William S. Estes’s marriage to Martha Dodder	Dec. 12, 1921	Calhoun County, MI	5	Parents are given as Ollie Estes and W. G. Estes
Wm G. Estes child with Croshia Brewer	Josephine born March 19, 1923	Springdale, Arkansas	5	Birth certificate, death certificate, census
William George Estes Marriage	Croshia Louise Brewer, Feb. 3, 1925, Wise County, VA	VA Marriage Registers, page 171	5	Parents given as Lazarus & Elizabeth Estes
1930 census	Cannot find the family
1940 census	Age 67, living with Crochie and their 2 daughters	Harlan Co., KY Lynch dist	5
1940s or 50s	Photo with “his sister Cornie” and also one with “Worth Epperson”	Claiborne County, TN	5	Photo is labeled and provided by Cornie’s family, who knew him
1950 census	76, lives with Crocie, daughter and boarder	Harlan County, KY	5	My mother visited William G. and Crocie with my father in the 1950s.
Cornie Estes Epperson’s 1958 death certificate	Born June 22, 1878 to Lazarus Estes and Betty Vannoy, age 79, died Feb. 18, 1958	Death Certificate	5	Correlates to census dates and other data indicating she is the daughter of Lazarus and sister of William G.
Cornie Epperson Obituary	Gives Will Estes, of Lynch, KY as her brother.	Newspaper clipping	4	Does not give her paents
William Sterling Estes obituary	Aug. 28, 1963, Star Press in Muncie, Indiana, page 3	Residence Dunkirk, IN	4	Lists surviving father as W. G. Estes, Cumberland, KY
William George Estes’s death	Nov 29, 1971, lived in Harlan Co., KY	Kentucky Death Index	5	Parents not given
Obituary	Parents not given, living children include Estil, Virginia, Margaret, and Minnie, their locations provided	Nov. 30, 1971, Middlesboro Tribune	4	His nephew, Cornie Estes Epperson’s son, Kermit Epperson is a pallbearer
Social Security Claims Index for William G.	Jan. 15, 1972 claim, birth 1873	Ancestry	5	SS # given, but no parents given
Social Security Claims Index for my father, William Sterling Estes	No claim filed
Will	No, rechecked film at FamilySearch 7-8-2024.
Legal	No, checked court index in Harlan County
Land Tax	No tax lists
Personal Tax	No tax lists
Deeds	Yes, 1915 deed from Lazarus to Cornie and Worth Epperson where they must pay his other heirs	Claiborne County deed book, in person	5	Cornie Estes Epperson to pay William Estes $120
William George Estes signed receipt and release	On July 22, 1957, Will signed on the edge of the above deed, releasing the claim on the deed and stating that the $120 had been paid.		5	Confirms his relationship to Lazarus Estes and Cornie Estes Epperson
Sibling Documents	Have not looked extensively beyond Cornie
Newspapers	Need to revisit when Claiborne County, TN newspapers are digitized
Organizational Searches such as Historical Societies	Have not looked recently, need to recheck local libraries
DNA	ThruLines to John Y. Estes, father of Lazarus Estes	Ancestry	5	Proven via 35 cousin connections to Lazarus’s parents through 3 of John’s siblings
DNA	Lazarus Estes ThruLines at Ancestry through Lazarus’s children	Ancestry	5	20 matches, 9 through William George, 7 through Cornie, 5 through Charlie Thomas Estes
DNA at FamilyTreeDNA	My autosomal matches to Buster Estes, Lazarus’s grandson	FamilyTreeDNA	5	Including 556 matches in common and many triangulated segments to descendants of Wm. G., Lazarus, John Y. Estes and upstream ancestors
Other	Relationship to wives and children	Letters from Aunt Margaret	3 or 4	Clearly states relationship of William G. and Lazarus
Other	Relationship to wives and children	Letters from William G. to my father	3 or 4	Clearly states relationship of William G. with his siblings and family members

Some types of information are notably unreliable. For example, obituaries may omit people or confuse relationships. William George Estes’s obituary omits his daughter and incorrectly notes her husband, his son-in-law, as William’s child.

Death certificates often give parents incorrectly, especially the mother’s birth surname.

The names of parents in both obituaries and on death certificates are often third-hand information provided by people who are at least two generations removed and are under significant stress at that time. My mother’s obituary was republished two times due to errors made AFTER I provided correct information.

We have several pieces of information that strongly suggest that the William George Estes who was born to Lazarus Estes and Elizabeth Vannoy is the same William George Estes that married Ollie Bolton, but there’s more.

We know for sure that William Estes, who married Croshie/Crosha Brewer, is the same person because his parents are given in the county marriage record book. This is first-hand information and judged to be more reliable because we can reasonably expect that William George knew who his parents were, or at least who they were supposed to be.

If we discount entirely the fact that my aunts personally knew Lazarus as their grandfather, and look only at the paper evidence, we just need to tie William George in his later life to the same William George in his earlier life.

Here’s a photo passed from William George’s daughters to me. Cornie Epperson’s grandchildren had this same photo showing William George Estes with his sister, Cornie Epperson.

Here’s another with Will Estes and Cornie’s husband, Worth Epperson.

Cornie’s children told many stories about their Uncle Will, who rode the bus from Harlan County to Claiborne County, as he didn’t drive. The legendary favorite story was about the time that Will had a bullet in his shirt pocket. It accidentally got mixed into his pipe tobacco, which he put into his pipe and was smoking on the bus.

Yes, the bullet blew up. No one was hurt, and miraculously, the driver didn’t crash. Nevertheless, Will was banished from riding the bus forever thereafter.

That story alone connects the William George Estes living in Lynch, in Harlan County, as the same person, as do his children from all three wives. So do letters from my aunt to family members discussing several people involved, and letters from Will himself in the early 1960s detailing some pretty spicy antics.

However, we’re looking for more than oral history. What other documents do we have?

The Smoking Deed

This deed serves, in essence, as the will of Lazarus Estes and his wife, both of whom conveyed this deed.

Thankfully, it identifies both Cornie and William as their heirs, along with several other children, although it never actually states that the people mentioned are their children. The census confirms that these people, Cornie and William George, along with Martha (Estes) Norris, Charlie Estes, and Lum (James Columbus) Estes mentioned, are their children.

If you’re still wondering if William George Estes is their son, notice the release of lien, stamped on the upper left-hand side of the page decades later, in 1957, with his signature.

This signature matches Will’s other handwriting on letters that he sent in the 1960s, in my possession, and on my father’s delayed birth certificate signed in 1952.

This document provides their relationship, the type of evidence submitted, and both of their addresses and signatures. Evidence doesn’t get much better than this.

For additional signature confirmation, William G. signed his 1918 draft registration in Claiborne County. In Harlan County, KY, in 1957, he signed the delayed birth certificate for his son, Estle, who was born in Springdale, Arkansas, in November of 1894.

When Evidence Isn’t Conclusive

Unfortunately, this situation happens often, especially with generations further back in time where less information is available. Let’s look at an example.

Genealogists tried for years, decades actually, to identify the parents of John R. Estes.

His son was named John Y. Estes.

No one knew what the R. stood for, nor what the Y. stood for. Truthfully, we still don’t, at least not for sure.

Here’s what was said:

John R. Estes’s mother was Mary Younger, who was married to George Estes. This claim was made because John R.’s son was named John Y. Estes, the Y. standing for “Younger.” That was the hypothesis, but it was stated as fact.
The middle initial R in John R. Estes stands for Regan or Reagan because his grandson, John Reagan Estes, son of John Y. Estes, was “named for his grandfather.” This was told to me by his grandchildren who were living in the early 1990s, as information they were told.

I fully understand why one would think those are possibilities or why conclusions might be drawn. They are clearly possibilities, but without additional evidence, that’s all they are. Eventually, that possibility begins to be passed along as a fact. Then, people don’t want to question what was passed down from “people who should know.”

So, let me play devil’s advocate here.

The Y in John Y. could stand for any number of things. For example, the surname Yancey is also found in Halifax County, Virginia. Y could have come from anyplace. At that point in time, we were searching for the parents of John R. Estes, so Mary Younger seemed to make sense.

Having said that, we now know that John Y. Estes’s grandmother WAS Mary Younger, BUT, that does NOT mean that the Y. stands for Younger, nor does it serve as any kind of concrete evidence.

Might it stand for Younger? Yes, of course. But the Y itself serves only as a potential hint.

Can you use it for evidence? Nope, not without more information. I’ve searched high and low, so if you find “Younger” in a reliable record for this man, by all means, let me know. While confirmation would be wonderful, we really don’t NEED to know like we do with Reagan.

John Reagan Estes (1871-1960), the son of John Y. Estes, could well have been named for his grandfather, John R. Estes (1787-1885). John was his father’s first name as well as his grandfather’s. That does NOT mean that that Reagan was John R. Estes’s middle name. We have no idea where Reagan comes from. If I had a letter from John Reagan’s mother or sister, for example, saying John Reagan was named for his grandpa Estes, who was also named John Reagan, that would be evidence because we have a contemporaneous source and know the information wasn’t assumed or constructed later to “fit” the question about John R. Estes’s middle name.

I have dug for years for any Reagan connection to the Estes line, or to the wives’ lines in upstream generations in Virginia, hoping to prove that Reagan genealogical connection. I have never found it, although that clearly doesn’t mean it’s not there. For all we know, Reagan could have been the name of the preacher or the doctor who delivered someone. It may or may not have anything to do with John R. Estes, and even if it does, Reagan may not be an ancestral surname.

So, if you’re taking yourself down the path of ascribing too much weight to information that may or may not be evidence – don’t. What you can do that’s beneficial is more research. If you think the Y or the R might be a hint, DIG!!! You just might find that evidence. If you haven’t utilized the new FamilySearch full-text AI search, by all means, do. These are the perfect types of situations to research using this amazing tool.

Treat everything as a hint, but it’s not evidence until it’s confirmed.

While we’ve since proven that, indeed, John R. Estes is the son of Mary Younger using other types of evidence, the middle initial R. and the middle name Reagan two generations later still is and may remain a mystery.

In the Weeds

At this point, you might be thinking that we are SO FAR DOWN IN THE WEEDS, and you’d be right, but the answers to our specific question are found here.

Our original goal was to prove that William George Estes was the son of Lazarus Estes and Elizabeth Vannoy.

The items bolded in red in the Individual Proof Table for William George Estes, above, individually and certainly cumulatively “prove” that relationship, as far as a paper trail can go.

The other information, especially taken together, supports that and, more importantly, does not dispute or provide contradictory or conflicting evidence about any of the other evidence. In other words, we have concensus.

Lineage Proof Table

The table below is designed to document the proof that the individual listed under the name column is, in fact, the child of the father and mother below. Other information from the Individual Proof Table that we completed above is omitted because it’s not needed in a Lineage Proof Table.

The Proof rows between the child and their parents are the proof, or the best evidence we have, that connects the child conclusively to the parent or parents. Sometimes that proof can arrive indirectly, such as a sibling’s obituary that lists your ancestor as their sibling – allowing you to connect the sibling who died and your ancestor both to their parents through the census or other documents.

Proof listed will vary and could be personal knowledge (someone you knew within your lifetime), a Bible, a will, a deed, an obituary, a church baptismal document, a pension application, census records, and more.

The best proof, of course, is multiple contemporaneous pieces of evidence.

Proof can also be negative proof. For example, if there was a will but this person was missing, that should be noted. However, that alone is NOT negative proof, as sometimes a child who had already received their inheritance was not mentioned. It does need to be listed because, when combined with other evidence, it may become very important. So is the wording of the will. For example, does it say “all my children,” but omit the person you’re searching for?

Proofs also must take into consideration things like individuals with the same name. In other words, we need to prove that THAT particular John was the son of THAT particular George.

There are times when one must dig deeply as well as far and wide, using siblings and the FAN (friends and neighbors) methodology to reveal a nugget or put enough information together from multiple sources to prove a relationship collectively. For example, I have found proof two generations downstream in Virginia chancery suits that detail the descendants of someone who died and left a will two or three generations earlier.

If this Lineage Proof Table was for my own use, I would utilize a spreadsheet, and I would provide links and more detailed information. For ease of use in this article, I’ve constructed a chart here.

The entire purpose of this lineage document is to unquestionably connect the generations. If these proofs are strong and unquestionable, the only piece of evidence that could upend all of them, together, is an unknown DNA event where a parent or parents are not the individuals reflected in the non-genetic proofs.

Name	Birth & Loc	Death & Loc	Father	Mother	DNA Confirmed
Me			William Sterling Estes	Separate lineage proof for mother’s line	Father confirmed via paternal half-sister’s children and cousins’ autosomal DNA matches..
Proof	My birth certificate, newspaper announcements
Proof	Father’s obituary
Proof	Social Security application after my father’s death
Proof	Personal knowledge, photos, and memories
Proof	DNA match at the expected level to my half-sister’s descendants and our upstream Estes relatives
William Sterling Estes	Oct. 1, 1902 or 3, Tazewell, TN	Aug. 27, 1963, Jay County, IN	William George Estes 1873-1971	Ollie Bolton 1874-1955	Autosomal DNA matches to multiple Estes cousins & half-sister’s children
Proof	Census and newspaper articles identifying my father as his parents’ child
Proof	My father’s marriage license, personal knowledge, and his delayed birth certificate
Proof	Death certificate and obituary
Proof	Aunts’ knowledge and family letters
William George Estes	March 30, 1873, Tazewell, TN	Nov. 29, 1971, Harlan Co., KY	Lazarus Estes 1845-1916/1918	Elizabeth Vannoy 1846-1918	Autosomal DNA triangulated to multiple descendants of both Lazarus Estes and Elizabeth Vannoy.
Proof	Deed to Worth and Cornie Epperson where Lazarus lists William George Estes as one of his heirs – Claiborne Co., Deed Book M2, page 371.
Proof	Various censuses showing parents and siblings, including sister Cornie Estes Epperson
Proof	Marriage license to Crocie Brewer lists his parents
Proof	Cousin George Estes knew these people and was at the funeral of Lazarus when he was a child, plus Aunt Margaret’s letters
Lazarus Estes	May 1845, Claiborne Co., TN	1916-1918, Claiborne Co., TN	John Y. Estes 1818-1895	Rutha Dodson 1820-1903	Y-DNA confirmed to haplogroup of Moses Estes, autosomal triangulated to descendants of Lazarus and Elizabeth and upstream ancestors through multiple matches.
Proof	1850 and 1860 census with his parents, 1870 census where he lives one house from parents with wife and children, 1880 census where his wife is still living a few houses from his parents, with their children, and John is found in Montague Co., TX
Proof	October 1865 deed where John Y. Estes deeds all his possessions to his eldest son, Lazarus. Claiborne Co., Deed book B1, page 37
John Y. Estes	December 29, 1818, Halifax Co., VA	Sept. 19, 1895, Montague Co., TX	John R. Estes 1785/88-1885	Nancy Ann Moore c 1785-1860/1870	Y-DNA confirmed through multiple sons. Autosomal triangulates to several descendants through multiple lines of other children.
Proof	Personal written knowledge of Claiborne County attorney, P. G. Fulkerson, published in the local newspaper who listed parents, wife, siblings, and children of John Y. Estes and wife and children of John R. Estes
Proof	John R. Estes signed as a witness for John Y. Estes in 1865 when he deeded goods to son Lazarus “for natural love and affection.” In 1850 census John R. Estes lives near sons Jechonias and John Y. Estes
Proof	John Y. Estes’s and John R. Estes’s death conveyed in letters between family in Claiborne County, TN, Texas, and Oklahoma
John R. Estes	1785-1788, Halifax Co., VA	May 1885, Claiborne Co., TN	George Estes 1763-1869	Mary Younger ~1775-1820/1830	Y-DNA confirmed through multiple lines. Autosomal confirmed triangulation of multiple lines of his children and his ancestors. Descendants’ DNA triangulates to that of Nancy Ann Moore’s ancestors.
Proof	Halifax County 1812 personal property tax list where John R. Estes is listed as the son of George Estes and lives next to him.
Proof	Halifax Co., VA chancery suit dealing with property of Moses Estes, father of George Estes, lists John R. and his wife’s name and location in Tennessee as Moses’s descendants.
Proof	War of 1812 pension application
George Estes	Feb. 3, 1763, Amelia Co., VA	July 1859, Halifax Co., VA	Moses Estes Jr. 1742-1813	Luremia Combs c1742-1820/1830	Y-DNA haplogroup descended from Moses Estes Sr. 1711-1787 and autosomal from his maternal and paternal lines, both.

I’ll stop here because you clearly understand the process. If I were applying for membership in a lineage society, I would simply continue this chart until I reached the individual in question. In this example, George Estes is a Revolutionary War soldier, so I could apply for DAR membership, assuming I meet their various criteria.

Another aid in documenting your ancestors is lineage organizations and their records, but keep in mind that their evidence, especially that submitted decades ago, may not be sufficient today.

DNA Confirmation

DNA can either confirm this relationship, even without a paper trail, or conversely, it can burn it all down.

The closer in time a DNA relationship is, the more likely you’ll be able to confirm it using autosomal DNA.

Sometimes, Y-DNA is a consideration, and it certainly would be in this circumstance, except that I’m not a male, and we don’t have a living Estes male descended directly from William George Estes (through all males) to test.

Mitochondrial DNA can’t be used in this circumstance either since William George Estes’s children have their mother’s mitochondrial DNA, not his.

For the purposes of today’s proof, I used the Family Finder autosomal DNA test.

Buster Estes, now deceased, grandson of Lazarus Estes through his son Charlie Tomas Estes, is my 1C1R, (first cousin once removed). He tested both his Y-DNA and took the autosomal Family Finder test for me many years ago.

Additionally, Cornie Epperson’s grandchild and great-grandchild, my second cousin and 2C1R, agreed to autosomal DNA testing for me as well. Cornie’s grandchild agreed to test their mitochondrial DNA, which descends from Elizabeth Vannoy – for which I remain immensely grateful.

All of these cousins match me, as well as each other, appropriately, as would be expected for their respective relationships to me and to each other.

Since then, additional descendants of Lazarus Estes and Elizabeth Vannoy have tested and match others at the appropriate, expected level.

I also match other descendants of Elizabeth Vannoy’s parents, as do my cousins, so I can literally walk both Estes and Vannoy segments back in time.

In this case, NOT matching close Estes relatives would conclusively prove that I’m NOT related to the more distant Estes family.

However, if I didn’t match, it’s also possible that my father would not have matched those people either. I don’t have a full sibling through my father, but I do have a half-sibling whose descendants I match appropriately for the expected relationship. That proves that I’m my father’s biological child.

My half-sister died before DNA testing. NOT matching my sister’s descendants would confirm that we were not sisters, meaning we did not share the same father. One or the other of us would probably match Estes descendants, such as our second cousins. Fortunately, we match each other and Estes descendants.

Unfortunately, my half-brother Dave did not match me, nor any Estes family members, providing that we did not share a biological father – a heartbreaking discovery. He’s still my brother though, just not biologically, and I loved him dearly. (For the record, I found Dave’s father and his family after his death.)

I can prove that my father descends from his father because I also match the descendants of my father’s paternal half-siblings, as expected.

I also match (and triangulate with) the descendants of my grandfather’s sibling, Cornie Epperson, as expected, which proves my connection back to Lazarus and, therefore, my father and grandfather’s connection to Lazarus, too.

By the time we reach John R. Estes, son of George Estes, we can also use Y-DNA. While I personally can’t test for the Estes Y-DNA, a descendant of John R. Estes has taken the Big Y-700 test, needed for this level of detail, and they match the unique mutation (R-ZS3700) that occurred between Abraham Estes and his son Moses Estes Sr., then descended through Moses Jr. to George to John R., then on to our tester, confirming this paternal lineage.

Furthermore, I and other descendants of Lazarus Estes autosomally match Y-DNA descendants of John R. Estes as would be expected of 3^rd or 4^th cousins.

Therefore, by proxy, using both Y-DNA and Family Finder, we are all confirmed to descend from this entire Estes lineage, to and including Lazarus Estes and his son, William George Estes, through my father to me.

Whew!!!

Summary

Yes, it was a long, detailed path to get here using both traditional genealogical research and DNA results, but we did, and that’s really all that matters. I probably provided more examples than I really needed to, but I’m trying to answer as many “what about this” questions as I can, in advance. The Proof Table methodology isn’t cast in concrete and is easy to replicate and adapt based on your situation and the records at hand.

My final word of caution would be to make sure you don’t discount or omit negative evidence inadvertently. I made that mistake when I was less experienced because I didn’t realize the importance of negative evidence.

I’ve seen situations where a resource was not recorded because there “was nothing there,” when the fact that “nothing was there” is in itself important negative evidence that needs to be weighed and considered.

That’s one reason why preparing a list of all the resources in a particular area is so important. When you discover new resources or they become available, be sure to record and check those resources. For example, if a tax list for a particular county or district is uncovered, record that resource, even if the person you’re seeking isn’t listed there. The next question to ask is why they would not be listed, which may lead you to seek out or perhaps reevaluate other information.

Future Topics

I have three more articles planned in this series and expect to publish the next one in the winter.

DNA as Proof – or Not
Leveling up
Writing it Up

______________________________________________________________

Sign Up Now – It’s Free!

If you appreciate this article, subscribe to DNAeXplain for free, to automatically receive new articles by e-mail each week.

Here’s the link. Just look for the black “follow” button on the right-hand side on your computer screen below the black title bar, enter your e-mail address, and you’re good to go!

In case you were wondering, I never have nor ever will share or use your e-mail outside of the intended purpose.

_____________________________________________________________

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 e-mail 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 your price but helps me 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

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
AncestryDNA Plus Traits
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
OldNews – Old Newspapers with links to save to MyHeritage trees
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Books

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US
The Complete Guide to FamilyTreeDNA – Y-DNA, Mitochondrial, Autosomal and X-DNA

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books
American Ancestors – Wonderful selection of genealogy books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

Which DNA Test Should I Buy? And Why?

Posted on June 21, 2023 by Roberta Estes

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.

John never mentioned what his testing goal was.
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.
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.
Does John have enough information to purchase a test?
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 16^ths.

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 3/16^th 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 3/16^ths 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 12/16^ths. 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 16/16^ths.

Added together, those sum to 28/32, which reduces down to 14/16^th or 7/8^th 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 14/16^ths or 7/16^ths, 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 3/16^th – so both of these factoids cannot simultaneously be accurate. But that does NOT mean neither is accurate.

John could be 7/8^th or 40ish%, 3/16^th 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 4^th 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 7^th 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:

FamilyTreeDNA with tests from people who originally tested two decades ago.
23andMe
Ancestry
MyHeritage

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 3/16^th Native estimate was close. 3/16^th 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-70 0 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:

23andMe
Ancestry
MyHeritage Upload with free matching, then $29 unlock
FamilyTreeDNA Upload with free matching, then $19 unlock
GEDmatch free upload, then $9.95 monthly subscription for advanced tools if needed
FamilyTreeDNA mitochondrial DNA test (using the same kit number as the upload)
FamilyTreeDNA Big Y-700 for John and also for Davis male tester if he can find one
DNAPainter for uploading ethnicity painting plus segments that can be identified to specific ancestors to determine which ancestors provided which ethnicity segments
MyHeritage records subscription (free trial) (for genealogy research)
Ancestry subscription for genealogy research

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?

Define your testing goal.
Determine if your Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA will help answer the question.
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.
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.
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.
Order 23andMe and Ancestry autosomal DNA tests.
Either test at or upload one of those tests to MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA, and GEDmatch.
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!
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.
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.
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

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage FREE Tree Builder – Genealogy software for your computer
MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Book

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

DNA: In Search Of…Your Grandparents

Posted on April 7, 2023 by Roberta Estes

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.

Prior to beginning this series, I wrote the article, Identifying Unknown Parents and Individuals Using DNA Matching which explains the process in general. In other words, how searching for unknown people, specifically unknown parents, works. I recommend that you read this article as a primer, as it takes you step-by-step through the tools and processes, in general, building a foundational understanding for the following articles.
First Steps When Your DNA Results are Ready – Sticking Your Toe in the Genealogy Water is an excellent resource for people just beginning to work with DNA results.
I introduced the “In Search of” series in the article, DNA: In Search of…New Series Launches.
In the article, DNA: In Search of…What Do You Mean I’m Not Related to My Family? – and What Comes Next? we discussed the discovery that something was amiss when you don’t match a family member that you expect to match, then how to make sure a vial or upload mix-up didn’t happen. Next, I covered the basics of the four kinds of DNA tests you’ll be able to use to solve your mystery.
In the article, In Search of…Vendor Features, Strengths, and Testing Strategies, we discussed testing goals and strategies, including testing with and uploading to multiple autosomal DNA vendors, Y-DNA, and mitochondrial DNA testing. We reviewed the vendor’s strengths and the benefits of combining vendor information and resources.
In the article, DNA: In Search of…Signs of Endogamy, we discussed the signs of endogamy and various ways to determine if you or your recent ancestors descend from an endogamous population.
In the article, DNA: In Search of…Full and Half-Siblings we discussed how to determine if you have a sibling match, if they are a half or full sibling, and how to discern the difference.
In the article, Connect Your DNA test, and Others, to Your Tree, I explained how to optimize your DNA tests in order to take advantage of the features offered by each our primary DNA testing vendors.
In the article, How to Share DNA Results and Tree Access at Ancestry, I wrote step-by-step instructions for providing access to another person to allow them to view your DNA results, AND to share your tree – which are two different things. If you have a mystery match, and they are willing to allow you access, in essence “to drive,” you can just send them the link to this article that provides detailed instructions. Note that Ancestry has changed the user interface slightly with the rollout of their new “sides” matches.
In the article, How Am I Related to That Close Match?, we step through the process of narrowing down the possibilities of how an unexpectedly close match is related to you – and what to do next.
Not all of your ancestors contribute an X chromosome to you. In the article, X Chromosome Master Class, I’ve described how you can utilize the X chromosome when seeking to identify certain people in your tree. Conversely, an X chromosome match can effectively eliminate some relationships.

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 5^th or 6^th 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.

I wrote about Triangulation in Action at 23andMe, here.
I wrote several articles about using DNAPainter, here.
Instructions to download your DNA matches and their segment data can be found here. 23andMe results cannot be sorted by X chromosome matches, but you can sort the downloaded spreadsheet by X matching.

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage FREE Tree Builder – Genealogy software for your computer
MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Book

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US

Genealogy Books

Genealogical.com – Lots of wonderful genealogy research books

Genealogy Research

Legacy Tree Genealogists – Professional genealogy research

Beethoven’s DNA Reveals Surprises – Does Your DNA Match?

Posted on March 23, 2023 by Roberta Estes

Beethoven’s DNA has been sequenced from a lock of his hair. That, alone, is amazing news – but that’s just the beginning!

The scientific paper was released this week, and the news media is awash with the unexpected surprises that Beethoven’s DNA has revealed for us. Better yet, his DNA is in the FamilyTreeDNA database and you just might match. Are you related to Beethoven?

His Y-DNA, mitochondrial DNA and autosomal DNA have been recovered and are available for matching.

You can check your autosomal results if you’ve taken a Family Finder test, or you can upload your DNA file from either AncestryDNA, 23andMe or MyHeritage to find out if you match Beethoven. Here are the download/upload instructions for each company.

But first, let’s talk about this amazing sequence of events (pardon the pun) and scientific discoveries!

Beethoven’s Genome is Sequenced

Everyone knows the famous, genius composer, Ludwig van Beethoven. He was born in 1770 in Bonn on the banks of the Rhine River and died in 1827 in Vienna. You can listen to a snippet of his music, here.

We are all about to know him even better.

Yesterday, amid much media fanfare and a press release, the genome and related findings about Beethoven were released by a team of renowned scientists in a collaborative effort. Research partners include the University of Cambridge, the Ira F. Brilliant Center for Beethoven Studies, the American Beethoven Society, KU Leuven, the University Hospital Bonn, the University of Bonn, the Beethoven-Haus Bonn, the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and FamilyTreeDNA. I want to congratulate all of these amazing scientists for brilliant work.

Beethoven’s Hair Revelations

In the past, we were unable to retrieve viable DNA from hair, but advances have changed that in certain settings. If you’re eyeing grandma’s hair wreath – the answer is “not yet” for consumer testing. Just continue to protect and preserve your family heirlooms as described in this article.

Thankfully, Beethoven participated in the Victorian custom of giving locks of hair as mementos. Eight different locks of hair attributed to Beethoven were analyzed, with five being deemed authentic and one inconclusive. Those locks provided enough DNA to obtain a great deal of different types of information.

Beethoven’s whole genome was sequenced to a 24X coverage level, meaning the researchers were able to obtain 24 good reads of his DNA, providing a high level of confidence in the accuracy of the sequencing results.

What Was Discovered?

Perhaps the most interesting discovery, at least to genealogists, is that someplace in Beethoven’s direct paternal lineage, meaning his Y-DNA, a non-paternal event (NPE) occurred. The paper’s primary authors referred to this as an “extra-pair-paternity event” but I’ve never heard that term before.

Based on testing of other family members, that event occurred sometime between roughly 1572 and Ludwig’s conception in 1770. The reported lack of a baptismal record had already raised red flags with researchers relative to Beethoven’s paternity, but there is nothing to suggest where in the five generations prior to Ludwig von Beethoven that genetic break occurred. Perhaps testing additional people in the future will provide more specificity.

We also discovered that Beethoven was genetically predisposed to liver disease. He was plagued with jaundice and other liver-related issues for much of his later life.

Beethoven, prior to his death, left a handwritten directive asking his physicians to describe and publicize his health issues which included progressive hearing loss to the point of deafness, persistent gastrointestinal problems and severe liver issues that eventually resulted in his death. Cirrhosis of the liver was widely believed to be his cause of death.

In addition, DNA in the hair revealed that Beethoven had contracted Hepatitis B, which also affects the liver.

The combination of genetic predisposition to liver disease, Hepatitis B and heavy alcohol use probably sealed his fate.

Additional health issues that Beethoven experienced are described in the paper, published in Current Biology.

It’s quite interesting that during this analysis the team devised a method to use triangulated segments that they mapped to various geographic locations, as illustrated above in a graphic from the paper. Fascinating work!!!

As a partner in this research, Cambridge University created a beautiful website, including a video which you can watch, here.

Beethoven’s Later Years

This portrait of Beethoven was painted in 1820 just 7 years before his death, at 56 years of age. By this time, he had been completely deaf for several years, had stopped performing and appearing in public. Ironically, he still continued to compose, but was horribly frustrated and discouraged, even contemplating suicide. I can’t even fathom the depths of despair for a person with his musical genius to become deaf, slowly, like slow torture.

His personal life didn’t fare much better. In 1812, he wrote this impassioned love letter to his “Immortal Beloved” whose identity has never been revealed, if it was ever known by anyone other than Beethoven himself. The letter was never sent, which is why we have it today.

FamilyTreeDNA

FamilyTreeDNA, one of the research partners published a blog article, here.

The FamilyTreeDNA research team not only probed Beethoven’s genealogy, they tested people whose DNA should have matched, but as it turns out, did not.

Beethoven’s mitochondrial DNA haplogroup is H1b1+16,362C, plus a private mutation at C16,176T. Perhaps in the future, Beethoven’s additional private mutation will become a new haplogroup if other members of this haplogroup have it as well. If you have tested your mitochondrial DNA, check and see if Beethoven is on your match list. If you haven’t tested, now’s a great time.

According to the academic paper, Beethoven’s Y-DNA haplogroup is I-Z139, but when viewing Figure 5 in the paper, here, I noticed that Beethoven’s detailed haplogroup is given as I-FT396000, which you can see in the Discover project, here.

Viewing the Time Tree and the Suggested Projects, I noticed that there are four men with that haplogroup, some of whom are from Germany.

The ancestor’s surnames of the I-FT396000 men, as provided in public projects include:

Pitzschke (from Germany)
Hartmann (from Germany)
Stayler
Schauer (from Germany)

If your Y-DNA matches Beethoven at any level, you might want to upgrade if you haven’t taken the Big Y-700 test. It would be very interesting to see when and where your most recent common ancestor with Beethoven lived. You just never known – if you match Beethoven, your known ancestry might help unravel the mystery of Beethoven’s unknown paternal lineage.

Beethoven’s DNA is in the FamilyTreeDNA database for matching, including Y-DNA mitochondrial and autosomal results, so you just might match. Take a look! A surprise just might be waiting for you.

_____________________________________________________________

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

FamilyTreeDNA – Y, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA testing
MyHeritage DNA – Autosomal DNA test
MyHeritage FREE DNA file upload – Upload your DNA file from other vendors free
AncestryDNA – Autosomal DNA test
23andMe Ancestry – Autosomal DNA only, no Health
23andMe Ancestry Plus Health

Genealogy Products and Services

MyHeritage FREE Tree Builder – Genealogy software for your computer
MyHeritage Subscription with Free Trial
Legacy Family Tree Webinars – Genealogy and DNA classes, subscription-based, some free
Legacy Family Tree Software – Genealogy software for your computer
Newspapers.com – Search newspapers for your ancestors
NewspaperArchive – Search different newspapers for your ancestors

My Book

DNA for Native American Genealogy – by Roberta Estes, for those ordering the e-book from anyplace, or paperback within the United States
DNA for Native American Genealogy – for those ordering the paperback outside the US

Genealogy Books