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

Mitotree Q&A for Everyone

Posted on June 11, 2025 by Roberta Estes

I recently presented Mitotree Webinar – What It Is, How We Did It, and What Mitotree Means to You at Legacy Family Tree Webinars. It’s still free to view through June 13^th, and after that, it’s available in the webinar library with a subscription. The 31-page syllabus is also a subscription feature.

Thank you to all 1000+ of you who attended and everyone else who has since watched the webinar – or will now.

We had a limited amount of time for Q&A at the end, so Geoff, our host, was kind enough to send me the list of questions from the Chat, and I’m doing the Q&A here. But keep in mind, please, that I’m assuming when I answer that you’ve watched the webinar or are familiar with how the new Mitotree and tools work.

That said, I think this Q&A can help everyone who is interested in mitochondrial DNA. Your genealogy gift from your mother and her female lineage.

Just a quick reminder that the mitochondrial DNA test tracks your direct matrilineal line only, meaning your mother’s mother’s mother’s line on up your tree until you run out of mothers. Of course, our goal is always to break through that brick wall.

This is a wonderful opportunity, because, unlike autosomal DNA, mitochondrial DNA is not admixed with the DNA of the other parent, so it’s a straight line look back directly up your mother’s female line.

Aha Moment!

Geoff said at the end that he had an aha moment during the webinar. Both males and females have mitochondrial DNA inherited from their mother, so we think of testing our own – but forget to obtain the mitochondrial DNA of our father. Testing your father’s mitochondrial DNA means obtaining your paternal grandmother’s mitochondrial DNA, so test your father to learn about his mother’s maternal line.

And it’s Father’s Day shortly.

Q&A

I’ve combined and summarized similar questions to make this short and sweet. Well, as short and sweet as I can make anything!

Can I benefit from Discover even if I don’t have a full sequence test?

You can benefit from the free FamilyTreeDNA Discover tool with any haplogroup, even a partial haplogroup. Be sure to click the down arrow and select mtDNA before entering the haplogroup if you’re using the public version.

However, to gain the most advantage from your test results and Discover, and to receive your closest matches, you need the full sequence test, called the mtFull, which you can purchase here. If you took one of the lower-level “Plus” tests, years ago, click here to sign in and upgrade or check your account to see if you have the full sequence test.

What benefits do I receive if I click through to Discover from my account versus using the public version of Discover?

Click any image to enlarge

If you click through to Discover directly from your FamilyTreeDNA account, you will receive features and additional information that are not available in the free, public version of Discover.

You’ll receive additional Notable Connections and up to 30 Ancient Connections based on how many are available and relevant for you.

You’ll also be able to view the Match Time tree, showing your matches, their earliest known ancestors, and where they fit in your haplogroup and haplotype cluster. In this example, two EKAs hinted at a common lineage, which turned out to be accurate after I did some digging.

I think the Match Time Tree is indispensable – the best thing since sliced bread!

The Scientific Details report is also customized for you with your Haplotype Cluster and your private variants.

Will a child and their mother always have the same haplogroup?

Yes, but if one of them has a mutation that the other doesn’t, or a heteroplasmy, they may be in a different haplotype cluster.

Also, they both need to have taken the full sequence test. Otherwise, the one who did not take the full sequence test will only have a partial haplogroup until they upgrade.

We will talk more about edge cases in Q&A on down the list.

I took a mitochondrial DNA test at FamilyTreeDNA, but how can I tell if it was a full sequence test or the partial (HVR1/HVR2) test?

Great question. Sign in to your account.

In the Maternal Line Ancestry section, which is mitochondrial DNA, check to see if both the Plus and Full boxes are pink. If so, you have taken both and you’ll have a new Mitotree haplogroup and haplotype cluster.

If the “Full” box is grey, you can either click there or at the top where it says “Add Ons and Upgrades” to upgrade to the full sequence test.

Why is it called the Million Mito Project? What were you counting?

When we first launched the project, we hoped for a million full sequence samples to build the initial tree. After removing duplicates, such as parent/child, partial sequence samples such as HVR1/2, unreliable samples from PhyloTree, and including FamilyTreeDNA testers and academic samples, we had between one-third and half a million samples when we launched. The Mitotree and Discover are growing with new testers and groups of samples from archaeological studies, academic samples, and other publicly available resources, following quality analysis, of course.

Is there a way to confirm that I submitted an mtDNA to the Mito Tree project? I think I submitted my mom’s when you first started, but my husband recently tested, and I don’t remember if we opted him in at that time.

The science team at FamilyTreeDNA is using all of the full sequence tests in the construction of the Mitotree, so you don’t need to do anything special.

Do or can haplotype F numbers (haplotype clusters) ever become haplogroups?

The answer is maybe. (I know – I’m sorry!)

If you have private variants in addition to your haplotype cluster, then yes, those are haplogroup seeds.

This is my result and I have no additional private variants left to use.

If you don’t have any private variants, or mutations, left over, then no, you won’t receive a new haplogroup for this reason. However, if for some reason the haplogroup splits upstream, you might receive a new haplogroup in the future due to that split.

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

How can mitochondrial DNA and the Mitotree be useful for breaking down genealogy in various parts of the world?

There are two aspects to mitochondrial DNA testing.

The first is to connect genealogically, if possible. To do that, you’ll be paying attention to your matches EKAs (earliest known ancestors), their trees, and their locations. You may well need to do some genealogy digging and build out some trees for others.

The second aspect is to learn more about that lineage before you can connect genealogically. Where did they come from? Do they share a haplogroup with any Ancient Connections, and what cultures do they share? Where did they come from most recently in the world, and where do the breadcrumbs back in time lead?

I wrote about this in the article, New Mitotree Haplogroups and How to Utilize Them for Genealogy.

Sometimes, DNA testing of any type is simply a waiting game until the right person tests and matches you. That’s one reason it bothers me so much to see people “not recommend” mitochondrial DNA testing. We all need more testers so we can have more matches.

When will Globetrekker for mtDNA be available?

I don’t know and neither does the team. The Mitotree is still being refined. For example, we are adding thousands of samples to the tree right now from multiple locations around the world. I probably wouldn’t expect Globetrekker until the tree is officially out of Beta, and no, I don’t know when that will happen either. It’s difficult to know when you’re going to be “finished” with something that has never been done before.

While it’s not Globetrekker, you do have the Matches Map to work with, and the Migration Map in Discover, which also shows the locations of your Ancient Connections.

During the webinar, Roberta mentioned that her ancestor is German, but she discovered her ancestors were Scandinavian. Can you expand about the “event” that explained this unexpected discovery.

In my case, the church records for the tiny village where my ancestor lived in Germany begin right after the 30 Years’ War, which was incredibly destructive. Looking at Swedish troop movements in Germany, the army of Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden marched through the region with more than 18,000 soldiers. Women accompanied the baggage trains, providing essential, supportive roles and services to the soldiers and military campaign. I’ll never know positively, of course, but given that the majority of my full sequence matches are in Scandinavia, mostly Sweden, and not in Germany, it’s a reasonable hypothesis.

People often receive surprises in their results, and the history of the region plays a big role in the stories of our ancestors.

You don’t know what you don’t know, until you test and follow the paths ahd hints revealed.

Why do I have fewer matches in the HVR2 region than the HVR1 region?

Think of the mitochondria as a clock face.

The older (now obsolete) HVR1 test tested about 1000 locations, from about 11-noon and the HVR2/3 region tested another 1000 locations, from about noon-1 PM. The full sequence test tests the full 16,569 locations of the entire mitochondria.

Each level has its own match threshold. So, if you have one mutation at either the HVR1 or HVR2/3 level, combined, you are not considered a match. For example, you can match 10 people at the HVR1 level, and have a mutation in the HVR2 level that 4 people don’t share, so you’ll only match 6 people at the HVR2 level.

If you have one mutation in the HVR1 region, you won’t match anyone in either the HVR1 or HVR1/HVR2 regions.

At the full sequence level, you can have three mutation differences (GD 3) and still be considered a match.

So, the short answer is that you probably have a mutation that some of your matches at the HVR2 level don’t have.

In addition to matches on your Matches page, you will (probably) have haplogroup matches that aren’t on your match list, so check Discover for those.

I have HVR1/HVR2 matches, but none at the full sequence level. Why?

It’s possible that none of your matches have tested at that level.

You have no mutations in the HVR1/2 region, or you would not be a match. If your HVR1/2 matches have tested at the full sequence level, then you have more than 3 mutations difference in the coding region.

Why do I match people at the full sequence level but not HVR1/2?

The match threshold at the HVR1/2 level is 1, so if you have one mismatch, you’re not listed as a match. However, at the full sequence level, the GD (genetic distance) is 3 mismatches. This tells me you have a mismatch in the HVR1 region, which also precludes HVR2 matching, but less than 4 mutations total. Click on the little “i” button above each match level on the matches page.

Why don’t all of my matches show on the Match Time Tree?

Only full sequence matches can show on the Match Time Tree, because they are the only testers who can receive a full haplogroup.

How does a heteroplasmy interfere with mtDNA research?

Heteroplasmies, where someone carries two different nucleotides at the same location in different mitochondrial in their body, are both extremely fascinating and equally as frustrating.

Heteroplasmies can interfere with your matching because you might have a T nucleotide in a specific location, which matches the reference model, so no mutation – like 16362T. Your mother might have a C in that location, so T16362C, which is a mutation from T to C. Your aunt or sister might have both a T and a C, which means she is shown with letter Y, so 16362Y, which means she has more than 20% of both. All three of you probably have some of each, but it’s not “counted” as a heteroplasmy unless it’s over 20%.

The challenge is how to match these people with these different values accurately, and how heteroplasmies should “count” for matching.

I wrote about this in the article What is a Heteroplasmy and Why Do I Care?

Bottom line is this – if you are “by yourself” and have no matches, or you don’t match known relatives exactly, suspect a heteroplasmy. If you ask yourself, “What the heck is going on?” – rule out a heteroplasmy. Check out my article and this heteroplasmy article in the FamilyTreeDNA help center.

Someone asked about the X chromosome and may have been confusing it with mitochondrial DNA. The X chromosome is not the same as mitochondrial DNA.

The confusion stems from the fact that both are associated with inheritance from the maternal line. Everyone inherits their mitochondrial DNA from their mother. Men inherit their X chromosome ONLY from their mother, because their father gives them a Y chromosome, which makes them a male. Females inherit an X chromosome from both parents. And yes, there are medical exceptions, but those are unusual.

I wrote about this in the article, X Matching and Mitochondrial DNA is Not the Same Thing.

How do you determine the location of the last mutation? A tester and their aunt are from one country, and another man in the same haplogroup is from another country, but he has tested only the HVR1/HVR2 level.

There are really two answers here.

First, you can’t really compare your full sequence new Mitotree haplogroup with a partial haplogroup based on only the HVR1/2 test. Chances are very good that if he upgraded to a full sequence test, he would receive a more complete haplogroup, and one that might be near the tester’s haplogroup, but perhaps not the same.

For example, my full sequence haplogroup is J1c2f. I have matches with people who only tested at the HVR1/HVR2 level, but they can only be predicted to haplogroup J, with no subgroup, because they are missing about 14,000 locations that are included in the full sequence test.

Using the Discover Compare feature, comparing haplogroup J to J1c2f clearly shows that the mutations that define haplogroup J1c2f happened long after the mutation(s) that define haplogroup J.

You can use other Discover tools such as the Match Time Tree (if you click through from your account), the Time Tree, the Ancestral Path and the Classic Tree to see when the various haplogroups were born.

My mother took the full sequence test in 2016, so should I look for an upgrade now? She is deceased so can’t retest.

First, I’m sorry for your loss, but so glad you have her DNA tests.

The good news is that you ordered the full sequence right away, so you don’t need to worry about an upgrade failing later. In this case, there is no upgrade because the full sequence tests all 16,569 locations.

Additionally, had you needed an upgrade, or wanted to do a Family Finder test, for example, FamilyTreeDNA stores the DNA vials for future testing, so you could potentially run additional tests.

And lastly, since we’re talking mitochondrial DNA, which you inherit from your mother with no admixture from your father, your mtDNA should match hers exactly, so you could test in proxy for her, had she not already tested.

Has anything changed in Native American haplogroups?

Absolutely. About 75% of testers received a new haplogroup and that includes people with Native American matrilineal ancestors.

For example, my Native ancestor was haplogroup A2f1a, formed about 50 CE and is now A2f1a4-12092, formed about 1600 CE, so has moved 2 branches down the tree and about 1500 years closer. My ancestor was born about 1683. Her descendant has 58 full sequence matches, 22 in the same haplogroup, and 16 people in their haplotype cluster.

I’m so excited about this, because it helps provide clarity about her ancestors and where they were before she entered my genealogy by marrying a French settler.

Are mtDNA mutations the same or similar to autosomal SNPs?

A SNP is a single nucleotide polymorphism, which means a single variation in a specific location. So yes, a mutation is a change in a nucleotide at a genetic location in Y-DNA, autosomal DNA, or mitochondrial DNA.

Can we filter or sort our matches by haplotype on our match page?

Not yet. Generally, your closest matches appear at or near the top of your match list. Of course, you can use the Discover Match Time Tree and you can download your matches in a CSV file. (Instructions are further down in Q&A.)

Is there a way to make it more obvious that the EKA should be in their matrilineal line? There are so many men as EKAs!

So frustrating. The verbiage has been changed and maybe needs to be revised again, but of course, that doesn’t help with the people who have already entered males. We know males aren’t the source of mitochondrial DNA.

When I see males listed as an EKA, I send the match a pleasant note. I’m not sure they make the connection between what they entered and what is being displayed to their matches. If they have included or linked to a tree, I tell them who, in their tree, is their mtDNA EKA.

I’ve written about how to correctly add an Earliest Known Ancestor. I’ll update that article and publish again so that you can forward those instructions to people with no EKA, or male EKAs.

I love learning about my ancient connections. I have a new match due to the updates, who is from a neighboring area to my great-great-great-grandmother.

I love, love, LOVE Ancient Connections. They tell me who my ancestors were before I have any prayer of identifying them individually. Then I can read up on the culture from which they sprang.

I’ve also had two situations where Ancient Connections have been exceptionally useful.

One is an exact haplogroup match to my ancestor, and the burial was in a necropolis along the Roman road about 3-4 km outside the medieval “city” where my ancestor lived.

In a second case, there were two villages in different parts of the same country, hundreds of miles apart, and one burial from about 200 years before my ancestor lived was found about 10 km from one of those villages. While this isn’t conclusive, it’s certainly evidence.

What does the dashed line on the Time Tree mean?

Dashed lines on the time tree can mean two things.

The red dashed line, red arrow above, is the haplogroup formation date range and correlates to the dates at the top of Time Tree, not show in this screen shot. You can also read about those dates and how they are calculated on the Scientific Details tab in Discover.

The brown dashed lines, green arrow above, connect an ancient sample to its haplogroup, but the sample date is earlier than the estimated haplogroup.

At first this doesn’t make sense, until you realize that ancient samples are sometimes carbon dated, sometimes dated by proximity to something else, and sometimes dated based on the dates of the cemetery or cultural dig location.

Archaeological samples can also be contaminated, or have poor or low coverage. In other words, at this point in time, the samples are listed, but would need to be individually reviewed before shifting the haplogroup formation date. Haplogroup formation dates are based on present day testers.

A cousin and I have been mtDNA tested. What might be gained by testing our other six female cousins/10 or so male cousins?

Probably not much, so here’s how I would approach this.

I would test one cousin who descends from another daughter of the EKA, if possible. This helps to sift out if a haplogroup-defining mutation has occurred.

If you or that cousin has private variants left over after their haplotype cluster is formed, testing a second person from that line may well results in a new haplogroup formation for that branch.

I absolutely would ask every single one of those cousins to take an autosomal test, however, because you never know what tools the future will bring, and we want to leverage every single segment of DNA that our ancestors carried. Testing cousins in the only way to find those.

In the Mitotree, I am grouped in a haplogroup that, according to the Mitotree Match Time Tree, branched off only about 200 years ago and has four mtDNA testers in it, including me. In fact, my earliest known maternal line ancestor I found using pen-and-paper genealogy was indeed born around 230 years ago and is also the known maternal ancestor for one of these three testers – confirming the Mitotree grouping is correct. But the other two matches in this haplogroup are completely unknown to me. Unfortunately, they do not have a tree online, and they did not respond to several messages. Is there any way to find out more about them using the new Mitotree tools?

First of all, this is great news. Having said that, I share your frustration. However, you’re a genealogist. Think of yourself as a sleuth.

I’d start by emailing them, but in this case, you already have. Tell them what you know from your line and ask if their line is from the same area? End with a question for them to answer. Share tidbits from Discover – like Ancient Connections maybe. Something to peak their interest.

Next, put on your sleiuh hat. I’d google their name and email address, and check Facebook and other social media sites. I’d check to see if they match me, or any cousins who have tested, on an autosomal test. If they do match autosomally, use shared matching and the matrix tool. If they are an autosomal match, I’d also check other testing sites to see if they have a tree there.

One webinar attendee is haplogroup H1bb7a+151 and is frustrated because they only have eight matches and don’t understand how to leverage this.

Of course, without knowing more, I can’t speak to what they have and have not done, and I certainly understand their frustration. However, in mitochondrial and Y-DNA, you really don’t want thousands of matches. It’s not autosomal. You want close, good matches, and that’s what the Mitotree plus haplotype clusters provide.

Your personal goals also make a lot of difference.

For me, I wanted to verify what I think I know – and received a surprise. I also want to go further back if possible. Then, I want to know the culture my ancestors came from.

First, step through every single one of Discover’s 13 tools and READ EVERY PAGE – not skim. These are chapters in your free book about your ancestor.

Their haplogroup was formed about 1200, so all of those matches will be since that time. The Ancient Connections tell me it’s probably British, maybe Irish – but they will see more from their account than I can see on the public version of Discover.

The Time Tree shows me one haplotype cluster, which is where the tester’s closest matches will probably be, barring a mutation or heteroplasmy.

Looking at the matches, e-mail people, look for common locations in their trees, and see if any of them are also autosomal matches using the Advanced Matching tool.

Looking at the 10 success story examples I used, one man was able to connect 19 of his matches into three groups by doing their genealogy for them. This doesn’t work for everyone, but it will never work if we don’t make the attempt.

An attendee would like to search on the Earliest Known Ancestor’s (EKA’s) name field.

I would like that too. You can search on surnames, but that’s often not terribly useful for mitochondrial DNA. The Match Time Tree shows the EKA for all full sequence testers.

In the upper right hand corner of your Matches page, there’s an “Export CSV” file link. Click there to download in a spreadsheet format. The EKA is a column in that file, along with both the new Mitotree haplogroup and haplotype F number, and it’s very easy to do a sort or text search from there.

Several questions about why people have so many more autosomal matches than either Y-DNA or mitochondrial.

There are several considerations.

First, autosomal testing became very popular, often based on ethnicity. There are many times more autosomal testers than there are either Y or mitochondrial.

Second, if you look back just six generations, you have 64 lineages. Y-DNA and mtDNA tests one line each and you don’t have to figure out which line. It also reaches back much further in time because it’s not admixed, so nothing washes out or rolls off in each generation like with autosomal.

Third, the Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA tests are very specific and granular.

More is not necessarily better. You’re looking for refinement – and mitochondrial is just one line. No confusion. Think how happy you’d be if your autosomal matches weren’t all jumbled together and could be placed into 64 neat little baskets. Think how much time we spend sorting them out by shared matches and other criteria. Both Y-DNA and mitochondrial is already sorted out.

I’ve broken through several brick walls with unrecombined Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA that could never be touched with autosomal – especially older lines where autosomal DNA is either gone or negligible.

You mentioned a Facebook group where I can ask questions about mitochondrial DNA?

The mitochondrial DNA Facebook group is the FamilyTreeDNA mtDNA Group, here.

To the webinar attendee who came to see me more than 20 years ago at Farmington Hills, Michigan, at one of my first, if not the first, genetic genealogy presentation – thank you!

Thank you for attending then when I really had no idea if ANYONE would come to hear about this new DNA “thing” for genealogy. I remember how nervous I was. And thank you for sticking around, continuing to research, and saying hello now!

Closing Comment

Mitochondrial DNA testing is different than autosomal, of course. It’s often the key to those females’ lines with seemingly insurmountable brick walls.

I attempt to collect the mitochondrial DNA of every ancestor. I trace “up the tree” to find people to test who descend from those ancestors through all women to the current generation, which can be males.

To find testers, I shop:

Autosomal matches at FamilyTreeDNA
Projects at FamilyTreeDNA
WikiTree
FamilySearch
Ancestry DNA matches
Ancestry Thrulines
Ancestry trees
MyHeritage DNA matches, where ther are a lot more European testers
MyHeritage Theories of Family Relativity
MyHeritage Cousin Finder
Relatives at RootsTech during the month before and after RootsTech when it’s available
Facebook Genealogy and family groups that appear relevant

When I find an appropriately descended person, I ask if they have already taken either the Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA test, whichever one I’m searching for at that moment. If yes, hurray and I ask if they will share at least their haplogroup. If they haven’t tested, I tell them I’m offering a testing scholarship.

I will gladly explain the results if they will share them with me. Collaboration is key and a rising tide lifts all ships.

My mantra in all of this is, “You don’t know what you don’t know, and if you don’t test, you’ll never know.” I’ve missed testing opportunities that I desperately wish I hadn’t, so test your DNA and find testers to represent your ancestors.

I hope you enjoyed the webinar. It’s not too late to watch.

_____________________________________________________________

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

FamilyTreeDNA’s New Matrix Shows How Your Matches Are Related to Each Other

Posted on February 12, 2025 by Roberta Estes

Click on any image to enlarge

FamilyTreeDNA’s new reworked Matrix includes relationships, in other words, how your matches are related to each other. But there’s more. It also includes the number of shared segments and the number of cMs shared between your matches.

You can then push those matches through to the chromosome browser to see exactly which segments overlap between you and your matches.

This is a game-changer!!

Why Are These Features Important?

For genealogists, knowing how your matches are related to each other, or not, is a HUGE clue about your common ancestor. Clusters of people who match each other are an important road sign directing you to a specific ancestor who contributed the same DNA segment or segments to all of you.

FamilyTreeDNA just released several VERY cool updates for their Matrix comparison tool. Plus, you get to select a group of 10 people to compare.

The purpose of the Matrix tool is to select Family Finder autosomal matches who are then displayed in a grid matrix for comparison, showing if and how those matches match each other.

Specifically:

Do your matches match each other?
What is their estimated relationship to each other?
How many segments of DNA do they share with each other?
How many cMs (centiMorgans) of DNA do they share with each other?

You can then push 7 matches through to the chromosome browser to see if they match on any of the same segments.

Automated Triangulation

If you are comparing bucketed (maternal or paternal) matches, or matches known to belong to the same side of your tree, the shared segments are automatically triangulated.

How cool is this?!!!

Keep in mind, though, that you may be related to someone through multiple ancestors, and they could be from both parent’s sides, so pay attention to the ancestral segment history.

Remember, every segment has its own unique history.

Let’s step through the new Matrix features and see how they work.

Select the Matrix

Navigate to the Matrix tool under “See More” under Autosomal DNA Results and Tools.

Under “Select Matches” you can select “All Matches” to choose from all of your matches, or you can select a grouping of matches to be displayed in the menu, below.

These groupings are shortcuts for you so you don’t have to pick everyone individually. You can also search for a name.

Click on the individuals you want to compare in the Matrix. The people you’ve selected from the group, at left, will appear in the box, at right. That’s who will be compared to each other.

Next, select which type of data will be compared.

I’m selecting “Close Relatives” for this example and “Relationship range.” First, I added my mother so I could see who matches with her.

Then I added the rest of the people I want to compare. In this case, I’ve added my closest matches, even though they are from both sides of my tree.

Relationship Range

I’ve selected “Relationship range,” which will show me how my matches estimated relationships to each other.

Based on the identity of these matches, and how they match each other, I can now determine their ancestral connection.

If I didn’t know who was related maternally and paternally, this grid would remove all doubt became I’m comparing to one of my parents.

If you don’t have a parent, adding close, known relatives on one or both sides will help immensely.

Be sure to make notes about what you’ve discovered on your matches page, and paint to DNAPainter if that’s how you’re tracking your segments to ancestors.

Number of Segments Shared

Now, I’ve selected “Number of segments shared” to compare the same group of people.

You can see the number of shared segments between Mom’s matches. Donald and Cheryl are full siblings.

The display shows how these people match Mom, and each other.

Melissa is Mom’s paternal second cousin. I was able to piece this together with the help of how she matches Mom and Mom’s known paternal first cousins, Cheryl and Donald.

Total cMs Shared

Next, I’m selecting “Total cMs shared” for comparison.

Looking at the number of shared cMs, even if I didn’t know that Donald and Cheryl were full siblings, I would now.

You can also push these through to the chromosome browser. I’ll illustrate in a minute.

Bucketed or Parental Side Matching

My favorite groupings for the new Matrix are the bucketed, meaning parental or maternal “side” matching.”

When your matches are already bucketed, thanks to having linked known matches to their profile card in your tree, the system does a lot of the “side” work for you behind the scenes.

When you select “Maternal, “Paternal” or “Paternal and Maternal” matches, the people who have been bucket to either side, or those related to you on both sides, are listed in the selection box.

I’m selecting 7 of my maternal bucketed matches because I’m going to push them through to the chromosome browser for additional evaluation. I’m not including my mother because I already know these people are related to both me and her, because they are bucketed maternally.

They’re compared in the various matrix configurations.

From the Shared cM comparison table, I can easily click to display matches in the chromosome browser.

If you’re comparing more than 7 people, you’ll need to reduce it to 7. I excluded my Mom because I already know she matches all of them.

Click on the Compare Chromosome Browser at the bottom for the 7 people selected.

I know that cousin Charles descends from Mom’s paternal Lentz line, and has no other connection, so I know that these other cousins who also match me on that same segment are also from Mom’s Lentz line.

I can also tell that the shared segments on chromosome 1 are from Mom’s maternal Lore line.

Shown here are the common ancestors in Mom’s pedigree chart. They are 4 and 5 generations back in time for me.

Look how easy that was!

I love this new Matrix tool.

Triangulation

Because three or more people, including me, match on the same segments, this means they also triangulate.

In the example above, we have two distinct triangulation groups. I’m only showing chromosomes 1-3 for illustration purposes, but there are also more triangulation groups on the other chromosomes. If I add other people, new triangulation groups will form!

Of course, these are my maternal bucketed matches, so I’m safe to reach that conclusion. If my father’s matches were also loaded here, I would have to check the matrix and see if these people also matched each other before I could determine that they triangulate.

Check Your Matches and Upload

Be sure to upload any tests to FamilyTreeDNA that you manage at other vendors, and encourage your cousins to upload too.

This combination of features is unique to FamilyTreeDNA. The more relatives you have available to match, especially when you already know the common ancestor, the better. Be sure to link your matches to their placard in your tree so that FamilyTreeDNA can do the bucketing for you.

Even if you don’t link people, you can still benefit greatly from the new matrix tool by just having your DNA available for matching. The matrix will help you sort out matches and identify who is related to whom, and how.

Take a look! What are you discovering?

_____________________________________________________________

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

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

23andMe Trouble – Step-by-Step Instructions to Preserve Your Data and Matches

Posted on September 19, 2024 by Roberta Estes

I don’t know what the future holds for 23andMe, but the financial floodwaters are rising. I’ve been torn about whether I should risk alarming people, perhaps unnecessarily, by writing about this, and if so, exactly what to say.

I’ve decided that the responsible action is to share my concerns with you and suggest that you act proactively – just in case.

Contrary to linking within this article which is what I normally do, I’m placing a list of relevant articles about what’s happening at 23andMe at the end for your reference. There are quite a few. I’ve located reputable articles without paywalls. There are even more publications today.

What’s Going On?

If you’re following the saga of 23andMe, you’ll know that they have been in financial trouble for some time, worsened by their data breach in October 2023. Not only was customer information accessed and downloaded, but 23andMe reacted extremely slowly, which made the situation worse. Lawsuits followed. I’ve written about the deteriorating situation several times.

Their financial situation has continued its decline ever since.

Recent developments, including the inability of Anne Wojcicki to raise funding to take the company private again, the $30 million data breach settlement this week, a further drop in their stock price, and just yesterday, the resignation of the board of directors in its entirety (except for Wojcicki), makes their future increasingly uncertain if not outright bleak.

Concerns

I am very concerned about the future of 23andMe. Never having experienced anything like this in our industry, I have no prediction about exactly what will happen, or when. That’s unknowable. I do know that I’m quite worried as are other professionals in this field.

I am strongly considering deleting my 23andme accounts. My personal hesitation is that I author this blog and I can’t write about 23andMe if I don’t have an account there.

Were it not for that, I would strongly consider deleting my account after recording my matches and downloading my data. 23andMe has ceased to be useful for me and has increasingly become a liability.

Please do NOT panic and run over there and delete your account without thoughtful consideration and taking these preservation measures first. Truly, I will tell you if I think you need to act on something immediately, as I have in the past.

I am NOT specifically recommending deleting your account. Everyone’s circumstances and goals are different.

For example, if you’re an adoptee fishing in all the ponds, you may want to wait. If your focus is health, you’re probably not reading this article, but that might be justification for people to wait. Or, if you’re a genealogist who wants as many matches as possible, you may want to wait and see how things shake out.

Regardless, the following recommendations ARE for everyone. Being prepared is better than being surprised.

Recommendations

Whether you choose to delete your account at 23andMe in the near future, wait, or maybe never, I have the following recommendations, just in case.

Download your raw DNA data file.
Preserve your matches in some fashion.
Save your ethnicity segments file.

Here are step-by-step instructions for each item, plus several tips and hints.

Download Your Raw DNA File

Download your raw DNA file so that you can upload it elsewhere if you wish.

To download your raw DNA file, click on Resources, then “Browse Data.”

Select “Download” at the top of the next page where you will be prompted for your birth date.

You will then see a full page of “Important Warnings to Consider.”

Scroll to the bottom

Check the “I understand” box and then click on “Submit Request.”

You will receive an email when your file is ready to be downloaded.

If your email is not current, you will need to call or contact 23andMe support for assistance.

You can upload your 23andMe DNA file to MyHeritage, here, to GEDmatch, and to FamilyTreeDNA again soon. I’ve written instructions for uploading and downloading data to/from each vendor in the article DNA File Upload-Download and Transfer Instructions to and from DNA Testing Companies, here.

Preserve Your 23andMe Matches

Next, review and preserve your matches shown under DNA Relatives. You may want to use screenshots or create a spreadsheet, which is my recommendation. You’ll be able to retain and preserve a LOT more information using a spreadsheet, including how your matches are related to each other.

The good news, or bad news, depending on your perspective, is that unless you have paid for a subscription, you’ll only have 1500 matches to deal with. With a subscription, you’ll have up to about 5,000.

Match Information Spreadsheet

I suggest working with your closest matches first.

You’ll find your matches under “Ancestry,” then “DNA Relatives.” Matches are listed in the closest match order.

For each match you can view information, including:

Birth year and location
Your predicted relationship
If they are in the genetic tree that 23andMe has created for you
Their ancestors’ birthplaces, if they have provided that information.
Their family surnames
An important link to their family tree if they have provided that link
Their ethnicity which may be important if you share a common ethnicity that suggests or precludes lineages
High level Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups
Relatives in Common which are shared matches – and how much DNA your two matches share with each other
Any notes you’ve made

Other features previously available at 23andMe were discontinued after the breach.

If you downloaded your matches file before the October 2023 breach, you’re in luck because you can simply update that file with your new matches except for segment information. That’s what I’m doing. Your download file will be a CSV file styled “roberta_estes_relatives_download” where your name replaces mine.

If you didn’t download your matches before the breach, you can’t today, as that’s one of the features they removed after the breach.

Recording your matches’ information is the first step, but there’s an important second step too that will help you piece all of this information together.

Relatives in Common Relationship Grid

I strongly suggest creating a relationship grid detailing who matches whom for your shared matches. Yes, I know that’s a LOT of work, but it may well be worth it to wring every ounce out of your DNA matches. Plus, you can then keep it current as new matches arrive. Right now, I’ve set a goal for myself to complete 100 per day. That’s do able.

The “Relatives in Common” feature is extremely useful and facilitates constructing your tree and fitting your matches into their relative places in your tree. Relatives in Common tells you not only how much DNA you share with your matches but also their estimated relationship to each other and how much DNA they share.

To begin the process, you really only need to be able to identify “someone” and then chain people together based on shared matches and estimated relationships. I’ll show you.

To find Relatives in Common information and how much DNA they share with each other, click on a specific match, preferably one that you know, under DNA Relatives, then scroll down to “Find Relatives in Common.”

Here’s the list of matches shared between DH and me.

Here’s the beginning of the relationship spreadsheet I created.

This example shows the amount of DNA I share with my matches in the left column, then how much they share with each other. I’ve color-coded the results. Blue is my father’s paternal line. His mother’s line is not represented in these matches. Purple is my mother’s maternal line, and apricot is her paternal line.

DH is estimated by 23andMe to be my second cousin and shares 7.13% of my paternal DNA across 17 segments. DH also shares DNA with James, George, Daniel, RA, and Joyce.

You can see how much DNA any match shares with me, as well as with any other match, which I’ve entered into the chart.

Unfortunately, only one person, Patricia, has included a link to a tree, but our common ancestor was shown there. In two other cases, surnames provided information, as did previous communications. I can fit almost every one of these people into my tree, at least tentatively, using this information. Sometimes I match them at other vendors too, providing additional information.

If you used Genetic Affairs to cluster your 23andMe matches before the breach, you may already have at least part of your match and shared match information. I save everything to my computer, and I hope you did too.

I happen to know how two of these people are related to me, so I can begin my “shared tree” there, adding other people as I figure out their shared relationships. For example, if a match is my second cousin and also a second cousin to another match, chances are really good that we all share great-grandparents. Remember that 23andMe has taken a stab at genetic tree construction on their genetically created (now nearly unreadable) Family Tree, found under “Family and Friends.”

This tree may or may not help you.

Please note – if you wish to message any of your matches, you need to do that through the 23andMe internal platform, so don’t wait, do it now by clicking on your match, then “Message.”

Download Your Ethnicity Results and Segments

Download your ethnicity results and segment information so that you can use your segment location information to compare to matches from other companies that provide matching segment information.

Your ethnicity information is available under Ancestry, then Ancestry Composition, then Select Scientific Details.

Scroll all the way to the bottom – which is a LONG way.

Select the confidence level and then click on Download Raw Data.” I use 50%, but you can download each one if you want.

The resulting file holds the locations on your chromosomes of your various estimated ethnicities. You can upload that file to DNAPainter to correlate with your matches from any testing company, and with ancestors whose DNA you’ve identified.

I wrote about that, here, and have discussed how to “walk ethnicity segments back in time” using DNAPainter in several presentations. This technique is how I identified my Native American ancestor on my mother’s side, which was then confirmed by mitochondrial DNA testing on an appropriately descended individual.

Prognosis

If 23andMe remains viable, you’ll be ahead of the game. You’ll have preserved your information and may have identified some new matches and their ancestors.

However, if 23andMe doesn’t survive or is sold, you’ll have protected your investment and won’t be caught by surprise.

If you’re thinking about deleting your account, take the steps set forth above, first. The reason I’m providing this information now is so that, in case something happens, you have time to complete these tasks to protect your important information and matches.

If you choose to delete your 23andMe account, you’ll have preserved as much of your investment as possible. Remember, think before deleting because once you’ve deleted your account, you can’t undo it without testing again. This is especially important if you’re managing the DNA of someone who is now deceased. In that case, delete is irrecoverable.

Let’s just hope this all blows over, and you’ll have benefitted by finding new genealogy information.

Recent News Articles

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/31/23andme-ceo-anne-wojcicki-files-proposal-to-take-company-private-.html

https://investors.23andme.com/news-releases/news-release-details/23andme-special-committee-responds-ceos-take-private-proposal

https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/23andme-settles-data-breach-lawsuit-30-million-2024-09-13/

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/17/23andme-independent-directors-resign-from-board-read-the-ceo-memo.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/09/18/23andme-board-turmoil-dna-test/

https://www.axios.com/2024/09/18/23andme-resignations-anne-wojcicki

https://investors.23andme.com/news-releases/news-release-details/independent-directors-23andme-resign-board

https://investors.23andme.com/node/9531/pdf

My Articles

https://dna-explained.com/2023/08/17/23andme-and-glaksosmithkline-partnership-ends-sparking-additional-layoffs/

https://dna-explained.com/2023/10/07/23andme-user-accounts-exposed-change-your-password-now/

https://dna-explained.com/2023/10/24/the-23andme-data-exposure-new-info-considerations-and-a-pause-strategy/

https://dna-explained.com/2023/10/29/23andme-dna-relatives-connections-event-history-report-and-other-security-tools/

https://dna-explained.com/2023/12/07/23andme-concludes-their-investigation-6-9-million-customers-data-exposed/

Six Ways to Figure Out How We’re Related

Posted on September 9, 2024 by Roberta Estes

In my latest Webinar, Six Ways to Figure Out How We’re Related, I discuss the various tools from Ancestry, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, and 23andMe – plus clusters from Genetic Affairs and the amazing DNAPainter.

This webinar lives in the Legacy Family Tree Webinar library, but as part of the “webtember” lineup, you can view it for free through the end of September.

It’s always exciting to discover a new match at one of the DNA testing companies, which, of course, begs the question of how you’re related.

So, what are the six ways to figure out how you’re related, and how do you use them?

Come along for a step-by-step guide!

Shared Matches

We begin with how each vendor handles shared matches, what that feature is called, where to find the information, and how to interpret what they are telling you.

23andMe goes a step further and creates a genetic tree, of sorts, although that functionality has changed since their breach last October.

Bucketing and Sides

Two vendors go a step further and provide unique tools to divide your matches maternally and paternally.

FamilyTreeDNA buckets your matches maternally and paternally (or both) based on matches you link to their profile cards in your tree. FamilyTreeDNA then uses your linked matches to triangulate with other matches and assign your matches accordingly, providing a maternal and paternal match list. Bucketing, also known as Family Matching, is one of my favorite tools.

Note that linking matches at FamilyTreeDNA requires that you have transferred your tree to MyHeritage. I wrote about that and provided instructions here and here, and produced a complimentary webinar, too.

Ancestry also divides your matches by parent, but they use a different technique based on their Sideview technology and either ethnicity or shared matches.

Surnames and Locations

Surnames and locations, either separately or together, provide HUGE hints!

MyHeritage provides a nice summary for each of your matches that includes ancestral surnames, a map of locations in common, and “Smart Matches” which shows you people in common in both of your trees. There are several ways to use these tools.

FamilyTreeDNA also provides a list of surnames. You can view either the surnames in common with a match, or all of their ancestral surnames, with locations if provided. The tester enters these surnames, and we review how to complete that step.

Ancestry also provides shared surnames, with clickable links to the number of people in your matches tree with that surname, plus common locations.

X-DNA

X-DNA is probably the most underutilized DNA matching tool. While each of the vendors actually test the X chromosome, only one, FamilyTreeDNA, provides X-matching. You can obtain X-matching results by uploading your DNA file to FamilyTreeDNA. I’ve provided upload/download instructions for all companies, here.

X-DNA has a very unique inheritance pattern because males only inherit an X chromosome from their mother which limits the number of potential common ancestors for any two testers. In other words, X-DNA matching does half your work for you!

Clustering Technology – AutoClusters, the Matrix and DNAPainter

In the past few years, match clustering has become a very useful tool. Clustering shows which of your matches match you and each other.

Genetic Affairs offers several flavors of these clusters, and both MyHeritage and GEDmatch have incorporated Genetic Affairs clusters into their product offerings.

If you haven’t used AutoClusters yet, by all means, try them out.

FamilyTreeDNA offers the Matrix, a slightly different version of clustering. You can select 10 people from your match list to see if they also match each other. Shared matches don’t automatically mean triangulation between you and those two people, or even that all three people descend from the same line. However, if the people are bucketed to your same side (parent) and they share common segments with you in the chromosome browser, they triangulate.

You’ll want to paint those matches to DNAPainter to determine which ancestor you share, especially if they haven’t provided a tree.

DNAPainter provides your chromosomes as the “canvas” upon which to paint your matches in order to correlate segments with ancestors and identify common ancestral lines with mystery matches.

Three vendors, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, and GEDmatch provide segment information with matches for you to paint. I illustrate how I walk segments back in time, identifying our most distant common ancestor possible.

Theories of Family Relativity and ThruLines

Both MyHeritage and Ancestry provide a combination of DNA matching and tree triangulation, where they search the trees of your DNA matches to find common ancestors with you – although their implementation is different.

MyHeritage’s Theories of Family Relativity provides varying theories about common ancestors for you and a specific match using both trees and historical documents. You can review the various pathways and confirm or reject theories. I love this tool.

Ancestry’s Thrulines functions a bit differently, showing you all of your matches that descend from a common ancestor in all your matches’ trees. Sometimes, the trees are incorrect, but Theories of Family Relativity and ThruLines should still be used as hints.

I showed how ThruLines helped me discover what happened to one of my ancestor’s grandchildren who was lost to the family at his mother’s death – and to all of us since. Not anymore.

Bonus – Y-DNA and Mitochondrial DNA at FamilyTreeDNA

Only FamilyTreeDNA offers both Y-DNA and Mitochondrial DNA testing and matching. All of the tools above pertain to autosomal DNA testing, which is named Family Finder at FamilyTreeDNA. Illustrated by the green arrow below, autosomal DNA testing measures and compares the DNA you inherited from each ancestral line, but that’s not the only game in town.

Y-DNA, in blue, for males, tracks the direct paternal line, which is the surname line in Western cultures. Mitochondrial DNA, in red, is passed from mothers to all of their children. Therefore, everyone can test, revealing matches and information about their mother’s direct matrilineal lineage.

Y-DNA testing includes the amazing Discover tool with a baker’s dozen different reports, including ancient DNA. Mitochondrial DNA will soon have its own MitoDiscover after the rollout of the new Mitotree.

Both tests include “Matches Maps” to help you determine how you are related to your matches, as well as where your ancestors came from before the advent of surnames.

The Advanced Matching feature allows you to select multiple tests to see if your matches match you on combined types of tests.

Tune In

Now that you know what we cover in the webinar, please tune in to see how to use these awesome tools. Be sure to fish in all four “ponds” plus GEDmatch, where you may find people who didn’t test at a company that provides a chromosome browser or matching segment information.

Tools provided by the DNA testing vendors facilitate multiple ways to determine how we match and which ancestor(s) we have in common.

You can watch the webinar, here.

Additionally, subscribers to Legacy Family Tree Webinars have access to the 25-page syllabus with even more information!

A Legacy Family Tree Webinar subscription normally costs $49.95 per year, but through the end of September, there’s a coupon code good for 20% off. Just click here, then enter webtember24 at the checkout.

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 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

DNA Academy Webinar Series Released

Posted on August 17, 2024 by Roberta Estes

Great news! Legacy Family Tree Webinars has just released DNA Academy.

DNA Academy is a three-part series designed to introduce the basics of DNA for genetic genealogy and how Y-DNA, X-DNA, mitochondrial and autosomal DNA can be utilized. Each of these different types of DNA serves a different function for genealogists – and reveals different matches and hints for genealogy.

DNA Academy Part 1 introduces genetic genealogy basics, then, Ancestry’s DNA tools – including their new pricing structure for DNA features. Click here to view.
DNA Academy Part 2 covers FamilyTreeDNA’s products. Click here to view the webinar, which includes:
1. Y-DNA for males which tracks the direct paternal line
2. Mitochondrial DNA for everyone which tracks your direct maternal line – your mother’s mother’s mother’s lineage
3. Autosomal DNA which includes matches from all of your ancestral lines and along with X-DNA matching, which has a very distinctive inheritance path.
DNA Academy Part 3 includes MyHeritage, 23andMe, and third-party tools such as DNAPainter and Genetic Affairs. Click here to view.

Legacy Family Tree Webinars has graciously made Part 2, the FamilyTreeDNA class, free through August 22nd for everyone – so be sure to watch now.

After August 22nd, Part 2 will join Part 1 and Part 3 in the webinar library for subscribers with more than 2240 webinars for $49.95 per year.

_____________________________________________________________

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

Ancestry’s ProTools – See How Much DNA Your Matches Share and Their Relationship to Each Other

Posted on June 22, 2024 by Roberta Estes

Ancestry reports that a ProTools subscription is available to all US users now – and with it, access to additional DNA match information. Oh, happy day!!

ProTools is Ancestry’s new offering that provides DNA testers with:

How you and any selected DNA match are BOTH related to your mutually shared matches
How much DNA a selected match and any shared match share with each other

Please note that ProTools does NOT include a chromosome browser, and the location of your matching DNA is NOT revealed. Shared matches and shared DNA does NOT equate to triangulation because the matches may be on different segments or due to different ancestors altogether.

Shared matching means that you match person 1 and person 2, and that person 1 and person 2 also match each other. It does not mean that you match on the same segment or because of the same ancestor.

Even if you don’t have or want ProTools, you need to read this article so you understand what your matches who subscribe to ProTools can now see about you and your relatives, especially your close relatives.

How Do I Find ProTools?

To determine if ProTools is available to you, click on any match in your DNA match list. You’ll see normal match information, displayed below.

At the bottom, you’ll see a banner inviting you to upgrade to ProTools.

ProTools provides multiple features for $10 per month ($120 per year), in addition to your regular or AncestryDNA Plus subscription.

ProTools includes other features as well, which I’m not reviewing today in order to focus specifically on the new enhanced Shared Matches feature.

I subscribed to ProTools and immediately had access to the new features.

Now, I see the “Pro” label beside Shared Matches.

Click on Shared Matches.

ProToolsShared Matches

By clicking on Shared Matches, I can now see how my match, ER, and I are both related to people we match in common. Said another way, if ER and I both match someone, say Susan, a grid now displays how I’m related to Susan and how ER is related to Susan according to Ancestry’s DNA prediction calculations. I also see how much DNA our shared match, Susan, shares with each of us.

Ancestry has calculated my estimated relationship to my first match, Susan, as my First-cousin-1-time-removed (1C1R) or Half-first-cousin, which is genetically equivalent, on my paternal side.

Ancestry has estimated that ER is also the 1C1R of Susan and they share 395 cM of DNA. How ER is related to Susan, and how much DNA they share, is new information that I didn’t have access to before ProTools.

Ancestry had already calculated that ER and I are Half-1st-cousins-two-times-removed.

Viewing ThruLines shows me that ER is my Half-1st-cousin-once-removed, so either the relationship estimate (based on DNA only) or ThruLines (based on trees) is inaccurate, or maybe both. However, they are both close to each other.

Using the trees of both ER and Susan, if they have trees, helps immensely in working out relationships. If Susan is ER’s first cousin once removed, that means that she shares a common grandfather with ER and with me. They are both paternal side matches and some flavor of first cousin to me, so that means our common ancestor has to be William George Estes.

Now that I can see how my matches are related to each other, I can easily work out the possibilities of how the three of us are related – even without seeing anyone’s trees or ThruLines.

Of course, in more distant generations, it’s much more difficult to sort out relationships without trees. That also means that multiple shared relationships are important, and you’re likely to find links among several testers to common ancestors.

I finally solved one pesky relationship that has been bugging me for a very long time. My match’s mother was identified as such, which led to additional and closer shared matches that helped solve the mystery.

Caution – Children’s Names and Relationships Exposed

Given Ancestry’s previous privacy policies, I was surprised to see that the names of my matches’ living children (or parents) are identified as such. Of course, I’m presuming here that “child” means 18 or older per Ancestry’s Terms and Conditions.

Here are two examples of shared matches with their relationship to my match clearly identified as their child.

This isn’t an anomaly or a bug – it’s just how the feature works.

Under the circumstances, this makes me uncomfortable given that my cousin, the parent, may NOT have ProTools and has absolutely NO IDEA that his matches with ProTools can see the name of his daughter and son and that they are identified as his children.

I’m not upset about the enhanced ProTools shared match feature itself. Conversely, I love it. I’m concerned that people without ProTools don’t realize this information is revealed, because it wasn’t previously. Before ProTools, no one would ever have a reason to suspect that anyone could identify someone on Ancestry as their child.

This seems like a significant policy shift for Ancestry, who has traditionally been extremely careful about not providing identifying information about living relatives. I’m surprised this feature was implemented without informing customers who may be affected or without perhaps obtaining opt-in for that level of exposure.

Then, it occurred to me that maybe my cousin’s children are now deceased.

I checked my cousin’s tree to see if his children’s names were revealed there, indicating they had passed away. Neither his name nor those of his children are provided in his tree, so I’m presuming they are all alive and well. That’s a relief.

Given that Ancestry has steadfastly refused to provide a chromosome browser for years due to privacy concerns, I’m actually shocked to see a child’s name and identifying relationship revealed. A chromosome browser reveals much less.

Disparity

Placing this enhanced Shared Match feature of ProTools behind a paywall, meaning not providing it to everyone who took a DNA test, creates a significant disparity between the ProTool subscribers and those without.

In some other countries, ProTools isn’t available yet.
Many people don’t check results regularly and would have no idea that ProTools even exists.
People who don’t subscribe to ProTools won’t know that people who do subscribe can view this information because it wasn’t previously available.
People who have others manage their DNA kit are entirely unaware.

If you don’t subscribe to ProTools, how would you ever know that your matches with ProTools have access to this information?

People who don’t have access to ProTools shared matches, meaning those who don’t live in the US, don’t subscribe to ProTools, don’t sign in regularly, or have someone else manage their DNA kit, have absolutely no idea that all of their matches who subscribe to ProTools now have access to the names and confirmed relationships of their children and close relatives who have also taken DNA tests.

I was unable to find any way to opt out of having a parental or close relationship revealed to shared matches. Even if the relationship wasn’t noted as “son” or “daughter,” based on the amount of shared DNA, a parental relationship is obvious. This is relevant not just for your test but also for any tests you manage for others.

I hope that Ancestry informs its customers about this change. I really like the new enhanced shared match feature, and I certainly don’t want to jeopardize it. The community has waited a very long time for additional information that helps us identify common ancestors and figure out how and where our matches fit into our tree.

However, everyone who has taken a DNA test needs to be informed so that they understand the privacy changes and the additional information now provided to shared matches who subscribe to ProTools.

_____________________________________________________________

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