RootsTech 2024 – MyHeritage is ON FIRE with 13 Announcements

I’ve got to tell you, MyHeritage has outdone themselves.

I had a hard time just keeping track of their announcements, which totaled 13 – a baker’s dozen.

You can watch the MyHeritage RootsTech keynote by Aaron Godfrey, here.

However, there are a few things not in the video, so let’s take a look at a quick summary of what’s new.

DNA Uploads with Free Advanced Tools Forever Extended Until March 10th

MyHeritage just extended their DNA upload that includes ALL ADVANCED TOOLS FOR FREE, forever, to March 10th so click here now to upload every kit you manage. This is a great deal. Hint – new ethnicity results are coming soon and you’ll be saving $29 on each kit you upload.

20+ Billion Records

MyHeritage has just passed the 20 billion record mark and is continuing to add. That’s billion, with a B. These records are available to customers with a MyHeritage subscription. If you don’t have a subscription, you can try a MyHeritage Subscription with a Free Trial, here.,

Additionally, right now, subscriptions are 50% off, but I don’t know how long that price lasts.

I love my MyHeritage subscription, and if you try it and don’t like yours, you can cancel and be charged nothing during the 14-day trial period.

I particularly like that the local newspaper where my grandparents lived is available on MyHeritage, and no place else. In addition, MyHeritage has integrated with FamilySearch, which is digitizing and indexing records like wildfire. That collaboration has provided me with information from European sources, including archives.

MyHeritage Wiki

MyHeritage has been working on their new Wiki, a community encyclopedia for genealogy and DNA, for almost a year now, although it was only recently released.

Photo courtesy of MyHeritage

I’ve been honored to write several articles for the newly announced MyHeritage Wiki, including the definition of DNA itself:

Take a look at the new Wiki, here.

You can filter in a number of ways, and you can even sign up to be a contributor.

Check out their blog article, here.

AI Record Finder

The AI Record Finder is the world’s first AI chat-based search engine for historical records.

I should probably tell you that, at this point in time, I do use AI, such as ChatGPT, very cautiously, and I’m inherently suspicious because AI tools sometimes hallucinate. It’s a new technology with lots of glitches and unknowns, so let’s see how MyHeritage is using this tool. It should be much more reliable since it’s in a controlled environment. I need to be convinced. 😊

The AI Record Finder is under the Research Menu. Just type your question about your ancestor.

I’m cheating and giving MyHeritage a tough one. I typed, “Please tell me about Solomon Ferwerda, who died in 1768 in Groningen, the Netherlands.”

MyHeritage returned three possibilities in their database, including their affiliated databases. One is a MyHeritage tree and two are records from FamilySearch.

Don’t limit yourself at this point.

I happen to know “my” Solomon is the first person, but I played around a bit before selecting the “right” Solomon. Why? Because there’s a lot that I don’t know about his life. It’s possible that the second and third records are ALSO the right person, so be sure to review everything.

Clicking on the middle or right record for Solomon shows that, indeed, this record from FamilySearch comes from the Dutch Archival Indexes, so it’s not “just someone’s tree.”

We do know the Ferwerda family is from Leeuwarden, but we don’t know when Solomon was born, nor if he was married twice. I only have the name of his second wife and one child, Jan, who was born the year he died.

The two FamilySearch Dutch archive records are from Leeuwarden, so maybe, just maybe, I’ve discovered something new about Solomon. How exciting!

I need to click through and check this out further.

I didn’t expect to like this tool, but so far, I really do. But wait – there’s more.

AI Ancestor Bio

You can click to have MyHeritage generate an AI bio of an ancestor for you.

The bio takes a few minutes to generate and will be available for download in the chat and will also be emailed to you. You can easily share with others. Getting other people interested in genealogy often encourages them to take a DNA test. DNA tests are still on sale for $39, here.

Solomon Ferwerda’s AI bio was completed quickly and arrived in pdf format. We know so little about him, I knew it would be short. I must say, I really enjoyed the “Historical Context” section that discussed the surrounding events that would have affected his life. That’s incredibly important and would have or could have influenced the decisions he made. Maybe the warfare and political unrest caused him to move from Leeuwarden to Groningen for some reason, where he died the year his son was born.

Here’s Solomon’s bio.

Here’s a link to the RootsTech lecture about the MyHeritage AI tools by Ran Snir, the VP of Product.

MyHeritage blog links for AI Record finder are here and here.

You can watch Telling Your Family’s Story with MyHeritage’s AI Features by Janna Helshtein at Legacy Family Tree Webinars, here.

I can’t wait to play with the MyHeritage AI tools more.

Updated Ethnicity Coming Soon

This is going to make a lot of people happy!

MyHeritage is in the process of updating their ethnicity results, increasing their regions from 42 to 80, with significantly optimized granularity in Europe. I initially misunderstood and thought the new results were available now, but they won’t arrive until summer.

I understand from talking to a Jewish friend involved in MyHeritage’s R&D effort that their own results are substantially improved and that they have now been placed in Armenia where their ancestors are from. They are no longer generically “Jewish.”

New Profile Pages with Hints

Daniel Horowitz said that everyone calls Smart Matches and Record Matches hints, so now MyHeritage has updated profile pages and is adding them to the profile page and officially calling them Hints.

You can still find Smart Matches and Record Matches listed separately under Discoveries, but on everyone’s profile, they are called Hints.

On Solomon’s profile page, scroll down to view his journey based on the information you’ve entered or accepted into your tree.

I did not yet add Leeuwarden, because I’m yet positive those records in Leewarden are his, but if I had, Leeuwarden would also be shown on his journey map. I’ll be incorporating these into my 52 Ancestors stories. I love maps! Maybe I can find old maps to include too,

You can read more about the new profiles and hints, here.

Tree Collaboration with FamilyTreeDNA

Aaron Godfrey announced tree collaboration with FamilyTreeDNA who pre-announced this at their conference in November.

I don’t have specific details about how it works, as this won’t happen for a few months yet, but FamilyTreeDNA customers will port their trees to MyHeritage which allows them to take advantage of MyHeritage’s record collections and such. Existing MyHeritage customers will simply connect their FamilyTreeDNA test to their MyHeritage tree.

FamilyTreeDNA has never been a “tree” company, so this means that users will have one less tree to maintain independently, and they can augment their research with records from MyHeritage.

I talked to Katy Rowe-Schurwanz, the Product Manager at FamilyTreeDNA to confirm that this is NOT a DNA transfer. FamilyTreeDNA matches still occur in the FamilyTreeDNA database, just like always, and MyHeritage matches still occur in the MyHeritage database. If you want matching in both databases, you still have to upload to or test at both. Only the trees are integrated, meaning when you click on a tree at  FamilyTreeDNA, you’ll see the tree displayed on MyHeritage.

The great news is that FamilyTreeDNA features such as Family Matching (bucketing) where you link your DNA matches at FamilyTreeDNA to their profile cards so that maternal/paternal bucketing occurs will still work the same way. The only difference will be that your tree will actually reside at MyHeritage and not at FamilyTreeDNA.

You’ll be able to enjoy the best of both worlds.

We will know more in a few months, and I’ll provide more details when I have them.

Invite Another MyHeritage User to View Your DNA Results

Aaron Godfrey said in the keynote that 2FA (two-factor authentication) at MyHeritage will become mandatory later this month, and with it, MyHeritage is adding the feature of being able to invite another MyHeritage user to view your DNA results. This allows people to collaborate more easily, especially if a different person is managing someone else’s DNA test.

Reimagine Multi-Photo Scanner App

This photo-scanning innovation is for your phone and allows you to scan photos and entire photo album pages – automatically separating and improving the photos. Then, of course, you just tag them to the proper person in your tree like any other photo.

Oh, and did I mention that Reimagine is free? I expected to have to pay when I downloaded the app, but I didn’t, probably because I have a full subscription.

Based on this article, Reimagine is not meant for other types of images, like pages of text or albums of clipped newspaper articles. But guess what? I downloaded the app, and it works just fine for those items! Hallelujah. How I wish I had this last week at the FamilySearch Library when I was finding pages in books I wanted to associate with a specific ancestor.

If you have album pages of photos to scan, this is golden and integrates with the profiles of people into your MyHeritage tree.

I really, really like the idea of having the ability to scan in the palm of my hand. That way if someone has a photo, you don’t have to try to take a photo of it. Gone are the days of literally dragging a laptop and scanner around with me when I’m traveling – just in case. Yes, I actually did and now I don’t have to anymore.

I cringe to think how many opportunities were lost to me before the days of laptops – but not now.

Thank you – THANK YOU, MyHeritage. What a great gift!

You can find the QR code to download the app, here.

OldNews is New News

MyHeritage has introduced a new website for old newspapers called OldNews which you can find here.

This addition doubles the number of newspapers previously available on MyHeritage.

Users can also subscribe separately to Old News for about $99/year.

MyHeritage customers use their normal credentials to sign in to either site, but accessing newspapers not previously integrated into MyHeritage will require an OldNews subscription too.

I had to try it. I entered my mother’s name.

Look, my Mom had a tonsillectomy. I never knew that. It was just a couple of months after she graduated from high school.

I didn’t know Mom spent the summer in Philadelphia, either. She was 19 at that time, and I had heard rumblings that she studied with a “prima ballerina” at the School of American Ballet. Guess where that is? Yep, Philly.

My Mom was a professional tap and ballet dancer before she became my Mom.

Understanding that Mom spent the summer of 1942 on the east coast sheds new light on this and a few other photos in Mom’s photo album, which I can now scan.

Ok, I can’t help myself. I have to enhance this photo at MyHeritage.

Much better. Another tiny piece of Mom’s life brought into focus.

I wonder what else is in OldNews that I don’t know about. Hmmmm…

You can read about OldNews here.

New All-Inclusive Omni Subscription

MyHeritage is launching a new Omni all-inclusive subscription plan that includes most of the MyHeritage products and tools, except for Filae, unless I’m missing something. Omni reportedly costs less than half the price if you were to subscribe to all of these individually. I’ve asked for a comparison chart which I don’t have yet, but I’m told will be coming soon.

Here’s what’s included:

Additionally, I asked MyHeritage about whether or not the advanced DNA tools are included with Omni, and they are. So, add advanced DNA tools to that list.

The following information about the Omni Plan is a screenshot from the MyHeritage blog article, here.

I have not been able to determine the price of an Omni subscription. At RootsTech, you were interested in the Omni plan, you submitted a Google form and a day or so later, you received this email.

I suspect MyHeritage needs to talk to you because how much it costs initially depends on your existing subscriptions, and how much time is left on those.

I reached out to MyHeritage and asked when Omni will be available to purchase, and the answer is “soon.” You can’t sign up just yet.

I have never subscribed to Legacy Family Tree Webinars, even though I’m a webinar presenter and have several webinars available there. My gift to myself is going to be Omni when it’s available because I want Legacy Family Tree Webinars, and I’d love a subscription to OldNews. I already have a full subscription to MyHeritage, and I’d probably use Geni more than I do as a casual user if I had the Omni subscription.

Artifact Testing – Maybe

Unfortunately, I was not able to attend CEO Gilad Japhet’s RootsTech session because his session and mine were at exactly the same time.

However, I asked Aaron Godfrey after Gilad’s session what I had missed that was not in Aaron’s keynote, other than Gilad’s wonderful stories.

Aaron and others told me that Gilad stated that he was personally submitting personal artifacts, such as stamps, to a third-party lab once again, to test the waters to see if DNA can now be extracted from artifacts successfully.

MyHeritage tried this a few years ago, ultimately unsuccessfully. Perhaps this time will be different, but I would not hold my breath, truthfully. Degraded DNA has quality issues, not to mention that the DNA extracted might not be the DNA of the person expected.

I would personally love this, but I am also skeptical at this point. Kudos to Gilad for trying again with his own personal items.

MyHeritage Online RootsTech Booth

MyHeritage has provided several educational videos in their online RootsTech booth, at this link. Be sure to take advantage of this free resource.

Whew, I’m finally done! I told you that MyHeritage had been very, very busy, and I wasn’t kidding. I hope I didn’t miss anything.

_____________________________________________________________

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

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Pedigree Collapse and DNA – Plus an Easy-Peasy Shortcut

Pedigree collapse can be responsible for you sharing more DNA than expected with another person.

What is pedigree collapse?

Pedigree collapse occurs when you descend from the same ancestor(s) through more than one path. In other words, you descend from those ancestors through two different children. Therefore, when matching with someone else who descends through those ancestors, you may share more DNA than would be expected from that level of relationship on the surface, meaning without pedigree collapse.

Endogamy is different and means that you descend from a community of ancestors who descend from the same group of ancestors. Often out-marriage is discouraged or otherwise impossible, so all of the group of people share common ancestors, which means they often match on segments without sharing close ancestors. Examples of descent from endogamous populations are Jewish, Amish, Brethren, Acadian, Native Hawaiian, Māori, and Native American people, among others.

I wrote about the difference between pedigree collapse and endogamy in the article, What’s the Difference Between Pedigree Collapse and Endogamy?

I’ve also written about endogamy in the following articles:

Degrees of Consanguinity

If you’re a genealogist, and especially if you’ve worked with Catholic church records, you’ve probably heard of “degrees of sanguinity,” which are prohibited blood relationships in marriage. For example, siblings are prohibited from marrying because they are too closely related, according to church doctrine.

By SVG remake by WClarke based on original by User:Sg647112c – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54804980

Today, we think of the genetic results of inbreeding, but originally, relationships (and consanguinity) also had to do with inheritance.

Essentially, marriages are prohibited by degree of sanguinity, and that degree is calculated based on this relationship chart. Prohibited degrees of consanguinity changed over time. Sometimes, a priest granted dispensation for a couple to wed who was of a prohibited degree of sanguinity. That’s a genealogy goldmine because it tells you where to look for common ancestors. It also tells you something else – that you may share more DNA with other descendants of that couple than one would otherwise expect.

More Than You Ever Expected

Recently, I’ve been working with an academic research team on a very interesting ancient DNA case that involves pedigree collapse. Doing the genealogy and genetic work on how much DNA was expected in a match without pedigree collapse, and how much was expected with pedigree collapse, was very interesting.

The team was working to confirm relationships between people in a cemetery. The burials shared more DNA than anticipated for who the people were believed to be. Enter pedigree collapse.

I can’t disclose the circumstances just yet – but I will as soon as possible. It’s an extremely interesting story.

We needed to ensure that readers, both academic and more generally understood pedigree collapse and our calculations. Why did burials share higher than expected DNA than indicated by the expected relationships? This puzzle becomes much more interesting when you add in pedigree collapse.

Academic researchers and scientists have access to models and mathematical algorithms that normal air-breathing humans don’t have easy access to.
So, what do you do if you and a match have a known pedigree collapse in your tree? How much DNA can you expect to share, and how do you calculate that?

These are all great questions, so let’s take a look.

I’m sharing the PowerPoint slides I prepared for our team on this topic. I’ve removed anything that would identify or even hint at the project and modified the slides slightly for easier consumption.

This presentation has never been given publicly, so you’re first! It seemed a waste to do this work and not share it!

Pedigree Collapse and DNA

Pedigree collapse occurs when you share an ancestor or ancestors through different pathways. In this case, the person at the bottom is the child of parents who were third cousins, but the father’s grandparents were also first cousins.

First cousin marriages were common in the not-too-distant past. Today, you could easily marry your third or fourth cousin and not even realize it unless someone in your family just happened to be a genealogist.

Genealogists use various tools to calculate the expected amount of shared DNA in relationships – first cousins, siblings, or half-siblings, for example. Both the Shared cM Project at DNAPainter and SegcM at DNA-Sci Tools provide tools.

Take a look at the article, DNA: In Search of…Full and Half-Siblings, for some great examples.

First cousins share common grandparents. Their child inherits DNA from two paths that lead back to the same ancestors. Some of that DNA will be the same, meaning the child will or can inherit the same ancestral segment from both parents, and some will be different segments from those ancestors that the parents do not share with each other.

Inheritance – How It Works

Let’s look at inheritance to see how this happens.

Let’s start with full and half-siblings.

Each child inherits half of their DNA from each parent, but not entirely the same half (unless they are identical twins.)

Therefore, full siblings will match on about 50% of their DNA, which is illustrated by the segments on the chromosome browser. However, and this will be important in a minute, about 25% of their DNA is exactly the same, when compared to each other, on the chromosome inherited from their father and mother at the same location.

On the chromosome browser, you can see that three siblings do match. One sibling (the grey background chromosomes) is the person both other full siblings are being compared to, in the example above.

What you can’t determine is whether they share the exact same DNA on both their mother and father’s Chromosome 1, where the matches overlap, for example. We know they both match their sibling, but the top person could match the sibling due to a match from their paternal chromosome in that location, and the bottom person could match due to their maternal chromosome. There’s no way to know, at least not from that view.

The areas where the siblings share exactly the same DNA on both their maternal and paternal chromosome, both, with each other are called Fully Identical REgions (FIR), as compared to Half Identical Regions (HIR) where the siblings match on either their maternal or paternal copy of the chromosome, but not both.

23andMe used to provide a tool that displayed both types of matches.

Since the data exposure incident at 23andMe, they no longer provide this lovely tool, and since that help page is now gone as well, I doubt this view will ever be returned. Fortunately, I grabbed a screenshot previously.

The dark purple segments are fully identical, meaning that these two full siblings match on both their maternal and paternal chromosomes in that location. The magenta are half identical, which means they match on EITHER the maternal or paternal chromosome in that location but not on both chromosomes. Of course, no color (light grey) means there is no match at that location.

Please note that because 23andMe counts fully identical regions (FIR) twice, their total matching cMs are elevated. The other companies do NOT count those regions twice.
GEDmatch also shows both full and half-identical regions as described more fully, here.

In this full-sibling example from GEDmatch, the green segments are fully identical regions across both the maternal and paternal chromosomes.

The definition of FIR is that two people match on both their mother’s and father’s DNA on the same chromosome. Therefore, in following generations, there technically should not be FIR matches, but in some instances we do find FIR matches outside of full siblings.

Moving down another generation, first cousins may share SOME fully identical DNA, especially if they are from an endogamous population or their mothers are related, but less, and it’s generally scattered.

Here’s my Mom’s GEDmatch comparison to her first cousin. The purple-legend segment shows a match, and the green within that match shows fully identical locations.

You can easily see that these are very scattered, probably representing “chance” or population-based fully identical matching locations within a segment. Comparatively, the green FIR segments for full siblings are dense and compact, indicating a segment that is fully identical.

Evaluating matches for dense FIR segments (known as runs of homozygosity – ROH) is a good indicator of parental relatedness.

Double Cousins

Of course, if these people were double first cousins, where the wives of the siblings were sisters to each other – the first cousins would have large patches of dense green FIR segments.

First cousins share grandparents.

Double first cousins occur when two people share both sets of grandparents, meaning that brothers marry sisters. Normal first cousins share about 12.5% of their DNA, but double first cousins share about 25% of their DNA.

In this case, Sharon and Donna descend from two brothers, James and Henry, who were sons of Joseph and Jane. In this scenario, James and Henry married unrelated women, so Sharon and Donna are first cousins to each other.

Double first cousins share both sets of grandparents so they would inherit FIR from both sets of siblings.

You need to be aware of this, but for now, let’s stick with non-double relationships. You’re welcome!

DNA Inheritance

Here’s a different example of DNA inheritance between two siblings.

  1. You can see that in the first 50 cM segment, both siblings inherited the same DNA from both parents, so they match on both their mother’s and father’s chromosomes. They match on both the 50 cM green and 50 cM pink segments. 23andMe would count that as 100 cMs, but other vendors only count a segment IF it matches, NOT if it matches twice. So, other vendors count this as a 50 cM match.
  2. In column two, these two people don’t match at all because they inherited different DNA from each parent. In this example, Person 1 inherited their maternal grandmother’s segment, and Person 2 inherited their maternal grandfather’s segment.
  3. In column three, our siblings match on their paternal grandmother’s segment.
  4. In column four, no match again.

How much can we expect to inherit at different levels – on average?

Different tools differ slightly, and all tools provide ranges. In our example, I’ve labeled the generations and how much shared DNA we would expect – WITHOUT pedigree collapse.

Ancestral couple Inherited cM Inherited %
Gen 1 – Their children 3500 cM 50
Gen 2 – Grandchildren 1750 cM 25
Gen 3 – Great-Grandchildren 875 cM 12.5
Gen 4 – GG-Grandchildren 437.5 6.25
Gen 5 – GGG-Grandchildren 218.75 3.125
Gen 6 – GGGG-Grandchildren 109.375 1.5625
Gen 7 – GGGG-Grandchildren 54.6875 .078125

Please note that this is inherited DNA, not shared (matching) DNA with another person.

Adding in pedigree collapse, you can see that we have three Gen 1 people involved, three Gen 2 descendants, and two Gen 3 and Gen 4 people.

Each of those people inherit and pass on segments from our original couple at the top.
We have three distinct inheritance paths leading from our original couple to Gen 5.
We have a first cousin marriage at Gen 2, at left, which means that their child, Gen 3, will have an elevated amount of the DNA of their common ancestors.

In Gen 4, two people marry who both descend from a common couple, meaning their child, Gen 5, descends from that couple in three different ways.

Did your eyes just glaze over? Well, mine did, too, which is why I had to draw all of this out on paper before putting it into PowerPoint.

The Gen 5 child inherits DNA from the ancestral couple via three pathways.
The next thing to keep in mind is that just because you inherit the DNA from an ancestor does not mean you match another descendant. Inheritance is not matching.

You must inherit before you can match, but just because you and someone else have inherited a DNA segment from a common ancestor does not guarantee a match. Those segments could be in different locations.

Categories of DNA

When dealing with inheritance and descent, we discuss four categories of DNA.

  • In the first generation, full siblings will, in about 25% of their locations, share the same DNA that has been inherited from both parents on the same chromosome. In other words, they match each other both maternally and paternally at that location. Those are FIR.
  • The DNA you inherit from an ancestor.
  • The DNA that both you and your cousin(s) inherit from a common ancestor and match on the same location. This is shared DNA.
  • The DNA that both you and your cousin(s) inherit from a common ancestor, but it’s not in the same location, so you do not match each other on that segment. Just because you inherit DNA from that ancestor does not necessarily mean that your cousin has the same DNA from that ancestor. This is inherited but not shared.

Inheritance is Not The Same as Matching

Inheritance is not the same thing as matching.

Inheriting our ancestor’s DNA isn’t enough. We need to match someone else who inherited that same segment in order to attribute the segment to that specific ancestor.

Depending on how close or distant the relationship, two people may share a lot of DNA (like full siblings), or one segment in more distant matches, or sometimes none at all. As we reach further back in time, we inherit less and less of our increasingly distant ancestors’ DNA, which means we match increasingly fewer of their descendants. I wrote about determining ancestral percentages in the article,  Ancestral Percentages – How Much of Them is in You?

Based on how much DNA we share with other known relatives, we can estimate relationships.

Pedigree collapse, where one descends from common ancestors more than once, increases the expected amount of inherited DNA, which in turn increases the probability of a shared match with other descendants.

Ancestral Couple Matching Between Shared DNA ~cM Shared DNA ~% Range (Shared cM Project) FIR – Identical DNA
Generation 1 Full Siblings 2600 50 1613-3488 25%
Generation 2 First Cousins 866 12.5 396-1397 0
Generation 3 Second Cousins 229 3.125 41-592 0
Generation 4 Third Cousins 73 0.78125 0-234 0

Here’s an example through third cousins, including expected FIR, fully identical regions where full siblings match each other on both their maternal and paternal chromosomes in the same location.

I provided a larger summary chart incorporating the information from public sources, here, minus FIR.

Of course, double cousins, where two pairs of siblings marry each other, represent another separate level of complexity. DNA-Sci’s Double Cousin Orogen explains this here and also provides a tool.

Double cousins, meaning when two pairs of siblings marry each other, are different from doubly related.

Doubly related means that two people descend from common ancestors through multiple paths, meaning multiple lines of descent. Doubly related is pedigree collapse. Double cousins is pedigree collapse on steroids.

Pedigree Collapse, aka Doubly Related

Calculating expected inherited DNA from multiple lines of descent is a bit more challenging.

A handy-dandy chart isn’t going to help with multiple relationships because the amount of expected shared DNA is based on the number of and distance of relationships.

Please note that this discussion excludes X-DNA matching which has its own inheritance path.

It’s time for math – but I promise I’ll make this relatively easy – pardon the pun.

What’s Behind the Math?

So, here’s the deal. I want you to understand why and how this works. You may not need this information today, but eventually, you probably will. This is one of those “refer back to it” articles for your personal library. Read this once as a conceptual overview, then read it again if you need to work through the relationships.

This is easy if you take it one step at a time.

First, we calculate each path separately.

In the first generation, full siblings inherit identical (FIR) DNA on both their mother’s and father’s chromosomes.

In the second generation, the male inherits the maternal segment, and the female inherits the paternal segment.

In the third generation, their child inherits those segments intact from both of their parents. The child inherits from the ancestral couple twice – once through each parent.

In generation 1, those two segments were FIR, fully identical regions. Both of those men married unrelated wives. When their children, Gen 2, were born, they had either the maternal or paternal segment from their father because they had an entirely different segment in that location from their mother.

However, the child in Gen 3 inherited the original green segment from their father and the original pink segment from their mother – reuniting those FIR segments in later generations.

First Cousin’s Child

Let’s calculate the inheritance for the child of those two first cousins who married.

Ancestral couple Inherited cM Inherited %
Gen 3 – Great-Grandchildren 875 cM 12.5
Gen 3 – Great-Grandchildren 875 cM 12.5
Total 1750 cM 25

Normally, a Gen 3 person inherits roughly 875 cM, or 12.5% of their great-grandparent’s DNA. However, since their grandparents were first cousins, they inherit about twice that amount, or 1750 cM.

While a Gen 3 person inherits as much as a grandchild (25%) normally would from the original couple, they won’t match on all of that DNA. When matching, we need to subtract some of that DNA out of the equation for two reasons:

  • In the first generation, between siblings, some of their DNA was fully identical and cannot be identified as such.
  • In the second generation, they will each have some parts of the ancestral couple’s DNA that will not match the other person. So, they inherit the same amounts from their common ancestors, but they can only be expected to match on about 25% of that amount two generations later.

However, the child of first cousins who marry inherits more DNA of the common ancestors than they would if their parents weren’t related. It’s just that some of that DNA is the same, potentially on the maternal and paternal chromosomes again, and some won’t match at all.

While matching DNA is the whole point of autosomal DNA testing, fully identical DNA matching regions (FIR) cannot be identified that way. For the most part, other than identifying full and half-siblings, sometimes pedigree collapse, and parent-relatedness, fully identical DNA isn’t terribly useful for genealogy. However, we still need to understand how this works.

It’s OK if you just want to say, “I know we’ll share more DNA due to pedigree collapse,” but if you want to know how much more to expect, keep reading. I’d really like for you to understand use cases and be able to track those segments.

Remember, we will learn a super-easy shortcut at the end, so for now, just read. It’s important to understand why the shortcut works.

Sibling Inheritance Versus Matching

In order to compare apples to apples, sometimes we need to remove some portion of DNA in our calculations.

Remember story problems where you had to “show your work”?

Calculating Expected DNA

Here’s the step-by-step logic.

Ancestral couple Inherited Non-Identical cM Inherited %
Gen 1 first son 3500 50
Gen 1 second son 3500 50
Less identical segments (FIR) -1750 (subtracted from one child for illustration) 25
Gen 2 son 1750 25
Gen 2 daughter married Gen 2 son 875 12.5
Gen 3 – Their child path through Gen 2 son 875 cM 12.5
Gen 3 – Their child path through Gen 2 mother 437.5 cM 6.25
Their child total without removing identical segments 1750 cM 25
Their child total after removing identical segments 1312.5 18.75

Category cMs Most Probable Degree Relationship
No Pedigree Collapse 875 98% Great grandparent or great-grandchild, great or half aunt/uncle, great or half niece/nephew, 1C 3
Pedigree Collapse without identical segment removal 1750 100% Grandparent, grandchild, aunt/uncle, half-sibling, niece/nephew 2
Pedigree Collapse after identical segment removal 1312.5 56% grandparent, grandchild, aunt/uncle, niece/nephew, half-sibling 2

Just because you HAVE this much shared (and/or identical) DNA doesn’t mean you’ll match on that DNA.

Next, let’s look at Gen 5 child who inherited three ways from the ancestors.

If you think, “This will never happen,” remember that it did, which is why I was working through this story problem. It’s not uncommon for families to live in the same area for generations. You married who you saw – generally, your family and neighbors, who were likely also family.

Let’s take a look at that 5th generation child.

The more distantly related, the less pedigree collapse affects matching DNA. That’s not to say we can ignore it.

Here’s our work product. See, this isn’t difficult when you take it step by step, one at a time.

Ancestral couple Inherited Non-Identical cM Inherited %
Gen 3 Child total after removing identical segments 1312.5 18.75
Gen 4 father – half of Gen 3 father 656.25 9.375
Gen 5 child – half of Gen 4 father 328.125 4.6875
Gen 5 child – mother’s side calculated from ancestral couple normally 218.75 3.125
Total for Gen 5 Child 546.875 7.8125

Inheritance Ranges

Lots of factors can affect how much DNA a person in any given generation inherits from an ancestor. The same is true with multiple paths from that same ancestor. How do we calculate multiple path inheritance ranges?

As with any relationship, we find a range, or combined set of ranges for Gen 5 Child based on the multiple pathways back to the common ancestors.

Gen 5 Child Inherited Non-Identical cM Inherited %
Without removing either paternal or maternal identical cMs 656.25 9.375
After removing paternal identical cMs only 546.875 7.8125

 

After removing maternal cMs only 546.875 7.8125

 

After removing both paternal and maternal identical cMs 362.50 6.25
Normal Gen 5 no pedigree collapse 218 3.125

What About Matching?

Inheritance and matching are different. Most of the time, two people are unlikely to share all of the DNA they inherited from a particular ancestor. Of course, inheriting through multiple paths increases the likelihood that at least some DNA from that ancestor is preserved and that it’s shared with other descendants.

Two people aren’t expected to match on all of the segments of DNA that they inherit from a particular ancestor. The closer in time the relationship, the more segments they will inherit from that ancestor, which increases the chances of matching on at least one or some segments.

Clearly, pedigree collapse affects matching. It’s most pronounced in closer relationships, but it may also be the only thing that has preserved that ONE matching segment in a more distant relationship.

So, how does pedigree collapse actually affect the likelihood of matching? What can we actually expect to see? Is there a name for this and a mathematical model to assist with calculations?

I’m so glad you asked! It’s called Coefficient of Relationship.

Coefficent of Relationship

My colleague, Diahan Southard, a scientist who writes at YourDNAGuide has authored two wonderful articles about calculating the statistical effects of pedigree collapse.

You can also read another article about the methodology of calculating coefficient of relationship, here, on WaybackMachine.

Diahan is a math whiz. I’m not, so I needed to devise something “quick and dirty” for my own personal use. I promised you a “cheat sheet,” so here’s the methodology.

Two Inheritance Paths – First and Third Cousins

Let’s look at an example where two people are both first cousins and third cousins because their grandparents were also first cousins.

Let’s calculate how these two people are related. They are first cousins and also third cousins.

When calculating the effects of pedigree collapse, we calculate the first relationship normally, then calculate the second relationship and add a portion of the result.

Here’s the math.

Using the Shared cM Project for the expected amount of shared DNA for both relationships, we’ve calculated the expected range for this pedigree collapse relationship.

Tying this back to degrees of relatedness.

Let’s look at ways to do Quick Calculations using the publicly available Shared cM charts and my composite tables, here.

Using Average Shared DNA

This first methodology uses average expected amount of shared, meaning matching, DNA. Please note, I’m not necessarily expecting you to DO this now, just read to follow.

Using Average Inherited DNA

Here’s a second method using average inherited DNA, meaning people wouldn’t be expected to match on all of the inherited DNA – just a portion.

You can’t always use the shared cM charts because all relationships aren’t represented, so you may need to use the amount of expected inherited DNA instead of shared DNA amounts.

Methodology Differences

Remember, none of these methodologies are foolproof because DNA inheritance is random. You may also have additional relationships that you’re aware of.

So, what’s the easiest method? Neither, actually. I’ve found an even easier method based on these proven methodologies.

Easy-Peasy Pedigree Collapse Shortcut Range Calculation in 4 Steps

Now that you understand the science and reasoning behind all of this, you can choose from multiple calculation methodologies after drawing a picture of the relevant tree.

You’re probably wondering, “What’s the easiest way to do this?”

  • These quick calculation methods are the easiest to work with for non-scientists and non-math whizzes. These are the calculations I use because, taking into account random recombination, you can’t do any better than get close.
  • Also, remember, if you’re dealing with double relationships, meaning double first cousins, you’ll need to take that into consideration, too.
  • If endogamy is involved, your matches will be higher yet, and you should use the highest calculations below because you need to be on the highest end of the range – and that may still not be high enough.

In these Easy-Peasy calculations, you calculate for the lowest, then the highest, and that’s your range. Please note that these are options, and truly, one size does not fit all.

  1. For the lowest end of the range, simply use the average of the highest relationship. In this case, that would be 1C, which is 866 cM. Remember that you may not share DNA with third cousins. 10% of third cousins don’t share any DNA, and 50% of fourth cousins don’t.
  2. For the highest end of the range, find the second relationship in the Shared cM chart, divide the average by half, and add to the value from the closest relationship. In this case, half of the 3C value of 76 is 38.
  3. Add 38 to 866 for the highest end of the range of 904.
  4. If there’s yet another path to ANY shared ancestor, add half that amount too to calculate the high end of the range – unless it’s 4C or more distant, then don’t add anything.

You can see that this easy-peasy range calculation for pedigree collapse compares very well to the more complex but still easy calculations.

  • Easy-peasy calculation: 866-904
  • Other calculation methods: 850-903
  • For this same relationship combination, Diahan’s statistical calculation was 850 cM.

Back to Genealogy

What’s the short story about how pedigree collapse affects genealogy?

Essentially, in close generations, meaning within a few generations of two first cousins marrying, descendants can expect to inherit and share significantly more DNA of the common ancestors, but not double the amount. As we move further away from those marriages in time, the effect becomes less pronounced and more difficult to detect. You can see that effect when calculating multiple paths where at the fourth cousin level, or more distant, those cousins have a 50% or greater possibility of not sharing DNA segments.

Of course, with multiple paths to the same ancestor, your chances of inheriting at least some segments from the common ancestor are increased because their DNA descends through multiple paths.

Today, close marriages are much less common and have been for several generations in many cultures, so we see fewer instances where pedigree collapse makes a significant difference.

Within a population or group of people, if pedigree collapse becomes common, meaning that there are multiple paths leading back to common ancestors, like our three-path example, DNA segments from the common ancestors are found among many people. Significant pedigree collapse becomes endogamy, especially if marriage outside of the group is difficult, impossible, or discouraged.

Normally, pedigree collapse is not recorded in actual records. It’s left to genealogists to discover those connections.

The exception, of course, is those wonderful Catholic parish records where the priest granted dispensations. Sometimes, that’s our only hint to earlier genealogy. In the case of the marriage of Marie-Josesphe LePrince to Jacques Forest, the priest wrote “dispense 3-3 consanguinity,” which tells us that they shared great-grandparents. It also tells us that their grandparents were siblings, that the bride and groom were second cousins, and that their children and descendants inherited an extra dose of DNA from their common great-grandparents.

How does that affect me today? Given that I’m their seventh-generation descendant – probably not at all. Of course, they are Acadian, and the Acadians are highly endogamous, which means I match many Acadians because all Acadians share the DNA of just a few founders, making it almost impossible to track segments to any particular ancestor. If it weren’t for endogamy, I would probably match few, if any, of their descendants.

Now, when you see those Catholic church dispensations or otherwise discover pedigree collapse, you can be really excited, because you understand the effects of pedigree collapse and how to calculate resulting matches! You might, just might, have retained a DNA segment from those ancestors because you inherited segments through multiple paths – increasing the probability that one survived.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase 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

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Bennett Greenspan: Meet My Extended Family & Discover Extraordinary Deep Heritage

“My ancestors are in my soul. I can’t get them out of my mind.”

Bennett Greenspan

“And yes, I brake for cemeteries.”

Bennett Greenspan gave an incredibly interesting presentation at the 15th International Genetic Genealogy Conference held by FamilyTreeDNA in November 2023. Since his retirement in January 2021, he has been able to focus on his genealogy. Once a genealogist, always a genealogist.

Bennett said some things I hadn’t thought about, and now I’m viewing Y-DNA matches with a different perspective – based on how he’s using his results.

Ever since I met him, Bennett’s focus has been to use genetics to unravel his complex Jewish heritage.

The questions that drive Bennett are the same ones that motivate most genealogists:

  1. Who are we?
  2. Where did we come from?
  3. Where were we before we were there?
  4. How did my ancestors get there?

Bennett “lost his family lines” before the mid-1800s due to his Jewish heritage, exacerbated in the 1930s by the devastation wrought by the Holocaust. Families were either killed or scattered to survive. It has been through Y-DNA in particular that he has been able to establish unquestionable and confirmed connections with other Greenspan men, sometimes by similar but different surnames, like Green, and sometimes with other surnames entirely.

When Bennett first started down this path, he tested more than 62 men before actually finding one a decade later that matched his Y-DNA. Bennet commented that it was “a little frustrating.”

Persistence is the key, and sometimes, genealogy is a waiting game, but that’s small comfort to genealogists during that unproductive waiting period.

Eventually, Bennett reassembled his family, at least somewhat, but it was a long journey. Here’s Bennett’s incredible story, including surprises, as he tells it.

Bennett discovered genealogy at age 12 and, like many genealogists, created a pedigree chart by talking to his family.

I love the mark-outs. How many of us still have our first chart with its edits?

This is the young Bennett Greenspan, whose interest in genealogy would one day unlock secrets for all of us!

It was a long way from a decade with no matches to finding his genetic kin in Ukraine.

The Big Y-700 Time Tree shows Bennett’s lineage in Ukraine, but stepping back in time, some descendants of his ancestors are found in adjacent locations.

Bennett was passionately discussing his matches on the time tree and in the Greenspan project, so I visited the Greenspan DNA Project, where the earliest known ancestors of Bennett’s Big Y matches are shown on the Group Time Tree.

Bennett’s closest matches are shown as descendants of haplogroup J-ZS1718. He has additional matches who are not in the Greenspan project. Since this is the Group Time Tree, it only displays the people in that project, along with their earliest known ancestors, Isaac and Usher Greenspan.

12-Marker Matches

Bennett never fails to amaze me. He said something very important and profound about 12-marker matches that I really hadn’t thought about – at least not this way.

As a community, we are often guilty of discounting 12-marker matches, those that don’t match us at 25-markers or above, or with different surnames, as “too far back in time” or otherwise irrelevant. I always look at the names and earliest known ancestors of 12-marker matches, because that person may have tested back in the day when fewer markers were available. But if I don’t recognize something, I move on.

However, Bennett said that, ”Y-12 matches reach back to a common ancestor. 12-marker matches are not a quirk. They are related to you, just further back in time. You share a common ancestor with them, someplace. They may be more distant, but they are still your close matches.”

I’ve been in too much of a hurry for a quick win, and ignoring the (apparently not so) obvious.

Determining when and where their ancestors lived also paves the way to discover yours. Your Y-DNA and theirs were in the same place at the same time.

Of Bennett’s 171 12-marker matches, 107 have upgraded to the Big Y, probably mostly due to his encouragement. This benefits both them and Bennett by fleshing out the history of that entire group of men, including how they got to where they are found in the first available records. The Time Tree shows when Big Y testers shared a common ancestor, and based on Earliest Known Ancestor (EKA) locations, where. This provides further information about the lives of ancestors before contemporary records – in other words – people that we can never identify by name. It’s a window into ancestors before surnames.

Bennett notes that testers need to know their ancestral village or location to be most useful within the project, and of course, they need to enter their EKA information. Location information is how the Migration Map, Matches Map, and Discover tools, including the Time Tree, are built.

What Happened in Spain?

Bennett’s ancestors and those of his 12-marker matches are found in Spain, and as Bennett says, “One son stayed and one left about the year 296.”

While we have no idea of their names, based on the Time Tree combined with the cluster of earliest known ancestors, we know that they were in Spain, and when.

Their family story is revealed in the bifurcation of the tree found beneath haplogroup J-L823, formed about 296 CE. One line stayed in Spain, and Bennett’s line migrated to eastern Europe where that man’s descendants, including Bennett’s family, are found in the Russian Federation, Belarus, Poland, Lithuania, Sweden, Slovakia, Ukraine, Germany, Romania, the Czech Republic, and other eastern European locations. The closer to you in the tree and in time, the more relevant to your more recent ancestral story.

However, Bennett’s deeper ancestry, the migration of his ancestors to Spain, was only revealed by testing those more distantly related men. Those same men could well have been ignored entirely because they only matched at 12 markers.

According to Bennett, “Y-12 markers are important because these are the men most closely related to you in a database of 1 million men.”

How incredibly profound. How much have I been cavalierly overlooking?

How does this actually apply to Bennett’s results?

Bennett’s Spanish Matches

Bennett has the following STR panel matches who indicate that their EKA are from Spain. You can see that they match Bennett on a variety of panels.

  • X = yes, match
  • No = no match
  • Blank = not tested at that level.

In the Big Y GD column, the genetic distance (GD) is displayed as 15/660 where 15 is the number of mismatches, or the cumulative genetic distance ABOVE the 111 panel, and 660 is the number of STR markers above 111 with results.

The Big Y-500 test guaranteed a minimum of 500 total STR markers, and the Big Y-700 guarantees a minimum of 700 total STR markers, plus multiple scans of the balance of the Y chromosome for SNP mutations that define haplogroups. Testers don’t receive the same number of markers because the scan technology sometimes doesn’t read a specific location.

Tester 12 25 37 67 111 Big Y Test Big Y GD Big Y Match Haplogroup
AA X X X No No Yes 15/660 No J-FTD8826
DT X X No No X Yes 17/664 No J-FTE50318
JG X X No No
AR No No X X No No
ELR X X X No No
EL X X Yes 17/666 No J-FTE50318
GC X X X X No No
JC X No No
JLG X X No No No Yes 14/662 No J-FTE23540
MF X X No X No Yes 15/665 No J-FTD91126
MT X X X X No No
BE X X X X X Yes 20/664 No J-BY1795
DR X X X X X Yes 16/660 No J-FTC87344
EC X X X X X Yes 15/665 No J-FTC87344
GM X X No No No Yes 16/650 No J-FTD28153
GM X X X X No Yes 17/664 No J-FTD11019
LS X X No No No Yes 18/666 No J-FTD28153
NE X X X X X Yes 23/597 No J-BY1795
NC X No No
RR X X X No X Yes 22/659 No J-BY1795
TT X X X X X Yes 16/647 No J-FTC87344
XG X X X No No Yes 17/523 No J-BY167283
JA X X No No No Yes 15/646 No J-FTD11019

Of those 23 Spanish matches, sixteen have upgraded to Big Y tests, 14 of which are Big Y-700s, resulting in nine different haplogroups, all of which are descendants of Haplogroup J-L823. How cool is that?

The “Nos” in the Big Y Match Column aren’t mistakes. That’s right – none of these men match Bennett on the Big Y test, meaning they had more than a 30 mutation difference between them and Bennett on the Big Y test.

At first glance, you’d think that Bennett would have been disappointed, but that’s not the case at all! In fact, it was the information provided by these distant Spanish matches that provided Bennett with the information that his line had split sometime around the year 296 CE, with one branch remaining in Spain and his branch migrating to Eastern Europe, where he has lots of matches.

DNA Plus History

What was happening in Spain or the Iberian peninsula that involved the Jewish people about that time? Historical records exist of Jews living in that region before the fall of the Second Temple in about 70 CE, including records of Jews being expelled from Rome in 139 for their “corrupting influence.”

Furthermore, the Ancient DNA Connections for haplogroup J-L823, the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) for all of those branches, includes connections to multiple burials from:

  • Lebanon
  • Iran
  • Rome (from 1-400 CE)
  • Turkey
  • Jordan

Clearly, Bennett’s ancestor was in the Iberian peninsula around or before 296 CE. One branch stayed, winding up in Spain, and one headed for Europe.

Without these matches, some who didn’t match above the 12 or 25 marker level, how would Bennett have EVER known that his Jewish ancestors left the Middle East for Spain in the early years? How would he have known they migrated from Spain to Eastern Europe, and how would he have known that his line did not migrate directly from the Levant to Eastern Europe in the 9th century?

Big Y matches are typically within about 1500 years, but non-matches are still INCREDIBLY valuable. Without them, you can’t completely assemble your family story.

I noticed on the Time Tree that in Bennett’s Eastern European line, one of his ancestor’s brother lineages includes the Katzenellenbogen Rabbinic Lineage derived from ancient DNA samples.

Bennett’s successes have resulted from contacting his matches and encouraging upgrades. So how did he do it? What’s the magic sauce?

Contacting Matches

How to contact matches successfully is a question I see often. In fact, FamilyTreeDNA recently wrote about that in an article, here.

Bennett’s methodology for contacting his matches to encourage an upgrade is that he sends an email explaining why he’s encouraging them to upgrade, followed by a 2nd email three days later.

Bennett tells the recipient that we are at an inflection point in time. “It’s winter, the wind is blowing hard, and many of the leaves are gone.”

In other words, we need to cast the net wider and capture what we can, while we can. Unfortunately, many early testers have died, and with them, chapters of history are perishing.

Collaboration is key. In addition to encouraging upgrades, Bennett also offers Zoom calls to these groups of men to explain the results if they are interested.

What a GREAT idea! I need to begin offering that as well.

Upgrade Request

Bennett reaches out to his matches at various levels, but he expects his closer STR matches, meaning at the 67 and 111 marker level with the fewest mismatches, to match him on a Big Y-700 test and connect someplace between 300-600 years ago, which helps everyone flesh out their tree.

Bennett’s email:

Hello <name>,

Since you have already made a sizable investment in your Y-DNA, you now know that we come from the dominant male Middle Eastern group (Haplogroup J) of men who <subject here>.

What’s really neat is that our Y-DNA has recently been found in an archaeological site in Northwestern Jordan dated to about 4200 years ago. I know this because I upgraded to the Big Y, which tests SNPs, looking at several million locations on the Y chromosome of each man.

One academic customer recently compared this new technology as the difference between looking into space with binoculars versus the Hubble Telescope.

I don’t know if you are familiar with your list of matches at the highest level you’ve tested for, either Y-67 or Y-111. If you are, you should recognize my name and the names of others who have taken the Big Y test.

You’ll see what you’ll gain by letting me upgrade your test for you and determining whether you are related to my line – probably between about 200 years and 500 years.

This might be the second time that I have written to you on this matter; can I presume if I don’t hear from you that you’re not really interested in the Y-DNA subject anymore?

Can I run the test so that I can see how closely we are related – at my expense? (Of course, you get to see how closely related we are, too).

Please reply to me and say “yes.” You don’t even have to put a 🙂 if you don’t want to.

I started this company and this industry over 20 years ago. I predict that you will be happy with the history of YOU that this upgrade will uncover.

Best,

Bennett Greenspan

As you can see, this email can easily be personalized further and adapted to matches at the 37, 25, and 12 marker levels – or even Family Finder matches, now that intermediate-range haplogroups are being reported.

What’s Next?

I’m going back to every one of the kits I sponsored or that represent descendants of one of my ancestors to review their matches again – focusing not just on the closest matches with common surnames, but also on locations – and specifically at lower matching levels. I’ll also be checking their Family Finder matches for male surname matches, or similar surnames.

As is evident from Bennett’s tests, an entire mine of diamonds is out there, just waiting to be unearthed by a Big Y test.

And to think that some people have been advising people to ignore 12-marker matches out-of-hand because they are “entirely irrelevant.” They aren’t – for two reasons.

  1. First, some early testers only tested to that level
  2. Second, because of the deeper history that Big Y tests from those matches will uncover

You can view your Y-DNA matches, upgrade your own Y-DNA test, or order a Big Y-700 test if you haven’t yet tested by clicking here. What’s your next step?

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase 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

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

FamilyTreeDNA 2023 Update – Past, Present and Future

At the FamilyTreeDNA International Conference on Genetic Genealogy, held November 3-5 in Houston for group project administrators, product and feature updates were scattered across both days in various presentations.

I’ve combined the updates from FamilyTreeDNA into one article.

I’ve already written two articles that pertain to the conference.

FamilyTreeDNA has already begun rolling the new Y DNA haplogroups from Family Finder autosomal tests, which I wrote about here:

I still have at least two more articles to publish from this conference that was chocked full of wonderful information from a wide range of talented speakers.

Past, Present, and Future with Katy Rowe-Schurwanz

Katy Rowe-Schurwanz, FamilyTreeDNA’s Product Manager, provided an update on what has been accomplished in the four and a half years since the last conference, what’s underway now, and her wish list for 2024.

Please note the word “wish list.” Wish list items are NOT commitments.

Recent Milestones

A lot has been happening at FamilyTreeDNA since the last conference.

Acquisition and Wellness Bundles

As everyone is aware, at the end of 2020, myDNA acquired Gene by Gene, the parent company of FamilyTreeDNA, which included the lab. As a result, the FamilyTreeDNA product menu has expanded, and wellness bundles are now available for FamilyTreeDNA customers.

If you’re interested, you can order the Wellness product in a bundle with a Family Finder test, here.

You can add the Wellness product for $39 if you’ve already tested.

New TIP (Time Prediction) STR Report

Did you notice that the old TIP report for Y DNA STR markers was replaced with an updated version several months ago?

To view the new report, sign on and select your Y DNA matches. At the far right of each match you’ll see these three icons representing a pedigree chart, notes, and the TIP (Time Predictor) report.

The updated TIP report includes wonderful new graphs and age estimates for each match category, which you can read about, here. Each category, such as 67-marker matches, has time estimates in which a common ancestor might have lived at each possible genetic distance.

Math is our friend, and thankfully, someone else has done it for us!

Please note that the Big Y SNP dates are MUCH more accurate for a variety of reasons, not limited to the instability and rapid mutation rate of STR mutations.

MyOrigins3

MyOrigins3, FamilyTreeDNA’s ethnicity offering, added over 60 new reference populations for a total of 90, plus chromosome painting. You can read about MyOrigins features here, and the white paper, here.

This is one of my favorite improvements because it allows me to identify the segment location of my population ancestries, which in turn allows me to identify people who share my minority segments such as Native American and African.

Due to a lack of records, these relationships are often exceedingly difficult to identify, and MyOrigins3 helps immensely.

Additional Releases

Additional products and features released since the last conference include:

Discover

Released in July 2022, Discover is the amazing new free product that details your ancestor’s Y DNA “story” and his walk through time and across the globe.

In the past 18 months, all of the Discover features are new, so I’m only making a brief list here. The great thing is that everyone can use Discover if you know or can discover (pardon the pun) the haplogroup of your ancestral lines. Surname projects are often beneficial for finding your lineages.

  • Haplogroup Story includes haplogroup location, ages derived from the earliest known ancestor (EKA) of your matches, and ancient DNA samples. Please be sure you’ve entered or updated your EKA, and that the information is current. You can find instructions for how to update or add your EKA here.
  • A recent addition to the haplogroup story includes Haplogroup Badges.
  • Country Frequency showing where this haplogroup is found with either a table view or an interactive map
  • Famous and infamous Notable Connections, including Mayflower passengers, Patriots from the American Revolution, US presidents, royal houses, artists, musicians, authors, pirates, sports figures, scientists, and more.

If you know of a proven connection to a notable figure, contact customer support and let them know! Notable connections are added every week.

One famous Discover connection is Ludwig von Beethoven which resulted from a joint academic study between FamilyTreeDNA and academic researchers. It’s quite a story and includes both a mystery and misattributed parentage. You can see if you match on Discover and read about the study, here.

  • Updated Migration Map, including locations of select ancient DNA sites
  • The Time Tree, probably the most popular Discover report, shows the most current version of the Y DNA phylotree, updated weekly, plus scientifically calculated ages for each branch. Tree node locations are determined by your matches and their EKA countries of origin. I wrote about the Time Tree, here.
  • Anticipated in early 2024, the EKA and block tree matches will also be shown on the Time Tree in Discover for individual Big Y testers, meaning they will need to sign in through their kits.
  • The Group Time Tree, visible through group projects, takes the Time Tree a step further by including the names of the EKA of each person on the Time Tree within a specific project. Information is only displayed for project members who have given permission to include their data. You can select specific project groupings to view, or the entire project. I wrote about the Group Time Tree here and here.
  • Globetrekker is an exclusive Big Y mapping feature discussed here, here, here, and here.
  • Ancient Connections includes more than 6,100 ancient Y DNA results from across the globe, which have been individually analyzed and added for matching in Discover. Ancient Connections serve to anchor haplogroups and provide important clues about matches, migration paths and culture. New connections are added weekly or as academic papers with adequate Y DNA coverage are released.
  • Your Ancestral Path, which lists the haplogroups through every step from the tester back to Y Adam and beyond. Additional information for each haplogroup in your path includes “Time Passed” between haplogroups, and “Immediate Descendants,” meaning haplogroups that descend from each subclade. New columns recently added include “Tested Modern Descendants” and “Ancient Connections.”
  • Suggested Projects include surname, haplogroup, and geographic projects. Katy said that people joining projects are more likely to collaborate and upgrade their tests. You can also see which projects other men with this haplogroup have joined, which may well be projects you want to join too.
  • Scientific Details provides additional information, such as each branch’s confidence intervals and equivalent variables (SNPs). You can read more here.
  • Compare Haplogroups is the most recent new feature, added just last month, which allows you to enter any two haplogroups and compare them to determine their most recent common ancestral haplogroup. You can read about Compare Haplogroups, here.

Please note that the Studies feature is coming soon, providing information about studies whose data has been included in Discover.

You can read about Discover here, here, here, and here.

If you’re interested, FamilyTreeDNA has released a one-minute introduction to Y DNA and Discover that would interest new testers, here.

Earliest Known Ancestor (EKA) Improvement

Another improvement is that the earliest known ancestor is MUCH easier to enter now, and the process has been simplified. The EKAs are critical for Discover, so PLEASE be sure you’ve entered and updated your EKA.

Under the dropdown beside your name in the upper right-hand corner of your personal page, select Account Settings, then Genealogy and Earliest Known Ancestors. Complete the information, then click on “Update Location” to find or enter the location on a map to record the coordinates.

It’s easy. Just type or drop a pin and “Save.”

Saving will take you back to the original EKA page. Save that page, too.

Recommended Projects on Haplogroups & SNPs Page

You’re probably aware that Discover suggests projects for Y DNA testers to join, but recommended haplogroup projects are available on each tester’s pages, under the Y DNA Haplotree & SNPs page, in the Y DNA STR results section.

If there isn’t a project for your immediate haplogroup, just scroll up to find the closest upstream project. You can also view this page by Variants, Surnames and Countries.

This is a super easy tool to use to view which surnames are clustered with and upstream of your haplogroup. With Family Finder haplogroups being assigned now, I check my upstream haplogroups almost daily to see what has been added.

For example, my Big Y Estes results are ten branches below R-DF49, but several men, including Estes testers, have been assigned at this level, thanks to Y DNA haplogroups from Family Finder testing. I can now look for these haplogroups in the STR and Family Finder matches lists and see if those men are receptive to Big Y testing.

Abandoned Projects

Sometimes group project administrators can no longer function in that capacity, resulting in the project becoming abandoned. FamilyTreeDNA has implemented a feature to help remedy that situation.

If you discover an abandoned project, you can adopt the project, spruce things up, and select the new project settings. Furthermore, administrators can choose to display this message to recruit co-administrators. I need to do this for several projects where I have no co-admin.

If you are looking for help with your project, you can choose to display the button
through the Project Profile page in GAP. For non-project administrators, if you’d like to help, please email the current project administrators.

New Kit Manager Feature

FamilyTreeDNA has added a “Kit Manager” feature so that an individual can designate another person as the manager of their kit.

This new setting provides an avenue for you to designate someone else as the manager of your DNA test. This alerts FamilyTreeDNA that they can share information with both of you – essentially treating your designated kit manager the same as you.

If you’re the kit manager for someone else, you NEED to be sure this is completed. If that person is unavailable for some reason, and support needs to verify that you have legitimate access to this kit, this form and the Beneficiary form are the ONLY ways they can do that.

If your family member has simply given you their kit number and password, and for some reason, a password reset is required, and their email address is the primary contact – you may be shut out of this kit if you don’t complete this form.

Beneficiary Page

Additionally, everyone needs to be sure to complete the Beneficiary page so that in the event of your demise, FamilyTreeDNA knows who you’ve designated to access and manage your DNA account in perpetuity. If you’ve inherited a kit, you need to add a beneficiary to take over in the event of your death as well.

What is FamilyTreeDNA working on now?

Currently in the Works

Katy moved on to what’s currently underway.

Privacy and Security

Clearly, the unauthorized customer data exposure breach at 23andMe has reverberated through the entire online community, not just genetic genealogy. You can read about the incident here, here, here, and here.

FamilyTreeDNA has already taken several steps, and others are in development and will be released shortly.

Clearly, in this fast-moving situation, everything is subject to change.

Here’s what has happened and is currently planned as of today:

  • Group Project Administrators will be required to reset their password soon.

Why is this necessary?

Unauthorized access was gained to 23andMe accounts by people using the same password for multiple accounts, combined with their email as their user ID. Many people use the same password for every account so that they can remember it. That means that all a hacker needs to do is breach one account, and they can use that same information to “legitimately” sign in to other accounts. There is no way for the vendor to recognize this as unauthorized since they have both your user ID and password.

That’s exactly what happened at 23andMe. In other breaches, this information was exposed, and hackers simply tried the same username and password combination at 23andMe, exposing the entire account of the person whose account they signed in “as.” This includes all of their matches, genetic tree, shared matches, matches of matches, ethnicity, and segments. They could also have downloaded both the match list and the raw DNA file of the compromised account.

At FamilyTreeDNA, project administrators can select their own username, which could be their email, so they will be required to reset their password.

Additional precautions have been put in place on an interim basis:

  • A pause in the ability to download match and segment information.
  • A pause in accepting 23andMe uploads.

Administrators will also be required to use two-factor authentication (2FA.) To date, two of the four major vendors are requiring 2FA. I would not be surprised to see it more broadly. Facebook recently required me to implement 2FA there, too, due to the “reach” of my postings, but 2FA is not required of everyone on Facebook.

Please note that if you received an email or message that is supposedly from any vendor requiring 2FA, GO DIRECTLY TO THAT VENDOR SITE AND SIGN IN.  Never click on a link in an email you weren’t expecting. Bad actors exploit everything.

Customers who are not signing in as administrators are not required to implement 2FA, nor will they be required to reset their password.

Personally, I will implement 2FA as soon as it’s available.

While 2FA is an extra step, it’s easy to get used to, and it has already literally saved one of my friends from an authorized hack on their primary and backup email accounts this week. Another friend just lost their entire account on Facebook because someone signed in as them. Their account was gone within 15 minutes.

2FA is one of those things you don’t appreciate (at all) until it saves you, and then, suddenly, you’re incredibly grateful.

At this point in time, FamilyTreeDNA users will NOT be required to do a password reset or implement 2FA. This is because customers use a kit number for sign-in and not a username or email address. I would strongly recommend changing your password to something “not easy.” Never reuse passwords between accounts.

I really, really want you to visit this link at TechRepublic and scroll down to Figure A, which shows how long it takes a hacker to crack your password. I guarantee you, it’s MUCH quicker than you’d ever expect.

Kim Komando wrote about this topic two years ago, so compare the two charts to see how much easier this has become in just two years.

Again, if you receive an email about resetting your password, don’t click on a link. Sign in independently to the vendor’s system, but DO reset your password.

FamilyTreeDNA also engages in additional security efforts, such as ongoing penetration testing.

New Permissions

Additionally, at FamilyTreeDNA, changes were already in the works to separate out at least two permissions that testers can opt-in to without granting project administrators Advanced rights.

  • Download data
  • Purchase tests

The ability to purchase tests can be very important because it allows administrators to order and pay for tests or upgrades on behalf of this tester anytime in the future.

Family Finder Haplogroups

FamilyTreeDNA has already begun releasing mid-level Y DNA haplogroups for autosomal testers in a staggered rollout of several thousand a day.

I wrote about this in the article, FamilyTreeDNA Provides Y DNA Haplogroups from Family Finder Autosomal Tests, so I’m not repeating all of that information here – just highlights.

  • The Family Finder haplogroup rollout is being staggered and began with customers on the most recent version of the testing chip, which was implemented in March of 2019.
  • Last will be transfers/uploads from third parties.
  • Haplogroups resulting from tests performed in the FTDNA labs will be visible to matches and within projects. They will also be used in both Discover and the haplotree statistics. This includes Family Finder plus MyHeritage and Vitagene uploads.
  • Both MyHeritage and Vitagene are uploaded or “transferred” via an intracompany secure link, meaning FamilyTreeDNA knows that their information is credible and has not been manipulated.
  • Haplogroups derived from tests performed elsewhere will only be visible to the user or a group administrator viewing a kit within a project. They will not be visible to matches or used in trees or for statistics.
  • Any man who has taken a Y DNA STR test will receive a SNP-confirmed, updated haplogroup from their Family Finder test that replaces their predicted haplogroup from the STR test.

Please read this article for more information.

New Discover Tools and Updates

Discover content continues to be updated, and new features are added regularly, creating an increasingly robust user experience.

Soon, group administrators will be able to view all Discover features (like Globetrekker) when viewing kits of project members who have granted an appropriate level of access.

Ancient and Notable connects are added weekly, and a new feature, Study Connections, will be added shortly.

Study Connections is a feature requested by customers that will show you which study your academic matches came from. Today, those results are used in the Y DNA tree, but the source is not detailed.

Anticipated in early 2024, the EKA and block tree matches will also be shown on the Time Tree in Discover for individual Big Y testers (not publicly).

Big Y FaceBook Group

FamilyTreeDNA has ramped up its social media presence. They launched the Big Y Facebook group in July 2023, here, which currently has just under 9000 members. Several project administrators have volunteered their time to help manage the group.

FamilyTreeDNA Blog

In addition, FamilyTreeDNA is publishing at least one blog article each week, and sometimes more. You can view or subscribe here. Some articles are written by FamilyTreeDNA staff, but project administrators and customers author other content.

Multi-Language Support

Translation of the main FamilyTreeDNA website and results pages to Spanish has begun, with more languages planned soon.

Paypal, Payments, and Gift Cards

Paypal has been added as a payment selection, along with a PayPal option that provides the ability to make payments.

Additionally, a gift card can be purchased from the main page.

Million Mito Project & Mitotree

Work on the Million Mito Project is ongoing.

The Million Mito Project was launched in 2020 as a collaborative effort between FamilyTreeDNA’s Research & Development Team and the scientific portion of the Genographic Project. I’m a team member and wrote about the Million Mito Project, here.

We’re picking up from where the Phylotree left off in 2016, analyzing 20 times more mtDNA full sequences and reimagining the mtDNA Haplotree. By examining more mtDNA data and applying the processes that allowed FamilyTreeDNA to build the world’s largest Y DNA Haplotree, we can also create the world’s largest Mitotree.

In 2022, the first update was released, authored by the Million Mito team, with the discovery of haplogroup L7. You can read about this amazing discovery rooted deep in the tree here, here, and here. (Full disclosure: I’m a co-author.)

Not only that, but “Nature Scientific Reports” selected this article as one of five named Editor’s Choice in the Mitogenomics category, here. In the science world, that’s a HUGE deal – like the genetic Emmy.

Here’s one example of the type of improvements that can be expected. Currently, the formation of haplogroup U5a2b2a reaches back to about 5000 years ago, but after reanalysis, current branches originated between 500 and 2,500 years ago, and testers are clustered more closely together.

This is SOOO exciting!!!

Just as Discover for Y DNA results was built one feature at a time, the same will be true for MitoDiscover. That’s my name, not theirs.

As the new Mitotree is rolled out, the user interface will also be updated, and matching will function somewhat differently. Specifically, it’s expected that many more haplogroups will be named, so today’s matching that requires an exact haplogroup match to be a full sequence match will no longer work. That and other matching adjustments will need to be made.

I can hardly wait. I have so many results I need to be able to view in a tree format and to place in a timeframe.

You can be included in this exciting project, learn more about your matrilineal (mother’s) line, and hopefully break down some of those brick walls by taking the full sequence mitochondrial DNA test, here.

After the new Mitotree is rolled out and the Y DNA Family Finder haplogroups are completed, Family Finder customers, where possible, will also receive at least a basic-level mitochondrial haplogroup. Not all upload files from other vendors include mtDNA SNPs in their autosomal files. The mitochondrial Family Finder haplogroup feature isn’t expected until sometime in 2025, after the new tree and MitoDiscover are complete.

The Future

What’s coming later in 2024, or is ongoing?

Privacy Laws

Most people aren’t aware of the new privacy laws in various states, each of which has to be evaluated and complied with.

The effects of these changes will be felt in various areas as they are implemented.

New Kits Opted Out of IGG

Since late August, all new FTDNA kits are automatically opted OUT of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) by default.

Regular matching consent and IGG matching consent have been separated during onboarding.

Biobanking Separate Consent

Another consent change is to have your sample biobanked. FamilyTreeDNA has always maintained your sample for “roughly 25 years.” You could always ask to have your sample destroyed, but going forward, you will be asked initially if you want your sample to be retained (biobanked.) It’s still free.

Remember, if someone declines the biobanking option, their DNA will be disposed of after testing. They can’t order upgrades without submitting a new sample. Neither can their family after they’re gone. I ordered my mother’s Family Finder test many years after she had gone on to meet our ancestors – and I’m incredibly grateful every single day.

MyHeritage Tree Integration

An exciting change coming next year is tree integration with MyHeritage.

And no, before any rumors get started, FAMILYTREEDNA IS NOT MERGING WITH MYHERITAGE. It’s a beneficial marriage of convenience for both parties.

In essence, one of the primary focuses of MyHeritage is trees, and they do that very well. FamilyTreeDNA is focused on DNA testing and their existing trees have had issues for years. MyHeritage trees are excellent, support pedigree collapse, provide search capabilities that are NOT case sensitive, SmartMatching, and much more.

If you don’t have a MyHeritage account, creating one is free, and you will be able to either port your existing FamilyTreeDNA tree, or begin one there. If you’re already a MyHeritage member, FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage are planning together for a smooth integration for you. More detailed information will be forthcoming as the integration progressed and is released to customers.

You’ll be able to connect multiple kits to your tree at MyHeritage, just like you can at FamilyTreeDNA today, which enables family matching, aka bucketing.

You can also have an unlimited number of different trees at MyHeritage on the same account. You’re not limited to one.

After you link your initial FamilyTreeDNA kit to the proper person in your MyHeritage tree, you’ll be able to relink any currently linked kits.

MyHeritage will NOT receive any DNA information or match information from FamilyTreeDNA, and yes, you’ll be able to use the same tree independently at MyHeritage for their DNA matching.

You’ll still be able to view your matches’ trees, except it will actually be the MyHeritage tree that will be opened at FamilyTreeDNA in a new tab.

To the best of my knowledge, this is a win-win-win, and customers of both companies aren’t losing anything.

One concern is that some FamilyTreeDNA testers have passed away and cannot transition their tree, so a view-only copy of their tree will remain at FamilyTreeDNA so that their matches can still see their tree.

Big Y Infrastructure

Katy mentioned that internal discussions are taking place to see what changes could be made to improve things like matching and test processing times.

No changes are planned for SNP or STR coverage, but discussions are taking place about a potential update to the Telomere to Telomere (T2T) reference. No promises about if or when this might occur. The last part of the human genome to be fully sequenced, the T2T reference model includes the notoriously messy and unreliable region of the Y chromosome with many repeats, duplications, gaps, and deletions. Some data from this region is probably salvageable but has previously been omitted due to the inherent problems.

I’m not sure this shouldn’t be in the next section, the Wishlist.

Wishlist

There are lots of good things on the Wishlist – all of which I’d love.

I’d have difficulty prioritizing, but I’d really appreciate some Family Finder features in addition to the items already discussed. I’d also like to see some GAP (administrator) tool updates.

Which items do you want to see most?

Katy said that FamilyTreeDNA is NOT planning to offer a Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) test anytime soon. So, if you’re holding your breath, please don’t. Based on what Katy did say, WGS is very clearly not a consideration in 2024 and I don’t expect to see it in 2025 either unless something changes drastically in terms of technology AND pricing.

While WGS prices have come down, those consumer tests are NOT scanned at the depth and quality required for advanced tests like the Big Y or even Family Finder. Normally consumer-grade WGS tests are scanned between 2 and 10 times, where the FamilyTreeDNA lab scans up to 30 times in order to obtain a quality read. 30X scans are in the same category as medical or clinical grade whole genome scans. Significantly higher quality scans mean significantly higher prices, too, so WGS isn’t ready for genealogy prime time yet.

Additionally, commercially available WGS tests are returned to the customer “as is,” and you’re left to extract the relevant SNPs and arrange them into files, or find someone else to do that. Not to mention, in order to preserve the integrity of their database, FamilyTreeDNA does not accept Y or mitochondrial DNA uploads.

Recently, I saw two WGS files with a 20-25% no-call rate for the autosomal SNPs required for the Family Finder test. Needless to say, that’s completely unacceptable. Some tools attempt to “fix” that mess by filling in the blanks in the format of either a 23andMe or Ancestry file so you can upload to vendors, but that means you’re receiving VERY unreliable matches.

The reason none of the major four vendors offer WGS testing for genealogists is because it’s not financially feasible nor technologically beneficial. The raw data file alone won’t fit on most home computers. WGS is just not soup yet, and it won’t be for the general consuming public, including relevant tools, for at least a few years.

I’ve had my whole genome sequenced, and trust me, I wish it were feasible now, but it just isn’t.

Suggestions Welcomed

Katy said that if you have suggestions for items NOT on the wishlist today to contact her through support.

I would add that if you wish to emphasize any specific feature or need above others, please send that feedback, politely, to support as well.

Katy ended by thanking the various teams and individuals whose joint efforts together produce the products we use and enjoy today.

Lab Update

Normally, DNA testing companies don’t provide lab updates, but this conference is focused on group project administrators, who are often the most dedicated to DNA testing.

A lab update has become a tradition over the years.

Linda Jones, Lab Manager, provided a lab update.

You may or may not know that the FamilyTreeDNA lab shifted gears and stepped up to handle Covid testing.

Supply-chain shortages interfered, but the lab ran 24×7 between 2020 and 2022.

Today, the lab continues to make improvements to processes with the goal of delivering the highest quality results in a timely manner.

On Monday, after the conference, attendees could sign up for a lab tour. You might say we are a rather geeky bunch and really enjoy the science behind the scenes.

Q&A and Thank You

At the end of the conference, the FamilyTreeDNA management team answered questions from attendees.

Left to right, Daniel Au, CTO; Linda Jones, Lab Manager; Katy Rowe-Schurwanz, Product Manager; Clayton Conder, VP Marketing; Goran Runfeldt, Head of R&D; and Andrew Gefre, Development Manager. Not pictured, Jeremy Balkin, Support Manager; Kelly Jenkins, VP of Operations; and Janine Cloud, Group Projects Manager. Janine is also responsible for conferences and events, without whom there would have been no 2023 FamilyTreeDNA conference. Janine, I can’t thank you enough!

A huge thanks to all of these people and many others, including the presenters, CSRs,  IT, and other FamilyTreeDNA team members for their support during the conference, enabling us to enjoy the conference and replenish the well of knowledge.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase 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

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

FamilyTreeDNA Provides Y DNA Haplogroups from Family Finder Autosomal Tests

Big News! FamilyTreeDNA is delivering holiday gifts early!

Y DNA haplogroups are beginning to be delivered as a free benefit to men who took the Family Finder test at FamilyTreeDNA. This is the first wave of a staggered rollout. Haplogroup results will be delivered to several thousand people at a time, in batches, beginning today.

This is no trivial gift and includes LOTS of information that can be used in various ways for your genealogy. Please feel free to share this article. The new Family Finder haplogroups are another reason to take a Family Finder test and to encourage other family members to do so as well.

How is this Even Possible?

Clearly, Y DNA is not autosomal DNA, so how is it possible to obtain a Y DNA or mitochondrial DNA haplogroup from an autosomal test? Great question!

Many autosomal DNA processing chips include a limited number of targeted Y and mitochondrial DNA SNP locations. Generally, those locations are haplogroup predictive, which is how haplogroup information can be obtained from an autosomal DNA test.

Compared to the actual Y DNA and mitochondrial DNA tests, only a small fraction of the information is available through autosomal tests. Only the full sequence mitochondrial DNA test or the Big Y-700 test will provide you with the full story, including your most refined haplogroup, additional information, and matching with other customers.

Having said that, haplogroups obtained from Family Finder provide important clues and genealogical information that will hopefully whet recipients’ appetites for learning even more.

Delivery Schedule

This first group of men to receive haplogroup results consists of testers who have purchased the Family Finder test since March 2019 when the most recent chip was put into production.

FamilyTreeDNA will be rolling haplogroups out in batches of a few thousand each day until everyone’s is complete, in the following order:

  • Family Finder tests purchased since March 2019 (their V3 chip)
  • Family Finder tests purchased between the fall of 2015 to March 2019 (their V2 chip)
  • Family Finder tests purchased from 2010 to the fall of 2015 (their V1 chip)
  • Autosomal uploads from other vendors for customers who have unlocked the advanced Family Finder features for $19

Uploaded DNA Files from Other Vendors

After the results are available for all males who have tested at FamilyTreeDNA, haplogroups will begin to be rolled out to customers who uploaded autosomal DNA files from other companies, meaning MyHeritage, Vitagene, 23andMe, and Ancestry.

To receive haplogroups for files uploaded from other vendors, the Family Finder advanced tool unlock must have been (or can be) purchased for $19. In addition to haplogroups, the unlock also provides access to the chromosome browser, myOrigins (ethnicity), Chromosome painting for myOrigins ethnicity, and ancient Origins.

Both MyHeritage and Vitagene tests are performed in the Gene by Gene lab. Those “uploads” are actually a secure business-to-business transaction, so the file integrity is assured.

Ancestry and 23andMe DNA files are downloaded from those companies, then uploaded to FamilyTreeDNA. Some people build “composite” files in the format of these companies, so FamilyTreeDNA has no way to assure that the original DNA upload file hasn’t been modified and it is a legitimate, unmodified, file from either 23andMe or Ancestry. Hence, in some situations, they are treated differently.

Both Ancestry and 23andMe utilize different chips than FamilyTreeDNA, covering different SNPs. Those results may vary slightly from results available from native FamilyTreeDNA tests, and will also vary from each other. In other words, there’s no consistency, and therefore haplogroup accuracy cannot be confirmed.

Haplogroups resulting from tests performed in the FamilyTreeDNA lab will be visible to matches and on the SNP pages within projects. They will also be used in both Discover and the haplotree statistics. This includes Family Finder plus MyHeritage and Vitagene DNA file uploads.

Tests performed elsewhere will receive haplogroups that will only be visible to the user, or a group administrator viewing a kit within a project. They will not be visible to matches, used in trees or for statistics.

At their recent conference, FamilyTreeDNA provided this slide during an update about what to expect from Family Finder haplogroups.

Today, only Y DNA haplogroups are being provided, but after the new mitochondrial tree is available, customer haplogroups are updated, and MitoDiscover (my name, not theirs) is released, FamilyTreeDNA is planning to provide mitochondrial DNA haplogroups for Family Finder customers as well. The current haplogroup estimate is late 2024 or even into 2025.

Unfortunately, some of Ancestry’s DNA files don’t include mitochondrial DNA SNPs, so some customers who’ve uploaded Ancestry files won’t receive mitochondrial haplogroups.

STR Haplogroups to be Updated

All FamilyTreeDNA customers who have taken Y DNA STR tests, meaning 12, 25, 37, 67, or 111 markers, receive predicted haplogroups. Often, the Family Finder extracted results can provide a more refined haplogroup.

When that is possible, STR test predicted haplogroup results will be updated to the more refined Family Finder haplogroup.

Furthermore, while STR results are quite reliably predicted, Family Finder results are SNP-confirmed.

Notification

When your Family Finder test has received a haplogroup or your STR-derived haplogroup has been updated, you’ll receive an email notification with a link to a short, less than 2-minute video explaining what you’re receiving.

You can also expect emails in the following days with links to additional short videos. If you’d like to watch the videos now, click here.

You can also check your results, of course. If you should have received an email and didn’t, check your spam folder, and if it’s not there, notify FamilyTreeDNA in case your email has managed to get on the bounce list.

Group project administrators will receive notifications when a haplogroup is updated for a member in a project that they manage. This doesn’t just apply to Family Finder haplogroup updates for STR results – notifications will arrive when Big Y haplogroups are updated, too.

Emails about haplogroup updates will include both the old and the updated haplogroup.

Haplogroups may change as other testers receive results, forming a new haplogroup. The Big Y-700 test is evergreen, meaning as the Y tree grows, testers’ results are updated on an ongoing basis.

New View

Let’s take a look at what customers will receive.

In one of my surname projects, one male has taken a Family Finder test, but not the Y DNA test.

Several other men in that same paternal line, who are clearly related (including his brother), have taken Y DNA tests – both STR and the Big Y-700.

We have men who have taken the Big Y-700 test, STR tests only (no Big Y), and one with only a Family Finder test, so let’s compare all three, beginning with the man who has taken a Family Finder test but no Y DNA tests.

He has now been assigned to haplogroup I-BY1031, thanks to his Family Finder test.

Before today, because he has not taken a Y DNA test, he had no haplogroup or Y DNA Results section on his personal page.

Today, he does. Of course, he doesn’t have STR results or matches, but he DOES have confirmed SNP results, at least part way down the tree.

He can view these results on the Haplotree & SNPs tab or in Discover. Let’s look at both.

Haplotree & SNPs

By clicking on the Haplotree & SNPs link, you can view the results by variants (mutations,) as shown below, or by countries, surnames, or recommended projects for each haplogroup.

Of course, as more Family Finder results are rolled out, the more names and countries will appear on the Haplotree.

Recommended Projects

It’s easy to determine which haplogroup projects would be a good fit for people with these new haplogroups to join.

Just view by Recommended Projects, then scan up that column above the selected haplogroup. You can even just click right there to join. It’s that easy!

Results still won’t show on the public project page, because these testers don’t have STR results to display. Perhaps this will encourage additional testing in order to match with other men.

Download SNP Results

If you’re interested, you can download your SNP results in spreadsheet format.

I’m only showing four of my cousin’s positive SNPs, but FamilyTreeDNA was able to extract 358 positive SNPs to assign him to haplogroup I-BY1031.

Are Family Finder Haplogroups Better Than STR Test Predicted Haplogroups?

How do Family Finder haplogroups stack up against STR-predicted haplogroups?

Viewing the Y DNA results of related cousins who have taken STR tests, but not the Big Y-700, we see that their Y DNA haplogroup was predicted as I-M253.

We also know that the haplogroup determined by the Big Y-700 for this line is I-BY73911.

How can we use this information beneficially, and what does it mean?

Discover

Family Finder haplogroups can access Discover, which I wrote about, here.

Clicking on the Discover link takes you to your haplogroup story.

Let’s look at the new Family Finder Haplogroup Story for this tester.

Haplogroup I-BY1031 is about 3100 years old and is found in England, Sweden, the US, and 14 other countries. Of course, as more Family Finder haplogroups are provided to customers, this information will change for many haplogroups, so check back often.

Of course, you’ll want to review every single tab, which are chapters in your ancestral story! The Time Tree shows your haplogroup age in perspective to other haplogroups and their formation, and Ancient Connections anchors haplogroups through archaeology.

You can share any Discover page in several ways. This is a good opportunity to excite other family members about the discoveries revealed through DNA testing and genealogy. Prices are reduced right now with the Holiday Sale, too, so it’s a great time to gift someone else or yourself.

Compare – How Good is Good?

Ok, so how much better is the Family Finder haplogroup than the STR-predicted haplogroup, and how much better is the Big Y-700 haplogroup than the other two?

I’ll use the Discover “Compare” feature to answer these questions.

First, let’s compare the STR-predicted haplogroup of I-M253 to the Family Finder haplogroup of I-BY1031.

I clicked on Compare and entered the haplogroup I wish to compare to I-BY1031.

I-M253 I-BY1031 I-BY73199
Haplogroup Source STR Predicted Family Finder Big Y-700
Formation Year 2600 BCE 1100 BCE 1750 CE
Age – Years ago 4600 3100 270
Era Stone Age, Metal Age Metal Age Modern
Ancestral Locations England, Sweden, Germany, UK, +100 Sweden, England, US, +14 Netherlands
Tested Descendants 26,572 121 2
Branches 6779 69 0 – this is the pot-of-gold end leaf on the branch today

I created this chart to compare the major features of all three haplogroups.

The STR-predicted haplogroup, I-M253, takes you to about 2,600 BCE, or about 4,600 years ago. The Family Finder haplogroup shifts that significantly to about 1100 BCE, or 3100 years ago, so it’s about 1500 years more recent. However, the Big Y haplogroup takes you home – from 3100 years ago to about 270 years ago.

Notice that there’s a LOT of room for refinement under haplogroup I-M253. A Big Y tester might wind up on any of those 6779 branches, and might well be assigned to a newly formed branch with his test. The Family Finder haplogroup, I-BY1031, which was, by the way, discovered through Big Y testing, moved the autosomal test taker forward 1500 years where there are 121 descendants in 69 branches. The Big Y-700 test is the most refined possible, moving you directly into a genealogically relevant timeframe with a very specific location.

I-M253 is found in over 100 countries, I-BY1031 in 17 and I-BY73199 is found only in one – the Netherlands.

Based on confirmed genealogy, the common ancestor of the two men who have Big Y-700 haplogroup I-BY73199 was a man named Hendrik Jans Ferwerda, born in 1806 in the Netherlands, so 217 years ago. Of course, that haplogroup itself could have been born a generation or two before Hendrik. We simply won’t know for sure until more men test. More testers refine the haplotree, haplogroup ages, and refine our genealogy as well.

Haplogroup Comparison and Analysis

Let’s look at the Discover “Compare” feature of the three haplogroups from my family line from the Netherlands. Please note that your results will differ because every haplogroup is different, but this is a good way to compare the three types of haplogroup results and an excellent avenue to illustrate why testing and upgrades are so important.

The haplogroup ages are according to the Discover Time Tree.

Y-Adam to Haplogroup I1 I-M253 STR Haplogroup  to I-BY1031 Family Finder Haplogroup I-BY1031 Family Finder Haplogroup to BY73199 Big Y Haplogroup
Y-Adam (haplogroup A-PR2921) lived about 234,000 years ago
A0-T
A1
A1b
CT
CF
F
GHIJK
HIJK
IJK
IJ
I
M170
Z2699
L840
I1 I1
I-M253 lived about 4600 years ago
DF29
Z58
Z2041
Z2040
Z382
Y3643
Y2170
FT92441
FT45372
PH1178
BY1031 I-BY1031 lived about 3100 years ago
FT230048
BY65928
BY61100
I-BY73199 lived about 270 years ago

 All of the base haplogroups in the first column leading to Haplogroup I span the longest elapsed time, about 230,000 years, from Y-Adam to I-M253, the STR-predicted haplogroup, but are the least relevant to contemporary genealogy. They do tell us where we came from more distantly.

The second column moves you about 1500 years forward in time to the Family Finder confirmed haplogroup, reducing the location from pretty much everyplace in Europe (plus a few more locations) with more than 6700 branches, to 69 branches in only 17 countries.

With the fewest haplogroups, the third column spans the most recent 2800 years, bringing you unquestionably into the genealogically relevant timeframe, 270 years ago, in only one country where surnames apply.

If we had more testers from the Netherlands or nearby regions, there would probably be more branches on the tree between BY1031 and BY73199, the Big Y-700 haplogroup.

The second column is clearly an improvement over the first column which gets us to I-M253. The Family Finder upgrade from I-M253 to BY1031 provides information about our ancestors 3000-4500 years ago, where they lived and culturally, what they were doing. Ancient Connections enhance that understanding.

But the third column moves into the modern area where surnames are relevant and is the holy grail of genealogy. It’s a journey to get from Adam to the Netherlands in one family 270 years ago, but we can do it successfully between Family Finder and the Big Y-700.

Family Finder Matching

Given that these new haplogroups result from Family Finder, how do these results show in Family Finder matching? How do we know if someone with a haplogroup has taken a Y DNA test or if their haplogroup is from their Family Finder test?

  • All Family Finder haplogroups will show in the results for people who tested at FamilyTreeDNA as soon as they are all rolled out
  • All MyHeritage and Vitagene uploads, because they are processed by the Gene by Gene lab, will be shown IF they have purchased the unlock.
  • No Ancestry or 23andMe haplogroups will be shown to Family Finder matches

To determine whether or not your matches’ haplogroups result from a Y DNA test or a Family Finder haplogroup, on your Family Finder match page, look just beneath the name of your matches.

The first man above received the Family Finder haplogroup. You can see he has no other tests listed. The second man has taken the Big Y-700 test. You can see that he has a different haplogroup, and if you look beneath his name, you’ll see that he took the Big Y-700 test.

For other men, you may see the 67 or 111 marker tests, for example, so you’ll know that they are available for Y-DNA matching. That may be important information because you can then visit the appropriate surname project to see if they happen to be listed with an earliest known ancestor.

After the rollout is complete, If you have a male Family Finder match with no haplogroup shown, you know that:

  • They did not test at FamilyTree DNA
  • If they uploaded from MyHeritage or Vitagene, they did not unlock the advanced Family Finder features
  • Or, they tested at either 23andMe or Ancestry, and uploaded their results

You can always reach out to your match and ask.

How to Use This Information

There are several great ways to utilize this new information.

I have a roadblock with my Moore line. Moore is a common surname with many, many origins, so I have autosomal matches to several Moore individuals who may or may not be from my Moore line.

I do know the base haplogroup of my Moore men, but I do not have a Big Y, unfortunately, and can’t upgrade because the tester is deceased. (I wish I had ordered the Big Y out the gate, but too late now.)

As soon as the results are complete for all of the testers, I’ll be able, by process of elimination to some extent, focus ONLY on the testers who fall into Family Finder haplogroup of my Moore cousins, or at least haplogroup close for Ancestry or 23andMe upload customers. In other words, I can eliminate the rest.

I can then ask the men with a similar haplogroup to my proven Moore cousins for more information, including whether they would be willing to take a Y DNA test.

  • Second, as soon as the Family Finder processing is complete, I will know that all male Family Finder matches and uploads from MyHeritage and Vitagene that have paid for the unlock will have haplogroups displayed on the Family Finder Match page. Therefore, if there’s a male Moore with no haplogroup, I can reach out to see where they tested and if a haplogroup has been assigned, even if it’s from Ancestry or 23andMe and isn’t displayed in Family Finder.

If so, and they share the haplogroup with me, I’ll be able to include or exclude them. If included, I can then ask if they would consider taking a Y DNA test.

  • Third, for lines I don’t yet have Y DNA testers for, I can now peruse my matches, and my cousins’ matches for that line. See items one and two, above. Even if they don’t reply or agree to Y DNA testing, at least now I have SOME haplogroup for that missing line.

Discover will help me flesh out the information I have, narrow regions, find projects, look at ancient DNA for hints, and more.

  • Fourth, the haplogroups themselves. I don’t know how many million tests FamilyTreeDNA has in their database, but if we assume that half of those are male, some percentage won’t have taken a Y DNA test at all. We’ll be able to obtain Y-DNA information for lines where there may be no other living descendant. I have at least one like that. He was the end of the surname line and is deceased, with no sons.

I’m literally ecstatic that I’ll be able to obtain at least something for that line. If it’s anything like my example Netherlands lineage, the Family Finder haplogroup may be able to point me to an important region of Europe – or maybe someplace else very unexpected.

The Bottom Line

Here’s the bottom line. You don’t know what you don’t know – and our ancestors are FULL of surprises.

I can’t even begin to tell you how MUCH I’m looking forward to this haplogroup rollout.

To prepare, I’m making a list of my genealogical lines:

  • If the paternal line, meaning surname line, is represented by any match in any database
  • If that line is represented by a known person in the FamilyTreeDNA database and by whom
  • If they or someone from that line has joined a surname or other FamilyTreeDNA project, and if so, which one
  • If they’ve taken a Y DNA test, and what kind – watch STR results for an updated haplogroup
  • If they’ve taken a Family Finder test – my cousin is a good example of a known individual whose kit I can watch for a new haplogroup
  • Old and new haplogroup, if applicable

If my only relative from that line is in another vendor’s database, I’ll ask if they will upload their file to FamilyTreeDNA – and explain why by sharing this article. (Feel free to do the same.) A Y DNA haplogroup is a good incentive, and I would be glad to pay for the unlock at FamilyTreeDNA for cousins who represent Y and mitochondrial DNA lines I don’t already have.

One way I sweeten the pie is to offer testing scholarships to select lines where I need either the Y DNA or mitochondrial DNA of relevant ancestors. It’s a good thing these haplogroups are being rolled out a few thousand at a time! I need to budget for all the scholarships I’ll want to offer.

I feel like I won the lottery, and FamilyTreeDNA is giving me a free haplogroup encyclopedia of information about my ancestors through my cousins – even those who haven’t taken Y DNA tests. I can’t even express how happy this makes me.

What lines do you want to discover more about, and what is your plan? Tests are on sale now if you need them!

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

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

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ancient DNA

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

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

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

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

Wesley Revels’ Lineage

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Lynn

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

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

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

Family members are found in Baldwin Township, shown above.

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

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

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

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

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

The 1890 census does not exist.

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

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

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

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

Subclades of Haplogroup O

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

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

How Closely Related Are These Haplogroup O Men?

How closely related are these two men?

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

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

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

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

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

Information provided by the project administrators is as follows:

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

Resources:

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

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

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

Haplogroup O Project Group Time Tree

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

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

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

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

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

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

Discover Time Tree

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

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

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

Geography

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Academic Papers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Spanish

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

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

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

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

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

Five Possibilities

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

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

Do we have any additional evidence?

Other Haplogroup O DNA

From my book, DNA for Native American Genealogy:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FamilyTreeDNA Haplotree and Discover

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

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

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

Let’s look at our three distinct clusters.

Cluster 1 – Pacific Northwest – Alaska and Canada

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cluster 2 – Mexico

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cluster 3 – East Coast

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Returning to the Discover Time Tree Maps

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Timeline

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

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

Conclusions

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

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

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

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

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

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

What’s Next?

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

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

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

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

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Étienne Hebert (c1625-c1670): Two French Brothers & Their Ancient Ancestors – 52 Ancestors #413

In the book, Les vielles familles d’Yamachiche: vingt-trois généalogies, v. 4 published in 1908 in Ontario, we discover that Étienne Hebert is one of two brothers who came from France and settled in Acadia, now Nova Scotia. Étienne married Marie Gaudet and Antoine Hebert married Genevieve LeFranc.

We know that Étienne and Antoine were brothers because in the 2nd marriage record for Jean-Jacques Hébert (1681-?) to Marguerite Leprince on April 27, 1734, at Saint-Charles-les-Mines, they were granted a dispensation from a 3rd degree consanguine relationship. The only overlap in their two family trees would be the parents of Étienne and Antoine Hebert.

Thank goodness for those church records.

Origins

Stephen A. White provided the following information about Étienne.

HÉBERT, Étienne, came from France with his wife Marie Gaudet, according to nine depositions: one from his grandson Jean Hébert (Doc. inéd., Vol. III, p. 11), one from Pierre Trahan, husband of his granddaughter Madeleine Comeau (ibid., p. 8), one from Pierre and Madeleine’s son Pierre Trahan (ibid., pp. 110-111) and one from their nephews Sylvestre and Simon Trahan (ibid., p. 30), two from husbands of Étienne’s great-granddaughters (ibid., Vol. II, p. 182; Vol. III, p. 90), one from a great-great-grandson (ibid., Vol. III, pp. 93-94), and two from husbands of his great-great-granddaughters (ibid., pp. 45, 92-93). Seven of these depositions name his wife as Marie Gaudet; only those of the two Pierre Trahans, father and son, do not.

Lucy LeBlanc Consentino documents these priceless depositions here.

Parents

There have been several proposed and presumed parents of Étienne and Antoine Hebert. None are proven, and some have been disproven. I’m not going to recount each theory here. I’ll briefly mention the most common ones and strongly suggest that anyone tempted to assign parents for these men consult existing resources and arguments first.

Tim Hebert’s website is no longer online, but you can view it here at Wayback Machine. Tim did an exceptional job documenting the various theories and Hebert descendants.

It has been said that possibly the brothers were from south of Loudon (LaChaussee, Martaize, etc.), however, since Charles Menou d’Aulnay’s family had land in that vicinity. If he recruited settlers from that area, there is a chance they came from there, but there is no proof of where they (or most other) Acadians came from. The linguistic studies by Genevieve Massignon tried to say that they were from the Loudon area, but perhaps she was focusing too much. It is probably true that they came from western France. But the lack of documentation in the Loudon region means that perhaps we’re looking in the wrong place. Michael Poirier has suggested they came from west of Loudon at the coast … near Baie de Bourgneuf.

He bases this on:
– the location of the monastery of the Assumption (on the island Chauvet), which was regularly attended by Richelieu and was the property of his brother, Alphonse.
– Port-Royal and the church of St Jean-Baptiste
– salt-water marshes in the area were drained … much like the dyke system utilized in Acadia
– it was a zone surrounded by Protestants and enclosing Catholics

Genevieve Massignon (1921-1966) argues that a number of familial alliances existed among the first Acadian settlers PRIOR to their arrival from France, pointing to a common French origin. She believes they lived in the Acadian Governor d’Aulnay’s seigneury in France near Loudun (comprised of the villages of Angliers, Aulnay, Martaizé, and La Chausée). The Hébert family was allied with the Gaudets through Étienne’s marriage to Marie. Marie’s sister Francoise was also allied with the Leblanc family through her marriage to Daniel. Evidence of their marriages in France is found in the Belle-Isle-en-Mer declarations in 1767. Moreover, a certain Jean Gaudet was censistaire in 1634 on land at Martaizé (Vienne) in the Seigneurie owned by the mother of Acadian governor Charles d’Aulnay. However, Massignon’s research failed to find any relevant baptismal or marriage records.

Another couple, Jacques Hebert and Marie Juneau have been debunked as parents, based on the date of their marriage and analysis by Stephen White. Jacques was found in Acadia 30 years before Étienne and Antoine, then moved into mainland Canada. It’s unlikely that his two sons would be found in Acadia and not near or with him. Not to mention the depositions that state that Étienne and Antoine were born in France.

Another parent candidate was Louis Habert who is generally considered to have been the first permanent settler in Canada, arriving in 1604. He married Marie Rolet in Paris in 1602 but wasn’t known to live in Acadia. Spelling variations of this family name include Hebert, Harbert, Herbert, Herbot, Harbelot, and others. You can read more about this at FamilySearch here.

One source stated that Stephen White reported that Etienne Hebert arrived on the ship, La Verge in 1648. Karen Theriot Reader, upon further examination, determined that the page given as the source does not in fact provide that information, nor elsewhere by White.

However, the Verve did arrive in 1648, chartered by Emmanuel LeBorgne, Sieur of Coudray, to transport supplies. No passenger list exists, and several ships arrived in Acadia over the years.

In a letter to Tim Hebert, Stephen White stated that their parents are “unknown.” No birth records have been found, and White found none of the proposed parents convincing or even probable.

We simply don’t know when and where Étienne and Antoine were born. It’s fair to say it was in France because families weren’t imported until 1636. The Hebert brothers were born in the 1620s. They would have been teenagers or young men in 1636.

What Was Happening in Acadia?

Warm up your tea or coffee, ‘cause this is a fascinating tale.

Acadia was truly the frontier and constantly caught in the middle in a tug of war between France and England for control of both the land and resources, along with the people.

Settlement in Acadia began in 1604, but we’re joining this history 28 years later.

In 1632, control of Acadia passed from the English back to the French, who immediately launched voyages transporting traders and workers, some of whom became settlers. Their initial goal wasn’t settlement, though, but trading posts.

Port Royal is shown on Champlain’s 1632 map.

Isaac de Razilly was a French noble sea captain and knight who convinced his cousin, Cardinal Richelieu, chief minister to the King of France, that colonizing and establishing fur trade with Acadia was a profitable business venture. As a bonus that probably sounded attractive to Richelieu, they could convert and baptize the Native people, too.

Razilly’s 1632 voyage on the L’Esperance a Dieu included about 300 people, mostly men with possibly 12-15 women. A French newspaper report from that time states that a third ship from Rochelle joined the other two. A mason, baker, nailmaker-blacksmith, joiners, gunsmiths, sawyers, laborers, and soldiers signed up.

In 1640, notarial records in La Rochelle, France, show many contracts of engagement for workers in Acadia, although most of those people aren’t shown in the 1671 census, meaning they either died or returned to France when their engagement was over. In 1640, at least 25 men and 5 women signed up.

Couillard-Despres in “Les Gouvernors” states that 63 men arrived on the Saint Clement in 1642 to assist Charles LaTour.

After Razilly’s death in 1635, his cousin, Charles de Menou d’Aulnay, de Charnisay prepared to take over the administration of Acadia. By this time, there were 44 inhabitants at Le Have, Razily’s base of operation. Sometime between 1635 and 1640, d’Aulnay moved the settlement to Port Royal, but the men who had married Native American women likely did not move with him.

However, Charles La Tour, who had lived in Acadia since he was 17 and was married to a Mi’kmaq woman, had other plans. His father, Claude, obtained a grant for Nova Scotia from the English king, and Charles was appointed Governor, serving from 1631-1642. In essence, the LaTour father-son duo had outsmarted d’Aulnay.

Workers still continued to arrive. The 1636 passenger list of the St. Jehan, including occupations and some location origins, still exists.

d’Aulnay and La Tour began as competitors, with LaTour working out of Cap Sable and the St. John River area with traders, and d’Aulnay, who moved the Acadian settlement from La Have to Port Royal, beginning cultivation. Given where we find Étienne Hebert living, he likely arrived with d’Aulnay.

However, the competition between those men soon became animosity, then open warfare, with both men claiming to be in charge of all of Acadia.

If you think there was no drama in a relatively unpopulated area, just try to keep this next bit straight.

In 1640, after LaTour’s Mi’kmaq wife died, he married a French Huguenot woman, Françoise-Marie Jacquelin, who had powerful connections.

In 1642, d’Aulnay had LaTour, a Huguenot, charged with treason against France. LaTour’s well-connected wife traveled to France to advocate on behalf of her husband, returning with a warship for him to defend himself.

Perhaps this was a bit hasty.

In the Spring of 1643, La Tour led a party of English mercenaries against the French Acadian colony at Port-Royal. His 270 Puritan and Huguenot troops killed three men, burned a mill, slaughtered cattle, and seized 18,000 livres worth of furs.

Apparently, LaTour was a traitor after all, at least from the French perspective.

LaTour then traveled to Boston seeking reinforcements from the English, and while he was gone, d’Aulnay seized all of his possessions and outposts, including Fort LaTour.

Are you keeping track of this? I think the score was 3 to 3 here, with a Hail Mary pass underway. Get the popcorn.

LaTour may have been traveling to Boston, but his wife, Françoise-Marie, had remained at home and was not about to relinquish Fort LaTour without a fight.

In the ensuing battle, Françoise-Marie, at the ripe old age of 23, defended Fort LaTour in the Battle of St. John for three days, using the warship. D’Aulnay lost 33 men but on the fourth day, was able to capture the fort. LaTour’s men were hung at the gallows as Françoise-Marie was forced to watch with a rope around her neck, just in case she got any bright ideas. She was clearly not a woman to be trifled with.

Françoise-Marie was not hung, but Nicolas Denys recorded in his journal that she died three weeks later as a prisoner in captivity. The cause remains unknown, but it’s safe to say that her death was a volley in war. 

After learning that his wife had died, his possessions confiscated, and his men killed, LaTour sought refuge in Quebec City. He did not return to Acadia for several years, but return he would – eventually.

For the time being, d’Aulnay was firmly in control, but that only lasted a few years.

In 1650, d’Aulnay drowned when his canoe overturned, which provided the opening LaTour had been waiting for. LaTour sailed to France, obtained royal favor, his property restored, and returned to Acadia as governor in 1653, accompanied by several new colonists, including Philippe Mius d’Entremont, 1st Baron of Pobomcoup.

It was about this time, around 1650, that Étienne Hebert married Marie Gaudet. Perhaps they hoped that living near her parents, a dozen miles upriver, would be more peaceful and less exposed to attack and conflict.

LaTour had remained a widower since his wife’s death defending Fort LaTour in 1645, but in 1653, he married…wait for it… d’Aulnay’s widow, Jeanne Motin. It was not a marriage in name only, as they had five children. Some said they married to heal the rift between the warring d’Aulnay and LaTour camps, some think it was simply a marriage of convenience for both, and others feel it was LaTour’s final victory over d’Aulnay. However, Jeanne was no shrinking violet because she evicted Nicolas Denys when he attempted to exploit d’Aulnay’s death by setting up trading posts at St. Ann and St. Peters.

LaTour wasn’t off the hook, though, because in an odd sort of way, d’Aulnay still managed to be a thorn in LaTour’s side – even from beyond the grave.

Along with d’Aulnay’s property and wife came his substantial debts to Emmanuel Le Borgne, his main financier from La Rochelle. There were two sides to this story because, as part of the deal, La Bourg and other seigneurs were supposed to recruit and transport new settlers to Acadia and care for them by building communal resources like mills and bake-ovens, but they didn’t.

It appears that the Acadians and their French sponsors were both relatively unhappy. The French did not live up to their end of the bargain by building mills and ovens, and consequently, the Acadians resisted paying taxes. Everyone resented the English, but the English needed the Acadian settlers to work the land. And, of course, the land passed back and forth between the French and English from time to time, punctuated by skirmishes and outright attacks.

Acadia, for an Atlantic peninsula of land with few people, was drama-central.

By 1653, it was estimated that there were 45-50 households at Port Royal and La Have, which provides us an estimate of 300-350 people, including 60 single men. Étienne Hebert was lucky to find a bride, any bride.

In 1654, Port Royal was still small, with approximately 270 residents, as estimated by pioneer Nicholas Denys. Denys was a French prisoner at Port Royal who had been responsible for recruiting volunteers for the 1632 Razilly expedition of 300 men from Rochelle, France. They landed at La Hève near modern Bridgewater, the eventual site of the Gaudet village. This location was near the upper reaches of the tidal portion of the Riviere du Dauphine, and their boat probably could not progress further.

Denys did us the favor of describing Port Royal in 1653:

There are numbers of meadows on both shores, and two islands which possess meadows, and which are 3 or 4 leagues from the fort in ascending. There is a great extent of meadows which the sea used to cover, and which the Sieur d’Aulnay had drained. It bears now fine and good wheat, and since the English have been masters of the country, the residents who were lodged near the fort have for the most part abandoned there houses and have gone to settle on the upper part of the river. They have made their clearings below and above this great meadow, which belongs at present to Madame de La Tour. There they have again drained other lands which bear wheat in much greater abundance than those which they cultivated round the fort, good though those were. All the inhabitants there are the ones whome Monsieur le Commandeur de Razilly had brought from France to La Have; since that time they have multiplied much at Port Royal, where they have a great number of cattle and swine.

The commentary about the French settling on the upper part of the river may be very important for the Hebert family because that’s exactly where they are found.

Denys also recorded that Robert Sedgewick of Boston had been ordered by Robert Cromwell to attack New Holland (New York). As Sedgewick prepared, a peace treaty was signed between the English and the Dutch. Since he was “all dressed up with nowhere to go,” he attacked Acadia in August 1654 and destroyed most of the settlements, including Port Royal, La Have, and the Saint John River village. Sedgewick left the area but appointed an Acadian council with Guillaume Trahan in charge. Some of the French may have returned to France at this point.

Denys doesn’t say if Sedgewick burned the upper river homesteads and farms or if he was satisfied with torching Port Royal. Living 12-14 miles away in the out-country may have been the saving grace of the Hebert and Gaudet families. Or, their homesteads and farms may have been destroyed, too. Certainly, if not burned out, they were devastated by Acadia falling to the English.

Acadia was back under English rule and would remain so until being returned, again, to the French in 1667.

After Sedgewick captured Acadia for the English, LaTour went to London to regain his property, again. Being a Protestant would have worked in his favor, as well as having led the English in raids against Port Royal in 1643.

In 1656, Cromwell granted property to two Englishmen and LaTour, but LaTour sold his share to the Englishmen and moved to Cap Sable, on the southern end of the peninsula, to attempt to live the rest of his life in peace.

We don’t know positively that the Hebert brothers were in Acadia at this time, but it’s almost assured. They had probably been in Acadia for between 10 and 30 years. If White is correct, they had resided in Acadia for eight years. Windows of immigration existed, but generally only when the French were in charge, although France imported settlers to other nearby parts of New France. The French were not imported directly into Acadia when the English ruled.

In 1666, France stopped sending colonists, ostensibly for fear of depopulating the mother-country. However, the English were still arriving in the colonies to escape religious prosecution and for economic reasons. Therefore, the Acadians were exposed to at least some English settlers, probably spoke and understood at least a little English, and established some level of trade with the English colonies along the Eastern seaboard.

By Mikmaq – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1351882

Given the 1671 census and the ages of his children, we know Étienne was married by 1651 and that his wife’s parents also settled in Acadia.

Life in Acadia always seemed to be contentious and apparently, in no small part, dangerous.

Étienne was probably in his mid to late 40s when he died, about 1670. He clearly didn’t die of old age, but probably as a result of hunting, fishing, or farming – some accident. Or, perhaps, there was a skirmish. It seemed like there was always some sort of skirmish, but a simple act of daily living such as fishing carried the risk of drowning.

The Catholic church records don’t exist, if they even had a priest at that time, so we don’t know when Étienne died. We can rest assured that, if possible, he was buried in the parish cemetery, now the Garrison Cemetery in Annapolis Royal, beside the fort and the Catholic church.

The First Acadian Census

Even though Acadia was officially returned to France in 1667, it didn’t actually happen right away. In 1670, the English surrendered the fort at Port Royal, apparently without incident. The new French governor arrived, bringing with him another 60 settlers and 30 soldiers. The new governor ordered a census, thankfully. He likely needed to know how many people would be paying taxes.

The first Acadian census was taken in 1671, documenting between 240 and 350  Acadian residents (depending which count you utilize) in 68 households in Port Royal and one household each in three other locations. Historians know some residents in settlements weren’t counted, and neither were Acadian/Native American families living with the Native people. Estimates of the entire Acadian population reach as high as 500.

Étienne was already deceased, but we can tell quite a bit from his widow’s census record, transcribed here by Lucy LeBlanc Consentino.

Marie Gaudet, widow of Étienne Hebert, 38. She has 10 children, two married children: Marie 20, Marguerite 19; Emmanuel 18, not yet married, Étienne 17, Jean 13, Francoise 10, Catherine 9, Martine 6, Michel 5, Antoine 1, 4 cattle, 5 sheep and 3 arpents of cultivated land.

This tells us that Etienne and Marie were married in about 1650, or maybe somewhat earlier. Their eldest living child was age 20. Étienne was probably about 25 years old when he married, so I’d estimate his birth year as 1625, give or take a few years. It appears that Marie Gaudet and her daughter, Marie Hebert, and her husband, Michel de Forest, and their families were probably living either on the same farm or even in the same house.

Marie’s youngest child was age 1, so we know that Étienne died sometime between 1669 and 1671.

His brother, Antoine Hebert is listed three houses away as a 50-year-old cooper, so he was born about 1621.

Hebert and Gaudet Allied Families

It’s clear that the Hebert family was somehow allied with the Gaudet family as early as 1650 when their children married. It’s possible that they married in France, or Acadia.

What we do know is that these two families lived in close proximity on the Riviere de Dauphine, now the Annapolis River.

This 1733 map at the Nova Scotia Archives is based on the 1707 census route and shows about a mile and a half or two miles distance between the Hebert and Gaudet homesteads – 57 years after Étienne Hebert and Marie Gaudet married.

Etienne Hebert lived along Bloody Creek, where the Hebert Village is found, courtesy of MapAnnapolis, below.

We know where Etienne, Marie, and their family lived and at least something about their life – but what else can we unearth?

The Hebert DNA Story

Eventually, the answer to where the Hebert brothers originated in France will be told through their Y-DNA, passed directly from father to son through the generations without ever being admixed with the mother’s DNA, or divided.

The Hebert family is well-represented in the Acadian AmerIndian Project with three Big-Y testers showing the same haplogroup. Haplogroup R-BY31006 was born about 1650, almost exactly when Étienne and his brother were marrying and having children near Fort Royal.

Click to enlarge any image

Two present-day project members descend from Étienne, and one descends from Étienne’s brother, Antoine. They have the same high-resolution haplogroup, so we know that their father had the same mutation that he gave to both sons. How I wish some Hebert men from France could test, but DNA testing for genealogy is illegal there.

Unfortunately, no other contemporary man of any surname is close to our Hebert cluster. The haplogroup ancestor upstream of R-BY31006 is the parent haplogroup R-BY31008 that occurred about 245 BCE, or 2245 years ago. The descendants of that man are also found in England, Norway, and Scotland, in addition to our Hebert men in France.

That’s quite interesting.

But there’s something even more interesting.

Ancient DNA

Looking at Ancient Connections in Discover, I note that one of the Hebert Ancient Connections was found in France and has been placed into haplogroup R-Z31644. I wonder what the connection is. Let’s take a look at that haplogroup.

The TimeTree shows us that nine ancient DNA samples are found on different haplogroup branches of R-Z31644, of which only one is found in Metz, France, and the rest in the British Isles. It’s unclear exactly what this means. Only the French sample and three others in England and Ireland are found in the current era, meaning after 1 CE. This was clearly prior to the Battle of Hastings in 1066, after which an influx of French settled in England.

Eight ancient DNA results are found in England, but none share a common ancestor earlier than 4300 years ago. Notably, one English burial from about 2000-2300 years ago shares a common ancestor with the Metz, France remains about 4000 years ago. The eight English remains, and our Metz guy descend from a common ancestor about 4300 years ago.

Did Étienne’s ancestors descend from the ancient sample at Metz? Maybe the study provides more clues.

According to the study’s authors:

The Sablon district, which is located in the southern part of the city of Metz, was, during the Gallo-Roman period, a huge necropolis where both inhumations and cremations are found. Towards the end of the 19th century, the exploitation of the sandpits enabled the uncovering of sarcophagi (stone), cists (brick and tile), coffins (wood) and vats (lead).

These characterise the new burial practices developed during late Antiquity. [Spans from about the 3rd to the 6th or 7th centuries.]

The largest funerary space spans almost a kilometre, on either side of the via Scarponensis (portion of the Reims/Metz road).

The Sablon area can be compared to the Collatina necropolis close to Rome by its chaotic organisation, although at a different scale

Looking at a map of Metz helps put this in context.

It’s unclear exactly where along this route the burials were discovered beginning in the late 1800s. They extend for more than a kilometer on both sides of the road in the Sablon neighborhood of Metz.

The Sablon neighborhood extends from near the old city center along the main artery that crosses railroad tracks that appear to sever the original road into the city.

Does the history of Metz tell us who lived there and what was occurring during this time? Indeed, it does.

Metz is located at the confluence of the Moselle and Seille rivers, near the junction of France, Germany, and Luxembourg. The original inhabitants were Celtic. The town was known as the “city of Mediomatrici,” a fortified city of the tribe by the same name.

The Mediomatrici village evolved into a Gallo-Celtic city after Julius Caesar conquered the Gauls in 52 BCE.

Named Divodurum Mediomatricum by the Romans, present-day Metz was integrated into the Roman empire in the first century CE, after which it was colloquially referred to as the Holy Village.

The historic district has kept part of the Gallo-Roman city with Divodurum’s Cardo Maximus, then called Via Scarponensis. Today, this is Trinitaires, Taison, and Serpenoise streets in the old city center, and the Decumanus Maximus, which is En Fournirue and d’Estrées streets. The Roman Forum was located at the Cardo and Decumanus intersection and is the Saint-Jacques Square today, as shown below.

By Alice Volkwardsen at German Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10681319

The ancient burial occurred between 432 and 551 CE, as calculated from a molar and was found in a very large Gallo-Roman necropolis, more than a kilometer long, located on both sides along the old Roman road.

This cityscape shows Divodurum Mediomatricum in the second century CE, capital of the Mediomatrici, ancestor city of present-day Metz. The original Roman amphitheater is shown at far left, and the living quarters are located within the city walls, protecting them from attack. A wonderful summary of archaeological findings can be found here.

Today the the Centre Pompidou-Metzocation is found at the site of the original large Roman amphitheater. This amphitheater held upwards of 25,000 people and was the largest and most consequential amphitheater outside of Rome.

Rome’s influence ended when the city was attacked, pillaged and burned by the Huns on April 7, 451, then passed into the hands of the Franks about 50 years later. By 511, Metz was the capital of the Kingdom of Austrasia.

How Does the Metz Burial Connect to England?

How do the dots between Metz and the British Isles connect, given that the common ancestor of our Metz burial and the British Isles burials has descendants scattered throughout the British Isles and in Metz?

The Celts first migrated to the British Isles about 1000 BCE, or about 3000 years ago, so this ancient French man and the other ancient burials in the British Isles make sense. Their common ancestor lived 4300 years ago in Europe. The closest common ancestor of our Metz man and any English burial occurred 4000 years ago, 1000 years before the earliest Celtic migrations across the English Channel.

This man from Metz lived 1500 or 1600 years ago and shares an ancestor with several ancient British men in addition to our Hebert line and was likely Celtic..

Of course, not every Celtic man left Europe. Many stayed and eventually integrated with whoever the next conquering army was. That ensured survival. Metz was a prize to be won, controlled over the centuries by many masters.

We don’t know if this specific Celtic man buried along the Gallo-Roman Road was a direct ancestor to our Hebert line, but if not, they were assuredly related and shared common ancestors. The descendants of haplogroup R-BY31008 are unquestionably the ancestors of our Hebert line.

Back to Étienne

Étienne’s Y-DNA has identified his ancestors as Celtic some 4000 years, or 200 generations ago.

More recently, his Y-DNA confirmed his connection to Antoine Hebert, and the church records of both of their descendants confirmed them as brothers.

Depositions given by Étienne’s grandchildren, spouses of grandchildren, great-grandchildren, nieces, and nephews confirm that Étienne was born in France, but, unfortunately, does not say where. This information alone debunked some of his parent candidates.

We find no suggestion of his parents in Acadia, although that’s not impossible. Many people died and never made it into existing records. The Hebert brothers likely arrived together as young men. Antoine may have married in France, as his wife’s surname is not found in Acadia. Of course, her father could have died and left no record. Étienne’s wife’s family lives next to the Heberts in Acadia, but we don’t know if Étienne and Marie Gaudet married in France or after arrival in Acadia.

How well did Étienne remember France? Did he look over his slice of countryside along the Riviere du Dauphine, with its dikes holding the tidal river at bay, and think of similar dikes constructed by his ancestors in France?

What about his parents?

Did they die, or did he sail away, knowing he and his brother would never see them or their siblings again?

Did their family shrink into tiny dots on the horizon, waving from the wharf, then disappear forever?

Did the brothers leave because they wanted to, or did they leave perhaps because they had no family left? Often, orphans had few options in their home country, and any opportunity was welcomed.

Did Étienne marry Marie Gaudet in Acadia, or did they marry someplace in France, then two Hebert boys immigrating to the new land with the Gaudet family?

In one way, we know so much – that Étienne matches an ancient Celtic burial in Metz who died about 1500 years ago, with whom he shared a common ancestor about 4000 years ago – yet we can’t identify Étienne’s parents. At least not today, but hope springs eternal. Two years ago, we didn’t know this.

Hopefully, one day, DNA testing for genealogy will be available to men in France. Our answers lie in Hebert men in some small French village, probably along a river that was once a highway of history.

Acknowledgments

I’m incredibly grateful to the Hebert men who have taken the Big Y-700 DNA test at FamilyTreeDNA, and to FamilyTreeDNA, because without those tests and the Discover tool that includes ancient DNA connections, we would never be able to peer beyond the mists of time into their deep ancestry.

As more men test and more academic studies and ancient DNA results are added to the Discover database, we’ll continue to learn more. The Big-Y DNA test is the gift that just keeps on giving.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on, and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Ancestry Updates Ethnicity, Introduces New Features & Pushes Some Behind Paywall

I knew something had changed at Ancestry when I signed in a few days ago and saw the following message:

Ancestry assured me that I’m fine, but people who don’t have a subscription can no longer see some DNA features.

Ancestry has placed some previously free features behind a paywall – meaning a subscription called AncestryDNA Plus.

If you have a full subscription to Ancestry, you’re covered. You’re not if you don’t have a full subscription and only ordered a DNA test.

I was waiting for clarification from Ancestry, which arrived in an email yesterday.

Ancestry’s Clarification

In the email from Ancestry, they listed the new AncestryDNA premium features, some of which were previously purchased separately, like Traits, some of which were included with the AncestryDNA test, and some of which are or will be new.

There are several features and changes, so let’s take a look.

AncestryDNA Plus Subscription

The biggest change is that Ancestry will now be requiring some type of membership, either a full Ancestry membership or an AncestryDNA Plus membership, in order to access several DNA features.

Ancestry has placed these features behind a paywall for customers without a full Ancestry subscription.

The subscription price is $29.99 for six months, not a year, and the subscription automatically renews. This means that unless you have a full Ancestry subscription, access to several DNA features now costs you $59.98 per year in addition to the price of your original DNA test. Ouch.

Whooboy. I can hear the screaming from here.

Yes, I know this is NOT what we were expecting when we purchased DNA tests, and I realize it’s quite pricey – especially given that it’s not a one-time purchase but an ongoing subscription.

I will review each of these features – but let me say that if you’ve been doing fine without them so far for your genealogy, there’s probably not anything you really need here.

The most important feature that genealogists need that is NOT available without a full Ancestry subscription is full access to the trees of our matches – and, to be clear, that is NOT available through the AncestryDNA Plus subscription.

Let’s look at each feature separately.

Traits and Traits by Parent

You know all those questions Ancestry has been asking you? Well, this is why.

Ancestry is comparing the DNA of individuals with specific answers to identify genetic commonalities.

Traits was a separate uplift fee in the past, but now it’s included in the AncestryDNA Plus subscription.

You may not have Traits on your account yet. My second test, which is a newer test, does NOT have traits available, but I’m sure it will soon.

If you have Traits, you will have a banner above your DNA Story, Matches and ThruLines on your DNA Results Summary page.

Ancestry includes 42 traits today.

Ancestry shows you which traits are most influenced by which parent, or both parents.

Where you fall within that range is provided as well.

Clicking on each trait provides additional information.

Don’t get too excited about this feature because some of these traits are apparently a lot more environmental than genetic. For example, according to Ancestry, male hair loss is “at least 4% genetic.” Each trait has similar information provided, and some have a surprisingly small percentage of genetic affinity. Others have a surprisingly large number of influencing genes.

Here’s a chart of my traits and the parent that Ancestry has assigned as most likely to have influenced this trait. Please note that for Ancestry to split your Traits by parent, you MUST be able to identify which side of your family your ethnicity categories descend from using SideView, which I wrote about, here. If your parents aren’t identified correctly, the source of your traits certainly won’t be either.

Trait & % Genetic My Result Influenced by Trait Accuracy
Alcohol Flush – 4% Face does not flush Maternal Wrong
Asparagus odor – 4% Able to smell asparagus metabolites (in urine) Paternal Accurate
Birth weight – 5% Above average Both Unknown
Bitter sensitivity – 20% Unable to taste a certain bitter flavor (PTC in brussel sprouts) Both Accurate – I taste brussel sprouts, but they don’t taste bitter
Caffeine intake – 4% Likely to drink a lot less caffeine than average Paternal Wrong – I can’t drink caffeinated beverages anymore, but when I could, I consumed coffee by the pot
Cilantro aversion – 5% Unlikely to enjoy cilantro Maternal Accurate
Cleft Chin – 8% No cleft chin Paternal Accurate
Dancing – 7% Least likely to enjoy dancing Maternal This is hilarious – my mother was a professional dancer, and I love dancing
Earlobes – 9% Unattached earlobes Maternal Accurate
Earwax type – 2% Wet earwax Both Accurate
Eye color – 7% Brown Maternal Accurate – although both parents had brown eyes
Facial hair fullness – 7% Patchier facial hair Maternal No idea
Finger length – 5% Ring finger longer than index finger Maternal Wrong
Freckles – 9% Unlikely Maternal Accurate
Hair color – 25% Dark hair Paternal Accurate, although both parents had dark hair
Hair strand thickness – 1% Thin hair Maternal Wrong – hair very thick
Hair type – 1% Wavy Maternal Accurate
Heart rate recovery – 12% Quicker recovery rate after exercise Both No idea
Introvert or extrovert – 1% Introvert Maternal Also hilarious – my mother was very much the extrovert
Iris patterns – 35% Furrows, crypts, and rings Both Can’t tell
Male hair loss – 4% Lower chance Paternal Probably accurate – my father was not balding in his 60s
Morning or night person – 17% Morning Paternal Wrong, wrong, 1000 times wrong
Omega 3 – 4% Average levels Both No idea
Oxygen use – 38% Average ability to raise maximum oxygen use Paternal No idea
Picky eater – 8% Picky Maternal Wrong
Remembering dreams – 1% Unlikely Paternal I remember some, sometimes, but they tend to fade
Risk Taking – 9% More likely than 60% of the population Both Probably accurate
Skin pigmentation – 13% Light to medium Both Accurate
Sun sneezing – 8% Non sneezer Paternal Accurate
Sweet sensitivity – 4% Extra sensitive Both Accurate
Taking naps – 6% Not a nap taker Maternal Accurate
Tolerating dairy – 1% Likely to tolerate Paternal Accurate
Umami sensitivity – 1% Less sensitive than others Both Uncertain – I can taste Umami but since this is comparative, I don’t really know
Unibrow – 1% No unibrow Paternal Accurate
Vitamin A – 7% Average level Maternal No idea
Vitamin B12 – 5% Average level Maternal No idea
Vitamin C – 4% Average level Paternal No idea
Vitamin D – 10% Average level Both No idea
Vitamin E – 14% Average level Maternal No idea
Wisdom Teeth – 8% Likely to develop all four teeth Maternal Accurate

If you’re thinking to yourself – how can some of these traits be anything BUT genetic, such as unibrow, you’re not alone. How can unibrow and some other traits be anything BUT genetic?

Initially, I thought maybe this would help me learn about my father, who died when I was young, but based on the low percentage of genetic influence, combined with answers that I know are inaccurate – I can’t really rely on any of this genealogically either. All I can say is that I’m really glad I didn’t pay for this feature.

Ancestry writes about their trait predictions in a white paper, here.

At the bottom of the Traits page is a “Compare Traits” tab where you can invite your matches to share traits with you.

My own second kit is not on the list of people to invite, so maybe immediate family is not available to invite? Or maybe it’s because that kit doesn’t have traits yet.

Ethnicity Inheritance

Ethnicity Inheritance shows which of your ethnicities were inherited from each parent. This was previously included in the price of your DNA test, but now it’s available through either the full Ancestry subscription or through the AncestryDNA Plus subscription.

I wrote about ethnicity inheritance when SideView was introduced, here.

Matches are now split by parent.

These matches and totals have recently been updated, at the same time as ThruLines.

Significant issues have been reported with both features, with matches incorrectly assigned that were previously assigned correctly. ThruLines has improved somewhat, but still has not been corrected entirely. Many known cousins who were previously linked to our common ancestor in ThruLines are no longer linked. I wrote about the ThruLines issue, here.

Chromosome Painter

Ancestry’s chromosome painter is NOT a chromosome browser. Yes, it looks similar, but it definitely IS NOT the same thing.

What’s the difference between a chromosome browser and chromosome painting?

Chromosome browsing with matches and chromosome painting look similar, but they aren’t the same and have different functions.

A chromosome browser allows you to compare your matching DNA segments with others and view them in a browser to see which shared DNA segments overlap, indicating a common ancestor. A chromosome browser is required to perform triangulation, which confirms common ancestors and facilitates identifying which segments descend from specific ancestors. I provided a list of triangulation resources, here.

For example, three maternal cousins above are compared on my chromosomes (in grey) using the chromosome browser at FamilyTreeDNA. The three bars under chromosome 1 represent my matches with three selected cousins who descend from Hiram Ferverda and Eva Miller.

  • The first blue cousin matches me in two locations on chromosome 1.
  • The second red cousin matches me in two locations on chromosome 1, one of which is the same location as the first blue cousin.
  • The third turquoise cousin does not match me on chromosome 1 but does on chromosomes 3 and 4.
  • None of those three cousins match me on chromosome 2.
  • On chromosome 3, you can see that all three cousins match me on a portion of the same segment which in this case indicates that we all inherited that segment from our common ancestral couple. I know these cousins, so I already know this is a maternal match, but I can easily confirm by checking my mother’s results or using the matrix tool to be sure we all match each other. Any unknown match who matches us on this same segment also descends from this same ancestral line – meaning either Bauke and Eva, or one of their ancestral lines.

All major vendors except Ancestry provide a chromosome browser.

Chromosome painting is different.

While a chromosome browser displays your matching segments with selected matches, ethnicity chromosome painting automatically paints your ethnicity on your maternal and paternal chromosomes at each location.

Ancestry paints your ethnicity on your chromosomes by parent, by assigned world region, based on YOUR designation of maternal and paternal “sides.” My maternal chromosome is displayed on the top, and my paternal chromosome is displayed on the bottom.

With chromosome painting, there’s no way to see which matches match you on specific chromosomes. Nor does Ancestry provide you with segment information. In other words, you can’t compare a specific segment to see which of your matches match you on that segment.

However, that’s one of the great features at DNAPainter, and they’ve found a way to utilize Ancestry’s painting for that purpose.

DNAPainter estimates the segment information from Ancestry’s chromosome painting, which means you can utilize the segment information from Ancestry at DNAPainter. Having said that, I’m very skeptical of Ancestry’s painting accuracy.

Note that almost all of Ancestry’s chromosome painting covers the entire maternal or paternal chromosome with one ethnicity. In my case, three maternal chromosomes have two ethnicities, and the balance of 39 chromosomes show only one ethnicity for the entire chromosome.

That’s very suspicious, given my mixed heritage, and does not align with ethnicities at the other vendors.

Furthermore, if you look at chromosome 10 as an example, my maternal chromosome shows Scotland, and my paternal chromosome shows Ireland. My mother, who is primarily (87.5%) German, Dutch, and French, and whose ancestors I’ve confirmed through 5 generations have zero, as in no Scottish or Irish. So, in this case, the ethnicity is misattributed, which means the painting of that entire maternal chromosome is incorrect as well.

That’s not the only one. Ancestry has also attributed all of maternal chromosome 18 and half of chromosome 2 as Scottish too.

Ancestry updates their ethnicity estimates periodically, generally every year or so.

If yours hasn’t been updated recently, updates are supposed to be complete by the end of September 2023.

Ethnicity estimates are just that, and each update varies slightly, but that’s about it. The only ethnicity update that would help me is IF Ancestry “rediscovered” my Native American segments that come and go at Ancestry, AND they would include matching segment information with cousins so I can determine which of my ancestors contributed that Native segment. Then I’d know which cousins share that Native segment and could utilize their trees to isolate the common ancestor. Yes, I know, I’m hallucinating, because that’s never going to happen.

However, maybe an ethnicity update will encourage people to sign in and create trees. That would be useful.

Compare My DNA Ethnicity and Communities

Another feature that seems to be new and does NOT say “Member Access,” so should be available to everyone, is the ability to compare DNA ethnicities and communities with others.

By selecting the Compare My DNA tab, then DNA Communities, you can see which of your matches share communities with you.

Note that I don’t match my own second test exactly.

By selecting Ethnicity estimates, you can see which regions you and your matches have in common.

Please understand that this does NOT necessarily mean you share those regions due to the same ancestors!

For example, my Ferverda cousin and I may or may not share some or all of our Germanic Europe or England and Northwestern Europe ethnicity from our common ancestors – and there’s no way to know or tell without segment information and a chromosome browser.

Future Features

Ancestry’s email referenced a future feature – Communities Inheritance by parental connection.

I only have three communities at Ancestry, and I know which ones result from which ancestors.

I’m presuming that if Ancestry is referencing this new feature, it’s not too far in the future.

Parental Sides Based on Ancestry Ethnicity

In the article about SideView, I discussed how customers indicate which parent is which based on ethnicity. If you can’t do it using ethnicity results alone, you can view your closest matches, which presumes you know how you’re related to them, and select ethnicity regions based on shared regions.

These additional features are built upon the base of SideView, which is built upon a base of Ancestry’s ethnicity estimate.

Many of these features rest on your ability to accurately determine your maternal and paternal sides – either using your ethnicity results or your shared ethnicity of your known closest matches. My Mom is 50% German and 24% Dutch, with the remainder being equally divided between French/Native (Acadian) and English. My father has no German and no known French. The high percentage of German made my parents easy to separate. Had I made a mistake though, or if Ancestry makes a mistake in ethnicity attribution, such as the Scottish example I provided, all of these features that depend on an accurate parental division will also be inaccurate.

Summary

This new feature rollout was confusing to sort out since:

  • Some features require a full subscription
  • Some require the new AncestryDNA Plus subscription (or a full subscription)
  • Traits was previously an extra purchase but is now included with either subscription
  • Some features remain available with the AncestryDNA test with no subscription

I made a chart.

Feature With DNA Test Subscription Needed Comment
Traits Yes Was an uplift, now included with either subscription
Traits by Parent Yes Now included
Ethnicity Estimate Yes No
Ethnicity by parent Yes Was included, now behind paywall
Ethnicity Chromosome Painter Yes Was included, now behind paywall
Matches by parent Yes Was included, now behind paywall
Compare Communities with Matches Yes No Today, there is no “Member Access” label
Compare Ethnicity Estimates with Matches Yes No Today, there is no “Member Access” label
Communities by Parent Yes Future Feature
Full Access to Matches’ Trees Partial Full subscription needed, not AncestryDNA Plus Future features in email from Ancestry

Features not mentioned above remain included in the AncestryDNA test, meaning without any additional subscription:

  • Matching
  • Grouping Matches
  • Shared Matches
  • Communities
  • ThruLines

Opinion

I have two issues with this new rollout. Ancestry is now charging for previously included features. Secondly, many of those up-charge features are predicated upon ethnicity estimates that the customer has to divide maternally and paternally. In other words, there’s a significant possibility that you’re paying for and depending upon something inaccurate.

What bothers me the most is the fact that Ancestry giveth, and Ancestry taketh away. The SideView features were included with the original DNA test purchase price initially, but now Ancestry has pushed some of those features behind a paywall. I feel that’s disingenuous.

In the bigger picture, I’ve wondered how long companies can continue to fund new features with new test sales. The companies have to provide the results to their millions of legacy clients that now reaches back years. As the database continues to grow, the processing and storage requirements do, too – and that isn’t free.

The companies BEST able to continue to fund that development are the companies that utilize DNA tests to leverage larger and repeated sales – like Ancestry and MyHeritage records subscriptions.

Furthermore,  Ancestry and 23andMe both collaborated with pharmaceutical companies, although both initial contracts have expired. Ancestry’s current collaborations are listed here.

Companies that do not utilize DNA to leverage other sales would have more motivation to place at least some of their advanced tools behind a subscription paywall. 23andMe has been doing that progressively since 2020 and now offers a “membership” for $69 per year – assuming you have a recent test. Otherwise, you have to retest for the additional cost of $229 before you can purchase the membership.

MyHeritage also limits access to full trees for DNA testers without a Premium subscription, but by comparison, they have not put any features behind a paywall that were previously included in the DNA test, nor do they have a separate DNA subscription.

Both FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage require a one-time unlock, $19 and $29, respectively, for advanced features if you upload a test from another testing company, meaning you didn’t test with them – but that’s entirely different from a secondary yearly subscription to access DNA features for paying customers.

FamilyTreeDNA, whose only business is DNA testing, includes all features with a DNA test. No subscription is available or required.

I’ve included this to say that I understand the need to generate revenue. My issue is that I feel like Ancestry, the largest DNA testing company, who could best afford research and development investment, essentially did a bait-and-switch with their customers by taking something away.

When ThruLines went sideways a month or so ago, I knew something was up. I suspected that Ancestry was recalculating relationships in the background for some reason. Now we know that the reason was these new features.

However, the problem with ThruLines isn’t fixed. I don’t believe many previous connections were wrong and are correct now. Cousins who match me and had common ancestors in their tree still have common ancestors in their tree and still match me – but aren’t currently connected through ThruLines. And I’m not referring to just a few.

Then, there are the issues with maternal and paternal match assignments.

Neither of these issues inspire much confidence, especially as a company begins charging for previously included features. Issues happen in IT, but the issues need to be resolved as soon as possible. The fact that these issues aren’t resolved, in addition to the required subscriptions being rolled out before the issues are resolved, makes me angry with a company many within the industry recommend in good faith.

I feel like all customers, full subscribers who want and need to utilize advanced tools to solve genealogical puzzles, along with customers who “only” tested their DNA, are being penalized.

The very least Ancestry could have done was delay the subscription rollout until they fixed the mess they made. The honorable thing would have been to only place new features behind the paywall, not taking existing features away from customers already enjoying them.

I have a full yearly subscription, so I’m covered, but if I were not, there’s nothing in the new features that I think will benefit my genealogy.

  • Traits doesn’t benefit genealogy
  • Traits by parent doesn’t benefit genealogy
  • Ethnicity by parent doesn’t – even if it was accurate.
  • Chromosome painting doesn’t – in part because the ethnicity and division is inaccurate and in part because no segment information is provided.
  • Matches by parent could be useful, but since it’s currently malfunctioning and is based on SideView ethnicity divisions, I don’t have much confidence in the results.
  • Communities by parent, a future feature, might be useful for some people, assuming parents are assigned correctly.

Since we are discussing Ancestry’s new features, I know that someone will ask if I’ve noticed the new Ancestry Dog DNA test that rolled out simultaneously.

Yes, I noticed. I suggest you read this article before purchasing any dog DNA test from any source.

There’s so much that Ancestry could do for their paying customers, whether we’ve paid for a DNA test, a subscription, or both, but instead, they’ve focused their efforts on another revenue-producing product that has nothing to do with human genealogy.

I feel like Ancestry is offering a lot of window dressing eye-candy, while what we really need are genealogical answers that are within their power to provide.

The four DNA-related features that Ancestry could provide that would be the most beneficial for genealogy would be:

  • DNA match search by ancestor. Not surname-only like is provided today. Not just Estes, but Moses Estes, or better yet –  the Moses Estes born in 1711 who died in 1787. I have 106,000 matches, and I’m not going to scroll through what are probably thousands of never-ending unrolling matches, each of which I have to click on their tree to see if my ancestor is there. This is entirely unnecessary.
  • Matching segment information for matches, including triangulation. I want to confirm which ancestor I share with my matches – and prove it.
  • Chromosome browser – seeing is believing.
  • ThruLines extended back at least another two generations, from 7 to 9.

Working without these features is akin to riding a unicycle with one hand tied behind your back. I swear, sometimes I feel like Ancestry doesn’t want us to FIND our ancestors; they just want us to keep looking!

But that really doesn’t help them in the long run, either.

Helping genealogists actually identify ancestors means we have an entirely new generation to search for in those subscription records, and then another, and another. Yep, we’d have more reason than ever to subscribe!

I want more than a carrot dangling at the end of a stick. I want tools that facilitate answers. Now, for that, I’d gladly pay a subscription.

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

 

Genealogy Books

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

Genealogy Research

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ancestry’s ThruLines Are a Hot Mess Right Now – But Here Are Some Great Alternatives

Right now, ThruLines at Ancestry is one hot mess.

Aside from the inherent frustration, especially over a holiday weekend when many people had planned to work on their genealogy, I’d like to say, “don’t panic.”

I don’t have any inside information about what’s going on at Ancestry, and I’ve attempted to make contact through their support page with no luck. They make talking to a person exceedingly difficult; plus, it’s a holiday weekend, and they are probably inundated.

Regardless, I have an idea of what is happening. Ancestry has been in the midst of recalculating “things,” perhaps in relation to their other changes, which I’ll write about separately in a few days.

In any event, Ancestry SURELY MUST KNOW there’s a significant problem because I imagine thousands of their customers are screaming right about now. Adding another voice won’t be helpful.

Symptoms

  • You may not have ThruLines at all.
  • If you do have ThruLines, don’t trust the information, or more to the point, don’t trust that it’s in any way complete.

I have two tests at Ancestry, both connected to different trees so that my matches and Thrulines are calculated separately for each test.

Test One

My first Ancestry test is connected to my primary tree. I’ve been amassing Thrulines cousins ever since the feature was released. I have hundreds of cousin matches descended from some of my more prolific ancestors.

Additionally, my sister’s grandchildren have tested, as have other close relatives who have connected their tests to their trees.

Today, those people are still showing on my match list, but are NOT showing as matches in ThruLines. None of them. Most of my ThruLines ancestors are showing zero matches, and the rest are only showing very few. Ancestors who had hundreds before now have 2, for example.

Here’s an example with my cousin, Erik.

My grandfather, William George Estes, shown in Erik’s tree, above, is his great-grandfather. Erik is my half first cousin, once removed, and we share 417 cM over 16 segments.

Yet, looking at my ThruLine for William George Estes, neither he nor my other cousins are shown as matches. Same for William George’s parents, and so forth.

ThruLines is VERY ill right now.

Test Two

My second DNA test at Ancestry is even worse. There are no ThruLines calculated, even though my DNA is tree-attached, and I had ThruLines previously.

I see this message now, and I can’t even begin to tell you how irritating this is – in part because it suggests the problem is my fault. It’s clearly not. My tree hasn’t changed one bit. I’m not alone, either. I’ve seen other people posting this same message.

And yes, if you’re thinking that there is absolutely no excuse for this – you’re right.

However, outrage isn’t good for us and won’t help – so let’s all do something else fun and productive instead.

Productive Genealogy Plans

Here are some productive suggestions.

At MyHeritage:

At FamilyTreeDNA:

  • Build your haplogroup pedigree chart by locating people through different companies descended from each ancestor in your tree through the appropriate line of descent, and see if they have or will take a Y-DNA or mtDNA test.
  • Tests are on sale right now, and there’s no subscription required at FamilyTreeDNA for anything.
  • Check Y-DNA and mtDNA tests to see if there are new matches and if you share a common ancestor.

At 23andMe:

  • Check for new matches and triangulation.
  • Check to see if 23andMe has added any of your new matches to your genetic tree.

Remember, the parental sides are typically accurate, but the exact placement may not be, and 23andMe deals poorly with half-relationships. It’s certainly still worth checking though, because 23andMe does a lot of heavy lifting for you.

DNAPainter

For me, the most productive thing to do this weekend would be to copy the segment information from new matches with whom I can identify common ancestors at FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage and 23andMe – the vendors who provide segment data – and paint those segments to DNAPainter.

Not only does DNAPainter allow me to consolidate my match data in one place, DNAPainter provides the ability for me to confirm ancestors through triangulation, and to assign unknown matches to ancestors as well.

As you can see, I’ve successfully assigned about 90% of my segments to an ancestor, meaning I’ve confirmed descent from that ancestor based on my autosomal matches’ descent from that same ancestor – preferably through another child. Will new matches propel me to 91%? I hope so.

What percentage can you or have you been able to assign?

If you need help getting started, or ideas, I’ve written about DNAPainter several times and provided a compiled resource library of those articles, here.

Have fun!!!

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Reminder – Free Discover Webinar Through September 5th

Wow – has this ever been a week!!! This article should be subtitled, “Never Argue With a Woman Named Idalia.” Trust me, Idalia will be the least popular baby name for 2023.

But first things first.

I want to provide a friendly reminder that the webinar, Y-DNA Discover Tool – What News Can Your Haplogroup Reveal? is free through September 5th at Legacy Family Tree Webinars and will be available in their library for subscribers thereafter.

Discover is a free Y-DNA tool provided by FamilyTreeDNA.

Anyone can use Discover. You don’t need to have taken a Y-DNA test, but the greatest benefit will be realized with Big Y-700 test results. Don’t worry about that now, though, because I explain the differences between tests in the webinar. You can get a lot out of Discover, even if you only know a base-level haplogroup.

Normally, these webinars are live, but those plans were interrupted by Hurricane Idalia.

Idalia developed so quickly – and we really weren’t sure where it was going until just a day or so in advance – or how severe it would be. It was ugly, and as I write this, Idalia is still torturing the east coast.

When I realized the possible impact, and that the probability of having both power and internet were very remote, I contacted Legacy Family Tree Webinars and discussed options.

We really didn’t want to reschedule since more than 2000 people from around the world had signed up for the webinar. We decided that the best option was to record the webinar in advance as a precaution. Then, if possible and Idalia targeted her wrath elsewhere, I would still give it live.

Needless to say, doing anything live wasn’t in the cards on Wednesday. I should add that I am safe and dry with minimal damage – just some branches and small trees down – but others nearby aren’t nearly so fortunate. Flooding was recorded in feet of water, roads are still closed to vehicles, boats rescuing people who didn’t evacuate are zipping down the flooded streets in many places, and there’s just a massive mess. Thousands of people are displaced.

However, as they say, “the show must go on,” and it did. The webinar was presented even though I couldn’t be there for Q&A. Anticipating that possibility, I recorded a lot of detail for you.

I hope I didn’t sound as rattled as I felt, because I was recording in the midst of hurricane prep and the first bands of wind and rain were already lashing the windows. I knew that we were facing a monster storm. That’s very unsettling.. All things considered, I think the webinar went quite well. I was afraid the power would go out while we were recording, but fortunately, it didn’t.

At the end of the webinar, I pulled everything from all of the Discover tools, the Block Tree, and the Group Time Tree together, then added historical migration records along with known, proven family genealogy.

Given that:

  • How did Discover do?
  • Was it useful?
  • Is it accurate?
  • How accurate?
  • What has it done for the Estes paternal line genealogy?
  • What do I know about my Estes lineage that I didn’t know before?
  • What’s the next step?
  • What can Discover do for you?

I really encourage you to tune in and take advantage of this free educational webinar through September 5th, maybe even over the Labor Day weekend.

Please feel free to share this article and information about the webinar with interested groups and organizations!!!

_____________________________________________________________

Follow DNAexplain on Facebook, here.

Share the Love!

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

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

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

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

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Book

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research