I know this has probably been discussed before but I can't find it in the archives; how do I display the raw data please of my family finder test and my dad's in an application? I have tried excel but it says the file is too large to display and only shows the first few chromosomes[?? it lists a lot of 1's and then a lot of 2's which I think must be the first few chromosomes]. I would like to compare segment matches we have so any suggestions on how best to do this daunting task or if there is some software to use that would be handy. Karen

Hi Ann Thank you for posting that information. It is taking me a bit to understand all the terminology. I am still struggling with what the plus side is? I guess this doesn't matter .. In my case I have Dad's and my DNA. If the match is listed with Dad and me it belongs to his side of the family. If the match isn't listed with Dad than it could be Mum's side[if over 10cMs] or IBS. If a segment I have in common with Dad matches me with someone but not Dad, I can check base pairs from the Raw Data, to determine if it matches Mum's bases or if it is IBS. Is IBS when the match has mixed bases some from Dad and some from what would be Mum? Is IBD when all the bases match only Dad's or match what would have been only Mum's bases? Karen FF is > always reporting one side of the double helix (called the plus side). The > two bases you see in the raw data are from the two copies of the > chromosomes, the maternal and the paternal (each one is a separate double > helix).

The one lady still didn't understand about the negative strand; and she decided it didn't matter. It pretty much doesn't; but I think Ann T said 23 reports the positive strand; and they don't always report it that way so I'll take a shot at it. We hear that there are 2 strands of DNA at a given chromosome and that's true in 1 sense. But there are actually 4 strands. 2 of those strands are never transcribed because they're sort of mirror images. In principle they could have been transcribed; but God and evolution never created the appropriate ribosome for reading and transcribing them (or if It did create 1, it didn't survive). re the other point. 23 tells us whether they're reporting a + or - .

These numbers seem high to me. This is not a strictly comparable breakdown, but I downloaded Ancestry Finder matches from 23andMe for a child and two parents. The child had 224 segments with names attached, 65 of which were not found in either parent. By segment size: > 7 cM: 2/73 3% 6-7 cM: 9/39 23% 5-6 cM 54/112 48% I don't personally have a father/mother/child trio at FTDNA, and I don't want to go through Chromosome Browser to get all the segment sizes. But at the match level, the worst case I have seen was 17/70 matches found in the child but not in either parent. I don't know how tedious this would be for you, but what if you limited segments to those with 700+ SNPs (the threshold at 23andMe). Also, I noted in another message in this thread that I saw a case where the parent clearly had a large identical segment match at GEDmatch, which somehow failed to meet FTDNA's (unknown) criteria for reporting a match. Ann Turner On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear All, > I decided to download the latest Family Finder data for my wife's > parents, my wife, my parents, and me yesterday. I then analyzed the data > so > see how many people appear in the FF match lists for my wife and me who > don't appear in the FF match lists our parents. I then used that data to > create my own statistics regarding the percentage of matches at various > segment lengths in cMs to see how my data compares to the statistics that > John Walden generated. > Here are my results: > cMs %IBD %IBS > >11 100 (52/52) 0 > 10-11 80 (12/15) 20 > 9-10 93 (25/27) 7 > 8-9 81 (34/42) 19 > 7-8 46 (11/24) 54 > 6-7 67 (4/6) 33 > 5-6 40 (6/15) 60 > 4-5 20 (10/51) 80 > 3.5-4 17 (11/66) 83 > > Below are John Walden's results from his analysis that I posted in > another message several days ago: > cM %IBD %IBS > 10 99 1 > 9 80 20 > 8 50 50 > 7 30 70 > 6 20 80 > 5 5 95 > > My results would suggest that a higher percentage of matches under 9 cMs in > length are IBD than John's analysis would suggest. In any case, it would > appear that a significant percentage of matches in the 6-9 cM range are > IBS. > If any of the rest of you have two parent/one child trio data in Family > Finder it would be interesting to see if your results are similar to mine. > > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 8:19 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with > few clues ? > > Sam > > What is the "big issue" about unphased data? As always, my reference is to > genealogy. > > I can see where it would help, some, to know if a match was on my Dad or > Mom's side, but SURNAMES and geography can help there, too. And even if I > knew which parent my match was on, I still wouldn't know which grandparent. > > Jim > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Tim Even without my coffee yet, I can look at this data and say my cup is half full;>) As a genealogist, there's gold in them thar hills! Even at 4cM 1/6 are IBD. The FTDNA cutoff of 7.7cM still gives at least a 50/50 chance (probably 75%, if you draw the curve for your data), or better, that each one they report is IBD. Or 3 of 4 are probably IBD. I wish I could get 50 percent of my 23&me matches to even accept my invitations. By providing an easy to scan list of my Patriarchs, and being persistent, I've heard back from over 80 percent of my FF matches, and confirmed the Common Ancestor with 20 percent (I don't know, yet, if they are IBS or IBD). Based on your data, I can assume most are actually IBD, partly because we did find a Common Ancestor, where as the others and I haven't. I'm not that good with statistics. My estimate that 3/4 of FF matches are IBD, is based on the 7.7cM or more large segment each one has. I wonder how many of the other 1/4 have at least one of the smaller segments that is IBD? I thought the FTDNA algorithm included other factors, that increased the probability that our FF matches were really cousins - this would be the icing on the cake for me (and really jazz up my presentations) Tim, could you look at your data again, and see what percentage of your FF matches have no IBD segments at all? Thanks - this is turning into a much more up beat discussion;>j Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:28 AM, "Tim Janzen" <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear All, > I decided to download the latest Family Finder data for my wife's > parents, my wife, my parents, and me yesterday. I then analyzed the data so > see how many people appear in the FF match lists for my wife and me who > don't appear in the FF match lists our parents. I then used that data to > create my own statistics regarding the percentage of matches at various > segment lengths in cMs to see how my data compares to the statistics that > John Walden generated. > Here are my results: > cMs %IBD %IBS >> 11 100 (52/52) 0 > 10-11 80 (12/15) 20 > 9-10 93 (25/27) 7 > 8-9 81 (34/42) 19 > 7-8 46 (11/24) 54 > 6-7 67 (4/6) 33 > 5-6 40 (6/15) 60 > 4-5 20 (10/51) 80 > 3.5-4 17 (11/66) 83 > > Below are John Walden's results from his analysis that I posted in > another message several days ago: > cM %IBD %IBS > 10 99 1 > 9 80 20 > 8 50 50 > 7 30 70 > 6 20 80 > 5 5 95 > > My results would suggest that a higher percentage of matches under 9 cMs in > length are IBD than John's analysis would suggest. In any case, it would > appear that a significant percentage of matches in the 6-9 cM range are IBS. > If any of the rest of you have two parent/one child trio data in Family > Finder it would be interesting to see if your results are similar to mine. > > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 8:19 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with > few clues ? > > Sam > > What is the "big issue" about unphased data? As always, my reference is to > genealogy. > > I can see where it would help, some, to know if a match was on my Dad or > Mom's side, but SURNAMES and geography can help there, too. And even if I > knew which parent my match was on, I still wouldn't know which grandparent. > > Jim > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear All, I decided to download the latest Family Finder data for my wife's parents, my wife, my parents, and me yesterday. I then analyzed the data so see how many people appear in the FF match lists for my wife and me who don't appear in the FF match lists our parents. I then used that data to create my own statistics regarding the percentage of matches at various segment lengths in cMs to see how my data compares to the statistics that John Walden generated. Here are my results: cMs %IBD %IBS >11 100 (52/52) 0 10-11 80 (12/15) 20 9-10 93 (25/27) 7 8-9 81 (34/42) 19 7-8 46 (11/24) 54 6-7 67 (4/6) 33 5-6 40 (6/15) 60 4-5 20 (10/51) 80 3.5-4 17 (11/66) 83 Below are John Walden's results from his analysis that I posted in another message several days ago: cM %IBD %IBS 10 99 1 9 80 20 8 50 50 7 30 70 6 20 80 5 5 95 My results would suggest that a higher percentage of matches under 9 cMs in length are IBD than John's analysis would suggest. In any case, it would appear that a significant percentage of matches in the 6-9 cM range are IBS. If any of the rest of you have two parent/one child trio data in Family Finder it would be interesting to see if your results are similar to mine. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 8:19 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? Sam What is the "big issue" about unphased data? As always, my reference is to genealogy. I can see where it would help, some, to know if a match was on my Dad or Mom's side, but SURNAMES and geography can help there, too. And even if I knew which parent my match was on, I still wouldn't know which grandparent. Jim

how many rows in your spreadsheet, Karen? True 2007 (.xlsx) format allows over a million rows, and columns up to XFD - if you only have 65,536 rows and IV rows, (IIRC) then it's giving you its 'compatible' format rather than full-fledged 2007 file format. On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Karen Hodges <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I am using 2007 but it didn't fit all the information only chromosome 1 and > 2 bases > > Karen > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Dwight Holmes <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Karen - It's probably not the answer you want to hear, but the newer >> version of Excel ("2007," I believe) handles far more rows and >> columns, and can handle these files.  there may be another solution, >> but i'm not aware of it. >> >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Karen Hodges <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I know this has probably been discussed before but I can't find it in the >> > archives; how do I display the raw data please of my family finder test >> and >> > my dad's in an application? >> > >> > I have tried excel but it says the file is too large to display and only >> > shows the first few chromosomes[?? it lists a lot of 1's and then a lot >> of >> > 2's which I think must be the first few chromosomes]. >> > >> > I would like to compare segment matches we have so any suggestions on how >> > best to do this daunting task or if there is some software to use that >> > would be handy. >> > >> > Karen >> >> >> ______________________________ >> For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >> http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Karen - It's probably not the answer you want to hear, but the newer version of Excel ("2007," I believe) handles far more rows and columns, and can handle these files. there may be another solution, but i'm not aware of it. On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Karen Hodges <[email protected]> wrote: > I know this has probably been discussed before but I can't find it in the > archives; how do I display the raw data please of my family finder test and > my dad's in an application? > > I have tried excel but it says the file is too large to display and only > shows the first few chromosomes[?? it lists a lot of 1's and then a lot of > 2's which I think must be the first few chromosomes]. > > I would like to compare segment matches we have so any suggestions on how > best to do this daunting task or if there is some software to use that > would be handy. > > Karen

Karen, The free IBM, among others, supported application OpenOffice (and LibreOffice fork) support the same number of rows as Excel2010. www.libreoffice.org/download/ www.openoffice.org/download/ When OpenOffice and LibreOffice forked LibreOffice came out with a newer version. OpenOffice hasn't yet. So, I prefer LibreOffice. Note, OpenOffice/LibreOffice is reasonable as a Raw Data viewer though slower than Excel. The difference is that it is FREE!! and and the interface is a lot more like Excel 95-2003 instead of like the entirely new Excel 2007/2010. Now if you are writing code that will run on three quarters to a million lines, Excel 2007 0r 2010 is essential. Sam Karen - It's probably not the answer you want to hear, but the newer version of Excel ("2007," I believe) handles far more rows and columns, and can handle these files. there may be another solution, but i'm not aware of it. how do I display the raw data please of my family finder test and > my dad's in an application? > Karen

Hi Tim Thank you for your help. The sites are both very good. Karen On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Karen, > If you go to Google and search for "DNA strand orientation" the 9th > hit is called "images for DNA strand orientation" that has lots of > illustrations on this that you might find helpful. There is also a lot of > good information at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA. > Sincerely, > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 11:17 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] segment matches > > Hi Tim > > Thank you for the answer. I understand your example but I don't understand > the later information especially in the page links. Is there a website with > labelled diagrams that explain this is a basic way. > > Karen > > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Open Office Calc works as well. T-Mobile. America’s First Nationwide 4G Network ----- Reply message ----- From: "Dwight Holmes" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] FF displaying the raw data in an application Date: Sun, Jan 8, 2012 6:28 pm Karen - It's probably not the answer you want to hear, but the newer version of Excel ("2007," I believe) handles far more rows and columns, and can handle these files. there may be another solution, but i'm not aware of it. On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Karen Hodges <[email protected]> wrote: > I know this has probably been discussed before but I can't find it in the > archives; how do I display the raw data please of my family finder test and > my dad's in an application? > > I have tried excel but it says the file is too large to display and only > shows the first few chromosomes[?? it lists a lot of 1's and then a lot of > 2's which I think must be the first few chromosomes]. > > I would like to compare segment matches we have so any suggestions on how > best to do this daunting task or if there is some software to use that > would be handy. > > Karen ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Tim Thank you for the answer. I understand your example but I don't understand the later information especially in the page links. Is there a website with labelled diagrams that explain this is a basic way. Karen > However, the > results from Family Finder and 23andMe are in the plus (or forward) strand > orientation. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/hemolysin/3versus5 and > http://www.imgt.org/IMGTindex/dnaStrand.html for background on the strand > orientation issue. > >

Hi Tim Thanks but does it keep to one side when matching[ all from the right side of the dna backbone or all from the left side of the dna backbone] or are some matches a mix, jumping between sides[taking some readings from the left and right of the dna segment] ? Karen On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Karen, > FF's program chooses from either side of the pair of alleles for a > match. > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 8:12 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] segment matches > > Does FF look at a string of bases down one side of the DNA backbone to > compare to find possible matches or does it look randomly, choosing from > either side of the pair [ A/T ,C/G]for a match? Sorry I don't know all the > technical terms to clearly ask this question. > > Karen > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Does FF look at a string of bases down one side of the DNA backbone to compare to find possible matches or does it look randomly, choosing from either side of the pair [ A/T ,C/G]for a match? Sorry I don't know all the technical terms to clearly ask this question. Karen

Karen, I think maybe Tim answered your question, but just to be sure, FF is always reporting one side of the double helix (called the plus side). The two bases you see in the raw data are from the two copies of the chromosomes, the maternal and the paternal (each one is a separate double helix). The two-base combo is called a genotype, and the two bases are called alleles. We don't know which allele came from the father and which from the mother, though, so the alleles are always given in a standard order. At 23andMe this is alphabetical. At FTDNA, it's not always alphabetical, but you see only these combinations (plus special codes for no-calls, insertions, and deletions) AC AG AT CG TC TG For a half-identical region (HIR), at least one of the two alleles in the first person must match at least one of the two alleles in the second person. We look for long consecutive runs where this occurs. In Tim's example, you would almost never see the combinations in SNPs #6 and 7, with three different possible alleles. Almost all SNPs are bi-allelic, since the mutation rate is so low. Practically speaking, the only way a run terminates is with opposite homozygotes (each person's own two alleles are the same, but the two people differ from each other, e.g. AA in one person and GG in the other person). Ann Turner On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Karen, > No the program "doesn't keep to one side". Let's consider some imaginary > data as follows for two people's comparison: > > #1 #2 > AA AG > GG GT > TT TG > AG GG > AC CC > TA AC > GG TC > > Note that in the above example the program would indicate that the alleles > for first 6 SNPs would be part of a half identical region (HIR) but the > program would stop the HIR at the 7th SNP. Keep in mind that the raw data > coming out of the SNP chip test is not phased. In other words, you can't > tell which chromosome the allele is from simply by looking at the results. > This is the reason why it is nice to phase the SNP chip data. However, the > results from Family Finder and 23andMe are in the plus (or forward) strand > orientation. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/hemolysin/3versus5 and > http://www.imgt.org/IMGTindex/dnaStrand.html for background on the strand > orientation issue. > Sincerely, > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 9:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] segment matches > > Hi Tim > > Thanks but does it keep to one side when matching[ all from the right side > of the dna backbone or all from the left side of the dna backbone] or are > some matches a mix, jumping between sides[taking some readings from the > left and right of the dna segment] ? > > Karen > > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Dear Karen, If you go to Google and search for "DNA strand orientation" the 9th hit is called "images for DNA strand orientation" that has lots of illustrations on this that you might find helpful. There is also a lot of good information at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA. Sincerely, Tim -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 11:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] segment matches Hi Tim Thank you for the answer. I understand your example but I don't understand the later information especially in the page links. Is there a website with labelled diagrams that explain this is a basic way. Karen

Dear Karen, No the program "doesn't keep to one side". Let's consider some imaginary data as follows for two people's comparison: #1 #2 AA AG GG GT TT TG AG GG AC CC TA AC GG TC Note that in the above example the program would indicate that the alleles for first 6 SNPs would be part of a half identical region (HIR) but the program would stop the HIR at the 7th SNP. Keep in mind that the raw data coming out of the SNP chip test is not phased. In other words, you can't tell which chromosome the allele is from simply by looking at the results. This is the reason why it is nice to phase the SNP chip data. However, the results from Family Finder and 23andMe are in the plus (or forward) strand orientation. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/hemolysin/3versus5 and http://www.imgt.org/IMGTindex/dnaStrand.html for background on the strand orientation issue. Sincerely, Tim -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 9:28 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] segment matches Hi Tim Thanks but does it keep to one side when matching[ all from the right side of the dna backbone or all from the left side of the dna backbone] or are some matches a mix, jumping between sides[taking some readings from the left and right of the dna segment] ? Karen

Dear Karen, FF's program chooses from either side of the pair of alleles for a match. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 8:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] segment matches Does FF look at a string of bases down one side of the DNA backbone to compare to find possible matches or does it look randomly, choosing from either side of the pair [ A/T ,C/G]for a match? Sorry I don't know all the technical terms to clearly ask this question. Karen

Ann, I am adding your suggestions from Message 6 to my plan and will make this my new atDNA goal for working with these four matches. Only one of the four has replied to the four emails I sent yesterday. I sent him a copy of one of these Digest mode emails we are working on now and he says it is more than Greek to him. So we have no way to go but up. Thanks. Linda Message: 6 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2012 07:22:34 -0800 From: Ann Turner<[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? To:[email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]om> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Not quite. I'd phrase it differently. For #1, you need to demonstrate that the segments are true IBD from a single ancestor, and one way to filter out IBS segments is to do #2, then compare every possible pair out of the set of five A matches B,C,D,E B matches C,D,E C matches D,E D matches E Ann On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Linda<[email protected]> wrote: > > For me, just now, I take away from this thread: > > 1. My GEDMATCH.com results are results that are true IBD and would be > the best choice for working on in the immediate and foreseeable > future. Am I understanding this correctly? > > 2. So, my initial query would be resolved by requesting those other > four matches to upload their results to GEDMATCH.com. Is this correct? > > 3. If there was still a match with any of the four it would remain to > determine all other info such as from mother or father DNA and to look > for surnames in common. > > Neither my husband nor myself have living parents and only one living > child who is not willing to do any DNA testing at all at this time. So, > unless new technology is found for working with atDNA am I correct in > thinking my best results would always be from a program such as GEDMATCH? > > > >

Thanks Tim ... I understand your response to my first question.  And I appreciate the clarity very much.    My brother has no children.   I have two children who will both test.   My mother is no longer living BUT she does have a sister who MAY be willing to test.   That should help.   And, I have her 1/2 brother testing as we speak.   So....I'll backdoor the phasing as best I can with a host of testing .... that works for me but is clearly impractical for most I'm quite certain .   On my second question I understand the single segment issue of IBS vs IBD.    But .... what about the situation re: IBS v. IBD where you and one other person share 14 matching segments ranging in size from 2.5 to 7.7 cM.    Now, any ONE of those segments ... maybe even 50% or more of those segments could be IBS .... but surely in a group of 14 seemingly matching segments ... even those coming in below the threshhold that causes us to all go .... "I don't think so" ..... there is a true IBD match.    Now ... we may not be able to find the connection via paper trail but doesn't such a complex match situation (multiple matching segments ... in my example 14) pretty much guarantee a biological IBD tie somewhere in that mixture?    Thanks for taking a second look at this. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Janzen" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2012 12:00:13 PM Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF        match        with        few clues ? Dear John,         If you have a two parent/one child trio and you phase the data you should be able to figure out about 83% of the mother's DNA.  If you have a two parent/two child quartet and you phase the data you should be able to figure out about 95% or more of the mother's DNA.  It becomes much more challenging when your mom's data isn't available for testing.  If your dad and you were both homozygous for a specific SNP (say AA and AA), then you would know that you got an A from your mom, but you wouldn't know what the other allele your mom had unless your brother got a different allele than you did, in which case you would know the two alleles that your mom had for that SNP.  If you have any children, I would suggest that you test your wife and your children.  This would allow you to phase your data.  You can then use your phased data to phase your dad's data.  If you have phased your data then you will have 50% of your mom's data and that portion will be phased.  If your brother has a!  ny children, I would also test your brother's children and his wife.  This would allow you to phase your brother's data.  You can then compare it to your dad's data which would in theory give you an additional 25% of your mom's data, raising the total of your mom's phased data to about 75% of what she had originally.         I am not sure that there is an easy answer to your 2nd question.  Simply having multiple people who match with you on a specific segment of DNA segment (say a 7 cM segment) doesn't necessarily imply that the segment is IBD.  If you have a child who also matches with these other people at that segment, then it is for all practical purposes IBD, but I could caution you not to jump to the conclusion that you have an IBD segment just simply because multiple people match you on that segment.  Also bear in mind that if you have multiple matches on a particular segment that some could be IBD and some could be IBS.  You can't really be sure which is which without phasing your data and then running the comparison. Sincerely, Tim Janzen