if you have a parent and child test with FF is the difference the mothers? Karen On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Larry Vick <[email protected]> wrote: > Jim, > > If you have AG at a location and you have two matches one of whom has AA > and the other has GG, you will match both, but they will not match each > other. FF has no way to know which of your parents you inherited the A > from and which you inherited the G from. > > Regards, > > Larry > > > ________________________________ > From: Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2012 4:46 PM > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Subject: How do you work a 5 way FF match > with few clues ? > > > > > And yes, when I emailed this info to each group, some did confirm that > although they matched me as noted, they didn't match one or more of the > others in the same way. I find this very puzzling - that two folks can > have > the same long segment of DNA that is an exact match with me, and yet > they > don't see such a match when they look at each other. Can anyone explain > to > my engineer brain why this is so? [to me this is like two lines each > being > parallel with a third line but not being parallel with each other... > QEnot] > > > > > Jim Bartlett > > > ______________________________ > 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 >

Dwight The LDS FHC is in Kensington, adjacent to the temple you see from the beltway - it's an all-day workshop on Sat 5 May. Send an email to [email protected] to pre-register/free (and get their outstanding Newsletter) I don't know where the MCGS meets - in Rockville, I think - I'd better look it up... Wed 25 Jan 7:30pm. Hope to see you at one of these. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Jan 7, 2012, at 4:25 PM, Dwight Holmes <[email protected]> wrote: > Jim when/where are these MC and DC events - I'll try to come to one :) > > On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> wrote: >> Tim >> >> Thanks for your experience, and for your proactive recommendations >> >> I will continue to recommend Family Finder and Y-DNA as powerful tools for genealogists. I just wrote a DNA Article that will be published later this month, I speak to the Montgomery Co, MD Gen Soc later this month and to the DC FHC in early May. >> >> For genealogists, my message will continue to be that FF matches are probably cousins, and the more DNA that's shared the higher the probability. Share all of your ancestry with all of your matches! >> >> I also agree that the limiting factor is not the tool, but the limited knowledge we and our matches have about our ancestries. More on this in a separate thread. >> >> Thanks again, >> >> Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! >> >> On Jan 7, 2012, at 2:33 PM, "Tim Janzen" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear Jim, >>> I have basically been a realist about both 23andMe and Family Finder >>> from the very beginning. I have also been encouraging people to test, but I >>> have been trying to not oversell what autosomal DNA can deliver. I realized >>> early on that autosomal analysis was going to be a long drawn out process in >>> which segments of DNA would painstakingly be linked to specific ancestors >>> after a lot of people had been tested. The key here is lots of patience. >>> Unfortunately many of our DNA matches are either unwilling to be in contact >>> with us, unwilling to share genealogical information with us, or unable to >>> provide enough genealogical information so that we can find the genealogical >>> link. The problem is not the test. I think that you should continue to >>> advise that every serious genealogist take the Family Finder DNA test >>> (and/or the 23andMe test). The more people who do the test the more we are >>> going to learn. I would certainly not suggest that you discard all matches >>> under 10 cMs. I suggest you continue to contact these people, but I would >>> suggest that your chance of finding a common ancestor when corresponding >>> with these people is significantly lower than it is when corresponding with >>> people who match you at over 10 cMs. Unfortunately, use and analysis of >>> autosomal DNA is fairly time intensive and many people aren't willing to put >>> the time in that is needed to first of all understand what they are doing >>> and then secondly to correctly interpret the data that they have. >>> So far I have found a 4th cousin of my mother-in-law through >>> 23andMe. I have also found a 3rd cousin once removed and a 5th cousin of my >>> mom's through 23andMe. I have also found some distant cousins of my dad's. >>> I think I would found more cousins with whom I found a genealogical >>> relationship if more people had been willing to share their complete >>> pedigree chart with me. I also have a lot of genealogical brick walls in >>> the 1700s that hamper me. I believe that if all of my matches had accurate >>> pedigree charts going back to 1600 and that I had a completely accurate >>> pedigree chart on all lines going back to 1600 that I would be able to find >>> common ancestors with many of my matches with whom I share a segment in >>> common in the 6 to 10 cM range. Unfortunately, my pedigree chart and my >>> matches' pedigree charts aren't that complete. I would like to encourage >>> you (and everyone else on this list) not to get discouraged about this whole >>> process. Keep working at it! >>> Sincerely, >>> Tim Janzen >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett >>> Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 6:29 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with >>> few clues ? >>> >>> Dear Tim, >>> >>> Thank you for outlining this process. I have very mixed emotions at this >>> point. The main ones are betrayed and upset. I have been pushing (as in >>> selling) Family Finder for the last 18 months - I make presentations at the >>> FHCs in DC and Baltimore at annual workshops, as well as retirement >>> communities and genealogy clubs in the region. I'm asked to speak, because >>> DNA is the most technical word I use - I proclaim that no biology is needed >>> to use the new DNA tools for genealogy, and I keep the presentation and >>> discussions at that level. I have a Masters in engineering and my wife has a >>> PhD in biology - but I try to keep the talks at a level everyone can >>> understand and use. Many have taken my advice: "every serious genealogist >>> should take the Family Finder DNA test." >>> >>> If I understand correctly, the simple rule for genealogy hobbyists is: >>> "discard all matches below 10cM, and focus on the few remaining". Later >>> today I'll see what that does in my case. In my 1024 23&me matches, what >>> should be the equivalent (to 10cM) cutoff - in percent and/or number of >>> segments? >>> >>> Is ANYONE finding any new cousins with FF or 23&me? By this I mean >>> strangers, not the close kin you already know and/or have paid for their >>> tests. What percent of your hitherto unknown matches have worked out? >>> >>> 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 > > > > ______________________________ > 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

As mentioned several times, a limiting factor in finding Common Ancestors with your atDNA matches is unknown ancestors. Both you and your match have to have the same Ancestor(s) in your Trees to determine a match. When making up your Ancestry - to share for atDNA matching only - I say: Throw in the Kitchen Sink! Folks tend to include only those ancestors in their Tree that can be proved with documentation, and without a doubt. I think you should include every possibility, every alternative, every hunch, every neighbor (in the case of missing maiden names), everyone from online files like Ancestry, IGI, DAR, etc, etc. - you get the idea. If it's a possibility include it. Remember, you and your match are both looking through long lists for just one Ancestor/couple that matches. The match could equally be any one of your ancestors, and any one of your match's. The match could be beyond your brick walls - this process may fill in some of these voids. You want your list to include as many possibilities as possible. It doesn't make much difference to the match - just a little more to scan. The same is true if you're using GEDmatch. As always I suggest adding Patriarch (or Matriarch) names/dates/places to the surnames to make them more readily recognized. When/if you determine the Common Ancestor is one of your Kitchen-Sink ancestors, you then compare notes with your match. You focus your genealogy skills on this specific Ancestor and decide if it's real or not. You may also find some clues in the atDNA info... The farther you can stretch your Ancestry - only for atDNA matching - the more Common Ancestors you'll find. Then decide whether to keep this possibility in your Tree. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime!

Tim, Your spreadsheets are definitely a great start. Hope you don't mind if I steal a few bits and peaces to play with. Sam

Jim when/where are these MC and DC events - I'll try to come to one :) On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> wrote: > Tim > > Thanks for your experience, and for your proactive recommendations > > I will continue to recommend Family Finder and Y-DNA as powerful tools for genealogists. I just wrote a DNA Article that will be published later this month, I speak to the Montgomery Co, MD Gen Soc later this month and to the DC FHC in early May. > > For genealogists, my message will continue to be that FF matches are probably cousins, and the more DNA that's shared the higher the probability. Share all of your ancestry with all of your matches! > > I also agree that the limiting factor is not the tool, but the limited knowledge we and our matches have about our ancestries. More on this in a separate thread. > > Thanks again, > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Jan 7, 2012, at 2:33 PM, "Tim Janzen" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Dear Jim, >>    I have basically been a realist about both 23andMe and Family Finder >> from the very beginning.  I have also been encouraging people to test, but I >> have been trying to not oversell what autosomal DNA can deliver.  I realized >> early on that autosomal analysis was going to be a long drawn out process in >> which segments of DNA would painstakingly be linked to specific ancestors >> after a lot of people had been tested.  The key here is lots of patience. >> Unfortunately many of our DNA matches are either unwilling to be in contact >> with us, unwilling to share genealogical information with us, or unable to >> provide enough genealogical information so that we can find the genealogical >> link.  The problem is not the test.  I think that you should continue to >> advise that every serious genealogist take the Family Finder DNA test >> (and/or the 23andMe test).  The more people who do the test the more we are >> going to learn.  I would certainly not suggest that you discard all matches >> under 10 cMs.  I suggest you continue to contact these people, but I would >> suggest that your chance of finding a common ancestor when corresponding >> with these people is significantly lower than it is when corresponding with >> people who match you at over 10 cMs.  Unfortunately, use and analysis of >> autosomal DNA is fairly time intensive and many people aren't willing to put >> the time in that is needed to first of all understand what they are doing >> and then secondly to correctly interpret the data that they have. >>    So far I have found a 4th cousin of my mother-in-law through >> 23andMe.  I have also found a 3rd cousin once removed and a 5th cousin of my >> mom's through 23andMe.  I have also found some distant cousins of my dad's. >> I think I would found more cousins with whom I found a genealogical >> relationship if more people had been willing to share their complete >> pedigree chart with me.  I also have a lot of genealogical brick walls in >> the 1700s that hamper me.  I believe that if all of my matches had accurate >> pedigree charts going back to 1600 and that I had a completely accurate >> pedigree chart on all lines going back to 1600 that I would be able to find >> common ancestors with many of my matches with whom I share a segment in >> common in the 6 to 10 cM range.  Unfortunately, my pedigree chart and my >> matches' pedigree charts aren't that complete.  I would like to encourage >> you (and everyone else on this list) not to get discouraged about this whole >> process.  Keep working at it! >> Sincerely, >> Tim Janzen >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett >> Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 6:29 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with >> few clues ? >> >> Dear Tim, >> >> Thank you for outlining this process. I have very mixed emotions at this >> point. The main ones are betrayed and upset. I have been pushing (as in >> selling) Family Finder for the last 18 months - I make presentations at the >> FHCs in DC and Baltimore at annual workshops, as well as retirement >> communities and genealogy clubs in the region. I'm asked to speak, because >> DNA is the most technical word I use - I proclaim that no biology is needed >> to use the new DNA tools for genealogy, and I keep the presentation and >> discussions at that level. I have a Masters in engineering and my wife has a >> PhD in biology - but I try to keep the talks at a level everyone can >> understand and use.  Many have taken my advice: "every serious genealogist >> should take the Family Finder DNA test." >> >> If I understand correctly, the simple rule for genealogy hobbyists is: >> "discard all matches below 10cM, and focus on the few remaining". Later >> today I'll see what that does in my case. In my 1024 23&me matches, what >> should be the equivalent (to 10cM) cutoff - in percent and/or number of >> segments? >> >> Is ANYONE finding any new cousins with FF or 23&me? By this I mean >> strangers, not the close kin you already know and/or have paid for their >> tests. What percent of your hitherto unknown matches have worked out? >> >> 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 Thanks for your experience, and for your proactive recommendations I will continue to recommend Family Finder and Y-DNA as powerful tools for genealogists. I just wrote a DNA Article that will be published later this month, I speak to the Montgomery Co, MD Gen Soc later this month and to the DC FHC in early May. For genealogists, my message will continue to be that FF matches are probably cousins, and the more DNA that's shared the higher the probability. Share all of your ancestry with all of your matches! I also agree that the limiting factor is not the tool, but the limited knowledge we and our matches have about our ancestries. More on this in a separate thread. Thanks again, Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Jan 7, 2012, at 2:33 PM, "Tim Janzen" <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Jim, > I have basically been a realist about both 23andMe and Family Finder > from the very beginning. I have also been encouraging people to test, but I > have been trying to not oversell what autosomal DNA can deliver. I realized > early on that autosomal analysis was going to be a long drawn out process in > which segments of DNA would painstakingly be linked to specific ancestors > after a lot of people had been tested. The key here is lots of patience. > Unfortunately many of our DNA matches are either unwilling to be in contact > with us, unwilling to share genealogical information with us, or unable to > provide enough genealogical information so that we can find the genealogical > link. The problem is not the test. I think that you should continue to > advise that every serious genealogist take the Family Finder DNA test > (and/or the 23andMe test). The more people who do the test the more we are > going to learn. I would certainly not suggest that you discard all matches > under 10 cMs. I suggest you continue to contact these people, but I would > suggest that your chance of finding a common ancestor when corresponding > with these people is significantly lower than it is when corresponding with > people who match you at over 10 cMs. Unfortunately, use and analysis of > autosomal DNA is fairly time intensive and many people aren't willing to put > the time in that is needed to first of all understand what they are doing > and then secondly to correctly interpret the data that they have. > So far I have found a 4th cousin of my mother-in-law through > 23andMe. I have also found a 3rd cousin once removed and a 5th cousin of my > mom's through 23andMe. I have also found some distant cousins of my dad's. > I think I would found more cousins with whom I found a genealogical > relationship if more people had been willing to share their complete > pedigree chart with me. I also have a lot of genealogical brick walls in > the 1700s that hamper me. I believe that if all of my matches had accurate > pedigree charts going back to 1600 and that I had a completely accurate > pedigree chart on all lines going back to 1600 that I would be able to find > common ancestors with many of my matches with whom I share a segment in > common in the 6 to 10 cM range. Unfortunately, my pedigree chart and my > matches' pedigree charts aren't that complete. I would like to encourage > you (and everyone else on this list) not to get discouraged about this whole > process. Keep working at it! > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 6:29 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with > few clues ? > > Dear Tim, > > Thank you for outlining this process. I have very mixed emotions at this > point. The main ones are betrayed and upset. I have been pushing (as in > selling) Family Finder for the last 18 months - I make presentations at the > FHCs in DC and Baltimore at annual workshops, as well as retirement > communities and genealogy clubs in the region. I'm asked to speak, because > DNA is the most technical word I use - I proclaim that no biology is needed > to use the new DNA tools for genealogy, and I keep the presentation and > discussions at that level. I have a Masters in engineering and my wife has a > PhD in biology - but I try to keep the talks at a level everyone can > understand and use. Many have taken my advice: "every serious genealogist > should take the Family Finder DNA test." > > If I understand correctly, the simple rule for genealogy hobbyists is: > "discard all matches below 10cM, and focus on the few remaining". Later > today I'll see what that does in my case. In my 1024 23&me matches, what > should be the equivalent (to 10cM) cutoff - in percent and/or number of > segments? > > Is ANYONE finding any new cousins with FF or 23&me? By this I mean > strangers, not the close kin you already know and/or have paid for their > tests. What percent of your hitherto unknown matches have worked out? > > Jim

Tim - This is incredibly useful information and I can not imagine how many hours you put into to arriving at these statistics!! Most of all, I want to say I find this very encouraging, really. Based on recent threads and information on this topic (the high likelihood of segments <10cM being IBS) I have increasingly been ignoring matches that are based on a longest segment of less than 10cM. But if I take your last two categories and combine them, you have found that you match 44% of your mother's matches in the range between 3.5cM and 8cM! Below the 'expected' 50% yes, but seriously that is a much more optimistic picture than what I had come to believe was true. Those under 8cM odds really aren't all that different from the over 10cM odds: 44% vs 47% (50-44% vs 50-47%, actually). Which says to me - and please tell me if you take a different lesson from this - all this really says is that there is no certainty in this - and we knew that! Treat every DNA match as a potential genealogical match and see what you find! On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Tim Janzen <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Dwight, >        Keep in mind that one of your long term goals needs to be to figure > out which portions of your DNA came from your mom and which portions came > from your dad.  The more of your DNA you can categorize in this way then > they easier time you will have eliminating portions of your pedigree chart > from consideration when you are evaluating your matches. >        Simply having your son tested would help you sort out a significant > percentage of your matches that are IBD.  Testing his mother as well would > help you phase your data so that you could run comparisons of your phased > data against the raw data files of any of your matches who are willing to > share their data file with you.  If you test your son you would expect that > about 50% of your matches would also share the same segment with your son, > assuming that all of your matches were IBD.  Unfortunately, we know that all > of your matches aren't IBD.  Let me provide further data that compliments > that statistics that John Walden generated.  This summer I downloaded all of > my mom's and my Family Finder matches.  I then categorized all of my mom's > matches as to whether or not I also shared the same segment with her > matches.  Here are my statistics: > 1.  For my mom's matches that were over 10 cMs, I was a match to 22 of her > 47 matches, or about 47%.  This is slightly under the expected percentage of > 50%, but in general this helps confirm John's statistics that about 99% of > matches over 10 cMs are IBD. > 2.  For my mom's matches that were between 9 and 10 cMs, I was a match to 7 > of her 18 matches, or about 39%.  This is somewhat under the expected > percentage of 50%. > 3.  For my mom's matches that were between 8 and 9 cMs, I was a match to 9 > of her 34 matches, or about 26%.  This is significantly under the expected > percentage of 50%. > 4.  For my mom's matches that were between 5 and 8 cMs, I was a match to 12 > of her 21 matches, or about 57%.  This is significantly higher the expected > percentage of 50%. > 5.  For my mom's matches that were between 3.5 and 5 cMs, I was a match to > 29 of her 73 matches, or about 40%.  This is significantly lower the > expected percentage of 50%. > > My data doesn't look quite as striking as John's does for the percentage of > matches that are IBS that are less than 8 cMs, but it does indicate that in > general a significant percentage of matches between 3.5 and 10 cMs will be > IBS.  When I have more time I will try to generate more data from both FF > and 23andMe on this topic. > > Sincerely, > Tim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dwight Holmes > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 11:18 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with > few clues ? > > Tim, if I were to test my son and his mother, we would be able to phase our > data. Would that then allow me to better evaluate my own matches as well as > my sons? I've always basically skipped over discussions of phasing because, > since my parents are both deceased, I just figured this was something that > didn't apply to me. But perhaps it would be allow for partial understanding > of my own atDNA by doing as I suggested above??  So any segments that my > son has that came from me and pass the phasing test would therefore also be > proven IBD segments for me as well. So I guess roughly 1/2 of my atDNA > would be assessable by this method? > > > > ______________________________ > 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

Jim, I understand your concern but I think this is one of those places where FF still works in reality in spite of the limitations.   I've been trying to come to grips with the differences between the science of FF and the practice of FF and at least feel like I am getting a sense of what works and what doesn't work  well at my present level of understanding.    And ... while I'm going to be diving into the world of "phasing" myself because I want to truly understand the science of it all, I also want to be able to continue to communicate with my "typical" new cousin  who will only take one test and then maybe reluctantly.   And, more importantly I want their data to fit in and be relevant too.       The science component will always be filled with unknowns.   But fortunately over time the knowns grow and the unknowns fade.   That's the nature of the beast.   But there is still the application to keep in perspective as well.    I think the application of FF  works as intended .... it helps us truly find new cousins .... but there is backroom work to be done to make it so.   The principle value of FF to me is that the DNA "match" points out the potential for intersecting family trees within a genealogical timeframe and narrows the field of the search from ALL to a FEW  .... and I believe that the observation of multiple segments "matching" between two individuals at some point assures us that such intersection of trees does exist.   I believe that while individual segments may be IBS vs IBD ... and the subject of much scientific debate  ... the totality of the match is also important in the artful consideration in the observations before us.   In fact we know one thing to be absolutely true ... we are all related.   And the more I look at FF data the more I understand that biologically and believe it observationally .    But ... can the art of reading the data by the average genealogist become sophisticated enough to be  easily used in practice?    I think so .... although even then that "backroom" work seems to presently exceed the desire of most folks to know that much about their ancestry.    You have to build out their trees for them in many cases to make this work.   You have to speculate.   You have to make and test assumptions.    You have to fret over whether you are right or wrong ... and whether or not you are leading yourself and others astray by your speculation.   It clearly isn't nearly as simple as "taking the test" and finding out that you are an 8th cousin to a KING or QUEEN somewhere.    We must not be that cavalier in our salemanship of FF.   I'm convinced that the artful application of FF will continue to grow ALONG with the science.   I think there are limitations both known and probably others to be learned but we do ourselves as genealogists a disfavor I believe if we grow too scientifically rigid in our application of this new tool and that the misreading of such understandable discussions within the practictioner community with raise unnecessary concerns with the average user such that they choose to spend their time and resources elsewhere.     We must always also keep in mind the artful application of the tool in practice such that real people find real cousin connections through its use ..... phased or not.    I can honestly say that I've learned enough simply through the communications that have opened up with FF testing that even without any successes in matching of cousins (which we have had) I'd consider the effort and expenditures successful anyway and will continue to expend my limited resources in the pursuit of the mysteries contained .... herein .    John

I have found a bunch of cousins, some through FF, some through 23andMe, a couple of them are on both. I'm so disorganized I don't actually have a list. ( If Google ever goes bust and gmail hits the dustbin of history, I'm toast, for so much of my life including my genealogical addiction resides to a large extent in gmail). But I can say I've got confirmed matches with at least 15 people ranging from 3rd cousin up to 11th cousin 1x or 2x removed, I forget which! I'd guess the majority of these connect through either Gov Thomas Dudley of Massachusetts Bay Colony or Augustine Warner, Jr. of Virginia Colony, and ancestor of George Washington. Since a necessary condition for confirming matches is having well-developed genealogies on both sides, I guess it's not surprising that it's easier to confirm matches on lines that involve famous or historical figures... On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Jim Bartlett <[email protected]> wrote: > >    Mary Alice; > >   This is of interest to me - thanks. > >   Actually I think you have a much better chance of finding a more distant >   cousin than a closer one. That's because you have so many more distant >   cousins! > > > >   Jim Bartlett > >   On 01/07/12, M. A. Farrell<[email protected]> wrote: > >   Jim, perhaps of interest to you; I have found several (5) previously unknown >   relatives  who descend from ONE of my sets of 3rd GGGgrandparents, and >   another descending from that 3GGGgrandfather's father. >   These matches are at both FTDNA and 23andMe, and range from 4th cousin to >   6th cousin. >   It amazes me that such a group of distant relatives, unknown to each other, >   have had Adna testing to reveal our source in this one line. >   Mary Alice >   ________________________________________ >   PeoplePC Online >   A better way to Internet >   [1]http://www.peoplepc.com >   ______________________________ >   For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >   [2]http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html >   ------------------------------- >   To   unsubscribe   from   the   list,   please   send   an   email  to >   A[3][email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without >   the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > References > >   1. http://www.peoplepc.com/ >   2. http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html >   3. mailto:[email protected] > > > ______________________________ > 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 Marleen, Everything you are doing so far looks good to me. Contact the 16 people in question and look for a shared ancestor in common with your father for those 16 people. I just uploaded an abbreviated version of the spreadsheet that I use to track all of my mom's 23andMe and Family Finder matches to http://dl.dropbox.com/u/21841126/23andMe%20and%20FF%20matches%20for%20Betty% 20Janzen%20%28public%29.xls. You might want to download that file and use it as a template for tracking your data and your correspondence with matches. I deleted all of the messages and the names of matches from this public version. I don't particularly like 23andMe's messaging system so I copy all my 23andMe messages into this file for my mom's matches. I do the same for correspondence with FF matches. I have separate but similar files for my dad's matches, for my wife's parents' matches, and for matches with my mother's two brothers. I find that keeping all of this information in one place in an Excel spreadsheet really helps me not lose track of important pieces of information. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marleen Van Horne Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 1:12 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? I had my half-brother FF tested. We share the same father. Any matches we have over 10 cM should be consider IBD. My half-brother has 83 FF matches without me. I made a list of all his > 10 cM matches and compared the names to my list of matches. He has 41 matches > 10 cM, of those sixteen names are on my list of matches. Most of the > 10 cM matches are on chr 4. My expectation would be that our matches on chr 4 should also match one another to some degree, as many of their location overlap with one another. First, is the above correct? Second, what is the best way to proceed? Marleen Van Horne

Mary Alice; This is of interest to me - thanks. Actually I think you have a much better chance of finding a more distant cousin than a closer one. That's because you have so many more distant cousins! Jim Bartlett On 01/07/12, M. A. Farrell<[email protected]> wrote: Jim, perhaps of interest to you; I have found several (5) previously unknown relatives who descend from ONE of my sets of 3rd GGGgrandparents, and another descending from that 3GGGgrandfather's father. These matches are at both FTDNA and 23andMe, and range from 4th cousin to 6th cousin. It amazes me that such a group of distant relatives, unknown to each other, have had Adna testing to reveal our source in this one line. Mary Alice ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet [1]http://www.peoplepc.com ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: [2]http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to A[3][email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message References 1. http://www.peoplepc.com/ 2. http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html 3. mailto:[email protected]

Thank you for such a clear explanation, Tim. Diana > From: Tim Janzen > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 12:30 AM > > Dear Jim, > The major issue with using unphased data for comparisons (in > Relative Finder, Family Finder, or other programs such as Jim > McMillan's > that compare unphased data) is that a significant percentage of > shorter > matching segments will be identical by state rather than identical > by > descent... <snip> > Doing comparisons using phased gets around the issue of > identical by > state matches... <snip>

Sam; I concur that the journey will only get better. I started a surname project in 2002, and it has grown steadily by about 2 kits per month. Since our research group already knew about many of the lines, it was easy to fit folks in. And we worked as a pretty cooperative group. With atDNA you are pretty much on your own - you try to get some cooperation from each match. It still amazes me how difficult it is to get a reply, much less share meaningful info. I still think there is hope for the average genealogist to use atDNA, and I plan to keep recommending it - I just have to scale back the expectations. Jim Bartlett On 01/07/12, Sam Eaton<[email protected]> wrote: Jim, The morning coffee jump start does help. I think that your ROI point is excellent as were your other points. The big issue is that autosomal DNA is more difficult to understand and work with than yDNA. Even worse, except for GEDmatch, Dr Pike's site and a few others there is no really useful software yet. Half million to million line spreadsheets really stretch what a spreadsheet can do. I expect that SQL is the ultimate answer. Still, for me, this journey started in NOV 2009 with the 23andMe beta. Looking back over that timeframe, the progress is astonishing. In another two to three years . . . Sam ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: [1]http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to A[2][email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message References 1. http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html 2. mailto:[email protected]

If any of the following represents a misunderstanding on my part, please correct me, gently. I had my half-brother FF tested. We share the same father. Any matches we have over 10 cM should be consider IBD. Of the 7500 total cM of atDNA, approximateley 3750 cM can come from one parent. I realize this division can be flexible. Of that approximately 3750 cM, my brother and I actually share 1607.60 cM of atDNA. The largest segment is 196.19 cM, on chr 4. My half-brother has 83 FF matches without me. I made a list of all his > 10 cM matches and compared the names to my list of matches. He has 41 matches > 10 cM, of those sixteen names are on my list of matches. I then downloaded the list of matching locations for these 16 people for both my half-brother and me to a Excel spreadsheet and sorted the information by chromosome and starting location for the matching segments. Most of the > 10 cM matches are on chr 4. My expectation would be that our matches on chr 4 should also match one another to some degree, as many of their location overlap with one another. First, is the above correct? Second, what is the best way to proceed? Marleen Van Horne

So, a couple questions here .... good thread by the way.    This is really helpful.   Complicated but helpful none-the-less. First .... if I can test my brother, my father and myself how much of my mothers atDNA (for FF purposes) can I tease out of the mixture?    Second .... the percentages mentioned that John Walden has brought forward (and your observations as well Tim) apply to a single segment of DNA being compared to a similar but likewise single segment of DNA ..... do they not?  However, in many to most of these reported or observed "cousin" situations with segments less than 8 cM ... heck ... less than 7 cM for that matter .... we "normally" have multiple "matching" segments.   Those phasing percentages therefore apply independently to each paired observation as I understand it and therefore the probability that one or more of say 14 matching segments is IBD vs IBS approaches 1 quite quickly.   Is that an accurate assessment?   I'm not saying that these are matches that can be determined in a genealogical timeframe but I'm just trying to understand whether this is an ALL or NOTHING situation .... I don't believe it is.    John 

Dear John, I would definitely try to get your aunt to test. If your aunt has a child, I would also test them. I would suggest caution about situations where you share 14 matching segments, but where all of the matching segments are short (in this case all less than or equal to 7.7 cMs). A significant majority of matches under 5 cMs are going to be IBS. I came to this conclusion early on after looking at the Family Finder data and also at the data from the 23andMe Mennonite project at http://kquilting.homeserver.com/23andme/resultsLoGerman.html where we use a 4 cM threshold for matches. If you look at my dad's (Robert Janzen) file on that web site you will see quite a few matches for him that are in the 4-6 cM range that are from people who aren't of Mennonite ancestry. As far as I can tell, essentially all of my dad's ancestors were Mennonites in Poland or that region in 1700. However, all of the people below row 725 have no Low German Mennonite ancestry from Poland. A few of those people do have Polish ancestry, but if there is a genealogical connection with any of the match! es on rows 726 to 934 the genealogical connections are likely to be before 1700. I would suggest you wait until you get your results from your two children back before you look at this situation again. At that point compare your children to this person as well and then see how many of the 14 segments that they match on. Also keep in mind that the total number of SNPs in the matching segment is another important clue as to whether or not the segment will be IBD or not. If the number of SNPs is over 1000 it is much more likely to be IBD than if the number of SNPs in the segment is 500 or less. If you look at my dad's file I mentioned above you will note that many of my dad's matches in the 4-6 cM range below row 725 have only 250-600 or so SNPs in the matching segment. This significantly increases the probability that the matching segment will be IBS. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John F Smeltzer Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 11:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? 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? John

Dear Jim, I have basically been a realist about both 23andMe and Family Finder from the very beginning. I have also been encouraging people to test, but I have been trying to not oversell what autosomal DNA can deliver. I realized early on that autosomal analysis was going to be a long drawn out process in which segments of DNA would painstakingly be linked to specific ancestors after a lot of people had been tested. The key here is lots of patience. Unfortunately many of our DNA matches are either unwilling to be in contact with us, unwilling to share genealogical information with us, or unable to provide enough genealogical information so that we can find the genealogical link. The problem is not the test. I think that you should continue to advise that every serious genealogist take the Family Finder DNA test (and/or the 23andMe test). The more people who do the test the more we are going to learn. I would certainly not suggest that you discard all matches under 10 cMs. I suggest you continue to contact these people, but I would suggest that your chance of finding a common ancestor when corresponding with these people is significantly lower than it is when corresponding with people who match you at over 10 cMs. Unfortunately, use and analysis of autosomal DNA is fairly time intensive and many people aren't willing to put the time in that is needed to first of all understand what they are doing and then secondly to correctly interpret the data that they have. So far I have found a 4th cousin of my mother-in-law through 23andMe. I have also found a 3rd cousin once removed and a 5th cousin of my mom's through 23andMe. I have also found some distant cousins of my dad's. I think I would found more cousins with whom I found a genealogical relationship if more people had been willing to share their complete pedigree chart with me. I also have a lot of genealogical brick walls in the 1700s that hamper me. I believe that if all of my matches had accurate pedigree charts going back to 1600 and that I had a completely accurate pedigree chart on all lines going back to 1600 that I would be able to find common ancestors with many of my matches with whom I share a segment in common in the 6 to 10 cM range. Unfortunately, my pedigree chart and my matches' pedigree charts aren't that complete. I would like to encourage you (and everyone else on this list) not to get discouraged about this whole process. Keep working at it! Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 6:29 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? Dear Tim, Thank you for outlining this process. I have very mixed emotions at this point. The main ones are betrayed and upset. I have been pushing (as in selling) Family Finder for the last 18 months - I make presentations at the FHCs in DC and Baltimore at annual workshops, as well as retirement communities and genealogy clubs in the region. I'm asked to speak, because DNA is the most technical word I use - I proclaim that no biology is needed to use the new DNA tools for genealogy, and I keep the presentation and discussions at that level. I have a Masters in engineering and my wife has a PhD in biology - but I try to keep the talks at a level everyone can understand and use. Many have taken my advice: "every serious genealogist should take the Family Finder DNA test." If I understand correctly, the simple rule for genealogy hobbyists is: "discard all matches below 10cM, and focus on the few remaining". Later today I'll see what that does in my case. In my 1024 23&me matches, what should be the equivalent (to 10cM) cutoff - in percent and/or number of segments? Is ANYONE finding any new cousins with FF or 23&me? By this I mean strangers, not the close kin you already know and/or have paid for their tests. What percent of your hitherto unknown matches have worked out? Jim -

Jim, I have not found any new cousins with FF or RF yet but have found a connection between my father-in-law and what must be a relatively-close cousin with common rare surname origin (Gorenstein). We just haven't pinpointed the connection, yet. Nothing close on the other 10 profiles...yet. Max -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 8:29 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? ... Is ANYONE finding any new cousins with FF or 23&me? By this I mean strangers, not the close kin you already know and/or have paid for their tests. What percent of your hitherto unknown matches have worked out? Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime!

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 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John F Smeltzer Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 4:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? First .... if I can test my brother, my father and myself how much of my mothers atDNA (for FF purposes) can I tease out of the mixture? Second .... the percentages mentioned that John Walden has brought forward (and your observations as well Tim) apply to a single segment of DNA being compared to a similar but likewise single segment of DNA ..... do they not? However, in many to most of these reported or observed "cousin" situations with segments less than 8 cM ... heck ... less than 7 cM for that matter .... we "normally" have multiple "matching" segments. Those phasing percentages therefore apply independently to each paired observation as I understand it and therefore the probability that one or more of say 14 matching segments is IBD vs IBS approaches 1 quite quickly. Is that an accurate assessment? I'm not saying that these are matches that can be determined in a genealogical timeframe but I'm just trying to understand whether this is an ALL or NOTHING situation .... I don't believe it is. John

Larry, Thanks - you did answer the question - and you've done some really hard and deep work on your ancestry. It looks like the DNA tools are working well for you. I, too, am using them on all fronts. They are powerful tools. It looks like your atDNA ROI is paying off, too. Thanks for being patient with me. Jim Bartlett On 01/07/12, Larry Vick<[email protected]> wrote: Jim, Yes, I have found previously unknown cousins at 23andMe (and then a couple of them tested at FTDNA, and we also matched there). The number I have found is very small. Thanks to CNN I even got to meet one (Bob STUBBS) in person. If you just count those where my match and I have identified a common ancestor or ancestral couple it has just been seven in my father's line (he is deceased so I can't test him) and 12 in my mother's line (fortunately she has been tested). I only counted one match per family (e.g. where I might match multiple members of the same family - say a parent, child, and sibling). I have been able to identify five cases where my wife and one of her matches have a shared ancestor or ancestral couple. Unfortunately, my wife isn't interested in genealogy, and she has some early brick walls I need to work on. My wife's parents are deceased, so I can't test them and she has no siblings. I am starting to find matches with more than one person on the same segment where we all can trace ourselves to a shared ancestor or ancestral couple. I need more matches to increase my confidence that the shared ancestor or ancestral couple we have identified is the one we inherited the segment from. I also have several cases where I have identified a shared ancestor or ancestral couple with one match but other matches we (the first match, and my mother or me) have on the same segment don't have a deep enough pedigree to know if they are also descendants of the ancestor or ancestral couple. In some cases we have matching surnames in our pedigrees but we just can't identify the shared ancestor. Hopefully, they will take the information I share with them and do some digging and come back to me later with what they find. Perhaps the most valuable information for me was finding an African segment in both my mother's and my wife's 23andMe Ancestry Paintings (different segments so they don't match on them). Finding my mother's African segment helped me to understand a story my maternal grandmother's 1st cousin had told me about where one of my maternal grandmother's lines had come from (Newman's Ridge in Hancock Co., TN) and the fact that the area was home to many Melungeon families. At the time the cousin told the story I could tell he expected me to understand the significance of Newman's Ridge, but I had no idea what he meant. While my mother and my wife don't match, I have noticed a pattern where my wife matches a person on a segment on one chromosome and my mother matches the same person on a different segment on another chromosome. In about half of the cases the matches have ancestry paintings with at least one African segment. I think this will lead me to finding my wife and my mother have a distant shared Melungeon ancestor. Well, I could go on and one, but I hope I have answered your question. Regards, Larry ________________________________ From: Jim Bartlett <[1][email protected]> To: "[2][email protected]" <[3][email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2012 9:29 AM Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] SUBJECT: How do you work a 5 way FF match with few clues ? Is ANYONE finding any new cousins with FF or 23&me? By this I mean strangers, not the close kin you already know and/or have paid for their tests. What percent of your hitherto unknown matches have worked out? Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. mailto:[email protected] 3. mailto:[email protected]