I reported that bug earlier this morning, and I just now downloaded a corrected file. Try again. Ann On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes@gmail.com>wrote: > except that it inserted *my* middle name as the middle name of all 584 of > my matches!! (this is a little disturbing!) > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Ann Turner <DNACousins@aol.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for > Chromosome > >>> Browser. > >>> > >> >

Ruth A word of caution: 1. We can find a Common Ancestor with a Match. 2. We can share a segment of atDNA with that same Match. 3. This does not guarantee that the segment in 2 above came from the CA in 1 above Probably over half the time the segment will come from the CA; but with over 200 CAs now identified with Matches, I can tell you that at least 30 of them, probably more, are not the source of the shared DNA segment. You need segment Triangulation AND genealogy Triangulation to have high confidence. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Dec 4, 2013, at 10:59 AM, "Ruth Cattles Cottrell" <ruthcottrell@verizon.net> wrote: > I, too, appreciate what I have learned from AncestryDNA. I finally loaded > my very large tree to Ancestry just recently, did the AncestryDNA test and > immediately linked to 30 individuals' trees showing where our lineage > intersected in our trees some as close as 3 generations, others as far as 7. > These were all on major lines I have researched for decades and if nothing > else it confirmed that I had been on the right track after all and there was > some comfort knowing that someone connected at 7 generations was thinking > the same as I. For one who does not yet have time to prepare all these > fancy spreadsheets, match segments, etc. and correspond with my thousands of > matches at FF and 23, most of who don't have trees loaded past 3 > generations, I have certainly gained from my AncestryDNA work. > > I would expect that AncestryDNA will eventually expand past the US and yes, > we are definitely at the beginning of this journey. > > Regards, > Ruth Cottrell >

The major limitation of the AncestryDNA test, apart from the lack of segment matching information, is that it is only available in the US. As one of the few non-Americans in their database I have found their test to be essentially useless. I have pages and pages of matches with very distant cousins in America and no chance of ever finding a genealogical connection with any of them. Family trees do not respect country boundaries and it is a very short-sighted move on Ancestry's part to sell their test exclusively in the US market. Debbie

The text below has already been posted on DNA-NEWBIE, GENEALOGY-DNA, and ISOGG. I didn't think to add AUTOSOMAL-DNA to the CC list. Are there many people who don't follow at least one of those lists? Ann ===== First of all, FTDNA is changing the terminology in response to our objections about the meaning of the term. Rebekah Canada just posted this morning ""We are changing the word *Triangulation* to *Common Matches* for Family Finder matching." http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=374403&postcount=1 Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for Chromosome Browser. Secondly, Rebekah had previously posted "The team is looking at the MatchesMatrix option with privacy concerns in mind. I will tell you more when they have something ready." http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=374355&postcount=3 The current consent form just gives permission to share your e-mail with your matches, not to look at their records. Rebekah is making the FTDNA forums even more useful, so it's a good idea to follow posts there. Ann Turner On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Carl Oehmann <oehmannc@att.net> wrote: Jim, You mentioned the better triangulation tools at 23andMe and Gedmatch. Why do you suppose FTDNA doesn’t offer that capability? Seems of the three, FTDNA is more in tune with people who are serious about using DNA to solve genealogical problems. After all it’s a database. If I can compare myself with any of my matches, why shouldn’t I be able to compare two of my matches with each other? -Carl Oehmann

Dear Carl, There are quite a few people who have requested that FTDNA create this capacity. I think that when FTDNA created the software for Family Finder they didn't realize how crucial it was that Family Finder allow their customers to compare your matches with each other similar to what you can do 23andMe. 23andMe didn't add this ability until about 1 1/2 years ago. It has been a major help for genetic genealogists to have this feature at 23andMe. I hope that FTDNA follows suit and allows this for Family Finder as well. It would be a major step forward in improving the overall functionality of the Family Finder product. It is great to hear that FTDNA will be allowing downloads of all of the matching segment data shortly. That feature was at the top of my priority list for Family Finder enhancements. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Carl Oehmann Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 4:06 AM To: AUTOSOMAL-DNA@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Chromosome comparison Does anyone know why FTDNA does not offer the ability to compare your matches with each other similar to 23andMe? Carl Oehmann

I, too, appreciate what I have learned from AncestryDNA. I finally loaded my very large tree to Ancestry just recently, did the AncestryDNA test and immediately linked to 30 individuals' trees showing where our lineage intersected in our trees some as close as 3 generations, others as far as 7. These were all on major lines I have researched for decades and if nothing else it confirmed that I had been on the right track after all and there was some comfort knowing that someone connected at 7 generations was thinking the same as I. For one who does not yet have time to prepare all these fancy spreadsheets, match segments, etc. and correspond with my thousands of matches at FF and 23, most of who don't have trees loaded past 3 generations, I have certainly gained from my AncestryDNA work. I would expect that AncestryDNA will eventually expand past the US and yes, we are definitely at the beginning of this journey. Regards, Ruth Cottrell -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of David Drabold Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 5:50 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Ancestry vs the rest Hi everybody, I would like to just stick up for Ancestry for a minute. I have learned far more from Ancestry than either FTDNA or 23andme. There is not any doubt that the "high confidence" (so called fourth cousin) matches are usually informative. For that matter, the "medium" ones often are, and I have also learned from some of the lower confidence matches. Yes, there are zillions of speculative matches, but no harm done (I also have 900 or so on 23andme)... Ancestry is very clear that these are speculative and we can easily ignore them as desired. At least the people on Ancestry are actually interested in ancestry, unlike 23andme (most of the time in my experience, a point of endless irritation on my part). I am inclined to think that the best of the bunch is FTDNA from a scientific point of view. I have just had limited success there, despite some good serious people "on the other end of the match". I guess it may have to do with my personal demographics and who is testing where. I am glad to hear from Tim that the Ancestry BP and cM criteria are strongly correlated. I would be interested in a quantitative proof that one criterion is uniformly superior to another. I would be surprised if this could be demonstrated. Ancestry could be improved in many ways, but my advice, as given to someone yesterday, is to take the Ancestry test. Of course the use of gedmatch is very important to map out the chromosomes, and add rigor to speculations. Until the testers automatically undertake the kind of work nicely described by Jim (for example), its going to be frustrating. One still gets the impression that we are very much of the beginning of this journey. Regards, Dave Drabold http://www.phy.ohiou.edu/~drabold ______________________________ 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 AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear Paul, My perception is that only about 1% or less of people who have tested at Ancestry.com, 23andMe, and FTDNA's Family Finder actively pursue contact with their matches in those databases. Perhaps a higher percentage than this are pursuing contact with their closest matches, but in all of the accounts that I monitor, I don't get very many people contacting me either, particularly from Ancestry.com. I haven't even contacted all of my family's Ancestry.com matches yet due to personal time constraints. In any case, I do plan to eventually contact my family's matches at Ancestry.com and encourage them to upload their raw data files to GEDmatch so that I can see the matching HIR data. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 6:31 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Ancestry vs the rest I am also one of the non-Americans in the database. There is very little that I can do with a bunch of fifth cousins who know nothing at that time depth. I have not received even one contact from somebody from AncestryDNA. The response rate is even lower than that for 23andMe. I still have a tree and a subscription to Ancestry, though. Psul Shenton.

If it's any comfort, most of my ancestors have been on this side of the big pond since 1700 +/- 50 years and most of my bazillion matches on AncestryDNA are the fifth-to-infinity cousin range... :) On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Paul <lpshenton@gmail.com> wrote: > I am also one of the non-Americans in the database. There is very little > that I can do with a bunch of fifth cousins who know nothing at that time > depth. I have not received even one contact from somebody from > AncestryDNA. The response rate is even lower than that for 23andMe. I > still have a tree and a subscription to Ancestry, though. > > Psul Shenton. > > > On 4 December 2013 07:34, Debbie Kennett <debbiekennett@aol.com> wrote: > > > The major limitation of the AncestryDNA test, apart from the lack of > > segment > > matching information, is that it is only available in the US. As one of > the > > few non-Americans in their database I have found their test to be > > essentially useless. I have pages and pages of matches with very distant > > cousins in America and no chance of ever finding a genealogical > connection > > with any of them. > > > > Family trees do not respect country boundaries and it is a very > > short-sighted move on Ancestry's part to sell their test exclusively in > the > > US market. > > > > Debbie > > > > > > > ______________________________ > 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 > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I am also one of the non-Americans in the database. There is very little that I can do with a bunch of fifth cousins who know nothing at that time depth. I have not received even one contact from somebody from AncestryDNA. The response rate is even lower than that for 23andMe. I still have a tree and a subscription to Ancestry, though. Psul Shenton. On 4 December 2013 07:34, Debbie Kennett <debbiekennett@aol.com> wrote: > The major limitation of the AncestryDNA test, apart from the lack of > segment > matching information, is that it is only available in the US. As one of the > few non-Americans in their database I have found their test to be > essentially useless. I have pages and pages of matches with very distant > cousins in America and no chance of ever finding a genealogical connection > with any of them. > > Family trees do not respect country boundaries and it is a very > short-sighted move on Ancestry's part to sell their test exclusively in the > US market. > > Debbie > >

Thanks for your offer, Tim; It will be good to understand the AncestryDNA process. Like Shannon, I have found little use for AncestryDNA matches - I can't seem to get data for the few interesting Matches, and far too many GEDcom Matches with Ancestry IDs are clearly IBS. It looks like perhaps the flat areas may be generating many Matches at AncestryDNA.... Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Dec 4, 2013, at 1:09 AM, "Tim Janzen" <tjanzen@comcast.net> wrote: > Dear Jim and Shannon, > There is actually a fairly strong correlation between the cMs and > the number of base pairs throughout the autosomal chromosomes. Last year I > downloaded a series of graphs from Rutgers University that shows this > correlation chromosome by chromosome. I can't seem to find the URL where I > downloaded the graphs from now, but in any case you can download them from > my Dropbox account at > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21841126/map%20comparing%20chromosome%20 > position%20to%20cM%20from%20Rutgers.pdf if you want to review them. The URL > for the Rutgers University computation genetics web site is at > http://compgen.rutgers.edu/maps. It describes some of the background there. > In any case, if you review these maps closely you will see that only about 9 > of the chromosomes that have portions of the graph where the slope of the > curve is very flat (in other words there are a large number of base pairs > per cM in these regions of the chromosome). Chromosomes which appear to > have regions where there could be more than 5 million base pairs in a > segment of the chromosome where there is less than 1 cM include chromosomes > 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 16, 17, 19, and 20. > I suspect that there is something going on here that is more than > just regions where the slopes of these graphs are relatively flat. I > suspect that the phasing of the data by Ancestry.com may be faulty in some > instances. In other words, some of the matches that Ancestry.com is > generating may not be true HIRs that contain 5 million or more base pairs. > I expressed some concerns about the quality of the phasing that Ancestry.com > is doing in an analysis I did this summer which I posted at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/AUTOSOMAL-DNA/2013-08/13765547 > 77. We would need to review some of the raw data files to sort this out. > Shannon, if you could send me some raw data files that appear as matches in > Ancestry.com but don't meet the 1 cM threshold in GEDmatch, I would be happy > to review the files and determine what the lengths of the longest HIRs are. > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen

Hi everybody, I would like to just stick up for Ancestry for a minute. I have learned far more from Ancestry than either FTDNA or 23andme. There is not any doubt that the "high confidence" (so called fourth cousin) matches are usually informative. For that matter, the "medium" ones often are, and I have also learned from some of the lower confidence matches. Yes, there are zillions of speculative matches, but no harm done (I also have 900 or so on 23andme)... Ancestry is very clear that these are speculative and we can easily ignore them as desired. At least the people on Ancestry are actually interested in ancestry, unlike 23andme (most of the time in my experience, a point of endless irritation on my part). I am inclined to think that the best of the bunch is FTDNA from a scientific point of view. I have just had limited success there, despite some good serious people "on the other end of the match". I guess it may have to do with my personal demographics and who is testing where. I am glad to hear from Tim that the Ancestry BP and cM criteria are strongly correlated. I would be interested in a quantitative proof that one criterion is uniformly superior to another. I would be surprised if this could be demonstrated. Ancestry could be improved in many ways, but my advice, as given to someone yesterday, is to take the Ancestry test. Of course the use of gedmatch is very important to map out the chromosomes, and add rigor to speculations. Until the testers automatically undertake the kind of work nicely described by Jim (for example), its going to be frustrating. One still gets the impression that we are very much of the beginning of this journey. Regards, Dave Drabold http://www.phy.ohiou.edu/~drabold

Does anyone know why FTDNA does not offer the ability to compare your matches with each other similar to 23andMe? Carl Oehmann

Shannon, I think you already know the answer - very little, if anything. I have stated before that without the DNA data, the AncestryDNA test is not worth it. If all you want to do is find cousins, you can search Ancestry for any of your ancestral names and find many, many cousins - no DNA test required... In fact when they report 4,000 matches that are based on such flimsy DNA (really IBS - or non-DNA matches) "data", you are actually just fishing for cousins without any DNA link. Again, you don't need to pay for a $99 test to do that (you have to pay a lot more for a subscription, however...) I've only gotten a few good matches at AncestryDNA, and most of them had already tested elsewhere. I have found some cousins with MRCAs that I don't have mapped, but I have not been able to find a good DNA segment for any of them. It is very frustrating, and I spend very little time anymore at AncestryDNA. Jim Bartlett On 12/03/13, Shannon Christmas<shannon.s.christmas@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Jim, Knowing that the correlation between cM and Mbps is minimal, that was my first thought. What can anyone learn from from these kinds of matches if you cannot perform chromosome mapping? Very Respectfully, Shannon On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Jim Bartlett <[1]jim4bartletts@verizon.net>wrote: > Shannon, > > It's because Ancestry's threshold for a match is 5Mbp. There are areas > where a 5Mbp segment doesn't have 1cM. > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Dec 3, 2013, at 8:04 PM, Shannon Christmas < > [2]shannon.s.christmas@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello all, > > I have observed a pattern for sometime now with AncestryDNA matches. I > will > > find a common ancestor with an AncestryDNA match and invite the match to > > upload their raw DNA data to GEDmatch.com. After the match has uploaded > > their raw data, they provide me with their kit number so that I can > compare > > their data to mine on GEDmatch. GEDmatch reports that there are no > matching > > DNA segments, even at the 1 cM threshold. > > > > Can someone explain why two individuals matched at AncestryDNA would not > > share even a single 1 cM segment on GEDmatch? > > > > Very Respectfully, > > Shannon > > -- > > Mr. Shannon S. Christmas References 1. mailto:jim4bartletts@verizon.net 2. mailto:shannon.s.christmas@gmail.com

Dear Jim and Shannon, There is actually a fairly strong correlation between the cMs and the number of base pairs throughout the autosomal chromosomes. Last year I downloaded a series of graphs from Rutgers University that shows this correlation chromosome by chromosome. I can't seem to find the URL where I downloaded the graphs from now, but in any case you can download them from my Dropbox account at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21841126/map%20comparing%20chromosome%20 position%20to%20cM%20from%20Rutgers.pdf if you want to review them. The URL for the Rutgers University computation genetics web site is at http://compgen.rutgers.edu/maps. It describes some of the background there. In any case, if you review these maps closely you will see that only about 9 of the chromosomes that have portions of the graph where the slope of the curve is very flat (in other words there are a large number of base pairs per cM in these regions of the chromosome). Chromosomes which appear to have regions where there could be more than 5 million base pairs in a segment of the chromosome where there is less than 1 cM include chromosomes 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 16, 17, 19, and 20. I suspect that there is something going on here that is more than just regions where the slopes of these graphs are relatively flat. I suspect that the phasing of the data by Ancestry.com may be faulty in some instances. In other words, some of the matches that Ancestry.com is generating may not be true HIRs that contain 5 million or more base pairs. I expressed some concerns about the quality of the phasing that Ancestry.com is doing in an analysis I did this summer which I posted at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/AUTOSOMAL-DNA/2013-08/13765547 77. We would need to review some of the raw data files to sort this out. Shannon, if you could send me some raw data files that appear as matches in Ancestry.com but don't meet the 1 cM threshold in GEDmatch, I would be happy to review the files and determine what the lengths of the longest HIRs are. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Shannon Christmas Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 5:51 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Match on AncestryDNA, but not on GEDmatch Hi Jim, Knowing that the correlation between cM and Mbps is minimal, that was my first thought. What can anyone learn from from these kinds of matches if you cannot perform chromosome mapping? Very Respectfully, Shannon On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Jim Bartlett <jim4bartletts@verizon.net>wrote: > Shannon, > > It's because Ancestry's threshold for a match is 5Mbp. There are areas > where a 5Mbp segment doesn't have 1cM. > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime!

Hi Jim, Knowing that the correlation between cM and Mbps is minimal, that was my first thought. What can anyone learn from from these kinds of matches if you cannot perform chromosome mapping? Very Respectfully, Shannon On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Jim Bartlett <jim4bartletts@verizon.net>wrote: > Shannon, > > It's because Ancestry's threshold for a match is 5Mbp. There are areas > where a 5Mbp segment doesn't have 1cM. > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Dec 3, 2013, at 8:04 PM, Shannon Christmas < > shannon.s.christmas@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello all, > > I have observed a pattern for sometime now with AncestryDNA matches. I > will > > find a common ancestor with an AncestryDNA match and invite the match to > > upload their raw DNA data to GEDmatch.com. After the match has uploaded > > their raw data, they provide me with their kit number so that I can > compare > > their data to mine on GEDmatch. GEDmatch reports that there are no > matching > > DNA segments, even at the 1 cM threshold. > > > > Can someone explain why two individuals matched at AncestryDNA would not > > share even a single 1 cM segment on GEDmatch? > > > > Very Respectfully, > > Shannon > > -- > > Mr. Shannon S. Christmas > > > > ______________________________ > 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 > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Mr. Shannon S. Christmas Chief Market Advisor | Design Strategist The Christmas Collective <http://thechristmascollective.com/> Strategic Real Estate and Land Use Solutions New York, NY | Washington, DC P: 212.433.0586 | 202.618.1687 F: 1.888.788.5984 shannon.christmas@thechristmascollective.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannonchristmas/

Shannon, It's because Ancestry's threshold for a match is 5Mbp. There are areas where a 5Mbp segment doesn't have 1cM. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Dec 3, 2013, at 8:04 PM, Shannon Christmas <shannon.s.christmas@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > I have observed a pattern for sometime now with AncestryDNA matches. I will > find a common ancestor with an AncestryDNA match and invite the match to > upload their raw DNA data to GEDmatch.com. After the match has uploaded > their raw data, they provide me with their kit number so that I can compare > their data to mine on GEDmatch. GEDmatch reports that there are no matching > DNA segments, even at the 1 cM threshold. > > Can someone explain why two individuals matched at AncestryDNA would not > share even a single 1 cM segment on GEDmatch? > > Very Respectfully, > Shannon > -- > Mr. Shannon S. Christmas

Hello all, I have observed a pattern for sometime now with AncestryDNA matches. I will find a common ancestor with an AncestryDNA match and invite the match to upload their raw DNA data to GEDmatch.com. After the match has uploaded their raw data, they provide me with their kit number so that I can compare their data to mine on GEDmatch. GEDmatch reports that there are no matching DNA segments, even at the 1 cM threshold. Can someone explain why two individuals matched at AncestryDNA would not share even a single 1 cM segment on GEDmatch? Very Respectfully, Shannon -- Mr. Shannon S. Christmas Chief Market Advisor | Design Strategist The Christmas Collective <http://thechristmascollective.com/> Strategic Real Estate and Land Use Solutions New York, NY | Washington, DC P: 212.433.0586 | 202.618.1687 F: 1.888.788.5984 shannon.christmas@thechristmascollective.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannonchristmas/

I would like some information about starting a project based on a location. In 1738, 1739, & 1740 three ship loads of passengers came from Scotland to New York. About 20 years later they were awarded a patent in Argyle New York. There were many marriages between the families and cousins marrying cousins. My thought is to start an Argyle Patent project. Would a project help with the endogamy issue with these lines? How much work is involved in starting and running a project of this nature? How much knowledge do I need to have to start a project? Thank you Ann Gilchrest

Dear Ann, I will give my opinion about the answers to your questions in the order you gave them in your message below. 1. Yes, provided that you were able to get enough members in the project. Endogamy complicates any serious autosomal DNA project. 2. This would depend on how many descendents of the original group of immigrants you are able to have tested. The more people in the project, the more work it would be. 3. I think that anyone with at least some background in autosomal DNA could start and manage a project of this nature. However, you will need to be very careful how you analyze the data. I have some suggestions for you if you are going to undertake a project of this nature: 1. Make sure you get both complete pedigree charts and the raw data files for each of your project participants. 2. Encourage the participants to have at least one child or parent test as well so that the data can be phased. If possible, get data from two-parent/one child trios. This will allow for the most accurate phasing. 3. Create a genealogy database that will readily allow you to see all of the known shared ancestors for any one person in your project. Programs such as Legacy can do this fairly well. You might want to add all of the pedigree charts to Wikitree, which will also allow you to see the known shared ancestors for any one person in your project. The advantage of doing this in Wikitree is that other genealogy researchers will benefit from any work you do in this area. 4. Carefully map the chromosomes of all your project participants. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of AGilchrest@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 9:45 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Autosomal Geographic project I would like some information about starting a project based on a location. In 1738, 1739, & 1740 three ship loads of passengers came from Scotland to New York. About 20 years later they were awarded a patent in Argyle New York. There were many marriages between the families and cousins marrying cousins. My thought is to start an Argyle Patent project. Would a project help with the endogamy issue with these lines? How much work is involved in starting and running a project of this nature? How much knowledge do I need to have to start a project? Thank you Ann Gilchrest

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/26/business/fda-demands-a-halt-to-a-dna-test-kits-marketing.html?_r=0 On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Diana Gale Matthiesen <DianaGM@dgmweb.net>wrote: > Today's NY Times has an article on 23andMe. > > D. > > > > ______________________________ > 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 > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >