New Family Finder New Since Ann - I was missing that, too. The easiest thing to find your latest matches is to "Sort by" Match Date, or just click on the Match Date heading. Your matches will be listed most recent first. (If you want to you can reverse the order by clicking Match Date again.) Sharon > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 11:08:52 -0400 (EDT) > From: AGilchrest@aol.com > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] New Family Finder New Since > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <d4b4c.64b29e1b.3f82d704@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > Hello, > > I just took a look at the new Family Finder. In the old I would view my new > matches from a specific date. The only choices I am seeing is new since 3 > or 6 month. Did they really take away the specific date option? > > Ann G > > >

Sort on date Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 6, 2013, at 11:48 AM, <fzsaund@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > I think so. That's the one thing I don't like about the new look. I could always log in and see if there were any new matches. Now, it would mean wading through 3 months of matches to see if any were new. > > Rick Saunders >

Barton What are your objectives? You may have heard the old saw "if you don't know where you're going, any path will get you there." So, as a facilitator, I often spend a little time up front writing a 1-2 sentence mission or objective sentence. You can then test your process or plan or aletrnatives to see if they will get you there. Your objective may focus on your parents' genomes vs yours, and this would lead you to balance cousins between them. Or you may have some particular area you want to focus on - surname, or a particular brick wall - that would lead you to select appropriate new cousins to test. Or like some of us, you want to ply in this new sandbox and see what happens. That's how I started. Now my objective is to map my chromosomes as finely as I can, so that at some point I can tell any/everyone who matches me who the Common Ancestor is based on our shared segment - a genealogist's dream. Fast forward 10 years, and think about the genealogy hobby... (Almost like before and after cell phones) Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 6, 2013, at 10:56 AM, BARTON LEWIS <bartonlewis@optonline.net> wrote: > hi Jim, thanks for all your suggestions. I only yesterday purchased > Family Finder for myself, having finally become convinced as to the > usefulness of my testing. I've already tested both parents, my mom's 2 > surviving siblings, 2 of my father's first cousins (he's an only child), > and an assortment of both parents' 2nd-5th cousins. I've decided to > either test more of my parents' first or second cousins next, and am > leaning to second cousins, but still on the fence somewhat, since > testing first cousins could isolate a big chunk of their other, more > distant matches. I especially appreciate your instructions in your last > email about GEDMATCH utilities for mapping once you have the > parent-child trio. > > Barton >

I went to Matches, then clicked Relatives so I could choose Show All Matches, then I clicked Match Date and it put all of my matches in order, with first page being all the new ones from 9/22/2013 then on back. On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 11:48 AM, <fzsaund@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > I think so. That's the one thing I don't like about the new look. I could > always log in and see if there were any new matches. Now, it would mean > wading through 3 months of matches to see if any were new. > > Rick Saunders > > > -----Original Message----- > >From: AGilchrest@aol.com > >Sent: Oct 6, 2013 9:08 AM > >To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > >Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] New Family Finder New Since > > > >Hello, > > > >I just took a look at the new Family Finder. In the old I would view my > new > > matches from a specific date. The only choices I am seeing is new since 3 > >or 6 month. Did they really take away the specific date option? > > > >Ann G > > > > > > ______________________________ > 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 >

Debbie Unless they can show the range or the distribution curve, the average, alone, is very misleading. Too many people take the average as the exact value to expect. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 6, 2013, at 11:03 AM, "Debbie Kennett" <debbiekennett@aol.com> wrote: > I've added some more statistics for "once removed" cousins to the autosomal > DNA statistics page in the ISOGG Wiki: > > http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_statistics > > I wonder if there are any clever programmers out there who might be able to > create web tool or spreadsheet that will allow people to input a > relationship and generate the average percentage. > > Debbie >

A new 23andMe match just responded, and I'm not sure what's going on. She matches me at 115,000,000-145,000,000 on Chromosome 1. She doesn't match the other person who matches me at that point, which would be okay EXCEPT this is a place where my brother and I are HIR and neither one matches him. Thoughts? Karla

Hello, I just took a look at the new Family Finder. In the old I would view my new matches from a specific date. The only choices I am seeing is new since 3 or 6 month. Did they really take away the specific date option? Ann G

Thanks very much, Tim. Barton On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 02:40 AM, Tim Janzen wrote: > Dear Barton, > If you take a look at > http://kquilting.homeserver.com/23andme/ref.html and then click on the > link > to "Distant relatives, non-endogamous" you can download a spreadsheet > that > has this information in it. If you have Ann Turner's book Trace Your > Roots > with DNA, review p. 120. > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen > > -----Original Message----- > From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barton Lewis > Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 9:53 PM > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] once removed etc. > > Dear list, > > I seem to recall seeing that for purposes of amount of DNA shared, a > cousin > once removed is roughly equivalent to the next higher number (e.g. 2nd > cousin once removed is = to third cousin). Is this correct? > > What about cousins twice or thrice removed? How are those amounts > quantified? > Thank you. > > Barton > > > ______________________________ > 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 > > > > ______________________________ > 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 >

Terrific, thanks for the links, Kitty. Barton On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 03:16 AM, Kitty Cooper wrote: > Barton - > > Statistics: see this article for the percentages: > > *http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_statistics* > > and this one for the expected number of cMs and segments > > http://www.isogg.org/wiki/IBD#Ranges_of_total_centimorgans_of_IBD_segments_expected.2C_based_on_family_relationship > : > > > but the further out you get, the less reliable any estimate is > > By the way I totally second the second cousins being the most useful. > They > share one set of g-grandparents so you get to narrow down your matches > to > that line when another matches both of you. This has been very useful > for > me. > > In fact I blogged about it today > > http://blog.kittycooper.com/2013/10/results-for-a-second-cousin-on-the-skjold-line/ > > but I have just started working on this data so not much yet > Kitty > >

hi Jim, thanks for all your suggestions.  I only yesterday purchased Family Finder for myself, having finally become convinced as to the usefulness of my testing.  I've already tested both parents, my mom's 2 surviving siblings, 2 of my father's first cousins (he's an only child), and an assortment of both parents' 2nd-5th cousins.  I've decided to either test more of my parents' first or second cousins next, and am leaning to second cousins, but still on the fence somewhat, since testing first cousins could isolate a big chunk of their other, more distant matches.  I especially appreciate your instructions in your last email about GEDMATCH utilities for mapping once you have the parent-child trio. Barton On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 07:19 AM, Jim Bartlett wrote: > Barton > > Another revision in your particular case. With both your parents > tested, you can use the GEDmatch utility to phase your own results. > The gives you two new files: your atDNA from each parent. You can then > run a GEDmatch utility to assign all your GEDmatch matches to a parent > or IBS. Use these assigned matches in Triangulated Groups in your > spreadsheet, to also assign most of your matches who are not on > GEDmatch. > Then you're back to deciding whether you want to map grandparents to > your genome, or as distant an ancestor as you can. In either case, > mapping grandparents on your genome will be very revealing, and is > always a good step and review point. > Use Kitty's mapper with grandparents as the MRCA to track your > results, and do a quality check at this level. This is recommended for > everyone who is mapping chromosomes. > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Oct 5, 2013, at 11:41 PM, Barton Lewis wrote: > >> Pardon, list if this query has been posted many times before, but I >> have the >> opportunity to test a range of 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins of both my >> parents, >> and I would like guidance on how to get the most bang for my buck. I >> can >> see potential arguments for especially 1st v. 2nd cousins, where the >> relationship is still close enough to yield a significant number of >> matches. >> I guess the question comes down to the number of matches you get vs. >> the >> degree of isolation; does anyone have particular thoughts on this? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Barton >> > > > > ______________________________ > 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 >

There could be a genotyping error that is preventing the person from matching your brother or your other match. There is a possibility that one of the matches is IBS, but that is not very likely when you are talking about an HIR that has 30 million base pairs in it. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Karla Huebner Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2013 8:44 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] quirky matching A new 23andMe match just responded, and I'm not sure what's going on. She matches me at 115,000,000-145,000,000 on Chromosome 1. She doesn't match the other person who matches me at that point, which would be okay EXCEPT this is a place where my brother and I are HIR and neither one matches him. Thoughts? Karla

Dear Debbie, I just uploaded a version of my spreadsheet that includes data on the median and the average number of shared cMs for people who are related to each other from the first cousin once removed level of relationship to the 5th cousin level of relationship to my Dropbox account at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21841126/compare%20genes%20function%20in %2023andMe%20(distant%20relatives%2C%20non-endogamous)(public).xls. The Tiny URL for this is http://tinyurl.com/lgwt7kr. This is an updated version of what is at http://kquilting.homeserver.com/23andme/ref.html. I have additional data to add to this file, but haven't had time to extract all the data I need yet. In any case, I think that some people will find this file of help as they review their personal results. In any case, my general rule of thumb is that when people share less than about 100 cMs or so, the genealogical relationship could range from as close as 2nd cousins to a relatively distant cousin. When you are trying to determine the precise relationship, testing more people and then aggregating the data as I did in my Youngman project at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21841126/Youngman%20DNA%20summary.doc makes the most sense. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Debbie Kennett Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2013 8:04 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] once removed etc. I've added some more statistics for "once removed" cousins to the autosomal DNA statistics page in the ISOGG Wiki: http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_statistics I wonder if there are any clever programmers out there who might be able to create web tool or spreadsheet that will allow people to input a relationship and generate the average percentage. Debbie

I think so. That's the one thing I don't like about the new look. I could always log in and see if there were any new matches. Now, it would mean wading through 3 months of matches to see if any were new. Rick Saunders -----Original Message----- >From: AGilchrest@aol.com >Sent: Oct 6, 2013 9:08 AM >To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com >Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] New Family Finder New Since > >Hello, > >I just took a look at the new Family Finder. In the old I would view my new > matches from a specific date. The only choices I am seeing is new since 3 >or 6 month. Did they really take away the specific date option? > >Ann G

Barton Another revision in your particular case. With both your parents tested, you can use the GEDmatch utility to phase your own results. The gives you two new files: your atDNA from each parent. You can then run a GEDmatch utility to assign all your GEDmatch matches to a parent or IBS. Use these assigned matches in Triangulated Groups in your spreadsheet, to also assign most of your matches who are not on GEDmatch. Then you're back to deciding whether you want to map grandparents to your genome, or as distant an ancestor as you can. In either case, mapping grandparents on your genome will be very revealing, and is always a good step and review point. Use Kitty's mapper with grandparents as the MRCA to track your results, and do a quality check at this level. This is recommended for everyone who is mapping chromosomes. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 5, 2013, at 11:41 PM, Barton Lewis <bartonlewis@optonline.net> wrote: > Pardon, list if this query has been posted many times before, but I have the > opportunity to test a range of 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins of both my parents, > and I would like guidance on how to get the most bang for my buck. I can > see potential arguments for especially 1st v. 2nd cousins, where the > relationship is still close enough to yield a significant number of matches. > I guess the question comes down to the number of matches you get vs. the > degree of isolation; does anyone have particular thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > > Barton >

Barton Let me revise my other response. Test the closest relatives first for the biggest bang for bucks. Grandparents, Aunts/Uncles, Half Siblings all have the most shared DNA (25 pct); with first cousins next (12.5 pct). These will help you determine which side all your other matches are on - when a Match with you also matches your close relative, you immediately know which parent's chromosome the Match is on. With several close relatives tested, you can assign many of your Matches. Siblings (50 pct) are also helpful, but you have to go through an intermediate drill to determine which segments are HIR and which are Full, and which HIR segments are on which side, and this gets you back to an effective (25 pct) - unless you use phasing techniques. Unless you can determine phased segments with a sibling, it's much easier to just use close relatives directly. I am about 80 pct assigned using known relatives. And new random Matches are being added almost every day, inching that pct up. So testing close (50 & 25 pct) relatives will leverage many of your other Matches - get them working for you on the right Chr - and thus they have the highest value in mapping. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 5, 2013, at 11:41 PM, Barton Lewis <bartonlewis@optonline.net> wrote: > Pardon, list if this query has been posted many times before, but I have the > opportunity to test a range of 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins of both my parents, > and I would like guidance on how to get the most bang for my buck. I can > see potential arguments for especially 1st v. 2nd cousins, where the > relationship is still close enough to yield a significant number of matches. > I guess the question comes down to the number of matches you get vs. the > degree of isolation; does anyone have particular thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > > Barton

It isn't a bang-for-the-buck argument... ...but I would test the oldest ones first. They will not be available to test forever. Otherwise, it seems to me that if you have both parents tested (and probably even if you didn't) then 2nd cousins to cover your pedigree would be the natural choice. Gregg ----- Original Message ----- > From: Barton Lewis <bartonlewis@optonline.net> > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, October 5, 2013 10:41 PM > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Who to test ?? > > Pardon, list if this query has been posted many times before, but I have the > opportunity to test a range of 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins of both my parents, > and I would like guidance on how to get the most bang for my buck.  I can > see potential arguments for especially 1st v. 2nd cousins, where the > relationship is still close enough to yield a significant number of matches. > I guess the question comes down to the number of matches you get vs. the > degree of isolation; does anyone have particular thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > > Barton > > > ______________________________ > 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 >

Barton It all depends on your objectives. You can map your atDNA at any generational level. If you want to map your atDNA with the contribution of large segments from your 4 grandparents, you need 2nd cousins and above to determine which segments are from each grandparent. If you want to map a particular ancestor (including a parent) you have to test many descendants of that person. If you want to map your atDNA to the smallest segment practicable, you need as many Matches as you can get (test at all 3 companies, and use GEDmatch) - you'll need Common Ancestors for about 500 segments in the 7-15cM range. If you want to map whatever you can over your genome, it doesn't make much difference. You'll get 1 small IBD segment from most distant cousins; and multiple, larger segments from close cousins. So there is a tradeoff between coverage over a larger area from close ancestors with closer cousins vs smaller segments from distant ancestors with more distant cousins. If you have funds and plenty of cousins to choose from, spread them out to cover all ancestors as evenly as you can and select cousins as widely separated as possible for the best coverage. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 5, 2013, at 11:41 PM, Barton Lewis <bartonlewis@optonline.net> wrote: > Pardon, list if this query has been posted many times before, but I have the > opportunity to test a range of 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins of both my parents, > and I would like guidance on how to get the most bang for my buck. I can > see potential arguments for especially 1st v. 2nd cousins, where the > relationship is still close enough to yield a significant number of matches. > I guess the question comes down to the number of matches you get vs. the > degree of isolation; does anyone have particular thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > > Barton

Barton - Statistics: see this article for the percentages: *http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_statistics* and this one for the expected number of cMs and segments http://www.isogg.org/wiki/IBD#Ranges_of_total_centimorgans_of_IBD_segments_expected.2C_based_on_family_relationship : but the further out you get, the less reliable any estimate is By the way I totally second the second cousins being the most useful. They share one set of g-grandparents so you get to narrow down your matches to that line when another matches both of you. This has been very useful for me. In fact I blogged about it today http://blog.kittycooper.com/2013/10/results-for-a-second-cousin-on-the-skjold-line/ but I have just started working on this data so not much yet Kitty On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 9:54 PM, <autosomal-dna-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 21:53:28 -0700 > From: Barton Lewis <bartonlewis@optonline.net> > Subject: > > [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] once removed etc. > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <EA6706EC2FD540CDAF040AAF62424E06@barton> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Dear list, > > I seem to recall seeing that for purposes of amount of DNA shared, a cousin > once removed is roughly equivalent to the next higher number (e.g. 2nd > cousin once removed is = to third cousin). Is this correct? > > What about cousins twice or thrice removed? How are those amounts > quantified? > > Thank you. > > Barton > --------------------------------------------------------------- Kitty Munson Cooper, web developer,programmer, San Diego,CA http://www.openskywebdesign.com/ linked in http://www.linkedin.com/in/kittycooper

Dear Barton, If you take a look at http://kquilting.homeserver.com/23andme/ref.html and then click on the link to "Distant relatives, non-endogamous" you can download a spreadsheet that has this information in it. If you have Ann Turner's book Trace Your Roots with DNA, review p. 120. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barton Lewis Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 9:53 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] once removed etc. Dear list, I seem to recall seeing that for purposes of amount of DNA shared, a cousin once removed is roughly equivalent to the next higher number (e.g. 2nd cousin once removed is = to third cousin). Is this correct? What about cousins twice or thrice removed? How are those amounts quantified? Thank you. Barton ______________________________ 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

Barton .... Wiki Pedia has a good explanation of 2nd, 3rd cousins etc as well as "once removed, etc". Joe Lake Dear list, I seem to recall seeing that for purposes of amount of DNA shared, a cousin once removed is roughly equivalent to the next higher number (e.g. 2nd cousin once removed is = to third cousin). Is this correct? What about cousins twice or thrice removed? How are those amounts quantified? Thank you. Barton ______________________________ 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