Aha, Ann, thank you so much for checking it out for us :-D On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Ann Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > I had to look up SJW (Social Justice Warrior), but it appears that Squawker > took some material from a satire site (cracked.com) a bit too seriously. > > Ann Turner > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Elizabeth O'Donoghue/Ross < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I think that was Squawker labeling the 23andMe results fake. Regardless, > > the last line of the article is worrisome: > > > > If you were hesitant to purchase these kind of kits before, I’d > > highly advise you to just save your money and discourage SJW’s from > telling > > every white person that they’re black. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: GENEALOGY-DNA [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf > > Of Ken Waters > > Sent: 11 December 2017 15:01 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [DNA] DNA Testing Companies Like 23andme Admit Adding Fake > > African Ancestry To White Profiles In Order To Screw With Racists | > Squawker > > > > Did you notice the clear label on the photo at the top of the article > that > > was stamped “FAKE NEWS”? > > > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 5:29 AM Elizabeth O'Donoghue/Ross < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > https://squawker.org/culture-wars/dna-testing-companies- > > like-23andme-admit-adding-fake-african-ancestry-to- > > white-profiles-in-order-to-screw-with-racists/ > > > > > > If this is true, it’s about as dreadful as could be imagined. > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > -- > > Amateur Genetic Genealogist in Mesa, AZ > > Twitter: @FamilyTreeAZ > > Interests: DNA, Azores, San Francisco, early colonial America > > Blog: http://familytreeAZ.com > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > ------------------------------- > 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

I had to look up SJW (Social Justice Warrior), but it appears that Squawker took some material from a satire site (cracked.com) a bit too seriously. Ann Turner On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Elizabeth O'Donoghue/Ross < [email protected]> wrote: > I think that was Squawker labeling the 23andMe results fake. Regardless, > the last line of the article is worrisome: > > If you were hesitant to purchase these kind of kits before, I’d > highly advise you to just save your money and discourage SJW’s from telling > every white person that they’re black. > > -----Original Message----- > From: GENEALOGY-DNA [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Ken Waters > Sent: 11 December 2017 15:01 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DNA] DNA Testing Companies Like 23andme Admit Adding Fake > African Ancestry To White Profiles In Order To Screw With Racists | Squawker > > Did you notice the clear label on the photo at the top of the article that > was stamped “FAKE NEWS”? > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 5:29 AM Elizabeth O'Donoghue/Ross < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > https://squawker.org/culture-wars/dna-testing-companies- > like-23andme-admit-adding-fake-african-ancestry-to- > white-profiles-in-order-to-screw-with-racists/ > > > > If this is true, it’s about as dreadful as could be imagined. > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > -- > Amateur Genetic Genealogist in Mesa, AZ > Twitter: @FamilyTreeAZ > Interests: DNA, Azores, San Francisco, early colonial America > Blog: http://familytreeAZ.com > > ------------------------------- > 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 > > > > ------------------------------- > 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

Thank you for posting this Steven. Is this study linked with living DNA? Karen On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 1:18 PM, steven perkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Abstract here with link to PDF on the page: > > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17124-4 > > "The extent of population structure within Ireland is largely unknown, as > is the impact of historical > migrations. Here we illustrate fine-scale genetic structure across Ireland > that follows geographic > boundaries and present evidence of admixture events into Ireland. > *Utilising the ‘Irish DNA Atlas’, acohort (n = 194) of Irish individuals > with four generations of ancestry linked to specific regions in Ireland, in > combination with 2,039 individuals from the Peoples of the British Isles > dataset, we show that the Irish population can be divided in 10 distinct > geographically stratified genetic clusters; seven of ‘Gaelic’ Irish > ancestry, and three of shared Irish-British ancestry. In addition we > observe a major genetic barrier to the north of Ireland in Ulster. * > > Using a reference of 6,760 European individuals and two ancient > Irish genomes, we demonstrate high levels of North-West French-like and > West Norwegian-like ancestry within Ireland. We show that that our ‘Gaelic’ > Irish clusters present homogenous levels of ancient Irish ancestries. We > additionally detect admixture events that provide evidence of Norse-Viking > gene flow into Ireland, and reflect the Ulster Plantations. Our work > informs both on Irish history, as well as the study of Mendelian and > complex disease genetics involving populations of Irish ancestry." > > > > -- > Steven C. Perkins [email protected] http://stevencperkins.com/ > Indigenous Peoples' Rights http://intelligent-internet.info/law/ipr2.html > Indigenous & Ethnic Minority Legal News http://iemlnews.blogspot.com/ > Online Journal of Genetics and Genealogy http://jgg-online.blogspot.com/ > S.C. Perkins' Genealogy Page http://stevencperkins.com/genealogy.html > S.C. Perkins' Genealogy Blog http://scpgen.blogspot.com/ > > ------------------------------- > 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

Abstract here with link to PDF on the page: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17124-4 "The extent of population structure within Ireland is largely unknown, as is the impact of historical migrations. Here we illustrate fine-scale genetic structure across Ireland that follows geographic boundaries and present evidence of admixture events into Ireland. *Utilising the ‘Irish DNA Atlas’, acohort (n = 194) of Irish individuals with four generations of ancestry linked to specific regions in Ireland, in combination with 2,039 individuals from the Peoples of the British Isles dataset, we show that the Irish population can be divided in 10 distinct geographically stratified genetic clusters; seven of ‘Gaelic’ Irish ancestry, and three of shared Irish-British ancestry. In addition we observe a major genetic barrier to the north of Ireland in Ulster. * Using a reference of 6,760 European individuals and two ancient Irish genomes, we demonstrate high levels of North-West French-like and West Norwegian-like ancestry within Ireland. We show that that our ‘Gaelic’ Irish clusters present homogenous levels of ancient Irish ancestries. We additionally detect admixture events that provide evidence of Norse-Viking gene flow into Ireland, and reflect the Ulster Plantations. Our work informs both on Irish history, as well as the study of Mendelian and complex disease genetics involving populations of Irish ancestry." -- Steven C. Perkins [email protected] http://stevencperkins.com/ Indigenous Peoples' Rights http://intelligent-internet.info/law/ipr2.html Indigenous & Ethnic Minority Legal News http://iemlnews.blogspot.com/ Online Journal of Genetics and Genealogy http://jgg-online.blogspot.com/ S.C. Perkins' Genealogy Page http://stevencperkins.com/genealogy.html S.C. Perkins' Genealogy Blog http://scpgen.blogspot.com/

This sort of problem has come up quite a lot recently - and I am coming to believe that it applies to many distant matches. And, I do not really like the term 'false positive' - but prefer something like ''fixed segment'. Therefore, I do not deny there is a link, but the question becomes as to just how far back ... I think GEDmatch, FTDNA, Ancestry, 23andMe are fairly reliable when the generation distance is under 4, but after that the number can often be double what is suggested, if not a lot further. Just recently when looking at GEDmatch  One-to-many pages I have been using 11cM, instead of the default 7cM; but even this fails to exclude the larger 'fixed segments'. Good examples of this can be shown when looking on GEDmatch at African and Asian submissions; as suddenly they can turn up with large numbers of spurious American matches all of which look to have quite significant matching segments ! The answer, I suggest, is to concentrate on your closest matches and be very wary of all distant matches. Ian ------------------------------------------- On 07/12/2017 17:24, Brooks Family wrote: > I have a match on AncestryDNA.  AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM > match.  The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't > match either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of > them are matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to > me but is not enough for them separately" > > It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall > that intermarried for at least a century or two.  I didn't spot an > obvious connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely. > > I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she > is reluctant to give up her idea.  I've provided two links about false > positives. > > Anyone have thoughts about this?  Either direction. > > Thanks!

AncestryDNA uses an algorithm, Timber, that edits the matching DNA segments, culling those matching pieces of DNA that, based on set criteria, seem to be something other than an indication of recent shared ancestry. Designed to reduce false positives and increase the accuracy of the relationship predictions, Timber - from my observations - has had the opposite effect (increasing the number of false negatives and reducing the accuracy of the relationship predictions) in too many cases. I recommend comparing your DNA, your match's DNA, and that of both her parents, on GEDMatch.com at the default matching threshold on that site. Let us know what you find. Very Respectfully, Shannon On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Karla Huebner <[email protected]> wrote: > The 6cm match that doesn't match either of her parents sounds random to me > (it isn't necessarily two tiny matching segments combining but could zigzag > across her parents' DNA), but since both of you have ancestry from the > small endogamous Cornish parish, then it might not matter whether you truly > share DNA, you might be related anyway. > > Karla Huebner > calypsospots AT gmail.com > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Brooks Family <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I have a match on AncestryDNA. AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM > > match. The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't match > > either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of them are > > matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to me but is not > > enough for them separately" > > > > It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall > that > > intermarried for at least a century or two. I didn't spot an obvious > > connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely. > > > > I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she is > > reluctant to give up her idea. I've provided two links about false > > positives. > > > > Anyone have thoughts about this? Either direction. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > ------------------------------- > 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 > -- Mr. Shannon S. Christmas Chief Market Advisor | Design Strategist The Christmas Collective <http://christmascollective.wix.com/the-christmas-collective> Strategic Real Estate and Land Use Solutions New York, NY | Washington, DC P: 212.433.0586 | 202.618.1687 F: 1.888.788.5984 http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannonchristmas/

Our Big-Ys have identified two new branches on the L1275 tree. One branch has two members, the other three. These new SNPs need names before terminal SNPs can be assigned to these branches. What is the best way to expedite the process? Lindsey

For "within the past five generations" I only look at segments that are 50cms and higher -----Original Message----- From: Brooks Family <[email protected]> To: genealogy-dna <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Dec 7, 2017 9:54 am Subject: Re: [DNA] AncestryDNA 6cM match - but neither of her parents, match me On 12/7/17 10:48 AM, [email protected] wrote: > *I don't match either of her parents,* It's the fact the I don't match either of her parents that makes me think it's a false positive? ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 17:48:06 +0000 From: Ian Logan<[email protected]> To:[email protected] Subject: Re: [DNA] AncestryDNA 6cM match - but neither of her parents match me Message-ID:<[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed This sort of problem has come up quite a lot recently - and I am coming to believe that it applies to many distant matches. And, I do not really like the term 'false positive' - but prefer something like ''fixed segment'. Therefore, I do not deny there is a link, but the question becomes as to just how far back ... I think GEDmatch, FTDNA, Ancestry, 23andMe are fairly reliable when the generation distance is under 4, but after that the number can often be double what is suggested, if not a lot further. Just recently when looking at GEDmatch? One-to-many pages I have been using 11cM, instead of the default 7cM; but even this fails to exclude the larger 'fixed segments'. Good examples of this can be shown when looking on GEDmatch at African and Asian submissions; as suddenly they can turn up with large numbers of spurious American matches all of which look to have quite significant matching segments ! The answer, I suggest, is to concentrate on your closest matches and be very wary of all distant matches. Ian ------------------------------------------- On 07/12/2017 17:24, Brooks Family wrote: > I have a match on AncestryDNA.? AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM > match.? The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't > match either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of > them are matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to > me but is not enough for them separately" > > It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall > that intermarried for at least a century or two.? I didn't spot an > obvious connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely. > > I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she > is reluctant to give up her idea.? I've provided two links about false > positives. > > Anyone have thoughts about this?? Either direction. > > Thanks! ------------------------------- 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

The 6cm match that doesn't match either of her parents sounds random to me (it isn't necessarily two tiny matching segments combining but could zigzag across her parents' DNA), but since both of you have ancestry from the small endogamous Cornish parish, then it might not matter whether you truly share DNA, you might be related anyway. Karla Huebner calypsospots AT gmail.com On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Brooks Family <[email protected]> wrote: > I have a match on AncestryDNA. AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM > match. The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't match > either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of them are > matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to me but is not > enough for them separately" > > It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall that > intermarried for at least a century or two. I didn't spot an obvious > connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely. > > I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she is > reluctant to give up her idea. I've provided two links about false > positives. > > Anyone have thoughts about this? Either direction. > > Thanks! > > > ------------------------------- > 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

6cm's is already so small that this match could be 12 generations in the past Is it that interesting to explore that idea? -----Original Message----- From: Brooks Family <[email protected]> To: genealogy-dna <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Dec 7, 2017 9:25 am Subject: [DNA] AncestryDNA 6cM match - but neither of her parents match me I have a match on AncestryDNA. AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM match. The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't match either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of them are matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to me but is not enough for them separately"It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall that intermarried for at least a century or two. I didn't spot an obvious connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely.I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she is reluctant to give up her idea. I've provided two links about false positives.Anyone have thoughts about this? Either direction.Thanks! -------------------------------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

On 12/7/17 10:48 AM, [email protected] wrote: > *I don't match either of her parents,* It's the fact the I don't match either of her parents that makes me think it's a false positive? ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 17:48:06 +0000 From: Ian Logan<[email protected]> To:[email protected] Subject: Re: [DNA] AncestryDNA 6cM match - but neither of her parents match me Message-ID:<[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed This sort of problem has come up quite a lot recently - and I am coming to believe that it applies to many distant matches. And, I do not really like the term 'false positive' - but prefer something like ''fixed segment'. Therefore, I do not deny there is a link, but the question becomes as to just how far back ... I think GEDmatch, FTDNA, Ancestry, 23andMe are fairly reliable when the generation distance is under 4, but after that the number can often be double what is suggested, if not a lot further. Just recently when looking at GEDmatch? One-to-many pages I have been using 11cM, instead of the default 7cM; but even this fails to exclude the larger 'fixed segments'. Good examples of this can be shown when looking on GEDmatch at African and Asian submissions; as suddenly they can turn up with large numbers of spurious American matches all of which look to have quite significant matching segments ! The answer, I suggest, is to concentrate on your closest matches and be very wary of all distant matches. Ian ------------------------------------------- On 07/12/2017 17:24, Brooks Family wrote: > I have a match on AncestryDNA.? AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM > match.? The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't > match either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of > them are matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to > me but is not enough for them separately" > > It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall > that intermarried for at least a century or two.? I didn't spot an > obvious connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely. > > I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she > is reluctant to give up her idea.? I've provided two links about false > positives. > > Anyone have thoughts about this?? Either direction. > > Thanks!

Thank you. Since I posted my question, FTDNA has updated terminal SNPs for the group where named SNPs are available; however, we have two men with 1nv and 2nvs on a branch with 9 unnamed SNPs one of which should be their terminal SNP. How do we get names for those 9 unnamed SNPs? We expect a similar situation on another branch when two more results are reported for our group. Lindsey In that regions, there ARE reliable SNPs. But to tell requires lots of investigation using IGV as well as BLAST/BLAT. That SNP is in a particular spot that, using the only build 38 BAM file I have (my own) shows all reads as map quality zero. In build 37 it shows map quality variable 0 to 3, with lots more reads showing. These are all bad signs. It also depends on read lengths. Some BigYs were done at 101 length, some 160 and a few even more. Thank you for your reply. There is a very very big difference in map quality in that area, whih reads 160 long being more reliable than 101 and 250 much much more reliable. Those files might have different normal read lengths. Build 38 will not in general provide any benefit for almost all SNPs. Of the 38 build 38 (yes, the same number) BED/VCFs I've received only a very few have made "naive statemets" that I should add a SNP to or remove one from my tree. And all of these are clearly borderline cases. Most have been cases where the number of "reads" has crosses the "low read number" theshold". You should at least examine the VCF files of those three people for such things as read numbers and map quality. Doug McDonald

I have a match on AncestryDNA.  AncestryDNA reports that it is a 6cM match.  The match contacted me, and reported that although I don't match either of her parents, the small segment "... means that both of them are matched to you and together their DNA adds up to a match to me but is not enough for them separately" It is true that we both have ancestry from a small parish in Cornwall that intermarried for at least a century or two.  I didn't spot an obvious connection on our trees, but I didn't inspect closely. I've suggested to my match that this segment is a false positive; she is reluctant to give up her idea.  I've provided two links about false positives. Anyone have thoughts about this?  Either direction. Thanks!

In that regions, there ARE reliable SNPs. But to tell requires lots of investigation using IGV as well as BLAST/BLAT. That SNP is in a particular spot that, using the only build 38 BAM file I have (my own) shows all reads as map quality zero. In build 37 it shows map quality variable 0 to 3, with lots more reads showing. These are all bad signs. It also depends on read lengths. Some BigYs were done at 101 length, some 160 and a few even more. There is a very very big difference in map quality in that area, whih reads 160 long being more reliable than 101 and 250 much much more reliable. Those files might have different normal read lengths. Build 38 will not in general provide any benefit for almost all SNPs. Of the 38 build 38 (yes, the same number) BED/VCFs I've received only a very few have made "naive statemets" that I should add a SNP to or remove one from my tree. And all of these are clearly borderline cases. Most have been cases where the number of "reads" has crosses the "low read number" theshold". You should at least examine the VCF files of those three people for such things as read numbers and map quality. Doug McDonald -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Lindsey Britton What difference, if any, will FTDNA's shift to Hg38, make for those who send data to YFull? If three men were positive for A8214 under the old format, why are only two listed as positive under Hg38? A8214 is in a questionable region, but with two or three positive tests is probably valid, but it isn't recognized by HG38. Lindsey

Thanks, I'll check it out. On 5 Dec. 2017 4:10 pm, "Kitty Cooper" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kitty > I have lots of basic articles about DNA testing on my blog. you might > start with this one > > http://blog.kittycooper.com/dna-basics/ > > Regards from another Kitty > > Mon, Dec 4, 2017, 5:55 PM Kitty Cusick <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ernest >> I don't have a tree online.. >> I have it all on my computer. >> And backed up on 3 external hard drives. >> Its not in tree form but in folders by name. >> I just needed to know if it was >> from both parents. >> Because I was told the dna could only be done by the Maternal side of the >> family. >> I wanted to know if it was both or maternal only. >> I know who is who by the areas they come from >> Thanks for your reply. >> Kitty >> >> On 5 Dec. 2017 12:47 pm, "Ernest Kapphahn" <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> >> > Both sides. You will have to determine by using your matches' trees and >> > their shared matches which side the match is on (testing parents makes >> it >> > easier). Make sure you have as much as you know about your family >> included >> > in your tree. >> > >> > >> > On 12/4/2017 5:38 PM, Kitty Cusick wrote: >> > >> >> Hi I am kitty >> >> I recently had my Dna tested by Ancestry.com. >> >> When the testing is done who's dna is it tested from >> >> Does it come tgrough your Mother's side or your Fathers side of the >> >> family.. >> >> Or both sides.. >> >> I am confused with my results >> >> Kitty >> >> Tasmania >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > 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 >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >> >

Thanks everyone. I only have half siblings.. So as an only child of two people. I dont have any full siblings. I have 3 living males on my maternal side as well as 4 sisters. On my Paternal side I have 2 brothers and 1 sister. So maternal i have two brothers 1 sister with a different male as a father 2 sisters also with a different father. 3 marriages. Paternal side i have 3 siblings with the same parents. So it is rather hard... Thanks again Kitty Tasmania On 5 Dec. 2017 1:43 pm, "Thomas Anderson" <[email protected]> wrote: Mitochondrial DNA tests only apply to the maternal side but Ancestry does not offer that test at this time . . . only autosomal tests and that applies to both maternal and paternal sides. Males can also do a yDNA test that only applies to the paternal side. You might want to consider building a tree on Ancestry or on WikiTree. You might also want to put your DNA results in other databases: GEDmatch, FTDNA, MyHeritage - all for free. -----Original Message----- From: GENEALOGY-DNA [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kitty Cusick Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 8:56 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DNA] Dna Testing is it maternal or paternal Ernest I don't have a tree online.. I have it all on my computer. And backed up on 3 external hard drives. Its not in tree form but in folders by name. I just needed to know if it was from both parents. Because I was told the dna could only be done by the Maternal side of the family. I wanted to know if it was both or maternal only. I know who is who by the areas they come from Thanks for your reply. Kitty On 5 Dec. 2017 12:47 pm, "Ernest Kapphahn" <[email protected]> wrote: > Both sides. You will have to determine by using your matches' trees > and their shared matches which side the match is on (testing parents > makes it easier). Make sure you have as much as you know about your > family included in your tree. > > > On 12/4/2017 5:38 PM, Kitty Cusick wrote: > >> Hi I am kitty >> I recently had my Dna tested by Ancestry.com. >> When the testing is done who's dna is it tested from Does it come >> tgrough your Mother's side or your Fathers side of the family.. >> Or both sides.. >> I am confused with my results >> Kitty >> Tasmania >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >> >> > > ------------------------------- > 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 ------------------------------- 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 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Ernest I don't have a tree online.. I have it all on my computer. And backed up on 3 external hard drives. Its not in tree form but in folders by name. I just needed to know if it was from both parents. Because I was told the dna could only be done by the Maternal side of the family. I wanted to know if it was both or maternal only. I know who is who by the areas they come from Thanks for your reply. Kitty On 5 Dec. 2017 12:47 pm, "Ernest Kapphahn" <[email protected]> wrote: > Both sides. You will have to determine by using your matches' trees and > their shared matches which side the match is on (testing parents makes it > easier). Make sure you have as much as you know about your family included > in your tree. > > > On 12/4/2017 5:38 PM, Kitty Cusick wrote: > >> Hi I am kitty >> I recently had my Dna tested by Ancestry.com. >> When the testing is done who's dna is it tested from >> Does it come tgrough your Mother's side or your Fathers side of the >> family.. >> Or both sides.. >> I am confused with my results >> Kitty >> Tasmania >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >> >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi I am kitty I recently had my Dna tested by Ancestry.com. When the testing is done who's dna is it tested from Does it come tgrough your Mother's side or your Fathers side of the family.. Or both sides.. I am confused with my results Kitty Tasmania

It looks like Family tree DNA are updating the way they display ethnicity. Karen

Hi Kitty I have lots of basic articles about DNA testing on my blog. you might start with this one http://blog.kittycooper.com/dna-basics/ Regards from another Kitty Mon, Dec 4, 2017, 5:55 PM Kitty Cusick <[email protected]> wrote: > Ernest > I don't have a tree online.. > I have it all on my computer. > And backed up on 3 external hard drives. > Its not in tree form but in folders by name. > I just needed to know if it was > from both parents. > Because I was told the dna could only be done by the Maternal side of the > family. > I wanted to know if it was both or maternal only. > I know who is who by the areas they come from > Thanks for your reply. > Kitty > > On 5 Dec. 2017 12:47 pm, "Ernest Kapphahn" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Both sides. You will have to determine by using your matches' trees and > > their shared matches which side the match is on (testing parents makes it > > easier). Make sure you have as much as you know about your family > included > > in your tree. > > > > > > On 12/4/2017 5:38 PM, Kitty Cusick wrote: > > > >> Hi I am kitty > >> I recently had my Dna tested by Ancestry.com. > >> When the testing is done who's dna is it tested from > >> Does it come tgrough your Mother's side or your Fathers side of the > >> family.. > >> Or both sides.. > >> I am confused with my results > >> Kitty > >> Tasmania > >> ------------------------------- > >> 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 > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > ------------------------------- > 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 >