I failed to make it clear, that as of yesterday I was on the old system, and I have no idea what the new system looks like.  I also forgot to mention that my wife's account shows zero entries, mine and my sis's initially show entries, but they might go to zero if I try to manipulate it some. On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:12:59 -0700, Barbara Shroyer wrote: Must be a glitch. Mine is behaving normally. I'm on the new site, but I didn't have any "glitches" before being transferred to the new one. I was moved last month. Barbara -----Original Message----- From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of jlerch1 via Sent: Friday, January 8, 2016 9:39 AM To: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [DNA] The new 23&Me??? Does anyone with more experience with the new 23&Me know if it's just a temporary glitch that DNA Relatives is badly misbehaving or is it a sign that I'm about to get the new DNA Relatives? Symptoms: 1) Frequently there are zero entries showing 2)There are no counts in the ("...25 of [X] matches..") box in the ~upper RH corner. 3) If you try to change which display (Relationship to say Most Recent Matches) the match dims out as if you tried to change the display while you're logged out (which we were able to do anyway (as long as we didn't try to edit our notebook) at one time but has been the norm for about a year). ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Does anyone with more experience with the new 23&Me know if it's just a temporary glitch that DNA Relatives is badly misbehaving or is it a sign that I'm about to get the new DNA Relatives? Symptoms: 1) Frequently there are zero entries showing 2)There are no counts in the ("...25 of [X] matches..") box in the ~upper RH corner. 3) If you try to change which display (Relationship to say Most Recent Matches) the match dims out as if you tried to change the display while you're logged out (which we were able to do anyway (as long as we didn't try to edit our notebook) at one time but has been the norm for about a year).

Mary wrote: > If 6 siblings share a common cousin, degree of which is unknown, amd the > range for the shared cMs goes from 24 cMs to 105 cMs shared, can we assume > that the highest range is the best estimate of closeness No, the best estimate is the mean of the 6, assuming they are full siblings. John Chandler

Must be a glitch. Mine is behaving normally. I'm on the new site, but I didn't have any "glitches" before being transferred to the new one. I was moved last month. Barbara -----Original Message----- From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of jlerch1 via Sent: Friday, January 8, 2016 9:39 AM To: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [DNA] The new 23&Me??? Does anyone with more experience with the new 23&Me know if it's just a temporary glitch that DNA Relatives is badly misbehaving or is it a sign that I'm about to get the new DNA Relatives? Symptoms: 1) Frequently there are zero entries showing 2)There are no counts in the ("...25 of [X] matches..") box in the ~upper RH corner. 3) If you try to change which display (Relationship to say Most Recent Matches) the match dims out as if you tried to change the display while you're logged out (which we were able to do anyway (as long as we didn't try to edit our notebook) at one time but has been the norm for about a year). ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Actually they are half siblings. On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 8:38 AM, John Chandler <john.chandler@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > Mary wrote: > > > If 6 siblings share a common cousin, degree of which is unknown, amd the > > range for the shared cMs goes from 24 cMs to 105 cMs shared, can we > assume > > that the highest shared is the best estimate of closeness > > No, the best estimate is the mean of the 6, assuming they are full > siblings. > > John Chandler >

Question for the experts... If 6 siblings share a common cousin, degree of which is unknown, amd the range for the shared cMs goes from 24 cMs to 105 cMs shared, can we assume that the highest range is the best estimate of closeness (assuming, of course, that there isn't additional SNPs coming into play from another ancestral line that is bumping up the total)? Four are in the 70-80 cM range. Of course, they would all be related - on paper - to the same degree. Any experience with this, and/or thoughts? Thank you. Mary E Hall Santa Barbara, CA

As I know nothing about WGS I'd like to know more, especially regarding why "regulation permitting" it; and why "enrichment procedure" costs will not go down. Thanks Daryl On Jan 5, 2016 4:35 PM, "Brian Swann via" <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > I had not heard or thought about this concept properly, before I heard it > from Thomas in a separate email about a week ago. > > I guess with the right tools it should enable cross-matches onto the > X-Chromosome to be ruled out, but I start to get out of my depth here. > > Everything, long term, is going WGS - regulation permitting. I guess we > would still only want the Y-DNA data out of that? > > At least with WGS you know there is nowhere else left to go in future! > > Brian > > -----Original Message----- > From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Thomas Krahn via > Sent: 06 January 2016 00:07 > To: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [DNA] Full Genomes Corporation Tests > > Atanas > > The largest cost factor for Y chromosome tests is not the sequencing, but > the enrichment procedure. With enrichment the price will never drop far > below $400, so you might as well sequence with sufficient coverage. > > On the long run there is no future for Big Y and FGCs Y tests since the WGS > tests keep dropping in the price, but Y tests don't. > > Thomas > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Somebody might have left a lot of offspring ;-) Andreas > On 7 Jan 2016, at 03:18, David Schroeder <dschroed991@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > Sorry about the sea of information. There were so many comparisons, and each > one had surprising results. > > I think I can say at least 25% of my matches coming from 23andme were from a > Pile-up on Chromosome 15: POS > 23976155 and POS < 25855576). > > I looked at the two kits, Ancestry checks for 460 RSIDs in this range of > positions. 23andme checks for 602. The pileups for Ancestry are much less > than 23andme. Ancestry only had 12 no-calls in this region, 23andme only had > 17. I don't know why there were hundreds more matches in this range for > 23andme compared to Ancestry. > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ahnen@awest.de [mailto:ahnen@awest.de] > Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 11:09 AM > To: David Schroeder; genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [DNA] Raw Data Files Comparisons with 23andme and AncestryDNA > > David, > > A summary on the last comparisons would be fine. I've got lost in the many > tables which despite your wonderful effort are still hard to read in plain > email format. > > Great analysis! > > Andreas >

Paul Thanks for you comments. Those were my thoughts. We all have a distant match to a cousin on Ancestry(who does not wish to do anymore with her Ancestry results) that I have paper documentation to my mother's ancestors and they have no matches with my paternal first cousin. Mike in Droitwich England On 07/01/2016 17:55, Paul Rakow wrote: > Mike, > > I had a peek at your gedmatch results. > > You've got a big match with the father, > 41.4 cM on chrom 12; 7.2 cM on chrom 18. > > These two segments also show up for the daughter, > 42.7 cm on chrom 12; 6.5 cM on chrom 18, > but the daughter also matches you on several small segments > (4 or 5 or 6 cm) where you don't match the father. > > The most likely explanation to me is that the chrom 12 match is > certainly genuine, probably the chrom 18 match is real too (it > is quite short, but it is in the same place in both cases). But > those other short matches that push the daughter's total up higher > than the father's total, are probably just matches by chance. > > It's good to see someone else from the UK posting here, > > Paul Rakow >

Michael, the basic explanation of IBS addendums in children: #longer part of chromosome from father (real IBD from CA) ......ACTGATTGAACCCAACCCCCCCATGTGTCAA #(shorter) part of chromosome from mather IBS -- luckily this continues to match the (supposed) cousin ..........................................................................ACTTGTGTGTAGATCGATGCATCGATGCTAGCGTCATCGA This is very common in 0-1cM lengths. Your difference on gedmatch is over 10cM however, this likely means that the match is related to your daughter through your wife's side to (the cousing and your wife and your daughter have the 10cM segment in common). Best regards, Kuba On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Michael Fisher via < genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Hi All > > Help please > > My 3rd and 4th matches on Ancestry are a daughter and father (we can't > find our MRCA) > The 3rd the daughter matches me with 35 cMs across 3 segments. > The 4th the father matches me with 31cMs across 3segments. > > We are all on Gedmatch my 2nd and 3rd highest matches > The 2nd the daughter 60.3 cMs largest 42.7 gen 3.9 > The 3rd the father 48.6 cMs largest 41.4 gen 4.1 > > Please can someone explain to a relative novice how I relate more > closely to the daughter. > > Regards > > Mike Fisher > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Do you really need all of these 40 GB? When I work with large files, I usually discard the unnecessary information. For example, if a 1000 GP BAM file is 20 GB, I filter out all information except for the Y-chromosome and I end up at 200 MB. This way I can save and process hundreds of such files. -- Best regards, Atanas Kumbarov http://dna.kumbarov.com/ On 2016-01-07 15:08, Iain Kennedy via wrote: > This is true, although the one I am working with is 40Gb and being stuffed into a sql database - it pays to get it right first time, and know every optimization trick for your db bulk upload. I found this article useful > > http://derwiki.tumblr.com/post/24490758395/loading-half-a-billion-rows-into-mysql > > except > 'READ-REPEATABLE' should read 'REPEATABLE-READ' and innodb_flush_method can't be changed under Windows.Iain > > Atanas wrote: > Regarding the VCF file, you can write a script or a small program to > > convert the VCF the way you like. I have added support for different > > types of VCF files to my software for processing Y-chromosome data from > > VCF files. > > >

This is true, although the one I am working with is 40Gb and being stuffed into a sql database - it pays to get it right first time, and know every optimization trick for your db bulk upload. I found this article useful http://derwiki.tumblr.com/post/24490758395/loading-half-a-billion-rows-into-mysql except 'READ-REPEATABLE' should read 'REPEATABLE-READ' and innodb_flush_method can't be changed under Windows.Iain Atanas wrote: Regarding the VCF file, you can write a script or a small program to convert the VCF the way you like. I have added support for different types of VCF files to my software for processing Y-chromosome data from VCF files. -- Best regards, Atanas Kumbarov http://dna.kumbarov.com/

You've probably seen this already, but there are a few region that are notorious for pile-ups: http://isogg.org/wiki/IBD#Excess_IBD_sharing Ann Turner On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 12:13 PM, David Schroeder via < genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > I thank you for all the feedback and suggestions. I've looked at this from > a > 20 thousand feet altitude and am beginning to drill down. Some of the > matching anomalies seem to be centered around at least two pileup regions > of > mine- one on chromosome 15 and another on chromosome 22. When I get a > chance > to play around with that- it may take a few days- I will respond. It is too > early for me to draw conclusions. > > > > Thank you, again. > > > > David Schroeder > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Regarding the VCF file, you can write a script or a small program to convert the VCF the way you like. I have added support for different types of VCF files to my software for processing Y-chromosome data from VCF files. -- Best regards, Atanas Kumbarov http://dna.kumbarov.com/ On 2016-01-07 10:12, Iain Kennedy via wrote: > I am playing around with what can be done with this data, I was particularly interested to see how far I could get mocking up an AncestryDNA type file from the data. However I think 2x is too low to get far except as a proof of concept. I have loaded the dbSNP VCF into mySQL but it doesn't seem to follow the normal VCF standard which is a shame (it isn't using '.' in the ALT column when the calls were all ancestral). I also had a go using mpileup and varscan overnight but this requires 8x reads minimum: > > C:\genealogy\software>samtools mpileup -f human_g1k_v37.fasta GWK3W.bam | java -jar VarScan.v2.3.7.jar pileup2snp > gwk3w_vs.vcf > [mpileup] 1 samples in 1 input files > <mpileup> Set max per-file depth to 8000 > Warning: No p-value threshold provided, so p-values will not be calculated > Min coverage: 8 > Min reads2: 2 > Min var freq: 0.01 > Min avg qual: 15 > P-value thresh: 0.99 > Input stream not ready, waiting for 5 seconds... > Reading input from STDIN > 2349372654 bases in pileup file > 8008795 met minimum coverage of 8x > 2905740 SNPs predicted > > I haven't loaded it into the db yet. > > The dbSNP VCF I refer to includes ancestral and derived calls and mine has 107M rows. > > Iain > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks to Ann for sharing this link. I don’t follow all the changes in Ancestry DNA, but if I did test at Ancestry I would find this attempt to reduce the number of distantly related matches to be a little disturbing, and agree with many of the comments made on the Ancestry site. I understand that Timber is an attempt to eliminate some of the “false positives” which are distant relatives erroneously estimated to be more closely related. The cost of this is, of course, the creation of an unknown additional number of “false negatives” … close relatives erroneously estimated to be too distantly related to report to the user. I would rather be able to see more of the false positives and judge them with a critical eye myself. I had an additional reaction which I posted there as a comment and wanted to pass along here too… "Population bias in Timber? ... even if Timber was valid and useful for the population represented by most of the Ancestry DNA participants .. it would not be for participants with a different ethnic history, or otherwise descended from a different population group (think recent immigrants from a country without a long history of immigration to the US). Matching segments common in the dominant population group and representing very distant ancestors, could easily be of genealogical significance in a different population. This ethnic or population bias due to the use of Timber suggests Ancestry DNA should be avoided by those who are not members of the dominant population. “ David Hamill > On Jan 7, 2016, at 11:58 AM, genealogy-dna-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com >>> [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ann Turner via >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 8:05 PM >>> To: DNA Genealogy Mailing List <GENEALOGY-DNA@rootsweb.com> >>> Subject: [DNA] segments and cM at AncestryDNA >>> >>> This blog post explains some of the questions we've raised about the number >>> of shared cM and segments at AncestryDNA and how they compare to numbers >>> seen at GEDmatch, 23andMe, and FTDNA. >>> >>> >>> http://blogs.ancestry.com/techroots/behind-the-new-ancestrydna-feature-amoun >>> t-of-shared-dna/ >>> >>> Ann Turner

Post the exact matching segments here for each match I suspect that you have a match to the daughter that will show comes from her mother Sent from AOL Mobile Mail On Thursday, January 7, 2016, Michael Fisher via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: Hi All Help please My 3rd and 4th matches on Ancestry are a daughter and father (we can't find our MRCA) The 3rd the daughter matches me with 35 cMs across 3 segments. The 4th the father matches me with 31cMs across 3segments. We are all on Gedmatch my 2nd and 3rd highest matches The 2nd the daughter 60.3 cMs largest 42.7 gen 3.9 The 3rd the father 48.6 cMs largest 41.4 gen 4.1 Please can someone explain to a relative novice how I relate more closely to the daughter. Regards Mike Fisher ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

But we cannot tell what are ancestral segments are except by triangulation Sent from AOL Mobile Mail On Thursday, January 7, 2016, Jim Bartlett via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: Patti Another way I try to explain this is that the testing process gets a value for each of the 700,000 SNPs on your mother's side and your father's side - so actually 1,400,000 results in all. The process now have does not know which ones are maternal and which are paternal - it just knows there are two values for each SNP. The presumption is that for a long enough comparison (between you and a potential Match), the only way two long strings of SNPs could be identical is if they were from the same ancestor. I needed several different explanations of this process before the "lightbulb" came on for me. In my blog (in my tag line), an early post explained the difference between ancestral segments (what you have in your body - from ancestors) and shared segments (generated by computer algorithms looking at all the SNPs). When a shared segment matches an ancestral segment we say it is IBD (Identical By Descent); when the shared segment is not the same as an ancestral segment th! e shared segment is false, and we say it is not-IBD or it is IBS (Identical By State) or IBC (Identical By Chance) [different folks use different terms] Hope this helps. Jim - www.segmentology.org > On Jan 7, 2016, at 7:50 AM, Ann Turner via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > You are correct about the biological reality. Segments do not jump back and > forth. However, the DNA results (e.g. CT) you receive for a particular SNP > are a "genotype." The DNA is chopped into tiny pieces before analysis, > which uses probes to detect the presence of a particular allele. The only > thing we can tell is that a C is present in some pieces and a T is present > in other pieces. Computer algorithms attempt to predict which SNPs are > traveling together as a package on a single chromosome (a haplotype) but > they don't always get it right. > > Ann Turner > >> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Patti Easton <amharach@msn.com> wrote: >> >> Ann, >> >> I really appreciated this article. I watch this list as an eager novice, >> knowing I have a steep learning curve, and having gained much knowledge >> from >> the talented people who contribute here. Hopefully this is appropriate to >> a! sk here, again given my novice status. >> >> What I have trouble wrapping my head around in this article, particularly >> given the DNA doesn't lie, DNA is a fact and end all, be all, is how does >> Germline allow matches to jump back and forth between segments? Isn't this >> counter intuitive to something directed at extracting genetic code? And >> without asking too much of the scientific end, how is that even possible. >> How can DNA move to other sections? >> >> Perhaps DNA isn't as black and white as I have been led to view it. I >> don't >> see it as fluid. But while coding appears to not fluctuate, I guess I am >> seeing that perhaps the testing makes it so. >> >> Thank you! >> Regards, >> Patti Easton >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ann Turner via >> Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 8:05 PM >> To: DNA Genealogy Mailing List <GENEALOGY-DNA@rootsweb.com> >! > Subject: [DNA] segments and cM at AncestryDNA >> >> This blo! g post explains some of the questions we've raised about the number >> of shared cM and segments at AncestryDNA and how they compare to numbers >> seen at GEDmatch, 23andMe, and FTDNA. >> >> >> http://blogs.ancestry.com/techroots/behind-the-new-ancestrydna-feature-amoun >> t-of-shared-dna/ >> >> Ann Turner >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com 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 GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com 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 GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes, plus the INFO string has fields summing ancestral and derived reads. I was just puzzled about the ALT field as the VCF standard states it should have a "." if not used ie no derived call. The BigY VCFs were like that. Iain From: dnacousins@gmail.com Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 05:15:35 -0500 Subject: Re: [DNA] Full Genomes Corporation tests To: ikennedy_msdn2@hotmail.com; genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Does the final column in the VCF file start with three characters like these? 0/0 homozygous for the REF allele 0/1 heterozygous 1/1 homozygous for the ALT allele Ann Turner On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 4:12 AM, Iain Kennedy via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: I am playing around with what can be done with this data, I was particularly interested to see how far I could get mocking up an AncestryDNA type file from the data. However I think 2x is too low to get far except as a proof of concept. I have loaded the dbSNP VCF into mySQL but it doesn't seem to follow the normal VCF standard which is a shame (it isn't using '.' in the ALT column when the calls were all ancestral). I also had a go using mpileup and varscan overnight but this requires 8x reads minimum: C:\genealogy\software>samtools mpileup -f human_g1k_v37.fasta GWK3W.bam | java -jar VarScan.v2.3.7.jar pileup2snp > gwk3w_vs.vcf [mpileup] 1 samples in 1 input files <mpileup> Set max per-file depth to 8000 Warning: No p-value threshold provided, so p-values will not be calculated Min coverage: 8 Min reads2: 2 Min var freq: 0.01 Min avg qual: 15 P-value thresh: 0.99 Input stream not ready, waiting for 5 seconds... Reading input from STDIN 2349372654 bases in pileup file 8008795 met minimum coverage of 8x 2905740 SNPs predicted I haven't loaded it into the db yet. The dbSNP VCF I refer to includes ancestral and derived calls and mine has 107M rows. Iain ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I thank you for all the feedback and suggestions. I've looked at this from a 20 thousand feet altitude and am beginning to drill down. Some of the matching anomalies seem to be centered around at least two pileup regions of mine- one on chromosome 15 and another on chromosome 22. When I get a chance to play around with that- it may take a few days- I will respond. It is too early for me to draw conclusions. Thank you, again. David Schroeder

Patti The best way to think of it is that there is less chance of error when you work with longer matching segments. The more SNPs and cM the better. This is a rough estimate of how the error rate changes for smaller segment sizes. 11 cM or greater matching segment: >99% IBD, <1% IBS 10 cM matching segment: 99% IBD, 1% IBS 9 cM matching segment: 80% IBD, 20% IBS 8 cM matching segment: 50% IBD, 50% IBS 7 cM matching segment: 30% IBD, 70% IBS 6 cM matching segment: 20% IBD, 80% IBS 5 cM matching segment: 5% IBD, 95% IBS 4 cM matching segment: ca 1% IBD, ca 99% IBS IBS = Identical By State = by chance IBD = Identical By Descent = inherited RPaine -----Original Message----- From: Patti Easton via Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 5:33 AM To: 'Ann Turner' ; genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [DNA] segments and cM at AncestryDNA Thank you for the reply Ann. So when looking at results from Ancestry uploaded to gedmatch, does that mean that the chromosome browser comparisons would be faulty? How much error should one expect? Is this just minutia, or would it factor into comparisons? Is this why Ancestry has no chromosome browser? Thank you again, Patti -----Original Message----- From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ann Turner via Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 5:51 AM Cc: DNA Genealogy Mailing List <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [DNA] segments and cM at AncestryDNA You are correct about the biological reality. Segments do not jump back and forth. However, the DNA results (e.g. CT) you receive for a particular SNP are a "genotype." The DNA is chopped into tiny pieces before analysis, which uses probes to detect the presence of a particular allele. The only thing we can tell is that a C is present in some pieces and a T is present in other pieces. Computer algorithms attempt to predict which SNPs are traveling together as a package on a single chromosome (a haplotype) but they don't always get it right. Ann Turner On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Patti Easton <amharach@msn.com> wrote: > Ann, > > I really appreciated this article. I watch this list as an eager > novice, knowing I have a steep learning curve, and having gained much > knowledge from the talented people who contribute here. Hopefully > this is appropriate to ask here, again given my novice status. > > What I have trouble wrapping my head around in this article, > particularly given the DNA doesn't lie, DNA is a fact and end all, be > all, is how does Germline allow matches to jump back and forth between > segments? Isn't this counter intuitive to something directed at > extracting genetic code? And without asking too much of the scientific end, how is that even possible. > How can DNA move to other sections? > > Perhaps DNA isn't as black and white as I have been led to view it. I > don't see it as fluid. But while coding appears to not fluctuate, I > guess I am seeing that perhaps the testing makes it so. > > Thank you! > Regards, > Patti Easton > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ann Turner > via > Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 8:05 PM > To: DNA Genealogy Mailing List <GENEALOGY-DNA@rootsweb.com> > Subject: [DNA] segments and cM at AncestryDNA > > This blog post explains some of the questions we've raised about the > number of shared cM and segments at AncestryDNA and how they compare > to numbers seen at GEDmatch, 23andMe, and FTDNA. > > > http://blogs.ancestry.com/techroots/behind-the-new-ancestrydna-feature > -amoun > t-of-shared-dna/ > > Ann Turner > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com 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 GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com 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 GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message