Hello Andreas, Yep, I agree. I have compiled a massive amount of information on my surname in a three volume work, totaling nearly 1200 pages, if memory serves me. Most are the use of my surname in the U.S., but I have some records that also include England and France. Plus, I have a lot of data from my Y-DNA surname project. Most of my autosomal segments only go out to about 4th or 5th cousin. Most of the data that I have an interest in is beyond my 5th cousin. There have been more than one occasion where folks have contacted me about my male line, and I have had to say, "no, that is not my line, that belongs to this other line," etc. (because I have information on a number of branches). I have some 1900 matching autosomal segments, and some 1717 matching segments on chromosome 1, with some 1138 matching segments on chromosome 11. My tiny segment studies for my Y-DNA project group tells me that these two chromosomes are my most dense for my 'surname' in haplotype group I1-M253. So, it is standard procedure for me (when I see a large number of matches in a particular area), to look to see who else matches at that location (or, what surnames match at that location). Many times I recognize the 'other' matching segment to a surname that relates to another branch. For example, most recently a person contacted me about triangulating to one of my ancestors. I immediately saw that it was not possible to connect to the tree that I have at FTDNA, nor their tree at Ancestry. I narrowed down my search to triangulating three surnames, plus data from one of the lines in my Y-DNA project. I noticed that we matched that particular start location with two other surnames (HAM, TAYLOR, and PERRY). Several possibilities, but the location and time frame helped narrow the search on that one. (The person who contacted me did not have the correct line. We triangulate to one of my 4th or 5th cousins.) I have a large amount of data on my many 5th cousins which usually includes at least children and spouses. I am getting to the point where I have created software that can tell me what surname bunches into which segments on whatever chromosome. I am getting to the point where I can identify which branch of whatever surname matches whatever branch of my matching surname. So, when I see a large number of matches on a particular segment range then I am a very happy camper. - Dave RE: On 12/18/2015 9:20 PM, genealogy-dna-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 08:35:35 +0700 > From: Andreas West<ahnen@awest.de> > Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs, > AncestryDNA > To: David Schroeder<dschroed991@sbcglobal.net>, > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com > Message-ID:<E0E61E4E-8BAC-48CF-A406-929903BBEE0D@awest.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > We're all related to each other, so pileups are still relatives even though it might back a very long time! > > See the WAAH on CHR 2 as an example > > Andreas > >> >On 19 Dec 2015, at 02:01, David Schroeder via<genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: >> > >> >Dave, >> > >> >"I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.'?" I am defining a >> >pileup as an extraordinary number of matches on a particular segment region. >> >These matches are with people I am not related to. Form me, it is chromosome >> >15 from positions 233,000 to 293,000 where I have several hundred matches. >> > >> >"I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what >> >surnames go missing?" Not yet, in the planning stages after the holidays. >> > >> >"Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as >> >well?" Not yet. I have explored enough matches in my pileup region to know >> >that there is no way most, if not all, of these people are related to me. >> >The pileups seem to show up in gedmatch, but it looks like 23andme >> >eliminated my pileup matches in DNA Relatives. >> > >> >David >> > >> > >> >Ann, >> >"You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls rather >> >that outright errors (miscalls)?" Yes fixing no-calls. There were only 106 >> >wrong-call between Ancestry and 23. Since I had over 3500 AA, TT, CC and GG >> >that were no-calls in either 23 or ancestry, I would think that a >> >significant number would be opposite homozygote which would break the >> >segment, and reduce the number of matches. >> > >> >David >> > >> >Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 15:15:34 -0500 >> >From: Dave Hamm<odoniv@earthlink.net> >> >Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs, >> > AncestryDNA >> >To:genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com >> >Message-ID:<567317E6.2010300@earthlink.net> >> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed >> > >> >Hi David, >> > >> >Oh, I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.' >> > >> >I did not appear to be having such a problem, and could think of several >> >scenarios of what you could be referring to. I was thinking of your >> >efinition of a 'pile-up' as in the HLA regions. (I identify those with a >> >simple calculation that includes the number of SNPS....) >> > >> >Now I get it. >> > >> >I am now thinking that you are looking at your surname signature(?). >> >Or, at worst, haplotype group signature(?). >> > >> >I get chromosomes with a high density of matching (tiny) segments on >> >chromosomes 1 and 11 when using autosomal sampling from my Y-DNA surname >> >project. >> > >> >I am thinking that I am looking at that as a basic signature for my surname, >> >because of the criteria I use to match each segment triad. >> > >> >Those segments that I do not use in the triad include at least one HLA >> >region on chromosome 6. That HLA region (in my small study) occurs in about >> >25% of my sampling (after processing). Hence the confusion for me in what >> >you were using for the term 'pile-up.' Apparently, I would gather that a >> >pile-up such as in an HLA region is not what you are referring to. >> > >> >I would think that you may be working on a method that might very well >> >refine your targeted matching segments. >> > >> >I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what >> >surnames go missing? >> > >> >Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as >> >well? >> > >> >(I am thinking that losing a random pool of names might be an indication of >> >progress.) >> > >> >Or am I still not understanding the definition (as used here) for a pile-up >> >region? >> > >> > - Dave Hamm >> > -- Dave Hamm Franklin, OH HAM Surname DNA Project Coordinator email: odoniv@earthlink.net URL: http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAMCountry.html

Would you be willing to publish this? Is it publishable? I have a publishing company, Ishi Press. I have published over 700 books. Sam Sloan On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Dave Hamm via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Hello Andreas, > > Yep, I agree. I have compiled a massive amount of information on my > surname in a three volume work, totaling nearly 1200 pages, if memory > serves me. Most are the use of my surname in the U.S., but I have some > records that also include England and France. > > Plus, I have a lot of data from my Y-DNA surname project. > > Most of my autosomal segments only go out to about 4th or 5th cousin. > Most of the data that I have an interest in is beyond my 5th cousin. > There have been more than one occasion where folks have contacted me > about my male line, and I have had to say, "no, that is not my line, > that belongs to this other line," etc. (because I have information on a > number of branches). > > I have some 1900 matching autosomal segments, and some 1717 matching > segments on chromosome 1, with some 1138 matching segments on chromosome > 11. My tiny segment studies for my Y-DNA project group tells me that > these two chromosomes are my most dense for my 'surname' in haplotype > group I1-M253. > > So, it is standard procedure for me (when I see a large number of > matches in a particular area), to look to see who else matches at that > location (or, what surnames match at that location). Many times I > recognize the 'other' matching segment to a surname that relates to > another branch. > > For example, most recently a person contacted me about triangulating to > one of my ancestors. I immediately saw that it was not possible to > connect to the tree that I have at FTDNA, nor their tree at Ancestry. I > narrowed down my search to triangulating three surnames, plus data from > one of the lines in my Y-DNA project. I noticed that we matched that > particular start location with two other surnames (HAM, TAYLOR, and > PERRY). Several possibilities, but the location and time frame helped > narrow the search on that one. (The person who contacted me did not have > the correct line. We triangulate to one of my 4th or 5th cousins.) > > I have a large amount of data on my many 5th cousins which usually > includes at least children and spouses. > > I am getting to the point where I have created software that can tell me > what surname bunches into which segments on whatever chromosome. I am > getting to the point where I can identify which branch of whatever > surname matches whatever branch of my matching surname. > > So, when I see a large number of matches on a particular segment range > then I am a very happy camper. > > - Dave > > RE: > On 12/18/2015 9:20 PM, genealogy-dna-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 08:35:35 +0700 > > From: Andreas West<ahnen@awest.de> > > Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs, > > AncestryDNA > > To: David Schroeder<dschroed991@sbcglobal.net>, > > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com > > Message-ID:<E0E61E4E-8BAC-48CF-A406-929903BBEE0D@awest.de> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > We're all related to each other, so pileups are still relatives even > though it might back a very long time! > > > > See the WAAH on CHR 2 as an example > > > > Andreas > > > >> >On 19 Dec 2015, at 02:01, David Schroeder via< > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >Dave, > >> > > >> >"I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.'?" I am > defining a > >> >pileup as an extraordinary number of matches on a particular segment > region. > >> >These matches are with people I am not related to. Form me, it is > chromosome > >> >15 from positions 233,000 to 293,000 where I have several hundred > matches. > >> > > >> >"I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what > >> >surnames go missing?" Not yet, in the planning stages after the > holidays. > >> > > >> >"Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames > as > >> >well?" Not yet. I have explored enough matches in my pileup region to > know > >> >that there is no way most, if not all, of these people are related to > me. > >> >The pileups seem to show up in gedmatch, but it looks like 23andme > >> >eliminated my pileup matches in DNA Relatives. > >> > > >> >David > >> > > >> > > >> >Ann, > >> >"You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls > rather > >> >that outright errors (miscalls)?" Yes fixing no-calls. There were only > 106 > >> >wrong-call between Ancestry and 23. Since I had over 3500 AA, TT, CC > and GG > >> >that were no-calls in either 23 or ancestry, I would think that a > >> >significant number would be opposite homozygote which would break the > >> >segment, and reduce the number of matches. > >> > > >> >David > >> > > >> >Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 15:15:34 -0500 > >> >From: Dave Hamm<odoniv@earthlink.net> > >> >Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs, > >> > AncestryDNA > >> >To:genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com > >> >Message-ID:<567317E6.2010300@earthlink.net> > >> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > >> > > >> >Hi David, > >> > > >> >Oh, I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.' > >> > > >> >I did not appear to be having such a problem, and could think of > several > >> >scenarios of what you could be referring to. I was thinking of your > >> >efinition of a 'pile-up' as in the HLA regions. (I identify those with > a > >> >simple calculation that includes the number of SNPS....) > >> > > >> >Now I get it. > >> > > >> >I am now thinking that you are looking at your surname signature(?). > >> >Or, at worst, haplotype group signature(?). > >> > > >> >I get chromosomes with a high density of matching (tiny) segments on > >> >chromosomes 1 and 11 when using autosomal sampling from my Y-DNA > surname > >> >project. > >> > > >> >I am thinking that I am looking at that as a basic signature for my > surname, > >> >because of the criteria I use to match each segment triad. > >> > > >> >Those segments that I do not use in the triad include at least one HLA > >> >region on chromosome 6. That HLA region (in my small study) occurs in > about > >> >25% of my sampling (after processing). Hence the confusion for me in > what > >> >you were using for the term 'pile-up.' Apparently, I would gather that > a > >> >pile-up such as in an HLA region is not what you are referring to. > >> > > >> >I would think that you may be working on a method that might very well > >> >refine your targeted matching segments. > >> > > >> >I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what > >> >surnames go missing? > >> > > >> >Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames > as > >> >well? > >> > > >> >(I am thinking that losing a random pool of names might be an > indication of > >> >progress.) > >> > > >> >Or am I still not understanding the definition (as used here) for a > pile-up > >> >region? > >> > > >> > - Dave Hamm > >> > > > > -- > Dave Hamm Franklin, OH > HAM Surname DNA Project Coordinator > email: odoniv@earthlink.net > URL: http://home.earthlink.net/~odoniv/HamCountry/HAMCountry.html > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >