Hi Kirsten, I misinterpreted your statement about needing two tests. I thought the other person had tested and you were going to test both dad and mom to see where there might be a match. By the way, for anyone testing, if both your parents are living, I suggest getting them to test -- maybe not at once because of the cost, but going back that extra generation increases the likelihood of finding a match. It sounds like in your case it is worth doing the test. As I said, my folks have many 5th cousin matches and I suspect a bunch are more like 6th or 7th. You're right, Y-DNA and autosomal DNA have nothing to do with one another in terms of the matches they produce. I took Dave's comment to mean that autosomal testing typically yields more matches than the Y. Still, as someone who has sponsored 10 different lines for Y testing, with varying success on each (but with hits in every case), I still recommend it. Good luck, and keep us posted as to what turns up on Mordecai. Barton On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Kirsten Bowman wrote: > Barton: > > Thanks for the encouraging information. I've found a woman whose 4th > great-grandfather is the man who I hope/suspect is also my 4th > great-grandfather, making her my possible 5th cousin (7 generations > back, > counting me and my unidentified ancestor). From what you and others > say, there > is a chance (although not a strong one) that we might find a match > through > autosomal testing. The issue of two tests came up because I would > have to > pay for her test as well as mine since she has unquestionable paper > proof of > her lineage and no motivation to test for her own purposes. > > I don't recall that Dave said chances of finding a match through yDNA > testing would be > very slim; rather, I should think it would be impossible since there's > apparently no way to compare an autosomal test from me with yDNA tests > done > by male descendants of the line I'm working on. That was my original > hope > and the reason for my initial post, but I've learned that it's not in > the > cards. > > Kirsten > > -----Original Message----- From: BARTON LEWIS > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 8:07 AM > To: viking@rvi.net > Cc: odinaz@comcast.net ; roots-l@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] Autosomal testing > > Kirsten, I'm not Dave, but you are correct as to the 3 assumptions in > your first paragraph. > > How many generations back is the common ancestor? If it's more than > 5, > FTDNA tells you there is a small chance of your matching with a > descendant of that person. I think that's conservative, and it's > further back -- more like 7 or 8. Most of my mom's and dad's matches > are 5th cousins or greater. That said, there may be many more people > who have tested who do not show up as matches -- hence your statement > about not making a match not being proof there of a non-relationship. > The FAQ on FTDNA provides a chart which shows the probability of > matching with each level of relationship. Also, you don't need to do > 2 > tests -- one on each (maternal and paternal) side. You could take the > test yourself since, of course, you have DNA from both parents, and > hope > for a match. If you have an idea how the other tester is descended > from > the common ancestor, presumably you know which side it's on, and the > match just confirms your assumption. > > One thing you should know about the 2 testing companies is that FTDNA > allows you to identify which other matches you have in common with any > given match. This can be helpful in isolating your relationship to an > individual. > > Also, as an aside, I have to take issue with Dave's comment that > finding > a match through Y-DNA is "very slim." When I tested my Y-DNA, I found > a > close match to a distant cousin immediately. I have sponsored about > 10 > other cousins on other lines and have had great success with Y-DNA. I > was able to identify the birth parents of my 2nd great grandfather, > adopted in Wisconsin in the early 1860s. There was circumstantial > evidence (the 1860 census), but the test proved it as a male > descendant > of his brother, whom he never knew, tested, and both men were a near > perfect match. A match doesn't always answer the question "who's my > ancestor's daddy?", but it often can isolate a group of people or a > geographical locale where that person should be found. For example, I > think my maternal Lewis ancestor is found in the 1810 Westmoreland > Co., > PA census. When a descendant of his tested, he matched with another > Lewis whose ancestor is found in that county at the same time. We > don't > know how they're related, but it confirms for both of us that our > ancestors are most likely those men with the same names found in > records > there in the early late 18th/early 19th centuries. > > Barton > > > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Kirsten Bowman wrote: > >> Dave: >> >> Oh, thank you! Now we're getting somewhere. So if I'm interpreting >> correctly, you're saying that two (or more) parties must have >> autosomal >> tests and that there's no possibility for matching my autosomal or >> mtDNA >> test with existing yDNA results to find a common ancestor who is >> neither >> direct paternal nor direct maternal. Further, I'm understanding that >> the >> more generations between test candidates and the common ancestor, the >> slimmer the chances of a match from autosomal testing. And that with >> autosomal testing a non-match is not necessarily proof of no common >> ancestor. Is all of that correct? >> >> Since I would probably have to pay both sides of FTDNA's $289 (or >> wait for >> the sale), and in view of the distance to the possible common >> ancestor, it >> sounds like a fairly expensive shot in the dark. I'm not terribly >> interested in identifying my general ethnicity (that's already pretty >> well >> established), and I'm not heavily involved in tracing lines other >> than >> this particular one. Unfortunately the member of our surname project >> who >> has already done the Family Finder test is a half-sibling and >> connects to >> the main tree even a couple of generations above me, so I'd guess >> that >> that makes a match even more unlikely. >> >> Altogether it seems I'd be better off spending my money in hiring a >> researcher in Canada to try and turn up a lead that I may have missed >> in >> my 12 years of searching. Do you disagree? >> >> Again, thanks so much for writing. >> >> Kirsten >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Dave Michaelson >> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 9:11 PM >> To: viking@rvi.net ; Roots-L@rootsweb.com ; gale_gorman@me.com >> Subject: Autosomal testing >> >> Kristin, >> >> >> >> Several of the answers given concerning DNA testing for Genealogical >> purposes were quite good but the did not clearly answer your >> question. >> >> >> >> Your answer is possibly, if you choose the right test. >> >> >> >> Y-DNA (of the strict father-father-father... etc line) and MT-DNA >> (for the >> STRICT mother-mother-mother... etc line) will tell you if you have a >> match >> IF the person you want to match is a member of the above strict lines >> (the >> edges on a ancestry chart ONLY). The autosomal tests are for all the >> other >> lines. In other words the Y-DNA and MT-DNA ONLY test two lines in >> your >> ancestry chart and are pretty much useless for identifying specific >> individuals. What those two tests are good for is giving you your >> haplogroup >> and telling where your ancestors came from 30,000 or so years ago. In >> other >> words, beyond 20 generations AT LEAST! The chances of you finding a >> specific >> individual randomly that falls on the two lines given above are VERY >> SLIM. >> >> >> >> The autosomal testing is not at all like that. It tests ALL lines in >> the >> family tree back about 5 to 7 generations quite accurately. Beyond >> that, >> the >> autosomal clues are pretty much diluted out as far as identifying >> specific >> families or individuals that are related to you... but all lines are >> tested. >> If you want to identify if a family is related to you AND THEY HAVE >> BEEN >> TESTED, or their DNA is available to test, then the autosomal tests >> will >> probably give you much more information than the Y-DNA or >> mitochondrial >> DNA >> testing. >> >> >> >> As far as Autosomal testing - Family Tree DNA is the largest in the >> world >> and provides one of the best testing services. Ancestry.com is just >> starting >> out and I know little about their testing but the general rule of >> thumb is >> that you get what you pay for. It is your choice though but unless >> there >> is >> a large enough database to compare against, it is useless for you to >> go >> looking for a match... if you know what I mean. FTDNA does have the >> Family >> Finder on sale from time to time for $199 or is you are a member of a >> surname group or other recognized group, you could get a special >> offer. >> You >> can go to ftdna.com and check all this out - they are very open about >> letting people browse to learn about DNA testing and what is >> available and >> what it will do you you. Check it out, what do you have to loose? >> >> >> >> And also MT-DNA is NOT found in the nuclear wall or membrane, it is >> found >> in >> all cell cytoplasm within the cell in structures called mitochondria >> - >> thus >> the name MT-DNA. >> >> >> >> Hope this helps and if you have further questions, you can email me >> direct >> if you wish. >> >> >> >> Dave Michaelson

Hi, There are two major mailing lists at rootsweb.com for the discussion of DNA testing. 1. dna-newbie@rootsweb.com this rootsweb.com mailing list is for people just learning, It has several Doctors and geneticists that help you learn about DNA testing for genealogy. 2. Genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com this rootsweb.com mailing list is more for administrators of DNA projects and geneticists. But will answer questions as they can.. Some of the different DNA companies staff also answer questions. You might want to check them out for correct answers to your genetic questions. Nelda Nelda L. Percival, Administrator of Y-DNA surname projects Gilpin, Cupp, Bonstein and Gillock My Genealogy - http://freepages.folklore.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bonsteinandgilpin/index.htm GeneticGenealogy - http://www.geneticsand.us Blog - http://aircastles-lets-talk.blogspot.com/ GilpinGenetics: http://www.gilpingenetics.us/ Web Mistress for LCRG - http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~molcgdrg