GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-09 > 1284471839


From: Ann Turner <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Experimenting with Family Finder Chromosome Browser
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 06:43:59 -0700
References: <8CD216A78041BF0-E5C-A7D@webmail-m004.sysops.aol.com><AANLkTine4eoH23C7rkaXoh6aEfWSYFfK_pAjVQ-H4PhS@mail.gmail.com><AANLkTim+Gr7aRo7d4Ue9xckXJDnLUT2hQDsLFDrTur7g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim+Gr7aRo7d4Ue9xckXJDnLUT2hQDsLFDrTur7g@mail.gmail.com>


I should point out that I don't expect this scenario to be a common
occurrence. I've looked at quite a few cases where Relative Finder and
Family Finder matches are congruent. I'm deliberately seeking out any
exceptions so I can understand any discrepancies better. I'd be happy to
look at more cases where both parties are willing to send me their raw data
from both FTDNA and 23andMe.

Ann Turner

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 12:03 PM, David Faux <> wrote:

> John,
>
> Ann Turner has made a very important observation that would appear to bear
> directly on what you are seeing. The matter was discussed at dna-forums
> under the following thread:
>
>
> http://dna-forums.com/index.php?/topic/12463-family-finder-match-not-in-relative-finder/
>
> Bottom line: There would appear to be a number of problems relating to
> FTDNA'a matching criteria that could come into play and create multiple
> false positives. As I see it, at this point in time, you are more likely
> to
> have many spurious matches due to the way the algorithm handles
> "discrepancies" - it appears to permit too many and still consider the
> segment a match. There is also the apparent higher error rate in the Affy
> chip (still excellent though) relative to the Illumina chip used by
> 23andMe.
>


This thread: