GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-12 > 1293681476


From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Recommendations for DNA testing
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 21:57:56 -0600
References: <52025593-9EF1-4A5D-A729-4186037ECADE@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <52025593-9EF1-4A5D-A729-4186037ECADE@comcast.net>


I am afraid the word genealogy is much abused in the world of commercial DNA
testing. If you ae using it in it generally understood meaning of proving
parent-child relationships (i.e., what genealogists do), you would choose
between DNAHeritage, Ancestry.com and FTDNA. I would compare the 43-marker
test of the first two and the 64-marker test of the latter. Both are more
than sufficent for genealogical testing, although it is posible to get along
with Ancestry's 33-marker test (called 36-markers by them) and FTDNA's
37-marker test.
If you are interested in biological relationships (population genetics),
which make up the bulk of the list discussions, I would go with FTDNA. They
really have the best SNP testing and tools for surname-relatedness analysis.
However, I have been involved in DNA testing since 2001. We have resolved
our major genealogical questions without a single SNP test or use of
relatedness tools. It just depends on your interest.

Bob Stafford
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Bob Bulthuis <> wrote:

> I am new to this. I know most of the posts here are quite advanced in
> nature. If my post is inappropriate and too simple, please excuse me.
> I am curious in doing my DNA genealogy. I am male, so i would like to test
> my paternal and maternal lines. Are there recommended testing firms you can
> recommend? Should I do a simple test and later do more advanced testing
> based on the results?
> Are the reports basic or very detailed? Are some better than others?
> Feel free to Email me
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>


This thread: