ROOTS-L Archives

Archiver > ROOTS > 2011-06 > 1307535222


From: Lesley Shockey <>
Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] ok I am convinced about DNA testing but...
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 08:13:42 -0400
References: <mailman.355.1307497107.11961.roots@rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.355.1307497107.11961.roots@rootsweb.com>


I feel that I must agree with Barton. I do have my ancestor fairly well
documented back several generations. I know the surnames of 15 of my 16
great grandparents which would cover 3rd cousins and 22 of my 32 great
great grandparents which covers 4th cousins. Of the seven persons
listed as suggested third cousins and in the relationship range 2nd to
4th cousin, my paper trail only shows one as a possible 6th cousin.
These seven people do not have as many surnames listed as I have but
there is only one case of a common surname. I know the areas these
ancestors were born, lived and died but these alleged cousins claim to
not have ancestors from the areas I have for my ancestors.

I have a total of 96 cousins in my Family Finder matches and still have
only one person that a paper trail shows as a 6th cousin.

Les

On 6/7/2011 9:38 PM, wrote:
> Barton,
> First I tested 23&me but run Y-dna projects at FTDNA. I do not agree with FTDNA's statement that an autosomal test only finds up to 5th cousins. There is not that much difference between the two tests RF and FF and 23 and me lists them up to 10th and distant.
>
> Sorry - but I do question your paper genealogy trail.. Please don't get upset. just think about this.
>
> I have a Hurst file that has over 2000 individuals over half of these are genetically related to me. If you have not done your lines siblings as far out as blood runs then you can miss people you are genetically related to, that might show up on a autosomal chromosome test.
>
> Neldahttp://freepages.folklore.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bonsteinandgilpin/
> ----------------------------------------
>> > Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:51:38 -0400
>> > From:
>> > To:
>> > CC:
>> > Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] ok I am convinced about DNA testing but...
>> >
>> > Therotically the Family Finder test from FTDNA would net you the most
>> > connections. But see my comment below about this test, which I had my
>> > father take. The Y-DNA test (which must be taken by a male) will link
>> > only to the test subject's paternal line (his father, his father's
>> > father, etc.); therefore, for example, if a descendant of his 4th great
>> > grandfather's brother also tested (also purely through the male line),
>> > that would confirm a relationship which might otherwise be suspected but
>> > not proven. The mtDNA test works in the same way for the female line
>> > with the execption that the test subject can be either male or female
>> > (since a mother passes her mtDNA to all her children, but mtDNA is not
>> > passed by a man to his children). The problem with the mtDNA test is
>> > that it at best can give you a "better then 50%" likelihood that you
>> > share a common female ancestor with someone over a several hundred year
>> > period, and this only with the most expensive of the mtDNA tests (I
>> > think something like $400 at FTDNA). Resolution on the Y test is much
>> > higher.
>> >
>> > I don't know about the 23andme test but presumably it works similarly to
>> > the Family Finder test; that is, it tests autosomal DNA and can connect
>> > you to 1st-5th cousins whether male or female. I had my father take the
>> > FF test and I have to say that I have been disappointed with the
>> > results. I have pretty thoroughly documented his lines dating from the
>> > late 1700s down to the the present; and though he has had many matches,
>> > I am not able to determine how any are related. It's not just that I
>> > don't recognize the individuals (which I should if they are 2nd - 4th
>> > cousins), but there are (in most cases) not even common surnames. Also,
>> > almost all of my father's lines were in one of 3 counties in southern
>> > Indiana and Illinois by 1815, and of the matches who have posted their
>> > GEDCOMs or responded to my emails, none have lines there. FTDNA gave
>> > vague or contradictory answers to my queries about the test, saying that
>> > "probably" the matches were for more distant relationships (than a 5th
>> > cousin). Since the FAQ specifically states that there is a less than
>> > 10% chance that a 5th cousin will be identified by the test, I find it
>> > hard to believe that all of my dad's matches for predicted 3rd cousins
>> > are actually 5th or more distant cousins.
>> >
>> > I'd be interested in hearing from others about their experiences with
>> > the FF test.
>> >
>> > Barton Lewis


This thread: