I saw a post recently in a group on Facebook asking if she and her husband shared matches does that mean they were related. The answer of course is possibly, but not necessarily. I am going to use some of my family as an example.
Both my mother and my father have roots that go back to Colonial Maryland in Prince George and Queen Mary's county. For my father this is the Pyburns, for my mother it is her Traherns. Both families end up in the same area of Virginia, the Pyburns by the mid 18th century show up in records for Lunenburg and Bedford and the Traherns are in Pittsylvania county (formed from Lunenburg) by the 1780's. Additionally two collateral families who marry into my mother's family (not my direct line) take this same path, the Brashears and the Walker (Sylvanius Walker and Tandy family) family.
Things get even a bit more interesting when you look at the Pyburn family. My direct line arrives in Tensaw in 1784 where they end up being neighbors to my ancestor Peggy and her husband Charles Juzan. Well as neighborly as the wilderness was at that time. Turns out that Peggy goes on to marry James Trahern and my line is developed. Peggy and her husband Charles Juzan are the godparents of at least one child of Adam Hollinger and his wife Mary Josephine Juzan. One of their sons marries Teresa Innerarity, the illegitimate daughter of Mary Pyburn and James Innerarity. Thus relatives I have in my Juzan line share relatives in common with my Dad.
Whenever I see a Brunson, Bronson or Brownson before 1810 I know that inevitably the line comes from one of two brothers who arrived in Connecticut in the 17th century. The same goes for the Copelands of Virginia, a name I see often enough in tree's for DNA matches of my mother, but oddly not for my father who is a Copeland. Funny how DNA works that way. That's not to say there isn't a handful of folks with small matches to both my parents, I just haven't figured those out yet.
If I start to talk about relatives on Dad's side, well it starts to look like I have a straight family tree. I don't, I don't even have cousins marrying cousins in my direct line in all the information I know about, (the closest is second cousins and only one of those), but we do have some first cousin marriages in the family. With Dad though, it's more that his family has lived in the same place for over 200 years. After a while, you just are related to about half the county who also descends from people who have been in the same place for 200 years. Which is why a recent DNA match matches my dad in two places, one from a match from his maternal grandmother, and the other, to a match through his maternal grandmother. Neither of us comes from consanguinity, we just come from families with a long history in the panhandle.
Take that in account with some of the rather large families Dad connects with, I mean he has one ancestor with over 100 grandchildren, 28 coming from my direct ancestor alone, and then make him a relative of another family who had 12 kids, and you get the picture. Before long you are kin to everyone, you just need a map to figure it out.
The funny thing is, Dad's family is so close and intertwined while my Mom's, aside from the Choctaw part, is not at all. And yet, she has some of the largest DNA matches with 4th through 6th cousins, and heck, sometimes with Dad it seems as if we are lucky to get a small one at 4.
So my point is, DNA is grand, but you have to take it in hand with genealogy and a grain of salt. After all, it's all relative.
Monday, August 31, 2015
Longhunter Roots and DNA
Update July 2016- we have had many more Wallen matches with the descendants of Doswell Rogers along this segment ( and on one other) since I wrote this blog. Also, we have confirmed DNA with one of Susie's sons with James Wallen (first cousin of Joseph.)
My mother is a linear descendant of Joseph Rogers and his wife Susannah via their son named Henry. Ydna has not only proven that Joseph Rogers was a son of Dauswell (Doswell) Rogers and his wife, but that Dauswell Rogers was a descendant of Adduston Rogers. While YDNA alone cannot prove definitively that Dauswell Rogers is the son of Adduston Rogers and his wife Catherine Dauswell, I am comfortable at this point in saying that these are his most likely parents, primarily because his name is the surname of Adduston's wife.
If in fact though Adduston Rogers and Catherine Dauswell are the parents of Dauswell Rogers, then the DNA matches on my mother's 11 the chromosome in the table below have to at least partly come from Dauswell's wife (unknown name but possibly Ann who signs release of dower in 1795.) I can say this because one of the matches in this section (over half of the 11th chromosome) matches in part to a descendant of Dauswell Rogers who does not descend from Joseph Rogers but his brother William. The table below lists some of the identified and larger segmental matches my mother has on the 11th chromosome.
Match
|
CH
|
Start
|
Stop
|
cM total
|
SNP
|
Ancestor
|
JM me
|
11
|
0
|
134
|
158
|
28796
|
My mom
|
MP
|
11
|
23
|
111
|
74.2
|
16167
|
adopted
|
JKP
|
11
|
23
|
70
|
36.8
|
7697
|
|
WM
|
11
|
22
|
75
|
42.1
|
4306
|
|
CLR
|
11
|
27
|
51
|
20.1
|
4103
|
Blevins[iii]
|
DC
|
11
|
34
|
110
|
63.3
|
Wallens[iv]
|
|
RFW
|
11
|
35
|
70
|
23.0
|
2491
|
Wallen[v]
|
KRM
|
11
|
37
|
106
|
52.5
|
5954
|
Wallen[vi]
|
AB
|
11
|
78
|
108
|
27.9
|
6759
|
Rogers[vii]
|
JB
|
11
|
78
|
117
|
37.5
|
4223
|
Rogers[viii]
|
NP
|
11
|
80
|
111
|
27.3
|
6683
|
Rogers[ix]
|
LJR
|
11
|
80
|
120
|
41.4
|
8934
|
Rogers[x]
|
PP
|
11
|
80
|
113
|
29.1
|
7052
|
Rogers[xi]
|
LR
|
11
|
97
|
120
|
5
|
1462
|
Wallen[xii]
|
PM
|
11
|
80
|
115
|
30.8
|
6691
|
Wallen[xiii]
|
[i] No
information
[ii]
No information
[v] No
information on lineage, surname is Wallen
[vi]
Elisha Wallen and Mary Blevins
[vii]
William Rogers and Hurd, son of Dauswell Rogers and wife (Ann?)
[viii]
Louisa Rogers, dtr of Joseph Rogers and Susannah, granddaughter of Dauswell
Rogers and wife
[ix]
Henry Rogers, son of Joseph Rogers and Susannah, grandson of Dauswell Rogers
and wife
[x]
Henry Rogers, son of Joseph Rogers and Susannah, grandson of Dauswell Rogers
and wife
[xi]
Henry Rogers, son of Joseph Rogers and Susannah, grandson of Dauswell Rogers
and wife
[xii]
Elisha Wallen and Mary Blevins
[xiii]
Elisha Wallen and Mary Blevins
What is clear then is that the majority of this 74 cM segment (63.3 cM) has a definitive connection to the Wallen/Blevins family line, and over half of it is definitively shared between descendants of Joseph Rogers and his wife Susannah, with almost all of that (27.9 of 37 cM) matching a descendant of one of Joseph Rogers brothers, William Rogers.
So what does this mean? The only logical conclusion would appear to be that the descendants of Dauswell Rogers (5 in total including my Mom) are directly related to the descendants of Elisha Wallen and Mary Blevins. If we rule Dauswell out as the source because there is no direct tie between his presumed parents and the Blevins or Wallen family, that leaves only his wife as the source of this connection. That would mean that the mother of Joseph and William Rogers had to be a Blevins if she was not a daughter of Elisha Wallen and his wife Mary Blevins since we have the one lone Blevins alone match in the mix.
Granted we don't know enough about David M. Blevins to say his mother was not a Wallens either, but in some way shape or form, Dauswell Rogers, who is of an age to be the son of Elisha Wallen and his wife Mary Blevins, is married to a daughter, niece or other close female relative of one if not both of these individuals.
What I can't explain is why this particular segment has stuck around intact for so many generations. Dauswell Rogers is my mother's 5th great grandfather, yes that is right, and so this dna segment has to come from a 6th generation or later MCA pair. Granted my mother's large segment could be a fluke, but the others almost as large are about equally as distant from the Wallen family. So in fact when I looked at the total cM as a guideline for when and where to look, I ended up looking too close and not far enough back. Even with the unknown's in my mother's family, Joseph's wife Susannah, his son's wife Mahala, and George Washington Adams, the intact match of half the chromosome makes it highly probable that this DNA doesn't come from one of them.
In order for the match to not come from the Roger's line we would have to have to many if's to complete. First, the descendant of William and one of my other lines would have to match. Then, they both would have to go back to the Blevins/Wallens within 2 or 3 generations. Then we have the segment length, other than the MCA pair of Elisha Wallen and Mary Blevins, it seems highly unlikely that a spouse of a Rogers could impart the exact same and missing DNA to the connection that is provided by the Rogers. For that reason it seems logical to me that the match is coming from the wife of Dauswell and not a more recent ancestor.
Genealogical facts put the Blevins, Elisha Wallen and Dauswell Rogers in the same place from the tithable list of 1765 in Pittsylvania up to Dauswell's death. This connection makes a lot of sense when you pair it with what looks to be a family connection by DNA.
Thursday, July 9, 2015
What it means to me to be Southern
There has been a lot in the news lately about the Confederate flag. A lot of people claim that it's a representation of their southern heritage and not racist. I can't say I agree with that.
It is 146 miles from Pensacola, Florida to Troy, Alabama. If I use that as a radius and draw a circle, my father's family has been in this area for the last two centuries, the oldest arriving in Tensaw 230 years ago, and the youngest arriving 180 years ago. For that reason I named my defunct myfamily group Panhandle Pioneers, the name of my current group now on Facebook.
I was born in the south, but spent the majority of my life elsewhere. For some of my family I suppose, that does not mean I am southern. I couldn't disagree further. There is something that happens to me whenever I drive home to Pensacola. Once I start crossing Mobile bay, a feeling of coming home takes over. This place is in my blood, it is essential to my being. I will return to California where I spent the majority of my childhood after 25 years away, and I doubt that I will feel the same sensation. Simply put, some part of my psyche, my DNA knows where it comes from.
The epitome to me of a Southern woman would be my Aunt Becky. She embodies all that I think of as southern, from sweet tea to black eye peas, she welcomes everyone with the renowned Southern hospitality. I can still recall swinging on her front porch, or "helping" her at their gas station and store out on 9 mile road. I recall summers spent camping at Munson, or driving for a swim at the beach after dark. Fireflies, mosquitos, and water bugs. Sitting under the hundreds year old Oak trees at my stepmother's home, and dreading raking those leaves come fall. Riding in the back of pick up trucks and tubing down the Blackwater River. Family, cousins and meeting for Sunday brunch. This to me is what it means to be Southern. Family, friends, food, ultimately, a way of life.
Most of my ancestor's fought for the Confederacy. I am not ashamed of that fact. Nor am I am ashamed of the few who did own slaves. The truth is, most of my ancestor's were poor white farmers, crackers, who worked in the forestry industry or in turpentine. I also have family who were from large plantations, who owned numerous slaves. One ancestor had a family with his slave, and acknowledged it. I am not ashamed because though the concept that owning another person is alien to me, abhorrent even, I realize that from earliest recorded times, human beings felt that they had the right to own another. That there was some sort of natural order that made one master and another slave, or captive. That made someone noble and another common. I can't say that they were good masters, or bad masters, but to them, this way of life was acceptable. And though I disagree, I can't fault them for it.
On the other hand, if I knew of a family member who belonged to the Klu Klux Klan, who supported white supremacy, who championed the idea of segregation, I would be ashamed. What is the difference do you ask? The difference is these people had ideals built from a culture of hatred and violence. I can't say I had family members who belonged to such a group, nor can I say that I did not. I just know that in my view, these people had values that I could not share, and these are the type of people in my eyes I associate with waving the confederate flag, not as a symbol of a way of life, but as a symbol of white supremacy. I know there are many who disagree, but to me there is a difference.
People who say the confederate flag represents the south aren't embracing the South of the civil war, they are embracing the south of Jim Crow laws, segregation and men in white hoods who thought nothing of hanging, killing and burning down the homes of other people, based not on the person but the color of their skin or their religion. It would also be an error to believe that those men, who hid behind their masks persecuted only people who were black, because they didn't. They had the same views against Jews, mexicans, and indians. They just didn't hate one people, they hated anyone who wasn't a representative of their white protestant ideal of supremacy.
It is 146 miles from Pensacola, Florida to Troy, Alabama. If I use that as a radius and draw a circle, my father's family has been in this area for the last two centuries, the oldest arriving in Tensaw 230 years ago, and the youngest arriving 180 years ago. For that reason I named my defunct myfamily group Panhandle Pioneers, the name of my current group now on Facebook.
I was born in the south, but spent the majority of my life elsewhere. For some of my family I suppose, that does not mean I am southern. I couldn't disagree further. There is something that happens to me whenever I drive home to Pensacola. Once I start crossing Mobile bay, a feeling of coming home takes over. This place is in my blood, it is essential to my being. I will return to California where I spent the majority of my childhood after 25 years away, and I doubt that I will feel the same sensation. Simply put, some part of my psyche, my DNA knows where it comes from.
The epitome to me of a Southern woman would be my Aunt Becky. She embodies all that I think of as southern, from sweet tea to black eye peas, she welcomes everyone with the renowned Southern hospitality. I can still recall swinging on her front porch, or "helping" her at their gas station and store out on 9 mile road. I recall summers spent camping at Munson, or driving for a swim at the beach after dark. Fireflies, mosquitos, and water bugs. Sitting under the hundreds year old Oak trees at my stepmother's home, and dreading raking those leaves come fall. Riding in the back of pick up trucks and tubing down the Blackwater River. Family, cousins and meeting for Sunday brunch. This to me is what it means to be Southern. Family, friends, food, ultimately, a way of life.
Most of my ancestor's fought for the Confederacy. I am not ashamed of that fact. Nor am I am ashamed of the few who did own slaves. The truth is, most of my ancestor's were poor white farmers, crackers, who worked in the forestry industry or in turpentine. I also have family who were from large plantations, who owned numerous slaves. One ancestor had a family with his slave, and acknowledged it. I am not ashamed because though the concept that owning another person is alien to me, abhorrent even, I realize that from earliest recorded times, human beings felt that they had the right to own another. That there was some sort of natural order that made one master and another slave, or captive. That made someone noble and another common. I can't say that they were good masters, or bad masters, but to them, this way of life was acceptable. And though I disagree, I can't fault them for it.
On the other hand, if I knew of a family member who belonged to the Klu Klux Klan, who supported white supremacy, who championed the idea of segregation, I would be ashamed. What is the difference do you ask? The difference is these people had ideals built from a culture of hatred and violence. I can't say I had family members who belonged to such a group, nor can I say that I did not. I just know that in my view, these people had values that I could not share, and these are the type of people in my eyes I associate with waving the confederate flag, not as a symbol of a way of life, but as a symbol of white supremacy. I know there are many who disagree, but to me there is a difference.
People who say the confederate flag represents the south aren't embracing the South of the civil war, they are embracing the south of Jim Crow laws, segregation and men in white hoods who thought nothing of hanging, killing and burning down the homes of other people, based not on the person but the color of their skin or their religion. It would also be an error to believe that those men, who hid behind their masks persecuted only people who were black, because they didn't. They had the same views against Jews, mexicans, and indians. They just didn't hate one people, they hated anyone who wasn't a representative of their white protestant ideal of supremacy.
Friday, January 30, 2015
A more accurate YDNA haplogroup from 23andme tests
While trying to find information about my family's Y DNA haplogroup, I ran across a post on a message board stating that the SNP testing at 23andme was accurate but that they used the 2010 tree. Hmm, I remembered reading a great blog about extra stuff you could do, and I went back to it. I thought I would blog about it so that other 23andme user's would know how to get the latest haplogroup based on the 2015 tree. To be honest, I do not know if there are snp's not tested by 23andme that determine haplogroups.
1. Download your raw data from 23andme.
This is found under the Browse raw data option on the upper right hand drop down menu. Once the data is downloaded, you need to extract the zipped file.
2. Download the 23andme to y snp program.
This wonderful little program is found here.
3. Open the 23andme to y snp program and then open your raw data file from within the program. It will analyze the data. Save this new information to a txt file from within the program. I usually save it in the same file as the raw data that is unzipped so I can find it again.
4. Download the chrome extension, ISOGG Y tree add on, a link to it is found here.
5. Open the ysnp file you just saved. Select edit, select all and copy.
6. On Chrome, go to the three lines in upper right corner, and click on it. Select settings in the drop down menu. Then select extensions.Find the ISOGG Y tree add on in the list. Under it there will be a link for options. When you select this you will get a new window. A sample is already in slot 1. You can add up to 9 more people's y snp data. Put the name of the person and paste the ysnp file data you copied from the text file. Close the window.
7. Go to the ISOGG Y tree. You can find it here. You will see letters representing the first letter of the haplogroup. There are also links for the Y tree from previous years. The add on will work with all of them.
Click the letter that corresponds with the haplogroup you were assigned by 23andme.
8. Once you get to the haplogroup page, the add on will load. In the upper left hand corner when it is done you will find a drop down screen. Select the name you want to run the program on. When it stops saying loading, scroll down the page. The SNP's will be highlighted RED or Green. Green means you have the SNP, Red means you don't. Simply put, the last green highlighted snp on the page is the one that corresponds to the haplogroup to it's left, and that's the haplogroup your dna is at this time.
As a result of this, my mom's paternal line went from R1b1b2a1a1d at 23andme to R1b1a2a1a1c2 in the 2015 table.
Hope this helps.
1. Download your raw data from 23andme.
This is found under the Browse raw data option on the upper right hand drop down menu. Once the data is downloaded, you need to extract the zipped file.
2. Download the 23andme to y snp program.
This wonderful little program is found here.
3. Open the 23andme to y snp program and then open your raw data file from within the program. It will analyze the data. Save this new information to a txt file from within the program. I usually save it in the same file as the raw data that is unzipped so I can find it again.
4. Download the chrome extension, ISOGG Y tree add on, a link to it is found here.
5. Open the ysnp file you just saved. Select edit, select all and copy.
6. On Chrome, go to the three lines in upper right corner, and click on it. Select settings in the drop down menu. Then select extensions.Find the ISOGG Y tree add on in the list. Under it there will be a link for options. When you select this you will get a new window. A sample is already in slot 1. You can add up to 9 more people's y snp data. Put the name of the person and paste the ysnp file data you copied from the text file. Close the window.
7. Go to the ISOGG Y tree. You can find it here. You will see letters representing the first letter of the haplogroup. There are also links for the Y tree from previous years. The add on will work with all of them.
Click the letter that corresponds with the haplogroup you were assigned by 23andme.
8. Once you get to the haplogroup page, the add on will load. In the upper left hand corner when it is done you will find a drop down screen. Select the name you want to run the program on. When it stops saying loading, scroll down the page. The SNP's will be highlighted RED or Green. Green means you have the SNP, Red means you don't. Simply put, the last green highlighted snp on the page is the one that corresponds to the haplogroup to it's left, and that's the haplogroup your dna is at this time.
As a result of this, my mom's paternal line went from R1b1b2a1a1d at 23andme to R1b1a2a1a1c2 in the 2015 table.
Hope this helps.
Discovering a lineage, with help from the X chromosome
As I have mentioned before, Mom's half first cousin recently tested. While I was waiting for his results from 23andme to show matches, I uploaded his raw data to Gedmatch. A few days later I was surprised to see his third highest match, 138 cM autosomal and 54.1 cM on the X chromosome with an estimated difference in generations on gedmatch of 3.4.
I emailed the match and requested a tree. Before receiving it though he had already confirmed he was of Hungarian lineage, which I also knew was the nationality of both of SH's grandparents. Unfortunately though, all SH knew was his grandfather was John Pado and his grandmother was Agnes Odor. From ancestry.com I knew what year Agnes arrived, and that on her death certificate her father's name was listed as John Odor.
Her immigration arrival gave also where she was from in Hungary, Gyovar.
I already knew that any connection we found in the tree's would have to come not only from SH's maternal side, but from either a connection to the mother of John Pado, the mother of Agnes Odor, or the mother of John Pado, because an X chromosome match ruled out anyone who was not an X donator. I also verified that the name Janos was the Hungarian equivalent for John. Since I was unable to find, and still cannot find, the immigration record for certain of John (Janos) Joseph Pado, I looked at what I did know, the village of Gyovar.
When I received the tree of SH's match, I looked it over. Bingo, he had in his tree the Kaposi family who intermarried with the Horvath family in his tree as his Great Grandparents and they were from Gyovar. Since the Great Grandparents were the right generation for the estimated match, I then went to ancestry.com and searched for Pados in Hungarian Baptism Records. I found Janos Pados whose wife was Rozalia Kaposi in several in the village of Gyovar.
My next step was to see if Anna Kaposi and Rozalia Kaposi were sisters, and indeed I found that Vendelin Kaposi and Julianna Holtain had baptism records for Anna Kaposi and Rozalia Kaposi in Gyovar, and that they were of the right age to match the baptisms of each girls children. Thus SH's great grandmother Rozalia Kaposi was the sister of his match's great grandmother, making them 3rd cousins, and giving SH and his sister a little bit more of their immigrant ancestor's history.
I emailed the match and requested a tree. Before receiving it though he had already confirmed he was of Hungarian lineage, which I also knew was the nationality of both of SH's grandparents. Unfortunately though, all SH knew was his grandfather was John Pado and his grandmother was Agnes Odor. From ancestry.com I knew what year Agnes arrived, and that on her death certificate her father's name was listed as John Odor.
Her immigration arrival gave also where she was from in Hungary, Gyovar.
I already knew that any connection we found in the tree's would have to come not only from SH's maternal side, but from either a connection to the mother of John Pado, the mother of Agnes Odor, or the mother of John Pado, because an X chromosome match ruled out anyone who was not an X donator. I also verified that the name Janos was the Hungarian equivalent for John. Since I was unable to find, and still cannot find, the immigration record for certain of John (Janos) Joseph Pado, I looked at what I did know, the village of Gyovar.
When I received the tree of SH's match, I looked it over. Bingo, he had in his tree the Kaposi family who intermarried with the Horvath family in his tree as his Great Grandparents and they were from Gyovar. Since the Great Grandparents were the right generation for the estimated match, I then went to ancestry.com and searched for Pados in Hungarian Baptism Records. I found Janos Pados whose wife was Rozalia Kaposi in several in the village of Gyovar.
My next step was to see if Anna Kaposi and Rozalia Kaposi were sisters, and indeed I found that Vendelin Kaposi and Julianna Holtain had baptism records for Anna Kaposi and Rozalia Kaposi in Gyovar, and that they were of the right age to match the baptisms of each girls children. Thus SH's great grandmother Rozalia Kaposi was the sister of his match's great grandmother, making them 3rd cousins, and giving SH and his sister a little bit more of their immigrant ancestor's history.
Ancient DNA and me
Over on Gedmatch you can compare your autosomal DNA raw data with ancient DNA. More about the types of ancient DNA and some other nifty tools you can use can be found here.
So I tested all five of my profiles at gedmatch. Not one snp matched, even on the lowest setting on comparison directly. You get a graph on the other function there, but all it looks like to me is a whole bunch of orange lines. So I decided to use the ancient calculator that Feliz Immanuel wrote and test our DNA that way.
Here are the results. I arranged them sort of higher to lower matching. The number is the percent of DNA that matches.
So I tested all five of my profiles at gedmatch. Not one snp matched, even on the lowest setting on comparison directly. You get a graph on the other function there, but all it looks like to me is a whole bunch of orange lines. So I decided to use the ancient calculator that Feliz Immanuel wrote and test our DNA that way.
Here are the results. I arranged them sort of higher to lower matching. The number is the percent of DNA that matches.
| Ancient DNA | ME | JM | SH | DAD | MOM |
| Ne 1 | 20.09 | 21.46 | 21.04 | 20.16 | 21.34 |
| usht ishm | 16.64 | 17.04 | 17.09 | 16.99 | 17.93 |
| loschbour | 16.92 | 16.32 | 17.36 | 17.5 | 15.34 |
| linearbandkeramik | 20.35 | 20.04 | 20.07 | 21.16 | 19.69 |
| clovis | 12.59 | 13.52 | 11.3 | 12 | 14.03 |
| br2 | 22.65 | 21.62 | 20.94 | 21.73 | 23.29 |
| kostenki14 | 5.7 | 5.35 | 4.83 | 5.12 | 5.34 |
| motala 12 | 6.12 | 5.66 | 5.26 | 6.16 | 5.31 |
| australian aboriginal | 1.01 | 1.1 | 2.24 | 0.85 | 1.29 |
| br1 | 1.44 | 1.8 | 2.05 | 1.75 | 2.25 |
| co1 | 2.6 | 2.42 | 3.17 | 3.31 | 3.07 |
| hinxton4 | 1.03 | 1.23 | 1.6 | 1.28 | 1.11 |
| IR 1 | 3.34 | 2.98 | 2.79 | 4.4 | 3.37 |
| KO1 | 3.24 | 3.27 | 4 | 3.44 | 3.18 |
| LaBranaarintero | 3.9 | 3.26 | 4.75 | 3.57 | 3.41 |
| Malta | 2.47 | 2.03 | 2.16 | 2.23 | 1.89 |
| NE 5 | 1.89 | 2.05 | 2.6 | 2.38 | 2.13 |
| NE 6 | 2.48 | 2.32 | 2.99 | 3.48 | 2.67 |
| NE 7 | 2.38 | 2.64 | 2.71 | 2.39 | 2.54 |
| Paleoeskimo | 2.58 | 1.85 | 1.62 | 2.85 | 2.22 |
| gokhem2 | 0.57 | 0.43 | 0.76 | 1.46 | 0.88 |
| hinxton 1 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.3 | 0.28 | 0.12 |
| hinxton 2 | 0.19 | 0.31 | 0.27 | 0.22 | 0.71 |
| hinxton 3 | 0.36 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.34 | 0.64 |
| hinxton 5 | 0.19 | 0.14 | 0.48 | 0.28 | 0.47 |
| vi33.16 neanderthal | 0 | 0.12 | 0.1 | 0 | 0.04 |
| vi33.25 neanderthal | 0.05 | 0 | 0.11 | 0 | 0.05 |
| vi33.26 neanderthal | 0 | 0.04 | 0.19 | 0 | 0.15 |
I would love to know if there are any averages for the above tests, and also if the above samples test higher with one than another in comparison.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Disappointment with Ancestry Admixture or Composition Results
Since many members of my groups on facebook research possible Native American ancestry, it is not unusual for me to see posts about how disappointed they are that there is not any, or very minuscule, amounts of Native American showing up on their admixture or composition results.
To be honest, there are times I honestly think that they got the results they were supposed to, however, there is a very good reason that someone does not have the results they think they should. It is called recombination and it is how our genes are passed down.
To illustrate this fact, I am going to use examples from my mom, her cousin SH and her nephew JM with genealogically proven third cousins once removed. Genetically speaking a third cousin has the estimated DNA of 0.781 percent or 53 cM, a third cousin once removed has the estimated amount of DNA around 0.391 percent or 26.56 cM shared, and a fourth cousin (for JM) should share about 0.195 percent or 13.28 cM of DNA.
Mom has matches with two sisters and one daughter on her Hager side. The sisters are 3rd cousins to my mother and SH and the daughter is a 3rd cousin once removed. (for JM that means third cousin once removed and fourth cousin).There is another Hager descendant also of the same degree they match as well.
Mom matches one sister at 145 cM, the other at 130 cM, both third cousins, the daughter at 65 cM and the last at 9.9 cM both third cousins once removed.
SH matches one sister at 40 cM, the other at 74 cM, the daughter at 39 cM and the last at 5.2 cM
JM matches the one sister at 29 cM, the other at 0 cM, both third cousins once removed, andthe daughter at 22 cM and the last at 7.7 cM, both fourth cousins.
Another example is a genealogically documented third cousin once removed on the Collins family.
Mom matches him at 38 cM, SH at 134 cM and JM not at all.
So let's say, hypothetically speaking, that the native DNA was represented by one of these ancestral common ancestors DNA. As you can tell by the numbers, the amount passed on varies significantly, even though the genealogical distance is the same for SH and my Mom. In the case of JM, when he has no shared DNA it means he didn't receive any of that genetic material. If this portion of the DNA represented the person who was passing on the Native DNA it would mean yep, he's not going to show a percentage even close to that of his biological Aunt.
It's obvious that there is some kind of sticky DNA going on in some of my mom's family, she is sharing 1.7-1.9 percent of DNA with her Hager cousins, but only 0.5 percent with her Collins one, and on the flip side, her first cousin is sharing .0.5-0.9 percent with his Hager cousins and 1.8 percent with his Collins cousin.In both cases, the lower percentage is more the average, so the larger matches while possible, are not typical.
Ancestry composition is passed the same way as this DNA, it is a recombination draw of the lottery in what gets passed on to each generation. So how is it my Mom actually shows a percentage of Native DNA close to her actual degree of blood based on genealogy and the Dawes? Luck for the most part, when you stop and think that her last full blood ancestors on the Trahern only side were born in the 1770's, with mixed bloods intermarrying until her great great grandfather married a full blood. Even at that, Mom's great grandmother could only be 11/16 Native American (her father was 3/8 and her mother full).
Based on the Dawes where she claimed only 1/2, mom's Choctaw DNA should be 1/16 or 6.25 percent, if you include the reported actual, it would be11/128 or 8.6 percent . Her 23 and me results show her at 8 percent, and gedmatch admixtures average 8-10 percent based on the program.
Even though her great grandfather and her grandfather are by family history Native American, their contribution would be so minuscule that it's not even worth computing.
So if your disappointed with your admixture results, you really need to look at some of your close family and test them. First cousins, and even siblings do not always share an equal amount of DNA from all their contributors.
To be honest, there are times I honestly think that they got the results they were supposed to, however, there is a very good reason that someone does not have the results they think they should. It is called recombination and it is how our genes are passed down.
To illustrate this fact, I am going to use examples from my mom, her cousin SH and her nephew JM with genealogically proven third cousins once removed. Genetically speaking a third cousin has the estimated DNA of 0.781 percent or 53 cM, a third cousin once removed has the estimated amount of DNA around 0.391 percent or 26.56 cM shared, and a fourth cousin (for JM) should share about 0.195 percent or 13.28 cM of DNA.
Mom has matches with two sisters and one daughter on her Hager side. The sisters are 3rd cousins to my mother and SH and the daughter is a 3rd cousin once removed. (for JM that means third cousin once removed and fourth cousin).There is another Hager descendant also of the same degree they match as well.
Mom matches one sister at 145 cM, the other at 130 cM, both third cousins, the daughter at 65 cM and the last at 9.9 cM both third cousins once removed.
SH matches one sister at 40 cM, the other at 74 cM, the daughter at 39 cM and the last at 5.2 cM
JM matches the one sister at 29 cM, the other at 0 cM, both third cousins once removed, andthe daughter at 22 cM and the last at 7.7 cM, both fourth cousins.
Another example is a genealogically documented third cousin once removed on the Collins family.
Mom matches him at 38 cM, SH at 134 cM and JM not at all.
So let's say, hypothetically speaking, that the native DNA was represented by one of these ancestral common ancestors DNA. As you can tell by the numbers, the amount passed on varies significantly, even though the genealogical distance is the same for SH and my Mom. In the case of JM, when he has no shared DNA it means he didn't receive any of that genetic material. If this portion of the DNA represented the person who was passing on the Native DNA it would mean yep, he's not going to show a percentage even close to that of his biological Aunt.
It's obvious that there is some kind of sticky DNA going on in some of my mom's family, she is sharing 1.7-1.9 percent of DNA with her Hager cousins, but only 0.5 percent with her Collins one, and on the flip side, her first cousin is sharing .0.5-0.9 percent with his Hager cousins and 1.8 percent with his Collins cousin.In both cases, the lower percentage is more the average, so the larger matches while possible, are not typical.
Ancestry composition is passed the same way as this DNA, it is a recombination draw of the lottery in what gets passed on to each generation. So how is it my Mom actually shows a percentage of Native DNA close to her actual degree of blood based on genealogy and the Dawes? Luck for the most part, when you stop and think that her last full blood ancestors on the Trahern only side were born in the 1770's, with mixed bloods intermarrying until her great great grandfather married a full blood. Even at that, Mom's great grandmother could only be 11/16 Native American (her father was 3/8 and her mother full).
Based on the Dawes where she claimed only 1/2, mom's Choctaw DNA should be 1/16 or 6.25 percent, if you include the reported actual, it would be11/128 or 8.6 percent . Her 23 and me results show her at 8 percent, and gedmatch admixtures average 8-10 percent based on the program.
Even though her great grandfather and her grandfather are by family history Native American, their contribution would be so minuscule that it's not even worth computing.
So if your disappointed with your admixture results, you really need to look at some of your close family and test them. First cousins, and even siblings do not always share an equal amount of DNA from all their contributors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)