Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere!



Go Back   Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere! > Research > DNA Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 18-10-19, 16:17
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default Ancestry Grouping Crisis?!!

So, I've created a few groups (4) and now I've got despondent/confused.

My 4th group has 11 people in it. Most of these individuals either have no tree or a tree of Americans who I don't recognise. However, two people in the group have a Common Ancestor leaf thing. I clicked one of these and then realised the owner is someone I used to email about FH about ten years ago so I know who he is related to (he is on my tree!) and his tree on Ancestry reflects this. Our common ancestors are my FMM's parents. He is my 3rd cousin once removed.

As I looked at this one first, I named the group after this branch of my tree.

I then looked at the tree of the other Common Ancestor match, only to find our common ancestor is in a completely different part of my tree, so I'm confused. Instead of being connected via my FM line, they are connected via my FF line in a different part of the country. This person is my 5th cousin once removed.

They both show up as potentially being 4th-6th cousins, so that part seams reasonable.

So, how is this DNA shared when one person is connected through my FM and the other through my FF? I feel like I now have no idea about the other people in the group and I the name of the group is now misleading.

Advice please
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 18-10-19, 17:12
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Also, I have looked at some other people who have matching trees but don't come up in shared matches. What's that all about?
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 18-10-19, 17:30
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merry View Post
Also, I have looked at some other people who have matching trees but don't come up in shared matches. What's that all about?
Are they on your DNA match list but with less than 20 cM's of shared DNA? Ancestry only lists someone as a shared match if they have 20 cM or more. I wish they would have another option to show those with less, because you can go through the lower matches checking each one to see who (of the > 20 cM matches) is shown as a shared match, but it is so time-consuming.

Or they share less than 20 cM with the other person.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 18-10-19, 19:53
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterunner View Post
Are they on your DNA match list but with less than 20 cM's of shared DNA? Ancestry only lists someone as a shared match if they have 20 cM or more. I wish they would have another option to show those with less, because you can go through the lower matches checking each one to see who (of the > 20 cM matches) is shown as a shared match, but it is so time-consuming.

Or they share less than 20 cM with the other person.
OK, so I think they must have less than 20 cM with the other person/people as they are around 30-50 with me.

So, would I add them to the group they look like they belong to? (of course that's the group that has these two conflicting people in it and I'm not sure which one perhaps shouldn't be in the group! So, which to put them with?!)

I suppose I could re-title the group to reflect the two branches and then bung 'everyone' in it?
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 18-10-19, 17:33
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merry View Post
So, I've created a few groups (4) and now I've got despondent/confused.

My 4th group has 11 people in it. Most of these individuals either have no tree or a tree of Americans who I don't recognise. However, two people in the group have a Common Ancestor leaf thing. I clicked one of these and then realised the owner is someone I used to email about FH about ten years ago so I know who he is related to (he is on my tree!) and his tree on Ancestry reflects this. Our common ancestors are my FMM's parents. He is my 3rd cousin once removed.

As I looked at this one first, I named the group after this branch of my tree.

I then looked at the tree of the other Common Ancestor match, only to find our common ancestor is in a completely different part of my tree, so I'm confused. Instead of being connected via my FM line, they are connected via my FF line in a different part of the country. This person is my 5th cousin once removed.

They both show up as potentially being 4th-6th cousins, so that part seams reasonable.

So, how is this DNA shared when one person is connected through my FM and the other through my FF? I feel like I now have no idea about the other people in the group and I the name of the group is now misleading.

Advice please
Well, the problem is that Ancestry doesn't have a chromosome browser like some other sites do, so you can't tell whether all the people in a shared match group share the same segment(s) of DNA with you and with each other. So some of them may be related to each other in a different way from how they are related to you. But in many cases (but not all!), the connection will be the same for all or most in the group.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 18-10-19, 19:58
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterunner View Post
Well, the problem is that Ancestry doesn't have a chromosome browser like some other sites do, so you can't tell whether all the people in a shared match group share the same segment(s) of DNA with you and with each other. So some of them may be related to each other in a different way from how they are related to you. But in many cases (but not all!), the connection will be the same for all or most in the group.
OK, so I need to think more flexibly. Thanks Kate.
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 18-10-19, 20:40
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Are you sure someone hasn't just dropped all my results on the floor and then mudded them up?

I have matches where one person has a tree full of my dad's ancestors and they apparently share DNA someone whose tree is all my mum's ancestors. One lot in Bristol and the other in London.

Then I have people with matching trees but no shared DNA.

Is the idea to put shared matches in all the groups they share matches with even when they make no sense at all? (even though I don't know if any of the matches are true?)
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 18-10-19, 22:54
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merry View Post
Then I have people with matching trees but no shared DNA.
Either they didn't take a DNA test, or they are distant enough that they don't actually share DNA with you even though you have shared ancestors, or their trees (or yours!) are wrong.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 18-10-19, 22:56
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merry View Post
Is the idea to put shared matches in all the groups they share matches with even when they make no sense at all? (even though I don't know if any of the matches are true?)
It's up to you, but I usually leave them out if they look likely to confuse the issue.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 19-10-19, 08:15
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Quote:
Does this help at all, or just make you more confused? It did my head in for a time.

Di
Um, well, I would probably have to read it again (maybe more than once!) - I will do that a bit later.

Quote:
Either they didn't take a DNA test, or they are distant enough that they don't actually share DNA with you even though you have shared ancestors, or their trees (or yours!) are wrong.
How very dare you (that last bit)!!!!!!! I know there are people 'out there' with both sides of my tree on their tree even though they are extremely unlikely to be related to both. I don't know if that could be having an impact?

What do you mean, "they didn't take a DNA test" - I had assumed (yeh, I know) everyone in my DNA results would have taken a DNA test

Quote:
It's up to you, but I usually leave them out if they look likely to confuse the issue.
OK. As I have no idea who is confusing the issue (where I can only identify a tree connection in two people in a group of 20 people and those two people appear to be connected to me in completely different ways), I'm going to delete all the groups I've made and go back to just looking at the ones that show a common ancestor and see if I can work out if I can safely group some of those together. I'll worry about all these other people later!

I'm not yet feeling as if my mental block with this is clearing yet!
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:40.


Hosted by Photon IT

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 PL3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.