Geneology - What's yours?

[ThistleDown]

No longer. In the last 5-7 years genetic genealogy has come into its own. By testing a man's Y DNA, which we inherit from our fathers, one can determine one's patrilineal ancestry quite well. Go to www.familytreedna.com and take a look at their FAQ. It's often a very helpful adjunct to traditional genealogical methodology. And often more reliable. A paper trail may contain misrepresentations based on wishful ancestry, but DNA doesn't.

Given that there is contributed DNA it is a wonderful advance. My brother found a distant cousin of ours using a service similar to the one you note. They had both contributed samples and, presto!, a connection. The gaps I was referring to, however, are ancestral and I don't think can yet be filled this way, can they? That is, if I am A and know for certain about ancestors B through L from a paper trail, will DNA testing produce M?

[Erikm]

The information I have really can't be trusted anyway. It seem's some of my line came from Mary Bruce, daughter of Robert De Brus and Margaret Carrick. Maybe this is not the same line? Mary Bruce married Alexander Fraser. Now this is just some of the information I gatherd from ancestry.com, and I am sure should be taken with a grain of salt.

[gilmore]

...The gaps I was referring to, however, are ancestral and I don't think can yet be filled this way, can they? That is, if I am A and know for certain about ancestors B through L from a paper trail, will DNA testing produce M?

I am not sure what your question is.

If one man has a paper trail to an ancient ancestor, and another has a dead end more recent than that, and the Y DNA results show that they match, then of course it would be reasonable to conclude that they are descended from a common ancestor.

There are other true gaps--not mere dead ends--- that genetic genealogists claim to have crossed with no paper trail at all. The haplotypes of descendants of Niall of the Seven Hostages and Somerled are said to have been identified.

Also, Genghis Khan's male descendants are said to be identifiable. There are quite a few men of Asian ancestry whose Y DNA shows a common ancestor who lived at the right time and place. Given the early Mongol policy of killing men and taking women as slaves of the areas that resisted them during the period of Mongol conquests, it dovetails with documented history.

Among Jewish men there is the Cohan Modal Haplotype that often but not always occurs in men whose families are said to be kohanim, in other words descendants of Moses' brother Aaron, if I remember the Old Testament correctly.

[ThistleDown]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThistleDown
...The gaps I was referring to, however, are ancestral and I don't think can yet be filled this way, can they? That is, if I am A and know for certain about ancestors B through L from a paper trail, will DNA testing produce M?

I am not sure what your question is.

If one man has a paper trail to an ancient ancestor, and another has a dead end more recent than that, and the Y DNA results show that they match, then of course it would be reasonable to conclude that they are descended from a common ancestor is there not?

There are other true gaps--not mere dead ends--- that genetic genealogists claim to have crossed with no paper trail at all. The haplotypes of descendants of Niall of the Seven Hostages and Somerled are said to have been identified.

No, in your first example you are recognising two present-day individuals' DNA and finding a common ancestor. That's triangulation and, of course, is the science. I am asking if it is possible, through DNA testing of a single person, to discover his ancestor at a specific generation in the past. I don't believe it is and, if not, then there is a "proof" gap at that generation.

[ThistleDown]

The information I have really can't be trusted anyway. It seem's some of my line came from Mary Bruce, daughter of Robert De Brus and Margaret Carrick. Maybe this is not the same line? Mary Bruce married Alexander Fraser. Now this is just some of the information I gatherd from ancestry.com, and I am sure should be taken with a grain of salt.

Yes, it probably should be, but the deviation from the thread you started is producing some good discussion between Gilmore and ThistleDown and some fine information is being exchanged. Ta.

[Erikm]

I agree great information

[gilmore]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThistleDown
...The gaps I was referring to, however, are ancestral and I don't think can yet be filled this way, can they? That is, if I am A and know for certain about ancestors B through L from a paper trail, will DNA testing produce M?




No, in your first example you are recognising two present-day individuals' DNA and finding a common ancestor. That's triangulation and, of course, is the science. I am asking if it is possible, through DNA testing of a single person, to discover his ancestor at a specific generation in the past. I don't believe it is and, if not, then there is a "proof" gap at that generation.

You are correct. But genetic genealogy relies not on mere triagulation (3 persons) but on comparing a huge multitude of Y DNA test results, and the more testing, the more accurate and precise the results. As I said, if you go to www.familytreedna.com and look at their FAQ you will see a rather good explanation of how this works.

When you test your Y DNA, it is compared to all the other Y DNA in the company's database, and you are given a list of men whose DNA closely match yours. Some match more closely than others. Specific markers (alleles, or sites on the Y chromosome) are tested and assigned numeric values. The greater the distance in these numeric values, the more distant the relationship and the further back in time the most recent common ancestor (MRCA). The more exact matches, the closer in time was the most recent common ancestor. Due to a huge number of Y DNA result having been tested, a comparison of two men's Y DNA will predict the probability of when their most recent common ancestor lived, based on past results. This is possible because ON AVERAGE each allele or marker mutates at a rate that can be predicted, especially over the generations.

So, merely testing one person without more will tell you very little. Testing three will tell you much more, and in fact, the larger the database, the more likely you are to find some one whose test results are closer to yours, and further, the more precise distance of a relationship those results are likely to show.

Family Tree DNA is the largest genetic genealogical testing company in the world, and has the largest database, as well as the lowest prices that I know of. Genetic genealogy has been commercially available for only 5-7 years and is still in its infancy. I receive news of a new match every several months. It reminds me of how we used to leave queries in card catalogues in genealogical libraries, and receive a response months or years later. Right now it seems to work well in most cases as an adjunct to traditional genealogy in showing you who you are not related to (or rather not related to closely) and where it would be fruitless to research, more than showing you who you are related to. Also, some people seem to simply get tested in hopes of benefiting from the hard work that others have done over the years in tracing the paper trail. But the more people who test, the more information available, and the greater usefulness it will be to all.

Another factor in its usefulness is the ethnic group one is a part of. People of Scots descent use DNA testing with goals pretty much like traditional genealogists, primarily to see how far back one can trace one's ancestry. Jews, especially those of Eastern European descent, are often interested in getting in touch with relatives whose ancestors scattered across the world, fleeing the pogroms of the 19th and early 20th centuries and the Holocaust. African Americans are often interested in establishing family connections that were broken by the slave trade.

For most men, Y DNA testing is casting your bread upon the water. You don't know what you are going to get. You may have close matches and discover a huge treasure trove of genealogical information pushing your patrilineal line back centuries to a glorious, historically significant progenitor. You may discover that you have an ancestor who was one of the 3.7 to 4% of Europeans and Americans who were the product of misattributed paternity, such as adultery. (Or both) You may find that you are related to others whose lines all point to a particular place of origin, but no one has yet worked out exactly what the relationships are. One thing is certain. You will come to a greater appreciation that, while all men may not be brothers, all human males are certainly cousins. Some are just more distant than others.

[ThistleDown]

Super-clear information, Gilmore. Thanks. My mistake earlier; it is familytreedna my brother used and, through it, made connection with a distant cousin we knew of but had never met. At the moment I have 26 12-Markers and 6 Distance-1 markers, the latter all with my surname.

I'm actually one of those fortunate ones who have paper-trails. Mine is unbroken to 1505 due to land tenure and lots of fine family record-keeping. The generation (or two?) before that is questionable, so we have the "gap" I was referring to earlier in the thread. Paper will never be found to fill that gap because that chest was lost in a fire in 1917.

[###KILTEDKIWI###]

Sorry to interrupt the conversation men, but those old photos are great. I have attempted to trace my "roots", and being that i live in New Zealand, and the fact that our country is quite young still (in manner of speaking), it has been relatively easy to track back to my paternal and maternal sides of the family who came out here, those would be
Cunningham - via Lanarkshire (1870)
Mcleod - via Tongue (1867)

I have given up on the other family connections (via marriage etc) (Mcdonalds, Morrision, Mcrae, Irwin, etc), and am quite happy to hand to my children these two lines.

Anyway, side tracked, here is my "old" photo of George Mcleod and Annabelle (nee Mcdonald)




Regards

Phil

[Ancienne Alliance]

Sorry to interrupt the conversation men, but those old photos are great. I have attempted to trace my "roots", and being that i live in New Zealand, and the fact that our country is quite young still (in manner of speaking), it has been relatively easy to track back to my paternal and maternal sides of the family who came out here, those would be
Cunningham - via Lanarkshire (1870)
Mcleod - via Tongue (1867)

I have given up on the other family connections (via marriage etc) (Mcdonalds, Morrision, Mcrae, Irwin, etc), and am quite happy to hand to my children these two lines.

Anyway, side tracked, here is my "old" photo of George Mcleod and Annabelle (nee Mcdonald)



Regards

Phil

Phil, this is absolutely gorgeous !

Do you have more ?

Anyone of the Rabble know if we have an "old photo" thread on Xmarks ?


Best,

Robert