Map Question

[Carolyn1955]

Hi All,
My question is if I have an exact match "red pushpin" what does the other numbers mean? I realize it says genetic distance but in terms of generations or something else? Also, If I have an exact match, why does this match only show up on my HVR1, but not on HVR2 or FGS? Could it be because it is the only one of my matches that bothered to put their earliest known relative on the map? Even so, it doesn't make sense to get an exact match if they don't show up on HVR2 and/or FGS. I guess I'm not understanding what the pushpins and the color coding represents. 1-step, 2-step etc.

Sorry if I sound confused. I don't like asking dumb questions, so I'll apologize in advance...

Carolyn

[rainbow]

Let's hope efgen or rivergirl posts a reply. I'll try as best I can for now. I think there may be a box to tick to see your HVR2 red push pin matches on the map. If you don't find and tick it , then the map will only show HVR1. Only look at exact matches (zero differences) and ignore the ones that say genetic differences. Genetic differences mean they have either one less mutation or one more than you have. Or 2 or 3 extra or less. People who signed the electronic consent form and gave a location for their maternal line and are your match will have a pushpin on the map.

[Carolyn1955]

I see it now. I do not have any HVR2 or FGS matches. Thanks

Let's hope efgen or rivergirl posts a reply. I'll try as best I can for now. I think there may be a box to tick to see your HVR2 red push pin matches on the map. If you don't find and tick it , then the map will only show HVR1. Only look at exact matches (zero differences) and ignore the ones that say genetic differences. Genetic differences mean they have either one less mutation or one more than you have. Or 2 or 3 extra or less. People who signed the electronic consent form and gave a location for their maternal line and are your match will have a pushpin on the map.

[rainbow]

I see it now. I do not have any HVR2 or FGS matches. Thanks

Hi Carolyn,

You're welcome. I am glad that I could be of help afterall. I saw your thread hours ago but I hesitated to post, waiting for a real expert to help, but none posted, so I did.

I see your mtDNA signature lists Parker. My mtDNA line also has a Parker, born in North Carolina in the early 1800s (she was a great granddaughter of NC's Edward Parker, originally from Virginia). My mtDNA is H1, but maybe we are related somehow on a zigzag line.

Elizabeth

[PDHOTLEN]

Re maps section

I just looked at the maps feature for the first time. But it only shows two HVR1 matches, and no HVR2 matches. And for my Y-DNA, it only shows one 67 marker match in Norway. I mean, I have 17 low level matches at FTDNA, for example.


Mitosearch & Y-Search: g986T

[Carolyn1955]

My thoughts are that if others don't bother to add their most distant known relative's location to the map, we won't see them there. I think that's what confused me. Other than that, I see no other real purpose for the map.

I just looked at the maps feature for the first time. But it only shows two HVR1 matches, and no HVR2 matches. And for my Y-DNA, it only shows one 67 marker match in Norway. I mean, I have 17 low level matches at FTDNA, for example.


Mitosearch & Y-Search: g986T

[PDHOTLEN]

Re maps section

Looking at the only two shown (out of supposedly 17), they both are from Massachusetts (although both not accurately shown on map). One goes back to before 1625. That sounds like Pilgrims/Puritans, who were supposedly from southeast England. So that goes along with my observations that my short HVR1 (16270 & 16519) tends to point toward south & SE England; not to earliest indigenous pre-Celts, etc. But on the other hand, there are 16270's in Scotland & Ireland. Some 16270's may be from the Norse. Well, so much for speculating.

[PDHOTLEN]

Looking at the only two shown (out of supposedly 17), they both are from Massachusetts (although both not accurately shown on map). One goes back to before 1625. That sounds like Pilgrims/Puritans, who were supposedly from southeast England. So that goes along with my observations that my short HVR1 (16270 & 16519) tends to point toward south & SE England; not to earliest indigenous pre-Celts, etc. But on the other hand, there are 16270's in Scotland & Ireland. Some 16270's may be from the Norse. Well, so much for speculating.

I meant one of those two plots were off.

Speaking of speculating, it looks like my mtDNA line might be true Celt; the ones who introduced Indo-European language and products of advanced cognition ("smart gene") ha ha. In that case, I may be more closely related to King Arthur than the pre-Celts he ruled over.