Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Newbie question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Newbie question

    I'm here for a different reason, my family are all gone. My mother was a geneologist however what I'm interested in is being connected to any relatives I may have out there. I don't have parents, grandparents, kids, grandkids, brothers, sisters, nieces or nephews. Is testing something that might put me in touch with any relatives? If so, which should I chose?
    Thank you for your feedback.
    Dianne

  • #2
    Originally posted by montanapets View Post
    I'm here for a different reason, my family are all gone. My mother was a geneologist however what I'm interested in is being connected to any relatives I may have out there. I don't have parents, grandparents, kids, grandkids, brothers, sisters, nieces or nephews. Is testing something that might put me in touch with any relatives? If so, which should I chose?
    Thank you for your feedback.
    Dianne
    Welcome. For a start, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) testing rarely if ever leads to relatives, because an exact match just means a 50% chance of a common maternal relative within the past 1,000 years or so.

    Regards,
    Jim

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Jim Honeychuck View Post
      Welcome. For a start, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) testing rarely if ever leads to relatives, because an exact match just means a 50% chance of a common maternal relative within the past 1,000 years or so.

      Regards,
      Jim
      Uh, really?

      I always thought an "exact match" in "Ultra Resolution" (FGS absolute identical) means 50% chance of a maternal relative in about 7 generations.

      Wich is only like 175-210 years?

      While an exact match in "High resolution" (HVR1+HVR2) means about 50% in 800 years IF the haplogroup subclade is identical of course (but one needs an FGS to know the exact subclade.... wich means, there is no reason in mtDNA testing if your NOT chosing an FGS, wich is extremely expensive...if there is no special offer... he he he)

      Edit:
      Uh wait... and since an FGS is very expensive, only few people have one at all.

      Final word:

      - Only an FGS can lead to relatives at all. Technically
      - An FGS usualy does not lead to anything, because only very few people have done an FGS so far, because of the pricing.

      So, screwed anyways.

      Well, I hav e one, just in case that some day.... more people do one.
      Last edited by Daniel72; 5 February 2010, 02:17 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by montanapets View Post
        I'm here for a different reason, my family are all gone. My mother was a geneologist however what I'm interested in is being connected to any relatives I may have out there. I don't have parents, grandparents, kids, grandkids, brothers, sisters, nieces or nephews. Is testing something that might put me in touch with any relatives? If so, which should I chose?
        Thank you for your feedback.
        Dianne
        Dianne,

        Have you gone through your maother materials. You might find names and addresses of relatives. Look for her ancestor charts to get the surnames of your ancestors then gor to genealogy message borads and post messages. You might try http://boards.rootsweb.com/Default.aspx and http://genforum.genealogy.com/index.html .

        As a female you can't use the Y-DNA test because you don't have Y-DNA. mtDNA will provide information on your maternal line (your mother's mother's mother's --- mother). Although people do find relatives using mtDNA the matchs are most often VERY distant (1,000s to 10s of 1,000s of years ago).

        You might look at the tests offered by https://www.23andme.com/ .

        A problem we all face is that you won't find a relative using genetic testing if a relative hasn't been tested.

        Comment


        • #5
          "Although people do find relatives using mtDNA the matchs are most often VERY distant (1,000s to 10s of 1,000s of years ago)."

          I think this is nonsense.

          Because:

          If you match by haplogroup alone, your related like 20.000 years ago.

          A FGS match is impossible to be 20.000 years ago.

          mtDNA is stabile, but not THAT stabile.

          Comment


          • #6
            I am waiting for my FGS results. If I have any exact matches (mtdna cousins) and it is accurate for about 200 years, then I will know my matches are descended from either the sister of my GreatGreatgrandmother (who married a Taylor during the US Civil War and moved from NC to Virginia), or from the sister of my Greatgrandmother who lived in NC and I know she had 3 daughters. If older than 200, I would still value any mtdna matches because it's a definite mtdna cousin.
            I may be the last mtdna descendant of my GGGGgrandmother, but I would still like to have FGS mtdna cousins even if they are from 500 to 2,000 ago, or from whenever.
            Last edited by ~Elizabeth~; 5 February 2010, 01:17 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              I'd reccommend the FGS.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
                "Although people do find relatives using mtDNA the matchs are most often VERY distant (1,000s to 10s of 1,000s of years ago)."

                I think this is nonsense.

                Because:

                If you match by haplogroup alone, your related like 20.000 years ago.

                A FGS match is impossible to be 20.000 years ago.

                mtDNA is stabile, but not THAT stabile.
                He specifically wrote "the matchs are most often VERY distant (1,000s to 10s of 1,000s of years ago)," which you quoted. That's a wide range, not the 20,000 years ago that you characterize him as writing. And he wrote "most often," not in 100% of cases.

                I agree with him that people should not assume an exact FGS match indicates a common ancestor in the last few hundred years. An exact FGS match is something that should be investigated based on the specifics involved. Is the haplogroup and subclade common or not? Do the two people have some ancestral town or at least area in common?

                If one person has a maternal line that has been documented back a few hundred years to, say, northern Germany and the other person has a maternal line documented back a few hundred years to Greece, I would not say that they must have a common ancestor in the last few hundred years. That would be very unlikely, unless the haplogroup/subclade is rare or they both have the same private mutation in that haplogroup/subclade.
                Last edited by MMaddi; 5 February 2010, 04:52 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Why don't people tell the truth?

                  I found my Mothers adopted Brother using MTDNA.
                  We knew his surname and got an exact match.
                  I repeat.
                  Same hospital, same small town..
                  Why refer people to other places that could go broke?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by darroll View Post
                    Why don't people tell the truth?

                    I found my Mothers adopted Brother using MTDNA.
                    We knew his surname and got an exact match.
                    I repeat.
                    Same hospital, same small town..
                    Why refer people to other places that could go broke?
                    Success stories like yours are great and they should be told so that people realize the unique tool that DNA testing represents for genealogists. However, we're not helping people looking to knock down a brick wall, FTDNA or genetic genealogy in general by allowing overly optimistic misconceptions about what results mean to spread.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by darroll View Post
                      Why don't people tell the truth?
                      Let me count the reasons ...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X