PBS "Finding Your Roots" starts 3/25

[Táltos]

lgmayka thank you for the information in regard to the Tatars and mtDNA W. That also makes sense that perhaps the autosomal did not show much for Martha in regards to Mongolia.

On the autosomal test if it were to show would it be a percentage of Central Asian or Western Asian? Do you know if they did a lot of DNA studies into the Mongolians and or Tartars?

I think the y DNA would probably not show it, it is usually only C3 correct, or is there any other y DNA that shows up in Mongolians? I of course have been trying to convince my brother for some time to take the test, but he does not seem interested. Maybe one day I can change his mind!

[lgmayka]

I wasn't sure that W directly related to Mongolia as I thought it was more European?

W is quite European. In the HVR1 region, W6 has mutations 16325C and 16192T, according to the latest phylotree. Our Polish(-Lithuanian-Belarusian-Ukrainian-Latvian) Project has 11 members of W with those two mutations--probably far too many to attribute to Tatar matrilineage, especially since the Tatars were warriors who probably married local (Eastern European) women upon settling.

Also would autosomal testing show this Mongolian component? I was very disappointed that they did not show this test for Martha as I have been very curious how this would show up.

The fact that the program did not show any such thing suggests that it was not reliably measurable, if present at all.

My father has told me since I was a small child that I look "Oriental" due to the Mongols invading Russia, but he never elaborated more. I have been asked many times if I am part Asian, or Native American, or part Mexican. So I have always wondered if there was something to what my father always told me about the Mongolians. My father's ancestry was Lithuanian, Polish, Russian, and Czech.

It might show up in an autosomal DNA test. Or if you're very lucky, it might show up in a Y-DNA (patrilineage) test.

[Táltos]

Did anyone see last night's episode with Martha Stewart? They told her that her maternal line was Muslim based on the last name, and then when they gave their time to the genetic component (which wasn't much) they said that she was W6 which is Central Asian, and shows that her maternal line was Mongolian, Polish Tartar. I wasn't sure that W directly related to Mongolia as I thought it was more European?
Also would autosomal testing show this Mongolian component? I was very disappointed that they did not show this test for Martha as I have been very curious how this would show up. My father has told me since I was a small child that I look "Oriental" due to the Mongols invading Russia, but he never elaborated more. I have been asked many times if I am part Asian, or Native American, or part Mexican. So I have always wondered if there was something to what my father always told me about the Mongolians. My father's ancestry was Lithuanian, Polish, Russian, and Czech.
Thanks for all inputs from everyone, you guys are great in all the advice you give!

[vinnie]

Having viewed the most recent episode, it's apparent that Gates does indeed have a sociopolitical agenda masked as genealogy. I didn't actually time the DNA portion, but it was no more than 10 minutes, max. Quite unfortunate. I hope that FTDNA and 23andme will consider a different host, if they have any say in the matter, and if the show goes into a second season of production. By the way, I bought both of the series he previously hosted, African American Lives and AALs II, because they were so interesting and so well done. But if he wants to pursue ancestral witch hunts under the guise of investigating genealogy, then he should just rename the show and be honest about it. As for issues of identity vis-a-vis DNA analysis, I'm with him 100%, but this last episode could have pursued that angle so much deeper than it did.

[PDHOTLEN]

A slight correction (after looking at my tree some more): That maternal line of Rachel Craig (paternal Craig line from Ayrshire, Scotland) goes back to a Judith Vassall, who became the wife of a Mayflower traveler (Resolved White). She herself arrived later (1635), and they married in 1640.

Ahem. Well, the mess above is apparently just a sideline. It is connected by marriage to my known direct mtDNA line, with the remote chance of it being part of my direct line via cousinage. HOWEVER, after more dabbling on Ancestry.com, I've now concluded that the maternal line connected to the Mayflower (with Resolved White in it), and going back to Essex, England was wrong, heh heh. The problem is with the Allen clan in New England; they were all mixed up. After using common sense along with the various data (much of it off kilter), I've replaced one wife with another. She also goes back to Plymouth, but thus far I don't see that line on the Mayflower itself (yet). This maternal line goes back ultimately to Sussex, England in the late 1500s. But my mtDNA haplotype looks more like a Norfolk-type origin than the Saxon-Flemish variety expected in Sussex. So I'll have to keep looking for my actual colonial (U5b2b2) thread going back to Massachusetts from NC.

[Xolotl]

Darn, i missed the show. Hopefully i get to watch some of it online.

[vinnie]

While interesting, last night's episode was quite disappointing vis-a-vis genetic genealogy. They could have incorporated more traditional genealogy for that matter. I hope the producers will focus on the topic at hand in episodes yet to be taped.

[PDHOTLEN]

To drag out my observations a bit more, within the past few days I found a direct female link from the Mayflower itself to the area in North Carolina where my own maternal line dead ends. It could even connect to mine, although it looks rather doubtful, based on my current assessment. That line does connect to the Falconburys, however, via a George Helms who married a Mary Margaret Falconbury (Falconborough). He didn't have that Mayflower mtDNA, but is connected to an earlier Rachel Craig who traces directly back to the Mayflower. Her maternal line appears to go back to Essex, England. If mine is somehow connected to Ann Johnson back in early Massachusetts, then mine seems to go back to Norfolk, England. But this is a lot of speculating.

A slight correction (after looking at my tree some more): That maternal line of Rachel Craig (paternal Craig line from Ayrshire, Scotland) goes back to a Judith Vassall, who became the wife of a Mayflower traveler (Resolved White). She herself arrived later (1635), and they married in 1640.

[Swennilsson]

I generally like the show, but am of the opinion they spend way too much time on the biography of the guest, and would be better spending more time on the ancestor hunt.

[PDHOTLEN]

That's pretty cool- so does that make you the Prince in Waiting of Rock and Roll?

I never really got into rock and roll. I went to high school in the conservative 1950s when Eisenhower was President. I also saw a claim that the late Senator Helms and President carter were somehow connected to this expanded tree. But anyone with a tree extending back into colonial times probably has famous people attached.

[Zaru]

Someone in my expanded tree, in some communication or other, claimed to be related to Elvis Presley. I may have stumbled onto the origin of that. I was just adding a few tidbits to an extra tree I added to Ancestry. The above ^ mentioned Rachel Craig had a daughter Mary (b.1760) who married a Richard (or M. Richard) Presley in Anson/Mecklenburg County, NC in 1786. To set the record straight, Rachel married a brother of George Helms.

That's pretty cool- so does that make you the Prince in Waiting of Rock and Roll?

[PDHOTLEN]

To drag out my observations a bit more, within the past few days I found a direct female link from the Mayflower itself to the area in North Carolina where my own maternal line dead ends. It could even connect to mine, although it looks rather doubtful, based on my current assessment. That line does connect to the Falconburys, however, via a George Helms who married a Mary Margaret Falconbury (Falconborough). He didn't have that Mayflower mtDNA, but is connected to an earlier Rachel Craig who traces directly back to the Mayflower. Her maternal line appears to go back to Essex, England. If mine is somehow connected to Ann Johnson back in early Massachusetts, then mine seems to go back to Norfolk, England. But this is a lot of speculating.

Someone in my expanded tree, in some communication or other, claimed to be related to Elvis Presley. I may have stumbled onto the origin of that. I was just adding a few tidbits to an extra tree I added to Ancestry. The above ^ mentioned Rachel Craig had a daughter Mary (b.1760) who married a Richard (or M. Richard) Presley in Anson/Mecklenburg County, NC in 1786. To set the record straight, Rachel married a brother of George Helms.

[Zaru]

Walters/Canady Episode.

I thought this was a much tighter episode in terms of tying the actual scientific applications with the theoretical. This is something that WDYTYA? falls short on doing. Knowing that Ancestry does have a small DNA component, one would think this would give them a cause to integrate and expand in future episodes.

There is much, dare I say, that we still do not know and shows such as these hopefully will assist in expanding the databases.

[PDHOTLEN]

To drag out my observations a bit more, within the past few days I found a direct female link from the Mayflower itself to the area in North Carolina where my own maternal line dead ends. It could even connect to mine, although it looks rather doubtful, based on my current assessment. That line does connect to the Falconburys, however, via a George Helms who married a Mary Margaret Falconbury (Falconborough). He didn't have that Mayflower mtDNA, but is connected to an earlier Rachel Craig who traces directly back to the Mayflower. Her maternal line appears to go back to Essex, England. If mine is somehow connected to Ann Johnson back in early Massachusetts, then mine seems to go back to Norfolk, England. But this is a lot of speculating.

[Javelin]

Cool, thanks!