Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Public or Private designation for 12 markers

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

  • Public or Private designation for 12 markers

    I am having a bit of a problem and wondered if any of you are experiencing this. My surname group has 27 members so far and some have been very sucessful in finding matches and others not so much so. I am very pleased with what has been determined so far using the 12 marker Y-DNA test alone. I have been able to get those with limited resources to participate for the price of that kit whereas I would not have been able to get most to participate for the price of the 25 marker kit.

    I encourged my participants to allow their results to be marked public thinking it might benifit some of them in time. Yesterday one man had 66 matches on the 12 marker test, none of whom were in our surname group. Needless to say he was very uncertain as to what had happened and concerned about the validity of DNA testing in general. I now believe I should have discourgaged all of them from making their results public if they were only purchasing the 12 marker test. I believe no one purchasing less than a 25 marker test should check public on the form. Do any of you have an opinion ? Are most of your surname participants purchasing the 12 or 25 marker test and why?

    Have any of you had problems such as this with the 12 marker test being checked public or do you come down on one side or the other when asked if the 12 marker Y-DNA test should be public or private ?


    Nancy

  • #2
    Nancy: Our surname group has also used the 12-marker test, and one of our members, who at this time appears to have a unique profile, was wondering the same. Our present decision is to wait until I can get a better handle on what those "outside" matches would prove, and probably I would recommend a 25 marker test before going public. I have posted a similar query to yours in some respects so am watching your post for responses. I think many people have a similar problem.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Public or Private designation for 12 markers

      Originally posted by bilgro
      I am having a bit of a problem and wondered if any of you are experiencing this. My surname group has 27 members so far and some have been very sucessful in finding matches and others not so much so. I am very pleased with what has been determined so far using the 12 marker Y-DNA test alone. I have been able to get those with limited resources to participate for the price of that kit whereas I would not have been able to get most to participate for the price of the 25 marker kit.

      I encourged my participants to allow their results to be marked public thinking it might benifit some of them in time. Yesterday one man had 66 matches on the 12 marker test, none of whom were in our surname group. Needless to say he was very uncertain as to what had happened and concerned about the validity of DNA testing in general. I now believe I should have discourgaged all of them from making their results public if they were only purchasing the 12 marker test. I believe no one purchasing less than a 25 marker test should check public on the form. Do any of you have an opinion ? Are most of your surname participants purchasing the 12 or 25 marker test and why?

      Have any of you had problems such as this with the 12 marker test being checked public or do you come down on one side or the other when asked if the 12 marker Y-DNA test should be public or private ?


      Nancy
      Nancy I have not made any of my results public. Trying to get more information...

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks, I tend to openness and this may not be a good idea in this case. I would like to hear from you and others who are group administrators about this.

        Nancy

        Comment


        • #5
          One explanation that has worked for me is this:
          The 12 marker test is much like matching the first 3 letters of the last name and the 25 marker test is close to a full name match.
          Most 3 lettter matches will not hold up when you look at the full name.
          On the other hand if the first 3 letters of the last name do not match there is no way the full name will match

          Comment


          • #6
            That is an interesting comparison. I have found that recruiting individuals to a surname project is much easier when asking them to spend $99 instead of $169. Many of my recruits are not that interested in researching their ancestry and some were just helping me establish our line. Others came from lines long established through courthouse research and were just generous enough to join our DNA project to establish a base line for that group to benefit others who might not know they were members of the well known line.

            Has anyone asked either of you if they should check public or private? They have me. I just wish it was not even a option in the 12 marker kit. I would like for it to be only available with the 25 marker test since those matches outside of a surname group are not considered valid unless a 25 marker test confirms them. What is your opinion?

            Nancy

            Comment


            • #7
              I am of the "knowledge is power" group so I like knowing and I am willing to deal with the questions. But then I am retired and
              have the time. I try to make it clear that the start the12 marker test
              is only really good for "exclusion" and if one wants to know about
              being "included" they must have the 25 marker test.
              Since most Surname studies want to establish "inclusion" the
              12 maker test is of limited usefulness.
              Yes this cost does make it more difficult to get participants.

              Comment


              • #8
                John,
                I am not quite sure how your mean inclusion vs exclusion. I have found that when teamed with research it works very well to "include". I have been able to include four branches into my line and five into another line by using only the 12 exactly matching markers coupled with a common surname and geographic location. Ours is as common or perhaps more so than Adams and perhaps the exclusion was done by limiting our geograpic focus.


                Nancy

                Comment


                • #9
                  RE I have found that when teamed with research it works very well to "include".

                  Let me give an example of what I mean.
                  We have a Surname Study and we have established a family
                  with a haplotype from a number of documented member of the
                  family and we did this using 25 markers.
                  We test yet another person at 12 markers and he matches 12/12
                  What are the chances he is part of the group - 80%
                  (This is the result of a study of such cases taken to 25 markers)
                  I consider 80% not a "good" number for "inclusion"

                  Now the other case- the person matches 8 our of 12
                  What are the odds he is excluded from the group
                  That is about 99.999% and that is good odds in my book.

                  Yes 12/12 when "teamed with research" can up the odds.
                  What we have to look at is the cost of the "reasearch" vs
                  the cost of the upgrade to 25 markers.
                  And that should be on a case by case bassis.
                  I hope this is clearer.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My turn,

                    Our Surname group of 27 at the monent contains two lines which have 5 matches each at 12/12 which includes documentation for both groups.

                    These groups are 6 apart from each other and are certainly not kin. Again, note ours is a huge surname isolated from others of the same surname not included in our study primarily by geographic location.

                    I see no reason any of these need to upgrade to 25. They are kin, so why spend the extra money.

                    I would consider the 12/12 you described as a match to your 25/25's and cannot understand why you say it is only 80% sure. Did he later upgrade to 25 and find he was not related within the same surname?

                    Most serious genealogists come from a background of research and are stuck for various reasons at a point in time. For many of us it is burned courthouse records. DNA has helped me get beyond those stopping points.

                    I understand that 25 markers cuts down the time frame in which the link occurs but the match is still there at 12/12. If you know the link is within 8 generations, I see no need to insist 25 markers is better than 12 markers to prove the connection.

                    Nancy

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bilgro
                      My turn,

                      ..... documentation for both groups.

                      ..... huge surname isolated from others of the same surname not included in our study primarily by geographic location.

                      I see no reason any of these need to upgrade to 25. They are kin, so why spend the extra money.

                      I would consider the 12/12 you described as a match to your 25/25's and cannot understand why you say it is only 80% sure. Did he later upgrade to 25 and find he was not related within the same surname?
                      [snip]
                      Nancy
                      Nancy
                      I agree - because you have two additional bits of information to
                      add to the DNA, Documentation and location.

                      Lets take a case of two men, they have the same surname with
                      exact spelling, they match on 12 of 12 - there is NO documented
                      connection. One is born Gerogia 1815 one is born Virginia 1750.
                      On just that do you do more location research or upgrade to 25,
                      or just say they are related and go on?

                      My thoght is to look at he most information for the dollar. If there
                      is no current clue that a son of the Virginia man headed for Georgia then the upgrade is in oder.
                      I would temper this with a look at how
                      common or rare their 12 marker Haplotype is.

                      Comments?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Always a comment

                        GO ON >>>>>>>>>

                        Since there is a known migration route of Americans from the states of MD and VA through SC, NC, GA , AL, MS and points West, I would absolutely be delighted if any 12/12 match came out of VA whether the haplotype were rare or common.

                        But to answer your question specificlly, without our surname's built in tracking, 12/12 is a match proving kinship no matter where it is from. I understand the data to say that 25/25 only suggets a closer link in TIME than 12/12 but the kinship is there.

                        If the research has been done, and you already know the point in time connection through geography and courthouse research, 25/25 is not necessary to prove kinship.

                        Nancy

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          John and Nancy,,, I am learning alot from you...you both have good ideas

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thank you John,

                            Although we have gotten away from my first thought of asking others who are surname group administrators if they had experienced a problem with the public/ private designation form included in the 12 marker test kit.

                            I think the choice of public should not be available in the 12 marker test kit since the "out of surname matches" which fairly often appear can only be excluded from kinship by upgrading to the 25 marker test.

                            I know the company normally sets 12 marker tests to private unless the participant signs the form and changes it to public. I have found participants sign it because they think they must to have their test compared to all others. Then when "out of surname" matches appear, it is alarming to them.

                            Do you have any thoughts on this?

                            Nancy

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              RE Then when "out of surname" matches appear, it is alarming to them.

                              Do you have any thoughts on this?

                              We and FTDNA could help this with education
                              If people a told to expect seveal matches by other surnames
                              at the 12 marker level
                              there will less of a problem. It is always good to look through
                              those and see if there are any connections.
                              I suspect every now and then (one every year or three)
                              an adoption or non-parental event might be uncovered.

                              We are still on the learning curve of how to run a surname project
                              and the database is still growing so there will be more and more
                              matches. But they will only change slowly now.
                              In the last 6 or so months the data base has grown by 25%
                              It will be a long time (ten years?) before we get up to 100,000 entries in the database. I look forward to that since it will multiply by 10
                              the chances of a match. Maybe in my life time we will see
                              a database of one million.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X