Are there any GOOD mtDNA tests? Detailed ones.

[MMaddi]

So, could you please tell me the Haplogroup's for Native American's for the Y-DNA? =^..^=

That would be some of the subclades of mainly Q. (There are some subclades of Q that are Scandinavian, not Native American.) I believe that a small number, but not many at all, of Native American paternal lines may also be some of the subclades of C.

And the yDNA only relates to the strict paternal line - father, paternal grandfather, paternal grandfather's fathers, etc.

[Via]

Y-DNA Native American

To answer her question about her relative's mtDNA result and the possibility of Native American ancestry, H3b1b is not a Native American haplogroup. Native American mtDNA haplogroups are regarded to be A, B, C, D and X.

The fact that her relative's haplogroup is H3b1b merely indicates that the relative's maternal line (mother, maternal grandmother, maternal grandmother's mother, etc.) was not Native American. But the maternal line is only one of 8 ancestors at the level of great-grandparents and an increasingly smaller percentage with each generation back.

So, could you please tell me the Haplogroup's for Native American's for the Y-DNA? =^..^=

[Kathy Johnston]

Thank you for EVERYONE"S help. This is what I thought, but I just wanted to make sure before I talk to my cousin. =^..^=

Even if someone personally has no autosomal, YDNA or mtDNA connections to an Amerindian line, there still are collateral lines that could have direct connections back to ancient times that you still need to find. So you certainly can't use your own tests to rule out the family history entirely. If your own mtDNA and autosomal tests are not productive, look further.

If you came from a colonial American line and can go back ~ 7 generations or so, you would have 128 individuals in that generation (barring cousins marrying cousins and having the same individuals show up twice). If you could find ALL the YDNA and mtDNA results from that generation you would have a better idea if Native American lines are represented in your family.

Many people have to go back quite a ways to get to "100%", "full blooded" Amerindian so that specific story is likely a myth, but having a family history of it is still quite possible. I inadvertently found someone with a Y-DNA Q M3 line on my mother's side of the family and it helped explain why we couldn't follow the surname back to anyone in England. It was the English sea captain story that was a fairy tale as far as I can tell. Native American ancestry can be hard to dispute once you find it.

I always have to chuckle when Henry Louis Gates, Jr. debunks someone's Native American story based on only one person's DNA. Just because the evidence is hard to find is not a reason to dismiss an entire family history. There could be an element of truth to it.

[B52]

old families?

I'm not being mean but uh, old families? As compared to some family just beamed down from the Enterprise?

I've heard the stories of being descended from William the Conqueror and while I never suspected that I was descended from him I did find out that I did descend from his mother's father or at least I wound up that my maternal grandfather had that surname, but infidelity is possible.

Without meaning to research and discover that I did so and in the process of doing that I found out that this business of direct descent from William the Conqueror, e.g. George Washington, is bunk. I can't even trace my maternal Grandfather's surname prior to 1450 or rather prior extremely motivated folk couldn't trace back further than 1450 and what they have researched in some cases is so poorly proven, more or less throwing everybody in a neighborhood with the same family name in the same immediate family despite the impossibility of the some of the women bearing that many children for that many years.

Likewise I took the Y-DNA test and was told, surprise, I descend from the Irish High-kings of Ui Neill. In this case I can only trace back with surety to 1690. But so anyway, cool, so I look up those UI Neill genealogies, bunk, the genealogies are a fabricated product of people that wanted to have familial evidence to usurp power when nothing gave them the right to make such claims. Historians and genealogists both know this and plainly state it.

So until archaeologists, stumble through dumb luck onto the bones of Ui Neill or William the Conqueror and do DNA tests, should they decide too, as it strictly not necessary, to substantiate such claims the paperwork claims to such descent are bunk. Nevertheless, I do like my family crest, it's pretty, but I'll leave off the knight's helmet and any personal claim as to having actually earned it myself.

As far as the Indian and Cherokee princess stories go if you are descended from a family with roots in colonial America preceding 1750 then you likely have a scant amount of Indian DNA. I test as 2% East Asian which if you do the generational autosomal mathematics, works out to one Amerindian ancestor preceding the George Washington administration (of course that single ancestor would have had many Amerindian ancestors themselves). Soon, I'll have the more modern Family Finder test although I won't know if they can match and know the difference between Amerindian and East Asian autosomal DNA. And at two percent from that long ago you can guess that some people that might actually have had Amerindian ancestry's autosomal DNA uniqueness selected out by too many succeeding non-Amerindian generations.

Finally, the often scoffed at claims of Cherokee or Amerindian princesses is an unfortunate misunderstanding of colonial Europeans understanding of Amerindian matrilineal culture, the Lenape are good examples. The detractors of people that make claims of descending from a Cherokee princess, rather than acknowledge that truth, seek to embarrass the modern people that claim that as liars or ignorant when in fact those making these modern day claims are truthfully telling what was misunderstood so many hundreds of years ago by colonial Europeans. As it turns out, these claims of having Amerindian matrilineal ancestors is more more likely than descending from William the Conqueror.

[Ann Turner]

Hi, I am new to the results of mtDNA. I know a little about YDNA results. I am trying to help a relative who believes her grandmother had some Native American in her. My 5th cousin 3 times removed is 96 years old and her health is not good at this time. She is hoping her mtDNA results can answer the question. Did her grandmother have Native American in her or not? I did a mtFull Sequence test on her. And it said she was in the mt-Haplogroup H3b1b. She match 93 people, Genetic Distance of 0-16 Genetic Distance of 1-26 Genetic Distance of 2-21 Genetic Distance of 3-30. When I click on Ancestral Origins they had all different Country. England - 30 Match Ireland - 35 Match United Kingdom - 10 Match United States (Native American) - 1 Match. So far that is the only place I saw Native American. Is there a Haplogroup just for Native Americans? Maybe the Native American is on her Grandmother's father side of the family? ANY help that you can give me to help me understand these results would be GREAT! Thanks =^..^=

Unfortunately, those Ancestral Origins records listing Native American are most likely from people who did not follow instructions for giving the place of origin for their most distant known maternal ancestor. You are not supposed to put United States unless you know the line is in fact Native American.

[BBA64]

I am wondering if there's any good detailed mtDNA tests out there?

The reason why I ask is my family is old, far older than most and comes from old higher class society [nobility / aristocratic and what were land owners back in a time when a vast majority of the population were serfs... later mostly rich/wealthy merchants when people were mostly working people - one merchant relative in the 1500s owned four separate properties alone].

My father's mother's family has 1,000+ years [closer to 1,300] of history in Ireland and by pedigree [not genes, like the average Irishman] can trace our bloodline to the High Kings themselves... and her halpogroup itself is connected with a number of European royalty to 960AD. ...

All our families are old. My R_L226+ shows my paternal ancestors have been around since Brian Boru (interestingly, also 960AD). DNA shows that. The pedigree (if documented) is supported by the DNA (or not since many surnames are multiple sept, folks grab surnames for respect, etc.). At some point pretty much every Irishman has a titled ancestor somewhere in their tree just by pure math. Interesting stuff to be sure, but isn't going to get us the title to the castle.

But back to your question - how do you think an mtDNA test will prove your pedigree? You're going back a 500-1000yrs from daughter to mother, etc. To connect to an ancestor c1500 in this fashion, you'd have to have an extremely detailed tree.

[Via]

What does mt-Haplogroup H3b1b1 mean?

Thank you for EVERYONE"S help. This is what I thought, but I just wanted to make sure before I talk to my cousin. =^..^=

[K. L. Adams]

Via's relative may or may not have some Native American ancestry, but I would not dismiss it out of hand, just because many Americans have family legends about a "Cherokee princess" ancestor with no basis in fact. At least she's trying to investigate by using DNA testing, which indicates that she's not just willing to accept a family legend.

To answer her question about her relative's mtDNA result and the possibility of Native American ancestry, H3b1b is not a Native American haplogroup. Native American mtDNA haplogroups are regarded to be A, B, C, D and X.

The fact that her relative's haplogroup is H3b1b merely indicates that the relative's maternal line (mother, maternal grandmother, maternal grandmother's mother, etc.) was not Native American. But the maternal line is only one of 8 ancestors at the level of great-grandparents and an increasingly smaller percentage with each generation back.

Via's relative may have Native American ancestry in some line other than her maternal line. If Via's relative wants to pursue this further, she should order the Family Finder test. That's an autosomal test that tests DNA from every line in her tree. If her grandmother had a significant amount of Native American ancestry, a small percentage may show up in the myOrigins percentages. However, if an ancestor with Native American ancestry was only 1/4 Native American (which is more often the case than being full Native American), then there may not be enough Native American DNA left for myOrigins to detect.

Maddi,

My wife's mother was always told that her mother father (my wife's Great Grandfather) was a full blooded Cherokee Indian.

I ran a Y-37 and ff on two of her mother brothers. Brother 1 had the following results:

Scandinavia 50%
British Isles 27%
Eastern Europe 13%
Southern Europe 10%

Still waiting on Brother two ff results to be completed.

What is interesting, There is absolutely nothing on any paper on were this grandmother was born in 1877 or who was her parents. One big black hole for me and other family researchers.

I would assume the Indian story was to cover up her past for what ever reason.

It will be interesting what the results will be for Brother 2, but I believe we are going to see 100% European again, which means the Indian legend is just a fairy tale.

[MMaddi]

Ask a hundred people whose ancestors were in the Americas in Colonial or Western development,around 90% will have an Indian in the woodpile story. Probably more like 99% if their honest.
I constantly see this scenario and seldom does the DNA confirm the stories told.
I had this discussion with a family member recently who told me flatly the DNA lied and that was the end of it for them.
Isn't it funny that so many rumors get debunked by DNA.

Via's relative may or may not have some Native American ancestry, but I would not dismiss it out of hand, just because many Americans have family legends about a "Cherokee princess" ancestor with no basis in fact. At least she's trying to investigate by using DNA testing, which indicates that she's not just willing to accept a family legend.

To answer her question about her relative's mtDNA result and the possibility of Native American ancestry, H3b1b is not a Native American haplogroup. Native American mtDNA haplogroups are regarded to be A, B, C, D and X.

The fact that her relative's haplogroup is H3b1b merely indicates that the relative's maternal line (mother, maternal grandmother, maternal grandmother's mother, etc.) was not Native American. But the maternal line is only one of 8 ancestors at the level of great-grandparents and an increasingly smaller percentage with each generation back.

Via's relative may have Native American ancestry in some line other than her maternal line. If Via's relative wants to pursue this further, she should order the Family Finder test. That's an autosomal test that tests DNA from every line in her tree. If her grandmother had a significant amount of Native American ancestry, a small percentage may show up in the myOrigins percentages. However, if an ancestor with Native American ancestry was only 1/4 Native American (which is more often the case than being full Native American), then there may not be enough Native American DNA left for myOrigins to detect.

[DNAJUNKIE]

Ask a hundred people whose ancestors were in the Americas in Colonial or Western development,around 90% will have an Indian in the woodpile story. Probably more like 99% if their honest.
I constantly see this scenario and seldom does the DNA confirm the stories told.
I had this discussion with a family member recently who told me flatly the DNA lied and that was the end of it for them.
Isn't it funny that so many rumors get debunked by DNA.

[Via]

What does mt-Haplogroup H3b1b1 mean?

Hi, I am new to the results of mtDNA. I know a little about YDNA results. I am trying to help a relative who believes her grandmother had some Native American in her. My 5th cousin 3 times removed is 96 years old and her health is not good at this time. She is hoping her mtDNA results can answer the question. Did her grandmother have Native American in her or not? I did a mtFull Sequence test on her. And it said she was in the mt-Haplogroup H3b1b. She match 93 people, Genetic Distance of 0-16 Genetic Distance of 1-26 Genetic Distance of 2-21 Genetic Distance of 3-30. When I click on Ancestral Origins they had all different Country. England - 30 Match Ireland - 35 Match United Kingdom - 10 Match United States (Native American) - 1 Match. So far that is the only place I saw Native American. Is there a Haplogroup just for Native Americans? Maybe the Native American is on her Grandmother's father side of the family? ANY help that you can give me to help me understand these results would be GREAT! Thanks =^..^=

[LynCra]

Why do you feel the full test will not meet your needs?

[MMaddi]

Maybe I didn't explain it properly. Where or how can one identify the mtDNA and the resulting SNPs if at all.

As David Guetta posted, the full sequence test of mtDNA is the ultimate test, since it fully tests mtDNA. In that sense, it's a more comprehensive test than Big Y, which tests 10+ million yDNA locations, still just a small percentage of the full y chromosome.

You seem to be asking how you can use mtDNA results to identify some connection with noble families. The answer to that question is that your mtDNA results are compared to a database of others' results. If anyone who shares the results that differ on 3 mutations or less from you is in the database, that person will show up in your match list.

The problem is that even an exact match of full sequence mtDNA results could easily represent a common ancestor over 1,000 years ago. And for those who don't match you exactly the time to the most recent common ancestory would possibly be a few thousand years ago.

The resolution of mtDNA tests is not that great, compared to yDNA testing. It's best used when you are trying to rule out that two people descend from the same maternal line ancestor within a genealogical time frame. If the two people being compared don't have the same haplogroup/subclade, then that rules out that they descend from the same maternal line ancestor they thought was a common ancestor.

The other problem is that relatively few people have had the full sequence mtDNA test, compared to yDNA testing. So, it may be that you don't have any relatively close mtDNA cousins in the database because none of them has tested yet.

[James78]

The mtFullSequence test tests the entire mitochondrial genome, so there is nothing more to test once you have done that.

Maybe I didn't explain it properly. Where or how can one identify the mtDNA and the resulting SNPs if at all.

[David Guetta]

The mtFullSequence test tests the entire mitochondrial genome, so there is nothing more to test once you have done that.