Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Experiences with Family Finder and PF

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by DavidaZ View Post
    I suspect the latter Moore group with photos are somehow related. The Gibsons of Louisa are part of my family and one the Gibsons married a Moore. I only recently learned of the Moore line and we are still looking for the connection.

    Well I wasn't really aware that my family made it to NC until recently. Hope your information isn't buried in a box somewhere. With the new batches coming in, you may find someone. I've had roughly 15 matches each test. Some of the original matches dropped out during the second test, but I have new ones.

    I do have some people on my Affy that have Moore in their lines. They may not have been upgraded yet???? The problem with my lines of Moore is one is my 6th great grandfather and the other Moore line is related to my Tudor 6th great grandfather. Both My Moore and Tudor direct male lines have Y-DNA tested but I am missing their wives. This is too far back on my tree to make any connections through FF. I need to get MT DNA on their wives. My male lines are Europen but them signing FPC petitions specifically about extra tax on behalf of wives and children who were FPC makes me wonder who their wives were. I have not located all the tax to know if they were charged extra tax on their wives and children.

    Comment


    • #77
      @Yaffa: My laptop is being repaired and I am lost without it. Much of my information is located there. I just realized that I still have an index of information from the Louisa Historical Society. I should be able to access it this weekend. Would you like a copy? It's an Excel spreadsheet. Now, having said that, the best information I have came from a box not associated with my family. Have to run and get dinner ready for the family. Will check in tomorrow.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by DavidaZ View Post
        @Yaffa: My laptop is being repaired and I am lost without it. Much of my information is located there. I just realized that I still have an index of information from the Louisa Historical Society. I should be able to access it this weekend. Would you like a copy? It's an Excel spreadsheet. Now, having said that, the best information I have came from a box not associated with my family. Have to run and get dinner ready for the family. Will check in tomorrow.
        Ill pm you and you can send.


        Here is some land records in VA and a few other states that might be helpful to you. If you dont have the deed mapper program you cant load the land mapped out but you can use the index which gives some info on the land record.

        http://www.directlinesoftware.com/pool.htm

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Yaffa View Post
          I dont research Mexico in the 1900's. My ancestors left Mexico in 1870. By the 1900's you have immigrants coming into Mexico. Even people fleeing the holocaust. Frieda Kahlo. Father was Jewish http://www.fridakahlo.com/

          I do happen to know professional genealogists and historians in Mexico who do a lot of research and also go look at the Mexico DNA project. These are people researching their ancestors before the 1900's. If you read Mexico records ( marriage, baptism) the race classifications are blood %. They will fluctuate from record to record as you get closer to the 18 th century because they can not keep up with who is mixing with who. Per DNA most have a higher % of Indian than Spanish. African % being at the bottom. Also not all people in Mexico descend from Mexican Indian tribes. In the 1800's you have many US tribes running back and forth across the US/MEX border . Apache, Comanche, Kickapoo, Cherokee just to name a few. My ancestors happen to not be Spanish
          I'm originally from Mexico, and I am researching prior to 1900 in Mexico. Paternal family is immigrant; maternal family is Mexican - half European and Half Native American. We are not in disagreement, as you will see by reading my second reply. I want to make sure people don't think Mexico still uses blood %.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Yaffa View Post
            They told me they have no US American Indian samples. Those Tribes may not match the samples they do have from Central and South America. I posted a few pages back why they have samples of Pima/Maya and it has to do with a diabetes study.

            I do have other Indian in my family from the US. My Affy test showed more mixture than my Illumina. This test is far from being accurate for some of us who do have close admixture. I do have an FF match to someone from a US tribe. I should email them to see what their PF is reading
            So they chose the Pima because of a Diabetes study? Sounds fishy but I'll let other people comment on that who are more in the know.

            FTDNA does not have any Mesoamerican tribe DNA or US tribe DNA other than Pima and Maya. However, I doubt that Mesoamericans and US Native American tribes are that different.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by dawer View Post
              So they chose the Pima because of a Diabetes study? Sounds fishy but I'll let other people comment on that who are more in the know.

              FTDNA does not have any Mesoamerican tribe DNA or US tribe DNA other than Pima and Maya. However, I doubt that Mesoamericans and US Native American tribes are that different.
              No they have that specific sample of Indian DNA on record to use for matches on % tests because they were doing a diabetes study. Not all tribes are giving up their DNA to science.

              The Pima have one of the highest rates of Diabetes -- - The Pima have given their DNA to science

              http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pub...d/pathfind.htm

              And I already posted results for 2 people with confirmed Indian ( both through MT and Y DNA and Paper) in the US who get Asian % on Decodeme and not PF. Not one of these people gets Pima matches on PF. Those people who do have Indian ancestry in the US , the Indian is showing on other tests just not PF. Decodeme % matches their ancestry. I think they are proof that not all American Indian tribes will match the Pima.
              Last edited by Yaffa; 30 March 2011, 04:57 AM.

              Comment


              • #82
                Forgot to mention I have not seen anyone who does have CONFIRMED ( not rumor) Indian ancestry who get Asian % on PF

                Comment


                • #83
                  Indian vs Native American

                  I just want to make a distinction between the use of the term Indian and Native American. Native American refers to the original inhabitants of America. America by the way is from Greenland to the Land of Fire. This continent is subdivided into regions: North, Central and South -- Mexico by the way is part of North America. There may be a better term, but Native American is a good one.

                  Indian refers to the people of India, a country located in South Asia. Hindu is used to refer to followers of Hinduism, so it is not a proper term for all people from India.

                  Through some rather interesting events, I happen to have both Native American and Indian Ancestry which was picked up by PF testing.

                  Perhaps this point only matters to me, but there you go.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by dawer View Post
                    I just want to make a distinction between the use of the term Indian and Native American. Native American refers to the original inhabitants of America. America by the way is from Greenland to the Land of Fire. This continent is subdivided into regions: North, Central and South -- Mexico by the way is part of North America. There may be a better term, but Native American is a good one.

                    Indian refers to the people of India, a country located in South Asia. Hindu is used to refer to followers of Hinduism, so it is not a proper term for all people from India.

                    Through some rather interesting events, I happen to have both Native American and Indian Ancestry which was picked up by PF testing.

                    Perhaps this point only matters to me, but there you go.
                    The tribal members I do know prefer to be called by their tribe or American Indian (AI). They will not use the term Native American because anyone born here in the US is Native American. Indigenous to the Americas, Mexico, South America is also more appropriate.

                    Yours may be picked up by PF test. Only Part of mine is showing up. There are also others who's AI is not showing up and they have documented proof not hearsay they have AI ancestors closer to the living. Its being picked up on other tests that seem to be better suited to be giving out more accurate results to ones ancestry. So far for many PF is not accurate.

                    Did they give you a Pima % or Asian? If you got a Pima % then you match to those they do have samples for. I have Pima/Maya but my ancestors were of neither tribe.
                    Last edited by Yaffa; 30 March 2011, 12:04 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      They gave me Pima, but my best educated guess is that my NA ancestry is actually Purepecha from Mexico. I got 3% ancestry from South Asia (Indian). This matches family tradition that our paternal grandmother's family was from India.

                      The problem I had with my Affy results is that it said almost 50% of my ancestry is NA, which cannot true -- I know my maternal ancestry is European and NA, with deeper roots in the Middle East; and the Indian heritage came is from my father's side, so neither side could have given 48% NA. However, I think it is so high because the maternal side of my family has Mestizos of mixed races in all its branches and all these branches have partial NA ancestry. Maybe that threw the results off. I'm expecting Illumina to refine (lower) my NA results and refine my European results. I got almost 1/4 North East Europe. It may be true, but if it'd said North Europe it would be more believable -- all of my YDNA matches over 25 markers are to North Europeans. Affy showed NO Western Europe, if Illumina shows the same then I will know my family tradition of our Iberian ancestors being middle eastern has been validated.

                      However, I don't hold out much hope based on the headaches people are having with Illumina results -- we shall see.
                      Last edited by dawer; 30 March 2011, 12:37 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by dawer View Post
                        They gave me Pima, but my best educated guess is that my NA ancestry is actually Purepecha from Mexico. I got 3% ancestry from South Asia (Indian). This matches family tradition that our paternal grandmother's family was from India.

                        The problem I had with my Affy results is that it said almost 50% of my ancestry is NA, which cannot true -- I know my maternal ancestry is European and NA, with deeper roots in the Middle East; and the Indian heritage came is from my father's side, so neither side could have given 48% NA. However, I think it is so high because the maternal side of my family has Mestizos of mixed races in all its branches and all these branches have partial NA ancestry. Maybe that threw the results off. I'm expecting Illumina to refine (lower) my NA results and refine my European results. I got almost 1/4 North East Europe. It may be true, but if it'd said North Europe it would be more believable -- all of my YDNA matches over 25 markers are to North Europeans. Affy showed NO Western Europe, if Illumina shows the same then I will know my family tradition of our Iberian ancestors being middle eastern has been validated.

                        However, I don't hold out much hope based on the headaches people are having with Illumina results -- we shall see.
                        Many of the indigenous people from Mexico seem to share some kind of markers found in the Pima/Maya. Your family in general in the right area to have that marker even tough your ancestors might be of a different tribe like mine

                        The people I posted about their results being AI. One is from NC/VA and the other of a NE American Indian tribe. Both these people with confirmed Indian ancestry through solid paper and Y and MT results to back it up. On PF both these people were classified as 100% European. On Decodeme one got 18% Asian and the other 12% Asian which matches to their genealogy. Many AI will match Asian DNA to a certain point. This also goes with Y and MT DNA. FGS on MT-DNA will tell the difference between Asian and Indian and certain markers on Y DNA will tell the difference between Asian and Indian.

                        Even us who have Indian ancestors from Mexico should also probably have some kind of Asian % and we dont. Also with Mexico and getting high Middle Eastern for many. Even if you look at the Mexico DNA project you will see how many different haplogroups there are on Y-DNA. Not all the people in Mex should be getting high Middle Eastern and many classified Jewish. Not to say that some were not crypto Jews but Mexico is a Catholic Country.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by dawer View Post
                          I'm expecting Illumina to refine (lower) my NA results and refine my European results.
                          My Pima results went slightly higher with Illumina and I lost my Middle Eastern % I had with Affy. It was replaced by more European all classified French which is not accurate. I have no known French. I also have no known Middle Eastern in my family. My ancestors in Mexico listed Indian and only have record of them being in Mex from 1790's to 1870.

                          My Illumina also made my FF matches closer (close relatives on both affy and Illumina) to me than some of them were before and I know this is probably not accurate either since I could not connect to them on paper being classified as close relatives on affy

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            finally new PF results in...not quite happy though...

                            So, I've posted before that I hold the fact that PF showed results for South Asian (Indian) consistent with family tradition as proof of how effective it is. I still do. My Illumina results still show about 3% South Asia (India). According to family tradition this comes from our father's side; keep that in my mind, because that's the key to my confusion.

                            Our mother's side is Mestiza, of mixed race, mostly European (Spanish/Portuguese) and Native American (Purephecha); her mtdna is likely North African (L2a1c); there is a tradition of deep sephardic heritage from her Portuguese side of the family, which also happens to be her mtdna roots. My mother's family is more documented than my father's, for whom I have only family traditions.

                            So Illumina upped my Native American from 48% to 52%. Unless I'm mistaken that means one of my parents, plus 2% from the other. See the problem here? If my mother is documented to have had Spanish/Portuguese ancestors within the last 5 or 6 generations, then it would be my father who is fully Native American, but then he can't be 3% South Asian (India), can he?

                            I think the truth lies somewhere in between both the Affy and Illumina results, that is, that my family heritage is Native American, European/Middle Eastern, African/North African, and South Asian/Indian.

                            I won't throw out PF completely, but I will say, Really, Population Finder? Really?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              OK, so now I have my "new" PF results too.

                              It claims me

                              French, Orcadian, Spanish: 90.64% (margin of error: 9.36%)
                              Tuscan, Finnish: 9.36% (margin of Error: 9.36%)

                              Hm.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                New Illumina Beta results

                                I just received the results from the Illumina Beta PF:

                                Europe (Western European): French, Orcadian: 73.12% +/- 8.67%
                                Native American (Central American): Pima, Maya: 17.52% +/- 0.75%
                                Middle East: Adygei, Iranian, Jewish: 9.36% +/-8.37%

                                The Beta questionnaire asked if I was:Jewish, Caucasus, Iranian, or None of the above. Being an adoptee, whose birth-father is from Mexico, I answered None of the above since his ancestry is unknown. However, I suspect possible Anousim Sephardic Jewish, and although the Native American Indian percentage decreased by less than 2%, the Middle East component decreased by approx. 9% while the European component increased by approximately 10%. If I had answered Jewish, I think the middle eastern component would have been higher based on the previous results of the Affy PF questionnaire when I had answered Jewish before resetting it back to none of the above (unknown).

                                Interesting that I have no matches to the Spanish Population as my birth-father is a Mexican citizen, although my non-ID from the orphange indicated that my father may possibly have French-Candian ancestry. I had thought that was an error in their records, but maybe it is not.
                                Last edited by c_thompson_68; 6 April 2011, 11:13 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X