Genetic Genealogy

[Sue Mackay]

Admin have set up a DNA forum and so I have moved this thread.

[tony vines]

Guy as usual makes the considered view of the subject and its complexity very well but I have always in the past majored on Michelle's point made I'm sure half in jest. I do not know enough about the subject to comment on whether she would ever get back results from DNA analysis that make her 25 years of research a complete waste of time. I think it more likely that she would simply not be able to prove some relationship via a DNA test.

This subject comes up all the time on genealogical forums and indeed this forum has had long discussions on the subject on several occasions in the 10 years I've been a member. While the tests have become better and there are now more companies who are doing them it still comes down to whether or not you believe the birth certificate or baptismal record stating that John Smith was the father of Jim Smith. If he wasn't - and frankly how likely is it that you would find otherwise after so many years - the results you would get back from tests on a sample given by a living ancestor would be meaningless in relation to that particular link. Well not exactly meaningless perhaps but because you have no idea that Fred Brown was actually the biological father you would misinterpret the result.

Now put the issue in the historical context of our ancestors where there were virtually no useful contraceptive measures that could be taken (hence the back street abortions so prevalent in those days) and a woman who gave birth before marriage (or conceived a child outside a marriage) was treated as a social outcast. There must have been great secrecy involved when such things occurred and we know that pregnant women were often despatched to distant relatives' homes to have their babies far from nosey neighbours. We all know that there were many instances of children born before marriage (or within a few months of a marriage taking place) where the child was then adopted by the husband - who may or may not have been its biological father. He may have adopted the child in full knowledge that he was not the biological father or he may have been deceived by its desperate mother. While this was obviously far more common before the mid 20th century when effective contraception became available I know from my own research of a father bringing up a child born in the 1940s he believed wrongly to be his own to his dying day.

I know that DNA testing has great value in forensic work and other types of scientific studies but I think that we should treat its claims to be able to create certainty in the world of family history very sceptically. I am with Guy on this.

[Megan Roberts]

Each of us probably has some degree of curiosity about what DNA might show about ourselves, including perhaps in the case of myself, rather than my heritage being principally Welsh it being shown to be something else.

However, one of the principal joys I get from family history is discovering the stories that attach to people (my ancestors) and how their lives, whether or not they are ultimately shown to have been genetically related to me, have impacted upon mine.

Most if not all of us have skeletons in the family tree, and I don't think that it's worth shaking that tree just for the sake of new scientific developments, as that may reveal things that are best left as they are.

So for me, unless there was a pressing medical reason to try and identify biological bloodlines, I don't think that this is an avenue of research that I will pursue.

[Heather Potter]

I took the Ancestory DNA in November 2015
It hasn't really helped with tracing any ancestors.
It told me I was 76% English and the rest split through Western Europe.
Not sure really how to read the results.
It certainly did not reveal where more recent Ancestors had lived.
A forum would be a good idea if only to understand the results.
Kind Reards Heather

[lockeroots]

I am the Admin of the Lock / Locke DNA project which was started a little over a decade ago. When used properly, Y DNA evidence can and will help confirm your paper trail research. There are 13 Locke men from my tree Y DNA tested to date, all 13 confirmed to be a Y DNA match to one another, and they range in kinship from 1st cousin to 6th cousin.
I have been blessed with the fact that my family regardless of genetic distance has been all to willing to participate in the DNA project to help represent their branch of the family tree.

Lock / Locke DNA project is a global DNA project and I would highly encourage Western European Lock / Locke to join the project.
DNA matches have already been found between Locke's of England and Locke's of the USA. There are over 100 men Y DNA tested in the project already, representing over 30 unrelated male lineages of the Lock and Locke surname.

Just to show you an example of what I have done for my own Lock family tree, I have built a chart to show exactly which branches of the tree have been involved in Y DNA testing. That is just the USA side of my tree, the UK side of the tree is not in this image. If you are a male Lock / Locke and wish to participate in the project, please contact me, or google the Locke DNA project and visit the project web page.

[lockeroots]

What that image does not show are the 2 UK Locke participants, they are both descendants of Matthew Lock and Memberance Boswell of England who are a Y DNA match to the descendants of Richard Lock of Frederick County Virginia.
So there are 11 Locke men in the USA Y DNA tested, and 2 in England. While Y DNA has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that Richard Lock of Virginia and Matthew Lock of England shared a common male ancestor, we do not yet know how they are related.

Both the Richard Lock and Matthew Lock branches have tested to the 67 marker level, plus both have done additional SNP testing to confirm they are indeed related Lock branches.

[t@nya]

I did DNA tests over at FamilyTreeDNA in 2012. From that I confirmed that my paper-trail ancestors George Tickle and Mary Ann Hill were my genetic ancestors as well, by matching another descendant of theirs, which was nice.

Also, I've found a likely connection to my Irish lines which is promising, since that has been one of my tougher ones to crack.

[Kiltpin]

Two observations -

Firstly, as far as heraldry and the inheritance of arms and titles is concerned, both the Lord Lyon and the College of Arms have firmly set their faces against the use of DNA as proof of a claim. It has been a pillar of UK establishment that if a man says "This is my son", then in law, he is the father of that child, regardless of genetics.

Secondly, be prepared for bad news, in equal measures with good news. An acquaintance of mine developed a degenerative genetic illness. He had three children, all between 16 and 21. All three had steady boy/girlfriends or partners. Everybody was tested. The results came back that not only were the three children not his, but they each had a different father. The family broke down completely and he died a short while later alone and unloved.

So - be careful what you wish for - you might just get it.

Regards

Kiltpin

[Jessie 888]

I took the Ancestory DNA in November 2015
It hasn't really helped with tracing any ancestors.
It told me I was 76% English and the rest split through Western Europe.
Not sure really how to read the results.
It certainly did not reveal where more recent Ancestors had lived.
A forum would be a good idea if only to understand the results.
Kind Reards Heather

I'm just learning about all this myself but I highly recommend downloading your DNA raw data from Ancestry (which is really easy and that's coming from a tech dummy) and putting it on GEDmatch and Family Tree DNA. I've spent months trying to wade through 50 odd pages of my matches on Ancestry DNA (that's about 2500 matches!) but so many trees are private it gets quite frustrating. GEDmatch and Family Tree DNA make it far easier to contact people and both sites give you tools to compare your matches properly? They've also got lots of 'learning resources' explaining what each test means and how to interpret your results. Pretty useful, I reckon!

[Heather Potter]

[QUOTE=t@nya;622072]I did DNA tests over at FamilyTreeDNA in 2012. From that I confirmed that my paper-trail ancestors George Tickle and Mary Ann Hill were my genetic ancestors as well, by matching another descendant of theirs, which was nice.

Also, I've found a likely connection to my Irish lines which is promising, since that has been one of my tougher ones to crack.[/QUOT