Author Topic: DNA Why I urge caution  (Read 6785 times)

Offline dobfarm

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,258
  • Scarcliffe village Derbyshire
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #18 on: Monday 26 February 18 19:17 GMT (UK) »
The paternal direct father son line back ancestry is ?

Extract from link

"Because y-chromosomes are passed from father to son virtually unchanged, males can trace their patrilineal (male-line) ancestry by testing their y-chromosome."

https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/Y-DNA-mtDNA-and-Autosomal-DNA-Tests

Thus may show up like you mention your ancestor birth 1784 -1784 (G H b 1786 if he had a brother {Mark]) birth if ancestor had a bothers birth lines down descending sons of another branch of a descendant son living today - etc.
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Any transcription of information does not identify or prove anything.
Intended as a Guide only in ancestry research.-It is up to the reader as to any Judgment of assessments of information given! to check from original sources.

In my opinion the marriage residence is not always the place of birth. Never forget Workhouse and overseers accounts records of birth

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline davidft

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,372
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #19 on: Monday 26 February 18 19:22 GMT (UK) »
The paternal direct father son line back ancestry is ?

Extract from link

"Because y-chromosomes are passed from father to son virtually unchanged, males can trace their patrilineal (male-line) ancestry by testing their y-chromosome."

https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/Y-DNA-mtDNA-and-Autosomal-DNA-Tests

That doesn't nullify what Guy said.

Yes it (yDNA) can be used to follow the patrilineal line but is does not mean that someone you find an exact match with is your father, grandfather, great grandfather etc

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline familydar

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #20 on: Monday 26 February 18 19:24 GMT (UK) »
They might be descended from ggf's identical twin
ALLEN
BARR, BARRATT, BERRY, BRADLEY,BRAMLEY,BRISTOW,BROWN,BUGBIRD,BUTLER
CAIN,CARR,CHAPMAN,CHARLES,CH*LTON,CHESTER,COCKETT
COLLASON,COLLYER,CORKERY
DARLING, DENYER,DICKERSON,DOLLING,DURBAN
FARMER,FURNELL
GIBSON,GILES,GROOMBRIDGE
HALL,HAMBIDGE,HARMES,HART,HICKS,HILL,HOLLOWAY
JACKSON
K*AT*S
LANCASTER,LINTON
MCDONALD,MCFADEN,MEARS,MILLARD
NICOLAS,NOAK,NORTH
PARFIT,PORTER
RIPPINGALE,ROBINS
SEARLE,SPENCER,STEDHAM
TYLER,TILLY,TUCKWELL
WADE,WAGER,WALKER,WATSON,WEBB,WITHRINGTON,WOOD

Offline dobfarm

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,258
  • Scarcliffe village Derbyshire
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #21 on: Monday 26 February 18 19:27 GMT (UK) »
They might be descended from ggf's identical twin

Good point.

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Any transcription of information does not identify or prove anything.
Intended as a Guide only in ancestry research.-It is up to the reader as to any Judgment of assessments of information given! to check from original sources.

In my opinion the marriage residence is not always the place of birth. Never forget Workhouse and overseers accounts records of birth

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,925
  • Hull Packet 25th July 1815 "both of that place"
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #22 on: Monday 26 February 18 21:29 GMT (UK) »
Hello

My Niece got a DNA match to start with and the two communicated by email. The other DNA Donor had a list of Surnames from her own F.H. research.

Using an original family Death Certificate I have, our known family history and my research, I felt a list of surnames, one of which was an exact family match, was pretty good.

However, the other DNA provider's research was absolutely first class match too, going back 100 years from our shared ancestor.

Sceptical
1) Although I'm a big DNA sceptic, due to the fact, that if the DNA donor's family history research is not first class, a DNA match could be misleading.

2) If there was secret infidelity, but a wife registered the baby as married husband's, that could give DNA results problems.

3) If my family didn't already know its history, one of those surnames, from that list of surnames sent from the other DNA donor, wouldn't have meant anything, which is effectively what I have on another male line from my ancestor awkward George.

4) Each family historian should do their own exhaustive checks, it is not a substitute for laziness, you may also discover other interesting things, they haven't, as you check accuracy.


My Other Line
One of George's Grandsons has named five of his children with surnames, as their middle names and two other middle names, which can be both forenames or surnames.

We can match three of the surnames (from research of the family) including the maiden surname of the wife of George, so there is something in the middle surnames.

But these spare surnames, don't help yet, at all!

We are back at archives and waiting for more copy 18th & 19th Century Deeds, to see if a clue to George's origin can be confirmed, that way.

Mark
"George HOOD of Selby" Before 1812?

Born about 1785 (Yorkshire per 1841 Census)

Married Sarah RUSSELL at Selby 1815 newspaper - "both of that place".

Buried in the Quaker Burial Ground at Selby as "Not in Membership" in 1845, aged 60 years.

George HOOD of Selby was refused Membership of the Quakers in 1836.

Elected Overseer of the Poor of Selby in 1838.

Had both known (Selby) and unknown (some not stated 1846) property interests.

Possible (but unknown) links to COOK and/or PEARSON names.

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,925
  • Hull Packet 25th July 1815 "both of that place"
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #23 on: Tuesday 27 February 18 00:01 GMT (UK) »
The paternal direct father son line back ancestry is ?

Extract from link

"Because y-chromosomes are passed from father to son virtually unchanged, males can trace their patrilineal (male-line) ancestry by testing their y-chromosome."

https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/Y-DNA-mtDNA-and-Autosomal-DNA-Tests

Thus may show up like you mention your ancestor birth 1784 -1784 (G H b 1786 if he had a brother {Mark]) birth if ancestor had a bothers birth lines down descending sons of another branch of a descendant son living today - etc.

Hello

This quote is most interesting, especially as I am interested, primarily only in the Male line backward.

A descendant of a possible unknown Brother, to my mystery George?

Thanks, Mark
"George HOOD of Selby" Before 1812?

Born about 1785 (Yorkshire per 1841 Census)

Married Sarah RUSSELL at Selby 1815 newspaper - "both of that place".

Buried in the Quaker Burial Ground at Selby as "Not in Membership" in 1845, aged 60 years.

George HOOD of Selby was refused Membership of the Quakers in 1836.

Elected Overseer of the Poor of Selby in 1838.

Had both known (Selby) and unknown (some not stated 1846) property interests.

Possible (but unknown) links to COOK and/or PEARSON names.

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,925
  • Hull Packet 25th July 1815 "both of that place"
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #24 on: Tuesday 27 February 18 12:03 GMT (UK) »
Hello

I think this DNA testing is a load of buncombe!

Just looked at another site who offer to keep your DNA result confidential and also claim how good the male line testing of DNA is, in line tracing.

However, they cite - the result gave him a sub-regional breakdown of his results and the regions within Britain of where his ancestors lived in the last few hundred years.

So what - that is not what I want from a test.

 ----------

In my Niece's case, she managed to obtain a list of surnames from a match. The reality is - we have found a descendant, of a close relative I personally knew up until he died, being my Gt. Uncle (who used to come and stay annually with my Gt. Aunt, who we saw several times a week) and who had 13 children. Had we have lived Geographically close to my Gt. Uncle, we may have known or heard of her personally anyway.

 ----------

But if the other DNA provider wants confidentiality, does not reply, or any match has gone to a competitor for a test, or NOT yet done a test (assuming an unknown family match descendant is still living), then a sub-regional break down is of little more value, than a gimmick?


Sorry, but after sleeping on it, I'm still very DNA sceptical!


Mark
"George HOOD of Selby" Before 1812?

Born about 1785 (Yorkshire per 1841 Census)

Married Sarah RUSSELL at Selby 1815 newspaper - "both of that place".

Buried in the Quaker Burial Ground at Selby as "Not in Membership" in 1845, aged 60 years.

George HOOD of Selby was refused Membership of the Quakers in 1836.

Elected Overseer of the Poor of Selby in 1838.

Had both known (Selby) and unknown (some not stated 1846) property interests.

Possible (but unknown) links to COOK and/or PEARSON names.

Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,429
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #25 on: Tuesday 27 February 18 12:33 GMT (UK) »

However, they cite - the result gave him a sub-regional breakdown of his results and the regions within Britain of where his ancestors lived in the last few hundred years.

 

I think that is precisely what many people are looking for from a DNA test ........  :)

Offline KGarrad

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,497
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: DNA Why I urge caution
« Reply #26 on: Tuesday 27 February 18 12:54 GMT (UK) »
Hello

I think this DNA testing is a load of buncombe!

In started a thread a few years ago (which was deleted!) entitled "DNA - Is It Bunkum?".
I stand by what I wrote back them, which was:
a) The science of DNA is sound,
b) The interpretation of results is more Marketing than Science ;D ;D
Garrad (Suffolk, Essex, Somerset), Crocker (Somerset), Vanstone (Devon, Jersey), Sims (Wiltshire), Bridger (Kent)