DNA Trees on Ancestry

[davidft]

Could someone who has taken an Ancestry DNA test tell me how the trees in the DNA section of the site are organised. I understand there are private and public trees just as on the main part of the Ancestry site. Can you do a search on the public DNA trees getting a list of matches or near matches and then explore the resulting trees just as on the main part of the Ancestry site.

And connected, has anyone ever had an explanation from Ancestry why they are running two sets of trees, one on the main website and the other in the DNA subsection of the site.

Thank you

[familydar]

I don't believe there are separate databases for DNA and non-DNA trees.  You can link an existing tree to your DNA results.  DNA results list matches and make it clear whether there is a tree associated with the results.  Private ones have a different icon from public ones.

Jane :-)

[davidft]

I don't believe there are separate databases for DNA and non-DNA trees.  You can link an existing tree to your DNA results.  DNA results list matches and make it clear whether there is a tree associated with the results.  Private ones have a different icon from public ones.

Jane :-)

Thanks for that but it is contrary to what my understanding is from reading people's messages here. Of course it is possible I have it wrong but I thought I would ask to see what people who have done an Ancestry DNA test say before contacting Ancestry if necessary (don't want to contact them with a load of wrong information).

[familydar]

You're right, from the ancestry home page I've just searched for a key individual in the public tree attached to my DNA results and no public trees are returned at all.  In a way I'm rather pleased because it means my tree is less likely to be harvested by name collectors.l

Jane :-)

[sugarfizzle]

David, There are definitely not two different sets of trees.

When you get your DNA results back, you can attach your results to whichever tree you have built up on ancestry.  I have separate trees for DNA matching and my own personal use, as the latter includes my grandaughter's family history, and is very large.

My main tree is private and shows up in other people's searches.

My DNA tree is public and attached to my results. It doesn't show up in searches, because I have added no ancestry records to it, as discussed in a recent thread, can't remember which one.

As an experiment, try searching for 'Thomas Brigden Brigdine, born 1583, Mereworth, Kent, England'.

He appears in both my public tree and my private tree, if you search for him it will show you a public tree (the wrong one) and a private tree, my main tree.

STEER/WESTALL for DNA, now deleted, was my original tree for DNA before my husband was tested. Then I needed to include his ancestors, but not my grandaughter's.

WILKINSON/STEER/NAYLOR/WESTON
It says 'The author of this tree asked us to keep it private. Ask them nicely and they might share.'

My current DNA tree does not appear, as previously explained. However, if you go to my profile, you will find it listed as WILKINSON STEER for DNA

So I can say with confidence that there are not two different sets of trees.

Regards Margaret

[familydar]

I'd forgotten about linked sources Margaret, that will be why my ancestor doesn't show up in my public tree.  Like you I've made the public pedigree tree attached to my DNA results completely unsourced.

Jane :-)

[davidft]

Margaret,

Thank you for your reply. It has set my mind at rest that there is not a separate "sub site" for DNA trees. Believe it or not I had searched through the ancestry FAQs but hadn't been successful in getting an answer that satisfied me, you have now done that for me thank you.

Jane,

Thank you for your reply. I guess it was useful asking the question as we now know that even if you have a public tree it will not show in searches if you haven't attached Ancestry records to it. Rather goes against the definition of public but at least we now know.

And as an afterthought i think it would be a good idea if Ancestry could put an icon on trees to say the person had taken a DNA test. Though of course some people would object so maybe as a compromise they could have a "DNA tested button" attached to trees which people who have DNA tested could switch on if they wanted. An idea worth suggesting to Ancestry ? I know that would persuade me to test with Ancestry if I saw it on a tree of someone that I knew I was related to (even though I am openly critical of their ethnicity DNA results).

[sugarfizzle]

"And as an afterthought i think it would be a good idea if Ancestry could put an icon on trees to say the person had taken a DNA test. Though of course some people would object so maybe as a compromise they could have a "DNA tested button" attached to trees which people who have DNA tested could switch on if they wanted. An idea worth suggesting to Ancestry ? I know that would persuade me to test with Ancestry if I saw it on a tree of someone that I knew I was related to (even though I am openly critical of their ethnicity DNA results)."

When you have DNA testing, one of the following messages appears when you look at somebody's profile.

'ABC is on your DNA match list Relationship: 2nd - 3rd cousins Confidence: Extremely High  View match' (or similar).

'ABC is not on your DNA match list. This person is either not a DNA match or has not yet taken a DNA test.'

I wish the second one would say something like 'ABC has taken a DNA test but is not on your match list', but at least it's a start.

I think we are all openly critical of the ethnicity results, it's a pity that appears to be the main selling point with certain companies, a lot of disappointed people.

Regards Margaret

[Jill Eaton]

I wish the second one would say something like 'ABC has taken a DNA test but is not on your match list, but at least it's a start.


Regards Margaret

That would certainly be very useful