RootsChat.Com
General => Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing => Topic started by: brigidmac on Sunday 24 October 21 15:06 BST (UK)
-
i have 6 dna matches to my scottish great grandparents thru 2 of my grandfathers sisters
so none with paternal surname .
also no matches furthur back with surname . im wondering if there could have been a break in the line non paternal event or adoption of a child as
however my aunt does match 2 people thru one of this great grandfathers brothers .
going up a generation i only get one extra thru line match to descendant of a half uncle of my grandfathers mother KYLE
up to 3 x great grandparents again extra matches only through the KYLE father in law FLEMMING
why are there lots of matches to this line and not the others
any theories ?
-
i think there must be something wrong with thru lines
i have 6 matches to descendants of my 3 x ggmother but none are showing to her husband yet my tree clearly links all children to both parents and i have not altered my tree recently .
iwonder why this is happening
-
It could be that they've not tested and they'd be 4th cousins and possibly with removes
Have you seen this piece:
https://isogg.org/wiki/Cousin_statistics
-
Thanks gadget thats very useful and interesting .
Im going to look for some 3rd and 4th cousins and find out if they have taken DNA tests
-
:Yes 4th cousins * 1 removed on the KYLE. Line are showing up but for some reason they are showing up as half 4th cousins david KYLE on my tree is not showing as their ancestor. *Two siblings at 14cm+ 15cm 1 segment
Fits with parameters given in that document
I dont know whether to try removing david Kyle 1810 and adding him again .
His wife janet Robertson is showing as mutual ancestor
-
I also have a 5th cousin 15cm.1 segment
From David KYLEs sister
My paternal aunt doesnt match these 4C 1R or the 5th C
But does match a descendant of another of David KYLE'S descendants who i do not match he would be my 4th cousin .
-
Had a very enjoyable time adding KYLE descendants to match my furthest DNA match 5th cousin in Canada
Really interesting to see that ancestors from aryshire mostly became mining families in Shettleston and Cambuslang in Scotland
Looking at full families also found a little chimney sweep who made his fortune in Australia
.A branch that ended up in Canada another in Usa
And a few single mothers + their children who ended up doing well
-
Found another explanation
I had the wrong years for David Kyle so some matches were to a different David Kyle of Shotts
Mine was not David Kyle b 1810 son of William KYLE b 1779 and Jean TRAIN which is why I was getting no matches to 5th ggmother
But I do match one of their siblings and think my David Kyle b 1789 was brother of that William
-
This is a success story
Now that I have the correct year and father's first name and 1 siblings David KYLE thru lines are showing to him . The other David KYLE may be his uncle
Still readjusting tree top
Also putting notes and comments on tree so people who have copied old details can correct it too 😂
# see reply 15 of this topiv
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=861885.msg7312323#msg7312323
-
I had a similar problem with another tree top
Wrong Walter MCFARLANE as father to Agnes
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=861911.msg7312687#msg7312687
Now have 28 matches on thru lines to Agnes maternal gparents . Many more with private or unattached trees.
-
Although I gave examples from my family .it's still a general question .
How many matches do you have to each of your Scottish great grandparents that show up on thru lines ?
part 2 of the question do you have thru lines that show up to one great grandparent and not the other .
& Any explanation for it
-
Hi Brigid
My tree is mainly Scottish and I get wildly varying numbers of matches on the different lines. I presume it's down to the number of children they had going down the generations and also how many of them emigrated, I think relatively more people in the States have been tested, a lot of my matches are there.
A lot of my Common Ancestors matches also show the match as being to one ancestor when it should be both of a married couple. I presume that's just a bug in the software which is still relatively new.
Overall ThruLines/Common Ancestors has been a real game-changer in my research, gave me one huge breakthrough and a few smaller ones. I call my Ancestry tree FDPossible to reflect that I'm adding potential ancestors in the hope of getting Common Ancestor matches.
-
Not exactly Scottish but your query is applicable to all Ancestry DNA tree dwellers.
I have shown the image below before but it may be useful to see it here
I printed out a pedigree chart and against each common xGGP pair I placed the mark between them. Where the common ancestor pair is beyond the last pair on the chart the mark for the DNA match is against the appropriate person descended from the common pair.
For an age I had zero DNA matches that I have been able to link to.
For me in all cases Thrulines has been useless.
-
Very interesting biggles
Don't you have any single mothers or remarriages where only one of the couple is a common ancestor .