RootsChat.Com
General => Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing => Topic started by: brigidmac on Wednesday 01 June 22 10:24 BST (UK)
-
On Ancestry there is a colour coding system that many people do not know about
or do not know how best to use
I think it would be good to have a topic about this in the orange posts on this forum .
But for now here are the first steps and examples
When you look at your shared matches there is a filter button on left
If you press this
You will get
The started matches and colours were created by me
I chose brown for Birkenhead group and add any matches with people from Birkenhead on their trees or profiles to this group .
I put stars on any match of interest
+ Remove the star when I work out the link
-
See
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=858301.0
and
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=838636.0
-
thanks gadget i knew there had been discussions before
the second link gives interesting examples of what colours and categories people use.
but i think there is still a need for a step by step ..how to method
Ive been doing colour coding for several years
now we dont need colours for fathers side /mothers side as ansestry does that for us
so have started to remove those colour groups to free up colours for two new groups one for innkeepers barmaids
+one for sailors
professions can be useful for explaining some links to adoptees or fathers unknown matches
-
My line's misbehaving
Here's a relevant article in Ancestry -
https://support.ancestry.co.uk/s/article/Grouping-and-Filtering-AncestryDNA-Matches
-
Next step with new matches
If you want to put them in a group press + sign and you get option add to group or create a group
For example I can look at this persons shared matches with me and put into SMITH JONES FELLMAN or ROBERTS group even if they don't have those surnames on their tree I will usually know which grandparent they link to
Or I could add to a location group if they have small tree and no shared matches
-
As well as a colour you can add a specific note .
I have a colour group for anyone who matches grandmother's legitimate son ie half cousin ..he doesn't have a tree himself .
-
Before you go any further, Brigid, the use of the colour codes is covered by this link that I gave. I think people might want to use the colour coding for various reason and it is often best to help with particular queries. There is a danger of, by using egs specific to your results, you might confuse.
Here's a relevant article in Ancestry -
https://support.ancestry.co.uk/s/article/Grouping-and-Filtering-AncestryDNA-Matches
-
Thanks gadget I posted at same time as you so didn't see link to
Line misbehaving
That's exactly what is needed.
It's also interesting to read what others do and what has worked or not.
Ive been freeing up some colours so I can have spare groups
I find specific examples useful when it's clear that the topic is general.( I've cropped out identifying people in my examples)
The ancestry explanation is well worded
-
There are many discussions and instructions of how to colour code. The links below are good examples
https://thednageek.com/quick-tip-color-code-your-ancestry-tree/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLKfRykQ-GI
https://www.danaleeds.com/the-leeds-method-with-dots/
Also -
How to get around the 24 colour limit:
https://youtu.be/0nCAbhNrdrI
-
Brigid,
A bit off topic but along the same lines...
I have a relationship match which was 'unexpected' but after a lot of working through things etc. I have worked out who he might be, where he belongs etc. although not 100% sure...
Having clicked 'Yes' on 'Do you recognize them', I then chose the side he belongs 'Father's side' which has 'Relationship Assignment' to which I clicked on (what I believe is our' relationship).
The next option is 'Confirm'...which I'm not going to do for now!
What I'd like to know is, would the relationship I 'think' he is, show to him or just myself?
I'm asking because I could be wrong & don't want to throw things off or cause mayhem as he was unknown to me until the match appeared!
Annie
-
Rosinish that's a good example
Relationship only shows to yourself
You can confirm father's side and click
"not sure " for exact relationship
How big is that match and have you put them into any other colour groups .
I keep a spare colour and use it for matches of . X unknown ..whoever I'm researching at time
-
I've done a few of those*, Annie, and I think it's only shown to you but they probably would come up in Thrulines.
* only selecting which side but not the exact relationship. I've later gone back to some and added the correct relationship when I've worked out our relationship
-
I go back and added exact relationship when i find out too Gadget .
currently helping someone look for birthfather
ancestry dna suggests the top match is a cousin
at moment thru line has them as uncle which is possible if it turns out to be a half brother tree will be altered + thru lines readjust
Ive suggested they choose a colour for all the matches that are shared with this top match .
+ another colour for where they believe birth father is from .
-
How big is that match and have you put them into any other colour groups .
Brigid,
1st – 2nd Cousin 8% shared DNA: 578 cM across 21 segments
I have him in 2 different surname groups which was the reason I was able to narrow down the most likely relationship which is a wee bit different to 1st-2nd cousin!
I've done a few of those*, Annie, and I think it's only shown to you but they probably would come up in Thrulines.
* only selecting which side but not the exact relationship. I've later gone back to some and added the correct relationship when I've worked out our relationship
Gadget,
I'm 100% sure he's on my paternal side, it's our relationship I'm not 100% sure of but having done a good bit of 'workings out', I'm almost certain but I guess there's a little niggle without confirmation from my match himself who hasn't read or replied to my messages?
There are no names or dates showing on his 'unlinked' tree, all 6 (including himself) up to g/parent level are showing as living but my shared matches have revealed a lot without knowing anything else about him other than his name on his ancestry profile (which means nothing) ;D
I'm not sure 'Thrulines' will work for him with an 'unlinked' tree?
Annie
-
Rosin + others who are wondering
thru lines WONT work on unlinked tree
but you can cheat and add a provisional link to your dna linked tree
I can talk you thru that and show examples via email if you want .
its important to that his surname appear on your tree
+ you add a comment on their profile
for example for a single mother add a spouse as Bio and put the surname you believe him to be
Then add a comment that dna matches suggest this to be a son of + X+ his known parents but tag them as hypothesis, again with comments
-
rosin
off the bat
depending on age compared to you
if its a non parental event
most likely to me a half aunt uncle
or half neice nephew
or half 1st cousin
-
Have you looked at all your shared matches with him, Annie.?
3 or 4 years ago I found my great grandfather by working through the shared matches. I collected a little group that just matched each other and me. Luckily, one of then replied to a message and said something like 'they came from a little village in Wales' . I asked if it was X - the village where great granny was from. Reply was yes! I then worked on their trees and found that many of the family had moved to Birmingham (Aston). Funny, so did my Great Granny. It took me 3-5 months of searching, creating trees for them and testing but I finally found her beau! I also have matches with whom I share common ancestors a couple of generations before, which is further confirmation. ...... and so we go on :)
-
having a colour for a small specific location is definitely useful
and a colour for all matches of a match you are particularly interested in also works
my half cousin (only sibling of grandma )without a tree only has
shared DNA matches to treeless and distant diverse matches at the moment but one had a surname which linked back to gmothers mothers side to early 1800s in small village of nottinghamshire
another seems to link to shipbuilders + carpententer who travelled from wales to birkenhead and USA from gmothers fathers side
lots of the american matches are enigmas dont match anyone else for now they have location colours match half cousin colour bubbles
-
depending on age compared to you
if its a non parental event
most likely to me a half aunt uncle
or half neice nephew
or half 1st cousin
I'm pretty sure he's 1 of the above which I discussed with you via PM.
Annie
-
i didnt know anything about other sites coloour code systems but as usual a helpful rootschat member had this to say ..
copied with permission from guy ..slightly abridged
"colour coding can be used to show a how you match a common ancestor. However, it does not stop there you can use different colour to identify different groups and a person may belong to a number of different groups and therefore display dots of different colours which instantly inform you specific things about that person.
There are many “standard” methods to colour code perhaps one of the most common or most used is the one used by Dana Leeds the creator of the Leeds method. Ancestry use a slightly more basic method. MyHeritage allows up to 30 colours to be used while other systems limit you to I think 18. From memory Johnny Perl of DNA painter suggests (when painting segments) using darker colours for the oldest (i.e. those furthest back in time) as light colours may be superimposed on the darker colours but tend to be hidden by darker colours.
Depending on the matches you have it may be possible for you to indicate by colour matching an ancestor and the segments they pass down through the various generations.
My view is as long as you have a key that explains the colour codes used there is no need to follow any particular choice of colours. Just as you choose what to add to your genealogical tree you are free to add what you want to your genetic tree "
-
I have been using Colour coding for a few years and it has proved useful.
Firstly when I have linked a DNA match into my tree I give them a Star, this is more useful than using the Common Ancestor feature as it includes many DNA matches who I have linked to via the hard slog method and not the Ancestry cobbled together via online trees that is the common ancestor method.
Like Guy, I use colour matching in a similar manner to the Leeds Method but without its limitations.
I use Ancestry’s add Note feature to show which xGGP pair are shared between the DNA match and I.
Taking my highest DNA matches I assigned each a colour and gave the same colour to each of the shared matches. Soon the list was pretty colourful.
I then transferred the top twenty to a spreadsheet as a pre cursor to categorising them al a Leeds Method.
Roll on a few years and now the Colour Coding is due for a review to rationalise the system
Below is my colour coding transferred to a spreadsheet and printed on three A3 sheets, if you try to expand it the names on the top are all blurred so you cannot see and names of living persons.
EDIT
After producing the spreadsheet I set about assigning them to a specific Grandparent, as per the Leeds Method and alas that is where I came unstuck as so many of my DNA matches do not have a tree and I could only match known Cousins who are already in my tree.
-
Thanks for that wonderful example biggles
I tag my tree with common dna ancestor and then tag each person thru to DNA match as DNA connection and I use the blue tree symbol to indicate who person is on treeeven if their trees are unlinked or wrong
I use stars for mysteries that I want to come back to later but definitely use notes function
As reminders to myself
" Connects to Abiah probably via Dorcas "
Or" connects to our ship builders "
I don't think notes or colour coded are visible to DNA matches
But alternative parents are visible if matches click on common ancestor profile .I add tags on trees for adopted in or out of the family so surname differences can be quickly explained
" Links to Jacobstadt could Litven be another name change variety from LEVINE)
-
How long does it take to learn how to use colour coding .
In past I have done the work for people to add colours to their matches .
I don't remember how long it took me
But I do remember one common mistake was I'd type a surname in the middle bar then tap the general search at the top instead of search button underneath and would get ALL my.matches instead of only the ones with the surname I was interested in on the tree
To tell the truth ..I still do that a lot when I'm tired !
-
How long does it take to learn how to use colour coding .
I used colour coding when I 1st got my results back, my own method at the time with shared matches which was along the lines of the Leeds Method...
However, I quickly found out about the LEEDS METHOD & would highly recommend.
As soon as you begin to use any colour coding system you're on your way as it doesn't take any specific amount of time to learn, you're following names, giving each shared match a colour.
It can take a good bit of time to go through all your matches, their matches (matches matches) but time comes down to the amount of matches.
I've mentioned previously, the Leeds Method can be done off computer by drawing lines just like an excel spreadsheet which is very easy & felt pens/highlighters for colour coding.
Annie
-
Thanks Annie
I must start using the LEEDS. Method more
For me ancestyr is useful because I can keep it all in one place . I've had so many moves in past 3 years that bits of paper are all over the place .
Maybe sorting out paperwork can be one of the relaxation activities I can do this month under doctors orders not to get stressed
-
Brigid,
Have another look at Biggles post Reply #20 especially his last sentence...
"After producing the spreadsheet I set about assigning them to a specific Grandparent, as per the Leeds Method and alas that is where I came unstuck as so many of my DNA matches do not have a tree and I could only match known Cousins who are already in my tree."
In other words, the LEEDS METHOD helps a lot when there are no trees to compare with.
Annie
-
Thanks Annie
I must start using the LEEDS. Method more
For me ancestyr is useful because I can keep it all in one place . I've had so many moves in past 3 years that bits of paper are all over the place .
Maybe sorting out paperwork can be one of the relaxation activities I can do this month under doctors orders not to get stressed
Why do it on paper, the same result can be achieved digitally on your computer and future changes more easily effected, plus it keeps everything in one place.
Cheers
Guy
-
This is the link to Dana Leeds’s website where she has a detailed explanation of her method.
https://www.danaleeds.com/
Anyone trying the Leeds Method should read the explanation in detail before clicking on the Spreadsheet or getting the coloured markers and a batch of paper out. The reason being is that there are criteria to be followed and its accuracy can be questionable for very high or very low cM matches.
That said the real limiting factors are matches having trees and the numbers of DNA matches you have that are in the sweet spot range for the Leeds Method.
My Wife has only four DNA matches over 60cM and hence the Leeds Method is useless for her. I have 20 DNA matches over 60cM but many relate to an NPE event which is proving very difficult to resolve and also the Leeds Method is not helping me.
-
Why do it on paper, the same result can be achieved digitally on your computer and future changes more easily effected, plus it keeps everything in one place.
Guy...
Brigid has admitted on numerous occasions her lack of computing skills...
"Computer incompetent but stiil trying"
I'm trying to help her realise not everything has do be done on computer/laptop/ipad or any other techy device but will produce the same results via the old fashioned way ;)
Annie
-
Why do it on paper, the same result can be achieved digitally on your computer and future changes more easily effected, plus it keeps everything in one place.
Guy...
Brigid has admitted on numerous occasions her lack of computing skills...
"Computer incompetent but stiil trying"
I'm trying to help her realise not everything has do be done on computer/laptop/ipad or any other techy device but will produce the same results via the old fashioned way ;)
Annie
Yes but she has also mentioned she has moved a number of times and paper records are all over the place. Using a computer is an easy way to keep all records in one place even if those records started life as written records they may easily be photographed or scanned and stored digitally.
An option she may not have thought about and as she says she is still trying.
A number of years ago I used to teach many computer novices (of the older age group) how to do simple tasks on their computer, avoiding the use of a computer is not the way forward as the problem is never addressed.
Providing solutions that the person has confidence to try removes the fear of the techonlogy and encourages their use of what seemed like a difficult thing to master.
Cheers
Guy
-
A computer isn't always the easiest way to do genealogy. Yes, it can be very good at keeping records all in one place, etc. but some people, even those who are computer literate, find it easier to visualise and retain details from using paper.
-
Thanks for your concern .
Yes I like having things on Ancestry in one place but I do work things out on paper too.
Recently I've had panic attacks about using computer so it may not be the way forward but Often I'd rather pay for someone to do the work than " learn "
I know it's a bit mixed up.
-
A computer isn't always the easiest way to do genealogy. Yes, it can be very good at keeping records all in one place, etc. but some people, even those who are computer literate, find it easier to visualise and retain details from using paper.
Yes I totally agree, I have been using computers since the days of the Commodore 64 (cir. 1983) I also use computers in a professional capacity producing data disks & files, since 2005 but I still prefer to print text and read it on paper rather than on a screen.
Cheers
Guy
-
Guy,
Good point.
Me too to a large extent (in my case Sinclair ZX Spectrum, then an Atari ST when they came out later.)
I also still find a print-out a lot easier to work with than something on a screen.
Trystan
-
Why do it on paper, the same result can be achieved digitally on your computer and future changes more easily effected, plus it keeps everything in one place.
Guy...
Brigid has admitted on numerous occasions her lack of computing skills...
"Computer incompetent but stiil trying"
I'm trying to help her realise not everything has do be done on computer/laptop/ipad or any other techy device but will produce the same results via the old fashioned way ;)
Annie
Yes but she has also mentioned she has moved a number of times and paper records are all over the place. Using a computer is an easy way to keep all records in one place even if those records started life as written records they may easily be photographed or scanned and stored digitally.
An option she may not have thought about and as she says she is still trying.
We were/are discussing the use of a spreadsheet (LEEDS METHOD) using the data which is already on Brigids' family tree on ancestry & her DNA matches which doesn't need any of her lost or misplaced bits of paper in several house moves.
It's more about her being able to see at a glance on a spreadsheet (off computer) exactly where her matches descend from which is far easier than viewing them on ancestry itself.
You have actually contradicted yourself as you've not read the whole thread to understand Brigids' dilemma, something which has been apparent to me for a long time as a follower of many of her threads.
The visual (on paper) is so much easier than trying to work through ancestry matches as it's all in one place, all matches are visible on the spreadsheet & any overlaps can be seen at a glance.
In my view, the LEEDS METHOD is 2nd to none & the way to go.
Annie
-
Why do it on paper, the same result can be achieved digitally on your computer and future changes more easily effected, plus it keeps everything in one place.
Guy...
Brigid has admitted on numerous occasions her lack of computing skills...
"Computer incompetent but stiil trying"
I'm trying to help her realise not everything has do be done on computer/laptop/ipad or any other techy device but will produce the same results via the old fashioned way ;)
Annie
Yes but she has also mentioned she has moved a number of times and paper records are all over the place. Using a computer is an easy way to keep all records in one place even if those records started life as written records they may easily be photographed or scanned and stored digitally.
An option she may not have thought about and as she says she is still trying.
We were/are discussing the use of a spreadsheet (LEEDS METHOD) using the data which is already on Brigids' family tree on ancestry & her DNA matches which doesn't need any of her lost or misplaced bits of paper in several house moves.
It's more about her being able to see at a glance on a spreadsheet (off computer) exactly where her matches descend from which is far easier than viewing them on ancestry itself.
You have actually contradicted yourself as you've not read the whole thread to understand Brigids' dilemma, something which has been apparent to me for a long time as a follower of many of her threads.
The visual (on paper) is so much easier than trying to work through ancestry matches as it's all in one place, all matches are visible on the spreadsheet & any overlaps can be seen at a glance.
In my view, the LEEDS METHOD is 2nd to none & the way to go.
Annie
Not a totally valid statement.
The Leeds Method does not work for either my DNA matches or my Wife’s.
Leeds Method prime criteria:-
1) Use only matches between 90 & 400 cM.
2) Do not use matches that start sharing at Grandparent level.
3) Use 2C and 3C.
Using this criteria I cannot group many of my DNA matches into a specific Grandparent as per the method.
My Wife has only 1 DNA match in Criteria 1) which is the Son of her Cousin and hence is well known but he has no tree. All her other matches and well below 90 cM.
Ergo
The Leeds Method is not the be all and end all of techniques.
Same thing with DNA Painters WATO tool, it has limitations that apply to my own use of it yet the website is adamant that it is valid. It to is a tool but should be considered accurate only if other supportive research validates the chosen probability.
-
In addition to the problems that Biggles50 has highlighted difficulties occur if a marriage happens between two people who are related.
-
I'm trying to help her realise not everything has do be done on computer/laptop/ipad or any other techy device but will produce the same results via the old fashioned way ;)
We were/are discussing the use of a spreadsheet (LEEDS METHOD) using the data which is already on Brigids' family tree on ancestry & her DNA matches
It's more about her being able to see at a glance on a spreadsheet (off computer) exactly where her matches descend from which is far easier than viewing them on ancestry itself.
The visual (on paper) is so much easier than trying to work through ancestry matches as it's all in one place, all matches are visible on the spreadsheet & any overlaps can be seen at a glance.
In my view, the LEEDS METHOD is 2nd to none & the way to go.
Not a totally valid statement.
The Leeds Method does not work for either my DNA matches or my Wife’s.
Leeds Method prime criteria:-
1) Use only matches between 90 & 400 cM.
2) Do not use matches that start sharing at Grandparent level.
3) Use 2C and 3C.
Using this criteria I cannot group many of my DNA matches into a specific Grandparent as per the method.
My Wife has only 1 DNA match in Criteria 1) which is the Son of her Cousin and hence is well known but he has no tree. All her other matches and well below 90 cM.
Ergo
The Leeds Method is not the be all and end all of techniques.
Same thing with DNA Painters WATO tool, it has limitations that apply to my own use of it yet the website is adamant that it is valid. It to is a tool but should be considered accurate only if other supportive research validates the chosen probability.
[/quote]
Biggles, I agree for the lower end of the criteria range it doesn't work but in Brigid's case, I think with her knowledge of DNA matching, she'd soon find a way to link lower matches.
It was basically to help Brigid with what she's already been doing, except on paper in front of her being as she has a phobia of computers.
I have numerous matches from around 4th - 8th cousins with no shared matches, some with no trees, others with e.g. 20 people in a tree going back to maybe grandparents/g g/parents who would be ages with my parents & g/parents i.e. not enough info. to follow back & absolutely no way of working out which side or anything else as surnames often don't match those of my ancestors especially where the link is through a female further back.
Anyway, for those with the criteria required, I still think the LEEDS METHOD is best!
Annie
-
In addition to the problems that Biggles50 has highlighted difficulties occur if a marriage happens between two people who are related.
I agree there too but I think where people are trying to work out their descent/relatives/match connections etc. the LEEDS METHOD is a general guide to the 'average/normal' likelihood, however, a paper trail should/would help those matches.
In my own tree I have 2 sisters married to the same man!
I also have relatives marrying relatives & brothers/sisters marrying sisters/brothers (not their own siblings)!
Annie
-
I use the colour coding and love it. It has helped answer many questions. The only problem is that I ran out of colours a very long time ago.
-
Running out of colours
When you've solved some mysteries you can remove some categories and rename
For example I had two colours for mother's side and father's side now ancestry does that for you so I painstakingly removed all those in those colour groups and added another classification with the freed up colour
-
I use the colour coding and love it. It has helped answer many questions. The only problem is that I ran out of colours a very long time ago.
Do you mean on ancestry or elsewhere (online) or your own home-made excel or other sheet where you're not limited to just colours & stars or whatever?
Is it not possible to use symbols, numbers or initials (anything personalised) to help further?
Annie
-
I've just recommended colour coding to someone and seen that there weren't any posts about it near the top of this forum
This particular thread is now long and a bit convoluted
Since it started . There have been developments in Ancestry DNA classifications + in personal trees
There NEEDS s to be a A post about colour coding in the orange stickered topics .
What can we suggest to admin
Could some clever person start a new one with quotes from this topic
Including the late Guy who's insights and explanations were often spot on !
-
Ethnicity is often neglected but can be VERY important
My cousin has a small amount of some African DNA
I've not yet solved that mystery but colour cide all matches which show up that have this ethnicity
Meanwhile I've helped a man with a known African grandfather and do the same with separate colours for the matches with Ghanain ethnicity .surnames or located in Ghana
+ A different colour for sierra Leone
This man's mother was half African half Welsh
Ancestry only separated out Welsh ethnicity recently
It's very useful for me to know if my DNA matches have Welsh ethnicity and how much
+ Can add colour codes to people with no trees according to there ethnicity