RootsChat.Com

Ancestry Matches by Cluster arrived on my computer today.

I have over 19,000 Ancestry matches, all bar 4 are clearly identified as Paternal or Maternal. 26 of my Paternal matches range between 65 and 292cM (the highest) but only 3 of my Maternal matches are within the defined clustering range. The clustering tool only captures 22 Paternal matches and some of those omitted are higher than the lowest of the ones included.

Ancestry gives me no option to cluster the Maternal matches (and the "ALL' button doesn't work either) and maybe that's because there are only 3 of them, but while it is curious, it doesn't really bother me because it is my Paternal side that I am researching. 

The Paternal clusters don't add anything to what I already knew, so I am probably long past that stage in my search. Interestingly at least one of the Paternal matches (130cM) omitted from the clusters is an important match because it doesn't seem to belong to the other 4 clusters which ultimately all link up, as you might expect. This omitted Paternal match does share cM with one of the other omitted matches but not with the other two omitted matches. Maybe Ancestry doesn't regard 2 as a cluster?



 

A few weeks ago I started to see something odd about my Ancestry matches (I have several thousands each of paternal and maternal matches). The total for the Paternal and Maternal matches had the same last three numbers i.e. the hundreds. Coincidence I thought, but the following day I had exactly the same number of new matches for both sides and the hundreds were again identical. Ever since then I've checked and the hundreds have increased by exactly the same amount for paternal and maternal sides and therefore the hundreds are still identical. This even includes a couple of days when I had no new matches.

I am not a statistician but I refuse to believe that this could be happening by fluke or chance. It appears that Ancestry is doling out the same number of matches for the two categories deliberately. Has anyone else noticed this or have an opinion about what is going on?

Biggles

You've mentioned the low cost deal with Ancestry but I don't recall you saying how? It is considerably below the normal price on offer.

Tony

Veering wildly off topic now but another trend I've noticed is many UK matches who were born in the 1940's, if they have trees they are generally just two or three generations deep and often have no paternal side. Few have profile information but I do wonder if many of them are wartime babies trying to find the identity of their father. Coupled with what seems to be an increasing number born in the swinging 60's who are trying to find an unknown grandfather it seems like two generations seeking the answer to the same question.

I plead partly guilty to the above. My online tree is purely my maternal side (although somewhat more than 2-3 generations) because my 2021 DNA test demolished my 75 year long presumption that I knew who my biological father was. I now have a very large research tree based on my biological paternal matches but still cannot place myself in it, so remain unable to add it to my DNA result. After the bombshell I stopped work completely on what I had previously thought was my paternal side (and had spent around 17 years assembling). I also spend little time thinking about expanding my maternal side even though I now have over 14,000 maternal matches on Ancestry alone.   I suspect that people like me are reluctant to go too public in their profiles for fear of putting off prospective close relatives.

Hi. Biggles50 has dealt with the basics but if I read your post correctly you are suggesting that relatives who are far too old to have taken a DNA test are matched to you. That is not possible. You can only be matched to people who have taken a test i.e. basically living people. Autosomal tests have been around for several years and typically if you tested today you might have several thousand matches on both sides of your family. As Biggles50 explained, the higher the centimorgan number the closer related you are to the match (as usual with such things there are some exceptions but they're not worth discussing at this level). The ethnicity part of your result may or may not be useful, the science is still developing, but the match side can be very useful as you try to break down brick walls.

Your DNA results however have to be used in conjunction with conventional genealogical research using all sorts of records, and I can see that you are into that already. The trick is to try to work out how your matches fit into your family and if they have attached trees, that's the place to start. If you can make the fit you may then see other parts of their tree that enable you to go back farther, or answer the kind of questions you referred to.

There is a wealth of help out there and far too much to explain in just one reply, but Biggles50 has given you a "starter for 10". I am neither scientific nor particularly numerate but there is a lot about DNA that is readily accessible if you take the time to read all the stuff out there.

Tony