Author Topic: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?  (Read 3423 times)

Offline sugarfizzle

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,517
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #9 on: Monday 27 May 19 13:22 BST (UK) »
Interesting, thanks everyone.

I'll let her know we probably aren't related, just statistical noise.
She thought it was a sure thing since it said I was related to her mother as well.

DNA is weird.

I don't think anyone said you probably weren't related, more that it could take time and effort on both your parts.

You might need to identify 1024 ancestors between you!

Regards Margaret
STEER, mainly Surrey, Kent; PINNOCKS/HAINES, Gosport, Hants; BARKER, mainly Broadwater, Sussex; Gosport, Hampshire; LAVERSUCH, Micheldever, Hampshire; WESTALL, London, Reading, Berks; HYDE, Croydon, Surrey; BRIGDEN, Hadlow, Kent and London; TUTHILL/STEPHENS, London
WILKINSON, Leeds, Yorkshire and Liverpool; WILLIAMSON, Liverpool; BEARE, Yeovil, Somerset; ALLEN, Kent and London; GORST, Liverpool; HOYLE, mainly Leeds, Yorkshire

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.go

Offline sugarfizzle

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,517
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #10 on: Monday 27 May 19 13:56 BST (UK) »
For context, my most distant confirmed match is a 3rd cousin, who shares 6 cMs with me.

This is not a fluke, or IBS, we both have several shared matches to the same couple.

We all appeared in DNA circles when I last looked, this match shares higher cMs with the other members of the circle.

Regards Margaret
STEER, mainly Surrey, Kent; PINNOCKS/HAINES, Gosport, Hants; BARKER, mainly Broadwater, Sussex; Gosport, Hampshire; LAVERSUCH, Micheldever, Hampshire; WESTALL, London, Reading, Berks; HYDE, Croydon, Surrey; BRIGDEN, Hadlow, Kent and London; TUTHILL/STEPHENS, London
WILKINSON, Leeds, Yorkshire and Liverpool; WILLIAMSON, Liverpool; BEARE, Yeovil, Somerset; ALLEN, Kent and London; GORST, Liverpool; HOYLE, mainly Leeds, Yorkshire

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.go

Offline Flemming

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #11 on: Monday 27 May 19 15:01 BST (UK) »
I've found some oddities with close-ish cousins, but on MH rather than Ancestry.

My great grandparents are great great grandparents to two matches. They share 105cM between them. I share 120cM with one of them, but 9cM with the other.

My 2x great grandparents are 3x great grandparents to two matches. They share 120cM between them. I share 75cM with one of them, but 18cM with the other.

Offline Mart 'n' Al

  • RootsChat Leaver
  • RootsChat Pioneer
  • *
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #12 on: Monday 27 May 19 15:59 BST (UK) »
 Margaret and others I would be interested in your opinion on the following. A couple of days ago I watched a YouTube video suggesting that even if you have one or more very good segments of DNA matching with someone and some smaller ones under 7 centiMorgans, that you should actually ignore those small segments as they are probably still background noise,  Even though you have one or more other good segments.

I had never considered it before, but it now seems a logical argument.

Martin


Offline Gadget

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 57,896
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #13 on: Monday 27 May 19 16:10 BST (UK) »
I haven't counted my 7 cM matches recently - I know there were many when I last counted (before the new -style DNA pages). However, I have managed to identify 6 of my 7cM matches with particular lines by looking at surnames/trees/shared matches and geographical locations.

Gadget
Census &  BMD information Crown Copyright www.nationalarchives.gov.uk and GROS - www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk

***Restorers - Please do not use my restores without my permission. Thanks***

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=877762.0

Offline sugarfizzle

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,517
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #14 on: Monday 27 May 19 17:58 BST (UK) »
Margaret and others I would be interested in your opinion on the following. A couple of days ago I watched a YouTube video suggesting that even if you have one or more very good segments of DNA matching with someone and some smaller ones under 7 centiMorgans, that you should actually ignore those small segments as they are probably still background noise,  Even though you have one or more other good segments.

I had never considered it before, but it now seems a logical argument.

Martin

Martin, For those of us who tested at Ancestry we get many thousands of '5th to 8th cousins', ranging down from 19.99 cMs to 6 cMs. I currently have 28, 410 such cousins.

Also, you only get given 2 figures - amount shared and number of segments shared, not size of largest segment.

My closest is 723 cMs across 32 DNA segments, my most distant are all 6cMs across 1 segment.

If the latter has a very well researched tree going back as far as 7G grandparents on all lines, I might be able to make an educated guess at the relationship. I haven't however achieved that on many of my lines, so there are plenty of gaps, similarly in their tree.

If I can persuade them to upload elsewhere, I can see more information, can check them against other matches, etc, etc.

A 10 cMs match of mine, relatively small, is it genuine, is it not? Descended from the same family as me from Chitterne, Wiltshire, our mutual 6G grandparents, paternal side.

A 7.8 cMs/1 shared segment match at myheritageDNA, descended from this same family, same line as my Ancestry match but split off at their mutual 4G grandparent level.

Makes it more likely.

Can I persuade my Ancestry match to upload elsewhere - no, she can't work out how to do it, doesn't particularly want to do it.

Does my cousin share both these matches? - yes, lilely to be a paternal match.

Can I persuade anybody else to upload elsewhere? Yes, this family well represented in my Ancestry matches.
 Does this person match anyone at myheritageDNA or elsewhere? Yes Eureka. But at only 6 cMs/1segment.

Do I ignore this because of only a 6cMs match?

No, I add it to my list of mounting evidence that we are all descended from Stephen Leversidge Leverstretch Leversuch from Mere and Chitterne, Wiltshire, and that he was indeed my 6G grandfather, something which had been only a (fairly strong) assumption before DNA testing came along.

To me, it is about building a case, regardless of size of match, and I rarely know what size segments I share with my Ancestry matches. Other than that below 12 cMs, by definition there can only be 1 segment, as they ignore segments under 6cMs.

Regards Margaret
STEER, mainly Surrey, Kent; PINNOCKS/HAINES, Gosport, Hants; BARKER, mainly Broadwater, Sussex; Gosport, Hampshire; LAVERSUCH, Micheldever, Hampshire; WESTALL, London, Reading, Berks; HYDE, Croydon, Surrey; BRIGDEN, Hadlow, Kent and London; TUTHILL/STEPHENS, London
WILKINSON, Leeds, Yorkshire and Liverpool; WILLIAMSON, Liverpool; BEARE, Yeovil, Somerset; ALLEN, Kent and London; GORST, Liverpool; HOYLE, mainly Leeds, Yorkshire

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.go

Offline squawki11

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #15 on: Tuesday 28 May 19 09:45 BST (UK) »
It would be a mistake to ignore these smaller Ancestry matches down to 6 cMs. They don't necessarily lead back as far as 7ggp and can be much closer. What is really necessary is spending time doing tree research based upon whatever info you can glean from the match. Believe it or not, thru-lines if interrogated and interpreted correctly and with some luck/research hard graft can bring results. Sharing those connections with the match may or may not bring confirmation but is likely to be more rewarding than sitting on your hands...

Offline Craclyn

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,462
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #16 on: Tuesday 28 May 19 20:34 BST (UK) »
I use my low matches. They can often lead to interesting clues that can help to develop your tree further. However, you need to be careful about presenting them as evidence of common ancestors. There is no guarantee that the particular segment you are matching on comes from the common ancestors you identify and choose to add to your tree.
Crackett, Cracket, Webb, Turner, Henderson, Murray, Carr, Stavers, Thornton, Oliver, Davis, Hall, Anderson, Atknin, Austin, Bainbridge, Beach, Bullman, Charlton, Chator, Corbett, Corsall, Coxon, Davis, Dinnin, Dow, Farside, Fitton, Garden, Geddes, Gowans, Harmsworth, Hedderweek, Heron, Hedley, Hunter, Ironside, Jameson, Johnson, Laidler, Leck, Mason, Miller, Milne, Nesbitt, Newton, Parkinson, Piery, Prudow, Reay, Reed, Read, Reid, Robinson, Ruddiman, Smith, Tait, Thompson, Watson, Wilson, Youn

Offline Mart 'n' Al

  • RootsChat Leaver
  • RootsChat Pioneer
  • *
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Are you 100% related to your DNA matches on Ancestry?
« Reply #17 on: Friday 31 May 19 12:42 BST (UK) »
I just found this chart, dated 2016.

https://thegeneticgenealogist.com/2016/05/24/family-tree-dna-updates-matching-thresholds/

I'm not supporting its content, nor refuting it.  I am just adding it to the discussion.

Martin