Ancestry Assignment to Both Sides

[phil57]

Conversely for me Living DNA is way off the mark.

Summation to 30% for East Anglia, Midlands, Cornwall and Scotland.

I have Zero ancestors from these areas in the last 250 years.

Is that on a transferred in kit Biggles? The results for my Ancestry DNA file transferred to LDNA are quite vague. The results on the test I took with LDNA are much more specific.

Of course, the other possibility is that I am a victim of the expectation bias that I always warn about, and your results confirm that the "science" is as imprecise as I generally believe!

[phil57]

(“Last names in trees” has no value either I don’t think.) 

I use that feature from time to time, and quite like it. Yes, it can turn up a lot of useless results, but especially with less common names, I have had some success in identifying connections to my tree where I had otherwise drawn a blank, including a tree that I almost discounted because all the information led to the completely opposite direction of England. But when I went through it more closely, I realised that the owners Gx3GF had been baptised in a location of interest to me. It ended up unlocking a further two generations for me after a lot more work.

[Ruskie]

(“Last names in trees” has no value either I don’t think.) 

I use that feature from time to time, and quite like it. Yes, it can turn up a lot of useless results, but especially with less common names, I have had some success in identifying connections to my tree where I had otherwise drawn a blank, including a tree that I almost discounted because all the information led to the completely opposite direction of England. But when I went through it more closely, I realised that the owners Gx3GF had been baptised in a location of interest to me. It ended up unlocking a further two generations for me after a lot more work.

Parent 2 has three familiar surnames (all related to my Irish) and others which are a mystery. Parent 1 = no familar surnames.

I think I’ve been unlucky with matches lack of trees and reluctance to reply to messages. 

[Biggles50]

Conversely for me Living DNA is way off the mark.

Summation to 30% for East Anglia, Midlands, Cornwall and Scotland.

I have Zero ancestors from these areas in the last 250 years.

Is that on a transferred in kit Biggles? The results for my Ancestry DNA file transferred to LDNA are quite vague. The results on the test I took with LDNA are much more specific.

Of course, the other possibility is that I am a victim of the expectation bias that I always warn about, and your results confirm that the "science" is as imprecise as I generally believe!

Yes it is Phil.

I do have a Living DNA test to undertake so it will be a few weeks before they give me the results.

The My Heritage site has both their own and Ancestry’s DNA data, and that shows 36% Scandinavian which is way off the mark but apparently typical of their data

[nestagj]

I have both sides matches in ancestry as well - around 400.   In my case I  know that there are quite a few about, including several in the present day which I had always known about.

I had two cousins from each side test their DNA some years ago and I found that they were all related - that is despite coming form either my mother's or father's side as a very close match to me they also matched to the other parent's side at around 5 - 8 cousins.  I uploaded to gedmatch and used the one that shows generations and I have close generation match with them as it should be but the other's are related to each other at a distant generation.

Living in our area I have found that 99% of our ancestors come from the same isolated area mostly from around a 50 mile diameter circle and if that's the case I'm quite sure that there was a lot on inter marriage, even today you hear about 3rd or 4th cousins marrying and believe me they know who's who because we all know each other's family having grown up with our parents saying that so and so is related, but with no direct line to see.
Thank you - sorry I waffled
Nesta

[phil57]

Yes it is Phil.

I do have a Living DNA test to undertake so it will be a few weeks before they give me the results.

It will be interesting to see if you find any difference, good or bad

[elzabay2]

Parental assignment employs a computer algorithm that utilizes known DNA matches and scans Ancestry family trees to identify lines of descent and correlate them across trees, thereby linking to families. Similar to Thrulines, it may be prone to errors if user trees contain inaccuracies, and it is currently labeled as being in beta phase. Notably, it does not solely rely on an analysis of your DNA. As autosomal tests are not phased, the phasing process is estimated.

Ancestry acknowledges that the accuracy of parental assignment will be at least 90% for approximately 9 out of 10 users, while being less than 90% accurate for the remaining 1 in 10.

[LizzieL]

I have a match with 42cM across 3 segments. She has the same uncommon surname as my mother. She has been correctly identified by Ancestry as having common ancestors with me (our 2 x great grandparents). She is definitely my 3rd cousin on my mother's side. Our trees on Ancestry overlap. Our four shared matches have all been identified correctly by Ancestry as being maternal.  But Ancestry designates her as  "unassigned". How does the algorithm work that one out?

[ikas]

I have a match with 42cM across 3 segments. She has the same uncommon surname as my mother. She has been correctly identified by Ancestry as having common ancestors with me (our 2 x great grandparents). She is definitely my 3rd cousin on my mother's side. Our trees on Ancestry overlap. Our four shared matches have all been identified correctly by Ancestry as being maternal.  But Ancestry designates her as  "unassigned". How does the algorithm work that one out?

I have a similar match (DN) where our common ancestor is correctly identified by Anc but sideview technology has not assigned the match to either parent. Interestingly another match (CS) who has the same common ancestor has been correctly assigned. All three of us are on MH and the chromosome browser shows my match with CS as triangulated over three segments but only one with DN. Think that suggests the lack of assignment for DN is because the sideview technology does not consider the match sufficient to assign to a parent with sufficient confidence. It does highlight that sideview technology does not use trees in making the assignment - only DNA is used. I am guessing your situation is similar?