@@lawrencejackson4001 Most of my matches are below the 60 cM level. But, if most of them were at that level I'd probably look at them if they had trees to see if I can spot the connection, if not, I generally don't try to figure out how they are related.
@@lawrencejackson4001 You can do a huge amount with building out quick and dirty trees. If your match doesn't have tree info, some of the shared matches may. And if a shared match has an unusual name, you can get things and that way.
I write from Hungary, I only understand the essence of the video. I have a cousin in position 3 on the FTDNA who is signaled by the system to be my 2-3 cousins. But he is not from Hungary but from a distant country, so it seems that he cannot be such a close relative of mine. Plus, I know my ancestors until the 7th generation. The solution is that he is a cousin to both my mother and father, but this person is already listed as the 5th cousin in my parents ’profiles. It may have been featured in this episode, but I thought I’d share this experience with viewers.
Couldn't you break up the Genealogical Timeframe subgroup into Modern Era (records destroyed or missing), ie Irish records, vs Ancient Era (records typically never kept), ie 10 gens or 300 yrs? I have multiple groups of 30-50 DNA floaters who should link to my tree in the 3-7th cousin range, clearly Modern Era, but I can't link them to my tree. Some of those groups are likely among my Irish ancestors, where solid records tend to dry up in the mid-19th century. Is anyone exploring innovative ways to consolidate the many floating trees out there to crowd source possible solutions? I suspect the answer could be the creation of John Doe common ancestor trees with surnamed place savers where documentation is unavailable.
I have a dna match i have met personally. I am descended from the brother and sister of his ancestral couple. So 2 brothers married 2 sisters. We share 3rd great grandparents. On myheritage we share 25.3cm estimated 3rd to 5th cousins. He shares 46.7cm with my mom. They are 3rd cousins once removed. He is in his 60s and my mom in her 70s. The cm numbers seem right for those relationships, but i would have thought that because brothers marrying sisters it would have been higher. The ancestral couple are from scotland and England
It is common for brothers marrying sisters could give you higher than normal shared cMS, Remember that in recombination and genetic inheritance, many of the segments disappear when we don't inherit them. 3rd Cousins don't share as much DNA from their common ancestors as 1st cousins would. And even between my children, they share different percentages of shared DNA with Devon and I and the grandparents we've tested. If you haven't watched this video in awhile, check it out. It's a great refresher. ruclips.net/video/rMBooDoB2Wk/видео.html
Q I have had my dna results from ancestry for a few weeks. I find I have a match of 192cM estimated 3rd cousin. I have researched both trees with good evidence but cannot find a connection going back 7 generations on each tree. There is good evidence of links to the same rural Lincolnshire England geographical area.. Does this look as if the relatively high cM shared is evidence of both matches originating from a small gene pool rather than specific shared ancestor? Thank you,
By the way, I have an amazing amount of useful experience on the topic that I could not discuss with anyone because no one here in Hungary understands genetics. For example, I have noticed that what the FTDNA shows with a distant relative hits for example 50cM and 8 largest segments is very often a much more distant relationship than the predicted generation. We know our common ancestor with so many American 4th cousins and they often lived in the 1600s. So we’re more of a 10th cousin to each other.
Q; I have three people who match me closer than others, but one don't match both of the other 2 matches. But the 2 matches match each other on every match what could be the reasons?
You did great!
I generally don't look at matches below 60 centimorgans.
What if most of your matches were at that range?
@@lawrencejackson4001 Most of my matches are below the 60 cM level. But, if most of them were at that level I'd probably look at them if they had trees to see if I can spot the connection, if not, I generally don't try to figure out how they are related.
@@greghanson407 that's the problem most of mine have small trees
@@lawrencejackson4001 You can do a huge amount with building out quick and dirty trees. If your match doesn't have tree info, some of the shared matches may. And if a shared match has an unusual name,
you can get things and that way.
@@LindaSchreiber thanks
Good luck Andy! :)
I write from Hungary, I only understand the essence of the video. I have a cousin in position 3 on the FTDNA who is signaled by the system to be my 2-3 cousins. But he is not from Hungary but from a distant country, so it seems that he cannot be such a close relative of mine. Plus, I know my ancestors until the 7th generation.
The solution is that he is a cousin to both my mother and father, but this person is already listed as the 5th cousin in my parents ’profiles.
It may have been featured in this episode, but I thought I’d share this experience with viewers.
Sorry I missed the Friday Livestream. I look forward to them but I was day shift instead of evening shift.
Couldn't you break up the Genealogical Timeframe subgroup into Modern Era (records destroyed or missing), ie Irish records, vs Ancient Era (records typically never kept), ie 10 gens or 300 yrs? I have multiple groups of 30-50 DNA floaters who should link to my tree in the 3-7th cousin range, clearly Modern Era, but I can't link them to my tree. Some of those groups are likely among my Irish ancestors, where solid records tend to dry up in the mid-19th century. Is anyone exploring innovative ways to consolidate the many floating trees out there to crowd source possible solutions? I suspect the answer could be the creation of John Doe common ancestor trees with surnamed place savers where documentation is unavailable.
Since genealogical timeframe depends on records, it doesn't make sense to define a subset of it that has no records.
very new at this, still confused, I did the Ancestry DNA trying to figure out.
I have a dna match i have met personally. I am descended from the brother and sister of his ancestral couple. So 2 brothers married 2 sisters. We share 3rd great grandparents. On myheritage we share 25.3cm estimated 3rd to 5th cousins. He shares 46.7cm with my mom. They are 3rd cousins once removed. He is in his 60s and my mom in her 70s. The cm numbers seem right for those relationships, but i would have thought that because brothers marrying sisters it would have been higher. The ancestral couple are from scotland and England
It is common for brothers marrying sisters could give you higher than normal shared cMS, Remember that in recombination and genetic inheritance, many of the segments disappear when we don't inherit them. 3rd Cousins don't share as much DNA from their common ancestors as 1st cousins would. And even between my children, they share different percentages of shared DNA with Devon and I and the grandparents we've tested. If you haven't watched this video in awhile, check it out. It's a great refresher. ruclips.net/video/rMBooDoB2Wk/видео.html
Q I have had my dna results from ancestry for a few weeks. I find I have a match of 192cM estimated 3rd cousin. I have researched both trees with good evidence but cannot find a connection going back 7 generations on each tree. There is good evidence of links to the same rural Lincolnshire England geographical area.. Does this look as if the relatively high cM shared is evidence of both matches originating from a small gene pool rather than specific shared ancestor? Thank you,
By the way, I have an amazing amount of useful experience on the topic that I could not discuss with anyone because no one here in Hungary understands genetics.
For example, I have noticed that what the FTDNA shows with a distant relative hits for example 50cM and 8 largest segments is very often a much more distant relationship than the predicted generation. We know our common ancestor with so many American 4th cousins and they often lived in the 1600s. So we’re more of a 10th cousin to each other.
Q; all of my matches or at the low end for the possible relationship, what can be the reasons?
Another Geiszler DNA new match at MyHeritage 28.5cM 4 segments largest 8.5cM as Giezen from Germany.
Q; I have three people who match me closer than others, but one don't match both of the other 2 matches. But the 2 matches match each other on every match what could be the reasons?
Q I have a cluster of 2nd cousins, 1 x removed with only 9cms
Q; if a person has many different kids, by different females is there a for sure way to find father
She is going to be gone, How long?
I get back next Saturday.
Q. How do I factor in non biological children?
I still don't understand what you mean by this question. Respond by starting a new comment thread.