Yes!! That is exactly what I hoped your conclusion would be!!! The colour scheme is great but so inconsistent!! I manage 5 DNA for family members and myself and have tried to compare the ethnicities via this tool and it's incredibly confusing,like trying to translate French to Spanish and back via Latin!
I found this sideview chart very helpful on both my side and my husbands. My mother's father is from Greece and her mother is French, having the Greek side and the French side both showing up 25% each, and nothing on my father's side (German, English and Irish) it was easy to figure out which side was whose. On my husband's side, by comparing his ethnicity to his Matches on each of his mom and dad's side, I was also able to figure out which parent was which. Because of that I can now place his father being Wales, English and Irish. The Wales factor being the final puzzle piece.
Ancestry has now nominated which side is Parent 1 (paternal) and which side is Parent 2 (maternal). This has been helpful to me. I have a paternal great-grandfather who had no father on his birth certificate. There were two contenders for this position, from my DNA matches, both on my father's side (so I believed). It now appears that one of those contenders is on my mother's side, so is cancelled out. Hopefully the problem is solved with the remaining contender. However it created another problem. I have no idea of these new maternal relatives' place in my maternal tree. Back to the 'drawing board!'
I'm still reviewing the separation that Ancestry is offering for Parent 1 and Parent 2. My wife's initial review is that the DNA matches that she had already determined which line they belong to are accurately divided into Parent 1 and Parent 2. I want to spend time with DNA kits that we match or have access to that have had no research done on them to see how well Ancestry separates the matches. Stay tuned.
For me this SideView tool is very accurate, I tested my parents on 23andMe and the split that Ancestry did is more or less the same as on 23andMe, so now I have very similar results on both Ancestry and 23andMe, although on Ancestry only I got tested. It also helped me figure out that the percentage of English comes from my father, which is correct based on what I've researched (something 23andMe didn't report). I mean, it's probably not 100% perfect, but it works pretty well. To be fair, I think Ancestry deserves some credit for this.
Dad's mom (mon petite mémère Canadienne-Française) was French-Canadian to the core. My dad's father's paternal grandmother was born in Ireland. Working with this information, and knowing that I can find no French ancestry on mom's side , it was a fairly simple process to determine that Parent 2 was my dad. This then leaves mom as Parent 1. I get it that over the last 1000 years, or even a shorter period, the French and German communities vascillated across the borders (especially Alsace Loraine). At the same time, the English and French conflation is equally fluid. The Normans invaded England, but the English ruled part of what is now France. Add to that, the Norsemen coming down to the mainland where Normandy derived its name while also recognizing that many Viking raids were also against England. Still and inspite of all that, my "French" DNA on Ancestry is only showing as 6%. This seems problematic from the standpoint that my dad should have been 50% (+/- a few points) French on his mother's side. I then should be getting about half of dad's 50, so I would have expected my French DNA to be much closer to 25%. At the same time, Ancestry also says I'm 20% what they call Germanic Europe. The other guys (23andMe) say I'm 67% what they are calling "French and German." Well, that's looking a little better -- even splitting that figure I end up 33.5% of one and 33.5 of the other and 33% is much closer to the 25% I would expect to see than is 6% (which ought to be something I'd find in my grandchildren). I do want to thank you for a most interesting and enlightening video however. The conclusions you reached are the same I would have after working the science and math. And, you've given me an idea -- I did it with FamilyTreeDNA and got tested on two different kits, several years apart. Now, I'm wondering if I should put another few bucks in Ancestry's pockets and get a second test avec un nom de guerre.
I did the second test only after I began the RUclips channel. I did it as a way to refute the claims that the genetic genealogy testing companies just make stuff up, and if the same person tested with the same company, they would get different results. As I pointed out in this video, ruclips.net/video/bj2KCzW44qU/видео.html, the companies do a good job of giving you nearly the same results. So, if you want to throw a few bucks at Ancestry, they'll happily take it. I'm just not sure it's worth the money. I would counsel you to focus on DNA matching rather than the ethnicity results.
It was helpful for me to see that all my German came from one parent and all my Irish, Scottish and English came from the other. Not that the other half of each parent couldn’t have included other elements, but if the German and/or Scottish/Irish/English HAD been split between the two parents, I would have had questions to resolve. Frankly, I think a 50% sample is unlikely to hide a significant chunk of ethnicity. My sister received a small Baltic tag that I didn't, and that's the level of loss I would expect. I'm actually pleased with the tool and look forward to more and better tools as time goes on.
Pat... I'll be frank. For some, this might be true. For others, not so much. In next weeks video, you'll see how I have ethnicities that don't apparently come from one parent or the other. The results cause more confusion than it solves. Stay tuned. Then let me know what you think.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics The explaination for you having ethnicities that your parents do not are addressed by Ancestry. I'm going to assume ( I know we should never do that but...lol ) that the ethnicities that you are referring to are neighboring regions. Here's where I really believe this will come in handy. They are going to be splitting our matches by parent 1 and parent 2. They will be, it's a matter of time. When this happens is when it will be very helpful to those who are just starting out, those who have been adopted and so on. Is this as it is helpful right now? No, but it will be for some people down the road ☺
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I look forward to your upcoming episode. I understand how people with parents of similar backgrounds can have difficulty sorting out Parents 1 and 2. I guess the question is what percentage of users will benefit from the tool. Certainly users born to interracial or otherwise interethnic couples would, but also those with a grandparent with a distinct ethnicity. Seems to me that's quite a few folks.
Ancestry are concentrating far too much on ethnicity which I see as a gimmick. I wouldn't mind if they did one enhancement for their ethnicity product and one that would help genealogical research, but they haven't. I don't mind this sidebar tool as a novelty but the chromosome viewer I find absolutely pointless. I'd much prefer a chromosome comparison tool with your matches than this. How much more difficult would it have been to add this than to put this out.
Would be nice if you could see if your matches ethnicity came from the same source. For example you and your match might have 1% native American but their native American could have came from an ancestor that wasn't your ancestor. Would make it easier to narrow down your ancestors and get more accurate trees
@@KentPetersonmoney I'm not sure in the example you give of 1% ethnicity coming from Native Americans how only showing matches with Native American ethnicity (or any ethnicity would really help) unless perhaps if the person you are matching has a large % of that ethnicity, which I'm not sure is what you are saying. A reading of 1% ethnicity could just as much be 0% (it could also be higher), but that low a % I would say is most likely a misread. You just can't match on ethnicity this way. If you do this and both you and your match had 1% Native American ethnicity you are just as likely to have completely different ancestors that gave you that DNA and that's even if it is accurate, as 1% is what, 5 or 6 generations back, maybe further, which gives you a possibility of hundreds of ancestors who could be the common ancestor (even if it was the same ancestor) and I doubt anyone, except those with royalty or very wealthy connections back then will have built their family trees back that far anyway, and those are very unlikely to be the parts that would have Native American people in those parts of their trees. If you are talking about 5% or above then I can understand maybe doing this as the Ethnicity readings are rough guidelines not spot on correct values but not with 1%.
I agree with you about the color inconsistencies being confusing. I figured out their color coding scheme, but they really should give a specific color to a specific ethnicity region. They appear to be color coded by line. I have access to a lot of DNA kits, so checked several. The colors ARE consistent based on the line they are on, regardless of what ethnicity is represented. So, the first ethnicity is always that pretty green, purple is always the 5th ethnicity listed, and the pink is always the 7th ethnicity listed. At least that is how it is working with our kits. Maybe someone needs to tell Ancestry that we aren't comparing by row, but by ethnicity, so we need the colors to remain consistent across the ethnicities, regardless of which line they are on. I have yet to be able to determine who is Parent 1 and who is Parent 2 for me.
I figured the colors were assigned from greatest to least percentage ethnicity group. However, it's still too confusing as you compare Side Views across individuals. Or even between myself and myself.
I liked the presentation and using a false kit really was effective to demonstrate what side view is and does. I've seen a few videos on "side view" and they were ineffective to be polite. While I agree with your conclusion that side view is relatively useless in GENETIC genealogy and what you do, you did show side view is pretty accurate and would therefore be somewhat useful to an amatuer genealogist. Many people at Ancestry are amatuers. When I did a DNA ethnicity test last year I found my mom was 16% Jewish, which was a surprise. I am not a complete amatuer now and through my mom's brother's Y DNA, autosmal DNA and trees (mostly on my heritage which is good for international and Jewish matches) I found my unrecorded 4xggf. In that search it was good to know that I was looking on my mom's father's side, which side view showed (my grandmother was part German so there was some doubt). Also Ancestry's computers can do a better job of keeping track of my cousins ethnicities than I can so I still find it useful. You did a good job on "side view" like you usually do. Incidently, how would I find out what chip Ancestry used when they tested me?
According to ISOGG, Ancestry started using a different chip in May 2016. isogg.org/wiki/AncestryDNA#:~:text=From%20mid%20May%202016%20onwards,mailing%20list%2C%2016%20May%202016.
Mine was somewhat accurate, I can tell which parent is which because my father has mostly Welsh and Irish ancestry while my mother is mostly English but they seem to struggle to place smaller DNA percentages and for some reason they keep giving me way too high Scottish percentage. I really think they are still confusing Irish and Scottish DNA, I'll be glad when they figure that out.
My 97-year-old mother’s DNA test yielded a range of different European ethnicities/countries even though none of her ancestors back many generations for which there are plenty of corroborating cousins and surname matches going back to people born in the 1740s was born anywhere but England or bore a non-English surname. In her case, like you, ancestry DNA has correctly sussed out her major Cornish DNA component, and she also has another region of England featured (Central Southern England), together equalling some 62% her ancestry. This matches the paper tree on which I have working for over forty years. Then however, her DNA results go a bit haywire in citing Scotland at 15%, Sweden & Denmark combined at 11%, Ireland at 11%, and Germanic Europe at 5%, with a caveat of the scales sliding all over the place from 0-24%. My question is this. Realizing that there was a fair amount of population movement around the British Isles over the centuries, as well as migration from Scandinavia, Germanic Europe, etc., do these rather unexpected results simply reflect that reality? Has Ancestry actually got DNA algorithms or chromosome parsing tools sufficient and sophisticated enough to distinguish between the ethnicities indicated by their country designations? Are they capable of distinguishing between say, Danes of England’s Danelaw counties and Danes from Denmark? Can they tell the difference between the Cornish and the Welsh or the Cornish and the Devonians? Is it possible that their references to Germanic Europe are drawing on the non-Brythonic Celtic components of my mother’s English roots? So far, the most recent non-English-born ancestry she has stems from Dutch and Flemish refugee ancestry in early 17th century London belonging to her tenth great-grandmother who, though baptized in the Dutch Church Austin Friars in 1616, was half Flemish from Antwerp and half Dutch from Breda. I suppose it’s possible that such ancestry could be reflected in her genetic makeup three hundred years later (she was born in 1925) as the inheritance is entirely random, but then again couldn’t what is identified as 5% of her ancestry be from the Anglo-Saxon substrate that arrived in England roughly 1400 years before her birth? Thanks for reading this.
It works for me. I have a well documented maternal line in the US from the UK since the 1640's. My paternal line is unknown except for two possible first cousins. One each on Ancestry and 23 and Me. They know each other and are both related to the same family that immigrated from the Southern Poland /Slovakia area in 1900. There were 4 first generation BIA brothers in that family living about 40 miles from my teen age mother. All are dead now and only these people have given DNA. My bio father could be one of them or some other unknown who's family immigrated from the same village to the same area of PA. But the side view puts my Southern Poland/ Slovakia on one parent and the UK on the other.
Great video, and your criticism of Ancestry's sideways feature is well taken, but there's one use for which sideways can be put--my half brother and I share our "parent 2"--his seems to have contributed about 22% Irish ethnicity (one shared grandparent was of Irish origin) and 28% a potpourri of ethnicities that seem to associate with our shared French Canadian grandparent. My parent 2 is represented as 28% Irish and 22% a constellation of the same ethncities, scaled down proportionally, that evidently come from the French Canadian grandfather. Given the Quixotic nature of autosomal DNA, this seems to indicate that, while one should take the ethnicity attributions from sideways with the proverbial grain of salt, it does allow one to infer the relative DNA weights one got from each of one's grandparents. Of course, I have no objective way to assess whether the 22-28 vs 28-22 splits are accurate or merely precise, though for what little it's worth. I am said to look more like the Irish branch of that side of the family.
I'm so ready for my results. Luckily, I have family records/charts/etc from both of my mother's parents (her dad pretty much full German and her mom pretty much full Irish...on paper of course). And can track my dad's side, cautiously, within the US. Mostly his mother's side. His father's side ends abruptly. Only family stories of "shut up/mind your business of when they would ask about the grandparent I hit a dead end with. So, I really hope to figure out Why exactly. But can't seem to find anything on that side outside of the US. I really hope that the DNA Traits test can help me find something out.
Focus on DNA Matching skills to go with your paper trail skills. Here are a few videos about that. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI Since you tested with Ancestry, be careful with the ThruLines. We have a video series that explains. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdm9FKEWYkGhtOMIZjfAhVgP
I didn't find a problem with the projected origins. But I did with their projections of some of my ancestors Think I will go back to FTDNA, so I can keep to my own research. thoughts.
I watched this video after catching the one on "ancestry Chromosome Browser. I find the Side View tool confused. Both Parent 1 and Parent 2 are labeled 100% Ashkenazi. I can't figure out how they make the choice of assigning a match to either parent 1, parent 2, or both. Each side of my family has been in the same region of Central/East Europe for at least four centuries and they are about 460 miles apart. My records findings don't conform to Ancestry's assignment. Could the both be a factor of the Ashkenazi bottleneck or of more recent immigration to Western Europe, Australia and the USA? As an aside, My Ancestry shows me to be 90% Ashkenazi and 10% Sephardi.
I'm not certain I know enough to answer your question. Again, the tool is in beta, so send your questions into Ancestry and let me know how that plays out.
I said from Day 1, it's close but not quite right. I got 43% Germanic from each parent (86% total). Baltics should be just my dad's side but Ancestry split it down the middle (yet my sister's Baltic is all on one side). What turned out to be the key was Eastern Europe/Russian that slipped back into my results on dad's side and most of Denmark & Sweden was on mom's side. I would like to see the chromosone browser improved. You can't do much with it at this point. Being able to compare it with DNA matches should be the next step.
You'll need to watch the video about the Ancestry Chromosome Painter that I'm releasing on Wednesday. You might be even more confused or frustrated by the results. ruclips.net/video/6v3WMsOdZ-g/видео.html
Right. 23andMe consider my European to be mostly Irish and British, while My Heritage and Family Tree has turned me more into one with 15 percent Scandinavian on My Heritage and 17 percent on Family Tree, including Iceland. What a cold place., Well I love Irish Soda Bread and Irish Oats, meanwhile I do love salmon and smoked fish foods of the Scandinavian regions. I just am complexed some how you ethnicities and flip back and forth. I test says I got a drop of North African and two see no traces of North Africa.
You have the same problem that my wife has. Some say that she's 30% German. Others say that she's 30% Scandinavian. She has one Swedish 2 x great-grandparent, of whom she only knows his name but no other details. She has at least 8 lines of German ancestors from one side of her family tree. These Germans immigrated to Ontario, Canada and Columbus, Ohio. One line of which is her paternal surname line. Her ethnicity percentages should sway more heavily toward German vs Sweden, but it's possible that the Swedish DNA didn't want to recombine much on its way to making her. ruclips.net/video/-f7VUPmgy2U/видео.html But, we still have the problem that none of the DNA tests agree. Which is why I advise people to ignore the ethnicity estimates and focus on building their genetic family tree. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Thanks I agree. I think it's more accuracy to focus on building a family tree and the origins of your matches. I did see that I have 808 Scandinavian matches! And by the way I am a person of mixed origins, not all European. Thanks for the feedback!
My grandmother's paternal passed DNA shows 30% Danish/,Swedish DNA when we anticipated both lines to be virtually 100% German/Polish/Russian region (because of boarder changes). This is the only significant amount to be surprising. How do I figure out where/who this came from? P.S. I have not figured out of it comes from her paternal grandfather, grandmother, or both.
I'm very frustrated with the DNA story because although included in previous versions, the latest update omitted my maternal grandfather's exceptionally well-documented line, as the migration of that branch of the family from VA -> NC -> TN -> MO -> AR is no longer shown on the map. They also omitted the tiny detectable maternal NA, so now I haven't enough markers to determine the genders of my parents' DNA estimates (our surnames, although proven, aren't helpful either). One parent has only English and Scottish, whereas either could very well be the source of the other four North Atlantic ethnicities listed (Wales, Sweden/Denmark, Ireland, Norway). It is uncertain how meaningful for practical purposes the maternal ethnicity *omissions* might be for determining whether the more diversified parent actually represents my father. It's difficult to take any of it very seriously.
You're making great points about the things that might be omitted. First, let's be sure that you understand how inheritance could impact your results. ruclips.net/video/-f7VUPmgy2U/видео.html Then, remember, there are many factors that cause ethnicity estimates to be inaccurate ruclips.net/video/i70SZRW9t90/видео.html. If you are building your family tree using traditional genealogical evidence and then linking your DNA to those trees, then you should be able to understand your heritage more accurately than any estimate can represent.
My mom is confused that she shows up as being Italian whereas I don't. This probably explains that to some degree. I show ancestry only in France. Our ancestry there is from Province of Torino in Piemonte occupied as part of France for many years. Both as the County and then Duchy of Savoy and then later outright bonafide occupied as part of France. So I'm not surprised that my ethnicity shows only France and not Italy. I'm more interested in finding the documents in Latin, Italian and French and connecting with those who share known ancestors discovered through said documents. These ethnic inheritance scales are kind of interesting as a novelty but I don't really see them as being that significant. The "old" results showed a lot of ancestry (probably on mom's side) from Spain and Portugal. The "new" results show no ancestry from those places but DO show 1% Native American probably on Dad's side (although dad has not tested with Ancestry). Dad was born in Alabama, so, that's interesting but who knows how far back that might go. Colonial North Carolina?
Two things might be happening. 1. The results aren't accurate. (My results have Norway ethnicity but my parents do not have that.) 2. Or, you have unexpected parentage in your family tree. THE BEST thing you can do is build your family tree using DNA matching (which I teach in this play list ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI) and traditional genealogy practices (which my wife begins teaching here ruclips.net/video/Fx2Tff-R-yI/видео.html) Only then will the answer be clear as to whether it's situation 1 or 2.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Some of the Thru Lines are not correct. I wonder if that might have something to do with it. My mother does not have a family tree at Ancestry so if it is comparing trees that might be a problem. Again I consider their ethnic results to be more of a novelty than anything. But thanks for the suggestions.
All side view is telling you is which ethnicity you could have possibly inherited from each parent I think it helps some but not very much. My half brother on my dad's side tested which I am related to his mom's side of the family which is Mom is a Stewart and I'm related to his mom sides family on both sides of the family which that seems to be a common thing that I'm related to step family on both sides of my family my dad's step dad was a Jones and I'm related to him on both sides of my family I find it interesting. I found a fourth grade uncle on the Hollis side of my family which is my mom's side that married two different first cousins.
Yes. I agree that this tool is in Beta (or is new enough) and could offer hypothesis. I am only responding to what my take away as a genetic genealogist who teaches RUclips videos and deals with so much confusion from the ethnicity tools. I keep trying to steer people toward DNA Matching tools as they are traditionally more reliable. But, it doesn't always work.
These types of things totally confuse me. Especially when it comes to relationship testing and what is called the Relationship Index. I don't understand how DNA is based on statistics. Statistics is a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of NUMERICAL data. DNA is a biological footprint SPECIFIC to an individual. If this is true science, then when a person is tested in comparison to another and we inherit our genes from a parent, then the lab should be able to give a 100% result or a 0% result. There would be no in between. For example, when someone runs a person's fingerprints, there isn't a probability that these are the person's fingerprints. It is or it isn't. Because fingerprints, like DNA, are specific to the person. Probability should not factor in because it is biological. This is what does not make sense to me with the DNA testing and why I think it's a chance of luck. Why does the relationship index/kinship index/siblingship index vary depending on the company even when the same LOCI is being tested and analyzed? I have had several tests done to determine kinship and with each company the results have been different even in regards to the relationship index. If DNA testing is so accurate, then why does every person in the world need to be tested in order to give a 100% result? Using the fingerprint example I mentioned earlier, shouldn't that be how DNA actually works?
I'm inbred so it a lot of it comes from the same place. Peter Wright that settled where I'm from, and Lord Thomas Wright of Kilverstone Manor before him. My tree is like a circle going back to the same people.
Yep. And my review of that is similar to the review I have for this new feature. I wish they would keep working on DNA matching technology rather than the ethnicity and trait stuff.
It depends. Whenever you see an ethnicity result that seems odd is to build your family tree using DNA matching ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI and genealogical resources.
For me, it didn't tell me anything. And worse, the info I would want is which side of the family so that investigating can be properly targeted. This doesn't tell me anything that the ethnicity report hadn't already. No info on which side is which. Kind of a gimmick at least in my case.
Thanks for sharing your review. Sorry to hear it wasn't what you had hoped it would be. The best thing to do is leverage DNA matching, which it sounds like you're already doing. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI
My paternal great grandfather was born in Ireland as was his father, and his father and his father, but apparently I did NOT get any of that Irish DNA. What I got was my paternal great grandmothers English DNA going back to the 1500's. I have 17 people who are related to me thru DNA from this couple. My maternal great grandmother was German as were both her parents. Her father's family goes back to the 1500's also. I have 3 people related to me thru DNA from this German couple but I didn't get any German DNA . This makes no sense to me.
In cases such as this, I would validate my family tree using DNA evidence. Ancestry doesn't have great DNA triangulation tools, so you might have to transfer your DNA to another platform. But, when someone gets clues like yours, I begin to wonder if something else is at play. Watch this video and see if it helps with your genetic genealogy research. ruclips.net/video/xte6-34bJ_M/видео.html using clues from your ethnicity results.
They have a built in error checking method with this for people that do have DNA samples from one or both parents. My fathers DNA results are different than the calculated result using my DNA and separating it into my parents. Seems when they have the parental DNA they'd default to that rather than using their algorithm. Perhaps thats in the future when they've refined the algorithm.
You are making valid points. I think you'll like part 2 which comes out next week that shows some clear inconsistencies between myself and my parents. I don't go into it in that video, but also my father and his parents. I predict I will have even more people commenting on this channel about how their ethnicity results are wrong and the tests are scams. What is a RUclipsr to do?
Yep. The science isn't exact and tools like these can cause more confusion. I do not wish to criticize, but rather to clarify the usefulness of tool in regards to family tree building.
To be fair, I would say they do educated guessing. However, the only thing that could really improve the ethnicity results is increasing the reference populations in the databases. Unfortunately, I'm not sure many groups around the world want to participate. And even then, things are subject to errors. I typically try to be honest with ethnicity tools and steer people towards DNA matching tools. The results are more accurate for close relatives.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I understand that you really can't take ethnicities too seriously unless they are continental, what I have a problem with the inheritance tool, where you try to figure out which is parent 1 or 2, they had it correct when they first rolled it out, I have Native American ancestry and most of it is on my mom's side, so I knew which side was which, then with the update they moved all of my Native American to my dad's side and left my mom's side with 0, but on their chromosome painter and 23andme it's clearly a larger segment on my mom's side with my dad's
Hi! Sorry for the OT but I just sent out my kit and I have a doubt about what I should/could expect in my matches. I know two of my 2xGGPs were first cousins and they're in the line I researched the most, so I know I should have some kind of match on that side due to immigration (I'm Italian and I'm quite sure no close relatives of mine have tested here). So the question is: would that make a difference considering most of the expected matches would be connected at the 4xGGPs level, and especially to the man, who had three marriages? Or is the relation so genetically distant that it won't make such a big difference?
I'm finding this to be true as well. My follow-up video to this one discusses this issue further. Ancestry's Chromosome Painter | Useful for Genetic Genealogists? ruclips.net/video/6v3WMsOdZ-g/видео.html
How distant is the DNA link to those areas? I find it doesn't seem to last much more than a century. But that said my two brothers didn't even get all the genetic communities that I did, they both only have a couple each but I have 8!
@@OpinionatedChicken59 back to 1600s, but it's all American colonies from then to like 1800s then it's Illinois like my family has been from Illinois for generations
@@OpinionatedChicken59 oh that's just for the English lines, my Scottish lines are a bit more recent like 1700s and Irish are the most recent like 1700s to 1800s
@@invadertifxiii You wouldn't have genetic communities from that far back unfortunately, you would more likely have US settler and migration communities?
@@OpinionatedChicken59 Ancestry gave me new York, Pennsylvania, new France/Quebec and southern Ontario for thos regions. But also northeast Poland for that quarter of my family. But the Ancestry tree I put together doesn't show any birth, death, or residential records for Canada. But I also have signed up for access But when I did the free trial I didn't find anything
![How Far Back is 3% Ethnicity? [Part 2] Multiple Ancestors In Result](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gThnugZcEUc/mqdefault.jpg)
😟 Are Ancestry DNA results accurate? 👉🏼 ruclips.net/video/R0Y7A9Gp7Pc/видео.html
My daughter's one says "mother/father" whereas mine isn't so I assume that it can say which parent is which if at least one parent is tested.
Yes!! That is exactly what I hoped your conclusion would be!!! The colour scheme is great but so inconsistent!! I manage 5 DNA for family members and myself and have tried to compare the ethnicities via this tool and it's incredibly confusing,like trying to translate French to Spanish and back via Latin!
Ha, ha! I think you gave the best analogy of how to compare the tool feels. Thanks.
I found this sideview chart very helpful on both my side and my husbands. My mother's father is from Greece and her mother is French, having the Greek side and the French side both showing up 25% each, and nothing on my father's side (German, English and Irish) it was easy to figure out which side was whose.
On my husband's side, by comparing his ethnicity to his Matches on each of his mom and dad's side, I was also able to figure out which parent was which. Because of that I can now place his father being Wales, English and Irish. The Wales factor being the final puzzle piece.
For those with distinctly different heritage for their parents, the sideview works. But for those who do not, it's not as clear cut.
Ancestry has now nominated which side is Parent 1 (paternal) and which side is Parent 2 (maternal). This has been helpful to me. I have a paternal great-grandfather who had no father on his birth certificate. There were two contenders for this position, from my DNA matches, both on my father's side (so I believed). It now appears that one of those contenders is on my mother's side, so is cancelled out. Hopefully the problem is solved with the remaining contender. However it created another problem. I have no idea of these new maternal relatives' place in my maternal tree. Back to the 'drawing board!'
I'm still reviewing the separation that Ancestry is offering for Parent 1 and Parent 2. My wife's initial review is that the DNA matches that she had already determined which line they belong to are accurately divided into Parent 1 and Parent 2. I want to spend time with DNA kits that we match or have access to that have had no research done on them to see how well Ancestry separates the matches. Stay tuned.
For me this SideView tool is very accurate, I tested my parents on 23andMe and the split that Ancestry did is more or less the same as on 23andMe, so now I have very similar results on both Ancestry and 23andMe, although on Ancestry only I got tested.
It also helped me figure out that the percentage of English comes from my father, which is correct based on what I've researched (something 23andMe didn't report).
I mean, it's probably not 100% perfect, but it works pretty well.
To be fair, I think Ancestry deserves some credit for this.
Feel free to give them any credit you wish. I have concerns and I'm voicing them.
Dad's mom (mon petite mémère Canadienne-Française) was French-Canadian to the core. My dad's father's paternal grandmother was born in Ireland. Working with this information, and knowing that I can find no French ancestry on mom's side , it was a fairly simple process to determine that Parent 2 was my dad. This then leaves mom as Parent 1.
I get it that over the last 1000 years, or even a shorter period, the French and German communities vascillated across the borders (especially Alsace Loraine). At the same time, the English and French conflation is equally fluid. The Normans invaded England, but the English ruled part of what is now France. Add to that, the Norsemen coming down to the mainland where Normandy derived its name while also recognizing that many Viking raids were also against England.
Still and inspite of all that, my "French" DNA on Ancestry is only showing as 6%. This seems problematic from the standpoint that my dad should have been 50% (+/- a few points) French on his mother's side. I then should be getting about half of dad's 50, so I would have expected my French DNA to be much closer to 25%.
At the same time, Ancestry also says I'm 20% what they call Germanic Europe.
The other guys (23andMe) say I'm 67% what they are calling "French and German." Well, that's looking a little better -- even splitting that figure I end up 33.5% of one and 33.5 of the other and 33% is much closer to the 25% I would expect to see than is 6% (which ought to be something I'd find in my grandchildren).
I do want to thank you for a most interesting and enlightening video however. The conclusions you reached are the same I would have after working the science and math. And, you've given me an idea -- I did it with FamilyTreeDNA and got tested on two different kits, several years apart. Now, I'm wondering if I should put another few bucks in Ancestry's pockets and get a second test avec un nom de guerre.
I did the second test only after I began the RUclips channel. I did it as a way to refute the claims that the genetic genealogy testing companies just make stuff up, and if the same person tested with the same company, they would get different results. As I pointed out in this video, ruclips.net/video/bj2KCzW44qU/видео.html, the companies do a good job of giving you nearly the same results.
So, if you want to throw a few bucks at Ancestry, they'll happily take it. I'm just not sure it's worth the money. I would counsel you to focus on DNA matching rather than the ethnicity results.
It was helpful for me to see that all my German came from one parent and all my Irish, Scottish and English came from the other. Not that the other half of each parent couldn’t have included other elements, but if the German and/or Scottish/Irish/English HAD been split between the two parents, I would have had questions to resolve. Frankly, I think a 50% sample is unlikely to hide a significant chunk of ethnicity. My sister received a small Baltic tag that I didn't, and that's the level of loss I would expect. I'm actually pleased with the tool and look forward to more and better tools as time goes on.
Pat... I'll be frank. For some, this might be true. For others, not so much. In next weeks video, you'll see how I have ethnicities that don't apparently come from one parent or the other. The results cause more confusion than it solves. Stay tuned. Then let me know what you think.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics The explaination for you having ethnicities that your parents do not are addressed by Ancestry. I'm going to assume ( I know we should never do that but...lol ) that the ethnicities that you are referring to are neighboring regions. Here's where I really believe this will come in handy. They are going to be splitting our matches by parent 1 and parent 2. They will be, it's a matter of time. When this happens is when it will be very helpful to those who are just starting out, those who have been adopted and so on. Is this as it is helpful right now? No, but it will be for some people down the road ☺
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I look forward to your upcoming episode. I understand how people with parents of similar backgrounds can have difficulty sorting out Parents 1 and 2. I guess the question is what percentage of users will benefit from the tool. Certainly users born to interracial or otherwise interethnic couples would, but also those with a grandparent with a distinct ethnicity. Seems to me that's quite a few folks.
Ancestry are concentrating far too much on ethnicity which I see as a gimmick. I wouldn't mind if they did one enhancement for their ethnicity product and one that would help genealogical research, but they haven't. I don't mind this sidebar tool as a novelty but the chromosome viewer I find absolutely pointless. I'd much prefer a chromosome comparison tool with your matches than this. How much more difficult would it have been to add this than to put this out.
You have a clear understanding of my thoughts.
They aren’t done. More rollouts to come. They’ll add more useful functionality.
Would be nice if you could see if your matches ethnicity came from the same source. For example you and your match might have 1% native American but their native American could have came from an ancestor that wasn't your ancestor. Would make it easier to narrow down your ancestors and get more accurate trees
@@KentPetersonmoney I'm not sure in the example you give of 1% ethnicity coming from Native Americans how only showing matches with Native American ethnicity (or any ethnicity would really help) unless perhaps if the person you are matching has a large % of that ethnicity, which I'm not sure is what you are saying. A reading of 1% ethnicity could just as much be 0% (it could also be higher), but that low a % I would say is most likely a misread. You just can't match on ethnicity this way.
If you do this and both you and your match had 1% Native American ethnicity you are just as likely to have completely different ancestors that gave you that DNA and that's even if it is accurate, as 1% is what, 5 or 6 generations back, maybe further, which gives you a possibility of hundreds of ancestors who could be the common ancestor (even if it was the same ancestor) and I doubt anyone, except those with royalty or very wealthy connections back then will have built their family trees back that far anyway, and those are very unlikely to be the parts that would have Native American people in those parts of their trees.
If you are talking about 5% or above then I can understand maybe doing this as the Ethnicity readings are rough guidelines not spot on correct values but not with 1%.
I agree with you about the color inconsistencies being confusing. I figured out their color coding scheme, but they really should give a specific color to a specific ethnicity region. They appear to be color coded by line. I have access to a lot of DNA kits, so checked several. The colors ARE consistent based on the line they are on, regardless of what ethnicity is represented. So, the first ethnicity is always that pretty green, purple is always the 5th ethnicity listed, and the pink is always the 7th ethnicity listed. At least that is how it is working with our kits. Maybe someone needs to tell Ancestry that we aren't comparing by row, but by ethnicity, so we need the colors to remain consistent across the ethnicities, regardless of which line they are on.
I have yet to be able to determine who is Parent 1 and who is Parent 2 for me.
I figured the colors were assigned from greatest to least percentage ethnicity group. However, it's still too confusing as you compare Side Views across individuals. Or even between myself and myself.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I agree. It is very confusing.
I liked the presentation and using a false kit really was effective to demonstrate what side view is and does. I've seen a few videos on "side view" and they were ineffective to be polite. While I agree with your conclusion that side view is relatively useless in GENETIC genealogy and what you do, you did show side view is pretty accurate and would therefore be somewhat useful to an amatuer genealogist. Many people at Ancestry are amatuers. When I did a DNA ethnicity test last year I found my mom was 16% Jewish, which was a surprise. I am not a complete amatuer now and through my mom's brother's Y DNA, autosmal DNA and trees (mostly on my heritage which is good for international and Jewish matches) I found my unrecorded 4xggf. In that search it was good to know that I was looking on my mom's father's side, which side view showed (my grandmother was part German so there was some doubt). Also Ancestry's computers can do a better job of keeping track of my cousins ethnicities than I can so I still find it useful. You did a good job on "side view" like you usually do. Incidently, how would I find out what chip Ancestry used when they tested me?
According to ISOGG, Ancestry started using a different chip in May 2016. isogg.org/wiki/AncestryDNA#:~:text=From%20mid%20May%202016%20onwards,mailing%20list%2C%2016%20May%202016.
Mine was somewhat accurate, I can tell which parent is which because my father has mostly Welsh and Irish ancestry while my mother is mostly English but they seem to struggle to place smaller DNA percentages and for some reason they keep giving me way too high Scottish percentage. I really think they are still confusing Irish and Scottish DNA, I'll be glad when they figure that out.
It's all possible. Lean on the DNA matching to build or confirm your family tree. You'll be less frustrated.
My 97-year-old mother’s DNA test yielded a range of different European ethnicities/countries even though none of her ancestors back many generations for which there are plenty of corroborating cousins and surname matches going back to people born in the 1740s was born anywhere but England or bore a non-English surname. In her case, like you, ancestry DNA has correctly sussed out her major Cornish DNA component, and she also has another region of England featured (Central Southern England), together equalling some 62% her ancestry. This matches the paper tree on which I have working for over forty years. Then however, her DNA results go a bit haywire in citing Scotland at 15%, Sweden & Denmark combined at 11%, Ireland at 11%, and Germanic Europe at 5%, with a caveat of the scales sliding all over the place from 0-24%.
My question is this. Realizing that there was a fair amount of population movement around the British Isles over the centuries, as well as migration from Scandinavia, Germanic Europe, etc., do these rather unexpected results simply reflect that reality? Has Ancestry actually got DNA algorithms or chromosome parsing tools sufficient and sophisticated enough to distinguish between the ethnicities indicated by their country designations? Are they capable of distinguishing between say, Danes of England’s Danelaw counties and Danes from Denmark? Can they tell the difference between the Cornish and the Welsh or the Cornish and the Devonians? Is it possible that their references to Germanic Europe are drawing on the non-Brythonic Celtic components of my mother’s English roots?
So far, the most recent non-English-born ancestry she has stems from Dutch and Flemish refugee ancestry in early 17th century London belonging to her tenth great-grandmother who, though baptized in the Dutch Church Austin Friars in 1616, was half Flemish from Antwerp and half Dutch from Breda. I suppose it’s possible that such ancestry could be reflected in her genetic makeup three hundred years later (she was born in 1925) as the inheritance is entirely random, but then again couldn’t what is identified as 5% of her ancestry be from the Anglo-Saxon substrate that arrived in England roughly 1400 years before her birth?
Thanks for reading this.
It works for me. I have a well documented maternal line in the US from the UK since the 1640's. My paternal line is unknown except for two possible first cousins. One each on Ancestry and 23 and Me. They know each other and are both related to the same family that immigrated from the Southern Poland /Slovakia area in 1900. There were 4 first generation BIA brothers in that family living about 40 miles from my teen age mother. All are dead now and only these people have given DNA. My bio father could be one of them or some other unknown who's family immigrated from the same village to the same area of PA. But the side view puts my Southern Poland/ Slovakia on one parent and the UK on the other.
My side view confirmed what I had discovered through my research.
You're fortunate.
Great video, and your criticism of Ancestry's sideways feature is well taken, but there's one use for which sideways can be put--my half brother and I share our "parent 2"--his seems to have contributed about 22% Irish ethnicity (one shared grandparent was of Irish origin) and 28% a potpourri of ethnicities that seem to associate with our shared French Canadian grandparent. My parent 2 is represented as 28% Irish and 22% a constellation of the same ethncities, scaled down proportionally, that evidently come from the French Canadian grandfather. Given the Quixotic nature of autosomal DNA, this seems to indicate that, while one should take the ethnicity attributions from sideways with the proverbial grain of salt, it does allow one to infer the relative DNA weights one got from each of one's grandparents. Of course, I have no objective way to assess whether the 22-28 vs 28-22 splits are accurate or merely precise, though for what little it's worth. I am said to look more like the Irish branch of that side of the family.
I'm so ready for my results. Luckily, I have family records/charts/etc from both of my mother's parents (her dad pretty much full German and her mom pretty much full Irish...on paper of course). And can track my dad's side, cautiously, within the US. Mostly his mother's side. His father's side ends abruptly. Only family stories of "shut up/mind your business of when they would ask about the grandparent I hit a dead end with. So, I really hope to figure out Why exactly. But can't seem to find anything on that side outside of the US. I really hope that the DNA Traits test can help me find something out.
Focus on DNA Matching skills to go with your paper trail skills. Here are a few videos about that. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI
Since you tested with Ancestry, be careful with the ThruLines. We have a video series that explains. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdm9FKEWYkGhtOMIZjfAhVgP
It just shows that, as another scientist said a year or so ago, that the science is nowhere near accurate and should be viewed more as entertainment.
Science is every evolving because we keep striving to find answers to questions that we have. For some that's frustrating to be sure.
I didn't find a problem with the projected origins. But I did with their projections of some of my ancestors
Think I will go back to FTDNA, so I
can keep to my own research. thoughts.
I'll wait until this tool improves before I recommend people use it. I think Ancestry has all the information to improve it.
I watched this video after catching the one on "ancestry Chromosome Browser. I find the Side View tool confused. Both Parent 1 and Parent 2 are labeled 100% Ashkenazi. I can't figure out how they make the choice of assigning a match to either parent 1, parent 2, or both. Each side of my family has been in the same region of Central/East Europe for at least four centuries and they are about 460 miles apart. My records findings don't conform to Ancestry's assignment. Could the both be a factor of the Ashkenazi bottleneck or of more recent immigration to Western Europe, Australia and the USA? As an aside, My Ancestry shows me to be 90% Ashkenazi and 10% Sephardi.
I'm not certain I know enough to answer your question. Again, the tool is in beta, so send your questions into Ancestry and let me know how that plays out.
I said from Day 1, it's close but not quite right. I got 43% Germanic from each parent (86% total). Baltics should be just my dad's side but Ancestry split it down the middle (yet my sister's Baltic is all on one side). What turned out to be the key was Eastern Europe/Russian that slipped back into my results on dad's side and most of Denmark & Sweden was on mom's side. I would like to see the chromosone browser improved. You can't do much with it at this point. Being able to compare it with DNA matches should be the next step.
You'll need to watch the video about the Ancestry Chromosome Painter that I'm releasing on Wednesday. You might be even more confused or frustrated by the results. ruclips.net/video/6v3WMsOdZ-g/видео.html
Right. 23andMe consider my European to be mostly Irish and British, while My Heritage and Family Tree has turned me more into one with 15 percent Scandinavian on My Heritage and 17 percent on Family Tree, including Iceland. What a cold place., Well I love Irish Soda Bread and Irish Oats, meanwhile I do love salmon and smoked fish foods of the Scandinavian regions. I just am complexed some how you ethnicities and flip back and forth. I test says I got a drop of North African and two see no traces of North Africa.
You have the same problem that my wife has. Some say that she's 30% German. Others say that she's 30% Scandinavian.
She has one Swedish 2 x great-grandparent, of whom she only knows his name but no other details.
She has at least 8 lines of German ancestors from one side of her family tree. These Germans immigrated to Ontario, Canada and Columbus, Ohio. One line of which is her paternal surname line.
Her ethnicity percentages should sway more heavily toward German vs Sweden, but it's possible that the Swedish DNA didn't want to recombine much on its way to making her. ruclips.net/video/-f7VUPmgy2U/видео.html
But, we still have the problem that none of the DNA tests agree. Which is why I advise people to ignore the ethnicity estimates and focus on building their genetic family tree. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Thanks I agree. I think it's more accuracy to focus on building a family tree and the origins of your matches. I did see that I have 808 Scandinavian matches! And by the way I am a person of mixed origins, not all European. Thanks for the feedback!
My grandmother's paternal passed DNA shows 30% Danish/,Swedish DNA when we anticipated both lines to be virtually 100% German/Polish/Russian region (because of boarder changes). This is the only significant amount to be surprising. How do I figure out where/who this came from?
P.S. I have not figured out of it comes from her paternal grandfather, grandmother, or both.
I'm very frustrated with the DNA story because although included in previous versions, the latest update omitted my maternal grandfather's exceptionally well-documented line, as the migration of that branch of the family from VA -> NC -> TN -> MO -> AR is no longer shown on the map. They also omitted the tiny detectable maternal NA, so now I haven't enough markers to determine the genders of my parents' DNA estimates (our surnames, although proven, aren't helpful either). One parent has only English and Scottish, whereas either could very well be the source of the other four North Atlantic ethnicities listed (Wales, Sweden/Denmark, Ireland, Norway). It is uncertain how meaningful for practical purposes the maternal ethnicity *omissions* might be for determining whether the more diversified parent actually represents my father. It's difficult to take any of it very seriously.
You're making great points about the things that might be omitted. First, let's be sure that you understand how inheritance could impact your results. ruclips.net/video/-f7VUPmgy2U/видео.html
Then, remember, there are many factors that cause ethnicity estimates to be inaccurate ruclips.net/video/i70SZRW9t90/видео.html.
If you are building your family tree using traditional genealogical evidence and then linking your DNA to those trees, then you should be able to understand your heritage more accurately than any estimate can represent.
My mom is confused that she shows up as being Italian whereas I don't. This probably explains that to some degree. I show ancestry only in France.
Our ancestry there is from Province of Torino in Piemonte occupied as part of France for many years. Both as the County and then Duchy of Savoy and then later outright bonafide occupied as part of France. So I'm not surprised that my ethnicity shows only France and not Italy. I'm more interested in finding the documents in Latin, Italian and French and connecting with those who share known ancestors discovered through said documents.
These ethnic inheritance scales are kind of interesting as a novelty but I don't really see them as being that significant. The "old" results showed a lot of ancestry (probably on mom's side) from Spain and Portugal. The "new" results show no ancestry from those places but DO show 1% Native American probably on Dad's side (although dad has not tested with Ancestry). Dad was born in Alabama, so, that's interesting but who knows how far back that might go. Colonial North Carolina?
Two things might be happening.
1. The results aren't accurate. (My results have Norway ethnicity but my parents do not have that.)
2. Or, you have unexpected parentage in your family tree.
THE BEST thing you can do is build your family tree using DNA matching (which I teach in this play list ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI) and traditional genealogy practices (which my wife begins teaching here ruclips.net/video/Fx2Tff-R-yI/видео.html)
Only then will the answer be clear as to whether it's situation 1 or 2.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Some of the Thru Lines are not correct. I wonder if that might have something to do with it. My mother does not have a family tree at Ancestry so if it is comparing trees that might be a problem. Again I consider their ethnic results to be more of a novelty than anything. But thanks for the suggestions.
All side view is telling you is which ethnicity you could have possibly inherited from each parent I think it helps some but not very much. My half brother on my dad's side tested which I am related to his mom's side of the family which is Mom is a Stewart and I'm related to his mom sides family on both sides of the family which that seems to be a common thing that I'm related to step family on both sides of my family my dad's step dad was a Jones and I'm related to him on both sides of my family I find it interesting. I found a fourth grade uncle on the Hollis side of my family which is my mom's side that married two different first cousins.
Yes. I agree that this tool is in Beta (or is new enough) and could offer hypothesis. I am only responding to what my take away as a genetic genealogist who teaches RUclips videos and deals with so much confusion from the ethnicity tools. I keep trying to steer people toward DNA Matching tools as they are traditionally more reliable. But, it doesn't always work.
Again the video confirmed my view that sidelines is not a great help
Should I be happy to help?
These types of things totally confuse me. Especially when it comes to relationship testing and what is called the Relationship Index. I don't understand how DNA is based on statistics. Statistics is a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of NUMERICAL data. DNA is a biological footprint SPECIFIC to an individual. If this is true science, then when a person is tested in comparison to another and we inherit our genes from a parent, then the lab should be able to give a 100% result or a 0% result. There would be no in between. For example, when someone runs a person's fingerprints, there isn't a probability that these are the person's fingerprints. It is or it isn't. Because fingerprints, like DNA, are specific to the person. Probability should not factor in because it is biological. This is what does not make sense to me with the DNA testing and why I think it's a chance of luck.
Why does the relationship index/kinship index/siblingship index vary depending on the company even when the same LOCI is being tested and analyzed? I have had several tests done to determine kinship and with each company the results have been different even in regards to the relationship index.
If DNA testing is so accurate, then why does every person in the world need to be tested in order to give a 100% result? Using the fingerprint example I mentioned earlier, shouldn't that be how DNA actually works?
I'm inbred so it a lot of it comes from the same place. Peter Wright that settled where I'm from, and Lord Thomas Wright of Kilverstone Manor before him. My tree is like a circle going back to the same people.
So you have tree collapse, do you? ruclips.net/video/Wlq_a-gdf9k/видео.html
They have a traits section too now.
Yep. And my review of that is similar to the review I have for this new feature. I wish they would keep working on DNA matching technology rather than the ethnicity and trait stuff.
So Andy, does Ancestry show you are a "Close Relative" to "Phil"?
I'm glad you asked. Why don't you watch this video and see all about Phil's results. ruclips.net/video/bj2KCzW44qU/видео.html
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Did you see my email on your Contacts Page 2 weeks ago? You asked for a snip of my Generational Narrative manuscript.
My Mom doesn't have Norway in her DNA but the maternal side says it comes from her. Can that be true??
It depends. Whenever you see an ethnicity result that seems odd is to build your family tree using DNA matching ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI and genealogical resources.
For me, it didn't tell me anything. And worse, the info I would want is which side of the family so that investigating can be properly targeted. This doesn't tell me anything that the ethnicity report hadn't already. No info on which side is which. Kind of a gimmick at least in my case.
Thanks for sharing your review. Sorry to hear it wasn't what you had hoped it would be. The best thing to do is leverage DNA matching, which it sounds like you're already doing. ruclips.net/p/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI
My paternal great grandfather was born in Ireland as was his father, and his father and his father, but apparently I did NOT get any of that Irish DNA. What I got was my paternal great grandmothers English DNA going back to the 1500's. I have 17 people who are related to me thru DNA from this couple.
My maternal great grandmother was German as were both her parents. Her father's family goes back to the 1500's also. I have 3 people related to me thru DNA from this German couple but I didn't get any German DNA .
This makes no sense to me.
In cases such as this, I would validate my family tree using DNA evidence. Ancestry doesn't have great DNA triangulation tools, so you might have to transfer your DNA to another platform. But, when someone gets clues like yours, I begin to wonder if something else is at play. Watch this video and see if it helps with your genetic genealogy research. ruclips.net/video/xte6-34bJ_M/видео.html using clues from your ethnicity results.
They have a built in error checking method with this for people that do have DNA samples from one or both parents. My fathers DNA results are different than the calculated result using my DNA and separating it into my parents. Seems when they have the parental DNA they'd default to that rather than using their algorithm. Perhaps thats in the future when they've refined the algorithm.
You are making valid points. I think you'll like part 2 which comes out next week that shows some clear inconsistencies between myself and my parents. I don't go into it in that video, but also my father and his parents.
I predict I will have even more people commenting on this channel about how their ethnicity results are wrong and the tests are scams. What is a RUclipsr to do?
Very interesting that your results varied a bit between two tests, that helps show that the science is not yet exact.
Yep. The science isn't exact and tools like these can cause more confusion. I do not wish to criticize, but rather to clarify the usefulness of tool in regards to family tree building.
I found the side view to be very inaccurate, I'm glad you took two test with different names, this shows a lot of what they do is guessing.
To be fair, I would say they do educated guessing. However, the only thing that could really improve the ethnicity results is increasing the reference populations in the databases. Unfortunately, I'm not sure many groups around the world want to participate. And even then, things are subject to errors. I typically try to be honest with ethnicity tools and steer people towards DNA matching tools. The results are more accurate for close relatives.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I understand that you really can't take ethnicities too seriously unless they are continental, what I have a problem with the inheritance tool, where you try to figure out which is parent 1 or 2, they had it correct when they first rolled it out, I have Native American ancestry and most of it is on my mom's side, so I knew which side was which, then with the update they moved all of my Native American to my dad's side and left my mom's side with 0, but on their chromosome painter and 23andme it's clearly a larger segment on my mom's side with my dad's
My dad's side a smaller segment.
Hi! Sorry for the OT but I just sent out my kit and I have a doubt about what I should/could expect in my matches. I know two of my 2xGGPs were first cousins and they're in the line I researched the most, so I know I should have some kind of match on that side due to immigration (I'm Italian and I'm quite sure no close relatives of mine have tested here). So the question is: would that make a difference considering most of the expected matches would be connected at the 4xGGPs level, and especially to the man, who had three marriages? Or is the relation so genetically distant that it won't make such a big difference?
It's very inaccurate for a lot of my family I've tested and I know this because their parents were tested too and nothing adds up
I'm finding this to be true as well. My follow-up video to this one discusses this issue further. Ancestry's Chromosome Painter | Useful for Genetic Genealogists? ruclips.net/video/6v3WMsOdZ-g/видео.html
its so peculiar that my english and irish doesnt break down the specific regions on ancestry or 23andme
How distant is the DNA link to those areas? I find it doesn't seem to last much more than a century. But that said my two brothers didn't even get all the genetic communities that I did, they both only have a couple each but I have 8!
@@OpinionatedChicken59 back to 1600s, but it's all American colonies from then to like 1800s then it's Illinois like my family has been from Illinois for generations
@@OpinionatedChicken59 oh that's just for the English lines, my Scottish lines are a bit more recent like 1700s and Irish are the most recent like 1700s to 1800s
@@invadertifxiii You wouldn't have genetic communities from that far back unfortunately, you would more likely have US settler and migration communities?
@@OpinionatedChicken59 Ancestry gave me new York, Pennsylvania, new France/Quebec and southern Ontario for thos regions. But also northeast Poland for that quarter of my family. But the Ancestry tree I put together doesn't show any birth, death, or residential records for Canada. But I also have signed up for access But when I did the free trial I didn't find anything
Is it a case of junk in junk out? That's what mine looks like.
It's possible. More and more questions arise than the tool resolves.
How can you use Chromosome Painter to figure out potential health issues?
You can't. That's not what it's designed for.
Very important, maybe you can help I found mine, I would appreciate the help 😊😀l please