Hermy Registered User
#16

I'd imagine also that a lot of these DNA kits are bought as presents and the recipients are not so inclined as some of us from this parish to see about compiling family trees.

3 people have thanked this post
VirginiaB Registered User
#17

Very good point, Hermy--and I like your term, 'this parish'.

2 people have thanked this post
dubhthach Registered User
#18

I think Hermy hit the nail on the head, personally I did a DNA test not because I was interested in genealogy but because I was interested more in what the test could tell me about deeper history (and pre-history) when it came to stuff like population history/migration etc. Of course this is one of reason why I concentrated on Y-DNA testing, it's kinda cool to think that your specific Y lineage can probably be traced back to one man in South-East Asia around 30-40,000 years ago and that sub-branches of it only spread into western Eurasia during the transition from Neolithic to Bronze age (using ancient DNA to baseline that). Let alone that further back that every man (3.7billion) on the planet shares common ancestry around 190,000 years ago when it comes to their Y-lineage. (There were other men alive at time, however they haven't left any modern direct line descendants)

Now I have both Ancestry and 23andme tests, but again the main interest in those are from what the data can tell about broader history though I do have the skeleton of a tree up on Ancestry as well

1 person has thanked this post
VirginiaB Registered User
#19

Today Ancestry updated its DNA results with some big changes for a lot of people.  Their database is evidently much larger than whenever they did this previously.  Mine is now closer to my records research altho there is one very missing great-grandfather's DNA which was there before.  Has anyone who did Ancestry's test checked their results today?  Any surprises--or business as usual in the ancestor department?

srmf5 Registered User
#20

There wasn't much of a change for me.

My results changed from 96% Ireland/Scotland/Wales, 2% Great Britain, 1% Finland/Northwest Russia and <1% Scandinavia to 98% Ireland and Scotland and 2% England, Wales and Northwestern Europe.

My mum's results changed from 98% Ireland/Scotland/Wales, 1% Finland/Northwest Russia and <1% Europe East to 100% Ireland and Scotland.

My aunt's results changed from 99% Ireland/Scotland/Wales and <1% Great Britain to 100% Ireland and Scotland.

My great aunt's results changed from 95% Ireland/Scotland/Wales, 2% Europe South, 1% Great Britain, <1% Europe West and <1% European Jewish to 98% Ireland and Scotland and 2% England, Wales and Northwestern Europe.

hjr Registered User
#21

I lost my 2% Spanish history overnight...! Just a regular old Irishman now!

KildareFan Registered User
#22

I lost my exotic middle eastern ancestry... but now I can't even access the Ancestry DNA results. I'm getting the 'File not found' screen.

dubhthach Registered User
#23

I've gone to 100% "Ireland/Scotland", likewise my father is also 100% "Ireland/Scotland" and my mother is "98% Ireland/Scotland ⁊ 2% England, Wales and Northwest European"

What's interesting is the genetic community feature is somewhat accurate for my parents. Namely:

Dad: (father from Belfast, maternal grandfather form East Galway, maternal grandmother from Cork)

  • Ulster (likely) -- "East Ulster"

  • Munster (possibly) -- no distinct genetic sub-community



  • Mum: (whose from North Clare with ancestry in South Galway as well)
    • Munster (very likely) -> Southern Ireland (which basically is generic north munster/south leinster cluster)
    • Connacht (possible) -> Galway and North Connacht


    I basically got "Munster (very likely) -- Southern Ireland". To put in perspective 5 of my 8 great grandparents were from Munster, 1 was from East Galway, 1 was from Belfast and final was "Liverpool Irish" (of probable Ulster background)

    Ipso Registered User
    #24

    Compared to 23andme, how does Ancestry estimations look?

    pinkypinky Moderator
    #25

    Here's my estimates - new and old on Ancestry and FamilyTree DNA on the right.

    Attachments
    both.jpg
    cosanostra Registered User
    #26

    My main area of research is my fathers side of the family, would i be better getting him to do the dna test or do it myself and have my mothers side as a bonus, bear in mind the results im most interested in is my fathers side so would it be more accurate to just get him to do it or does it not matter

    spurious Category Moderator
    #27

    cosanostra said:
    My main area of research is my fathers side of the family, would i be better getting him to do the dna test or do it myself and have my mothers side as a bonus, bear in mind the results im most interested in is my fathers side so would it be more accurate to just get him to do it or does it not matter


    It would be better if he took it.

    1 person has thanked this post
    dubhthach Registered User
    #28

    You could technically test both yourself and your father. That way any matches you don't share come via your mother's line. Of course what's also worth pointing out is you might have matches through your mother where you don't share any DNA with them but your mother does (eg. when you got the 50% of DNA from your mother it didn't include DNA found in some matches she would have)

    Want to share your thoughts?

    Login here to discuss!