PDA

View Full Version : DNA testing?


John
08 February 2007, 12:44 PM
1.)
Can anyone suggest who offers the best DNA testing for genealogy?

2.)
Is the Dr Spencer Wells/National Geographic DNA collection a useful adjunct to Reunion8?
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

Thanks,
John
Reunion8. Mac OS 10.4.8.
_____

SVass
08 February 2007, 06:36 PM
This question has many answers. y dna tests of 12 to 67 markers are available from www.FTDNA.com as well as mtDNA tests. Ethnoancestry also offers such tests and both offer haplogroup tests which answer deep ancestry group questions. www.SMGF.org offers free testing to their own schedule so it is also of interest.

The National Geographic site and data are over-simplified. This is a new science that is subject to being completely revised every year. The main point would be to enter your y data at www.ysearch.org and your mtDNA data at www.mitosearch.org after you get tested so that you can search for and contact new relatives. Sam Vass, C27F2 at the search sites

Clayton Heathcock
08 February 2007, 06:37 PM
I have used Family Tree DNA and belong to the H*athcock/Hathcoat study group. It has been very interesting in that most of our male study group have identical or nearly identical Y-DNA profiles, as we should. What has been a surprise is the discovery of several males with other surnames (Norton, Jacobs) that also are identical. In one case we have figured out what must have happened because a Martha Hathcock married a John Norton back in the late 1700s and we think the couple may have adopted a male Hathcock orphan, probably son of her brother, and raised him as a Hathcock.

You can also have your mitochondrial DNA done and this is harder to track since it is maternal and doesn't follow surname. But even this has been good for me because it caused me to focus on my maternal line with the result that in the last month or so I have succeeded in extending it several generations.

Here is the website for FTDNA; http://www.familytreedna.com/

Once you have your profile, you can upload the results to the National Geographic database.

Mac Main
08 February 2007, 10:50 PM
"Best" is perhaps too high a standard since you only mention for genealogy.

I like FamilyTreeDNA and participate in a MAIN surname DNA project they support. You don't list your surname, but you should search for a company that has a SURNAME study for your surname. Or you could start a FTDNA study for your surname and become the study administrator.

I beleive FamilyTreeDNA does the processing for the National Geographic project. You can start with one project and have your data included with the other. I joined the MAIN study first and then had my data sent to the National Geographic project for a small additional charge. I think you can do the reverse.

Many companies do this. I'm pleased with FTDNA's work and support, but can't say they are best.....but certainly adequate and/or good for my purposes.

Bob Goode
09 February 2007, 12:06 AM
I also use FamilyTreeDNA. Agreeing with the two previous posts, to participate in a DNA study with FTDNA, I recommend doing so through a Surname group. I was fortunate to have someone become a group administrator. Without joining a surname group, your DNA results will be limited.

My DNA results allowed me a path toward a specific line of Goodes. While I have not yet connected to the immigrant in the 1600's in Virginia, I at least know that we have a "common ancestor" and several of the participants have an identical match indicating a definite link to a specific line. This also allowed me to broaden my base of researchers.

Again, I can not make the judgement of "best" since I was contacted about participating in a group at FamilyTreeDNA and did not do any comparisons with other options, but I can say that it was GOODE for me. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Bob

John
09 February 2007, 08:38 PM
Many thanks for the useful replies re DNA testing for genealogy.

I talked to the Lab that does the testing for both the National Geographic - Genographic Project and Family Tree DNA.

They suggest joining the National Geographic part first. That provides the 12 most basic markers.
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

Then you have the option to join (at a discount) into a more focused Family Tree DNA research, Surname project etc.
http://www.familytreedna.com/default.aspx

You don't re-test as they have your 12 markers. You just give permission to use them. This latter offers options to increase the number of DNA markers from 12 up to 67.

Also I will follow your suggestions to post my/our DNA in the free sites suggested including the SMGF site by Sorenson.

First step remains getting the DNA data to use so I've ordered the kit from National Geographic - Genographic Project @ $99.95 (plus s&h).

They have a companion book 'Deep Ancestry: Inside the Genographic Project' by Spencer Wells.

Any suggestions for other or better books?

Thanks again,
John
Reunion8. Mac 10.4.8.

AlainFarhi
10 February 2007, 09:40 AM
I have been using FamilyTreeDNA for a Migration and Common ancestry of about 50 individuals belonging to the Anzarut, Alhadeff, Bekhor, Capuya, Chitayat, Constantini, Dwek, Farhi, Gubbay, Lisbona, Marzouk, Modiano, Pisante, Rousso, Souroujon and Taranto families.

Recently the turn around time for determining Y-DNA results has dramatically increased. The FTDNA laboratory must be very busy.

For a full report of our Sephardic Heritage study check our webpage on the FTDNA website. http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Sephardic_Heritage

I have found FTDNA staff and president very helpful on all matters.

Alain Farhi

SVass
10 February 2007, 06:05 PM
Bringing this into more relevant focus is a request for a feature to be added to Reunion. I have added an attribute identified as Haplogroup for all entries. I would like to have that attribute automatically attach to all direct male relatives such as father to son, brother to brother if so directed and I would like a similar capability for female mtDNA haplogroup which follows from mother to son and daughter except fathers do not pass it on.

A note back to the suggestion that one getting a dna test join a surname group. If one is of English, Western European, and/or Christian ancestry this is reasonable. Otherwise it might make more sense to join a geographic or ethnic group as surnames were not generally adopted by others until recently. Also, the 12 marker test is not exact enough to identify close relatives in a "popular" grouping that has lots of testees. 37 markers are a more precise test. National Geographic is studying the major migration patterns of humanity and not the travels of our local relatives. sam vass C27F2 at www.ysearch.org

Trace Your Roots with DNA by Ann Turner is a simple book and http://www.isogg.org/ has more information on dna than you might care to read.

Nancy G Chesnutt
03 June 2007, 04:40 PM
I had my husband's DNA done with Family Tree using the 37 marker test. By doing this I am able to link his line to the Virginia line because all markers perfectly matched an individual who has traced his family back to that state with documentation. Now, if only I could get his oldest ancestor back to Virginia and out of Tennessee!

jjl1329
04 June 2007, 01:10 PM
1.)
Can anyone suggest who offers the best DNA testing for genealogy?

2.)
Is the Dr Spencer Wells/National Geographic DNA collection a useful adjunct to Reunion8?
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

Thanks,
John
Reunion8. Mac OS 10.4.8.
_____
Family Tree DNA at Familytreedna.com

xejn
08 June 2007, 09:17 AM
So, lets say the forum's wisdom is correct and FTDNA is the "best", which of their tests are a) the best (as in, money is no object, but the data you pay for should actually be useful) or b) the best bang for your buck?

I'm sure the Y-DNA67 - 67 Marker Test gives more data than the 37, but it really that useful?

Is the mtDNA Full Sequence ever worth it?

Also, if you are not checking for Native American or African blood ancestry, is the mtDNAPlus really worth the added cost over the standard mtDNA. For example, my father's maternal line may have Native American blood so I may have him tested with the mtDNAPlus option, but I know my mother's line has no Native American blood so I am considering the standard mtDNA, is there any thing else I would missing out on?

Lastly, I am considering doing a Y-DNA and mtDNA on myself, asking my dad to do a mtDNA only (since we share the same paternal Y-DNA line but different maternal mtDNA line) and my Uncle from my mother's side to do a Y-DNA test only (since we share the different paternal Y-DNA line but same maternal mtDNA line). Does that make sense? Is there any reason to test my dad's Y-DNA or my uncles mtDNA as well?

Thanks

Michael

John
08 June 2007, 06:37 PM
So, lets say the forum's wisdom is correct and FTDNA is the "best", which of their tests are a) the best (as in, money is no object, but the data you pay for should actually be useful) or b) the best bang for your buck?
- Michael

_____

I've done the DNA testing in recent months, first via the National Geographic's Genographic Project, followed by additional testing via FTDNA.

Before proceeding I called FTDNA [713-868-1438] and they [Brandi] suggested:

1.)
Begin with the Genographic process (for which FTDNA does the lab work).
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

Results were ready in 3-4 weeks after they received our samples.

The Genographic results page has a link which takes you to FTDNA.

2.) At that point you have an option to expand your DNA from the 12 Markers of the Genographic Project.

FTDNA said they generally suggest upgrading by an additional 25 markers to a total of 37, for both male Y-DNA and female mt-DNA.

They said this is usually quite adequate. If, down the road, more are needed they can always be added at that time.

The additional markers took about 6 weeks. No additional sample was needed as they work from the initial sample sent to the Genographic Project. I was notified by email when they were ready.

We've done this for myself and a sister; plus my father's sister and my mother's brother.

FTDAN can advise re which family member/s based on your goals and just who is available and willing.

FTDNA may be wrong, but they seem quite helpful in these matters, so as a genetics lay person I've been deferring to their friendly advise.

I like what I've learned from the Genographic link. I like contributing to the data base of their project, and it did not cost us any more!

Good luck,
John

R. Walker
08 June 2007, 09:12 PM
So, lets say the forum's wisdom is correct and FTDNA is the "best", which of their tests are a) the best (as in, money is no object, but the data you pay for should actually be useful) or b) the best bang for your buck?

I'm sure the Y-DNA67 - 67 Marker Test gives more data than the 37, but it really that useful?

Is the mtDNA Full Sequence ever worth it?

Also, if you are not checking for Native American or African blood ancestry, is the mtDNAPlus really worth the added cost over the standard mtDNA. For example, my father's maternal line may have Native American blood so I may have him tested with the mtDNAPlus option, but I know my mother's line has no Native American blood so I am considering the standard mtDNA, is there any thing else I would missing out on?

Lastly, I am considering doing a Y-DNA and mtDNA on myself, asking my dad to do a mtDNA only (since we share the same paternal Y-DNA line but different maternal mtDNA line) and my Uncle from my mother's side to do a Y-DNA test only (since we share the different paternal Y-DNA line but same maternal mtDNA line). Does that make sense? Is there any reason to test my dad's Y-DNA or my uncles mtDNA as well?

Thanks

Michael


Michael,
I would refer you to the Genealogy DNA Forum by Rootsweb (You can check it out here-- http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/DNA/GENEALOGY-DNA.html
You can browse a bit and get an idea of what they are about. I warn you that sometimes the discussions get technical, but when you want answers there are lots of well informed professionals on the list. Just be sure to subscribe in the DIGEST form, or you will be innundated with single messages.) They can tell you what you need to order next, and what your results mean. I would recommend the 12 marker Genographic test to start, and then when you get the results, transfer them to FTDNA There is a space to click on the results page to have that done, and it transfers automatically. I would recommend the 67 upgrade for the Y marker. Then enough markers are present to be meaningful. A 12 marker match really doesn't mean anything.

With the mtDNA there is a problem. If you are looking for possible matches, the mega test should be ordered. It is $$$. But if you want a general idea of the maternal patterns, then the upgrade by FT after the Genographic is done is enough. The "experts" at the DNA forum can explain it to you.

One thing, doing the two steps -Genographic then FTDNA- will take much longer for results than just doing FTDNA from the start. So it depends how much of a hurry you are in. Check out both the Genographic website, and Family Tree DNA before you decide.

R. Walker

S. Kennedy
10 June 2007, 12:14 AM
There are at least 3 or 4 organizations that do genealogical DNA testing and I would not recommend one over another. However I do agree that the 12 marker tests are of very little use and think that 37 markers should be the minimum for y-dna.

I would like to strongly recommend that everyone should list their results on one or both of the open databases. The following is a quote from KENNEDY-DNA PROJECT at rootsweb.com by Iain Kennedy.

"The two open databases (www.ybase.org and www.ysearch.org) permit any level of privacy you wish, you don't even need to reveal the email address if you don't want. As an extra layer, for those in my project you can opt to have messages sent via me if that makes people feel safer."

These two databases allow one to search for close matches world wide and this is one of the main advantages of getting the tests run. My experience has been that FTDNA will not allow posting of results from other organizations and except for family studies there is virtually no ability to search their database. If you post your results to ybase or ysearch you increase your chances of finding matches dramatically.

xejn
10 June 2007, 09:57 AM
Based on the info here: http://www.familytreedna.com/faq2.html

The difference beteen 12 market and 25 (not offered by FTDNA), 37 and 67 is big. The difference between 25 and 37 is very close as is the difference betwenn 37 and 67.

I guess with FTDNA the 37 marke test is the sweet spot and if you find a match, you can always upgrade.

Karen Peters
29 June 2007, 06:48 PM
My parents and I are discussing having their DNA tested. I was wondering what the best option would be for our situation. Joining a surname group isn't a possibility for me: My Greek paternal grandfather made up his name when he went through Ellis Island. We are not trying to answer any specific question, we are just sort of curious.

I looked at the National Geographic site and it seemed that there isn't an option for mtDNA testing on men, only the Y-chromosome. I would be interested in his mtDNA, however.

Would just a basic test with fewer markers with someone like Family Tree DNA be a good idea, something like my dad's Y-chromosome and his mtDNA and my mother's mtDNA?

Dennis J. Cunniff
29 June 2007, 10:05 PM
I was wondering what the best option would be for our situation. Joining a surname group isn't a possibility for me: My Greek paternal grandfather made up his name when he went through Ellis Island.

I looked at the National Geographic site and it seemed that there isn't an option for mtDNA testing on men, only the Y-chromosome. I would be interested in his mtDNA, however.

DNA testing projects aren't limited to surnames; there are also groups related to geographic areas; for example, you might want to contact the project director at http://www.greekdnaproject.net/ . If nothing else, he might be likely to extend the group discount to you for the initial tests; and he might well have additional information for you. There are probably other such Greek DNA groups; that just happens to be the one I found.

I also believe that while the National Geographic site doesn't make it obvious, it will test males for either mtDNA or Y-DNA; it just wants you to pay double if you test both.

John
02 July 2007, 06:04 PM
Starting DNA testing via Genographic Project is a good entry. It offers Y-DNA for men and MT-DNA for women. The actual testing is done via FamilyTreeDNA.

Once your results are ready you have a Link which takes you directly to FamilyTreeDNA. At that point you have the option for additional tests, at a discount.

I found two quick calls to Brandi (713) 868-1438 at FTDNA a useful step in deciding what to do first, and then later, after Genographic, which to do next.

Genographic has a very extensive FAQ section including:

"#9. Should everyone in the family take the test?

No. It would not be necessary for more than one male and one female member of any one family to provide a sample to determine the deep ancestry of both the paternal and maternal lines of descent. For example, only one of two brothers should take the test. They share the same story and therefore it would be unnecessary to buy two Public Participation Kits. Similarly, it would not be necessary for both mother and daughter to have their mitochondrial DNA analyzed."
See the attached chart for a fuller answer:
https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/faqs_participation.html#Q9

John
Reunion v.9.05
Mac OS 10.4.10
_____

John
02 July 2007, 06:13 PM
DNA testing projects aren't limited to surnames; there are also groups related to geographic areas; for example, you might want to contact the project director at http://www.greekdnaproject.net/ .

I also believe that while the National Geographic site doesn't make it obvious, it will test males for either mtDNA or Y-DNA; it just wants you to pay double if you test both.
_____
Dennis makes a good point.

The Genographic kit requires that you check off on a form if the sample is to do a y-DNA or an mt-DNA test. But they have no information if the sample is from male or female.

Following the Genographic suggestions we submitted four samples:

my y-DNA
my sister's mt-DNA
my mother's brother's y-DNA
my father's sister's mt-DNA.

Good luck!
John
_____

Karen Peters
03 July 2007, 09:33 AM
Thanks for the advice. Now I know where to start looking. I found it a little overwhelming when I just googled the subject. It's hard to tell if a company is legitimate or not just from their website. Also, I never would have found the Greek DNA Project on my own.

Keith Ogier
10 July 2007, 12:57 PM
Has anyone used SMGF (Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation)? They don't send you the results, though it says "your results and genealogy will be added to the Sorenson database, and you can find them by searching for your surname and looking at related family trees." Does this mean you can find your actual results and record the data to add to other databases?

Thanks

Keith

SVass
10 July 2007, 08:37 PM
Yes, although you may have to search for your results as they can have typos. sam

Larry Jelf
09 August 2007, 04:48 PM
What kind of costs are attached to this service today? Naturally, I would assume that it depends on how extensive the information desired. It would be nice to make a possible connection to a family not yet assimilated in our records.

Larry Jelf
09 August 2007, 10:14 PM
I have neither grandparents nor parents. My living cousins are far away, and aunts and uncles are also long dead. What value am I going to get out of DNA testing and with no living available relatives, what info could I ask for that would be meaningful? This discussion is interestig and has whetted my interest but leaves me curious regarding value.

ostater
09 August 2007, 11:19 PM
Since most use the dna route to find new "cousins", it's unfortunate but ok that your parents/g-parents can't participate. Unless, you're worried about the "milkman"...

Seriously, it's a good research tool that will help you connect with others through common ancestors several generations back.

Amelia
10 August 2007, 12:43 AM
What value am I going to get out of DNA testing and with no living available relatives, what info could I ask for that would be meaningful?

Y-DNA testing gives you results correlating to your particular male-line descent. Other men descended from the same men as you will have identical or nearly identical results. You may not have traced your ancestry back far enough to that common ancestor, so finding people with the same results gives you clues as to where to look.

For example, say you've traced your male line back to X, born in 1750. Your results come back a match with a man descended from Y, born in 1720. X may be the son, nephew or more distant cousin of Y, and while DNA results won't tell you which, knowing about Y will help you direct your research to figure out if there's a connection. And just as importantly, if you thought you were connected to Y, but there's NOT a match, that tells you something useful too.

The most helpful results are going to be people you didn't know about before, so it doesn't matter whether your close relatives are alive or not.

Chris Philippo
08 August 2009, 12:01 PM
I've had this done with FTDNA. YDNA67 with Deep Clade and mtDNAPlus I think. I don't know if the info can be added/is worth adding in Reunion 9?

Male is R1b1b2a1a4 and female is I.

Being adopted, there's the barest possibility I will learn of biological relatives through this. I doubt that happens very often right now (but it does happen), however in the future as more people have this done, perhaps.

Dennis J. Cunniff
09 August 2009, 04:21 PM
I've had this done with FTDNA. YDNA67 with Deep Clade and mtDNAPlus I think. I don't know if the info can be added/is worth adding in Reunion 9?

Male is R1b1b2a1a4 and female is I.

Being adopted, there's the barest possibility I will learn of biological relatives through this. I doubt that happens very often right now (but it does happen), however in the future as more people have this done, perhaps.

It would be good to have a place to record the values for the standard Y-SNPs and for mitochondral differences from the CRS (you can do this in a non-standardized way now, by creating a "DNA note", for example). Unfortunately, recording subclades designations such as R1b1b2a1a4 is turning out to be not as helpful, since they change as the phylogenetic tree is rearranged by subsequent studies; the nomenclature shows signs of settling on using something like the furthest downstream mutation as the subclade designator (e.g. R-M222 vs. R1b1c). I suppose a "fill-in-the-blank" subclade designator field would work.

egudridge
01 September 2009, 03:27 PM
Look into 23andme. Very interesting.