DNA Ancestry Review Part 3

At long last, here is the final installment of my DNA Ancestry review (follow the links for the other installments:  Part 1, Part 2, Part 2.5, Alert).  Also check out my Family Tree DNA review of a year ago.  I wanted to have this written earlier, but a combination of family activities, work, and a bit of laziness all conspired to delay my efforts a bit.  My plan here is to first look at how DNA Ancestry displays and explains the results - also how they fit into Ancestry.com as a whole.  Then I will attempt to compare these results with my Family Tree DNA test of a year ago.  The second piece may be more difficult than I first envisioned.  This is not a surprise really because I find the whole genetic genealogy thing a complicated subject, but I will give it a go.   

Overall, I like Ancestry.com's addition of DNA testing to there genealogy offerings.  As I wrote in the first two parts of this series, the testing kit came quickly, the instructions were clear and easy to follow, and the most surprising aspect is it only took nine days for my results to arrive.  To get to my DNA results I now click the "DNA" tab on the top of the home page and on the upper right part of the screen there is a "My DNA" link that takes me to my results.  I would like to include screen shots of everything I'm going to talk about, but I'm not sure if Ancestry allows it so I will do my best to describe the pages (I also don't feel like reading through those mind numbing terms of service to see if screen shots are allowed).  One thing I did notice is that DNA is not included in the Ancestry advanced search form...at least I couldn't find it.  I think one of the advantages talked about when DNA testing was first announced was the integration of this into Ancestry as a whole.  They may get to there, but for now it appears the DNA and other Ancestry.com databases are separate.

The "My DNA" page is very simple and easy to understand.  The 46 markers are clearly listed and there's a link to create a PDF file to download.  This is very handy because it makes it easier to type your results into the various free databases on the internet like YSearch.org.  Also on this page is a map of North Africa, the Middle East, and Europe showing my "Paternal Ancient Ancestry" and my haplogroup classification.  I'm listed as an E3b and the map sidebar gives a brief explanation of what this means.  I was a little disappointed in this part because the map appears generic - it has an arrow coming out of Africa going through the Middle East and into Europe.  I also wish there was a more detailed explanation of my haplogroup...after reading it I felt like I wanted more.  Now, I have to temper my disappointment a little because I took an additional test at Family Tree DNA (not offered by DNA Ancestry) that provided a lot more resolution to my haplogroup, so a direct comparison is not really fair.   

Probably the most important part of the page is the "Find Paternal Matches" button.  Clicking this takes me to a listing of people who match me to varying degrees and also includes a map showing where each match currently lives (down to the state level).  I think this is the part of the site users will really like.  The page shows I have 25 genetic matches listed according to how close of a match they are to my test results.  The listing shows a name and the figure of a person color coded by the closeness of the match.  Above the listing is a slider bar that filters these matches to within the number of generation you are interested in.  Clicking on a name brings up a cloud on the map pointing to where the person lives and how close of a match they are.  For example, the first person on my list has a very Italian name, and is from Utah.  On this little cloud there is a "Compare DNA" button that brings up my 46 markers on top of his for an easy comparison.  Clicking on his name again is where you'll find the probability of when you had a common ancestor.  In this case, there is a 50% probability we had a common ancestor within 15 generations (approximately 375 years) and a 95% probability of one within the last 36 generations (about 900 years).  These are not really useful numbers for my family history (they may be very useful for other haplogroups), but comparing my DNA results with all of the matches is very interesting to see.  Of the 25 matches I have, I don't think I could ever locate a common ancestor, but as this database grows I guess it's possible.

I found comparing the actual test results of DNA Ancestry and Family Tree DNA difficult.  In appears they came up with similar results: DNA Ancestry = E3b and FTDNA = E3b1b2.  I got more resolution from FTDNA because they offered an a Deep SNP test (for an additional $100) that told me more about my genetic origin.  When I tried laying the results of the two DNA tests side by side (Y-46 from DNA Ancestry and Y-37 from FTDNA) I actually came up with more questions when I tried to make a comparison.  Of course there were 9 more markers tested by DNA Ancestry and most of the other markers had the same value in both, but there was one marker that had a different value in the two tests and a couple markers tested by FTDNA were not on my DNA Ancestry results.  Do genetic genealogy testing companies all test the same markers?  If they don't, does it matter?  How much of an impact is there when two testing companies come up with a different value for the same marker?  Is there a genetic genealogy testing standard (common practices by all) or is the field so new everyone does their own thing?  I suspect my questions aren't important overall because the two testing companies came up with generally the same result, but consumers are basically taking this whole process on faith and I think one should at least ask these questions.

Choosing one testing company over the other depends on what you want to get out of it.  If your focus is on genetic origins and the migration of your mostly pre-written history genes (like me), then Family Tree DNA is probably the place to go.  They have a wide range of testing choices and an incredible amount of information on their site to help you out.  If you are mainly interested in finding genetic matches with people alive today to further your research, DNA Ancestry may be the way to go.  It only offers the basics (at a decent price) and is very user friendly - I have the feeling their DNA database will probably grow rather quickly as time goes on and the matching results will bet better and better.

There you have it.  Of course these are only my opinions and others may have a different experience.  I found the whole series fun to write and apparently my readers were interested too because these posts had more traffic then any other in the year I've had this blog.  I welcome any comments, but would particularly like to hear from anyone who had a different experience than I did, or who disagrees with my opinions...I actually like it when people disagree with me...it makes me think critically about my own opinions and sometimes causes me to change them.

Click here to subscribe to Genealogy Reviews Online

Comments

[Liz]

I am just considering testing and looking at Ancestry (where I have an account) and at FTDNA. I did find an explanation that the name of some of the markers vary between companies explained at Ancestry (under FAQs) and also several unbiased mentions of FTDNA. Ancestry does state that they attempt to offer a conversion from FTDNA results (or other companies) so that results done from other companies can be manually loaded into Ancestry's database. They seemed rather agreeable to me about not "forcing" you to use their product to enter results. Of course, that might be explained by the fact that the larger their database, the more attractive to prospective customers. But, since they are a company whose product is assisting people to trace their ancestors, I suspect they were just trying to provide more tools. I do believe that there should be an industry standard for these tests. One should not have to get a test done at multiple locations to search each of their databases. A little "sharing" would be nice between companies on customer database searches, but that may never happen.

[waka]

thanks for this review... although actually it made me think twice about doing dna testing--looks like results are confusing. For me it might be worthwhile just to figure out what region my y chromosome comes from, b/c it could be from anywhere. all this haplogroup talk puts me to sleep to be honest. it seems like what the average person wants from a dna test is a y-chromosome test to figure our where ancient patriarch was from, a mt-test to figure out where ancient matriarch was from, and analysis of the rest of dna to identify ethnically identifiable strands of dna so people can know if they are what percentage of what ethnicity, or if there is some as-yet unknown ethnicity in your dna somewhere. Also people want to connect to distant relatives not trackable through paper trails. religious people want to know how their genes fit into a religious context--like are they descended from a specific person or do they have Jewish ancestry or whatever. some people want to know what diseases they might be prone to. some people will want to know their natural aptitudes. anyway if above is true, it seems like ftdna and even ancestry mostly drop the ball on these issues, drowning their customers in y's and haplogroups and GCs and ATs. Another thing i don't like about all the dna science sites is that they foist speculation about populations migrations, or even timelines, onto their customers as established scientific fact.

Anyway thank you so much for your reviews.

[Ken]

My comment is also on Ancestry testing since that is what I also choose but in my case it was a specific need. I need to prove a connection not make new ones. Our families name is changed or more like morphed and this test it to prove connections. In doing so one point no one seems to make is how we can have different last names her is my comments on that and also some things I thing about some other issues regarding these test.

Although this is new to us as family historians and we may be able someday to make better use of the results right now unless we as using it to prove connections or just want to see what general geographic region you Great … Grand Father came from the test has limited usefulness.

I think in some ways ancestry as an example is misleading us or better said overselling the results. I have a person that is showing a connection with 8 generation (normal results default), 200 years with a 50% probability of being related but if you up this to 95% it goes to 35 generations and 625 years making the tree at the top to have 33,554,432 grand kids at the bottom the common grand father. Knowing the value of the test is as important as test it’s self.

One of the problems with this DNA testing is that it ONLY shows direct relationships by males but there are at least four ways I have found this test shows connections with similar OR dissimilar names;

1) Names similar or the same - Direct name line handed down from father to son. Names and spelling change over time but usually are somewhat close (Lewetag vs Levedag).

2) Out of wedlock - Great Granddad had a relationship with someone and a child was born out of wedlock breaking the family name but preserving the DNA chain (child keeping the mothers name or taking on the name of whom she eventually married)

3) By death or other means - The child was moved into a new family when either the father passed away or the marriage ended and the mother remarried taking her child with her and the child then taking on the new step fathers name. The other possibility is both parents pass away and another related family (married sister of the mother as an example) or just friends of the family adopt the child.

4) Deliberate name change - This applies big time to the US names, the male just outright changes their last name. This occurred a lot when immigrating to the US but I have others in the family that changed due to a family conflict from Hamm to Hohman,

[Tim Agazio]

Beth, Thank you for your comment and your effort in answering some of my questions. I also think a DNA test would be a wonderful Christmas present for your Grandmother! Since she's been able to track your family back so many generations, a DNA test would probably be very helpful in focusing additional research.

Tim

[Beth Lewis]

Thanks for the reviews. Genealogy is my maternal grandmother's favorite hobby. I have an ancestral history going back 12 generations (including mine)/over 300 years that includes what she had as of July 1995, and I know she's made significant progress since then, one branch going back to the 1200s. I was thinking that something to help her research might make a good Christmas present this year, and a DNA test seems like a promising option for a number of reasons. With DNA tests being a relatively new market, companies do well enough to focus on the benefits of testing in general without trying to separate themselves from competitors, your review will definitely help me decide among the companies.

With the little research I've done into DNA testing for genealogical purposes and my background in biology from college (I majored in biology), I think I can answer the first and part of the third of your 3 questions:

For "Do genetic genealogy testing companies all test the same markers? If they don't, does it matter?" there are a number of different markers that can contribute to meaningful matches, which is why you can have tests that check for each of 100+ markers; the tests for smaller numbers of markers are just testing a subset of the markers that have been deemed worthy of testing. I'm not sure of the particulars regarding which markers are chosen beyond that they have to be variable enough to be different among individuals but consistent enough that a match likely or certain if two individuals are related. For lack of a better analogy, in dating a person's favorite color will vary from person to person, but two people liking the color blue doesn't mean they will get along better or worse than if their favorite colors aren't the same, whereas two people sharing a religion may be an important factor in determining how well they'll get along. Likewise, a marker that often matches between two random people without them being related isn't helpful in these DNA tests, but a marker that will usually/always match if the two people are related is more useful. I can only assume there are certain advantages to looking at one marker over another among the subset of useful markers that companies use to determine which markers they will use, just as (to continue with the dating analogy) some people may care more or less about the other person's religion based on how religious they are, etc...

From what I've read, I think any standards that exist for genetic genealogy testing stem from practicality and not an organized standard, except that the markers two or more companies use in common should be labeled the same unless the names have changed, as Mr. Matthews mentioned.

[Tim Agazio]

Thank you for your comment! I appreciate your thoughtful opinion! You are absolutely correct about the wealth of info on FTDNA verses DNA Ancestry. I also have to point out that Ancestry didn't start their DNA effort from scratch...they formed a partnership with Sorenson Genomics which is an established DNA testing firm. I have the feeling this partnership will expand the testing options once the partnership matures a little.

This review was only meant to relate MY experience with each...I apologize if my poor writing skills made it seem otherwise. There are no surname projects for me to join (my name is not common at all), and if I started my own, I would be the only member unless I could convince my brother and a couple of cousins to join...but we already know we are related. I have joined a couple of geographic projects, but to date no other member of either group comes close. I have zero matches for 37 markers...I do have a few where 25 out of 37 match...where the probability of a common ancestor within the last 24 generations is 99%. It's impossible for me to trace my family tree (Y-DNA) back 24 generations so chances are I will never find a match that will be useful for genealogy purposes...I imagine it's possible, but probably won't happen for a lot of years until more people get tested in southern Italy or North Africa.

I also did a lot of research before I tested with FTDNA and saw others get good results, but I went into it knowing that I most likely wouldn't be one of them. Knowing this going in, my expectation was to find out more about my genetic origins and where my Y-DNA line originated. I was extremely pleased when I discovered this information from FTDNA.

[Greg Matthews]

While I've read this series with interest I have to finally disagree with your conclusions in this final installment. When I want to buy a new computer I go to an electronics store, not Wal-Mart. By the same token, when I want info on genealogy DNA testing I go to a specialist: FTDNA. I tested with FTDNA nearly two years ago to 37 markers. As my project started to get a few more people who were closely related to me (within less than 8 generations with high probability) I upgraded to the 67 marker test. The 67 markers gives a far greater degree of accuracy than Ancestry's 46 marker results. There lies the heart of why FTDNA is far superior to Ancestry's efforts: what does it all mean? I've had the chance to explain the benefits of DNA testing to over a dozen people over the past two years and I got better and better at explaining it each time I emailed someone about DNA testing. I could explain things like why the testing is helpful, what the different types of tests were used for and how they were helpful depending on the circumstances and then point the person to links on FTDNA that backed up my simplified explanations if they required more background on the testing. Ancestry, to my knowledge, doesn't have anywhere near the amount of descriptive explanations for DNA testing that FTDNA has.

That's the heart of the matter: most people have no idea what they are in for when they begin the process of having their DNA tested or what the results mean when they get them back. Ancestry does nothing beyond saying "here's your haplogroup and here's the people who you match with within X generations". Big deal. Without the context of what that means it is hardly of any use. One of the nice things about FTDNA is that they show you in your project group which markers are rapidly mutating and once you find a group of folks who are closely related to you you can start to use the fast mutating markers to determine which branches of the family they descend from. If you only had experience with Ancestry you would have no idea of what the markers REALLY meant!

Your implication that FTDNA is really only useful for discovering genetic origins and pre-historical migrations, in my opinion, could not be further from the truth. The way you worded that makes it appear that if people want meaningful results within a historical context that they can trace then FTDNA is NOT the place to go. I'm not sure how anyone could reach that conclusion after using both services. Granted, I have not used Ancestry's testing, but the project groups of FTDNA are full of information on people matching up with others who can trace back to within 300 years to a known common ancestor. Better yet, those family projects are run by people like you and I who have no connection to FTDNA. They can manipulate their own project web pages and present the test results by sub-family groups and explain to their group members what the results mean in relation to how their 8th great grandfather relates to the testees or what big mysteries have been solved with DNA testing. Pigs will fly before Ancestry allows that kind of interaction between test participants. One of the first things I did before I sent off for the FTDNA test kit was look at some of the other family projects to see what kinds of results other people were getting. I was very impressed by the projects that I looked at and how the project admins were making the results available to all. They were explaining what was being discovered by the test results as they came in. I seriously doubt we will ever see that kind of interaction on Ancestry.

As to your comment on why there were some markers that show up in the Ancestry testing and don't show up in the FTDNA testing (or vice versa) or why some seem to have different names between the two services I suggest you look up DYS markers on wikipedia. You will find out that the names for some markers have changed. you can find some information on that also on the FTDNA site as well as their forums. I doubt you can find that on Ancestry. It wouldn't do for them to acknowledge anything their competitors are doing....