Using DNA as a Genealogy Research Tool

-

DNA Dot Reform

Last night I removed all my AncestryDNA® dots. 

And then, started over. This was years of work removed, but after watching Diahan Southard's "The 5 Steps to Organizing Your DNA in 2023," I had to do it. 

After studying Research Like A Pro, I've reformed my research practices, and heading into Research Like a Pro With DNA, I want to do that with DNA too, because it is a  really valuable record source. I realized I had been using the dots only as labels, not as filters which Southard's simple how-to enables. I'm using Ancestry as an example; the techniques will work elsewhere of course.

Dot Groups as Filters

Once the dots were gone, I created four groups, one for each of my great grandparent couples. Here is the view of the near end of my pedigree. I've blurred all but my great-greats, and boxed each couple to show what Southard proposes:

Valorie's great-grandparent couples

So my first four groups are: Cowan-McPherson, Schell-Andersdotter, McBee-Booth, and Baysinger-Disney.

Using Known Matches to Find Best Mystery Matches

Then, using all my known second cousins, I am marking ALL their matches in common with me with their group. This is an important step in using the dots as a filter. My sister and some of my first cousins have tested at Ancestry, so of course they get dot groups, but they are not used in this "all matches in common" step - only known second cousins. I assume that second-cousin-once-removed will work if the second cousin didn't test; time will tell!

By the way, I'm going to delete my MyHeritage dot groups as well, and start over there as well. And this time I'll pay more attention to the colors, and make them match the Ancestry colors I've chosen. In my notes on 23andMe, I'll make them match my dot groups too - the notes will act as a filter too. Gedmatch also has match groups and I think I'll begin using them more now.

Best Mystery Matches

All of this work is to find the people whom Southard calls Best Mystery Matches (BMM). This is all before the "Doing Genealogy" step and will prove as a valuable foundation for research questions about great grandparents and their parents and siblings. 

Southard demonstrates using ThruLines® to easily find your Best Known Matches of each of your great grandparents. Ideally, you will find descendants from each of their children. Once you have dotted each known matches and ALL of their shared matches, it's time to Do Genealogy and get each of those Best Mystery Matches into your tree. And if you neglected to get a few of your best known matches aren't in your tree, polish off that task, tag and link them all. 

Analyze Your Matches

Once this work is done, it's time to analyze your DNA matches. Southard demonstrates putting your known match data into a spreadsheet by basically copying the data from ThruLines® into a spreadsheet. This sounds like busy work, right? However, Southard explains how moving the lineage data into a spreadsheet, your brain begins to see it in a new way, which is where insight comes from. 

I have not yet done this, but am excited to do it soon, with data from all the sites.

Branch Points

Southard introduces the concept of "branch points" which you can now clearly see in the spreadsheet. Of course you can also build this spreadsheet from your own tree where for one reason or another doesn't show up on ThruLines®, moving the lineage data into a spreadsheet, or from other sites. This is a key reason for moving this data - you will get everything from everywhere, and can analyze it all in one place. 

Fortunately Southard shows how to extend the dot labels to the third cousin/ second-great grandparent groups and beyond, the magic that happens then. If I'm diligent in marking each shared match, then from the dot pattern alone, I will know their descendency, whether or not they have a tree, or respond from messages, or have a nickname I can't tie to a specific person. 

After doing the spreadsheet step, I will be watching this webinar yet again, to soak up all the analysis steps, and I hope many readers will do the same thing. After all, if we are to truly use DNA data in our genealogy and family history work, shouldn't we analyze this data as critically as we do every other record we find? The Genealogy Proof Standard tells me YES. 

Also see https://bcgcertification.org/standards-for-dna-evidence/

*Cartoons courtesy of PngItem (magnet) and Createzilla (magic wand). 


Valorie Zimmerman



Comments

  1. ValorieFebruary 28, 2023 at 7:45 PM

    After rewatching again, I noticed that the link that Southard provides about how to contact your mystery matches does not work for me. However, this works: https://www.yourdnaguide.com/ydgblog/contacting-your-dna-matches

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Looking for a Needle in a Haystack? GAME CHANGER at FamilySearch

-
Image
Generated with Bing ImageCreator (AI), March 13, 2024 Where is YOUR Needle, Your Missing Record? Genealogical Proof Standard When we use the GPS (Genealogical Proof Standard) as our guide, we all know that "exhaustive research" can be both tedious and exhausting. Is life long enough to search page by page through all the counties where all the members of a family might have lived, paid taxes, bought, leased or sold property, made a will or died intestate? It is possible that the new Full Text Search at FamilySearch will  eventually  allow us to do just that. It has been estimated that 75% or more of the records at FamilySearch were browsable but not searchable; the only indexes those found in the records themselves. Those records are certainly attainable by using those indexes and browsing to the record of interest, but the process is tedious, often frustrating, and slow. And once found, the record must be read and transcribed to be useful. This new Full Text Search tackles a...
Read more

What's the Question?

-
Image
We genealogists are often told by experienced researchers how important it is to begin with a research question. I resisted doing this for a long time, but now that I use a series of questions to guide my research, the search is more focused and actually finds more of the history of the family I'm investigating. I use a Google Doc as the  research proceeds, where I keep the question(s), the plan, timelines, checklist of resources to search, etc. all in one place. I've seen others use spreadsheets in the same way, perhaps splitting up things in tabs (Excel or Google Sheets). I prefer a document because I add source citations as I find them and I can begin writing up the case right there in the doc as the hypotheses are proven. Specific Questions in Previous Successes As beginners we often have no clue how much and what details we already know about a person, event or relationship, so it's hard to specify what we want to know. But when looking back at successful research, it ...
Read more

Help Save This Abused and Neglected Cemetery

-
Image
Screen capture from Google Maps History In an exchange of emails this past week in both the main SKCGS group, and in the Washington-State-Genealogy group, many facts were revealed about the history of the I.O.O.F. Comet Lodge Cemetery, also known as the Old Burying Ground, the Georgetown Cemetery, the Graham Street Burying Ground and maybe more.  FindAGrave sums it up this way: "Since it was established in 1881, the Comet Lodge cemetery site has been whittled away to less than half its original 5 acres. Records are sketchy but it's safe to say that some 500 pioneers were buried here, atop unknown numbers of native Duwamish people. New burials ended in the 1930s. Since then, homes and streets were built on top of many of the plots as the neighborhood around the cemetery grew.  "Upkeep and ownership of the cemetery bounced between the city, civic groups, relatives of Comet Lodge residents, and nearby neighbors. For years, much of the property was allowed to deteriorate int...
Read more