If you are considering
purchasing family tree or genealogy software, you need to find the package that will work with
your computer abilities, your computer platform, and your goals. And
cost is also a factor. You may want to check out this website to see
the excellent comparison between software package options.
I found a great side-by-side comparison of such packages at at Findthebest.com.
I use Family Tree Maker and find it very efficient and pleasant to use. I like the interface with the information on ancestry.com, and I am constantly finding new features that amaze me. I particularly like the feature that allows the information from ancestry.com to be added to a person on a family tree with the documentation included. Talk about time-saving!! The forum at Family Tree DNA currently is running a poll which shows that for those who have responded, this is the software of choice.
Update December 2015: Ancestry.com has announced that it is dropping its interface with Family Tree maker.
Sunday, July 8, 2012
Saturday, July 7, 2012
Rare SNP search at Gedmatch.com
Update 7/20/2012: The Rare SNP feature has been moved from Gedmatch to another website. I think we can expect that there will soon be information on Gedmatch.com about how to access the new website.
Using your autosomal DNA results, which are easy to load up to Gedmatch.com, you can search for rare SNPs you have in common with one other person (whose kit number you know). You could compare yourself to a close or distant relative. I tried it and found it pretty easy to do and the results are fascinating to read. What is an SNP? you may ask. An SNP is just short for SNiP, a snip, or section of DNA that can be compared to the same sections of DNA for another individual. Working with SNPs, we can find commonalities which point to how related or unrelated we are to another person, or we can look at decoding the messages in the SNPs.
The utility works very quickly. Enter the kit numbers, click to compare, and boom! It is there before you.
Then you can see what scientific abstracts have to say regarding these SNPs and their correlation to health issues. I wish I could understand those abstracts better, but at least I can see what the headings are and know that the SNPs are (possibly) relevant to certain health matters, whether in a positive or negative way. For example: you may see that a certain SNP has been researched in regard to certain addiction issues or cancers. Your particular mutations are relevant, and the way in which they are relevant is explained. You can see the information and the source of the research.Very intriguing, and for those scientifically-inclined, it should be quite interesting to ponder.
Again, we have a new and useful feature from Gedmatch.com.
This is the websites's description of the feature, and they say it better than I can:
"This utility finds rare SNPs that are shared by more than one person.
It may be useful for identifying SNPs from deep common ancestry,
or SNPs related to shared characteristics."
http://gedmatch.com/
image from Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Browse scanned records at Familysearch.org
https://familysearch.org/Newly added to the collection of images that can be browsed at Familysearch.org are many probate records from Pennsylvania. To find them, just go to the Familysearch website and then, instead of searching for a name, scroll down below the name boxes to the locations that have images to browse. The header is "Browse by location." Click on any location that interests you, and you will be into the data set. Most of these images are not indexed, but there are some indexes for some of the locations.
For the most part, the indexes are not connected to the data sets you will want to look at, so you can take notes of what to look for when you find the index. There may be a box or file number. Again, you have to browse for that number. Many of the images are in chronological order, which is helpful. Sometimes they load slowly.
There should be some good finds here, although it takes a bit of work to get to results that are relevant to a particular family tree.
There are images for many other locations, too. New York has many records included. I found the Cornwall records to be excellent. You can see birth, marriage, and burial records for specific locations. I found a marriage record that I have not seen before anywhere. It helps connect a family relationship.
It is wonderful to see scanned records from so many far-flung locations. Instead of traveling or ordering microfilms, you can just browse at your computer.
The information takes a bit of time to wade through, but it can be rewarding, and perhaps in the future these records will all be indexed and searchable.
For the most part, the indexes are not connected to the data sets you will want to look at, so you can take notes of what to look for when you find the index. There may be a box or file number. Again, you have to browse for that number. Many of the images are in chronological order, which is helpful. Sometimes they load slowly.
There should be some good finds here, although it takes a bit of work to get to results that are relevant to a particular family tree.
There are images for many other locations, too. New York has many records included. I found the Cornwall records to be excellent. You can see birth, marriage, and burial records for specific locations. I found a marriage record that I have not seen before anywhere. It helps connect a family relationship.
It is wonderful to see scanned records from so many far-flung locations. Instead of traveling or ordering microfilms, you can just browse at your computer.
The information takes a bit of time to wade through, but it can be rewarding, and perhaps in the future these records will all be indexed and searchable.
Friday, June 29, 2012
Melungeon ancestry currently debated
I have been reading with interest the Melungeon-DNA email list hosted by rootsweb.com. The main topic seems to be the same as ever, and it is a very interesting one--what is the ancestry of the Melungeons?
A little twist, though,has arisen in this debate--and that is--what exactly are researchers determining, and how are they determining it? When you analyze Y-Dna and Mtdna, which are very specific and very limited, just what do you end up with? Can you make judgments about the ethnic make-up of a population as a whole?
In addition, there is a second twist, which is that a scholarly paper has been interpreted by the media. The online discussion has covered every possible permutation of the arguments that can arise from the facts, the way the research was done, and the interpretation of results.
The scholarly paper was recently written on the topic of the ancestry of the Melungeons and it has been accepted in the Journal of Genetic Genealogy. The article has generated some media attention, and some good discussion.
I haven't seen the article yet, but I gather from the thread that I have been reading that it appears that the authors looked at MtDNA and Y-DNA lines to see what evidence there might be for ancestry. MtDNA traces a person's mother's mother's mother's mother--and so on, for thousands, and often tens of thousands of years. It is very good for identifying that matrilineal lineage, but of course cannot account for any ancestry introduced by males (and their mothers) throughout the many generations traced back. It is useful, but limited. Y-DNA is similarly limited, in that it can trace a man's father's father's father--etc. for many generations, but again, any women and their fathers who married into that line do not get represented in the DNA picture that results.
Update July 1, 2012: Thanks to those who sent a link to the article, I have now read it. It is very interesting and contains a lot of information about the families studied. Having seen the article, I would still suggest that autosomal DNA analysis be looked at in the future, along with relevant paper trails. In response to the comments that autosomal DNA doesn't go back many generations, I would say that many of us who have tested find that our cousin matches appear to be clearly beyond five generations back. Some useful information may be gleaned by testing. That's just my opinion.
A media report on the paper points to men of African ancestry marrying women of European ancestry. That means, of the people whose DNA was accepted into the study and then taken into account for the research (and that may mean including or excluding some persons, according to what I have read in the thread), many of the paternal lines were of African ancestry and the maternal lines of European ancestry.
This might tell a story, and it might not. For example, a man who submitted both YDNA and MtDNA for the study might find that the ancient patrilineal ancestor was from Africa. The ancient matrilineal ancestor was from Europe. But there could be all sorts of other ancestry (Native American, for example) introduced into the person's genetic make-up.This additional ancestry can be seen to some extent in autosomal DNA, although the results are not as neat and tidy as those of Y-DNA and MtDNA. Autosomal DNA is also problematic in that it can only show heritage for a certain number of generations, and even then it is a spotty record, as some ancestry is inevitably discarded as DNA recombines with each generation. Yet, I'd want to see the autosomal results, and see those analyzed by geneticists. I think they would add to the picture.
Melungeon stories and documents about heritage provide a variety of possible directions for ancestry, including Native American, Portuguese, Turkish, African, and others. It will indeed be interesting to see just what the DNA will be able to show. And, in my opinion, that means looking at autosomal DNA and connecting that to paper trails as much as can be done. It is a lot of work, but would provide a richer basis for analysis than what was provided for the paper in JOGG. That work is important, but does not tell the readers much about the ethnic ancestry of the population.
The debate itself is fascinating, and if you want to see it for yourself, check the email list at rootsweb.com (easy to subscribe to).
I think following the debate is a great way to see the different points of view and the evidence for each. The researchers are informed, and so are their critics. It is the kind of debate that lets the readers glean information and ideas.
You may also wish to see a bit about the hullaballoo in a HuffPost article
Also recommended: blog about Melungeons from an informed and intelligent point of view:
Melungeon blog
See also a perspective from a blogger with relevant family history: http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/
A little twist, though,has arisen in this debate--and that is--what exactly are researchers determining, and how are they determining it? When you analyze Y-Dna and Mtdna, which are very specific and very limited, just what do you end up with? Can you make judgments about the ethnic make-up of a population as a whole?
In addition, there is a second twist, which is that a scholarly paper has been interpreted by the media. The online discussion has covered every possible permutation of the arguments that can arise from the facts, the way the research was done, and the interpretation of results.
The scholarly paper was recently written on the topic of the ancestry of the Melungeons and it has been accepted in the Journal of Genetic Genealogy. The article has generated some media attention, and some good discussion.
I haven't seen the article yet, but I gather from the thread that I have been reading that it appears that the authors looked at MtDNA and Y-DNA lines to see what evidence there might be for ancestry. MtDNA traces a person's mother's mother's mother's mother--and so on, for thousands, and often tens of thousands of years. It is very good for identifying that matrilineal lineage, but of course cannot account for any ancestry introduced by males (and their mothers) throughout the many generations traced back. It is useful, but limited. Y-DNA is similarly limited, in that it can trace a man's father's father's father--etc. for many generations, but again, any women and their fathers who married into that line do not get represented in the DNA picture that results.
Update July 1, 2012: Thanks to those who sent a link to the article, I have now read it. It is very interesting and contains a lot of information about the families studied. Having seen the article, I would still suggest that autosomal DNA analysis be looked at in the future, along with relevant paper trails. In response to the comments that autosomal DNA doesn't go back many generations, I would say that many of us who have tested find that our cousin matches appear to be clearly beyond five generations back. Some useful information may be gleaned by testing. That's just my opinion.
A media report on the paper points to men of African ancestry marrying women of European ancestry. That means, of the people whose DNA was accepted into the study and then taken into account for the research (and that may mean including or excluding some persons, according to what I have read in the thread), many of the paternal lines were of African ancestry and the maternal lines of European ancestry.
This might tell a story, and it might not. For example, a man who submitted both YDNA and MtDNA for the study might find that the ancient patrilineal ancestor was from Africa. The ancient matrilineal ancestor was from Europe. But there could be all sorts of other ancestry (Native American, for example) introduced into the person's genetic make-up.This additional ancestry can be seen to some extent in autosomal DNA, although the results are not as neat and tidy as those of Y-DNA and MtDNA. Autosomal DNA is also problematic in that it can only show heritage for a certain number of generations, and even then it is a spotty record, as some ancestry is inevitably discarded as DNA recombines with each generation. Yet, I'd want to see the autosomal results, and see those analyzed by geneticists. I think they would add to the picture.
Melungeon stories and documents about heritage provide a variety of possible directions for ancestry, including Native American, Portuguese, Turkish, African, and others. It will indeed be interesting to see just what the DNA will be able to show. And, in my opinion, that means looking at autosomal DNA and connecting that to paper trails as much as can be done. It is a lot of work, but would provide a richer basis for analysis than what was provided for the paper in JOGG. That work is important, but does not tell the readers much about the ethnic ancestry of the population.
The debate itself is fascinating, and if you want to see it for yourself, check the email list at rootsweb.com (easy to subscribe to).
I think following the debate is a great way to see the different points of view and the evidence for each. The researchers are informed, and so are their critics. It is the kind of debate that lets the readers glean information and ideas.
You may also wish to see a bit about the hullaballoo in a HuffPost article
Also recommended: blog about Melungeons from an informed and intelligent point of view:
Melungeon blog
See also a perspective from a blogger with relevant family history: http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)