Ancestry.com has updated the computer algorithm it uses to assess its ethnicity estimates, providing more detailed results for those with Pacific ancestries.
Those following this blog for a while know that I’ve been struggling to make sense of the results of several DNA tests I’ve done since my late sister, Bonnie, talked me into it as a way for her to extend her understanding of our father’s roots in Scotland.
The DNA, however, led in a different direction.
I’ve ended up doing tests through three different companies–ancestry.com, familytreendna.com, and myheritage.com. The companies differ in the size and makeup of the DNA database that they use to interpret the broad sweep of family history and ethnicity. Each company, based on their own database, produces slightly different lists of DNA “matches.”
It turned out that Bonnie’s carefully researched Lind family genealogy which she painstakingly traced back over a number of generations through records in Scotland was undermined several generations back when there was apparently a “non-paternity event,” something that disrupted the apparent family tree. In other words, it appears that one of my male Lind ancestors was adopted, or perhaps, as my mother would say, “someone jumped the fence,” as in an extra-marital relationship. Shocking, I know, but par for the course, I’ve come to believe.
In any case, my DNA tests turned up surprisingly few genetic Lind relatives. But they have turned up hundreds of Maori “cousins” going back around four generations. It’s that connection that I’ve been trying to untangle.
In the past week, Ancestry sent out notices that it has made changes to its ethnicity estimates.
Ancestry is constantly updating our technology and cutting-edge science. As we update our algorithm and reference panel, your results may change. Additionally, as we add more and more customers to our AncestryDNA database, we hope to increase the number and granularity of our ethnicity regions, making each update more precise.
We calculate your AncestryDNA ethnicity estimate by comparing your DNA to a reference panel made up of thousands of DNA samples from people with long family histories in one place or within one group. Our reference panel is robust due to the millions of family trees linked to our DNA customers. For this update, Ancestry’s team of scientists increased the AncestryDNA reference panel size we use to make ethnicity estimates. The updated reference panel has more samples from more parts of the world to increase the total number of regions available for analysis from 77 to 84.
Because this update is more precise overall, many users will see improvements in their ethnicity estimates as percentages change. Others will see new or updated regions in their estimates. Ancestry will continue to work to expand the diversity of our products to provide more precise ethnicity estimates to our customers.
Previously, Ancestry calculated that my DNA included 13% traced to “EasternPolynesia&New Zealand Maori,” which included Hawaii. That’s just about what I would expect, since I am 1/8 Hawaiian (my great-grandmother was Hawaiian, and my grandmother and mother married non-Hawaiians).
In the most recent Ancestry update, the category has been split, so they now estimate my background as Scotland (42%), Ireland (30%), Hawaii (9%), England and Northwestern Europe (8%), New Zealand Maori (4%), Sweden and Denmark (4%), Wales (2%), and Tonga (1%).
To tell the truth, I don’t know how or whether this will assist me in tracing the Maori connection. I subscribe to another genetic genealogy site, Gedmatch.com, which offers software to do different types of DNA analysis with links to traditional genealogical research and family trees. But, for now, it’s beyond my skill level.
It seems unlikely that I’ll ever identify the source of that Maori DNA. My understanding is that these “autosomal” identify ancestors over more recent generations rather than the kinds of DNA tests that trace back to the beginning of time. But I’m just trying to learn more, a bit at a time. That’s what it’s all about, isn’t it?
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ve tried some of those services too. As far as I can tell they’re good at who’s related to whom, limited mostly by who’s signed up, but disagree about where we came from. I suspect the ancestors may have moved around.
I have a 3rd cousin match on ancestry that I couldn’t figure out where we matched, but after a few years looking at censuses, marriage certificates, newspaper & obits it became clear. Her supposed German grandfather had a son with Rose and died a year later. Within 4 months Rose marries William (my 1st cous. 2x rem.) and is married for decades with many children. It turned out when Rose and German grandfather married, William was one of the 2 witnesses at their marriage so clearly they knew one another. Interestingly when William’s father George got married his neighbor Nick was one of his witnesses, 18 years later there’s a birth notice that George & Nick’s 18 yo daughter Katie had a illegitimate child. That child I haven’t figured out who and where it fits in my tree. Have you ever thought about some assistance figuring your Lind side, ancestry offers that service. I know getting into y dna (father’s side) and mitochondrial dna (mom’s side) can get you into the dna “weeds” if you’re not dna savvy but looking in Lind/not Lind side might be doable with your autosomal dna results. I found it helped to ethnically color id my 4th cous matchs when possible & keep notes if I know their surnames and where they fit on my tree. That in turn, helps id people with 5-8th cous matches if we also share 4th cousins. Also that single star that ancestry gives you I use for interesting,unusual or large family tree cous matches to look into later. Anyways that’s what I do. Hope that helps.