Hi Holly,
On Tuesday, June 12, 2012, 4:52:31 PM, you wrote:
.... and not only do you need to test everyone of your ancestors
still living, you need to test everyone of their siblings still living!
> They are in business to make money. They will offer what people
> will buy. The three tests give different information. So it all
> depends on what you are looking for. Some people are looking to
> connect with living relatives. Some people are just interested in
> learning more about their family histories.
>
> 1) Y-DNA is passed only from biological father to biological son. A
> Y-DNA test only provides information about the direct paternal line
> and no other part of the tree. Only males have Y-DNA. Females don't
> have Y-DNA.
>
> 2) mtDNA is passed only from biological mother to biological child.
> An mtDNA test only provided information about the direct maternal
> line and no other part of the tree. Both males and females have
> mtDNA but only mothers pass it on to their children.
>
> 3) Autosomal DNA is inherited randomly. It takes a lot of work and
> luck to figure out where it came from.
>
<snip>
>
> As I said, the testing services are in the business to make money
> so having a test that can be purchased by both males and females is
> going to create more customers. Most of the time two brothers will
> have the same Y-DNA so there is not much point in having two
> brothers both take a Y-DNA test. Ditto with two siblings and mtDNA.
> But since autosomal DNA is inherited randomly, two siblings could
> have very different autosomal DNA test results. When you are
> talking autosomal DNA, a lot more people in a family need to be
> tested. In an ideal world -- you would want to test every one of
> your ancestors still living because you have only half of your
> father's autosomal DNA and only half of your mother's autosomal
> DNA. That's a lot of money for DNA testing!
>
Interesting, Holly, how in the last four paragraphs you have so
clearly and succinctly summarised what I have been trying to find out
for some time recently.
If I had those four paragraphs in front of me when I started I would
have been saved hours of reading and studying. Life sciences are a
subject of which I had very little prior knowledge. Most genetics
writers seem to expect their readers to have post-graduate knowledge
of the subject. My level of understanding had previously reached as
far as your paragraphs 1) and 2), but your following paragraph really
put the autosomal DNA issue into perspective. Thanks!
Parents and grandparents are now long gone - I'm coming up to my
eighties myself - so my main interest at the moment is deciding which
tests on my DNA would give results that will be most useful (and the
best value for money!) to pass on to my children and my grandchildren
when they later on get working on their heritage. I see the results as
something to pass on to them, somewhat like the various family
heirlooms and family history source documents, rather than as an
immediately useful research tool - though it may turn out to be the
latter as well. Of course, after I've popped my clogs they may be
totally uninterested in their family history - but that's a risk we
researchers all take. All we can do is practice our LOCKS - "Lots Of
Copies Keeps Stuff Safe" - and make sure that as many people as
possible, as well as our direct descendants, have the data.
<snip>
> "there is also a CARTER-DNA list wherein yourname, Holly,
appeared consistently."
>
> Guilty as charged.
Good job I realised I might be teaching Granny to suck eggs!
<snip the rest>
Right, back to work - and thanks, Holly!
--
Best wishes,
Tom Piercy