Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 164

Thread: New Parental Phasing

  1. #21
    Registered Users
    Posts
    147
    Sex
    Location
    Maidenhead, UK
    Ethnicity
    White British
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b (FGC5494)
    mtDNA (M)
    Not tested

    I can't see this feature for any kits. Can anyone point me where the Beta feature should be, thanks

  2. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,760
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Ethnicity
    Ger.-Brit.-Catalan-more
    Nationality
    (U.S.) American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-YP619*
    mtDNA (M)
    H1bg

    United Kingdom Germany Bayern Catalonia France Ireland Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by MAbrams View Post
    Here is a tidbit that I think bears noting....after comparing stats with another member

    Regarding the Unassigned (I have 4,690).

    "Why are some matches unassigned?
    If a match appears in this category, it could be because their test was processed after our last update or because we don't have enough information to assign them to one parent or the other.

    You may see updates in the future, in which case some unassigned matches may be assigned to a side."


    I sorted my list by Date, Newest to Oldest


    For my newest Paternal match, I just happened to date it. Pure serendipity. March 26 2022. So it's interesting that no new matches have been phased in the last 6 months.. I know sales are rather slow, but 6 months of sales does add up.

    I didnt realize that there was such a time lag. I thought they meant a few days.

    And they may be updated. May??

    ~~~~

    Another reason for many Unassigned is that any archived matches from 6 to 8 are not phased. I have about 16-1700 of those, so my 4690-1600 = a bit over 3000, of which 1000 (??) are newish, after March 26 or whatever the key date was.

    I am estimating about 2000 truly Unassigned. Some of which I can manually phase.
    A match that appears as "unassigned" for my daughter has been in both of our match lists for years. He shares 265 cM with me, with a longest segment of 34 cM. This doesn't count the 42.3 cM of sharing on the X chromosome, which Ancestry tests for but stupidly fails to take any advantage of.

    If they did, of course, that's all they would need to know my 2nd cousin and I are both maternally related -- since we're both male.

    Since he's on my side, therefore he's either on my daughter's paternal side or on both. However, this match shares no DNA with my wife. My daughter, however, shares 116 cM -- which is a lot. It would definitely make him at least a 3rd cousin in most instances, but since he's my 2nd cousin he's my daughter's 2nd cousin once removed.

    Ancestry can't use the excuse that he's only recently tested, and they absolutely have enough information to assign him to her paternal side -- unless somehow they ignore tested parents when determining side.

    EDIT:

    My daughter's 116 cM also does not include her 42 cM of X-chromosome matching with this same cousin. Of course, she has to share with him on the X chromosome, since I do; and I only have the one X chromosome for her to have inherited a copy of.

    Being a female, she also has an X chromosome from her mother but does not match on this copy, and would not be expected to. But, c'mon Ancestry, it should be easy-peasy not only to tell that this match is on her father's side, but on her paternal grandmother's side.

    In actuality, because I know that the two matching segments on the X chromosome came from my mother's father's X chromosome, I can readily tell which of my daughter's 2nd great grandmother's the match came from. (At least as far as the X chromosome is concerned, since the autosomal matching could be from my grandfather's father's side.)
    Last edited by geebee; 10-08-2022 at 11:47 PM.
    Besides British-German-Catalan, ancestry includes smaller amounts of French, Irish, Swiss, Choctaw & another NA tribe, possibly Catawba. Avatar picture is: my father, his father, & his father's father; baby is my eldest brother.

    GB

  3. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,760
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Ethnicity
    Ger.-Brit.-Catalan-more
    Nationality
    (U.S.) American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-YP619*
    mtDNA (M)
    H1bg

    United Kingdom Germany Bayern Catalonia France Ireland Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Loderingo View Post
    I can't see this feature for any kits. Can anyone point me where the Beta feature should be, thanks
    On your match page near the top. You should see "By Parent Beta", "All Matches", and "By Location".
    Besides British-German-Catalan, ancestry includes smaller amounts of French, Irish, Swiss, Choctaw & another NA tribe, possibly Catawba. Avatar picture is: my father, his father, & his father's father; baby is my eldest brother.

    GB

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to geebee For This Useful Post:

     Loderingo (10-09-2022)

  5. #24
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,760
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Ethnicity
    Ger.-Brit.-Catalan-more
    Nationality
    (U.S.) American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-YP619*
    mtDNA (M)
    H1bg

    United Kingdom Germany Bayern Catalonia France Ireland Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by KatieC View Post
    Happily I was one of those who got brief glimpses of what might happen.. First in August I guess when it became obvious that my newly identified Welsh Grandfather wasn't just partly Welsh..which explained the years of his identity being slowly obvious by all my awesome Welsh cousins ( close to 800 and growing) Sister is 40% Welsh and I am 33-38% ( it varied)
    Ancestry DNA then showed me that ALL my Welsh ancestry was from my paternal side We all sort of knew that something else would be revealed SOON! HOWEVER Dad's ethnicity was revealed to be ONLY on my paternal lines Boom! Wales Parent #1
    It started popping up for me 3 days ago.. Sort of miraculously I got 6 new 5th and 6th Greats who came bringing new cousin matches with them. Some had 18 cousins nestled in with the rest of us

    My assumption is that Ancestry could see my sister and I having all our Welsh paternally AND an added bonus for them is that MOST of my Welsh cousins were 90-100% Welsh .
    The cousin matches who were NOT 100% they had already identified as being " 60% or more " and the additional group was "Common communities
    These are the most common communities of your closest parent 1 matches. Delaware & Chesapeake Bay Settlers Delaware Valley, Chesapeake & Midwest Settlers New Jersey & Eastern Pennsylvania Settlers Wales
    and..Common communities
    These are the most common communities of your closest parent 2 matches. New Jersey & Eastern Pennsylvania Settlers Ulster, Ireland Donegal, Ireland Early Pennsylvania Settlers

    I think this was done fairly accurately
    I wish I could show people how often DNA from either my wife or me "magically" morphs into something else for our daughter. For example, my wife's two copies of chromosome 1 are shown (1) split between "Sweden & Denmark" and "Ireland" on her mother's side; and (2) entirely "Scotland" on her father's side. So you'd think that my daughter's maternal chromosome could either be split into up to three different ethnicities, or if only one it would have to be "Scotland".

    Nope. Her maternal copy of this chromosome is "England & Northwestern Europe" only -- something that doesn't show up on either of her mother's two copies.

    How about my daughter's paternal side? My maternal copy of this chromosome is shown up as entirely "Scotland", and my paternal copy is shown up as entirely "Germanic Europe". So the most probable thing to see for my daughter would be a split between "Scotland" and "Germanic Europe". For her to have only one or the other would mean that I passed on an unrecombined copy of chromosome 1 to her, with DNA only from my father or only from my mother.

    I actually did pass on several chromosomes to her that appear to have come from only one of my parents, which reportedly is a fairly common occurrence. However, it happens less over for the larger chromosomes, and chromosome 1 is the largest of them all. It did not happen with this chromosome.

    That is, 23andMe clearly shows that my daughter and father have no matching for the first 50 cM of this chromosome. So that first 50 cM came from my mother, and therefore should show up as "Scotland" -- not as "Germanic Europe". Instead, her entire paternal copy is shown as "Germanic Europe", which likely means that Ancestry flipped the label for the first 50 cM to match the remainder of the chromosome.

    My point is, Ancestry may well be right for many of their customers, but their assignments cannot entirely be trusted for a variety of reasons. One is that they do not appear to really make use of situations in which the customer has TWO tested parents, and therefore this should override their usual phasing algorithm. Nothing beats using both parents to do phasing, unless possibly comparing to multiple siblings.
    Besides British-German-Catalan, ancestry includes smaller amounts of French, Irish, Swiss, Choctaw & another NA tribe, possibly Catawba. Avatar picture is: my father, his father, & his father's father; baby is my eldest brother.

    GB

  6. #25
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,329
    Sex
    Location
    Brisbane
    Nationality
    Australian
    Y-DNA (P)
    T-P322 (T1a2b1)
    mtDNA (M)
    H6a1

    Australia Cornwall England Scotland Germany Poland
    Quote Originally Posted by Rufus191 View Post
    I note the help thread does imply it is not infallible

    "If a match is labeled incorrectly or is unassigned, you can change their label. From your list of DNA matches, click on their name > Edit Relationship > select the right parent label > Save. Our algorithm will improve over timeóbut in the meantime, you can change the label for any match. Matches that you manually labeled will appear with an icon info that shows you that you labeled the match yourself."

    https://support.ancestry.com/s/artic...language=en_US
    Yes, but there is no immediate feedback from our inputs to change assignments for our matches.
    And - please correct me if I am wrong on this - there is no use in calculation of any assignment we may have made manually to mother's or father's side.
    It's all about the algorithm.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Saetro For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (10-09-2022)

  8. #26
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,760
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Ethnicity
    Ger.-Brit.-Catalan-more
    Nationality
    (U.S.) American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-YP619*
    mtDNA (M)
    H1bg

    United Kingdom Germany Bayern Catalonia France Ireland Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Saetro View Post
    Yes, but there is no immediate feedback from our inputs to change assignments for our matches.
    And - please correct me if I am wrong on this - there is no use in calculation of any assignment we may have made manually to mother's or father's side.
    It's all about the algorithm.
    As far as I can tell, Ancestry does not use our assignments. Not only that, but for people with two tested parents they don't even seem to follow the simple expedient of saying that anyone who matches either of the parents has to either be on that parent's side -- or on both sides if they happen to match both parents. How can they be "unassigned"?

    In one case, a 2nd cousin of mine -- sharing 265 cM with me -- is correctly placed on my paternal side. Yet for my daughter, who is a 2nd cousin once removed to the same person and shares 116 cM with him, they actually use the qualifier that "This is a label you selected for this match". (Yeah, Ancestry, and if your algorithm can't tell this match is paternal when he's on the dad's side, then it's deeply flawed.) I mean, what do the tech guys at Ancestry think paternal means?

    In another case, my wife has a match to the daughter of one of her 1st cousins. This makes them 1st cousins once removed, and they share 368 cM. The match is therefore our daughter's 2nd cousin, and the two of them share 179 cM. Yet once again Ancestry qualifies the label showing side with "This is a label you selected for this match" -- as if somehow they're unclear about it -- and they place this match in the "unassigned" category.

    They do say this is a beta feature; I understand that. It really seems more like an alpha feature, not yet ready for beta. They also give an explanation for the "unassigned" category. But I've seen this inability to identify obvious matches with people who -- like my wife, my daughter, and me -- tested years ago.
    Last edited by geebee; 10-09-2022 at 05:20 AM.
    Besides British-German-Catalan, ancestry includes smaller amounts of French, Irish, Swiss, Choctaw & another NA tribe, possibly Catawba. Avatar picture is: my father, his father, & his father's father; baby is my eldest brother.

    GB

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to geebee For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (10-09-2022)

  10. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,231
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Mixed
    aDNA Match (1st)
    Muslim Sharqi Andalusi Iberia_Southeast_c.10-16CE:I12514 0.03148322

    Quote Originally Posted by geebee View Post
    As far as I can tell, Ancestry does not use our assignments. Not only that, but for people with two tested parents they don't even seem to follow the simple expedient of saying that anyone who matches either of the parents has to either be on that parent's side -- or on both sides if they happen to match both parents. How can they be "unassigned"?

    In one case, a 2nd cousin of mine -- sharing 265 cM with me -- is correctly placed on my paternal side. Yet for my daughter, who is a 2nd cousin once removed to the same person and shares 116 cM with him, they actually use the qualifier that "This is a label you selected for this match". (Yeah, Ancestry, and if your algorithm can't tell this match is paternal when he's on the dad's side, then it's deeply flawed.) I mean, what do the tech guys at Ancestry think paternal means?

    In another case, my wife has a match to the daughter of one of her 1st cousins. This makes them 1st cousins once removed, and they share 368 cM. The match is therefore our daughter's 2nd cousin, and the two of them share 179 cM. Yet once again Ancestry qualifies the label showing side with "This is a label you selected for this match" -- as if somehow they're unclear about it -- and they place this match in the "unassigned" category.

    They do say this is a beta feature; I understand that. It really seems more like an alpha feature, not yet ready for beta. They also give an explanation for the "unassigned" category. But I've seen this inability to identify obvious matches with people who -- like my wife, my daughter, and me -- tested years ago.
    Thank you, yes clearly they don't use our assignments, it's clearly mainly algorythmes, some attributions for estimates to a specific parent are very funny
    Distance: 0.0083% / 0.00831528 | R5P
    31.3 French_Bigorre
    28.5 BelgianA
    16.3 Saharawi
    15.8 Czech
    8.1 Greek_Crete

    Distance: 0.0078% / 0.00780947 | R7P
    25.5 BelgianA
    17.2 Czech
    16.7 Saharawi
    12.7 French_Brittany
    11.0 Sardinian
    10.5 French_Bigorre
    6.4 Italian_Basilicata

    Distance: 0.0108% / 0.01075681 | ADC: 0.25x RC
    20.2 French_Nord
    18.6 French_Bigorre
    14.2 BelgianB
    13.6 Czech
    12.7 Mozabite
    9.0 BelgianC
    8.7 Saharawi
    3.0 Italian_Lazio

  11. #28
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,760
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Ethnicity
    Ger.-Brit.-Catalan-more
    Nationality
    (U.S.) American
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-YP619*
    mtDNA (M)
    H1bg

    United Kingdom Germany Bayern Catalonia France Ireland Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Aben Aboo View Post
    Thank you, yes clearly they don't use our assignments, it's clearly mainly algorythmes, some attributions for estimates to a specific parent are very funny
    Yeah, although so far I at least am not seeing matches being assigned to the wrong side. I mean, my family's matches seem to either be on the correct side or just "unassigned".

    I do find the "both" category kind of funny. I only have four in mind, but three of them are: my daughter, and the daughters of two of my full sisters. So, yeah, I'm related to them on both my parents' sides. Duh. The fourth person here is a bit of a puzzle. We have something like 77 shared matches, ranging from 8 matches who each share more than 90 cM with me down to a match who shares just over 20 cM. But all 77 of these matches are very clearly on my mother's side -- yet Ancestry assigns this match to both sides?

    I've reassigned her to just my maternal side, so we'll see if Ancestry pays any attention to that.
    Besides British-German-Catalan, ancestry includes smaller amounts of French, Irish, Swiss, Choctaw & another NA tribe, possibly Catawba. Avatar picture is: my father, his father, & his father's father; baby is my eldest brother.

    GB

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to geebee For This Useful Post:

     Aben Aboo (10-09-2022)

  13. #29
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,231
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Mixed
    aDNA Match (1st)
    Muslim Sharqi Andalusi Iberia_Southeast_c.10-16CE:I12514 0.03148322

    Quote Originally Posted by geebee View Post
    Yeah, although so far I at least am not seeing matches being assigned to the wrong side. I mean, my family's matches seem to either be on the correct side or just "unassigned".

    I do find the "both" category kind of funny. I only have four in mind, but three of them are: my daughter, and the daughters of two of my full sisters. So, yeah, I'm related to them on both my parents' sides. Duh. The fourth person here is a bit of a puzzle. We have something like 77 shared matches, ranging from 8 matches who each share more than 90 cM with me down to a match who shares just over 20 cM. But all 77 of these matches are very clearly on my mother's side -- yet Ancestry assigns this match to both sides?

    I've reassigned her to just my maternal side, so we'll see if Ancestry pays any attention to that.
    yes, i don't talk about DNA matches
    Distance: 0.0083% / 0.00831528 | R5P
    31.3 French_Bigorre
    28.5 BelgianA
    16.3 Saharawi
    15.8 Czech
    8.1 Greek_Crete

    Distance: 0.0078% / 0.00780947 | R7P
    25.5 BelgianA
    17.2 Czech
    16.7 Saharawi
    12.7 French_Brittany
    11.0 Sardinian
    10.5 French_Bigorre
    6.4 Italian_Basilicata

    Distance: 0.0108% / 0.01075681 | ADC: 0.25x RC
    20.2 French_Nord
    18.6 French_Bigorre
    14.2 BelgianB
    13.6 Czech
    12.7 Mozabite
    9.0 BelgianC
    8.7 Saharawi
    3.0 Italian_Lazio

  14. #30
    Registered Users
    Posts
    147
    Sex
    Location
    Maidenhead, UK
    Ethnicity
    White British
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b (FGC5494)
    mtDNA (M)
    Not tested

    Quote Originally Posted by geebee View Post
    On your match page near the top. You should see "By Parent Beta", "All Matches", and "By Location".
    Sadly I'm out of luck then. Hopefully in the next few days. I've been looking forward to this feature as a couple of my kits have similar ancestry for both parents so I'm hopeful it will tell me which side is which.

Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-09-2020, 01:49 AM
  2. Ancient uni-parental descent -- crazy question
    By grumpydaddybear in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-2019, 03:13 PM
  3. Phasing DNA
    By Araz95 in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-17-2017, 07:13 PM
  4. parental phasing for DIYDodecad users, etc.
    By dp in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-11-2017, 01:18 AM
  5. Averaging results from both phased parental kits
    By lukaszM in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-03-2017, 09:31 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •