AncestryDNA’s new BETA

On the original dashboard there is a link entitled 'Still want to use DNA Circles', which I presume would flag your choice not to use ThruLines.

I frequently use the back button, but that is not really my issue. I often try and navigate between several different DNA results and skipping between them is reasonably easy in everything except ThruLines, as once I get back to one of the main pages, I have a drop down menu that allows me to switch tests. I have been clicking the DNA button to go back, and that always takes me back to my own DNA results and then I have to switch, (and that is fully my own usage), while a button the page theoretically would take me back to the DNA test I have been viewing.

NOTE:

I just noticed something interesting - as I have had my entire family DNA tested with Ancestry, the results of my siblings and I are now flagged either "Mother's Side" or "Father's Side", which is rather convenient if I was using them predominantly (which I don't all that much).

However I was just scanning through and noticed that a few results are not flagged with either. What are the odds these people may not be related to us at all?
The top one on my brother's list (who shares DNA with me, and a relative I tentatively flagged as a relative of my father and grandmother) shares about 32 cM across 2 segments, but does not show any relationship with my father or grandmother. Given that's where our DNA for that side of the family is coming from, is this person an anomaly?

 

Yes, I think Ancestry has got us all busy with ThruLines and/or New & Improved DNA Matches 'BETA'! Although the two improvements are obviously linked they are separate algorithms with different approaches to the same ‘problem’. AND like all computer software, they have their limitations and can never be 100% correct all the time.

ThruLines searches for connections using “names” (and possibly location) and with surnames not being a reliable indicator of relatedness many false positives and incorrect connections are made as has been attested in a number of posts. As the main criteria for a ThruLine search is a surname it will not and cannot be expected to find a name change or NPE.

Whereas New & Improved DNA Matches’ first focus is DNA then looking for overlapping trees that include the same ancestor(s). This results in matching that jumps over brick walls and see around name changes and provide many more new potential ‘green leaf’ Common Ancestors which are increasing almost daily. My old ‘green leaf’ count is 24, then it jumped to 39 when I first looked at BETA 3 days ago and is now 51! Having at least briefly investigated each new ‘green leaf’ it appears that New & Improved DNA Matches is at least 90% correct compared to my ThruLines experience which indicates the potential ancestor found using the surname approach are incorrect about 90% of the time. So I have been ignoring ThruLines and just looking at New & Improved DNA Matches with the ‘Common ancestor’ filter turned on.

As to evidence as to which works best, I have a 19th century case of identity change (if not theft) in my tree … Benjamin Major changed his name to William Wilson. ThruLines provides a lot of incorrect potential ancestors with ‘Wilson’ connections whereas by following the DNA, New Matches BETA has found known plus previously unknown DNA connections that are true matches. So while ThruLines has been underwhelming for me New & Improved DNA Matches 'BETA' is most powerful and a real winner. Congratulations to Ancestry.

 

Congratulations on finding the solution to your cuckoo problem, Jacqueline!
I know how difficult it can be to locate the parent of an illegitimate child - although yours seems to have been disguised! - I have a similar ancestor who had two illegitimate children (to, I'm fairly sure, two different men) before marrying a third and having another 12 or so. My great-grandfather took his mother's maiden name however, rather than the name of his stepfather, although he would list his step-father on his marriage documents, and that makes it a lot easier to spot his illegitimacy - unfortunately no signs yet of his father through DNA, although I have a few on the list I can't explain that may be relatives of his - not enough information on either side to say as yet.

I think that Ancestry has a bunch of kinks to work out - for example I think ThruLines should default to the user's tree rather than the perception of the "correct" ancestor from other trees.

However on the whole, I think this is going to be a good, massive step forward for the ability to use DNA easily on their platform, and shows signs of allowing everyone to access the benefits.

 

I agree the focus is on names, and the 'potential ancestors' it displays are usually wrong, so I've found these a waste of time and filter them out of the display. If you ignore the potential ancestors and just focus on the actual ancestors, then I've found ThruLines very useful, not least that it displays groups of DNA matches on one screen and shows how they are related to each other. For example, I have 2 ancestors who each have 11 DNA matches descended from them which I can see at once, and see where these matches are close relatives of each other.

By contrast, the 'New & Improved DNA matches' only looks at one match at a time, and it too looks at names to match ancestors. I agree it is useful in discovering connections to specific DNA matches, but surely the 'common ancestors' (of the right names) must be there in your tree and others' trees to get a match. I must be missing something, but I can't really see how it can 'jump over brick walls and see around name changes.' As far as I can tell looking at my list, it will only report a 'common ancestor' if that ancestor has the same name in the different trees.

I also notice that, with the 'New & Improved DNA matches' disabled, I have only 11 'shared ancestor hints' (i.e. my old 'green leaf' count) compared to 42 'common ancestor' matches with the new BETA enabled. It is not surprising the numbers have increased, as Ancestry is drawing on its whole database of trees to find matches, but what I find surprising is that 3 of my old 'green leaf' hints do not appear in the new list, despite us having common ancestors in our trees. Must be a glitch somewhere.

Clearly they aren't perfect, but I find both ThruLinks and the New & Improved DNA matches Beta useful in different ways, and both can be powerful tools if used correctly. I've certainly found new leads using them.

 

I agree, very annoying when your actual ancestor is replaced by an imposter from another tree! Fortunately, I don't have too many examples of this, but enough to be irritating. If we all send feedback to Ancestry about this, perhaps they'll do something about it.

 

How satisfying to finally solve this conundrum, and well done on unravelling the mystery. I think many people will have illegitimacy issues in their trees, which DNA is finally resolving. I have an ancestor who was born 4 years before his mother married and, although he took his mother's husband's name, I was always unsure who his birth father was. However, I now have DNA matches to relatives of the (step)father so am reasonably confident that he was the father (having said that, there is a possible cousin marriage here, so I can't be 100% sure!)

 

An excellent posting Jacqueline and very interesting and informative. But I must ask you to explain the acronym (or initialism a better term) 'N.P.E'. I dislike their use on principle unless very common or garden and in everyday use, or first spelled out in full. When encountered and unfamiliar, I positively refuse to second guess their meaning, even if I might get close. So what please is an N.P.E cuckoo?

 

I have to agree with Helen (who I see has already singled out this part of your posting) I think this a little over the top in what can be expected from the new Beta features introduced by Ancestry. Certainly not in their present incarnation. However I do agree the 'New and Improved DNA' is likely to be the winner in due time.

 

My feelings are that it could be counter-productive to always default to the users tree. I am happy to have an impostor from another tree, in the knowledge that I could be an impostor on somebody else's suggestion. After all we all know that there are very many incorrect trees out there. Having an impostor gets you thinking and in the end you can always reject the suggestion.

 

Sorry cannot find this - can you confirm still there?

 

Still appearing on my dashboard - and all of the other DNA dashboards, ironically except for one (unsure as to why) if it is appearing, it should be directly above the green "Explore ThruLines" button.

 

That clinches is then. I only have two dashboards and it appears on neither.

 

I am happy to see suggestions for potential ancestors which go back further than I have in my tree. Clearly they may prove useful in further research (even if they prove to be mostly wrong, there might be something useful there). But if I have carefully researched and found an ancestor that I am sure about (with evidence to back up my conclusions), then for ThruLines to replace them with someone called just 'Esther' (for example), with no sources in the tree to back it up, seems counter-productive to me. What I would like is for ThruLines not to replace existing ancestors in my tree, just to suggest potential ancestors from earlier generations.

 

Except you can't in Thrulines. Whether an impostor has replaced a genuine ancestor or gone into a gap, there is nothing you can do to reject them except hope the other tree owner will correct their mistake.

Admittedly the impostors in the gaps can just be ignored but you can't get back the genuine ancestors that have been displaced, and so cannot see if ThruLines might have had something useful to say about them. I know I have matches via some of my displaced ancestors.

 

Non Paternity Event or Not Parent Expected.

 

Same here. I have no button to go back to DNA Circles on my dashboards on both Firefox and Chrome. I thought it was because I was never in any DNA Circles.

 

Were you in any DNA Circles before? Looking at the different DNA tests in my account, the two that were previously in circles have the option to switch back. The two that weren't don't.

 

Thanks Pauline, that resolves the matter as neither of my Trees had been admitted to a DNA Circle. I dare say that applies to the odd one out for jorghes?