Genealogy's Secret Weapon: How mtDNA Can Solve Family Mysteries

[SeanDVincent]

  MTDNAENG.png (Size: 21.67 KB / Downloads: 261)
Says my:
Mitotree MTDNA Haplogroup Analyzing Beta.

My old information is still on FtDNA, T2B
I'll be pleasantly surprised if much changes.

[Mabrams]

Two questions

For those who have their new mitoTree assignment, how has that affected your FMS match list? 
Did you gain or lose anybody? Did the Genetic Distances change?

~~~

Why is there such a large difference between the Public Haplotree and mitoDiscover?
Are there other factors besides Academic studies?

             Haplotree vs  mitoDiscover
L-root       199,565 vs  268,169

Over 30% more on MitoDiscover.

The HaploTree is even prefaced with "world's largest mtDNA database containing 258,000 mtFull Sequences ", yet they only show 199,565.

for my own subclade, the discrepancy is even worse proportionally, almost 50% higher
T1a1    2721 vs  3964

[Dewsloth]

Two questions

For those who have their new mitoTree assignment, how has that affected your FMS match list? 
Did you gain or lose anybody? Did the Genetic Distances change?

~~~

Why is there such a large difference between the Public Haplotree and mitoDiscover?
Are there other factors besides Academic studies?

             Haplotree vs  mitoDiscover
L-root       199,565 vs  268,169

Over 30% more on MitoDiscover.

The HaploTree is even prefaced with "world's largest mtDNA database containing 258,000 mtFull Sequences ", yet they only show 199,565.

for my own subclade, the discrepancy is even worse proportionally, almost 50% higher
T1a1    2721 vs  3964

Not a direct answer to your question [yet] but when they get around to the H's:
Dad is currently listed as H1j, as are 10 (public) of the 18 members of the Elizabeth WALKER Warren mtDNA FTDNA Group.  Nobody there is officially H1j10a.
He has 31 "exact matches" for mtFull.  All H1j.
Meanwhile in Discover they say there are 45 members who are H1j10a.
But:

mtDNA Results H1j10a [1]
The FTDNA Mayflower Project and the Elizabeth WALKER Warren mtDNA Lineage Project currently documents nine matrilineal (all female line) descendants of Elizabeth (Walker) Warren. All nine have been assigned to the H1j haplogroup, but the YFull mtDNA tree has futher refined the clade to H1j10a.[2]

As of 1 October 2024, FTDNA documents a total of 31 individuals who have taken a Full mtDNA test and are exact mtDNA matches to most[3] of the known matrilineal descendants of Elizabeth WALKER Warren. As such, the H1j10a haplogroup is not limited to matrilineal descendants of Elizabeth WALKER Warren, but it is believed they all likely descend from a matrilineal ancestor of Elizabeth. Thus the H1j10a Haplogroup in and of itself cannot be used to conclusively identify a matrilineal line from Elizabeth, but all of Elizabeth's matrilineal descendants must fall under this haplogroup (with the possibility of additional mutations).

Speculation
Currently, the four individuals in YFull's mtDNA tree who fall under H1j10, but are not H1j10a are all from Spain.[4] As such it may be possible where a matrilineal ancestor of Elizabeth had emigrated from Spain to England.

 https://mayflowerdna.org/wiki/index.php/...sted_lines

So are these H1j10a folks in Discover really a different pool, or are they "double-counted" and an internal tally of H1j's who will be revealed when FTDNA get around to the H's?

[Capsian20]

Two questions

For those who have their new mitoTree assignment, how has that affected your FMS match list? 
Did you gain or lose anybody? Did the Genetic Distances change?

~~~

Why is there such a large difference between the Public Haplotree and mitoDiscover?
Are there other factors besides Academic studies?

             Haplotree vs  mitoDiscover
L-root       199,565 vs  268,169

Over 30% more on MitoDiscover.

The HaploTree is even prefaced with "world's largest mtDNA database containing 258,000 mtFull Sequences ", yet they only show 199,565.

for my own subclade, the discrepancy is even worse proportionally, almost 50% higher
T1a1    2721 vs  3964

I dont have any matches in FMS

[Capsian20]

Great , i find in my matches HVR1 sample british ( has same my subclade ) i trying to sent Message I hope he is will reply

[Dewsloth]

Okay, mine updated. No longer J2a1a1e, now I'm J2a1a1t1^ formed ~650 CE estimated MRCA 700 CE, one Lebanon, one Cyprus, one Syrian Arab Republic, one Cuba.
Closest ancient is still a Viking (Salme VK551)

The notation is getting crazy: J2a1a1t1^ formed 650 CE from J2a1a1t,
but J2a1a1t (and sister J2a1a1u) formed ~2700 BCE from J2a1a1t'u

The sister line consists of Germans and Ukrainians. So my line could still have reached the Levant any time between the Neolithic and the Crusades.

[FionnSneachta]

Mine has updated to H6a1b2h like YFull. My dad's is still pending.

All 26 of my full mtDNA matches have the Mitotree haplogroup H6a1b2h or they're still pending.

[Riverman]

I got the update now as well. They renamed the haplogroup - from the YFull designation to a new one, which created way more structure between the different levels. Very interesting to be put in a whole new upstream branch. The dating changed massively as well. Many matches are still pending. I'm not sure about that new structure though, whether its solid or not...

[Mabrams]

Count me in also! T1a1 group.

T1a1p exactly, 1100 BCE to T1a1p-11914!!  at 1150 CE.  So am improvement of 2250 years.  That's a pretty good jump

The range for T1a1p-11914 is 800 to 1400 CE, so not quite out to genealogical times, but still a lot better than 1100 BCE. 
It would be nice if FTDNA could perhaps date the clusters. 

25 T1a1p testers went to 15 T1a1p-11914 and 10 of those ended up in my cluster.  But an oddity with the clusters. 

I have a pair of testers who share "Lucy" in early 1800s, thus 3rd-4th cousins.  One is in my cluster, the other is not.
I have another pair of testers who share "Brigid" in early 1800s, thus 3rd-4th cousins.  One is in my cluster, the other is not.

The first pair has a GD of 1 between them, but the second pair has a GD of 0.  So its not necessarily the GD.

(I have read the mouseover which states that due to mutations, a person outside the cluster might still be more closely related than those inside).

In any event, knocking the 25 down to a cluster of 10 that I can focus on, is very helpful.

[rmstevens2]

Got my Mitotree update today: U5a2c3a3c, ~1300 AD



The closest thing in Discover's Ancient Connections is U5a2c, but I recall three ancient Beaker samples that are U5a2c3a: 

Sample I1382,  2435–2136 calBC,  Mondelange - PAC de la Sente (Moselle, France), (male, Y-DNA R-P312), Olalde et al, 2018;

Sample I2455,  2130-1910 calBC,  Over Narrows (Needingworth Quarry, Cambridgeshire, England), female, Olalde et al 2018;

Sample I2597,  2280–2030 calBC,  Amesbury Down (Wiltshire, England), (male, but no Y-DNA reported), Olalde et al 2018.

I don't see any real changes in my matches. I still have two that are exact matches for me, a brother and sister. Their mdka (1837-1876) was from the same place, Lauderdale County, Alabama, that my mdka was from, but she died a couple of years before my mdka was born. Obviously they were related, but I have yet to find out what the connection was.

[boiler20100203]

Interesting, my top 3 are also Viking age: VK92, VDP A6 and VK153. Going back further my ancient matches are still from that region, add England and Brittany to those.

Lejre 92
850 - 900 CE
Shared Ancestor
1500 BCE

You and Lejre 92 share a common maternal line ancestor who lived around this time.

Rare Connection
1 in 327
Only 821 customers are this closely related to Lejre 92.

Lejre 92 was a woman who lived between 850 - 900 CE during the Viking Age and was found in the region now known as Lejre, Sealand, Denmark.

She was associated with the Viking Denmark cultural group.

My mito updated and so did my ancients above. Our shared ancestor went from 1500 BCE to 950 BCE as did the # of customers closely related. 

If I had to make a better educated guess, Frankish of Gothic appear to be the best odds based on current distribution.

[geebee-1015]

My confirmed haplogroup is H1bg. Once the beta Mitrotree analysis was completed, it came out as ... H1bg.

I only have two exact matches at FTDNA. One of these lists the same woman I do as his "Maternal Earliest Known Ancestor". Her name was Marie Anne Catherine Berda dit Picard, my 6th great grandmother. However, this match is actually much closer than that -- our maternal grandmothers were half sisters, so we're half 2nd cousins.

The other match lists a different woman as his "Maternal Earliest Known Ancestor", but she happens to have been Marie Anne Catherine's daughter. She and her husband are also the most recent common ancestors I share with this match, so we're 6th cousins.

Marie Anne Catherine was born on Horn Island off the Gulf coast of Mississippi in 1726.

[RCO]

FTDNA mito changed my mtDNA haplogroup from H1ao1 to H1tv ? What is the scientific criteria ? We have the same H1ao A93G T11809C mutations ?

[Dewsloth]

Two questions

For those who have their new mitoTree assignment, how has that affected your FMS match list? 
Did you gain or lose anybody? Did the Genetic Distances change?

~~~

Why is there such a large difference between the Public Haplotree and mitoDiscover?
Are there other factors besides Academic studies?

             Haplotree vs  mitoDiscover
L-root       199,565 vs  268,169

Over 30% more on MitoDiscover.

The HaploTree is even prefaced with "world's largest mtDNA database containing 258,000 mtFull Sequences ", yet they only show 199,565.

for my own subclade, the discrepancy is even worse proportionally, almost 50% higher
T1a1    2721 vs  3964

Not a direct answer to your question [yet] but when they get around to the H's:
Dad is currently listed as H1j, as are 10 (public) of the 18 members of the Elizabeth WALKER Warren mtDNA FTDNA Group.  Nobody there is officially H1j10a.
He has 31 "exact matches" for mtFull.  All H1j.
Meanwhile in Discover they say there are 45 members who are H1j10a.
But:

mtDNA Results H1j10a [1]
The FTDNA Mayflower Project and the Elizabeth WALKER Warren mtDNA Lineage Project currently documents nine matrilineal (all female line) descendants of Elizabeth (Walker) Warren. All nine have been assigned to the H1j haplogroup, but the YFull mtDNA tree has futher refined the clade to H1j10a.[2]

As of 1 October 2024, FTDNA documents a total of 31 individuals who have taken a Full mtDNA test and are exact mtDNA matches to most[3] of the known matrilineal descendants of Elizabeth WALKER Warren. As such, the H1j10a haplogroup is not limited to matrilineal descendants of Elizabeth WALKER Warren, but it is believed they all likely descend from a matrilineal ancestor of Elizabeth. Thus the H1j10a Haplogroup in and of itself cannot be used to conclusively identify a matrilineal line from Elizabeth, but all of Elizabeth's matrilineal descendants must fall under this haplogroup (with the possibility of additional mutations).

Speculation
Currently, the four individuals in YFull's mtDNA tree who fall under H1j10, but are not H1j10a are all from Spain.[4] As such it may be possible where a matrilineal ancestor of Elizabeth had emigrated from Spain to England.

 https://mayflowerdna.org/wiki/index.php/...sted_lines

So are these H1j10a folks in Discover really a different pool, or are they "double-counted" and an internal tally of H1j's who will be revealed when FTDNA get around to the H's?

To answer my own question, they were double-counted:  Dad is now H1j10a, and there are still 45 folks who are.

I can see them all in Match Time Tree, and fascinatingly I can see many people identified all the way up to H1j (2500 BCE).  
Meanwhile Discover YDNA Match Time Tree will only let me see names of six of about 14 of my closest Big Y matches even though we are all from the same person in the Roman Era.

[JMcB]

My final results came in yesterday and as expected, I’m H1e2g. They’ve also put me into the Haplogroup Cluster F1482976. Which is interesting. Although, I’m not sure how useful it will be. Considering, how old the branch is (300 BC)