As many of you know, Phylotree has not been updated in several years. While I support Phylotree and Dr. Van Oven’s efforts, he has not answered emails in some time either. This is so for both many of you and for myself.
In some genetic genealogy circles, they call it the Usry Case. It should not be called that though. It is the ongoing investigation into the murder of Angie Dodge. Angie was 18. A few short weeks after she moved into her first apartment, she was found dead.
This week Brad Larkin wrote a very nice post about the distribution of samples on the Y-DNA tree by country. In it, he looks at many factors including world populations by country. I was really enjoying it until I got to one small paragraph about Y-DNA Q.
It is day six, and we are back to genealogy. The only thing that is going to change PCA ethnic origins into a meaningful product for genealogists and even for personal ancestry enthusiasts is to use markers that date to the genealogical and historic time frames.
Finding the boundaries is itself kind of a frontiering science, so I would say that makes it kind of a science and an art. That quote came out of a recent news article about DNA testing. Surely it was taken out of context. So often quotes in the news are.
This post continues my series on PCA based ethnic origins, what they are meant for, how they work, and what can make them better. This time I will go over what is wrong with all of the visual presentations, the maps, that the companies use.
As I described in Part 2, Principal Component Analysis is a method that can show how alike or different populations of people are. Here, I will show how this method is reversed to attempt to find someone’s ethnic origins.
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is at times used as a population analysis method. It was designed to show the computed similarities and especially differences between and within data sets. The data sets could come from anything such as shopping patterns, books read, or favorite TV shows. The key is that some groups will be more alike and others less alike.
The following was written by Martin Hendrix one of the administrators of the Hendricks DNA Project. He asks what the difference is between the FBI or other Law Enforcement agencies asking for the right to be paying customers in a commercial genetic matching database and the other non-genealogy uses of commercial databases.
The following email was sent out by FTDNA this afternoon, 3 Feb 2018. In it, I find something deeply good, that is a true commitment to work toward improving communication with customers. In my long and passionate adventure in genetic genealogy, lack of customer communication has been the nagging aching stumbling point. Thus, I must say this sparks joy in my heart.