Question

I have the same mtDNA Haplogroup as a pre-1700 Wiki Profile. How do I correctly post it on the profile? Thanks

Answer 1

Hello Mary,

I see that 23andMe reported that you belong to mtDNA haplogroup V.

Go to https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Special:DNATests and select that you have taken an “Other mtDNA” test.  In the mtDNA haplogroup field, enter V for your haplogroup.  In the note field enter something like “Mitochondrial DNA haplogroup as reported by 23andMe on Sep 27, 2019.”  In the Test Type field select “Other”. Leave the mitoYDNA ID field blank. Click the button that saves your entry. Within 24 hours your V haplogroup will be automatically associated with everyone known to be in your direct maternal line which is currently: https://www.wikitree.com/treewidget/Watson-2285/890

Comments

In the Test Type field select “Other”. In the note field please put the approximate date you received your 23andMe results (not my made up date I used as an example ;-).  The date is important because over time 23andMe has reported some haplogroups differently.

Answer 2

I don't think it's quite accurate to say you share the haplogroup with a pre-1700 person.  More likely you share it with a descendant of that person.

Comments

since MtDNA changes so little over centuries it is not only possible but could even be likely that this would signify a match over time.   The same would not hold true for autosomal DNA.  

see:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1378010/

and https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/mitochondria.html

---

Nevertheless, that ancestor hasn't been tested.

---

Julie with MtDNA that does not matter if the paper trail is accurate.   See https://www.wikitree.com/treewidget/Watson-2285/890  the link that was in the answer by Peter Roberts.  The copy on the WT page says it all...  

---

Sorry, I'm not getting it.  What specifically are you referring to?

Although mtDNA changes little over centuries, that is no guarantee it hasn't changed between any two particular generations, is it?  Just probabilities.

---

Two other people and I trace on paper to a 1600's Parisan.  One differs from the other two of us by one mutation and our trees diverge ~1700 by sisters.  If you are talking full sequence, mutations happen in near-autosomal scales, but small ones.

But, 23&me is not giving all of the private mutations and "V" or, in my case, "U4c2a" is not detailed enought to say this person has your exact match sequence.  Assuming paper trail is correct (and 'non-maternity events' are rarer than non-paternity events!) then I would say they are V and should be close to an exact match (distance 3 or less).

---

According to studies there is a 95% chance the DNA for MtDNA does not change for centuries.  So you are banking on just 5% probability of a change.  Nothing is 100% but I will take 95% odds over 5% any day of the week.   You were saying that because the woman in the 1600s had not been directly tested that the statement made by the descendant was not accurate.   I disagree.  If the papertrail is accurate then there is a 95% probability her statement will bear out.  

Why throw water on her excitement?   She has more of a chance of being right and being excited to do more research to prove it with that discovery.  And WT's page supports that view with the copy on that page.

---

I can't think of any reason Mary's excitement would be diminished by my suggestion.