I have two GEDmatch numbers. Can I add second GEDmatch number to my list of DNA tests section?

+4 votes
103 views
in WikiTree Tech by Enrique Treat Gleason G2G6 (6.4k points)

1 Answer

+6 votes
 
Best answer

Hi Enrique, you wouldn't want to do that.  What you should do is set one of those Gedmatch tests to 'Research'.  There's no reason to have more than one public Gedmatch ID.  The only reason, in my opinion, to upload kits from multiple sites, is to create a Superkit.  You might want to review this post from a few years ago.

by Darlene Athey-Hill G2G6 Pilot (437k points)
selected by Enrique Treat Gleason
Darlene, is the Superkit more accurate?

Hi Julie!  It's supposed to be.  Have you read this article?

Not much time today, but I'll chime in to support the Superkit notion. We can't know which SNPs actually end up being used in comparisons after GEDmatch has "slimmed" an upload, but what we can do is run the File Diagnostic Utility and look at those stats, particularly the number of total matches (these aren't individual people, of course; think of them as segments) shown in the database for that particular kit.

Quick rundown of my own kits' (same DNA) numbers, as of early last month:

Superkit extracted from whole genome sequencing:

  • Number of original SNPs: 2,080,567
  • Usable SNPs: 1,377,182
  • Usable SNPs (slim): 1,019,459
  • Total matches for kit: 56,802
  • Matches to slimmed SNP count: 5.57%

23andMe v5:

  • Number of original SNPs: 635,966
  • Usable SNPs: 496,179
  • Usable SNPs (slim): 397,773
  • Total matches for kit: 161,680
  • Matches to slimmed SNP count: 40.65%

AncestryDNA v1:

  • Number of original SNPs: 636,709
  • Usable SNPs: 636,709
  • Usable SNPs (slim): 441,045
  • Total matches for kit: 65,845
  • Matches to slimmed SNP count: 14.93%

FTDNA v3:

  • Number of original SNPs: 627,817
  • Usable SNPs: 487,649
  • Usable SNPs(slim): 382,550
  • Total matches for kit: 109,359
  • Matches to slimmed SNP count: 28.59%

Living DNA v2 (this kit was simulated by using the template of actual SNPs tested by the Living DNA Affymetrix chip)

  • Number of original SNPs: 698,531
  • Usable SNPs: 563,991
  • Usable SNPs (slim): 431,418
  • Total matches for kit: 141,648
  • Matches to slimmed SNP count: 32.83%

MyHeritage v2:

  • Number of original SNPs: 610,128
  • Usable SNPs: 494,251
  • Usable SNPs (slim): 390,654
  • Total matches for kit: 117,136
  • Matches to slimmed SNP count: 29.98%

So the actual matching results are sort of all over the place. But clearly the kit that started out with over 2 million reported SNPs has the lowest total match count of any...by a huge margin if we look at matches by SNP volume. Deductively, the implication is that as we increase the number of unique SNPs on file, the more likely that what would otherwise be evaluated as contiguous segments are, in fact, not. That there is enough interruption in the assumed contiguity of the segment that it no longer evaluates as a match.

And, yes; I think it should be a factor of concern among those folks not using a Superkit (and I really wish we could take the GEDmatch SNP catalog up to around 20-25 million...I've got 'em, but I can't upload 'em). More SNPs nets you fewer matches, but the resulting matches are likelier more accurate because they're less affected by algorithmic mismatch assumptions. This should be another of many cautionary tales about using very small singleton segments as genealogical evidence. IMHO.

Edited: If you're using a decent calculator it probably isn't wrong...but the person punching the keys may be.

Thank you both, Darlene and Edison.  You've talked me into it.  I'll go make my Superkit right now.

For anyone else reading this:  It took me a minute to figure out what the fifth item is in Edison's comparisons above.  It is the fourth line divided by the third.

But Edison!  I think you made a mistake.  Shouldn't the percentage for the WGS matches be 5.57 and not 2.73?

Oh geez. Basic math (gonna go correct that before Barry sees it). I used the total number of SNPs submitted as the divisor instead of the "slimmed" SNPs. Oops. The others look correct, though. Seventeen-hour workdays make you stupid.
blush

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
+12 votes
2 answers
+4 votes
2 answers
747 views asked Apr 3, 2018 in WikiTree Help by Cheryl Cotter G2G Crew (560 points)
+30 votes
11 answers
+17 votes
2 answers
0 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
112 views asked Nov 22, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Marilyn Griffin G2G Crew (340 points)
+6 votes
2 answers
443 views asked Jul 30, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by Irene Pantalone G2G6 (7.1k points)
+5 votes
1 answer
155 views asked Jan 15, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by Teresa McCrary G2G Rookie (280 points)
+6 votes
1 answer
253 views asked May 13, 2016 in WikiTree Tech by Sandy Martin G2G2 (2.8k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...