Acadian DNA sources - proposed edits
Location: [unknown]
[send private message], Cindy Cooper [send private message], Christopher Young [send private message], and Audrey Lee Crockett [send private message]This is a working space for the proposed edits to https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Acadian_DNA_sources.
Y-DNA/mtDNA Haplogroup Analysis
- Note: When working with Y-DNA and mtDNA, it is important to understand the difference between the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) and the Earliest Known Ancestor (EKA). The earliest-known ancestor is simply the most-distant ancestor in the paternal or maternal lineage that we have been able to trace with genealogy. The MRCA between DNA testers is not necessarily their Earliest Known Ancestor. For the official help page, see Help: Most Recent Common Ancestor.
WikiTree uses Stickers for identifying Y and mtDNA Haplogroups in biographies of Earliest Known Ancestors. These stickers are for Y700 level tests and mtDNA Full Sequence (mtFS) level tests and are available here:
The Earliest Known Ancestor Finder App is available to help identify the EKAs for a tester.
Note that this is not the same as DNA Confirmation for relationships. For DNA confirmation, see the DNA Confirmation Statements section below.
The above EKA stickers automatically add the related DNA category to the profile. For other Y-DNA/mtDNA ancestors who are not the Earliest Known Ancestor, the DNA category should be added but not the sticker. Please see this page for a list of DNA categories.
For the earliest Acadian ancestors, we often don't have enough information to mark their fathers or mothers as "confirmed by DNA", either because their parents are not known or because we don't have the necessary Y-DNA or mtDNA testers from France. However, we have a wealth of information that can provide evidence for that ancestor's ancient origins (such as European or First Nations).
Here are some examples of how a biography can incorporate DNA findings from Y-DNA or mtDNA tests. Customize to your person and sources. Place a === DNA === subheading in the Research Notes section, followed by the paragraph.
Scenario 1: MRCA (Confirmed Haplogroup)
If an ancestor has at least two different sons/daughters with descendants who have taken consistent Y-DNA/mtDNA tests, the haplogroup assignment can be considered confirmed.
- Example:
- Several direct matrilineal descendants of Radegonde Lambert have taken mitochondrial DNA tests, descending from her daughters Madeleine Blanchard, Anne Blanchard, and Marie Blanchard. Radegonde Lambert's confirmed haplogroup signature is X2b4.[1] Details of the mtDNA tests are reported by the Mothers of Acadia Project. See this diagram of descendants for more information.
Scenario 2: Direct Descendant(s) (Presumed Haplogroup)
If an ancestor has only one child with Y-DNA or mtDNA-tested descendants, the ancestor's haplogroup can be reasonably assumed based on the haplogroup results of their descendant(s). Consistent results from multiple branches of that child's descendants increases the reliability of the haplogroup determination. The haplogroup is assumed to represent the haplogroup of the individual's paternal/maternal line, including the earliest known ancestor.
- Example:
- Some direct patrilineal descendants of François Savoie have taken Y-DNA tests, descending from his son Germain Savoie. François Savoie's presumed haplogroup signature is R1b-FT369318.[2] Details of the Y-DNA tests are reported by the French Heritage Project and Québec ADNy Project. See this DNA catalogue entry for more information.
(Sources):
- ↑ Denis Savard, Stephen A White, Lucie LeBlanc Consentino, Acadie ADN / Acadian DNA (Mothers of Acadia) Signatures ADN Radegonde LAMBERT (m France/Acadie v 1640 Jean BLANCHARD), Accessed 20 Nov 2023.
- ↑ Beauregard, Denis, Administrator Catalogue de signatures ADN/DNA Signatures Catalogue SAVOIE, François m 1651 Catherine LEJEUNE, Accessed 20 Nov 2023.
Sources and Citations
- Mothers of Acadia mtDNA Project sorted by Last Name, includes all entries by that name (often more than one for a single person) with originating country, and corresponding Haplogroup. Project Background
- Citation: <ref>Savard, Denis, Administrator [https://www.familytreedna.com/public/mothersofacadia/default.aspx?section=mtresults Mothers of Acadia mtDNA Project mtDNA Test Results] PAGE, Accessed DATE</ref> Fill in the page (very helpful to others as the pages are not otherwise indicated) and date accessed, as these data change
- Mothers of Acadia different view sorted by last name, shows family relationships, DNA type in color for easy interpretation, i.e. French in green, English in yellow, Native in blue. Click on name for more relationship information.
- Citation: <ref>Savard, Denis, Administrator [http://www.savart.info/AcadieADN/ Acadie ADN / Acadian DNA (Mothers of Acadia) Signatures ADN] NAME of Mother, Accessed DATE </ref> Fill in the name of the Mother and date accessed, as these data change Note that one or both of the above citations may be used
- White's Founding Mothers of Acadia includes indigenous women, provides DNA results, includes spouse, does not include children
- Citation:<ref>White, Stephen A. (2020, May). [http://www.acadian-home.org/Founding-Mothers-of-Acadia.html Founding Mothers of Acadia]. Founding Mothers of Acadia - Acadian Ancestral Home by Lucie Consentino. Accessed DATE.</ref> Fill in the date accessed and the update date which is currently May 2020, as these data may change
- White's mtDNA Proven Origins includes indigenous women, includes spouse, and Haplogroup, includes at least one family list.
- Citation:<ref>White, Stephen A. (2020, May). [http://www.acadian-home.org/origins-mtdna.html mtDNA Proven Origins]. mtDNA Proven Origins - Acadian Ancestral Home by Lucie Consentino. Accessed DATE</ref> Fill in the date accessed as these data may change
- Beauregard's DNA Signatures Catalogue Y-DNA and mtDNA triangulations sorted by last name
- Citation: <ref>Beauregard, Denis, Administrator [https://www.francogene.com/triangulation/index.php Catalogue de signatures ADN/DNA Signatures Catalogue] NAME of Father/Mother, Accessed DATE </ref> Fill in the name of the Father/Mother and date accessed, as these data change
- FamilyTreeDNA Results for Y-DNA Sorted by Haplogroup
- Citation:<ref>Estes, Roberta and Marie Rundquist. Acadian and Amerindian Ancestry DNA Project - Y-DNA Classic Chart. Acadian and Amerindian Ancestry DNA Project. [https://www.familytreedna.com/public/AcadianAmerIndian?iframe=yresults Y-DNA Results], Accessed DATE.</ref> Enter the date you accessed this, and a page number where found. These change frequently so the date is important
- FamilyTreeDNA Results for mtDNA Sorted by Haplogroup
- Citation:<ref>Estes, Roberta and Marie Rundquist. Acadian and Amerindian Ancestry DNA Project - mtDNA Test Results. Acadian and Amerindian Ancestry DNA Project. [https://www.familytreedna.com/public/AcadianAmerIndian?iframe=mtresults mtDNA Results], Accessed DATE.</ref> Enter the date you accessed this, and a page number where found. These change frequently so the date is important
- La Souche Caplan has a well developed compendium of information about DNA sources, together with other useful information. Citation for the individual sources are provided there.
Blogs and Articles
- Login to edit this profile and add images.
- Private Messages: Contact the Profile Managers privately: Valerie Penner, Cindy Cooper, Christopher Young, and Audrey Lee Crockett. (Best when privacy is an issue.)
- Public Comments: Login to post. (Best for messages specifically directed to those editing this profile. Limit 20 per day.)
For example:
Category:MtDNA haplogroup C1c Category:C1c FS mtDNA Haplogroup Category:MtDNA haplogroup D1 Category:D1 FS mtDNA Haplogroup
1) My message got reformatted. My intention was to show "DNA" as a subheading under Research Notes.
2) You can set any parent to "Confident" based on genealogy alone. DNA has nothing to do with it.
We cannot be "confident" about a DNA Haplogroup based upon the existence of testers among the MRCA's descendants.
What we can do is to add image to the EKA. See example usage on Mi'kmaq-11
This shows that the profile subject is the declared EKA of at least one mtDNA tester.
3.)
4.) You wrote "We can probably remove Scenario 3. I think one of the issues Denis was having was with the automatic "DNA Connections" section, which populates profiles with haplogroup info even if it is not based on direct descendants tests. The scenario 3 paragraph could help clarify that there are no tested descendants with tests."
The "DNA Connections" list on any profile is entirely based on WikiTree members who have recorded their tests.
It is akin to the notion that DNA haplogroups can be inferred, but in this case it is WIkiTree who is doing the inference, based on what it assumes is perfect information. That is, it has a record that one/more descendants of an ancestor have recorded their own DNA results, and so it can walk the tree to identify all descendants of the tree who, all things being equal, should carry the same signature.
5.) Yes, I am aware that the Help page is misleading.
It is true that sometimes we find a GD=1 or even GD=3 in a match who should be a perfect match, all things being equal. Often, we find those differences in the HVR1 or HVR2 region, and often we can explain away those differences by reference to well-know hyper-variable facets. In other case, the differences occur in the coding region (CR) and they are harder to explain away. Your average WikiTreer is not equipped to make those determinations. It would take someone with much more experience, and might require direct access to the matches kit comparisons. Most of us don't get to see details of the coding regions.
Even when you have a perfect match, if the genealogy does not support a Confirmation, then all bets are off.
7.) a) I thought that too. Then I created an mtDNA Confirmation without seeking approval of a subject. I was asked to take it down. b) auDNA Confirmation requirements are not as stringent as yDNA and mtDNA. c) The requirement for independently verifiable confirmations is based on a precept of science: that we rely upon the word of no-one. My favorite example is Einstein's theory that gravity bends light, which was confirmed by Eddington's independent experiment, which has subsequently been confirmed by other experimenters. Thus, it is not sufficient to cite Einstein on this matter, one must cite Eddington and/or the later experiments.
So, FTDNA groups and the attestations issued from their leaders are secondary or tertiary evidence. To confirm something, we must be able to look at the evidence and either verify or challenge the assertion.
9) It is not enough to state the testers relationship to the MRCA or even the EKA. Anybody who wants to attempt to validate the genealogy needs to be able to find their way to a more recent ancestor. As a rule of thub, we try to say that the tester is the grandchild or great-grandchild of the most recent ancestor who has passed. In some cases, if the grandmother has passed recently for example, we will refer to the great-grandmother. So, at least we can follow the tree part way down to the tester. In may cases, a WikiTreer may have inside knowledge about the tester, and naming a more recent ancestor will help them to infer who the subject is.
10) Well, even so, if we are giving advice on how to show Haplogroup info, then we should also talk about yDNA.
11) I don't see the need to wait, but will go along if that's what the group prefers.
Please amend to read:
Segment triangulation for auDNA requires at least 3 test-takers who all match each other on an overlapping DNA segment, and who all trace their genealogy to a common ancestor, through at least three different lines of descent.
1.) Unless there is an mtDNA or yDNA Confirmation, then any statements regarding DNA should be relegated to the Research Notes.
2.) Scenario 1 states "If an ancestor has at least two different sons/daughters with descendants who have taken Y-DNA/mtDNA tests (and those descendants match each other), we can consider these descendants' paternal or maternal lines to be DNA-confirmed up to that ancestor."
This is not correct. We cannot consider any paternal/maternal lines to be DNA-Confirmed unless there are DNA Confirmations. There is no "we can consider"
3.) Scenario 2 says "the ancestor's haplogroup can be reasonably assumed based on the haplogroup results of their descendant(s)."
I suggest that such statements belong in the Research Notes because we have not confirmed this information independently. Following is an example from Boudot-16 <nowiki> Research Notes mtDNA "There are five mtDNA test results posted at Québec mtDNA Project claiming Marie Boudot as their Earliest Known Ancestor, and reporting Hg=D1. There are also two test results reporting Louise Boudot as Earliest Known Ancestor. See also FrancoGène mtDNA Triangulation TRI0397. </nowiki> 4.) Scenario 3 say "the ancestor's haplogroup can be inferred based on the haplogroup results of their sibling's descendant(s). "
I disagree with this completely. Certainly we can say, in Research Notes, that a DNA result for a sibling is a strong hint that the subject may share the same haplogroup. We have not yet proven, with DNA, that they are in fact siblings, so such an inference is breaking a rule of logic that called "Begging the Question"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
5.) mtDNA example 1. An DNA Confirmation that does not list "Full Spectrum mtDNA match on CR, HVR1 and HVR2" does not confirm maternal lines. 6.) mtDNA example 2. An DNA Confirmation that does not list "Full Spectrum mtDNA match on CR, HVR1 and HVR2" does not confirm maternal lines.
7.) mtDNA example 1. A DNA Confirmation must be independently verifiable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority#False_authority
It is not sufficient to state that one or more authorities have stated that something is true. We must be able to confirm that independently, or we must have a statement from two parties who have independently verified. For example, the testers themselves can verify that they reviewed the statement and can attest to its truthfulness.
8.) mtDNA example 2. A DNA Confirmation must be independently verifiable.
9.) DNA Confirmation example in general. Especially in cases where one of the DNA testers is not on WikiTree, it is important to state a most recent ancestor. For example, "Tester 1 is a granddaughter of WikiTree-ID." That way, we can preserve anonymity while also allowing for some level of traceability of the line.
9.) No yDNA exmples?
10.) I think that this whole proposal should be reviewed by the WikiTree DNA team, including Mags Gaulden and Peter Roberts.
edited by Murray Maloney
1.) Edited the page to say "Place the paragraph in the Research Notes section. Start the paragraph with DNA:."
2.) Edited the wording in Scenario 1 to "If an ancestor has at least two different sons/daughters with descendants who have taken consistent Y-DNA/mtDNA tests, the haplogroup assignment can be considered confident"
3.) Page edited earlier to indicate the paragraph should go in the Research Notes section
4.) We can probably remove Scenario 3. I think one of the issues Denis was having was with the automatic "DNA Connections" section, which populates profiles with haplogroup info even if it is not based on direct descendants tests. The scenario 3 paragraph could help clarify that there are no tested descendants with tests. But it is probably not entirely necessary and provides less helpful information than the first two scenarios.
5.) I'm a little surprised that you say a full mtDNA test is required for DNA confirmation, because this is not mentioned in the WikiTree help pages nor does Greg Clarke's app ask whether the mtDNA test is a full sequence test. His app also allows a genetic distance of 1 for a confirmation statement. The example mtDNA confirmation statement in the help pages says "...is confirmed by an exact HVR1 and HVR2 match between...".
7.) Aren't the existing WikiTree guidelines for DNA confirmation already not independently verifiable? We are not required to ask permission from our matches to write a confirmation statement, and we can simply identify them by their initials or other anonymous identifier (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:DNA_Confirmation#Source_requirements_if_your_match_is_not_on_WikiTree). The match is not verifiable by any third parties, unless you allow others access to your DNA matches. On the other hand, it is possible for others to access a public database at FTDNA and view the matches for themselves.
9.) Agreed, but the example does already state the WikiTree ID of the tester's most recent ancestor on WikiTree?
10.) I didn't include any Y-DNA examples, because the Acadians project doesn't really have anything different to add to the existing Y-DNA confirmation help pages. The lineages displayed in the Mothers of Acadia project on the other hand, gives us opportunities for mTDNA confirmation statements we wouldn't normally have.
11.) Agreed, after the Acadians project is done working on the page we can ask for the DNA team to review.
edited by Valerie (Fremmerlid) Penner
«Scenario 3 say "the ancestor's haplogroup can be inferred based on the haplogroup results of their sibling's descendant(s). "
I disagree with this completely. Certainly we can say, in Research Notes, that a DNA result for a sibling is a strong hint that the subject may share the same haplogroup. We have not yet proven, with DNA, that they are in fact siblings, so such an inference is breaking a rule of logic that called "Begging the Question"»
I agree, yet this is how DNA-connections is coded to work in WT. I have complained about this to a g2g editor in the past, as it creates confusion as in the Mary Duffenay case where implied signatures appear to rule out her actually tested lines (her documented genealogy is evidently wrong, as she is triangulated to a different Mother). This is what spurred this whole revision in fact. The «coded» assignment should be clearly labelled as inferred, as opposite to proven (i.e. directly tested) lines. Some siblings were secretly adopted, so inference can go against the whole point of testing.
«7.) mtDNA example 1. A DNA Confirmation must be independently verifiable.»
This is impossible (outside the wikitreers offering up their info) in many cases without having full access to the tester's lineage and results, which are not public, outside project administrators. We can group them under the EKA in the FTDNA projects' results, but you are still taking the word of the admin for its accuracy (mutations and paper trail).
In FH and MoA we verify the lines ourselves. But in the former they are no longer published in the Catalogue after the European privacy laws came into effect, but we keep them (charts) in the latter up to births in the 1900 which are masked for privacy, since participants joined knowing they were participating in the lineages study (Lucie had the lines down to the living, I cut that back a bit).
I had one participant have me removed her line (which was stand alone for a Native Mother), even though it was fully published in book form by Victorin Mallet, and yet «I» was intruding her privacy. I will add her back as soon as I get a supporting line, but citing Victorin's book's conclusion instead of lab results. In these cases, statements or actions (grouping) by project administrators is all the proof accessible to the public. In Mothers of Acadia, the lines are validated by Stephen White. I don't know of a better authority. But what true for Acadians is not true elsewhere.
9b) We can use the Doucet example here. I have not dug into Y Acadian lines much as it is mostly covered in French Heritage and the Catalogue (or the Doucet project in this case where I am also Admin of late). Another example is the Richard/Robichaud lines who's profiles i need clearing up. I will give a conference at the Richard reunion on this matter next August in Nova Scotia (Congrès Mondial). I will follow up on a column (Acadie Nouvelle) and then include the conclusion in their respective profiles.
edited by Denis Savard
DNA Connections works as designed, which just happens to not be how some people intuit it. The idea of DNA Connections is that it lets people who have published their DNA test on WikiTree see where their DNA extends. If I see someone's name on a profile, I know that that person has a genealogical connection to the subject of the profile, and I can estimate how far away that person may be, based on the % shown. That's the design and that is what it does. My yDNA line goes up and comes back down to all the males on those patrilines. Anyone on WikiTree who wants to know whether they are a good candidate to show perfect DNA match with my 3rd great-grandfather just has to look at the list of yDNA matches on his own profile and he would either see the same group of matches as on William Moloney's, or not. He would know whether to expect a match before he ever swabs his cheek.
So, let's not spend time on that subject. It is what it is, and it is not what it is not. It will persist on WikiTree.
I don't think that I follow your Mary Duffenay story. That is not a name on WikiTree. Please send me more info. If somebody else's conflicting mtDNA haplogroup is showing up on her profile, then that is a warning that something is wrong with the genealogy. That's part of the design of the feature... if I see that a woman has DNA Connections with someone Hg=C1c and someone Hg=D1, then something is wrong and I need to track it down.
With respect to "That is impossible". I know the feeling. Welcome to WikiTree. You'll adjust, you'll adapt.
So far as WikiTree is concerned, FTDNA projects are the hosts of curated databases of DNA results, many of which happen to have public identifiers, but which results are incomplete for the purposes of public determination of DNA matches. Probably the reason that so many old DNA Confirmations only mention HVR1 & HVR2 is because that is all the public could see. But in a privacy-constrained world, it simply is not possible to allow public access to anyone's CR values or a man's full yDNA results. In consequence of these facts of life, groups such as MoA and QuebecMtDNA are also constrained in which information can be revealed, unless it is anonymized and masked appropriately. Now, you may have noticed that mitoYDNA is recruiting yDNA and mtDNA testers to connect their kits to WikiTree and compare kits easily. But I haven't managed to get all of my WikiTree/FTDNA cousins to copy themselves onto mitoYDNA. It's a struggle to be sure.
At WikiTree, there are strict rules about yDNA and mtDNA Confirmations, and the DNA Confirmation is a prerequisite to applying the "Confirmed with DNA" flag to a parent. That flag triggers WikiTree to start treating that pair of profiles specially, and it build a chain of profiles if one exists. The "Confirmed with DNA" chain of profiles represents a gold standard of genealogical certainty on WikiTree. yDNA and mtDNA chains can extend through hundreds of years. And that chain is a real thing on WikiTree, not an intangible idea in our minds.
WikiTree requires participation of any member reporting a DNA test result; the member must sign in themselves and fill in the details; agents and overseers are forbidden. It requires a bit of a commitment, but then it gets easier for us to observe the obvious. There are lots of people on WikiTree who have a strong list of mtDNA Connection with Hg=C1c matches. And that is staring to encourage more people to take a test.
Is it hard to get people to establish themselves on WikiTree? Yes. It took me several years to recruit two different sets of DNA testers to WikiTree. Luckily I was able to find those candidates who were willing to be public about their membership on WikiTree and their yDNA and mtDNA test results. There are my yDNA Maloney cousins and there are my cousins who have taken mtDNA tests with Hg=C1c results. I have not recruited any D1 testers, but my great-grandfather would have been Hg=D1, so I pay attention to them too.
I am familiar with the list of people who did C1c tests and are published in V.M.'s book. That list and that triangulation and what happend to it, due to Privacy Laws, is very strong evidence against relying on others for analysis of genealogy and DNA results. If the parties are not committed to their roles, then it all falls apart. The genealogy of Catherine David has always been in question anyway. Was Catherine really 100 years old when she died? Inquiring minds... So, the withdrawn lineage and kit are not needed, or indeed usable, to participate in any mtDNA triangulation that attempts to extend earlier than Catherine David.
9b) I think that you are saying that yDNA is not applicable to MoA, which is true, but surely if the project is going to expend so much effort and attention to the mothers of Acadia, then we can spare a moment for the fathers, and their role in the genetic material.
Murray:
I would like to ask the DNA project to review the page and to clarify three issues for us: