An Ancestry chromosome browser with triangulation would be a super game changer given the size of their database. Brick walls would come tumbling down.
I have been ranting about this for ages. Glad to see someone with a larger megaphone get involved. Those professionals who say that you don’t need one are being disingenuous. Some of them are paid by Ancestry. That obviously has an impact on their position. This is one of those don’t get me started topics.
I hope that Ancestry will get a chromosome browser before I croak! There are some matches that I won't be able to figure out any other way. Our internet is down at home for another week, so am using Walmart's Wi-fi right now. I sure do miss getting to see the live streams. Thanks for another great video, Have a blessed day.
@Suzanne McClendon We miss hanging out with you as well. However, we're going to Europe for the rest of June. So, perhaps things will be resolved by the time we get back?
Ancestry definitely must get a chromosome browser. I don’t even consider them a useful DNA testing company anymore, until they get one. I used to recommend Ancestry’s DNA test, foolishly believing a chromosome browser must be in the works. I would do a review of my ethnicity results every time they came out with an update, since 2018, and give out Ancestry DNA kits whenever possible, but in the past few years, the lack of a chromosome browser has crossed the line into ridiculous, and I can’t recommend them anymore. Having the largest database is awesome, but it’s useless if the real data isn’t actually accessible. I’ve stopped reviewing Ancestry’s updates, until they get a browser, and I now give out MyHeritage test instead. I really do hope they get their heads out of their asses at some point, because it really is such a waste to have so many testers, already there and waiting, but simply locked behind a companies short-sighted decision making. It’s such a sham. So much potential being wasted, for no good reason.
Whilst I do agree with you and I definitely do want a chromosome browser is you have me the choice of a chromosome browser or say them telling me how much DNA my matches share with their shared matches, something MyHeritage also provides, or even showing shared matches below 20cM, say down to 15cM, then I'd take the latter first. It's just my opinion and I do want to say this isn't me saying I don't want one but those would be my priority. Now you could say you could work out all of this is they have you a chromosome browser that showed matching segment locations, and that is true, but it would take a lot of work to go through all your matches and do this one at a time. I think the reason Ancestry isn't doing this is because their database behind the website is so poorly designed it can't handle the amount of data, match of up, and provide it back to the user at present, let alone with more functionality. They probably need to fix that first before they can do anything else and that will take a lot of time and effort and so it's why we aren't getting the new features we need, but are being thrown bones like sideview, which is nice, but doesn't provide a huge amount of insight into where distant relatives are in your tree, so it's really only shared matches and trees Ancestry has as tools, but it has a lot more DNA test results than any other provider and so feels it can do anything it wants, and is more info the gimmick of Ethnicity than it is genealogy when it comes to advertising its DNA kits.
I feel your frustration. They're still useful, but the chromosome browser might help break down some brick walls. Also, some people who are on multiple sites, including those with browsers, use different names across sites. Sigh! :) It would be helpful to be able to check segments among shared matches and to be able to triangulate matches. I wish they would also do like MyHeritage and 23andme do, which is not only tell me my shared matches but tell me how much I shared with them and how much the person I am viewing shares with them, along with our predicted relationships. I have written about both the browser and this issue to Ancestry previously. They have the largest database, and they keep adding features, but somehow the premier company has not provided a chromosome browser and provided for triangulation. I wish 23andme would revise their browser so that yes would go back to meaning triangulation.
I wanted to retest all my family members with Ancestry (currently all are on FTDNA and only 3 tests on Ancestry) but I won't do it if they don't give us the chromosome browser because such DNA test has no value to me.
I agree with you, even more than you agree with yourself! As a long-time genealogist searching a number of generations back, chromosome browsers are the miter saws in my toolbox. I do most of my genealogy research at Ancestry, but the majority of my matches are far enough back that they may match other testers on several of my lines, even though they are usually related to me in only one way. I could also give a number of examples in which a given match, or in a few cases, several closely-related (to each other) people, APPEAR to match one of my lines by sharing some of my matches from that particular line, but who are actually related to me in a different way; their connection to my other matches happens to be through their common ancestors who are not related to me at all. The truth is revealed only when I find them or their close relatives on 23andMe or MyHeritage, where I can see just how they are genetically related to me. I spend at least as much time working with segments as I do working with Ancestry matches, and there is just no substitute for a chromosome browser.
I fully agree! What I am even more bummed about is that they don't give me shared matches under 20 cM. For people in the Caribbean for instance, it is the only way to get an idea on which side of the family a match is. There are not many who have been tested.
Yes! This is the same with Indian Ocean islanders too. Cutting off the shared match list at 20cM misses so many shared matches that would be helpful.We don't have that many to start with on that side.
@@volkstouareg5620 It's a nice feature in principle but at the moment there are still a lot of matches that are unassigned. My mum has 33 matches assigned to her paternal side (the Mauritian side), 386 maternal and 17,570 unassigned. At the top it says updated Dec 2022 🤷♂When I look at the paternal matches I can already spot a large percentage that are incorrect as they match my mum on her maternal side. Unfortunately, neither of her parents are alive to test. At least with myself I have my mum tested on ancestry/23andme and dad on 23andme so it's easier for me to separate mine out, manually if needed (I've done a large part of my unassigned myself)
I went through my sub 20cM matches to find if they had matches, a staggering number did match to groups I had created and many have public trees, they seem to be the type who want to link up their tree to mine even when the connection is way way back whereas the 2nd-3rd cousins are more 'copy that tree' type and know nothing beyond a name and date, in fact that's often all they have, no sources, no evidence, no proof. Just the right name in the right place around the right time and a 'it must be right' arrogance that they refuse to leave behind.
In my case the chromosome browser is my primary tool as my dna research is to map my chromosomes :) Regular research has got me back as far as I can - identifying where my dna came from is my current project. Which may also help expand my tree :). But thanks to MyHeritage for the most part, I have confirmed all my parents grandparents and now attempting to identify matches that can break down their great grandparents etc
Whilst I, like you, would love a chromosome browser, your claim that genealogy can't be done properly without one is absurd. Maybe it got included the word genetic I'm inclined to agree with you, but you can do it properly without one, but it certainly helps confirm things with one. Having just been given access by a DNA match to the DNA match lists for two matches to my grandpa and having copied from the match list page all the matches down to a certain limit and matching them all together it is staggering what you don't see with the 20cM limit, as well as being able to see how much these matches match with shared matches to me is probably more useful. I'd prefer to be able to see how much DNA my matches and shared matches have in common ahead of a chromosome browser.
@BentleyDrummle1 Genetic genealogy research is harder without a chromosome browser. Additionally, it's very difficult to make a conclusive argument about relationships without seeing how individuals triangulate on specific chromosomes at specific segment locales. So, genetic genealogy can be done without it. However, with it, we can validate more of our theories.
Nice rant Andy! The lack of a chromosome browser or some other way to look at/download segment data on Ancestry has been a real sore point for me. Every time I fill out a survey about Ancestry's services, I implore them to get a chromosome browser. Besides the privacy issue that you mention as Ancestry's reason for not having one, I have also seen some comments that Ancestry feels that such a tool would be "too confusing" for the average user. That is an insult to users, and the existence of a chromosome browser would not force anyone to use it if they didn't want to or didn't understand it. There are plenty of users who would understand how to use a chromosome browser, and it is high time Ancestry gave it to us. P.S. - As a fellow woodwork, I love your saw analogy! Don't forget the oscillating saw, reciprocating saw, hacksaw, and coping saw!
Thanks Andy for using your platform and reach to really highlight this glaring omission. I've yet to see any depth of response from Ancestry that validates their "privacy" concerns re a Ch browser. They have the data, they CAN provide it, but choose not to. As it is we effectively only have the equivalent of a post/zip code for a match when we need the actual address.
To ensure that I'm not burning bridges, I can sympathize with Ancestry's desire to protect privacy. However, in the past 10 years, we've seen many ways that other platforms have navigated this issue. I'm in favor of allowing people to opt-in to the tool.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics for sure, privacy is one of the utmost considerations that Ancestry should be complying with and I respect that they do. I guess my point is I've never seen an explanation of just how this presents as a privacy issue. Opt in/out would surely address any concerns
As to privacy, that could easily be addressed through the privacy settings, where people can Opt-out. That's how it is with MyHeritage. With some of my matches on MyHeritage I can't use the Chromosome Browser, because they've opted-out.
Chromosome browsers are like a street map of a town with individual property addresses on it. You can never know where someone specifically lives without the benefit of a map or an address book; the same holds true with DNA.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I love to think of matching segments as miniature pieces of real estate of varying size, with houses on them that are reflective of the ethnicity present. One side of the street represents one parent, and across the street the other. Unresolved segments are open lots and positively identified ones have houses(or log cabins or longhouses) on them. When I print out what I have on DNA painter, I add fences to show the property lines with dates attached to indicate when they were created, which is not yet possible on DNA painter. Then I add symbols to show what is on the property and where it may lead to in the past.
I can see by MyHeritage how useful a Chromosome Browser would be. But they have so many fewer matches then Ancestry. If I compare MyHeritage DNA to Ancestry DNA, I find that when I look at MyHeritage DNA matches, I am down to 71 cM by the 7th match. With Ancestry, I have 105 DNA matches before I'm down to 71 cM. Or if I compare MyHeritage's "Theory of Family Relativity" to Ancestry's "Common Ancestor", I find that MyHeritage has only 37 compared to perhaps thousands with Ancestry. More than I can count. I have had my DNA tested with FamilyTreeDNA, both autosomal and the YDNA test. But, they have fewer DNA matches than even MyHeritage. And something else that doesn't help is that even fewer actually have a tree. When the majority of people don't bother with trees, there isn't much you can do with the DNA matches. This leads to this dilemma. If you want a better Chromosome Browser, you have to go with a service with far, far fewer matches. If you want matches, you have to go with Ancestry. More matches wins this battle. Let's just hope that Ancestry eventually listens to their customers. In dreaming of having a Chromosome Browser with triangulation in Ancestry, I can imagine the brick walls it could break down. On the other hand, if limited to the fewer matches of MyHeritage or FamilyTreeMaker, I would have never even reached those brick walls.
You're not alone in dreaming of the power of the brickwalls that could come down with an Ancestry chromosome browser, or bare minimum a downloadable segment data file.
Your are absolutely correct. For those people going back a few generations the chromosome is not only very valuable, but can be invaluable in helping to match ancestors. By not having an excellent chromosome browser, Ancestry is just pushing people to other Genealogy/DNA sites and away from Ancestry. Go ahead Ancestry, push people over to Family Tree DNA (which, by the way, not only does the basic autosomal DNA test which Ancestry does, but also provides sophisticated Y-DNA tests which follow the paternal line, and mitochondrial DNA tests which follow the maternal line, neither of which is offered by Ancestry). Re: chromosome browser, Family Tree DNA also has a good chromosome browser - you did not mention that.
So True !! It's about time us serious genealogists made it clear that Ancestry and Living DNA should be providing a chromosome browser. Why would they not ? Ancestry say's it's for privacy reason's but heh - we are trying to establish the biological families of our family lines especially the brick wall's where only DNA and hopefully family tree info that you not aware of can be gained in solving these lines and the only way we can accomplish this is the chromosome browser and utilizing DNA painting which is essential to genetic genealogy. Well done Andy !!
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Thank you for putting this out there. If all the genealogy vloggers can rant together about the lack of a very necessary tool that (Ancestry) should have hopefully they will get the message and make some improvements that benefit us all.
Perhaps it would be hard to impliment but I've always wondered why Ancestry keeps saying privacy is the reason they haven't got a chromosome browser, when they've already got several privacy features that let you choose not to share certain (or even any) genetic information with your matches. And 23andMe does too--they have a feature where you can choose not to let your matches see the chromosome information. I consider chromosome browsers a very important tool, and I agree that Ancestry should impliment it if they want to be considered the top of genetic genealogy companies. So if privacy is what's holding them back, why not put in the effort to respect the privacy of those who don't want to share it while also letting the rest of us have a chromosome browser?
I completely agree! You said it all! Thanks for putting this out Andy. ANCESTRY we want a chromosome browser! PLEASE!! It is really needed to "see the original record".
Hopefully you can have some influence on this subject. I’ve been asking them for years to add this crucial tool. Their side view browser is useless for those with limited origins.
I completely feel this. I did not watch your other video, mainly because my quality matches are at Ancestry (though I am due to check that again at My Heritage). And because Ancestry has not had a Chromosome Browser I just haven't studied it. I know I should go work on GedMatch or My Heritage, but I am lazy, I have a lot of projects going on, and so I don't have the discipline to work on it on my own. It is one of the reasons why I loved your workshops, because it forced me to work on it because I had a class deadline to have done so.
An excellent rant Andy! Your point about the chromosomes being the original record is a very powerful argument. I love the GEDmatch tools and I agree that they offer the most powerful suite of tools. I hope that someone can use this rant to persuade Ancestry to change their position on this issue. The absence of a chromosome browser for my Ancestry matches is a huge frustration and impediment for my research. Love you DNA videos!
As I said in the video, I have hope that they're working on this. Since I don't work for the company, I don't have any more power than you. But I can complain.
Well said. Back in the 90s companies used to boast about, World's Best Practice. Ancestry falls well short of that mark at the moment. Thankyou for saying this Andy.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics they don't even indicate how our matches share/relate to each other. I've had a daughter not appear on a shared match list with her father and had to uncover the fact that two matches were first cousins to each other. With different surnames and no trees there was no indication they were that close to each other.
I think they will eventually come out with a chromosome browser because of the demand but I also believe they are going to want to increase the price for it.
Agree with this rant. The mental gymnastics and hypotheticals I read for why they shouldn't from a privacy perspective are pretty outlandish in my opinion.
I can't necessarily blame the company for striving to protect the privacy of their customers. However, I can disagree and suggest they allow individuals to opt into the service if they chose. Perhaps that would be the best of both worlds?
To be fair, Ancestry is trying to balance the need to protect the privacy of all of its users. They have said balancing that is challenging. But, I think there is a way to balance privacy with chromosome browsers. So, I'll still insist that Ancestry and Living DNA need to add this tool to indicate that they have a comprehensive set of tools
I'm watching this on Sept 18 2023; I believe Ancestry has finally added a Chromosome Browser to its DNA tools. I'm hoping it's gonna be helpful for me to figure out my father's paternal side! H
My mums 2nd-3rd cousin match I mentioned is 111cM across 4 segments, largest segment 30cM. The additional problem is that this match's paternal grandmother is adopted. The only shared match we have with her (that we can see due to the shared matches cut off) is my mum's grand niece. I wanted to rule out her Réunion island side by seeing if she shared the matches on MyHeritage from Réunion (certain surnames are popping up a lot in the matches trees from there and she has them in her tree too, but could be just that they are common in the French Settlers community there). I asked about her uploading to MyHeritage a while back but so far she hasn't for whatever reason. If I had the segment data though I could compare it to my 23andme/MyHeritage/Gedmatch matches, at least narrrow it down a bit. Its the most difficult side of my family to research due to lack of access to records and Im currently stuck at my 2x great grandparents for most branches on that side.
Ancestry marketing, certainly for the UK pushes ethnicity and instant 'easy' trees very heavily and people fall for it. I have a paternal cousin who tested just before xmas, by the new year she had a tree of 3,000 names she had copied and pasted. She has no certs, no sources and doesn't know how to use the census. Why? Because Ancestry are appealing to 'one click tree' market. I've spent 20 years building a well researched tree supported by over 100 bmd certs, wills, burial registers, census and newspaper reports but DNA results show some of the information on the certs is incorrect, a child born to a married woman for example is assumed to be the child of the husband, in the rare cases where the woman admits he isn't the father will only be named on the certificate if he attended the registrar and gave his permission for his name to be recorded as the father. As a result I now have 2 batches of maternal matches that don't fit my tree and as those tests are on Ancestry, the testers largely have private trees and haven't exported their results, I've asked to view trees, asked them to share the raw data elsewhere and nothing. I haven't been able to use a chromosome browser tool for any of those matches. Ancestry just released new messaging 'features' including circles, basically a group messaging option. Wonderful! Now I can bulk message people with no result instead of individual messages with no result. What a marketing coup that is. I can't wait to use it.
My wife has initially neglected the collaboration feature. Not that they aren't an improvement but the fact that few people collaborate in genealogy. But, quick tree building seems to have been a constant trend for most genealogy companies, and Devon and I get so frustrated because the increased 'interest' hasn't necessarily helped build accurate family trees.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I'm finally closing the net on how two groups of matches link to me, they account for about 40% of my maternal matches. I can barely find two trees with consistent information which suggests little in the way of collaboration or info sharing is taking place. I've messaged a few people and still haven't had replies two months down the line.
@@glenjones6980 Very few people will respond to a message from someone they don't actually know. I've gotten very few responses to messages I've sent. But the flip side is I haven't always responded to messages that were sent to me. Why? Well, when it's a stranger I don't really feel an obligation to respond.
I do not plan on renewing my Ancestry account because of the lack of a chromosome browser. I know MyHeritage has a smaller database but they have superior tools.
In regard to why Ancestry is refusing to add a chromosome browser ... this is just a random thought of mine and I could be completely wrong, but I would like to know if other people feel this way..... Is it possible that since there has been a huge increase in Ancestry's database size, that maybe they have realized that many of their relationship estimates are wrong, and making the segment data public would emphasize this? For example, their labeling system of 4th-6th cousin vs 5th-8th cousin gives people the impression that all their matches must be 8th cousin or closer. In reality, many of those matches could be further back, or even false matches. From what I understand, their "Timber Algorithm" was supposed to limit all the false matches and far-back matches, but if their method of doing this is kept private, no one really knows how accurate it is. What worries me is that IF or when the chromosome browser becomes available, it could be a major disappointment because people would realize that the vast majority of their matches are much further back than expected and can never be integrated into their tree. Additionally Ancestry has no method of resolving matches that are double-cousins (share 2+ ancestor lines). So many of the so-called 4th-6th cousins could actually be 8th+ cousins on 2 lines, right?
You bring up possible theories of explanations. I can't comment on it any further because I don't work for the company (and I make them mad too often). But it's something to consider.
Problem is, Ancestry doesn't need the chromosome browser because they currently have the market pretty much sewn up. They are experts in dumbing down and encouraging poor quality genealogy by all sorts of means. Idiot hints based on inaccurate trees is just one example. Yet their bank balance is, presumably, pretty healthy But, to offer what they claim to offer, that is, as Andy says, a comprehensive tool kit, they should provide one. It would solve all manner of problems for us, the users. Do they care? Probably not.
Thanks for sharing your rant. Since I don't work for Ancestry, I can't really speak as to why they don't offer the tool. You could be right. You could be way off. All I know is that they need to offer the tool to have a comprehensive set of tools
Ancestry tells me that I have a 1-segment 10cM DNA match with a person who did a DNA test on Ancestry. Both that person and I have extensive trees going back to the 1600s in New England. Looking at her tree, we have 3 common ancestors from the late 1600s/early 1700s. We would like to know which common ancestor this segment came from. If both of us were to transfer our DNA to, say GedMatch, to use its chromosome browser, is there any way that GedMatch could help us identify which of the three ancestors the segment came from by comparing it to segments provided by other people descended from the same three ancestors? Any other ways that we could identify the ancestor that provided that segment?
You have the exact reason why chromosome browsers are important. You and the match should transfer your DNA to GEDmatch to see what segment you have in common (or use MyHeritage. That also works). Then, look at the known matches you match with your match. (Does that make sense). As you being to figure out which known DNA matches you and this match share in common, that should help you resolve the question you have. Now do you see why the chromosome browser is important? You not only need the DNA segment from your match, but also other known matches. So you both need to invite even more folks to migrate their DNA to a platform that has a chromosome browser to resolve your question.
Not really. People still choose Ancestry because it has by far the largest database. And most of that "competition" they can get for free by uploading their Ancestry data to the other sites.
LivingDNA wants to but limited in funds to provide. My uncle has 700 matches on livingdna. It's useful. Ancestry needs allow us to see reverse matches cms. Like 23andme.
I think LivingDNA has the chromosome info as ‘waiting’ in one of the tabs. I keep checking it and the trees there as my mothers Hobbs matches are on that site rofl but the dna is incompatible on myheritage now
As other commenters have said, DON’T EVEN GET ME STARTED on this subject. DNA match lists are only indicators!!!! How can you be sure HOW you are related to a specific match IF YOU CANNOT SEE THE DATA!! Ancestry is doing its users and genealogy in general a major disservice by not providing a chromosome browser. Ancestry, don’t go the way of IBM and ignore your users’ pleas, else you will go the way it went. In the meantime, folks, download your data and upload to GEDMATCH!
To be fair, they are trying to protect the privacy of their users. However, I do think they have that built into the platform already. Anyone who designates their DNA and trees as private could be excluded. Everyone else could be included in the chromosome browser technology. Just a thought.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Yes, but chromosome browsers don’t actually let you see the base source data either (the actual values). They just show you where on the chromosomes you actually match someone. Theoretically, if you have a downloaded file of the data you could see the actual values, but if they had a proper browser, users would not need to do that at all.
Hello, not sure you will see this but I’m desperate at this point lol I think my biological grandpa is my grandma’s ex boyfriend and not her husband. I took an AncestryDNA test and matched to my cousin and share 635cm across 24 segments, ancestry categorized us as 2nd cousins (I just took this as half 1st cousins.) The problem is we don’t talk to her and she’s inactive on ancestry so I can’t message her to see who she matched to. Her sister who I do talk to just got her test results back and to my surprise we share even more DNA, 733cm across 20 segments and ancestry categorized us as 1st cousins with only 12% chance of being half 1st cousins and this is where I hit a wall. The problem is she matches to my grandma’s husband’s cousins and I do not, but I’m still very confused about the amount I share with my cousin. I’m positive we are half cousins, so could we just share an above average amount of DNA for half 1st cousins? I also want to add all we know about my grandma’s ex is that he had some hispanic/indigenous in him and her husband is supposed to be 100% Italian give or take. My ethnicity shows Central American, Spain and Yucatán and Guatemalan community while my cousin inherited mostly Italian and 10% Greek (I have 0 Greek) and she did not get the Guatemalan community. This can’t be a coincidence right?
Ok, so I think you are saying the answer to why doesn't Ancestry DNA have a chromosome browser is Privacy! But that doesn't make any sense at all to me. If the million of people that tested with Ancestry were concerned about privacy, they shouldn't have tested in the first place! And many of them participate in social media sites -- those obviously are not concerned about privacy! Look at Germany and France. The Germans may love David Hasselhoff, but they don't love DNA, for privacy reasons, so we won't find many Germans that have tested unlike us here in North America. And last time I checked, it wasn't legal to sell DNA kits in France. I agree, Gedmatch has the best chromosome browser, but the number of matches related to the focus of my research (German) that have uploaded to Gedmatch is so small, it is insignificant compared to the huge list of German matches that I have at Ancestry DNA! Chromosome browser may be a speciality tool, but for me and my Germanic "brick wall" it is Huge and the most important tool! Please Ancestry DNA, come out of the genetic Dark Ages and give us a Chromosome Browser! Les Wiz Bang -- more Chromosome Browser! :-). BTW as a hobby woodworker, I use my tablesaw the most! Followed by my bandsaw and router table and a little bit of radial arm saw :-)
Providing a chromosome browser is not going to increase the sale of DNA kits, but could be used as a way of increasing revenue by introducing an additional charge for the less than 10% of test takers who would use it. Ancestry, like all companies, are not going to introduce something that is not cost effective.😢
You might be right about the additional sale of DNA kits. But that's not the point I'm advocating. Instead, I'd like a comprehensive set of tools to do genetic genealogy to validate the Ancestry ThruLines and other DNA match tools that Ancestry provides.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I hope they do introduce this tool, but I stand by my comment. A useful tool, but one that less that 10% of Ancestry users would make use of. So what company is going to introduce a loss making product/feature? Good luck in your efforts to accomplish this!
How in the world do all of the other major DNA databases provide one if it is so expensive? Ancestry probably has access to way more funds to develop this than all of the other sites combined.
@@jeffkennedy8034 Probably, because as another user has said, Ancestry’s databases and associated indexes are likely in dire need of redesign (poorly designed for current purposes) and the additional access traffic coming in from a chromosome browser would crash the system. (I’m a former database administrator/system designer). Being the first and most popular product on the market can have its downfalls. Remember when Ancestry started crashing all over the place when the TV show first came out? They weren’t prepared for the additional access traffic. Though obviously they have improved the system substantially, there may be underlying “faults” remaining unfixed that we, the users, don’t know about. I have tried over the years to give them hints on how to fix such things (best DB/software and QA tools, etc.), though I’m admittedly doing it blindly. Of course I never get any comm back from them. Still, I try, because I’ve been in their position and respect what they have accomplished. But I still want a chromosome browser. It’s an absolutely necessary tool. So Ancestry, bite the bullet and get on with it.
@@jeffkennedy8034 Developing the chromosome browser doesn't really cost anything (Ancestry probably already has one that they use internally). But people will need help using it and Ancestry will have to greatly expand its Customer Service Staff. It's those extra hires that makes the Chromosome Browser an expensive proposition for. Ancestry. Of course, that's also the case with the other firms. But they do it because in order to compete with Ancestry, they need to offer something that Ancestry doesn't.
On the one hand, I don't see Ancestry developing a chromosome browser, because they've built their product to be an "index" (as you called it) that requires you to stay subscribed to their ecosystem. OTOH... They love to let paying subscribers connect all the dots for them while they sit back and watch the money roll in. So maybe they WILL make a chromosome browser tool!
A chromosome browser would keep me on their platform longer because most of my matches are there (as many others have found out). So I don't think the index keeps folks on platform... but rather sends them elsewhere.
Very true. My highest matches are on Ancestry. A chromosome browser might help me solve a 150 year old NPE. I suspect the bio Dad is already in my tree.
I disagree, DNA Genealogists don’t need a chromosome browser at ancestry. What we DO need is the ability to download the shared matches segment data, not just individually, but as complete list for all of one’s shared matches. I could even live with a filter that allowed me to download say over 100cm; between 50-100cm or whatever defined range I would be looking at. I certainly don’t want to be limited by Ancestry’s interpretation of what they want to show me. I want to be able to use any 3rd party products that give me the answers to the questions I want to ask. That means I need a downloadable list.
Yes, we need segment data at a minimum (though I'd like to see it for any match or set of matches I select, not just for shared matches). A chromosome browser would be even better. I'm tired of having Ancestry decide for the customer what the customer wants.
It's easy to see why Ancestry doesn't provide a Chromosome Browser: it's because they don't need to. They already have a lock on the market, and a Chromosome Browser isn't going to add anything to their bottom line. If and when they start losing market share to their competitors, that will change. So far that hasn't happened.
When AncestryDNA fails to provide a chromosome browser to African American descendants of enslaved people, AncestryDNA makes it harder for African Americans to find our enslaved ancestors whose last names may have changed each time they were sold to new enslavers. As a result AncestryDNA is complicit in perpetuating the present effects of past discrimination (race based slavery).
I didn't consider this point and I'm not sure what I think about it. I think everyone's genealogical research is shortchanged by only have indexes to DNA results, rather than 'original records.'
Yes, everyone's research may be shortchanged because of AncestryDNA's failure/refusal to provide a chromosome browser. However, my point is that some groups are shortchanged even more than other groups by AncestryDNA's failure/refusal. @@FamilyHistoryFanatics
Ancestry does have a Chromosome Painter in Beta, but only shows paternal and maternal matches. You have to go to Ethnicity and then down to where they show Ethnicity inheritance. Not sure if everyone has it or just a few.
@Rosalie Howe The Chromosome Painter is okay if you're trying to believe ethnicity. (But I have tried to persuade people to disregard the ethnicity estimates as they cause more confusion then they solve). But, I think you're aware. The Ethnicity Painter is not the same thing as a chromosome browser. They are similar in construction but not information. Does that make sense?
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Agree. It’s a smokescreen at best and a constantly moving target. I basically ignore it, since it has little to do with specific genealogy research activities.
An Ancestry chromosome browser with triangulation would be a super game changer given the size of their database. Brick walls would come tumbling down.
That's my belief.
I have been ranting about this for ages. Glad to see someone with a larger megaphone get involved. Those professionals who say that you don’t need one are being disingenuous. Some of them are paid by Ancestry. That obviously has an impact on their position. This is one of those don’t get me started topics.
Well, I didn't hold back. Did you see my water bottle moment in the beginning?
I hope that Ancestry will get a chromosome browser before I croak! There are some matches that I won't be able to figure out any other way.
Our internet is down at home for another week, so am using Walmart's Wi-fi right now. I sure do miss getting to see the live streams.
Thanks for another great video, Have a blessed day.
@Suzanne McClendon We miss hanging out with you as well. However, we're going to Europe for the rest of June. So, perhaps things will be resolved by the time we get back?
Ancestry definitely must get a chromosome browser. I don’t even consider them a useful DNA testing company anymore, until they get one. I used to recommend Ancestry’s DNA test, foolishly believing a chromosome browser must be in the works. I would do a review of my ethnicity results every time they came out with an update, since 2018, and give out Ancestry DNA kits whenever possible, but in the past few years, the lack of a chromosome browser has crossed the line into ridiculous, and I can’t recommend them anymore. Having the largest database is awesome, but it’s useless if the real data isn’t actually accessible. I’ve stopped reviewing Ancestry’s updates, until they get a browser, and I now give out MyHeritage test instead. I really do hope they get their heads out of their asses at some point, because it really is such a waste to have so many testers, already there and waiting, but simply locked behind a companies short-sighted decision making. It’s such a sham. So much potential being wasted, for no good reason.
Whilst I do agree with you and I definitely do want a chromosome browser is you have me the choice of a chromosome browser or say them telling me how much DNA my matches share with their shared matches, something MyHeritage also provides, or even showing shared matches below 20cM, say down to 15cM, then I'd take the latter first. It's just my opinion and I do want to say this isn't me saying I don't want one but those would be my priority. Now you could say you could work out all of this is they have you a chromosome browser that showed matching segment locations, and that is true, but it would take a lot of work to go through all your matches and do this one at a time.
I think the reason Ancestry isn't doing this is because their database behind the website is so poorly designed it can't handle the amount of data, match of up, and provide it back to the user at present, let alone with more functionality. They probably need to fix that first before they can do anything else and that will take a lot of time and effort and so it's why we aren't getting the new features we need, but are being thrown bones like sideview, which is nice, but doesn't provide a huge amount of insight into where distant relatives are in your tree, so it's really only shared matches and trees Ancestry has as tools, but it has a lot more DNA test results than any other provider and so feels it can do anything it wants, and is more info the gimmick of Ethnicity than it is genealogy when it comes to advertising its DNA kits.
I feel your frustration. They're still useful, but the chromosome browser might help break down some brick walls. Also, some people who are on multiple sites, including those with browsers, use different names across sites. Sigh! :) It would be helpful to be able to check segments among shared matches and to be able to triangulate matches. I wish they would also do like MyHeritage and 23andme do, which is not only tell me my shared matches but tell me how much I shared with them and how much the person I am viewing shares with them, along with our predicted relationships. I have written about both the browser and this issue to Ancestry previously. They have the largest database, and they keep adding features, but somehow the premier company has not provided a chromosome browser and provided for triangulation. I wish 23andme would revise their browser so that yes would go back to meaning triangulation.
Thanks for participating in the rant session with me.
I wanted to retest all my family members with Ancestry (currently all are on FTDNA and only 3 tests on Ancestry) but I won't do it if they don't give us the chromosome browser because such DNA test has no value to me.
I agree with you, even more than you agree with yourself! As a long-time genealogist searching a number of generations back, chromosome browsers are the miter saws in my toolbox. I do most of my genealogy research at Ancestry, but the majority of my matches are far enough back that they may match other testers on several of my lines, even though they are usually related to me in only one way. I could also give a number of examples in which a given match, or in a few cases, several closely-related (to each other) people, APPEAR to match one of my lines by sharing some of my matches from that particular line, but who are actually related to me in a different way; their connection to my other matches happens to be through their common ancestors who are not related to me at all. The truth is revealed only when I find them or their close relatives on 23andMe or MyHeritage, where I can see just how they are genetically related to me. I spend at least as much time working with segments as I do working with Ancestry matches, and there is just no substitute for a chromosome browser.
Thanks for sharing your experiences with me.
I fully agree! What I am even more bummed about is that they don't give me shared matches under 20 cM. For people in the Caribbean for instance, it is the only way to get an idea on which side of the family a match is. There are not many who have been tested.
Yes! This is the same with Indian Ocean islanders too. Cutting off the shared match list at 20cM misses so many shared matches that would be helpful.We don't have that many to start with on that side.
Ancestry has DNA Matches Split Up By Parent in Beta right now. I'm not sure it's available in every country. It's a nice feature.
@@volkstouareg5620 ,yeah, that only works well if you have already been able to identify a lot of your matches, so basically it is your own work.
@@volkstouareg5620 It's a nice feature in principle but at the moment there are still a lot of matches that are unassigned. My mum has 33 matches assigned to her paternal side (the Mauritian side), 386 maternal and 17,570 unassigned. At the top it says updated Dec 2022 🤷♂When I look at the paternal matches I can already spot a large percentage that are incorrect as they match my mum on her maternal side. Unfortunately, neither of her parents are alive to test. At least with myself I have my mum tested on ancestry/23andme and dad on 23andme so it's easier for me to separate mine out, manually if needed (I've done a large part of my unassigned myself)
I went through my sub 20cM matches to find if they had matches, a staggering number did match to groups I had created and many have public trees, they seem to be the type who want to link up their tree to mine even when the connection is way way back whereas the 2nd-3rd cousins are more 'copy that tree' type and know nothing beyond a name and date, in fact that's often all they have, no sources, no evidence, no proof. Just the right name in the right place around the right time and a 'it must be right' arrogance that they refuse to leave behind.
In my case the chromosome browser is my primary tool as my dna research is to map my chromosomes :) Regular research has got me back as far as I can - identifying where my dna came from is my current project. Which may also help expand my tree :). But thanks to MyHeritage for the most part, I have confirmed all my parents grandparents and now attempting to identify matches that can break down their great grandparents etc
Cool. Good job on what you've done so far.
Well done. Genealogy can't be done properly without a chromosome browser. You need to be able to see where the segments have come from.
Whilst I, like you, would love a chromosome browser, your claim that genealogy can't be done properly without one is absurd. Maybe it got included the word genetic I'm inclined to agree with you, but you can do it properly without one, but it certainly helps confirm things with one. Having just been given access by a DNA match to the DNA match lists for two matches to my grandpa and having copied from the match list page all the matches down to a certain limit and matching them all together it is staggering what you don't see with the 20cM limit, as well as being able to see how much these matches match with shared matches to me is probably more useful. I'd prefer to be able to see how much DNA my matches and shared matches have in common ahead of a chromosome browser.
@BentleyDrummle1 Genetic genealogy research is harder without a chromosome browser. Additionally, it's very difficult to make a conclusive argument about relationships without seeing how individuals triangulate on specific chromosomes at specific segment locales. So, genetic genealogy can be done without it. However, with it, we can validate more of our theories.
Nice rant Andy! The lack of a chromosome browser or some other way to look at/download segment data on Ancestry has been a real sore point for me. Every time I fill out a survey about Ancestry's services, I implore them to get a chromosome browser. Besides the privacy issue that you mention as Ancestry's reason for not having one, I have also seen some comments that Ancestry feels that such a tool would be "too confusing" for the average user. That is an insult to users, and the existence of a chromosome browser would not force anyone to use it if they didn't want to or didn't understand it. There are plenty of users who would understand how to use a chromosome browser, and it is high time Ancestry gave it to us. P.S. - As a fellow woodwork, I love your saw analogy! Don't forget the oscillating saw, reciprocating saw, hacksaw, and coping saw!
The tool is easy enough for my wife, the Debbie Downer of DNA to understand. It's actually one of the easiest tools to explain. **SIGH ***
Thanks Andy for using your platform and reach to really highlight this glaring omission. I've yet to see any depth of response from Ancestry that validates their "privacy" concerns re a Ch browser. They have the data, they CAN provide it, but choose not to. As it is we effectively only have the equivalent of a post/zip code for a match when we need the actual address.
To ensure that I'm not burning bridges, I can sympathize with Ancestry's desire to protect privacy. However, in the past 10 years, we've seen many ways that other platforms have navigated this issue. I'm in favor of allowing people to opt-in to the tool.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics for sure, privacy is one of the utmost considerations that Ancestry should be complying with and I respect that they do. I guess my point is I've never seen an explanation of just how this presents as a privacy issue. Opt in/out would surely address any concerns
As to privacy, that could easily be addressed through the privacy settings, where people can Opt-out. That's how it is with MyHeritage. With some of my matches on MyHeritage I can't use the Chromosome Browser, because they've opted-out.
Louder for the people in the back! This video is spot on! I work at the Family History Library and frequently refer people to FHF videos.
Awww. Thanks for sending people our way.
Chromosome browsers are like a street map of a town with individual property addresses on it. You can never know where someone specifically lives without the benefit of a map or an address book; the same holds true with DNA.
Nice analogy.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I love to think of matching segments as miniature pieces of real estate of varying size, with houses on them that are reflective of the ethnicity present. One side of the street represents one parent, and across the street the other. Unresolved segments are open lots and positively identified ones have houses(or log cabins or longhouses) on them. When I print out what I have on DNA painter, I add fences to show the property lines with dates attached to indicate when they were created, which is not yet possible on DNA painter. Then I add symbols to show what is on the property and where it may lead to in the past.
I can see by MyHeritage how useful a Chromosome Browser would be. But they have so many fewer matches then Ancestry.
If I compare MyHeritage DNA to Ancestry DNA, I find that when I look at MyHeritage DNA matches, I am down to 71 cM by the 7th match. With Ancestry, I have 105 DNA matches before I'm down to 71 cM.
Or if I compare MyHeritage's "Theory of Family Relativity" to Ancestry's "Common Ancestor", I find that MyHeritage has only 37 compared to perhaps thousands with Ancestry. More than I can count.
I have had my DNA tested with FamilyTreeDNA, both autosomal and the YDNA test. But, they have fewer DNA matches than even MyHeritage. And something else that doesn't help is that even fewer actually have a tree. When the majority of people don't bother with trees, there isn't much you can do with the DNA matches.
This leads to this dilemma. If you want a better Chromosome Browser, you have to go with a service with far, far fewer matches. If you want matches, you have to go with Ancestry. More matches wins this battle. Let's just hope that Ancestry eventually listens to their customers.
In dreaming of having a Chromosome Browser with triangulation in Ancestry, I can imagine the brick walls it could break down. On the other hand, if limited to the fewer matches of MyHeritage or FamilyTreeMaker, I would have never even reached those brick walls.
You're not alone in dreaming of the power of the brickwalls that could come down with an Ancestry chromosome browser, or bare minimum a downloadable segment data file.
Your are absolutely correct. For those people going back a few generations the chromosome is not only very valuable, but can be invaluable in helping to match ancestors. By not having an excellent chromosome browser, Ancestry is just pushing people to other Genealogy/DNA sites and away from Ancestry. Go ahead Ancestry, push people over to Family Tree DNA (which, by the way, not only does the basic autosomal DNA test which Ancestry does, but also provides sophisticated Y-DNA tests which follow the paternal line, and mitochondrial DNA tests which follow the maternal line, neither of which is offered by Ancestry). Re: chromosome browser, Family Tree DNA also has a good chromosome browser - you did not mention that.
I'm aware of Family Tree DNA's chromosome browser. I just highlighted the one I think is the best - GEDmatch.
Except that people can get Family Tree DNA for free by uploading their Ancestry data.
So True !! It's about time us serious genealogists made it clear that Ancestry and Living DNA should be providing a chromosome browser. Why would they not ? Ancestry say's it's for privacy reason's but heh - we are trying to establish the biological families of our family lines especially the brick wall's where only DNA and hopefully family tree info that you not aware of can be gained in solving these lines and the only way we can accomplish this is the chromosome browser and utilizing DNA painting which is essential to genetic genealogy. Well done Andy !!
Thanks for watching and supporting me in this rant.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Thank you for putting this out there. If all the genealogy vloggers can rant together about the lack of a very necessary tool that (Ancestry) should have hopefully they will get the message and make some improvements that benefit us all.
Perhaps it would be hard to impliment but I've always wondered why Ancestry keeps saying privacy is the reason they haven't got a chromosome browser, when they've already got several privacy features that let you choose not to share certain (or even any) genetic information with your matches. And 23andMe does too--they have a feature where you can choose not to let your matches see the chromosome information. I consider chromosome browsers a very important tool, and I agree that Ancestry should impliment it if they want to be considered the top of genetic genealogy companies. So if privacy is what's holding them back, why not put in the effort to respect the privacy of those who don't want to share it while also letting the rest of us have a chromosome browser?
All great questions that I don't have answers to.
I completely agree! You said it all! Thanks for putting this out Andy. ANCESTRY we want a chromosome browser! PLEASE!! It is really needed to "see the original record".
You must have watched the previous video about why Chromosome Browsers are important along with this one.
Hopefully you can have some influence on this subject.
I’ve been asking them for years to add this crucial tool.
Their side view browser is useless
for those with limited origins.
I wish I had more influence. I only have a soapbox.
I completely feel this. I did not watch your other video, mainly because my quality matches are at Ancestry (though I am due to check that again at My Heritage). And because Ancestry has not had a Chromosome Browser I just haven't studied it. I know I should go work on GedMatch or My Heritage, but I am lazy, I have a lot of projects going on, and so I don't have the discipline to work on it on my own. It is one of the reasons why I loved your workshops, because it forced me to work on it because I had a class deadline to have done so.
You're not alone in not switching to other platforms. That's for sure.
Well said!!! Love this, keep up the great work you guys :)
We'll try. Do me a favor... go watch some of my wife's videos and share the love there as well.
An excellent rant Andy! Your point about the chromosomes being the original record is a very powerful argument. I love the GEDmatch tools and I agree that they offer the most powerful suite of tools. I hope that someone can use this rant to persuade Ancestry to change their position on this issue. The absence of a chromosome browser for my Ancestry matches is a huge frustration and impediment for my research. Love you DNA videos!
As I said in the video, I have hope that they're working on this. Since I don't work for the company, I don't have any more power than you. But I can complain.
Well said. Back in the 90s companies used to boast about, World's Best Practice. Ancestry falls well short of that mark at the moment. Thankyou for saying this Andy.
They don't provide a comprehensive set of tools.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics they don't even indicate how our matches share/relate to each other. I've had a daughter not appear on a shared match list with her father and had to uncover the fact that two matches were first cousins to each other. With different surnames and no trees there was no indication they were that close to each other.
Andy, very glad you did the Rant! I hope Ancestry listens and adds the chromosome browser soon!!!
I doubt. People have been asking the chromosome browser since 2013 and Ancestry only repeats that nobody needs it.
@Jerome Spears One could only hope. However, I have a feeling I will only have made a few folks mad, rather than encourage the tool.
@Tomas K Or that no one really understands it.
Don't hold your breath (I'm not).
I think they will eventually come out with a chromosome browser because of the demand but I also believe they are going to want to increase the price for it.
I'd pay a fee (like with MH and FTDNA) for it. But that's not the justification they're providing for not having one currently.
I'm not sure about the price increase, but I don't work for the company so I can't speak to that.
If they (Ancestry) ever offers it I expect it would be a premium service, where you'd pay some annual fee.
Amen brother. Well said.
Thanks. Glad you agree.
Agree with this rant. The mental gymnastics and hypotheticals I read for why they shouldn't from a privacy perspective are pretty outlandish in my opinion.
I can't necessarily blame the company for striving to protect the privacy of their customers. However, I can disagree and suggest they allow individuals to opt into the service if they chose. Perhaps that would be the best of both worlds?
Totally agree. And it's our data as ancestry users.
To be fair, Ancestry is trying to balance the need to protect the privacy of all of its users. They have said balancing that is challenging. But, I think there is a way to balance privacy with chromosome browsers. So, I'll still insist that Ancestry and Living DNA need to add this tool to indicate that they have a comprehensive set of tools
I got on Living DNA this morning.. they have a browser now !
Do they? I'll have to look.
I'm watching this on Sept 18 2023; I believe Ancestry has finally added a Chromosome Browser to its DNA tools. I'm hoping it's gonna be helpful for me to figure out my father's paternal side!
H
My mums 2nd-3rd cousin match I mentioned is 111cM across 4 segments, largest segment 30cM. The additional problem is that this match's paternal grandmother is adopted. The only shared match we have with her (that we can see due to the shared matches cut off) is my mum's grand niece. I wanted to rule out her Réunion island side by seeing if she shared the matches on MyHeritage from Réunion (certain surnames are popping up a lot in the matches trees from there and she has them in her tree too, but could be just that they are common in the French Settlers community there). I asked about her uploading to MyHeritage a while back but so far she hasn't for whatever reason. If I had the segment data though I could compare it to my 23andme/MyHeritage/Gedmatch matches, at least narrrow it down a bit. Its the most difficult side of my family to research due to lack of access to records and Im currently stuck at my 2x great grandparents for most branches on that side.
I can feel your pain so much. Good luck.
Ancestry marketing, certainly for the UK pushes ethnicity and instant 'easy' trees very heavily and people fall for it. I have a paternal cousin who tested just before xmas, by the new year she had a tree of 3,000 names she had copied and pasted. She has no certs, no sources and doesn't know how to use the census. Why? Because Ancestry are appealing to 'one click tree' market.
I've spent 20 years building a well researched tree supported by over 100 bmd certs, wills, burial registers, census and newspaper reports but DNA results show some of the information on the certs is incorrect, a child born to a married woman for example is assumed to be the child of the husband, in the rare cases where the woman admits he isn't the father will only be named on the certificate if he attended the registrar and gave his permission for his name to be recorded as the father.
As a result I now have 2 batches of maternal matches that don't fit my tree and as those tests are on Ancestry, the testers largely have private trees and haven't exported their results, I've asked to view trees, asked them to share the raw data elsewhere and nothing. I haven't been able to use a chromosome browser tool for any of those matches.
Ancestry just released new messaging 'features' including circles, basically a group messaging option. Wonderful! Now I can bulk message people with no result instead of individual messages with no result. What a marketing coup that is. I can't wait to use it.
My wife has initially neglected the collaboration feature. Not that they aren't an improvement but the fact that few people collaborate in genealogy.
But, quick tree building seems to have been a constant trend for most genealogy companies, and Devon and I get so frustrated because the increased 'interest' hasn't necessarily helped build accurate family trees.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I'm finally closing the net on how two groups of matches link to me, they account for about 40% of my maternal matches. I can barely find two trees with consistent information which suggests little in the way of collaboration or info sharing is taking place. I've messaged a few people and still haven't had replies two months down the line.
@@glenjones6980 Very few people will respond to a message from someone they don't actually know. I've gotten very few responses to messages I've sent. But the flip side is I haven't always responded to messages that were sent to me. Why? Well, when it's a stranger I don't really feel an obligation to respond.
Andy, I'm interested in you saying Gedmatch has a better chromosome browser than MyHeritage. Can you expand on that reasoning please. Thank you.
Gedmatch provide the SNP and Q values which give you a good indication of whether a segment is IBD or IBC.
@Caz Derby You beat me to the punch.
If you have another person's GEDMatch number, you can see where a chromosome match is, even if it goes more than 8 generations back.
I SAW this coming.
My rant? You know me too well.
BTW... Love the tool pun.
I do not plan on renewing my Ancestry account because of the lack of a chromosome browser. I know MyHeritage has a smaller database but they have superior tools.
You're not alone in this sentiment.
Great analogy!
Glad you thought so.
In regard to why Ancestry is refusing to add a chromosome browser ... this is just a random thought of mine and I could be completely wrong, but I would like to know if other people feel this way..... Is it possible that since there has been a huge increase in Ancestry's database size, that maybe they have realized that many of their relationship estimates are wrong, and making the segment data public would emphasize this? For example, their labeling system of 4th-6th cousin vs 5th-8th cousin gives people the impression that all their matches must be 8th cousin or closer. In reality, many of those matches could be further back, or even false matches. From what I understand, their "Timber Algorithm" was supposed to limit all the false matches and far-back matches, but if their method of doing this is kept private, no one really knows how accurate it is. What worries me is that IF or when the chromosome browser becomes available, it could be a major disappointment because people would realize that the vast majority of their matches are much further back than expected and can never be integrated into their tree. Additionally Ancestry has no method of resolving matches that are double-cousins (share 2+ ancestor lines). So many of the so-called 4th-6th cousins could actually be 8th+ cousins on 2 lines, right?
You bring up possible theories of explanations. I can't comment on it any further because I don't work for the company (and I make them mad too often). But it's something to consider.
Problem is, Ancestry doesn't need the chromosome browser because they currently have the market pretty much sewn up. They are experts in dumbing down and encouraging poor quality genealogy by all sorts of means. Idiot hints based on inaccurate trees is just one example. Yet their bank balance is, presumably, pretty healthy
But, to offer what they claim to offer, that is, as Andy says, a comprehensive tool kit, they should provide one. It would solve all manner of problems for us, the users. Do they care? Probably not.
Thanks for sharing your rant. Since I don't work for Ancestry, I can't really speak as to why they don't offer the tool. You could be right. You could be way off. All I know is that they need to offer the tool to have a comprehensive set of tools
Ancestry tells me that I have a 1-segment 10cM DNA match with a person who did a DNA test on Ancestry. Both that person and I have extensive trees going back to the 1600s in New England. Looking at her tree, we have 3 common ancestors from the late 1600s/early 1700s. We would like to know which common ancestor this segment came from. If both of us were to transfer our DNA to, say GedMatch, to use its chromosome browser, is there any way that GedMatch could help us identify which of the three ancestors the segment came from by comparing it to segments provided by other people descended from the same three ancestors? Any other ways that we could identify the ancestor that provided that segment?
You have the exact reason why chromosome browsers are important. You and the match should transfer your DNA to GEDmatch to see what segment you have in common (or use MyHeritage. That also works).
Then, look at the known matches you match with your match. (Does that make sense).
As you being to figure out which known DNA matches you and this match share in common, that should help you resolve the question you have.
Now do you see why the chromosome browser is important? You not only need the DNA segment from your match, but also other known matches. So you both need to invite even more folks to migrate their DNA to a platform that has a chromosome browser to resolve your question.
My father had those tools and many others. He called himself a "Jake of all trades and a master of None."
Too funny.
Every single day that Ancestry doesn't provide users with a chromosome browser, they send customers to their competition.
Perhaps. Or at least cause more work that I'd like to do.
Not really. People still choose Ancestry because it has by far the largest database. And most of that "competition" they can get for free by uploading their Ancestry data to the other sites.
LivingDNA wants to but limited in funds to provide. My uncle has 700 matches on livingdna. It's useful. Ancestry needs allow us to see reverse matches cms. Like 23andme.
Then should just provide the segment data in a downloadable format, like a CSV file.
I think LivingDNA has the chromosome info as ‘waiting’ in one of the tabs. I keep checking it and the trees there as my mothers Hobbs matches are on that site rofl but the dna is incompatible on myheritage now
Yep. LivingDNA is a smaller company and I'd love to see them have more tools. But, it all depends on the talent they have available.
As other commenters have said, DON’T EVEN GET ME STARTED on this subject. DNA match lists are only indicators!!!! How can you be sure HOW you are related to a specific match IF YOU CANNOT SEE THE DATA!! Ancestry is doing its users and genealogy in general a major disservice by not providing a chromosome browser. Ancestry, don’t go the way of IBM and ignore your users’ pleas, else you will go the way it went. In the meantime, folks, download your data and upload to GEDMATCH!
To be fair, they are trying to protect the privacy of their users. However, I do think they have that built into the platform already. Anyone who designates their DNA and trees as private could be excluded. Everyone else could be included in the chromosome browser technology. Just a thought.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Yes, but chromosome browsers don’t actually let you see the base source data either (the actual values). They just show you where on the chromosomes you actually match someone. Theoretically, if you have a downloaded file of the data you could see the actual values, but if they had a proper browser, users would not need to do that at all.
Hello, not sure you will see this but I’m desperate at this point lol
I think my biological grandpa is my grandma’s ex boyfriend and not her husband. I took an AncestryDNA test and matched to my cousin and share 635cm across 24 segments, ancestry categorized us as 2nd cousins (I just took this as half 1st cousins.) The problem is we don’t talk to her and she’s inactive on ancestry so I can’t message her to see who she matched to. Her sister who I do talk to just got her test results back and to my surprise we share even more DNA, 733cm across 20 segments and ancestry categorized us as 1st cousins with only 12% chance of being half 1st cousins and this is where I hit a wall.
The problem is she matches to my grandma’s husband’s cousins and I do not, but I’m still very confused about the amount I share with my cousin. I’m positive we are half cousins, so could we just share an above average amount of DNA for half 1st cousins?
I also want to add all we know about my grandma’s ex is that he had some hispanic/indigenous in him and her husband is supposed to be 100% Italian give or take. My ethnicity shows Central American, Spain and Yucatán and Guatemalan community while my cousin inherited mostly Italian and 10% Greek (I have 0 Greek) and she did not get the Guatemalan community. This can’t be a coincidence right?
Tell it like it is, brother!
I'm trying.
Ok, so I think you are saying the answer to why doesn't Ancestry DNA have a chromosome browser is Privacy! But that doesn't make any sense at all to me. If the million of people that tested with Ancestry were concerned about privacy, they shouldn't have tested in the first place! And many of them participate in social media sites -- those obviously are not concerned about privacy! Look at Germany and France. The Germans may love David Hasselhoff, but they don't love DNA, for privacy reasons, so we won't find many Germans that have tested unlike us here in North America. And last time I checked, it wasn't legal to sell DNA kits in France.
I agree, Gedmatch has the best chromosome browser, but the number of matches related to the focus of my research (German) that have uploaded to Gedmatch is so small, it is insignificant compared to the huge list of German matches that I have at Ancestry DNA! Chromosome browser may be a speciality tool, but for me and my Germanic "brick wall" it is Huge and the most important tool! Please Ancestry DNA, come out of the genetic Dark Ages and give us a Chromosome Browser! Les Wiz Bang -- more Chromosome Browser! :-). BTW as a hobby woodworker, I use my tablesaw the most! Followed by my bandsaw and router table and a little bit of radial arm saw :-)
Love your order of saw usage!
Can't say I wasn't warned.
YES! Yes! YES!
Glad you agree.
Providing a chromosome browser is not going to increase the sale of DNA kits, but could be used as a way of increasing revenue by introducing an additional charge for the less than 10% of test takers who would use it. Ancestry, like all companies, are not going to introduce something that is not cost effective.😢
You might be right about the additional sale of DNA kits. But that's not the point I'm advocating.
Instead, I'd like a comprehensive set of tools to do genetic genealogy to validate the Ancestry ThruLines and other DNA match tools that Ancestry provides.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I hope they do introduce this tool, but I stand by my comment. A useful tool, but one that less that 10% of Ancestry users would make use of. So what company is going to introduce a loss making product/feature? Good luck in your efforts to accomplish this!
How in the world do all of the other major DNA databases provide one if it is so expensive? Ancestry probably has access to way more funds to develop this than all of the other sites combined.
@@jeffkennedy8034 Probably, because as another user has said, Ancestry’s databases and associated indexes are likely in dire need of redesign (poorly designed for current purposes) and the additional access traffic coming in from a chromosome browser would crash the system. (I’m a former database administrator/system designer). Being the first and most popular product on the market can have its downfalls. Remember when Ancestry started crashing all over the place when the TV show first came out? They weren’t prepared for the additional access traffic. Though obviously they have improved the system substantially, there may be underlying “faults” remaining unfixed that we, the users, don’t know about. I have tried over the years to give them hints on how to fix such things (best DB/software and QA tools, etc.), though I’m admittedly doing it blindly. Of course I never get any comm back from them. Still, I try, because I’ve been in their position and respect what they have accomplished. But I still want a chromosome browser. It’s an absolutely necessary tool. So Ancestry, bite the bullet and get on with it.
@@jeffkennedy8034 Developing the chromosome browser doesn't really cost anything (Ancestry probably already has one that they use internally). But people will need help using it and Ancestry will have to greatly expand its Customer Service Staff. It's those extra hires that makes the Chromosome Browser an expensive proposition for. Ancestry. Of course, that's also the case with the other firms. But they do it because in order to compete with Ancestry, they need to offer something that Ancestry doesn't.
On the one hand, I don't see Ancestry developing a chromosome browser, because they've built their product to be an "index" (as you called it) that requires you to stay subscribed to their ecosystem.
OTOH... They love to let paying subscribers connect all the dots for them while they sit back and watch the money roll in. So maybe they WILL make a chromosome browser tool!
A chromosome browser would keep me on their platform longer because most of my matches are there (as many others have found out). So I don't think the index keeps folks on platform... but rather sends them elsewhere.
Very true. My highest matches are on Ancestry. A chromosome browser might help me solve a 150 year old NPE. I suspect the bio Dad is already in my tree.
It would help confirm theories.
I disagree, DNA Genealogists don’t need a chromosome browser at ancestry.
What we DO need is the ability to download the shared matches segment data, not just individually, but as complete list for all of one’s shared matches.
I could even live with a filter that allowed me to download say over 100cm; between 50-100cm or whatever defined range I would be looking at.
I certainly don’t want to be limited by Ancestry’s interpretation of what they want to show me.
I want to be able to use any 3rd party products that give me the answers to the questions I want to ask.
That means I need a downloadable list.
I would agree with your second point about having the abilty to download Shared Match lists.
Yes, we need segment data at a minimum (though I'd like to see it for any match or set of matches I select, not just for shared matches). A chromosome browser would be even better. I'm tired of having Ancestry decide for the customer what the customer wants.
I agree too!
Awesome.
yeah i use gedmatch for comparisons tool
I'm glad you found it.
FTDNA also offers a Chromosome browser.
You are correct. Sorry for the oversight.
It's easy to see why Ancestry doesn't provide a Chromosome Browser: it's because they don't need to. They already have a lock on the market, and a Chromosome Browser isn't going to add anything to their bottom line. If and when they start losing market share to their competitors, that will change. So far that hasn't happened.
That's a cynical way of thinking about it.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Cynical? Perhaps, but it's on the mark. FYI: just got an email from Living that they've ADDED a chromosome browser.
When AncestryDNA fails to provide a chromosome browser to African American descendants of enslaved people, AncestryDNA makes it harder for African Americans to find our enslaved ancestors whose last names may have changed each time they were sold to new enslavers. As a result AncestryDNA is complicit in perpetuating the present effects of past discrimination (race based slavery).
I didn't consider this point and I'm not sure what I think about it. I think everyone's genealogical research is shortchanged by only have indexes to DNA results, rather than 'original records.'
Yes, everyone's research may be shortchanged because of AncestryDNA's failure/refusal
to provide a chromosome browser. However, my point is that some groups are shortchanged even more than other groups by AncestryDNA's failure/refusal. @@FamilyHistoryFanatics
I would love for ancestry to provide a chromosome browser
Me too! Devon as well. That makes three.
Ancestry does have a Chromosome Painter in Beta, but only shows paternal and maternal matches. You have to go to Ethnicity and then down to where they show
Ethnicity inheritance. Not sure if everyone has it or just a few.
The chromosome painter does not show any matches. It shows false layout of pseudo-ethnicities on your own chromosomes.
@Rosalie Howe The Chromosome Painter is okay if you're trying to believe ethnicity. (But I have tried to persuade people to disregard the ethnicity estimates as they cause more confusion then they solve).
But, I think you're aware. The Ethnicity Painter is not the same thing as a chromosome browser. They are similar in construction but not information. Does that make sense?
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Agree. It’s a smokescreen at best and a constantly moving target. I basically ignore it, since it has little to do with specific genealogy research activities.
Dnagenics
?