Recently, MyHeritage rolled out their new updated ethnicity estimates.

Here is a look at my previous ethnicity list:

What I found interesting is that my East European percentage was only 23% in spite of the fact that my paternal tree is 100% Eastern European.

Now, look at my updated estimates:

I like the presentation of the results with the colorized map much more than the earlier stark list with numbers. More importantly, though, look at my numbers. East European is now way up at 45.9%. Considering that the area where my family is from – Eastern Slovakia in the Rusyn villages – and that many marauders, armies and migrants passed through the area, the “missing” 4.1% can easily be found in the 8.9% Balkans grouping.

Notice the 24.7% of 7 more ethnicities. When I look in my account, I see an expanded list:

These smaller ethnic groupings match my own research quite well, as I have Danish, Swedish and Dutch lines.

I think MyHeritage nailed it on the head for me!

Now, let’s look at my hubby’s report. This is his previous report:

And, again, his expanded list of results:

His results don’t have a dramatic change in numbers. However, note that almost 7% of Middle East/Africa is now gone. I’m not sure about the new North Italian or Portuguese numbers came about, but the other ethnic groups are well represented in my research into his family lines..

Again, I think MyHeritage nailed it!

In addition to the updated ethnicity reports, MyHeritage also now offers insights into Ancient Origins.

Ancient Origins is fun to browse, looking at the various groups and moving a slider through historical time periods. However, I have to admit I don’t understand some of it.

Overall, MyHeritage’s new DNA results are terrific.

I don’t often write about genetic genealogy, mostly because I’ve never had much luck finding new information, either in terms of ancestors or even about distant cousins.

Positive Findings:

1. I have 4 DNA matches to my first and second cousins, all of whom I know.
2. I have 46 matches to third and fourth cousins, some of whom I know and others I can place in the family tree based on the information they have shared.
3. No surprises found anywhere in my maternal or paternal trees.
4. MyHeritage DNA matches provide me with 40 matches on the first two pages, ranging from second through fourth cousins.
5. MyHeritage has many more European matches, probably because it is based in Israel and more Europeans test with them than Ancestry.
6. MyHeritage also provides links to shared matches with other cousins, which I will discuss in a bit.

Negatives:

1. Ancestry doesn’t provide links to shared cousins with my matches.
2. Ancestry ThruLines, for me anyway, is either 100% correct OR, and this is really important, brings up potential ancestors who either never existed (it somehow conflated two people and turned them into one person) or the person existed, but no records whatsoever are provided to document any familial tie to my ancestors.

ThruLines Examples:

My 3X great grandfather, Andrew Szova, born c1810 and died 8 March 1896 in Hajtovka, Slovakia, is supposedly the son of this man. The problem is that the church books begin c1828 and Andrew’s death/burial record doesn’t name his parents and his marriage apparently took place before November 1828, when the records begin.

Who was this Demetrious Szova? He was born c1781, died on 15 August 1855 and was buried two days later in Kellemes, Presov region. That’s about 37 miles from Hajtovka and Szova isn’t a terribly uncommon surname in the Presov region. Also, Kellemes church records begin about the same time as those in Hajtovka, so again, there are no records tying Demetrious to Hajtovka.

In addition, there is a supposed wife for Demetrious named Eva Pjatak, who I have never heard of and none of the trees with this couple’s name in them has a single record to support this theory.

Next up, we have one Rachel Thropp, supposedly born to a Thorp family in Connecticut. Furthermore, she supposedly married a Lt. J. Benjamin Parker, who I doubt ever existed, at least not by that name, in Perth Amboy, New Jersey. She is suggested as a possible mother to my Benjamin Parker, born in 1788 in New Brunswick, Canada. There are ties to the Throop family, not Thorp or Thropp, but I doubt Benjamin’s mother is this suggested ancestor.

The last example in ThruLines is that the suggested father of my Walter Stewart, born 1750. Take a look at Duncan’s theorized date of birth. Pretty much impossible. In addition, while there are some Scottish records attached to this Duncan Stewart. He lived his entire life in Scotland, dying there (according to a different family tree) in 1858. That also seems somewhat doubtful!

My take from all this is that everyone using Ancestry’s ThruLines take a very close look at suggested ancestors. Did the person ever even exist? If so, are there any records whatsoever tying them to your own family tree?

Unfortunately, I still haven’t found a way to remove suggested ancestors from the ThruLines results. It would be really helpful if Ancestry added that feature.

Now to MyHeritage, which has two really useful features. First of all, MyHeritage offers the Theory of Family Relativity, which is sort of line ThruLines, but a much better version. This theory suggests possible relationships with one’s own ancestor AND, if your DNA match has a linked online tree, it will identify a common ancestor for you when found.

Notice that this man is my fourth cousin, the common surname is Jones and the Theory of Family Relativity will actually compare our family trees to show the match.

In this case, Jones is 100% correct because our common ancestor is my 3X great grandmother, Rebecca Jones, who married (1) Peter Crouse and (2) Benjamin Blyther.

Notice that I can Confirm or Reject this theory, unlike on Ancestry’s ThruLines.

There is one other feature of the Theory of Family Relativity that I love. How frustrating is it to contact a DNA match only to never receive a reply AND you’d really like to know how you are related to this person.

The Theory of Family Relativity also creates a list of shared DNA match cousins for the user:

Notice at the top that it says my cousin and I share 120 DNA matches! Yes, that is accurate because the Crouse family was and remains huge. Many of them have DNA tested.

However, if I didn’t know how my example was related to me – maybe he had no tree on MyHeritage or else his tree consisted of one private person – I could read over my other 120 matches hoping that one of them shared enough info that I could make the connection.

In fact, our very first shared match would answer my question about how we are related. Notice this man has a linked tree with 661 people in it. Looking at it, I can see this man is related through my Coleman family and my 2X great grandmother, Sarah Moriah Crouse, was a daughter of Peter Crouse and Rebecca Jones.

Because of these features, and because MyHeritage has many more DNA results that include my distant European cousins, I personally find MyHeritage to fit my research needs much better than Ancestry.

I keep hoping that I’ll eventually break through an early 17th or 18th century brick wall with DNA, but so far, it just hasn’t happened.

October’s Tech Moment is an introduction to Jonny Perl’s WATO (What Are The Odds) program, which uses the amount of DNA shared between two people to help narrow down the possibilities of how the two might be related.

First, if you are new to genetic genealogy and don’t know who Jonny Perl is, he is the winner of RootsTech DNA Innovation contest in 2018.

Jonny is also the creator of DNA Painter, a freemium (free features with more advanced tools by subscription) program, which helps genetic genealogists to work with their DNA test results. DNA Painter featured in the Empty Branches’ May Tech Moment.

WATO is a tool developed by Jonny Perl that helps deciding where in a tree an unidentified DNA match might fit. Here are Jonny’s tips for getting started with WATO:

Here’s the quick version of how WATO can help: You know when you look at websites that show your DNA matches? There might be quite a few matches who you recognize, but there are also “cousins” as it were who share a good amount of DNA with you, but you have no idea how they might be related. Suggestions might be made, such as “second cousin, second cousin once removed, great grandchild,” etc. That’s a lot of researching needed to narrow down exactly how you are related.

WATO allows a comparison of amounts of DNA and then gives the percent probability of all possible relationships.

Let’s say “second cousin, second cousin once removed, great grandchild” are actual suggestions found on a website for your unidentified match. Using WATO, the possibilities show 10% probability for second cousins, 3% probability as great grandchild, but 87% probability as second cousins once removed.

That certainly narrows down the type of relationship to be follow when trying to figure out how that unknown DNA match fits in your family tree.

To learn more about using WATO, check out the following resources:

DNA Painter What Are the Odds Made Easy – Family History Fanatics on YouTube

DNA Painter Tool What Are the Odds (WATO) – Genealogy Tutorial

What Are the Odds? An online tool that can help solve DNA puzzles – Legacy Family Tree Webinar (by subscription)

Also, be sure to follow Jonny Perl’s DNA Painter Blog, as he often updates the WATO program.