Who Do You Think You Are Magazine Forum

[marshland]

The Times Newspaper on 24 October 2013 reported on a study in Belgium reported in the science magazine 'Biological Studies' of a comparison on birth records and genetic profiles for 1500 people who had a paternal ancestor alive before 1800.
This study , using the Y chromosome, found that 52 of the 60 pairs did have the same chromosome as their ancestor which puts the 'cuckoldry' rate for individuals as between 1 and 2 % of people rather than the previous estimate of 10%.
The second part of the study was of men who moved to Belgium from France which had similar findings.
Whilst the sample is still small it would be foolish to disregard the likelihood that some married women have conceived to a man who was not her husband.
If we translate this to our work it means that there is a 1.5 % chance of error for every entry. Not a big risk for an individual but taken over a large family tree then it is likely to be a factor.
We all know how catastrophic, one error a few generations back, can be to a family tree- Just look at some of those on Ancestry!
No problem for us at the moment as DNA records for the UK are limited but as DNA use spreads I can see some problems of people may find that their tree is accurate for family group purposes but not accurate for biological ancestry.
If DNA shows this problem then it may bring the question -Would we rather record the people who have shaped our family or those who are biologically responsible for our family ?

[Editor]

That's an interesting question. I've spoken to doctors who seem to think that it is closer to the 10% which I always thought was a bit high. 2% seems much more likely. I guess we have to go with the perceived and accepted father but if someone did a DNA test and proved to me that my great great grandfather was not genetically related to me, I'm not sure what I would do. Knowing me I'd still research him but he would probably take a bit of a back burner.

Sarah


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum

[Editor]

That's an interesting question. I've spoken to doctors who seem to think that it is closer to the 10% which I always thought was a bit high. 2% seems much more likely. I guess we have to go with the perceived and accepted father but if someone did a DNA test and proved to me that my great great grandfather was not genetically related to me, I'm not sure what I would do. Knowing me I'd still research him but he would probably take a bit of a back burner.

Sarah


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum

[lindseymyatt]

Hi sorry just come across this thread.

As someone who has adoption in her family. I would trace the men who bought up that child. Family is family and I know people say blood is thicker than water I would say that's not true but that's from personal experience.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum