Finding Fayette's Father: Autosomal DNA Reveals Misattributed Parentage
Jennifer Zinck, CG®, AG®
Content
Welcome
46s
About BCG
4m 59s
Speaker's Introduction
57s
Introduction
2m 7s
Case Study
37m 38s
What Are The Odds tool
9m 41s
More Questions
7m 31s
Announcements
1m 43s
Questions / answers
7m 29s
About this webinar
Traditional documentation clearly identified Fayette's father without conflict. However, the DNA results of Fayette's descendants told a different story. Learn how DNA evidence combined with a trail of clues and the application of the Genealogical Proof Standard revealed a secret from the summer of 1913.
About the speaker
Jennifer Zinck, CG®, AG® is a genealogical researcher, speaker, and educator who specializes in incorporating DNA results into genealogical research. Her traditional research focus is Connecticut and ...
Learn more...Related webinars
01:04:38
00:57:38
01:03:14
00:59:25
Comments (123)
Thanks! I kept checking back to see if you had answered. And, I'm SURE you caught that I mis-typed typo as type in my first message. I need to ALWAYS slow down and proof before hitting Send or Submit.
I actually figured out what I did! I was thinking about how that could have happened and I realized that when I used my initial tree structure in Lucidchart as a template for Charlotte and Samuel, I updated everything except Charlotte's birthdate. I'm glad I figured out *how* that happened because it seemed like such a random error. Many thanks to those who paid attention to detail and to Geoff for offering to make edits I have submitted for the recorded slides! Each instance should correctly reflect her birthdate soon. I believe the saying that I have heard repeatedly in genealogy courses, "Everyone needs an editor." \n\nBy the way, all this talk about Charlotte, wasn't she beautiful?! I really hope my grandma met her and I wish they knew about their biological connection as grandmother and granddaughter.
I loved this presentation, but I may need to review part of it. During the presentation I momentarily got "LOST" when Charlotte Burkenshaw Bradshaw was shown with the dates (1883 - 1931) -- which could NOT be possible with the dates for the children. Since I could not back up at the time, I simply made a note. Maybe there is an explanation -- or a type. In any case, any clarification would be much appreciated. The explanations and research were outstanding otherwise. \n\nThanks.\n\nCarol Snow
Thank you, Carol. It is indeed a typo and I've fixed it on my end. Geoff has kindly offered to edit it on the slide. She surely could not have had children before she was born. She was born about 1841 and got married in 1865. Good catch!
Loved seeing the progression of this case over the years culminating in this great presentation, Jen. Brava!
Thank you so much, Francine. I am so glad to have you as an accountability partner, for certification and onwards!
I always advise researchers to use the relationship predictions at AncestryDNA rather than the "crowd sourced" "Shared cM tool" when both the tester and match are at AncestryDNA. I suggest the "Shared cM tool" when looking at matches at other sites.
Yes, oftentimes we're comparing across companies and some of my data was from FTDNA, not just Ancestry. Ancestry's estimated relationships did not exist when I did this research. Now, I usually look at both and that is what I recommend because it's best to have all of the information we can.
Engaging story, well organized and presented DNA study!
The presenter was very organized and informative.
She brings excitement to genealogy.
Great sleuthing on this one!