The Genetic Genealogist

The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) is a searchable database created from the U.S. Social Security Administration’s Death Master File, which contains the name and social security number of deceased persons reported to the Social Security Administration since roughly 1962.  In addition to being used by genealogists, the Death Master File and SSDI are used by financial firms and government agencies for various reasons such as preventing identity fraud.

A Genealogy Meme Using the SSDI

Michael Neill at RootDig has two posts – “Have You Searched for All Your Ancestors in the SSDI?” and “My in-laws in the SSDI” – that list his and his wife’s ancestors in the SSDI.  Michael has 7 ancestors, while his wife has 6.

This led me to wonder how many ancestors I have in the SSDI, and a very brief search led me to conclude that I currently have a total of 8:

1. Theodore LaBounty 1927-1983
2. Jane (Garcia) LaBounty 1931-1984
3. Theodore LaBounty 1903-1963
4. Goldiah (Blanchard) LaBounty 1906-1996
5. Roy Bettinger 1916-1975
6. Marley (Johnson) Snell 1889-1983
7. Victor Mullin 1901-1972
8. Clara (Fitzgerald) Mullin 1907-1997

Eventually I will have a total of 11 ancestors in the SSDI, but my parents and a grandparent are still, thankfully, living.  My wife also has a total of 8 ancestors in the SSDI:

1. Harlon Conger 1921-2005
2. Lois (Finney) Conger 1891-1975
3. John Alden 1900-1971
4. Margaret (Wolford) Alden 1902-1991
5. Inez Simmons 1891-1979
6. Albert Bacon 1895-1963
7. Guy Simmons 1921-1989
8. Margaret (Bacon) Simmons 1929-2007

Other Questions

Out of your ancestors in the SSDI, who had the earliest date of birth?  Mine is Marley (Johnson) Snell who was born in 1889, and my wife’s is a tie between Lois (Finney) Conger and Inez Simmons, both born in 1891.

How many of these ancestors did you meet (whether you remember it or not)?  I met 5 of my 8 ancestors in the SSDI, and my wife met 4 of hers.

How many ancestors do you have in the SSDI?

Trends in Genetics has an article by Turi E. King and Mark A. Jobling from the University of Leicester highlighting Y-DNA genetic genealogy.  Specifically, the article – “What’s in a name? Y chromosomes, surnames and the genetic genealogy revolution” – looks at the relationship between surnames and Y-DNA genetics.  Dr. King and Dr. Jobling have previously conducted a great deal of research in this area (see here and here, for example).

The article is a review of this area and contains some interesting information, including a section regarding “Genetic genealogy and the rise of recreational genetics.”

Genetic genealogists recognized as making genuine contributions to the field:

In the article, the authors note that genetic genealogists are making discoveries in this field:

“Genetic genealogy enthusiasts often display an impressive level of knowledge about aspects of molecular evolution, population genetics and statistics; some of this is evinced in the quarterly online Journal of Genetic Genealogy (www.jogg.info). Although it lacks the standard scientific peer-review system of traditional journals, it is nonetheless attracting academic geneticists among its authors and is an interesting model for public involvement in scientific publication. Other resources for genetic genealogy are listed in Box 3. Thanks to the advances in DNA technology and the power of the internet, genetics is now joining astronomy as a science in which amateurs can make useful discoveries.”

From the abstract:

Heritable surnames are highly diverse cultural markers of coancestry in human populations. A patrilineal surname is inherited in the same way as the non-recombining region of the Y chromosome and there should, therefore, be a correlation between the two. Studies of Y haplotypes within surnames, mostly of the British Isles, reveal high levels of coancestry among surname cohorts and the influence of confounding factors, including multiple founders for names, non-paternities and genetic drift. Combining molecular genetics and surname analysis illuminates population structure and history, has potential applications in forensic studies and, in the form of ‘genetic genealogy’, is an area of rapidly growing interest for the public.

HT: Ugo Perego

As part of her doctoral research, Sudeepa Abeysinghe is asking people who have purchased genomic tests to complete the “User Experiences of Direct-to-Consumer Genomic Testing Survey”.  According to Sudeepa, the survey focuses on the consumer experience and is completely independent of any testing company.

Although I’m late on reporting this (it was already covered by GenomeWeb, for example), I thought I would mention it in case anyone has missed the previous coverage and might be interested in completing the survey.

This is an opportunity for genetic genealogists to share their experiences and voice their thoughts regarding DTC genomic testing.

Another great article from the Genomics Law Report (if you aren’t already reading this new blog, you should be) – “Is the ACCP’s Call for Greater Governmental Regulation of DTC Genetics Premature?”

Barbara Ameer and Norberto Krivoy of the American College of Clinical Pharmacology (ACCP) have an article (pdf) in The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology that promotes regulation of DTC genetic tests (which could conceivably include genetic genealogy tests).  The Genomics Law Report analyzes the paper’s arguments and concludes with the following:

“Without convincing evidence of the harms of DTC genetic testing, it remains difficult to fully justify more rigorous governmental regulation, or to anticipate its content, structure or ultimate effect, which perhaps explains why such regulation continues to remain just over the horizon.”

If you’re interested in this area, click over to the Genomics Law Report and read this article (as well as the original ACCP article).

Today, the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF) reported that they are adopting a standardized Y-STR reporting system proposed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce and supported by the International Society of Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG).

The standardized system was first published in the Fall 2008 issue (pdf) of the Journal of Genetic Genealogy (JoGG).

First, let me add a note of caution – this change ONLY represents a change in how results are REPORTED.  Even though companies report results differently, this does not mean that the actual DNA testing results are wrong or different!  This shift is NOT to correct errors in testing results; it is only to standardize reporting.

From the Press Release:

SALT LAKE CITY (Aug. 17, 2009)-The Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF) today announced it has implemented a recently developed industry-standard format for expressing Y-chromosome DNA profiles in genetic genealogy. The new system, or nomenclature, for Y-STR genetic markers will reduce confusion for genetic genealogy consumers, eliminate conversion errors, make personal DNA profiles easily portable and lead to more genetic matches when searching among different ancestry databases once the industry-wide standard is adopted. Y-DNA is an unrivaled tool for tracing paternal ancestry. Only males have the Y-chromosome, which is passed down virtually unchanged from father to son.

SMGF, a non-profit scientific organization with the world’s largest collection of correlated genetic and genealogical information, is the first to adopt the new system proposed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce and promoted by the International Society of Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG). Genetic genealogy is the application of genetics to traditional genealogy and is a component of ancestry research experiencing strong growth through personal DNA testing and online ancestry databases.

“We strongly believe this industry-wide standard benefits everyone,” said Natalie Myres, director of research and development for SMGF. “DNA profiles will become more useful to consumers because they will not have to use a conversion process to search different genetic genealogy databases. For DNA laboratories and providers, this common nomenclature leads to greater reporting accuracy and saves time explaining to customers why their results appear different from those of another provider.”

Until now, genetic genealogy companies and laboratories reported Y-STR genetic markers in DNA profiles to customers in various formats developed for forensic DNA reporting. “As DNA testing for genetic genealogy purposes has become common and more people put their DNA profiles into online ancestry databases, the need for a universal format became apparent,” said Katherine Borges, ISOGG director.

“This is a big benefit to consumers,” said Borges. “They will definitely find more matches because of this new standard. Currently, consumers are often unaware they have to convert their results for use on different databases or are intimidated enough by the process that they don’t check a variety of databases. Also, some errors find their way into conversion tools. All these problems reduce chances of finding matches.” Borges estimates close to one million DNA tests for genetic genealogy purposes have been purchased to date.

The three largest U.S. providers of genetic genealogy DNA testing have committed to adopting the new Y-STR reporting standard and Borges expects the others to follow suit. NIST has not recommended a uniform reporting standard for mtDNA, the genetic material passed down from mother to child.

About Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation
The Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF; www.smgf.org) is a non-profit research organization that has created the world’s largest repository of correlated genetic and genealogical information. The SMGF database currently contains information about more than seven million ancestors through linked DNA samples and pedigree charts from more than 170 countries, or approximately 90 percent of the nations of the world. The foundation’s purpose is to foster a greater sense of identity, connection and belonging among all people by showing how closely we are connected as members of a single human family. For more information about the foundation’s free, publicly available database, visit www.smgf.org.