Here’s a DNA‑aware version of your Zotero “Research Plan + Control” template, keeping GPS in view while adding match‑ and test‑specific structure.familysearch+3.
You'll find here templates for using Ancestry, MyHeritage and FTDNA (including mtDNA) as well as tag set for all three platforms is.
1. DNA research objective
[State one precise DNA‑genealogy question focused on identity/kinship.]
Examples (adapt wording as needed):
“Use at‑DNA matches to test the hypothesis that Benjamin Cox is the biological father of Rachel Cox, born about 1835 in X County.”legacytree+1
“Identify the paternal grandfather of John Martin (b. ca. 1870) using Y‑DNA and autosomal DNA from known descendants.”legacytree
2. Background summary (documentary + DNA)
Documentary summary:
[Key facts and citations about the research subject from traditional records; link to Zotero items.]
DNA context:
Testing companies used: [Ancestry, 23andMe, MyHeritage, FTDNA, etc.]legacytree+1
Known test‑takers and how they relate to the research subject (by traditional genealogy).
Summary of existing DNA work: cluster analyses, segment work, trees reviewed, hypotheses already considered.familylocket+1
Prior negative or inconclusive results (e.g., “no close matches in paternal line,” “no triangulating segments yet found”).
3. Working DNA hypothesis
[1–3 sentences that tie DNA and records together.]
Examples:
“[Hypothesis] Rachel Cox is a daughter of Benjamin Cox, supported by at‑DNA matches that cluster around descendants of Benjamin’s documented children, pending segment‑level confirmation.”familylocket
“[Hypothesis] The unknown father of John Martin belongs to the X surname cluster identified by at‑DNA and Y‑DNA matches in the 300–400 cM range, associated with Y County.”
Include a brief note on how you expect DNA evidence to behave if the hypothesis is correct vs. incorrect (e.g., which clusters should appear, what shared cM ranges you expect).legacytree+1
4. DNA‑specific research plan (numbered steps)
Keep the same structure as your document‑only plan, but tune the fields.
Identify and document key DNA matches relevant to the hypothesis
DNA type / platform: [e.g., at‑DNA, Ancestry; Y‑DNA, FTDNA, etc.]
Target: [Define cM range, side of tree, cluster—e.g., “matches 60–250 cM who share segment(s) overlapping the Cox cluster and have trees.”]familylocket+1
Method note: [Use shared matches / clustering tools; record match name/handle, cM, segments, tree link, and inferred MRCA where possible.]
Output: [Zotero item for each important match, or one item per cluster with child notes; spreadsheet or Airtable optional.]
Linked Zotero item: [link to “Key Cox DNA matches” item.]
Status: [to‑do / in progress / done]
Build and evaluate trees for key matches in the target cluster
DNA type / platform: [at‑DNA; specify site.]
Target: [For top X cluster members, build/review trees to at least great‑grandparent level; identify any Cox or associated families; note locations and timeframes.]
Method note: [Document tree quality, sources, and conflicts; do not import unvetted trees wholesale.]
Output: [Child notes summarizing each match’s genealogical path; cluster diagram if desired.]
Linked Zotero item: [e.g., “Cluster 1 – Cox descendants – tree review.”]
Status: [...]
Segment and cluster analysis (if tools and data allow)
DNA type: [at‑DNA with segment data: e.g., GEDmatch, MyHeritage, FTDNA, 23andMe.]legacytree+1
Target: [Identify shared segments among matches in the hypothesized Cox cluster; record chromosome, start/end, cM, and involved testers.]
Method note: [Use cluster/segment tools where permitted; confirm that segments are not simply population‑level.]
Output: [Segment table; diagram or DNA Painter map; Zotero note summarizing segment evidence.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Cox segment triangulation – chromosome map.”]
Status: [...]
Develop a targeted testing plan (if additional tests are needed)
DNA type: [at‑DNA, Y‑DNA, mtDNA as appropriate.]legacytree
Target: [Identify specific relatives whose tests would be most informative for confirming or excluding the hypothesis.]
Method note: [Consider generational distance, line of descent, and potential for phasing or triangulation.]
Output: [List of proposed testers with relation, expected cM, and rationale; correspondence templates (outside Zotero if you prefer).]legacytree
Linked Zotero item: [“DNA testing plan – Cox hypothesis.”]
Status: [...]
Correlate DNA evidence with documentary evidence
DNA + records: [Specify which cluster(s), segments, and matches are being correlated with which records.]
Target: [Align inferred MRCAs from matches with documented family structures; test for fit with chronology, geography, and social network.]
Method note: [Create a table of matches vs. proposed MRCAs vs. evidence quality; flag conflicts.]
Output: [Correlation table; summary note feeding into your proof argument.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Cox hypothesis – DNA + records correlation.”]ngsgenealogy+2
Status: [...]
Reassess hypothesis and document interim conclusions
Target: [Summarize whether current DNA + documentary evidence supports, weakens, or refutes the working hypothesis; identify remaining gaps.]
Method note: [Explicitly address GPS elements—exhaustive research, correlation, conflict resolution, conclusion.]bcgcertification+2
Output: [One‑page interim conclusion note and outline for a full proof argument.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Interim DNA conclusion – Cox hypothesis.”]
Status: [...]
(You can expand with steps for each platform—Ancestry, MyHeritage, etc.—or each tool you commonly use.)
5. DNA‑aware status table
6. DNA‑specific questions and future lines of inquiry
[Question 1: e.g., “Do all matches in Cluster 1 plausibly descend from the same Cox couple?”]
[Question 2: e.g., “Are there untested relatives whose results would decisively support or contradict the hypothesis?”]
[Question 3: e.g., “Do any segments associated with this hypothesis also appear in known matches from a different line, suggesting pedigree collapse or a different MRCA?”]
________________________________________________________________________
Here’s an Ancestry‑focused version of the DNA “Research Plan + Control” template, ready to paste into a Zotero note and reuse.youtubethegeneticgenealogist+4
1. DNA research objective (AncestryDNA)
[State a specific DNA + genealogy question that AncestryDNA can help answer.]
Example pattern:
“Use AncestryDNA matches and shared‑matches/grouping tools to test the hypothesis that [X] is the biological [father/mother/grandparent] of [research subject], born [time/place].”familylocket+1
2. Background summary (records + AncestryDNA context)
Documentary summary:
[Key facts and citations about the research subject; link to Zotero items.]
AncestryDNA context:
Test(s) used: [Name(s) of test‑takers whose kits you manage or can view.]
Side(s) of tree relevant to this question: [paternal/maternal, specific ancestral couple if known.]
Current AncestryDNA work so far:
[e.g., “Have already grouped matches into colored groups for major ancestral couples,” “Have partial Leeds‑style clustering,” “No clustering yet.”]thegeneticgenealogist+2youtube
3. Working DNA hypothesis (Ancestry‑aware)
[1–3 sentences.]
Example:
“AncestryDNA matches that I’ve grouped in the ‘Cox–Martin’ color group represent descendants of Benjamin Cox and his wife in X County. If this is correct, the cluster’s trees and shared matches should converge on that couple, and the research subject should fit into that structure as a descendant.”dna-explained+3
4. AncestryDNA‑specific research plan (numbered steps)
Define and document the AncestryDNA test environment
Platform: AncestryDNA.
Target: [List which kits you can access (your own, siblings, cousins) and which kit will be the “anchor” for this project.]
Method note: [Note any close relatives whose matches you will hide/ignore for clustering (e.g., parents, full siblings, sometimes half siblings).]thegeneticgenealogist+1
Output: [Zotero note summarizing accessible kits, relationships, and any privacy constraints.]
Linked Zotero item: [“AncestryDNA kit overview – [project].”]
Status: [to‑do / in progress / done]
Identify key AncestryDNA matches relevant to the hypothesis
Platform feature: Match list, filters (e.g., “Shared DNA: 40 cM and up,” “Unviewed,” “In common with [known cousin]”).familyhistoryfanaticsyoutubethegeneticgenealogist
Target: [Define cM thresholds and any existing color groups; e.g., “matches 40–250 cM that have been placed in the [Cox–Martin] group or share matches with [anchor cousin].”]
Method note: [Work from highest to lower cM; record match name/handle, total cM, # segments (if shown), tree availability, and existing group color.]
Output: [Zotero note or spreadsheet listing “key matches for [hypothesis],” plus one Zotero item for especially important matches.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Key AncestryDNA matches – [hypothesis].”]
Status: [...]
Cluster and group matches using Ancestry tools
Platform feature:
Standard: Shared Matches tab and custom colored groups.
If available: Ancestry’s match clustering / “Custom Clusters” (Pro Tools).youtubemossiesmusings.blogspotyoutube+1dna-explained
Target: [Form one or more clusters that likely correspond to the line in question (e.g., all matches who are in common with a known second cousin from the target line).]
Method note:
Use Shared Matches on 2C–3C matches you know belong to the target line.
Apply or refine colored groups for cluster(s) tied to the hypothesis.
Note limitations (no segment data, Timber, only 4C and closer on Shared Matches).mossiesmusings.blogspot+2
Output: [Zotero note summarizing each cluster, its color/group name, approximate size, typical cM range, and any obvious shared surnames/locations.]
Linked Zotero item: [“AncestryDNA clusters – [project].”]
Status: [...]
Evaluate trees for cluster members
Platform feature: Match’s tree preview, full trees, ThruLines (used cautiously).familyhistoryfanatics
Target: [For top X matches in the target cluster (by cM), review or build trees to identify proposed MRCAs, focusing on names/places relevant to your hypothesis.]
Method note:
Use Ancestry’s grouping plus ThruLines as hints only.
Record tree quality (sources, depth, conflicts).
Note whether the match’s proposed ancestry actually supports the cluster’s MRCA or could reflect another line.legacytree+2
Output: [Child notes in Zotero for each key match summarizing relationship path, MRCA, tree quality, and open questions.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Tree evaluations – cluster [name].”]
Status: [...]
Integrate AncestryDNA evidence with traditional research
Target: [For each cluster related to the hypothesis, align proposed MRCAs and locations with documented ancestors and FANs in your conventional research.]
Method note:
Build a table in Zotero or spreadsheet: Match / cM / Ancestry group / Proposed MRCA / Documentary support.
Note conflicts (e.g., matches assigned to the cluster whose documented ancestry doesn’t fit).ngsgenealogy+3
Output: [Correlation table and summary note linking match clusters to specific ancestral couples and records.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Correlation – AncestryDNA clusters & records.”]
Status: [...]
Plan follow‑up (targeted trees, messaging, or testing)
Platform feature: Ancestry messaging; invite collaborators to view trees, etc.legacytree+1
Target: [Decide which matches to contact, which lines need better trees, and whether additional tests on other platforms are necessary for confirmation.]
Method note:
Prioritize matches by cM and tree clarity.
Draft message templates outside this note but link them.
If additional testing is needed, note who should test and why (most informative relationships).legacytree+1
Output: [Zotero note “DNA follow‑up actions – AncestryDNA” with a checklist and target list.]
Linked Zotero item: [“AncestryDNA follow‑up – [project].”]
Status: [...]
Reassess hypothesis and document interim conclusion
Target: [After clustering, tree evaluation, and correlation, restate whether the AncestryDNA evidence supports, weakens, or refutes the hypothesis.]
Method note:
Explicitly mention coverage (which lines are represented by matches, which are not).youtubelegacytree
Tie your conclusion to GPS elements (exhaustive use of available AncestryDNA evidence, correlation with records, resolution of conflicting match patterns).familysearch+1
Output: [Short interim conclusion note in Zotero forming the DNA section of your proof argument.]
Linked Zotero item: [“Interim AncestryDNA conclusion – [hypothesis].”]
Status: [...]
5. AncestryDNA‑aware status table
6. AncestryDNA‑specific questions / future work
[“Are there ungrouped matches at 40–80 cM whose trees point to the same locality but haven’t been assigned to a cluster yet?”]
[“Do any of the ThruLines suggestions for this couple contradict my documented research, and how should I test them?”]
[“Which lines lack coverage at AncestryDNA and might benefit from testing additional _relatives?”]youtubelegacytree+1
_______________________________________________________________________
Here’s a multi‑site DNA “Research Plan + Control” template tuned for: (1) match discovery and grouping mostly at Ancestry (or others), and (2) segment‑level work specifically at MyHeritage.conniedavis+1youtube+1dna-explained+2
You can paste this straight into a Zotero note and reuse.
1. DNA research objective (multi‑site with MyHeritage segments)
[State the identity/relationship question and note that segment data will come from MyHeritage.]
Example pattern:
“Use autosomal DNA matches across Ancestry and MyHeritage, with segment and triangulation data from MyHeritage’s chromosome browser, to test whether [X] is the biological [relationship] of [research subject], born [time/place].”yourdnaguide+32. Background summary (records + DNA platforms)
Documentary summary:
[Key facts and citations about the research subject; link to Zotero items.]
DNA context:
Platforms in scope: [AncestryDNA, MyHeritage, FTDNA, etc.; specify which kits you manage on each.]
Key existing work: [e.g., “Match clusters built at Ancestry; subset of matches transferred to MyHeritage for segment analysis.”]dna-explained+2
Prior segment work: [“Some triangulated groups on MyHeritage for chromosomes X/Y; not yet tied cleanly to specific ancestral couples.”]dna-explained+2
3. Working DNA hypothesis (segment‑aware)
[1–3 sentences combining cluster and segment expectations.]
Example:
“Matches in the ‘Cox–Martin’ cluster at Ancestry who also appear at MyHeritage should share overlapping segments with the tester that can be triangulated using the MyHeritage chromosome browser. If the hypothesis is correct, these triangulated segments should correspond to a common Cox ancestor documented in X County.”youtubethegeneticgenealogist+34. Multi‑site research plan (steps tuned to MyHeritage segments)
Map cross‑platform coverage for this project
Target: Document which key matches (especially cluster anchors) appear on each platform and which platforms have segment data.
Method note:
Start from your “anchor” kit and key matches at Ancestry; list those same testers at MyHeritage (or note where they’re missing).conniedavis+1
Note which platforms provide segment data (MyHeritage, possibly FTDNA or GEDmatch; Ancestry does not).yourdnaguide+1
Output: Zotero table or spreadsheet: Match / Relationship / cM (Ancestry) / Present on MyHeritage? / Segment data available?
Linked Zotero item:
[Cross‑platform match map – project]Status: [to‑do / in progress / done]
Identify MyHeritage matches most relevant to the hypothesis
Platform: MyHeritage.
Target: [Matches above a chosen cM threshold (e.g., ≥20 cM) whose trees or notes connect to your target surname/locality or known Ancestry cluster anchors.]
Method note:
Use MyHeritage filters for close matches, tree presence, and shared surname/locality.
Flag matches known from Ancestry or other platforms.youtubeconniedavis+1
Output: Zotero list or note: “Key MyHeritage matches – [hypothesis],” including cM, # segments, and tree flag.
Linked Zotero item:
[Key MyHeritage matches – project]Status: [...]
Download and organize MyHeritage segment data
Platform feature: MyHeritage “export shared DNA segment info for all matches” or targeted export; possibly DNAGedcom or similar tools if you use them.doc.dnagedcomyoutube+1
Target: Obtain a CSV/table with chromosome, start, end, cM, and match IDs for your MyHeritage kit.
Method note:
Export matches and segments from MyHeritage as recommended (matches list + segment info).youtube+1doc.dnagedcom
Store original CSVs and optionally filter/sort by chromosome and cM threshold.
Output: Local CSV plus Zotero item with a note describing the export (date, options, thresholds).
Linked Zotero item:
[MyHeritage segment export – YYYY‑MM‑DD]Status: [...]
Perform triangulation using the MyHeritage chromosome browser
Platform feature: MyHeritage chromosome browser and triangulation tool (purple/triangulation box).youtube+1dna-explained+1youtube
Target: Identify segment‑based triangulated groups on specific chromosomes that involve: the tester + ≥2 matches who are in your hypothesized cluster or share the relevant surname/locality.
Method note:
Start with a promising chromosome/segment from the CSV.
Use the browser to compare the tester with 2–7 matches at a time; use the triangulation indicator to confirm true 3‑way (or multi‑way) sharing.youtube+1dna-explained+1youtube
Record: chromosome, start, end, cM, involved matches, and known/possible MRCA(s).
Output: Zotero note “Triangulated segments – [project]” with a table of triangulated groups, plus references to matches’ trees.
Linked Zotero item:
[Triangulated segments – [hypothesis]]Status: [...]
Interpret triangulated segments in genealogical context
Target: For each triangulated group, link the segment evidence to proposed ancestral couples or lines.
Method note:
Combine segment info (who shares what, where) with tree information from MyHeritage and other sites.
Beware short segments and population‑level sharing; apply threshold filters as advised (e.g., focus on >10–15 cM segments).dna-explained+2
Output:
A correlation table: Triangulated group / Chromosome / cM / Involved testers / Proposed MRCA / Documentary support / Confidence.
Linked Zotero item:
[Segment–tree correlation – [project]]Status: [...]
Reconnect segment‑based groups to non‑segment platforms
Target: Tie triangulated MyHeritage groups back to your Ancestry (or other) clusters so your overall analysis isn’t siloed by platform.
Method note:
For each triangulated group, list the same testers (or their equivalents) on Ancestry/FTDNA/GEDmatch where possible.
Update your cluster notes on those sites to indicate “segment‑confirmed group via MyHeritage” or similar.
Output: Zotero note summarizing “How segment‑confirmed groups map onto my Ancestry clusters and documentary families.”
Linked Zotero item:
[Cross‑platform cluster alignment – [project]]Status: [...]
Reassess hypothesis and outline proof argument
Target: Decide whether the segment‑supported clusters, combined with documentary evidence, support or refute your initial hypothesis.
Method note:
Explicitly mention which lines are supported by triangulated segments and which rely only on non‑segment cluster evidence.
Address GPS elements: reasonably exhaustive multi‑site DNA use, correlation of segment and record evidence, and conflict resolution.dna-explained+2
Output: “Interim DNA conclusion – multi‑site with MyHeritage” note feeding into your formal proof.
Linked Zotero item:
[Interim DNA conclusion – [hypothesis]]Status: [...]
5. Multi‑site / MyHeritage segment status table
6. MyHeritage‑segment‑specific questions / future work
[“Which triangulated segments are still lacking good trees for one or more testers?”]conniedavis+1youtubedna-explained
[“Can any ‘mystery matches’ in MyHeritage triangulated groups be linked to known clusters on Ancestry or FTDNA?”]
[“Do any triangulated segments seem inconsistent with the proposed MRCA (suggesting endogamy, multiple lines of descent, or a wrong tree)?”]
__________________________________________________________
Here’s a Zotero “Research Plan + Control” template tuned for a multi‑site project where the heavy lifting for Y‑DNA, mtDNA, and autosomal segments is at FTDNA.dna-explained+8
You can paste and reuse this as a note.
1. DNA research objective (FTDNA‑centered)
[State the question and specify which lines/tests are in play.]
Examples:
“Use Y‑DNA at FTDNA, supported by autosomal Family Finder matches, to determine whether the Smith men of X County descend from the same direct paternal ancestor as the research subject.”familytreedna+3
“Use mtDNA and Family Finder at FTDNA to test whether the research subject shares a direct maternal ancestor with [comparison line] beyond a 19th‑century brick wall.”familytreedna+2
2. Background summary (records + FTDNA context)
Documentary summary:
[Key facts and citations about the research subject and target line(s); link to Zotero items.]
FTDNA context:
Kits in scope (with kit IDs if you use them in notes):
[Family Finder kit(s).]
[Y‑DNA test(s), level(s) – e.g., 37/111/Big Y – and whose Y‑line they represent.]familytreedna+2
[mtDNA test(s) – level(s) and whose matriline they represent.]familytreedna+2
Existing DNA work:
[Any prior Family Finder clusters/matrix work, Y‑DNA surname projects, mtDNA comparisons, or hypothesized MRCAs.]
3. Working DNA hypothesis (autosomal + Y + mtDNA)
[1–3 sentences that say how each test type should behave if the hypothesis is correct.]
Example:
“If the Smith men of X County share a common direct paternal ancestor with the research subject, his Y‑DNA at FTDNA should match other Smith males in the relevant surname project at appropriate levels, and Family Finder segments with those cousins should triangulate on shared segments consistent with the documented line.”familytreedna+74. FTDNA‑focused research plan (numbered steps)
4.1 Family Finder (autosomal) at FTDNA
Document Family Finder match landscape
Platform feature: Family Finder match list, filters, and Family Finder Matrix.familytreedna+2
Target: Summarize key matches (especially those on the target paternal or maternal line) with cM, suggested relationship, and tree availability.
Method note:
Use “In Common With/Not In Common With” filters for known cousins to separate lines.familytreedna+1
Note which matches also appear on other platforms (Ancestry/MyHeritage/GEDmatch).
Output: Zotero note “FTDNA Family Finder overview – [project]” with a small table of top matches.
Linked Zotero item:
[FF overview – project]Status: [to‑do / in progress / done]
Create and evaluate triangulation groups with Family Finder
Platform feature: Family Finder Chromosome Browser + Matrix (for triangulation).isogg+3
Target: Identify autosomal triangulated groups involving the tester and ≥2 others that likely relate to the line under study.
Method note:
Use the Matrix and Chromosome Browser to confirm that multiple matches share the same segment with the tester, not just each other.thegeneticgenealogist+2
Record chromosome, start, end, cM, and the testers involved.
Output: Zotero note “FTDNA triangulated segments – [project]” with a table of groups and proposed line associations.
Linked Zotero item:
[FF triangulated groups – hypothesis]Status: [...]
4.2 Y‑DNA at FTDNA
Summarize Y‑DNA haplogroup, STR results, and project context
Platform feature: Y‑DNA results page, haplogroup, and surname/ geographic projects.familytreedna+2
Target: Document the tester’s Y‑haplogroup, marker level, and membership in any Y‑DNA projects (surname, locality, etc.).
Method note:
Record key matches by genetic distance and surname; note which belong to the same or closely related haplogroup branches.
Output: Zotero note “Y‑DNA overview – [surname/line]” summarizing level, haplogroup, and closest matches.
Linked Zotero item:
[Y overview – surname]Status: [...]
Compare Y‑DNA matches to documentary lines
Target: For each close Y‑match of interest, identify their documented paternal line and potential MRCA with the research subject.
Method note:
Focus on matches with the target surname or plausible variants, especially in relevant localities/time frames.familytreedna+3
Note where the paper trail of both lines meets or nearly meets.
Output: Table in Zotero: Y‑match / genetic distance / surname / location / documented line summary / candidate MRCA.
Linked Zotero item:
[Y‑DNA correlation – surname project]Status: [...]
Refine Y‑DNA testing strategy (if needed)
Target: Decide whether to upgrade to higher Y‑levels or recruit additional Y‑testers from specific branches.
Method note:
Use FTDNA project guidance and match patterns to choose upgrade levels (e.g., from 37 to 111 or Big Y) and identify the most informative male relatives to test.legacytree+3
Output: Zotero note “Y‑DNA testing plan – [surname line]” listing proposed testers, their relationship, and expected payoff.
Linked Zotero item:
[Y testing plan – project]Status: [...]
4.3 mtDNA at FTDNA
Summarize mtDNA results and match landscape
Platform feature: mtDNA results, haplogroup, and match list.familytreedna+3
Target: Document tester’s mt‑haplogroup, level of test (e.g., mtDNA Plus vs. Full Sequence), and key matches.
Method note:
Note which matches have trees and which reflect geographic/ethnic clusters relevant to the matriline under study.
Output: Zotero note “mtDNA overview – [matriline line]” summarizing haplogroup and matches.
Linked Zotero item:
[mt overview – line]Status: [...]
Use mtDNA to test specific matrilineal hypotheses
Target: Confirm or refute whether two suspected matrilineal lines share a direct maternal ancestor.
Method note:
Compare mtDNA results from multiple descendants of the supposed matrilineal ancestor; if they match at the appropriate level, it supports the shared matriline; if not, at least one line is mis‑assigned.familytreedna+2
Output: Zotero note “mtDNA correlation – [ancestor]” describing which testers match and how that interacts with the documentary evidence.
Linked Zotero item:
[mt correlation – hypothesis]Status: [...]
4.4 Integrating autosomal, Y‑DNA, mtDNA, and records
Combine Family Finder triangulation with Y‑DNA/mtDNA evidence
Target: For key triangulated autosomal groups, note whether involved testers (or their relatives) also share Y or mtDNA lineages relevant to the hypothesis.
Method note:
Use Advanced Matches/combined tools where available; otherwise, track manually which FF matches also participate in Y‑DNA projects or share mtDNA lineages.dna-explained+4
Output: Correlation table: Group / Chromosome / cM / testers / Y‑line? / mt‑line? / proposed MRCA.
Linked Zotero item:
[Integrated DNA correlation – project]Status: [...]
Reassess hypothesis and outline DNA section of proof
Target: Decide how the combination of Family Finder, Y‑DNA, mtDNA, and records affects your hypothesis.
Method note:
Explicitly separate what is supported by autosomal segments, what is underpinned by Y‑DNA, what is informed by mtDNA, and where each line still has gaps.isogg+5
Output: “Interim FTDNA DNA conclusion – [hypothesis]” note, ready to plug into a larger GPS‑based proof argument.
Linked Zotero item:
[Interim FTDNA conclusion – hypothesis]Status: [...]
5. FTDNA‑aware status table
6. FTDNA‑specific questions / future work
[“Which Y‑DNA matches with relevant surnames/locations have not been fully researched in trees?”]familytreedna+3
[“Do mtDNA matches support or contradict my current matrilineal assignments?”]legacytree+2
[“Which autosomal triangulated groups at FTDNA also include testers with key Y‑ or mtDNA results?”]dna-explained+1
___________________________________________________________
Here’s a consolidated Zotero tag set that will work across all three DNA workflows outlined above: Ancestry‑centered, multi‑site with MyHeritage segments, and FTDNA (including Y and mtDNA). You can adjust capitalization to your style; I’ll show them as lowercase.
1. High-level project and evidence tags
Use these on items and notes across all platforms.
project:[short‑code] – e.g.,
project:cox-hypothesisline:paternal, line:maternal, line:target-surname – broad lineage.
gps:plan, gps:analysis, gps:proof – where the item sits in your GPS workflow.
evidence:autosomal, evidence:y-dna, evidence:mtdna, evidence:segments – primary test type involved.
platform:ancestry, platform:myheritage, platform:ftdna, platform:gedmatch – where the data came from.
role:anchor-test, role:key-match, role:cluster-representative – special matches or kits.
status:to-do, status:in-progress, status:done, status:review – work status on that item/note.
2. AncestryDNA–focused tags
For your Ancestry‑centric plan.
ancestry:cluster-[name] – e.g.,
ancestry:cluster-cox-martinfor colored groups.ancestry:thru-lines-hint – items where a ThruLines suggestion is being evaluated (not accepted as fact).
ancestry:tree-reviewed – key matches whose trees you’ve assessed.
ancestry:tree-weak, ancestry:tree-strong – quick quality shorthand for those trees.
ancestry:message-sent, ancestry:message-reply – matches you’ve contacted and heard from.
Use these on Zotero items representing match profiles, tree summaries, or correlation notes from Ancestry.
3. Multi‑site with MyHeritage segments
For the cross‑platform/segment‑heavy plan.
segment:myheritage – segment data from MyHeritage.
segment:triangulated – segments confirmed in a 3‑way (or more) triangulated group.
segment:candidate – segments of interest not yet fully confirmed.
cluster:segment-group-[id] – e.g.,
cluster:segment-group-01to label one triangulated group across notes/items.match:cross-platform – matches you’ve identified on more than one site.
platform:primary – whichever site you treat as primary for that project (often Ancestry).
Apply these to: segment export items, triangulation notes, and correlation tables tying segments to ancestors.
4. FTDNA autosomal (Family Finder), Y‑DNA, and mtDNA
For the FTDNA‑centered work.
ftdna:family-finder – Family Finder match or analysis item.
ftdna:matrix – items using/deriving from the Family Finder Matrix.
ftdna:y-dna, ftdna:mtdna – tests and notes specific to those types.
y-level:37, y-level:111, y-level:big-y – Y‑DNA test level.
y-project:[surname] – membership in a surname or geographic Y‑project.
y:close-match, y:distant-match – quick triage of Y matches.
mt-level:plus, mt-level:full-sequence – mtDNA test level.
mt:close-match, mt:haplogroup-cluster – mtDNA relevance shorthand.
Use these on: kit overviews, project summaries, Y/mtdna correlation notes, and testing plans.
5. Correlation and conclusion tags (shared across all DNA work)
correlation:dna-records – items explicitly correlating DNA with documentary evidence.
correlation:multi-platform – notes that align clusters/segments across sites.
hypothesis:supported, hypothesis:weakened, hypothesis:refuted, hypothesis:open – your current assessment for that specific hypothesis.
priority:high, priority:medium, priority:low – what you want to work next.
6. How to apply these in practice
One simple pattern that scales:
Zotero items (e.g., match summaries, exports, tables) get platform + evidence + status tags.
Zotero notes (plan/control notes, correlation notes, interim conclusions) get project + gps + hypothesis + correlation tags.
Specialized tags (like
ancestry:cluster-*,segment:triangulated,y-project:*) go only on items/notes that truly belong to that subset, so saved searches remain sharp.
No comments:
Post a Comment