Page Actions


Autosomal DNA tools

From ISOGG Wiki

Move sub-lists

Debbie, you mentioned standalone pages for the major tools. The four of GedMatch, DNAGedcom, DNA.Land, and GenomeMate are the only one that have multi-line sublists. Given how long the list is, keeping list items to one line only seems like a good idea. I can make pages for these big four and move the sublists to those pages. Castedo (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2016 (EST)

It would be a big help if you could make new pages for the four major tools. Ideally the new pages would need some descriptive content as well. We currently only have a page for Promethease. We don't yet have MyHeritage or on this autosomal DNA tools page. They both allow free uploads for an alternative analysis. Ideally both those companies could do with standalone pages and should be included in the List of DNA testing companies.DebbieKennett (talk) 08:22, 16 December 2016 (EST)

Split/Categorize by tools usable from just a standard web-browser vs tools that require installation/setup

10 tools require installation on Windows/Mac/Linux/iOS or require a non-standard browser extension. And the other 20 of them can be used with only a standard (recent) web browser. Do most readers care whether tools require installation? I tend to prefer first checking out tools that I don't have to install and only if there is over-whelming benefits to install something will I be wiling to install software on my computer. What preferences and sense do other have? Castedo (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2016 (EST)

That might be a useful way of categorising the tools. Also some tools are free and others require payment. Some of the items listed are actually companies that allow third-party uploads so perhaps that ought to be an additional category. Unless anyone comments further on this thread I would suggest you go ahead and do what you think best on the lines we've discussed. DebbieKennett (talk) 08:22, 16 December 2016 (EST)
Some feedback from friends leads me to believe that most people don't care so much whether a tool needs to be installed vs just a website. So I've attempted a categorization using free vs paid, as you mentioned, plus what type of input these tools take. Here is the result: User:Castedo/Autosomal_DNA_tools. What do you think? If nobody objects I'll go ahead and make this change. Castedo (talk) 21:45, 17 December 2016 (EST)
Thanks Castedo. I can see that this is going to be complicated because a number of the tools fall into multiple categories. DNAGedcom and GedMatch are both free services but both also have extra features which are available as a subscription. Perhaps these should both be in the free section but there should be a note included that extra features are available for a fee. The ASDA tool on DNAGedcom does use raw data. I believe that the Double Match Triangulator also requires you to download your results. It's difficult to know about some of the tools because I haven't used them all. DebbieKennett (talk) 11:36, 18 December 2016 (EST)
I skipped categorizing based on free vs paid since some site offer both. I doubled checked the manual for ASDA and it does not seem to take raw data in the sense of the raw DNA that comes from the microarray chips that AncestryDNA, 23andMe and FamilyTreeDNA use to read customer DNA. Likewise for Double Match Triangulator. The category of "match data" might be a bit fuzzy. But "raw DNA data" as in microarray is pretty clear, there should be a row of data for each of the half-million or so SNPs that these companies read for a single person. Data of which segments of chromosome match other people is something else. Castedo (talk) 22:30, 18 December 2016 (EST)
Many thanks. That all looks good. I've just updated the descriptions and GedMatch and DNA Gedcom just in case people don't click through to see the Wiki pages. DebbieKennett (talk) 18:45, 20 December 2016 (EST)

Split into two pages

The Autosomal DNA tools page has been getting impressively long. Thank you to Debbie Kennett for keeping it up-to-date!

More than a year ago Debbie and I talked about ways to split up DNA tools and went for subdividing them into raw DNA data vs DNA match results, and this still seems like a good split. Continuing in this vein, I’m thinking that the time has come to split out a separate page for “Raw DNA data tools”. I’ve cooked up a candidate for everybody to check out in my user sandbox:

Additionally, here’s a proposed update to the Autosomal tools page where raw DNA data tools are now moved to the new “Raw DNA data tools” page:

What do y’all think of this proposed reorganization?

--Castedo (talk) 13:19, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

I have created a new page Raw DNA data tools for the "Using Raw DNA data" section to move to, per the proposal above. I envision introducing a highly structured intro to the different DNA tool input types at the top of the Autosomal DNA tools page like can be seen here User:Castedo/Autosomal DNA tools. If it looks OK to everybody, I'll go ahead and make the change this weekend.

--Castedo (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2018 (EDT)