Talk:Pedigree chart

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pedigree chart article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Molecular Biology: Genetics

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Cousin chart#Relationship charts|Cousin chart]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled discussion[edit]

"pied de gru" - it would be interesting to know which language this is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.95.194.72 (talk)

"pied de gru" is in french meaning foot of gru..what is a gru??!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisa unieke (talk • contribs)

What is the pedigree chart used for —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.138.43 (talk)

Things like determining genetype and the inheritance of phenotype--RNAi 19:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wrong chart[edit]

The chart (

) which has been at this article since autumn 2004, is definitely wrong. That chart presents clearly some lines of descent. That's not pedigree. Pedigree is always about ancestry. Hope that someone brings a correct example chart here, but we cannot continue with a wrong one. ObRoy 13:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wrong[edit]

I agree that that pedigree shown is deffinetly wrong there's no such thing of the dash as a symbol if you think it's right maybe you should research more on it . would be a great idea :)

(elisa) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisa unieke (talk • contribs)

Chart? Nothing wrong with it[edit]

I don't know what ObRoy is going on about, there is nothing wrong with that pedigree chart?

The dictionary of Genetics by King and Stansfield says that a pedigree chart is "A diagram setting forth the ancestral history or genealogical register." And it includes a chart that is very similar to that one shown.

In genetics, a pedigree chart diagrams the family and can be used to trace traits in families and determine genotypes.

I have uploaded two new pedigree charts that I have made.

Chart A is a standard chart with symbols and a key. Chart B is a chart that traces genotypes of a gene called A.

I have also included the original SVG file is someone finds objection to it and wants to change it.

I plan to insert chart B into this entry. I think that this entry would also benefit by including the kind of written chart that is used by geneologists, who are researching offical lineages. These are charts made of words. Maybe there is some old one that's gone public domain by now.

Rozzychan 23:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chart: It is indeed incorrect[edit]

The chart at the top of the page is a family tree, a record of the descendents of a person (or couple). A family tree is not a pedigree. A pedigree is the opposite, it is the record of a person's ancestors. The chart should be replaced. Skates61 (talk) 23:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Usage[edit]

I have added this subsection to the article, since "pedigree chart" has a very specific meaning to American genealogists. NextExit 17:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pedigree[edit]

the pedigree is basically a way to tell the family history —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.86.144.190 (talk) 02:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to U.S. Usage[edit]

I have worked among American genetic genealogists , and their usage I have seen is unfortunately not consistent with your definition. I have not changed your definition except to clarify it to agree with your reference. Your reference shows a chart of all ancestors of the first 3 generations of ancestors, numbered 2,3 for the parents, 4-7 for the grandparents, and 8-15 for the great-grandparents.

In Y-DNA genetic genealogy, instead, one is pursuing only the fathers line or patriline from among all ancestors, namely: 2,3 for the parents, only 4,5 among the grandparents, and only 8,9 among the great-grandparents, and often going back for perhaps another 7 or more generations to the 10th generation or more -- where all ancestors would total 1024 added at or for the 10th generation alone.

Your definition just said "the direct ancestors", and unfortunately the genetic-genealogy ancestors of interest are direct ancestors. I'm afraid that your definition may have given the administrators of our surname DNA projects an excuse to (continue to) misuse the term Pedigree chart for their entity, which I've described above (a linear thing, not a chart -- perhaps a table as the Ahnentafel name means). So at least I've now changed your definition to "all of the direct ancestors", to make it harder to honestly misuse -- better late than never.

What term would I like these project administrators to use instead of Pedigree chart? I'd suggest fathers-line table (and/or patrilineal table), rather than fathers-line list (which seems lame somehow). What an academic question, when it is probably already too late to straighten out! For7thGen (talk) 00:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a "generic" article not only about human genealogy, but also animal pedigrees. I'll stay out of the argument on pedigrees for people, but pedigrees for animals are also covered here for now. I wonder if pedigree - the disambiguation page - needs further tweaks? Montanabw^(talk) 00:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge question[edit]

Pedigree charts are used for animals as well as humans. However, last I checked, no one uses genograms for ~~people~~ animals! LOL! For that reason, I oppose a merge, or if one occurs, then can we keep this article title and use it to reference the animal pedigree issue. We only have about 300 horse breed articles that may link to it... Montanabw^(talk) 21:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genograms can and ARE used for animals as well as people too... I have even seen more genograms then charts drawn as one presented. It is more likely that this two variations of visual representation of family trees and/or genealogical data are drawn as consequence of local and historical influence. I believe it should be noted so! Vladimirko (talk) 13:14, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I hope I am not confusing syntax here, but what all the horse breed articles link to is the concept of a chart listing ancestors, and not second cousins or the name of the horse's first boyfriend...or who gets along with who and if they were close to their mother, If I am mistaken in my understanding of a genogram, I am familiar with the concept from the psychological technique of understanding people's family interrelationships, but if in ancestry research it means something else, then I stand corrected. But my point is simply that animal breeders use pedigrees to record ancestry and such, and "pedigreed" as a term references animals with recorded ancestry, which is basically what a breed registry is all about. I don't want to have to redirect 100 wikilinks. Beyond that, I don't really have an axe to grind here. Montanabw^(talk) 03:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pedigree symbols chart wrong[edit]

in standard genetics pedigrees, males are represented by a square and females represented by a circle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.233.9 (talk) 03:20, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The comment above is true, I suggest to edit the article accordingly. Gklambauer (talk) 12:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Montanabw^(talk) 18:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]