View Single Post
  #5  
Old 13th October 2017, 04:43 PM
clintonslayton76 clintonslayton76 is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 243
I can only add an experience to this thread.
I have about 50 men in my overall project, but not all tested at FTDNA. We have YDNA evidence of two patrilines because about 15 are haplo I-P37.2 and 15 are I-M253. They cannot share a common Paternal in historic times, but all have used SLATON among their variants.
I was contacted by a male whose surname was not mine, but family stories suggested a surname very similar to ours, "Slater," for a man who killed a neighbor and took up a very common surname, Williams, managing to show in two later census in two states under that name. He later returned "home," whether surrendering or captured, and resumed his birth name of SLATON, serving a prison term under it. This was put together by good old detective work.
The male who contacted me (years ago) did his YDNA last year. His family were b as Williams, because the ancestor was using that name.
Had he simply looked for STR matches, and had not clues from the past, he would have found a very high match with a 37-marker male with his common surname, Williams. He would have found STR matches with our Slaton variants to be interesting but probably just a convergent coincidence (no SNP tests among our group except for me.) Why would he have even suspected a connection?
Interpretation of STR testing might well have caused years of fruitless research into WILLIAMS for this man. While I consider the surname to be an extremely unreliable indicator of relatedness, the relative guessing game of TiP and Gen Distances is just as questionable.
A Haplo admin grouped this man with WILLIAMS based solely on that STR match and the name in use, which was not unreasonable, but provably wrong. That is why surname admins must not rely solely on haplo admins, but must maintain good communications with them. They can help us if we help them.
The problem is bridging the huge gap between SNP and STR research, and I do not consider either to be "superior" to the other in genealogical research in all applications. The cost and complexity of
big SNP tests does not make it a good tool for those who are curious about their backgrounds in the most general sense.

Last edited by clintonslayton76; 13th October 2017 at 05:01 PM. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote