Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If YOU ARE ONE, BE ONE

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by DMac
    Stevo,
    Use these settings:
    Show user that tested at least [37] of the markers I did. Then click the radio button before "maximum genetic distance of 1 per marker compared above [change number to 27 for GD of 10 or less] markers."
    That worked pretty well, DMac! Thanks!

    Here's what I came up with.

    Nine at a distance of 10 and under from England.

    Two from Northern Ireland.

    Two from Ireland.

    One from Wales (Dr. Price again).

    One from the Netherlands.

    One from Germany.

    I suspect the Irish matches may have all been English immigrants to Northern Ireland (the 17th century "Plantation" of King James).

    I ignored American matches and those of unknown origin. My closest near-hit, Mr. Webb (34/37), from New Jersey, has what is apparently an English surname.

    I realize my methodology is unscientific and that YSEARCH is dependent upon its members to accurately enter the country of origin. I have also not tried to account for possible multiple entries for the same ancestor.

    Just the same, the preponderance of my 10-and-under guys are English.

    The German and the Dutchman make me wonder if that means Anglo-Saxon English rather than Celtic Briton.

    Okay, so it's not science.

    It was fun anyway!
    Last edited by Stevo; 13 June 2006, 07:50 PM.

    Comment


    • Maybe I should join the British Isles Project?

      BTW, if I reduce the genetic distance to 9 and under, only the English entries remain (except for Dr. Price).

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Stevo
        Maybe I should join the British Isles Project?

        BTW, if I reduce the genetic distance to 9 and under, only the English entries remain (except for Dr. Price).
        I'm betting that, since you have 390=23, all or most of those of GD of 9 or under share that value with you.

        Here's an interesting experiment to try. Go to John McEwan's page for S21 and see how many of those English entries of GD of 9 or less have tested positive for S21. That would be very interesting to know.

        Mike

        Comment


        • Originally posted by MMaddi
          I'm betting that, since you have 390=23, all or most of those of GD of 9 or under share that value with you.

          Here's an interesting experiment to try. Go to John McEwan's page for S21 and see how many of those English entries of GD of 9 or less have tested positive for S21. That would be very interesting to know.

          Mike
          I'm going to try that, Mike.

          I made a slight error, however.

          When I reduce the distance to 9, the German also remains.

          If I have problems navigating John's web site, I'll give you a holler.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by MMaddi
            I'm betting that, since you have 390=23, all or most of those of GD of 9 or under share that value with you.

            Here's an interesting experiment to try. Go to John McEwan's page for S21 and see how many of those English entries of GD of 9 or less have tested positive for S21. That would be very interesting to know.

            Mike
            I only see one of them that has tested for S21 (my guess is that the others have not tested with EA for that SNP).

            The S21+ guy is my Netherlands guy, surname Damvelt, YSEARCH ID F6C85.

            I'm going to go back and check and see how many of them have 390=23.

            Comment


            • You were right, Mike.

              All but one of my 9-and-unders has DYS390=23.

              The exception (one Englishman) has 24 repeats there.

              Comment


              • This comment is also unscientific:

                Stevo, didn't you already know your name was English?

                I mean the numbers for the name Stevens are big in the south of England, specifically Truro.

                My two cents...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by EBurgess
                  This comment is also unscientific:

                  Stevo, didn't you already know your name was English?

                  I mean the numbers for the name Stevens are big in the south of England, specifically Truro.

                  My two cents...
                  As a matter of fact, I did know that, but it is also a common name in the Netherlands. In addition, there was a family of German origin in the area where my ggg-grandfather was born who were neighbors of his mother's family. They had anglicized their name from Stephan to Stevens (sometimes spelled Stephens). The name of the family patriarch was Wilhelm Christian Stephan, aka William Christian Stevens. Two months after he died, my ggg-grandmother presented my ggg-grandfather with a baby boy. They named him William Christian Stevens.

                  My ggg-grandfather's mother came from a Netherlands Dutch family (although her male line originated in Denmark), so I thought her husband might be Dutch, as well.

                  That is why I haven't paid too much attention to the English Stevenses and why I originally joined the Steffen Project rather than the Stevens Project (although I participate in both now).

                  Sorry for all the personal detail.

                  Anyway, I may spend some more time pursuing the English end of things now. There were a lot of New England Puritans with my surname. I'm thinking that perhaps one of those families may be connected to mine.

                  Comment


                  • Sorry for all the personal detail.
                    No problem, I find genealogy fascinating even when it is not my own. The fun is putting the puzzle pieces together. I would imagine with your background in history it would be double the pleasure.

                    Ok, now to get to the point I have been trying to make in the last few posts.

                    As individauls we test our DNA and come up with specific values. We cannot assume that the result by itself represents the modal for our family. If you happen to have a cobo 11,15 for DYS 385 a and b. Your value for b could be a mutation that occured in your generation.

                    Furthermore, there is a danger of being misled into thinking you match some geographic modal value Frisian etc... which are usually based on slight differences between key markers. Granted, some of these markers appear to be remarkably stable, but the sample is still small I think.

                    Better to find other potential relatives, test them and establish your families modal. Then compare this modal to the Geographic modals and you have a better chance of getting the source of your line.

                    i.e. a bottom up approach rather than top down.

                    For my personal work I have found one 5th cousin who is a match but differs on two markers, I want to find another 5th cousin to test out of another branch to triangulate on my ancestors markers 6 generations back. Even then I still won't be satisfied. Some of our surname members have 10 instances from their line and they are lucky because the family modal is very clear.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by EBurgess
                      Better to find other potential relatives, test them and establish your families modal. Then compare this modal to the Geographic modals and you have a better chance of getting the source of your line.
                      Good idea.

                      I need to work on doing just that.

                      My big problem is going to be finding male relatives who think geneaology and genetics are worth their time and more especially their money.

                      My brothers and cousins like spending their money on big pickup trucks and hunting rifles.

                      Is there a Redneck DNA Project?
                      Last edited by Stevo; 14 June 2006, 08:23 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Is there a Redneck DNA Project?
                        A while back while watching "Braveheart", I noticed the characters drinking and partying in their matching clan kilts and I realized right then and there...

                        ...kilt clan patterns were the ORIGINAL redneck flannel!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Lost-Sheep
                          A while back while watching "Braveheart", I noticed the characters drinking and partying in their matching clan kilts and I realized right then and there...

                          ...kilt clan patterns were the ORIGINAL redneck flannel!
                          If there were a Redneck DNA Project, I'm sure I would very quickly find myself inundated with 37-marker matches with guys named Earl and Bubba and Vern.

                          (No jokes about having only one branch on the family tree, please!)

                          Comment


                          • Has anyone else tried the genetic distance of 10 thing besides me?

                            Go to YSEARCH and click on "Search for Genetic Matches." Set the box that says "Show users that tested at least _ of the markers that I did" to 37.

                            Then click on the little "Allow" circle that says "maximum genetic distance of 1 per marker compared above _ markers." Enter the number 27 in the box there (DMac suggested that part).

                            This will give you everybody in YSEARCH at a distance of 10 and under from your haplotype.

                            See if there are any geographic trends in your results.

                            One more thing. Have you all checked your haplotype against the R1b Project modal?

                            I did. I'm at a genetic distance of 13 from it. I'm not sure what that means except that perhaps many of the project's participants are not from the same neck of the woods as my ancestors. It also probably means that I am way off the AMH, which I knew already.

                            What did you all get there? What do you think it means?
                            Last edited by Stevo; 15 June 2006, 08:34 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Stevo
                              Has anyone else tried the genetic distance of 10 thing besides me?

                              Go to YSEARCH and click on "Search for Genetic Matches." Set the box that says "Show users that tested at least _ of the markers that I did" to 37.

                              Then click on the little "Allow" circle that says "maximum genetic distance of 1 per marker compared above _ markers." Enter the number 27 in the box there (DMac suggested that part).

                              This will give you everybody in YSEARCH at a distance of 10 and under from your haplotype.

                              See if there are any geographic trends in your results.

                              One more thing. Have you all checked your haplotype against the R1b Project modal?

                              I did. I'm at a genetic distance of 13 from it. I'm not sure what that means except that perhaps many of the project's participants are not from the same neck of the woods as my ancestors. It also probably means that I am way off the AMH, which I knew already.

                              What did you all get there? What do you think it means?
                              Thanks for that hint. For some reason, whenever I pulled up the list of R1b1c's and then compared the rest of the list to me (ysearch ID 6M79M), the closest genetic distance I got to anyone was 14.

                              Following your directions above, I come up with 3 of GD of 10 or below. One is listed as R1b for haplogroup and the other two are listed as unknown. One lineage is from England, one from Alabama and the last is unknown. Here's the interesting part - all three are named Hawkins! Doesn't sound even vaguely Italian to me. Hmmm.... I wonder what that means.

                              Here's the link for the haplotype comparison, take a look - http://www.ysearch.org/research_comp...VK6RT%2C+FNRQN

                              As far as haplotype, all three match me for the classic S21+ modal values (393=13, 390=23, 391=11). I'm S21+ and I bet they are too. (I'll have to check John McEwan's S21 page to see.) All three differ from me on 385a-b: they all have 11-15 and I have 11-16, so that's only a single mutation off. They are all 15-15-15-16 on 464a-d, while I am 14-15-15-15. I match two of them on CDYa-b (38-40) and the third one is 38-41. That's significant to me since my 38-40 is high and hard to match to other R1b's. Other markers where I differ from some or all of these are 439, 449, 576 and 570.

                              All these differing markers I've named above are marked in red by FTDNA as fast mutators! I do differ from them on 3 slow mutators - 392, 389-2 and 447. Well, who knows, maybe you should be calling me Mike Hawkins.

                              Mike Maddi
                              Last edited by MMaddi; 15 June 2006, 11:06 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by MMaddi
                                Thanks for that hint. For some reason, whenever I pulled up the list of R1b1c's and then compared the rest of the list to me (ysearch ID 6M79M), the closest genetic distance I got to anyone was 14.

                                Following your directions above, I come up with 3 of GD of 10 or below. One is listed as R1b for haplogroup and the other two are listed as unknown. One lineage is from England, one from Alabama and the last is unknown. Here's the interesting part - all three are named Hawkins! Doesn't sound even vaguely Italian to me. Hmmm.... I wonder what that means.

                                Here's the link for the haplotype comparison, take a look - http://www.ysearch.org/research_comp...VK6RT%2C+FNRQN

                                As far as haplotype, all three match me for the classic S21+ modal values (393=13, 390=23, 391=11). I'm S21+ and I bet they are too. (I'll have to check John McEwan's S21 page to see.) All three differ from me on 385a-b: they all have 11-15 and I have 11-16, so that's only a single mutation off. They are all 15-15-15-16 on 464a-d, while I am 14-15-15-15. I match two of them on CDYa-b (38-40) and the third one is 38-41. That's significant to me since my 38-40 is high and hard to match to other R1b's. Other markers where I differ from some or all of these are 439, 449, 576 and 570.

                                All these differing markers I've named above are marked in red by FTDNA as fast mutators! I do differ from them on 3 slow mutators - 392, 389-2 and 447. Well, who knows, maybe you should be calling me Mike Hawkins.

                                Mike Maddi
                                I checked that out, Mike. You do seem to have a similar haplotype to those Hawkins guys. Strange. You're probably right about S21.

                                I wonder that you got so few folks with a GD from you under 10.

                                Did you select R1b1c as the haplogroup?

                                Maybe you would get more hits if you selected R1b1 or just R1b?

                                I have a Hawkins line up my Dad's family tree someplace.

                                Is there a publication on the web somewhere that says which markers are slow mutators and which are faster?

                                My weirdest marker seems to be DYS385b=11.
                                Last edited by Stevo; 15 June 2006, 12:21 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X