Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Could "Less common" markers offer a clue?

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

  • Could "Less common" markers offer a clue?

    Let me try to explain my situation a bit ...

    After tracing my family history for 30 years, I've learned that our Y-DNA doesn't match our paper trail ancestor. In fact, I don't match anyone yet. Also, I expected an R1b Haplogroup result, but we are R1a, loud and clear.

    Now ... here's the problem.

    With no matches, and no match to our paper trail patriarch (or of ANYONE yet of the surname), I'm trying to figure out where the paper trail might break and where I should begin to focus my time. I have two choices:

    --- More common MATERNAL ancestors are from Eastern Europe, where R1a is far more prevalent. My dad's family was always described as "English, Polish, and German", with the English coming from his paternal side, and Polish and German coming from his maternal ancestorsl. Recent generations have very strong family resemblances through at least the last two generations, and the paper trails are solid too. We appear to go back to the mid-1800s before the line might become a bit more iffy.

    --- The paper trail becomes extremely thin between 1728 and 1873, where a break, in fact, could occur. When trying to prove data in the printed genealogy, it's evident that the person who reported the connection with our immigrant ancestor had extremely sketchy data. In fact, births of the children were proven to be way off, and he also mentioned towns that they didn't seem to live in. For one generation in particular, I haven't found the birth record for either the father or mother of the family, and there do not appear to be any wills, deeds, or other documents found to link the mother (with a VERY common surname) to any parents. The father in question is estimated to have been about 45 when he married this woman in 1773, who is estimated to have been born 1735-1750. It's likely it was his second marriage, but I haven't found any record of the first. It is this particular family that is the main reason we tested the DNA ... I was hoping I could eventually get some leads to the mother of that family, wasn't expecting to break the link to the father. LOL

    Hopes of getting fairly recent Y-DNA samples of our line are slim pickings. All uncles and grand-uncles are deceased, and I believe we are the only branch that has males in current times. So, no luck there. I'm really feeling that there would be NO DNA prospects until we get back to that paper trail break. (Sigh)

    So I was searching around on some marker statistics, and I do have a few markers that seem to be sort of "rare". Would there be a way that I could look up specific marker values and see on a map where those markers might be more prevalent? In other words, would that tell me if those "rare" markers are more typical of Eastern Europe or Western Europe? That might at least give me a clue that the break is farther back as suspected.

    Other than that, I have absolutely no idea where to turn. I'm hoping SOME of my 30 years of research is still of value, but I have to admit these results weren't expected! Because of that I'm having my male relative take a second test, just to confirm the results of the first before I start tearing my tree apart and contacting people I don't know.

    Suggestions welcome. I'm so new to this I have no idea where to turn.
    Last edited by DeeTyler; 16 May 2009, 03:28 PM.

  • #2
    If the test results of R1a are correct, thereby disproving your paper trail documentation and the associated surname, then you are not looking for a surname, since you don't immediately know what it is. You're now in the position of someone who was adopted or whose ancestor was adopted. You have to cast a wider net.

    Now you have to look for close matches in public databases. If your matches are sufficiently close, then you may have found the true surname for this line. If they are not that close, but all or most seem to be from a certain geographic area or ethnic ancestry, then perhaps you've narrowed down at least where you should be looking, say England vs. Poland or Germany.

    Have you uploaded your results to the ysearch database? If not, do that. This database includes those with results from FTDNA as well as other companies. You can easily upload your results to ysearch for free from your FTDNA account - go to the "Y-DNA Matches" pages and click on the link labelled "Click here to upload to Ysearch.org." Then follow the directions to set up your account.

    If you just want to search for matches to certain of your marker results, you can do that at ysearch. Go to www.ysearch.org and click on the tab labelled "Search for Genetic Matches." There's a link near the bottom of the page you're sent to ("Click here") that enables you to search for matches to specified marker values. However, you have to search for at least 8 different markers as the minimum search. Choose the one or two rare marker values you have, plus 6 or 7 common marker values in R1a that you have and see what close matches you get. You can set the maximum genetic distance from your search markers between 0 and 6. Try setting the maximum distance to 1 and see how many matches you get. You can adjust the distance to 0 or more than 1 marker mismatch if you're getting too many or too few matches.

    Also, you should join the R1a1 haplogroup project. The administrator of that project is well versed in that haplogroup and may be able to tell you if some of your marker values point toward a certain geographic or ethnic ancestry.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for your reply! That gives me some leads, anyway ... I really suspect it's that 1728-1780 paternal ancestor that might be the problem area, but if I got this much of a surprise I suppose I should be prepared for more. LOL If the second DNA test comes back as a match (it's with a different company, and the kit is on the way), I have a lot of work ahead.

      I notice you belong to the Italy and Sicily projects ... my maternal line comes from Sicily (have the town too). Can you join both projects, or only one? We had HVR1 and HVR2 tested and got 2 low-res hits in Sicily, so there's not much there yet.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DeeTyler View Post
        I notice you belong to the Italy and Sicily projects ... my maternal line comes from Sicily (have the town too). Can you join both projects, or only one? We had HVR1 and HVR2 tested and got 2 low-res hits in Sicily, so there's not much there yet.
        There's no longer any limit on how many projects you can join. You can join both the Italy and Sicily Projects, based on your mtDNA results. I look forward to getting notice from FTDNA that you've joined the Sicily Project.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by MMaddi View Post

          Now you have to look for close matches in public databases. If your matches are sufficiently close, then you may have found the true surname for this line. If they are not that close, but all or most seem to be from a certain geographic area or ethnic ancestry, then perhaps you've narrowed down at least where you should be looking, say England vs. Poland or Germany.
          I also should have mentioned adding your FTDNA results to the Ancestry.com database. Although they started doing their own testing last year, they are allowing anyone with results from other companies to enter their results (for free) in the Ancestry.com database and have the right to look for matches in their database. I guess they are trying to boost the size of their database by having results from other companies included.

          I can attest that searching in their database works. I have 42/43 and 43/43 matches in their database. The 42/43 match retested at FTDNA and we're a 72/76 match now, probably indicating a common ancestor 300-400 years ago. The 43/43 match is probably closer, but has not agreed to retest at FTDNA so we can compare at 76 markers. At least now I have an idea of the surname of the birth father of my great-grandfather, who was abandoned as an infant.

          To include your results in Ancestry.com's database, go to www.ancestry.com and click on the link at the top of the page for "DNA." Then click on the link labelled "Transfer Results From Other Lab" near the bottom of the page and follow the directions.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks again!

            I've searched at YBase, Ancestry, and YSearch ... the closest matches so far seem to be in Poland, Germany, and less close but some in UK, but we are so far talking about matches of a significant distance. That's what threw me off initially and got me asking about if somehow a mother's genetics could influence the son's YDNA (because of the Polish and German maternal ancestries that my dad has).

            My second test is being done through Ancestry, which will give me a few different markers. So, from the sounds of it, I'll have 76 markers to compare as well (well, that is, if the results turn out to corraborate).
            Last edited by DeeTyler; 16 May 2009, 07:21 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Keep in mind that there are not equally much tested people from every country.

              UK for example may apear in great numbers just because a lot of Brits did a test.

              Its ROUGHLY like....
              1/2.000 Brits did a test
              1/10.000 Germans
              1/20.000 Poles

              Also, Germany and Poland kind of "overlap", because of the "Eastern Terretories" like Prussia, Pommerania, Silesia etc.

              Even trough some of these terretories had been part of the "Holy Roman Empire of German nation" since 1500 or so, like Silesia and Pommerania. (or like 1200 under control of the "Teutonic knights" in case of East-Prussia) and had been Germanspeaking for centuries, these people usualy are R1a and do match Poles more than Germans.

              Comment


              • #8
                OK ... thanks for that iniput. But for this newbie, I am not sure what that might mean (please forgive my newbieness!). To me, it could mean one of the following (and I'm hoping for the former! LOL)

                (1) R1a's originated in Eastern Europe, so the haplotype would be more common to those STILL in Poland and Germany, even though my descendants might have migrated into England later on

                or

                (2) Because fewer people are tested in Poland and Germany, the fact that I am getting closer matches there (and by close I mean 29 out of 37 vs more like 21 out of 37 in the UK), means that I should be looking for a Polish or German surname

                Either seems a possibility in my lineage, although the likelihood that the break is in more recent generations seems less likely due to family resemblances and family tradition.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DeeTyler View Post
                  (2) Because fewer people are tested in Poland and Germany, the fact that I am getting closer matches there (and by close I mean 29 out of 37 vs more like 21 out of 37 in the UK), means that I should be looking for a Polish or German surname
                  Thats it. The same number of matches is more important in Germany and even more in Poland, because of fewer tests.

                  Either seems a possibility in my lineage, although the likelihood that the break is in more recent generations seems less likely due to family resemblances and family tradition.
                  As far as I know, iGENEAs "Country of Origin" prediction bases on where the profile is most common NOW. And they interpret that as the home of the lineage during the middle ages.

                  Wich is a time before surnames became common.

                  I know a guy who is considered Indigenous People: Iberian, Country of Origin: Spain. And his papertrail shows, his family has spend the past 300 years in Silesia.

                  Could be similiar in your case.
                  The line could be in Britain for the past 500 years and it still wouldnt push Britain to the top of the list of countries where your profile is common.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
                    Thats it. The same number of matches is more important in Germany and even more in Poland, because of fewer tests.



                    As far as I know, iGENEAs "Country of Origin" prediction bases on where the profile is most common NOW. And they interpret that as the home of the lineage during the middle ages.

                    Wich is a time before surnames became common.

                    I know a guy who is considered Indigenous People: Iberian, Country of Origin: Spain. And his papertrail shows, his family has spend the past 300 years in Silesia.

                    Could be similiar in your case.
                    The line could be in Britain for the past 500 years and it still wouldnt push Britain to the top of the list of countries where your profile is common.
                    Aw darn, I was hoping you wouldn't say that. That would tear some 7 generations out of my tree! (and about 85% of my research) LOL

                    Oh wait ... I just realized what you said (I think). You're saying that my ancestors COULD have been in Britain. That makes sense. I just found a picture of who I THINK is my great grandfather sitting on a horse. At least I think it's him ... he is the only ancestor that I know of for sure that did own a horse. He has the family "look". And another picture of one of his children also has the family "look" ... and I also notice that he looks a LOT like Paul McCartney did when he was younger. In other words, he looks British.

                    So I remain ever hopeful that I can keep a few more generations intact, at least. 8-)
                    Last edited by DeeTyler; 17 May 2009, 12:17 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The National Geographic has the largest data base of people in the world.
                      They are still going all over the world gathering DNA samples.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        There is an excellent video series on YouTube that I just happened to watch Friday night.

                        Go to YouTube and search for "Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey". It has 13 parts. It was fascinating! Might be of interest to many here.

                        I think it's affiliated with the National Geographic Society, because the same man also appeared in a video about the Genographic Project.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Maybe

                          Originally posted by DeeTyler View Post
                          Let me try to explain my situation a bit ...

                          After tracing my family history for 30 years, I've learned that our Y-DNA doesn't match our paper trail ancestor. In fact, I don't match anyone yet. Also, I expected an R1b Haplogroup result, but we are R1a, loud and clear.

                          Now ... here's the problem.

                          With no matches, and no match to our paper trail patriarch (or of ANYONE yet of the surname), I'm trying to figure out where the paper trail might break and where I should begin to focus my time. I have two choices:

                          --- More common MATERNAL ancestors are from Eastern Europe, where R1a is far more prevalent. My dad's family was always described as "English, Polish, and German", with the English coming from his paternal side, and Polish and German coming from his maternal ancestorsl. Recent generations have very strong family resemblances through at least the last two generations, and the paper trails are solid too. We appear to go back to the mid-1800s before the line might become a bit more iffy.

                          --- The paper trail becomes extremely thin between 1728 and 1873, where a break, in fact, could occur. When trying to prove data in the printed genealogy, it's evident that the person who reported the connection with our immigrant ancestor had extremely sketchy data. In fact, births of the children were proven to be way off, and he also mentioned towns that they didn't seem to live in. For one generation in particular, I haven't found the birth record for either the father or mother of the family, and there do not appear to be any wills, deeds, or other documents found to link the mother (with a VERY common surname) to any parents. The father in question is estimated to have been about 45 when he married this woman in 1773, who is estimated to have been born 1735-1750. It's likely it was his second marriage, but I haven't found any record of the first. It is this particular family that is the main reason we tested the DNA ... I was hoping I could eventually get some leads to the mother of that family, wasn't expecting to break the link to the father. LOL

                          Hopes of getting fairly recent Y-DNA samples of our line are slim pickings. All uncles and grand-uncles are deceased, and I believe we are the only branch that has males in current times. So, no luck there. I'm really feeling that there would be NO DNA prospects until we get back to that paper trail break. (Sigh)

                          So I was searching around on some marker statistics, and I do have a few markers that seem to be sort of "rare". Would there be a way that I could look up specific marker values and see on a map where those markers might be more prevalent? In other words, would that tell me if those "rare" markers are more typical of Eastern Europe or Western Europe? That might at least give me a clue that the break is farther back as suspected.

                          Other than that, I have absolutely no idea where to turn. I'm hoping SOME of my 30 years of research is still of value, but I have to admit these results weren't expected! Because of that I'm having my male relative take a second test, just to confirm the results of the first before I start tearing my tree apart and contacting people I don't know.

                          Suggestions welcome. I'm so new to this I have no idea where to turn.
                          I'm responding to your comment about less common markers. If you're talking about the DYS markers specifically, you can increase your chances of finding out the region where its most common. I have a couple of rare markers and I have a subclade that I'm assigned to that is rare. I have yet to find anybody matching to help me bust through the brickwall of finding my lineage before the 1870s in Boston, MA where my paper trail ends. So I resorted to doing a Deep SNP test to help give me an idea where my deep ancestry comes from and maybe work from that point forward with the high hopes of finding near matches. So far I can only tell you with my rare markers that my lineage in Britain points to around an area from Wales, Gloucester, Bristol, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall. In Ireland it points to the eastern shoreline from Cork towards Dublin DYS 448=17 (extremely rare). I confirmed this with my deep SNP which is SRY2627 and its highest frequency in Britain occurs around the Devon region. However, it's abundantly found more so in Catalonia with the highest frequencies around the Central Pyrenees (Val D'Aran). Luckily it's a rare subclade in Britain and helps to identify a more specific locality. On the other hand I am no closer to getting further back than 1870 than I was a few years ago when I started DNA testing. All you can do is try and don't bother to waste your money on having duplicate tests done, they (FTDNA) are pretty good about controls and the quality of their genetics testing. So there's no need to confirm results.

                          Arch

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'm expecting Deep Clade results in batch 307 (though not sure how much additional that would tell an R1a), and upgrade to 67 markers in batch 308. At this point I think I have to take any data I can find! LOL

                            But my less common markers are as follows (I got the percentages from SMGF):

                            DYS19 = 16 (roughly 10% reporting this)
                            DYS442=14 (roughly 3%)
                            DYS464a,b,c,d = 12-15-15-16 (roughly 2.5%)
                            DYS449 = 36 (roughly .2%)
                            Last edited by DeeTyler; 18 May 2009, 08:24 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Arch View Post
                              So far I can only tell you with my rare markers that my lineage in Britain points to around an area from Wales, Gloucester, Bristol, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall. In Ireland it points to the eastern shoreline from Cork towards Dublin DYS 448=17 (extremely rare). I confirmed this with my deep SNP which is SRY2627 and its highest frequency in Britain occurs around the Devon region.

                              Arch
                              How does one go about finding out where specific markers are most common?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X