Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Please help, I am confused

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

  • Please help, I am confused

    Ok. I am sorely confused, I understand mtDNA is only passed from Mother to Mother to Mother and so on. Is it the same with Paternal DNA, only passed from Father, to Father to Father and so on and not taking into account any females at all? Reason being is, My husband matches 4 Males from another Surname with 0 Distance. His Surname is TINKER but he matches FANCHER perfectly. The only intermarriage I can find is from a Female TINKER to a male FANCHER and it traces right back to these 4 mens Most Distant Common Ancestor. Should I be looking for a Male TINKER that married a Female FANCHER or how does this work? Im so confused.

  • #2
    Females have 2 "X" chromosomes and males have an "X" and a "Y".

    Females get one X from their mother and the other X from their father.

    Males get the X from their mother and the Y from their father.

    Thus, Y-DNA test results apply only to the male lineage.

    The relevance of genetic distance depends on the number of markers tested by all participants. 12 markers is next to useless. (At 12 markers I "match" on 13 men who are not at all related to me). These days at least 37 markers or better 67 markers need to be tested and compared between candidates.

    Now, if a Smith man matches a Jones man closely at 67 markers, and for other reasons they believe they are related, then there's likely a name change / non-paternal event along the way. For instance, in the case you mention, one of the men may have been fathered by a Tinker but taken the name Fancher. It can get complicated!
    Last edited by gtc; 16 January 2010, 01:58 AM. Reason: clarification

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by dtinker View Post
      Ok. I am sorely confused, I understand mtDNA is only passed from Mother to Mother to Mother and so on. Is it the same with Paternal DNA, only passed from Father, to Father to Father and so on and not taking into account any females at all? Reason being is, My husband matches 4 Males from another Surname with 0 Distance. His Surname is TINKER but he matches FANCHER perfectly. The only intermarriage I can find is from a Female TINKER to a male FANCHER and it traces right back to these 4 mens Most Distant Common Ancestor. Should I be looking for a Male TINKER that married a Female FANCHER or how does this work? Im so confused.
      mtDNA is passed through the mother's line, from her to all her children, male and female, then passed down by her daughters only.

      Since only men have a Y chromosome, a father gives his Y-DNA to his sons only, then his sons pass it down to their sons, etc.

      Since your husband has the common Y-DNA type R1b, exact matches at 25 or 37 markers, or even 67 markers, are not a reliable indicator of relatedness. You would have to compare family trees.

      Regards,
      Jim

      Comment


      • #4
        If even 67 markers are not reliable in R1b1b2 then why even bother getting them done? I guess it seems like I am just looking for a needle in a haystack then doesnt it? Thus far the only link I can find from us to them is that one single solitary Tinker woman that married a Fancher man, but since she is female she doesnt count so I am back to sqaure one....ughhhh lol

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by dtinker View Post
          Ok. I am sorely confused, I understand mtDNA is only passed from Mother to Mother to Mother and so on. Is it the same with Paternal DNA, only passed from Father, to Father to Father and so on and not taking into account any females at all? Reason being is, My husband matches 4 Males from another Surname with 0 Distance. His Surname is TINKER but he matches FANCHER perfectly. The only intermarriage I can find is from a Female TINKER to a male FANCHER and it traces right back to these 4 mens Most Distant Common Ancestor. Should I be looking for a Male TINKER that married a Female FANCHER or how does this work? Im so confused.
          Maybe I am confused, but it seems to me that marriage of a FEMALE Tinker to a MALE Fancher is very important.

          On the biological side of things, your husband got his y chromosome from his father, who got it from his father, who got it from his father, and so on (obviously).

          But surnames don't always follow biology.

          So-

          1. Your husband's y-dna haplotype matches the y-dna haplotypes of several Fanchers exactly.

          2. But his surname is Tinker.

          3. But you have said there was a MALE Fancher who married a FEMALE Tinker, and that Fancher line goes directly to the most common y-dna ancestor of your husband's Fancher matches.

          Possible conclusion:

          Somehow your husband's line took the surname Tinker from that female but got its y chromosome from that MALE Fancher.


          That kind of thing happens all the time.

          Sorry if I have misunderstood and thus misinterpreted your story.

          And, by the way, an exact 67-marker match (I don't know if that is what you have) is fantastically good.
          Last edited by Stevo; 16 January 2010, 11:55 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dtinker View Post
            If even 67 markers are not reliable in R1b1b2 then why even bother getting them done? I guess it seems like I am just looking for a needle in a haystack then doesnt it? Thus far the only link I can find from us to them is that one single solitary Tinker woman that married a Fancher man, but since she is female she doesnt count so I am back to sqaure one....ughhhh lol
            You have the opposite situation to many of us, in that this type is too common and you have too many matches.

            There's a Tinker on www.SMGF.org. Has a family tree with it. No haplogroups are indicated in that database.

            You might also look for Tinker on www.DNAReunion.org.

            Also search the Family Tree DNA British-related projects.

            Regards,
            Jim

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jim Honeychuck View Post
              You have the opposite situation to many of us, in that this type is too common and you have too many matches.

              There's a Tinker on www.SMGF.org. Has a family tree with it. No haplogroups are indicated in that database.

              You might also look for Tinker on www.DNAReunion.org.

              Also search the Family Tree DNA British-related projects.

              Regards,
              Jim
              Jim,

              I went back over her posts, and I cannot find anyplace where dtinker says her husband's haplotype is so blasted common that his matches don't really count for anything.

              I'm assuming you read the part where she said there was a female Tinker who married a male Fancher whose y-line goes right back to the y ancestor of her husband's Fancher matches.

              It seems to me a pretty obvious possibility is that her husband acquired his surname from that female Tinker and his y-dna from that male Fancher.

              That Fancher/Tinker couple could have died early, leaving at least one son an orphan. A family from the Tinker side (his mom's side) could have taken him in and for whatever reasons given him its surname.

              Voila, a Tinker line is created bearing Fancher y-dna.

              And 67-marker matches are significant, even within R1b.

              Comment


              • #8
                We found my Mothers brother by accident using MTDNA.
                He was a 100% match and I looked at the surname which we knew.
                I contacted him. Same town, same hospital and he had a very rare surname.
                He said that he knew his parents so I dropped the whole thing.
                I was not going to tell him that he was adopted.
                He said he would look into our surname when he had time.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I thought I read in her other threads that dtinker's husband has tested up to 25 markers. The match is 25/25 to Fanchers. She and her husband are waiting for results on 37 markers.
                  Last edited by ~Elizabeth~; 16 January 2010, 02:40 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Stevo View Post
                    Jim,


                    And 67-marker matches are significant, even within R1b.
                    She has posted in another thread that her husband has 25 marker results and is waiting for the final panel, which would give him 37. The perfect match to the Fancher results is 25/25.

                    Her husband is in the Tinker surname project but doesn't match the 8 other men in the project perfectly. It would be useful to know how closely he matches the other Tinkers (22/25, 23/25 or less?), but she hasn't given that information, although I asked in the other thread about that.

                    I advised her to wait until the final panel comes in before coming to any conclusion. If her husband has a 22/25 or 23/25 match to a Tinker, it's possible that at 37 matches the match with Fancher will be less close than the match to a Tinker. But I don't know if my statement is correct, since I don't know what the 25 marker genetic distance is with the Tinker men.

                    And I do agree with you that the marriage between a Tinker woman and Fancher man may turn out to be the key to this situation. Your scenario is entirely plausible and may explain why he is matching a Fancher 25/25. But I think the final panel, which will give her husband 37 markers, should make things clearer.
                    Last edited by MMaddi; 16 January 2010, 03:13 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I tried going to the Tinker surname project website to see if I could determine for myself how close dtinker's husband is at 25 markers to the other Tinkers in the project. The link to the project website is not good, so I couldn't do that.

                      I went to ysearch to do a comparison of the Fancher and Tinker results there. I can't remember whether dtinker has uploaded her husband's results there.

                      Here's a link to the comparison of the Fancher and Tinker results in ysearch - http://tinyurl.com/yb8tv3r

                      There's one Fancher with 67 markers, another with 37 markers and one Tinker with 37 markers in the comparison. Also, there's one Fancher with 25 markers and one Tinker (2B6GG) with 25 markers, who may be dtinker's husband.

                      Of the two Fanchers with 37 or more markers, they both have YCAii-b=22, which is one below the strong modal for R1b1b2. The Tinker with 37 markers has the R1b1b2 modal of 23 for that marker. Also, the three Fanchers in the comparison with 25 or more markers have DYS464a=14, one below the R1b1b2 modal. The Tinker with 37 markers has the modal value, 15. The Tinker with 25 markers (2B6GG), who may be dtinker's husband, has 14, matching the Fanchers.

                      If 2B6GG is dtinker's husband, it looks to me, without seeing the haplotypes of the others in the Tinker surname project, that he is actually a Fancher. However, as I advised in the other thread, no conclusions should be made until he gets the final panel and has 37 markers. That panel will include YCAii-b. If he has 22 for that marker and is a 34/37 match or better to the Fanchers, I'd be inclined to believe that he's actually a Fancher and that Stevo's scenario explains what happened in the past.
                      Last edited by MMaddi; 16 January 2010, 04:18 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks for all the replies. Yes the 25 marker match on Ysearch is my husband. He matches 4 Fancher men on here with a Genetic Distance of 0 at 25 markers. Now there are more Fancher Men that he matches some with a Genetic Distance of 1 and then some with a distance of 2. What maddi said is just basically greek to me...lol I cannot see any Tinker matches here on FTDna so that is why I am unable to tell you if there are any distant matches at all. The only match I found to Tinkers on YSearch was a Genetic Distance of 9 on one and others were as high as 17. For some reason the Tinker Group doesnt have a page that is accessible so without me being able to access the results of the other men in the project I have no way of knowing if he matches any of them, I just assumed if he was a match he would be getting Tinker matches under the Match Results page here on FTDna, but out of a lot of Matches, there are None listed bearing the surname Tinker. Hope this clarifies it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
                          .
                          If 2B6GG is dtinker's husband, it looks to me, without seeing the haplotypes of the others in the Tinker surname project, that he is actually a Fancher. However, as I advised in the other thread, no conclusions should be made until he gets the final panel and has 37 markers. That panel will include YCAii-b. If he has 22 for that marker and is a 34/37 match or better to the Fanchers, I'd be inclined to believe that he's actually a Fancher and that Stevo's scenario explains what happened in the past.
                          Just wanted to let you know that the markers are back and he IS a match on YCAii at 22 like you suggested!! And he also is a Match to a Fancher on 36/37 markers, Genetic Distance of 1 and more Fanchers at a Genetic Distance of 3. So am I to assume my husbands name should actually be Fancher?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Is this any clue?

                            http://news.rootsweb.com/th/read/PAS...-08/0904576015

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Thanks, I saw that and have checked into it already, it seems Caroline Fancher married a Man named Tinker, they only had one child, a female. Now this Tinker mans dad was Lee Tinker who was a brother to the Guy that had the daughter Parthena Tinker that married a Newman Fancher, am I making sense? This is way back in the 1700`s and these two are the only links I can find between the Tinker and the Fancher families at all. I have looked at all the known relatives kids and their kids and no one married a Fancher. I have looked at Census records to see if the name Fancher appeared on the same Census as the Tinker Family did. I am basically grasping at straws here. My husbands known last ancestor was born somewhere in North Carolina, I do not know where, the Fanchers were in North Carolina also. The rest of my husbands Tinker clan was in Washington/Unicoi County Tennessee and the Fanchers at that time were in another part of Tennessee. I just wish I had something more to go on. Thanks for all your help as I try to fit this piece of the puzzle together, at this point my husband is so confused because he doesnt really know "Who" he is.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X