No announcement yet.

Confused by non-Surname Match

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Confused by non-Surname Match

    How am I to interpret a y-DNA 37 Marker (-1) match when the surname does not match but is identical to another match with my surname? Am I correct to assume that there is a possibility of an adoption or a name change sometime prior to oldest known ancestor born in about 1770?

    How else can the results be explained?

    Last edited by ; 24 August 2010, 07:04 PM.

  • #2
    One marker (genetic distance one) is not really enough to distinguish the exact difference in generations. Even a son and father can be genetic distance of one. At 37 markers the only way to fine tune the MCRA prediction is to test more markers. The more the better and the closer you can determine the prediction - but even then it is really just a prediction as there are variables that occur which may swing it farther or closer in time.

    That said at this point it is possible to say something happened but maybe saying it was about 1770 is a little premature with 37 markers. It depends on what you are wanting to accomplish, maybe you need to test more markers. Never hurts but you'd need both you and your match to upgrade to 67.


    • #3

      What's your paternal ancestry? Some regions didn't have patrilineally inherited surnames for as long as others. For example, those with Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry will always have high-level matches with different surnames because the majority of that population adopted surnames only 200-300 years ago. I've seen this happen with some Irish and Welsh ancestry, and I believe Finland as well (and maybe other Scandinavian countries too?)

      Outside of these situations where it's expected that people will have different-surname matches -- yes, there is always a possibility of an adoption, deliberate surname change, infidelity, etc.

      As for you having a 36/37 match with a different surname, while that person has a 37/37 match with your own surname? Sounds like there may have been a mutation in your own ancestral line, somewhere between you and the common ancestor that you mention. It could have happened as recently as between you and your father, or it could have happened several generations back.

      If you haven't already, please join the E-M35 project, which studies haplogroup E1b1b1 (formerly E3b) and its subclades. Once you're in the project, I can review your marker values and classify you into one of the many "clusters" that we have defined in the project. This will give you a prediction of the subclade (subgroup) of E1b1b1 that you are in.

      Also visit the E-M35 project's discussion forum to learn more than you ever wanted to know about haplogroup E1b1b1

      E-M35 Project Admin Team


      • #4

        Thanks for your reply. My paternal line is Reid (Reede) and I have a known y-37 (-1) match with two individuals, one with the surname Reed, and one with the surname Rayder. I have read recently that the Rayder surname may have derived from Reeder. My oldest known ancestor was born in 1770 in Pennsylvania, and was known in various records as Reede, Reed, and Reid. My predicted results place me in the E1b1b1 haplogroup, very rare for most Reid, Reed, Reads.

        I'm wondering if the test results support the theory that either my ancestor, or the Rayder ancestor experienced a name change or adoption sometime after our MRCA, either Reede or Raydar (Radar). The Radar name may be a derivative of German ancestry and more common to the E1b1b1 haplogroup.

        Your thoughts, or anyone else who might share some insight, would be appreciated. I have not ordered a deep clade test. Would that help to clarify?



        • #5
          I have a match at all 37 markers and our common ancestor is 10 generations ago.