Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is a match at 67 markers really relevant?

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

  • Is a match at 67 markers really relevant?

    As more Big-Y results are returned we are going to see more cases where the previous genealogical assumptions around STR GD are violated. Here is a new example which show that a 67 marker test based match may not be genealogical.

    In this case the new result is 61/67 with A656 and 62/67 with PF740. Historically we would have considered a 62/67 match as being borderline genealogically relevant. Even if this new result tests out as PF740+ we know from Big-Y results that the shared common ancestor appeared ~1600 years ago.

    R-Z326 (1270BC)
    *FGC18842 (592BC)
    **S21728 (302BC)
    ***A656 (153BC)
    ****A655
    ***PF740 (400AD)
    ****3714003
    ****A312

    Full y-sequence testing is still needed to establish the degree of relationship if you are matching different surnames at the 67 STR marker level.

  • #2
    Originally posted by wkauffman View Post
    As more Big-Y results are returned we are going to see more cases where the previous genealogical assumptions around STR GD are violated. Here is a new example which show that a 67 marker test based match may not be genealogical.

    In this case the new result is 61/67 with A656 and 62/67 with PF740. Historically we would have considered a 62/67 match as being borderline genealogically relevant. Even if this new result tests out as PF740+ we know from Big-Y results that the shared common ancestor appeared ~1600 years ago.

    R-Z326 (1270BC)
    *FGC18842 (592BC)
    **S21728 (302BC)
    ***A656 (153BC)
    ****A655
    ***PF740 (400AD)
    ****3714003
    ****A312

    Full y-sequence testing is still needed to establish the degree of relationship if you are matching different surnames at the 67 STR marker level.
    John Cleary has said the same in his presentation. I posted about it at http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=37531

    Dr. Doug McDonald has recently stated that the 111 marker tests are close to what BigY results provide as far as time depth but with both a 111 marker test and a BigY test it is 1.4 times better.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by wkauffman View Post
      As more Big-Y results are returned we are going to see more cases where the previous genealogical assumptions around STR GD are violated. Here is a new example which show that a 67 marker test based match may not be genealogical.

      In this case the new result is 61/67 with A656 and 62/67 with PF740. Historically we would have considered a 62/67 match as being borderline genealogically relevant. Even if this new result tests out as PF740+ we know from Big-Y results that the shared common ancestor appeared ~1600 years ago.

      R-Z326 (1270BC)
      *FGC18842 (592BC)
      **S21728 (302BC)
      ***A656 (153BC)
      ****A655
      ***PF740 (400AD)
      ****3714003
      ****A312

      Full y-sequence testing is still needed to establish the degree of relationship if you are matching different surnames at the 67 STR marker level.
      This post shows that when two people are close at 67 markers with different surnames that one of them is not the result of an NPE.

      Comment


      • #4
        I have a 62/67 match to an individual who shares my surname. Unfortunately, he has no genealogical record beyond the birth year of his furthest back paternal line ancestor, Luke Schroeder, who was born in 1800. Luke lived in England, but my match doesn't know if he was born there.

        Luckily, since the Lutheran church in northern Germany kept excellent records, I have a good candidate for my matches linkage to my line. I have a 3rd gr-grand uncle, who was born in 1775 in Ostereistedt, Germany; so would be just the right age to be Luke's father. Additionally, at Geneanet, he's listed as having no offspring, which usually indicates that he migrated to another country, or another region of Germany. My gr-grandfather, Johann Schroeder is similarly listed as having no offspring since he moved to America in 1866.

        Here are the marker values for my match (under Luke Schroeder), and myself (under Johann Schroeder): http://www.worldfamilies.net/surnames/schroeder/results

        Comment


        • #5
          Your 62/67 match is way-way-back in time.

          Comment


          • #6
            My closest Y67 match, GD 2, is Scottish and L1302-, while I am Finnish I-L1302.

            Now, according to YFull experimental tree I-L1302 was formed 2600 to 1900 years ago with 95% certainty.

            Furthermore, an STR based methodology gave 1067 years before present (+/-374 years) TMRCA for the included L1302 positives.

            Even history seems to tell that mine and my match's MRCA probably have lived at least 1000 years ago.

            On the other, at Y111 level we do not match any more (our GD at that level is 18).

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 192971 View Post
              My closest Y67 match, GD 2, is Scottish and L1302-, while I am Finnish I-L1302.

              Now, according to YFull experimental tree I-L1302 was formed 2600 to 1900 years ago with 95% certainty.

              Furthermore, an STR based methodology gave 1067 years before present (+/-374 years) TMRCA for the included L1302 positives.

              Even history seems to tell that mine and my match's MRCA probably have lived at least 1000 years ago.

              On the other, at Y111 level we do not match any more (our GD at that level is 18).
              This is a good example of why either a 111 marker test or a BigY test should be used to determine if a 67 marker match is genealogically significant or not.

              Only the matches that hold up at the 111 marker level are genealogically significant and if they ever diverge in the Y-DNA SNP phylogenetic tree prior to the past 1,000 years based on a BigY test and professional analysis they aren't genealogically significant.
              Last edited by Armando; 17 October 2015, 11:05 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                So I shouldn't go all crazy over my 65/67 match? It may not be that close? The other person has only done 67 as well and both of the two people I match at this level are deceased. Im just trying to figure out how far back the match is I am new to this so any insight will be helpful..thanks!!

                The two matches are first cousins once removed.
                KITS DYS576 CDY DYS
                1 18 36-38 17
                2 19 36-36 17
                3 19 36-38 18 MY KIT

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by danette823 View Post
                  So I shouldn't go all crazy over my 65/67 match? It may not be that close? The other person has only done 67 as well and both of the two people I match at this level are deceased. Im just trying to figure out how far back the match is I am new to this so any insight will be helpful..thanks!!

                  The two matches are first cousins once removed.
                  KITS DYS576 CDY DYS
                  1 18 36-38 17
                  2 19 36-36 17
                  3 19 36-38 18 MY KIT
                  Does this match share your yDNA surname?
                  Do you have matches that share your yDNA surname?
                  Do you have reason to doubt your yDNA surname is correct (NPE, adoption, ect.)?

                  Genetic distance figures are based on average mutation rates, mutations can happen at any time and even two brothers can have a GD of 2 (65/67). One would have to look at the whole picture to determine relevance.

                  In my family, my father and his paternal 1st cousin have a 4GD to one another at the 67 marker level (63/67). My father and or Grandfather had an higher then average mutation rate on their STR markers. Cousins matches are the closest GD wise to surname matches.
                  Of his matches(my fathers cousin), the 65/67 matches common ancestor are prior to my fathers 2x Great Grandfather (mid to late 1700's).
                  Last edited by prairielad; 22 October 2015, 06:24 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Both matches have the same surname. They are caucasion my dad is african american so..you know the rest. Im trying to figure out the rest. Im also looking at family finder people to see if there are any links there. Thank you for responding!

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X