Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Single DNA segment - 28cM: Passed Unchanged Since 1600's.

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

  • Single DNA segment - 28cM: Passed Unchanged Since 1600's.

    Good Day Everyone,

    I would like to request some input. I have a match which we will call David A. Via 23andMe - David A and I share a single DNA segment of 28cMs. This DNA segment resides on chromosome 3. It turns out that via investigation performed by myself, our last common ancestors are Richard Goode (1600-1650) and Wife Whitley 1590.

    Would one agree that a single DNA segment of 28cM can pass unchanged (via recombination) since the 1600's to present day descendants?

    Thanks
    Steve
    Attached Files
    Last edited by shandy4473; 11 September 2012, 11:59 AM.

  • #2
    Highly unlikely. Much greater chance that you have a common ancestor that's not showing up on your paper trail.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by JOlson View Post
      Highly unlikely. Much greater chance that you have a common ancestor that's not showing up on your paper trail.
      Agreed.

      Comment


      • #4
        Is it possible you are getting a double dose of the common ancestor's DNA because of subsequent cousin marriages?

        I've got a situation like that where a predicted 4th cousin is actually a 7th. It's possible I haven't found a more recent common ancestor who is responsible for my 24cm block but I do know I"m getting DNA from the known common ancestor from two different paths.

        Comment


        • #5
          Dumb question but how do the two trees match? Those are not the same Richard Goodes are they?

          I wouldn't trust Ancestry too much.

          Comment


          • #6
            10th Cousins

            From the paper trail - it looks like both David A and my father are 10th cousins. Richard Goode (1600-1650) is their shared 9th great-grandfather. Looks like there is a shared cM of 25.1cM - as reported by GedMatch.

            Thanks
            Steve

            Comment


            • #7
              That looked like two completely different Goode lines to me.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by shandy4473 View Post
                Good Day Everyone,

                I would like to request some input. I have a match which we will call David A. Via 23andMe - David A and I share a single DNA segment of 28cMs. This DNA segment resides on chromosome 3. It turns out that via investigation performed by myself, our last common ancestors are Richard Goode (1600-1650) and Wife Whitley 1590.

                Would one agree that a single DNA segment of 28cM can pass unchanged (via recombination) since the 1600's to present day descendants?

                Thanks
                Steve
                JOlson is correct. The matching segment is much too large for your MRCA to have lived 400 years ago. Neither double-dosing, triple-dosing, or even quadruple-dosing is sufficient to account for your matching segment. Your MRCA with David A. was about 4.5 generations ago. You should be looking at contemporaries of Adam Huntsinger, not Richard Goode.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Appear to be the same

                  Originally posted by mkdexter View Post
                  Dumb question but how do the two trees match? Those are not the same Richard Goodes are they?

                  I wouldn't trust Ancestry too much.
                  The trees appear to be the same. It appears to be the same Richard Goode. Here is the link to my matches tree as his tree is public.

                  Match Tree - http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/15917544/family

                  His Richard Goode is 1629-1719 is the son of Richard Goode (1600-1650)

                  In my tree - John Goode 1620-1709 is his sibling.

                  Steve's Tree - http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/22708735/family

                  Thanks
                  Steve
                  Last edited by shandy4473; 11 September 2012, 03:08 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    There is no way a segment that large would date back 400+ years. 400+ years would be like 10 generations. A segment that large would prob fall under 4th cousins

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by shandy4473 View Post
                      The trees appear to be the same. It appears to be the same Richard Goode. Here is the link to my matches tree as his tree is public.

                      Match Tree - http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/15917544/family

                      His Richard Goode is 1629-1719 is the son of Richard Goode (1600-1650)

                      In my tree - John Goode 1620-1709 is his sibling.

                      Steve's Tree - http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/22708735/family

                      Thanks
                      Steve
                      Well unless you can go the link itself (which I can't) and show that Richard had two wives, no they are not siblings. My problem is that I can't see all of the info you are seeing, so I'll take your word for it but still I wonder... about the Ancestry info because a generation back, in one tree, a Richard Goode born 1600 had a wife that was 36 years younger than him. It doens't look right.

                      Anyway... I also don't think that a 28cm segment would last long. You may want to see if this perrson is on gedmatch and see if the segment if half or full identical. If full then there's an issue. If half then I'd look for a 3rd to 5th cousin connection in this case..


                      Maybe when I get off of this iPad and to a real computer later I'll see what you are talking about..

                      Matt.
                      Last edited by mkdexter; 11 September 2012, 05:03 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Scratching Head

                        Well I am scratching my head to trying to understand. Unless the shared cM number from 23andMe is incorrect and is actually lower than what is reported? Nevertheless our paper trails match up to Richard Goode (1600-1650).

                        Who knows!!!!!

                        Thanks for the input

                        Steve
                        Last edited by shandy4473; 11 September 2012, 05:09 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          John and Richard Goode

                          Originally posted by mkdexter View Post
                          Well unless you can go the link itself (which I can't) and show that Richard had two wives, no they are not siblings. My problem is that I can't see all of the info you are seeing, so I'll take your word for it but still I wonder... about the Ancestry info because a generation back, in one tree, a Richard Goode born 1600 had a wife that was 36 years younger than him. It doens't look right.

                          Anyway... I also don't think that a 28cm segment would last long. You may want to see if this perrson is on gedmatch and see if the segment if half or full identical. If full then there's an issue. If half then I'd look for a 3rd to 5th cousin connection in this case..


                          Maybe when I get off of this iPad and to a real computer later I'll see what you are talking about..

                          Matt.
                          What I am seeing on Ancestry is that John Goode (1620-1709) and Richard Goode (1630-1719) are siblings. Their parents are Richard Goode Sr (1600-1650) and Wife Whitley (1598-???).

                          The 36 year difference was an error in my tree before I corrected it.

                          Here is a link to a tree with both siblings: http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/12381...son/-123074758

                          Thanks
                          Steve
                          Last edited by shandy4473; 11 September 2012, 09:55 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by shandy4473 View Post
                            The 36 year difference was an error in my tree before I corrected it.

                            Here is a link to a tree with both siblings: http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/12381...son/-123074758

                            Thanks
                            Steve
                            Ok yes that makes more sense.

                            The problem is we can't say that is it not possible, it would be up to a lot of recombination occurring in just the right places though.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Genetic Genealogy and the Single Segment


                              http://ongenetics.blogspot.com/2011/...e-segment.html

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X