GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-10 > 1065238192


From: Charles <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Practical mtDNA test, or Kelly sisters project
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 23:29:58 -0400
References: <BAY4-DAV3xVY60mJWEs0000403b@hotmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BAY4-DAV3xVY60mJWEs0000403b@hotmail.com>


Bill,

Bravo! Excellent experiment. Thank you for sharing the results of this
example of using the Mitochondria DNA Test for solving a real world
genealogical puzzle.

Charles


William Hurst wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Back on May 20, I proposed a practical test of mitochondrial DNA to try to
> prove that two women named Kelly were sisters. Martha Kelly was born in 1803
> and Catherine Kelly (my ancestor) was born in 1807, probably both in Wythe
> County, Virginia. The original message is in the Archives at:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2003-05/1053486912
>
> Having come up with the idea, I had to find direct maternal descendants of
> the two women. For Catherine, any of the children of my father's sisters,
> and their daughters' children, would qualify. I finally got a volunteer. For
> Martha, I had an obvious candidate, since one of her descendants had
> suggested the relationship of the two women back in 1983. It helped in
> devising this test that daughters of the two women were the first and second
> wives of my great grandfather. So my two test candidates were already
> half-second cousins, once removed - but have never met.
>
> Finding candidates was one step, getting them to agree to take the test was
> another step, getting them to actually take the test was yet another step.
> Then it was a matter of waiting for the results.
>
> A few weeks ago, the first result came in from FamilyTreeDNA. The first
> cousin had the following mtDNA:
>
> Haplogroup H
> HVR1 mutations: 16183C, 16189C, 16519C
> HVR2 mutations: 263G, 315.1C
>
> That result produced one low-resolution, or HVR1, match, who is apparently
> is not related in any reasonable time frame. Ann Turner checked the Oxford
> Ancestors database for me and found three matches on just the first two
> numbers - OA not testing for 16519C or HVR2.
>
> Today, the second cousin's results came in. His results were EXACTLY THE
> SAME!! They are the only two with that exact haplotype in the FTDNA
> database.
>
> Based on these results and on my study of the old census reports and other
> data, I think it's safe to say that Catherine Kelly and Martha Kelly were
> indeed sisters. Their father was John Kelly. Their mother was Elizabeth
> Cummins - the first name from estate and census records and the last name
> only from my grandmother's notebook.
>
> Yes, I know the results would be the same if they were cousins instead of
> sisters. For first cousins, that would have required that two men named
> Kelly - perhaps brothers - married two Cummins sisters. However, John Kelly
> was born in Ireland and Elizabeth Cummins was born in Virginia. Not exactly
> two brothers and two sisters from the same little village having a double
> wedding.
>
> Still not definite, but if I can find two women from a century ago, with no
> documented relationship, then determine that their descendants have the same
> rare DNA, then I can call them sisters if I wish.
>
> Me, I now have a new set of 3rd great grandparents.
>
> Bill Hurst
>
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
>


This thread: