GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1115302624


From: Bonnie Schrack <>
Subject: Re: Assistance with Results Interpretation
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 10:17:04 -0400


Hi John,

Since you've specifically asked me to comment, I will try to do so, even
though I have very little familiarity with R1b -- so take this for what
it's worth.

John wrote:

> 1. Due to the similarity of my results with a group in the Barlow DNA
> project I have asked for my results to be posted with their project. A
> very recent match between myself and a new Barlow candidate has just
> occurred at 33/37 using the Stepwise Model. However 2 of the steps
> occur at CDYa which FTDNA have as one of their faster mutating
> markers. Am I correct in thinking when using the FTDNA hybrid model I
> should interpret this difference as 1 not 2, in FTDNA terms making us
> 34/37 = related?
>
> my kit is # 22784, the close matching Barlow project member is kit # 30538
> http://www.barlowgenealogy.com/Options/BARLOWDNAPROJECT.htm
>
> 2. We all appear to have a version of the AMH however the DYS393=12 is
> a common feature of the Barlow subgroup marked in Blue. I would be
> very interested to hear what Bonnie, Anne, Ken, David etc have to say
> about this feature and any other of the markers which they feel may
> have significant values.


I would note that:

a) you do match 25/25 with three of the Barlows
b) the' mismatches' you have at 456, CDYb and 442 are shared by some or
most of the Barlows in various combinations
c) the only real mismatches you have are the 10 at 460 and the 39 at
CDYa, which after all, is quite a hot mutator.

As I mentioned, I don't usually evaluate R1b haplotypes. I know many
of them are extremely similar, but it seems to me that there is a very
good chance of your having a common ancestor with these Barlows; the
only question, of course, is how recently. I would certainly not expect
it to have been since arrival in America. If you were able to do some
extensive research in your places of origin -- Britain I assume -- who
knows, you might get lucky. I would be looking into that if I were in
your shoes. I would try to find out exactly where your respective
immigrant ancestors came from and do local research in that area. A
little challenging, but genealogists have been thriving on that kind of
challenge for many years.

This isn't the way I had been planning to tell the list about it, but I
have a similar situation with my own family. I found this match through
the Sorenson database, and the other family unfortunately does not have
a surname project. The person I've found from their family who has a
genealogy website is not the DNA donor (whose surname had changed, due
to the remarriage of a mother a few generations back), doesn't know him,
and seems uncomfortable with the idea of DNA testing and our genetic
similarity.

It's not a close match by the standards of R1b, but given that we are
J2, and that our haplotypes are unusual ones within J2, it's very
striking. It turns out that our families are from closely adjoining
locations in Switzerland, and my research so far shows very good reasons
to think that we descend from a common ancestor who might have lived as
recently as the Middle Ages (before surnames came into use), or anytime
between then and the Roman period. I still have great hopes that I will
eventually find people in the other family who are interested and that
we can learn more about our early ancestry.

Bonnie Schrack


This thread: