GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119285803


From: Charles <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] was New to DNA - now Statistics of Parallel Mutations
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 12:43:23 -0400
References: <NGECJOFCABPEOGMJNBMFGEGGEEAA.terry@bartons.org>
In-Reply-To: <NGECJOFCABPEOGMJNBMFGEGGEEAA.terry@bartons.org>


Terry:

Yes the DYS449 mutation is definitely precluded from being shared by a
common ancestor. These two mutations to allele value 31 for marker
DYS449 happened separately and independently in two separate lines of
descent from the MRCA. You can see the relationships of the people
tested in the various branches in this descent chart. Kit numbers are in
the blocks at the bottom of the chart.
http://www.kerchner.com/utecountingdiagram.htm

Here again is the test data results table for convenience.
http://www.kerchner.com/kerchner37mkrs.htm

Kit #3074 is legally a descendant of the MRCA, Frederick Kerchner, but
not genetically. The Henry Number for him shows the legal historical
relationship for his to the MRCA. But obviously somewhere along the way
the Y chromosome in his branch was changed do to a hidden adoption or
false paternity event in his line. He is legally a distant cousin of
mine but not a genetic cousin. This was an unexpected surprise in the
project.

Charles


Terry Barton wrote:
> Charles, I know how meticulous you are, so my question is probably
> unnecessary, but I do want to be complete in my understanding.
>
> Do your paper trails preclude the mutation at 449 from coming first and
> being a branch mutation?
>
> And, out of curiousity - why do you have #3074, who doesn't match,
> separating the Karrigers from the main genetic family?
>
> thanks, Terry
>
> ps I haven't forgotten your mutation study. It's still on my list of things
> do to.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:58 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] was New to DNA - now Statistics of Parallel Mutations
> Terry:
> For what it is worth, I will add to this thread that I have a parallel
> mutation in my Kerchner surname project with marker DYS449. Two distinct
> and separate descendant lines from the MRCA mutated from the ancestral
> allele value of 30 to 31. This was confirmed by testing two males in
> each branch. The traditional genealogical relationships in this group
> was long known and well documented long before there was any DNA testing
> done. One can see the relationships in the chart via the Henry Numbers.
> Parallel mutations do occur. As to the statistics and frequency of their
> occurrence, that I will leave to others.
> http://www.kerchner.com/kerchner37mkrs.htm
>
> Charles Kerchner
> http://www.kerchner.com/dna-info.htm
> http://www.ystrlog.org/

This thread: