GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-05 > 1146636221
From: "Andrew and Inge" <>
Subject: scots versus sc2
Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 08:03:41 +0200
From: "Mark MacDonald" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] scots versus sc2
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 15:47:56 -0500
No Campbells. I think that the 13 24 14 10 11 15 signatures were
disproportionally distributed in Clan Donald north. I have one from Kintail
immediately across from Skye, one a Glengarry from Scotus on Knoydart which
directly looks at the sleat peninsula on Skye and is aa
20 at 458, a Glengarry who is near my signature and who is increasing
markers with me to confirm or disprove closer relationship. The original
Campbell lands abutted the MacDougalls in Lorne.
I think that basing your comments on 6 markers is simply not going to work.
11-15 is going to be a common variant of any haplotype which is 11-14 and
that single one-step mutation will have happened many times in many places,
so in your clan it is likely to exist in several different families. To rule
out coincidence you need a pattern showing more significance.
If you look at 37 markers, the McCutcheons and the Campbells are clearly a
seperate group within the greater Scots cluster - more closely related to
each other than to the rest.
I don't have your full database of course so I don't know if you have any
McDonalds who are close to the McCutcheons on more than just those 6
markers, but I suspect not. Just from what I have it appears as if all
McCutcheons share one common ancestor, and that this common ancestor was
reasonably closely related to the main line of Campbells.
Key markers in seeing that this is one cluster are:
DYS458=20 (or one step away) This is a big jump from standard Scots 18 or
WAMH 17, and the most important identifier.
The other markers are all typical Scots cluster.
We have to be careful about using SMGF here because several key marker won't
show there. For example on Ysearch we can see that this group has near hits
which have the surname Morrison, but in my opinion this could be just
coincidence. As Ken pointed out earlier there is also a group of Smiths on
SMGF who may be similarly related. I think Ken did not notice that there is
also one Tedford and one Spencer who fit the bill.
This is a good example of why the Scots cluster is desperate for more