GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-08 > 1154514215


From: "Daniel Jenkins" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] research strategy for genealogists
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 10:23:35 +0000


Ann and Diana,

Since you both are far more expert than I regarding the significance of the markers,could you look at the
markers I posted yesterday and offer me an opinion. Do these particular markers put weight in any direction of possible relationship. I now find that there are 2 people who have the same surname that
are a one step mismatch at 4 markers with the gentleman I am helping. Unfortunately one has not posted his results to Y-Search
so I am unable to get a handle on his line or know if he is related to the other with same surname. My gentleman has no knowledge of his line prior to a gr. grandfather born 1846 and only a guess as to the fathers' name, and only a first name for the mother. I looked at the MRCA comparison at FTDNA and appears 25-28 generations seems reasonable . This would be after naming period .
If the 2 matching surnames are not related , would this lend credence to a possible adoption or non paternal event in my gentlemans' line. I would tend to assume the 2 matching surnames are likely related
somewhere way back.I have exhausted all usual resources on finding the origins of the unamed father of the child born 1846. I may be grasping at straws, but that seems
to be all I have at moment. I can give you more details off list if you want to look at what I have to date.

Dan Jenkins




----------------------------------------
> From:
> Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 22:47:17 -0400
> Subject: Re: [DNA] research strategy for genealogists
> To:
>
> In a message dated 7/31/2006 2:30:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> writes:
>
> > The difference between animal morphology and Y-chromosome STRs is that the
> > former is being driven by natural selection, while we are assuming the
> > latter is
> > selection neutral, meaning the resemblances are technically coincidence, not
> > convergence. So, how does "resemblance" caused by coincidence or
> > convergence
> > affect our Y-DNA STR research strategy? Is having two unrelated animals
> > look
> > alike similar to having similar STR motifs? The answer is, yes, in terms of
> > having to figure out how to separate real relationship from a superficial
> > resemblance.
>
> It is surprisingly difficult to achieve this state of
> coincidence/convergence. I know you meant it to dramatize your point, but your specific example would
> be well nigh impossible to achieve. I ran some simulations one time with
> easier starting points -- just one or two differences out of 37 markers. The
> results were summarized in this old message (long URL, ends in +F)
>
>
> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ifetch2?/u1/textindices/G/GENEALOGY-DNA+2005+17283828476+F
>
> Convergence occurred in a very small percentage of cases, so it's not a good
> explanation for why different surnames have the same haplotype. Relatively
> speaking (pun!), it's far more likely that they have the same haplotype because
> they descend from a common ancestor who lived before the time surnames were
> adopted. It's harder to estimate the relative probability of another explanation,
> that different surnames have the same haplotype because of name changes and
> misattributed paternity in more recent times, where there's some chance of
> finding a paper trail.
>
> Ann Turner
>
>
> ==============================
> New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429
>

_________________________________________________________________
Try Live.com: where your online world comes together - with news, sports, weather, and much more.
http://www.live.com/getstarted

This thread: