GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-08 > 1154535422


From: "Diana" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] research strategy for genealogists
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 12:17:02 -0400
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W2F2613B6F12B722B1952485520@phx.gbl>


Dan,

I think I answered you the day you posted... I would ignore a 33/37 match
outside my surname, especially in Haplogroup R1b1.

Diana

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Diana [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 6:51 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [DNA] Expert opinion request
>
> Dan,
>
<snip>
>
> I would ignore such a low level of matching outside my
> surname, especially for an R1b1. If these lines are related,
> closer matches will pop up as more people are tested in
> the future; so, not pursing this line, now, doesn't mean you're
> throwing away the chance to connect, eventually (though my
> prediction is that it won't happen). If you're intent on
> pursuing the connection, now, I suggest upgrading to 67
> markers, then re-assessing their degree of relatedness, before
> wasting any time trying to connect them on paper.
>
> Use the DNA to test your paper genealogy, not to lead you on
> wild goose chases. IMHO, of course.
>
> Diana
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Jenkins [mailto:]
> > Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 4:55 AM
> > To:
> > Subject: [DNA] Expert opinion request
> >
> > List,
> >
> > Need advice on following ;
> >
> > 2 men, [R1b1] with different surnames , both tested with
> > FTDNA, match 33/37 markers with the variance being only one
> > at the folowing 4 markers.
> >
> > DYS 458, 447, 607, 576,
> >
> > 1 is 17 25 16 18
> >
> > 1 is 18 26 15 17
> >
> > Both have paper trails to men living in abutting counties ,
> > in New Jersey, in the same state late 1700s. One is sure to
> > 1760 , the other is sure to 1825 about. Research does not
> > show any other connection between families. Since the 4
> > markers are fast moving , what if any conclusions can be
> > drawn. Are they indeed possibly related by some earlier
> > event or should further research not be pursued? Thanks
> for any help.
> >
> > Dan Jenkins
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Jenkins [mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 5:24 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [DNA] research strategy for genealogists
>
> 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
>
>

This thread: