GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives
Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211081156
From: Michael Maddi <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] 12 STR tests are useful (was Re: Some truth inarticle(wasRe: Answer from Ancestors Magazine))
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 20:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Vince Vizachero wrote:
The only worthwhile objective is to find the best tool
for the job. There are plenty of people in the field
who recognize that, thankfully.
If you someone can't figure out how to use a 12 marker
test productively, that is no one's business but
theirs I suppose, but hopefully people on this list
are wise enough to recognize that the problem lies in
the implementor and not in the implement.
My reply:
I have recently found a close match (42/43) with
someone who tested with Relative Genetics. We became
aware of our match through both of us being in the
Ancestry.com database.
This is quite significant for me, since I have a brick
wall involving my great-grandfather, who was born
about 1845, but was abandoned as an infant. The
problem is my close match's grandfather came to the
U.S. from a small town in Calabria 209 miles from
Mezzojuso (Sicily), the small town where my
great-grandfather lived and may have been born.
I am trying to make the connection between these two
lines, which seems to exist with such a close match. I
have a theory that the link may be in a town (Trabia)
20 miles from where my great-grandfather lived. In
this town, the second most common surname is
Vallelunga, with just one letter difference from that
of my close match, whose grandfather's surname was
Vallelonga.
My strategy is to recruit descendants of Vallelungas
from Trabia to test 12 markers. I think it will be
evident from just 12 markers if they may be a close
match to me too. First of all, if they are not
predicted to be R1b1b2, then their paternal line is
not related to me, since I'm R1b1b2g. Also, I have a
few unusual marker values in my first 12. I think it
will be clear when seeing the results of any
Vallelunga if there's a chance they may be a close
match to me at 37 or 67 markers. If so, I'll ask them
to upgrade.
I think this situation illustrates what Vince is
saying about the possibility that 12 markers may play
a useful role in determining relatedness.
Mike Maddi
This thread: