GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265910351


From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Puzzled
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:45:51 EST



A couple years ago I created a few charts to illustrate how having a
healthy start ( lots of sons) in the early days of a line can affect today's
population of male descendents. Starting with an ancestor that lived in the
1600's we were able to determine how many sons lived to reproduce, out to
five generations for five different Davenport lines. I then projected those
trends out to 13 generations or roughly the present day. As expected, the
ancestor with the most sons (our Pamunkey line) also has the most descendents
in our DNA project. On the other extreme, in our Rev John line, who only had
one son, the descendents are hard to come by. You can see the charts here:
>http://davenportdna.com/lines.htm#Davenport_Line_Growth

The stats at the top of the page are outdated, but the "Davenport Line
Growth" is still valid.

Bill Davenport
>

------------
In a message dated 2/11/2010 5:40:50 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
writes:


If you are thinking of a family descended from a male 10 generations back
who left males down to recent generations, he may not have daughtered out,
it may just be that you are unaware of where his living male line
descendants currently are.

In my family, lots of recent branches have daughtered out, but the family
male line ancestor 10 generations back has many dozens, if not more, direct
male line males living today.





This thread: