GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266728295


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject) - when is a MOORE not a MOORE?
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:58:15 -0500
References: <50909.1266702728@connpoint.net><6AA2184FE7774606A2F99D85F0BEE93F@HP><9EBC0BC2D15947108668C8BA6A382789@belinda>
In-Reply-To: <9EBC0BC2D15947108668C8BA6A382789@belinda>


Hello Belinda,

In order to render my opinion to Cornelia, I compiled this table of MOORE Group
2 results, where I highlighted #131835's differences in orange. I've just
boldfaced the three kit numbers in question, to make them easier to spot:
http://dgmweb.net/DNA/y-dna-projects/MOORE-Group2.shtml

I found #71529 to be modal for Group 2 and #123490 to be one off the modal, but
I don't see #131835 as being that close to either one, not in genealogical time.
By my reckoning, #131835 has a GD of 8 from #71529 and 7 from #123490, not 4 and
3. It's an open question, to me, whether he has a common ancestor with them in
genealogical time, despite the surname coincidence.

If his surname were rare, or even uncommon, that would tip the balance towards
the shared surname supporting a near common ancestor, but MOORE is the 9th most
common surname in the United States. We can expect it to have *many* origins
and, as an English surname, the majority of them can be expected to be R1b.

Forgive me, but I don't see his inclusion here as a slam dunk, and I don't see
the group as "compact." In my view, these are what I call "compact" groups,
that is, people related in genealogical time:

http://dgmweb.net/DNA/General/SignatureMarkers.shtml#data

http://dgmweb.net/DNA/Straub/StraubDNA-results-HgI1-AS5.shtml#data

http://dgmweb.net/DNA/Carrico/CarricoDNA-results-HgJ2a4b.shtml#data

If I have gone astray here, please explain to me how. I'm not trying to being
confrontational -- in fact, I really, really don't want to "start" anything here
because I'm much too busy right now, but I don't want to leave Cornelia in a
state of confusion. I'm not necessarily disputing the reality of Group 2, I
haven't looked into that question, just the inclusion of #131835 as a member of
it.

Diana

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Belinda Dettmann
> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:05 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject) - when is a MOORE not a MOORE?
>
> Hi Cornelia
>
> I've constructed a Fluxus Network diagram of relationships for Moores
> in Group 2 (for 37 markers) and I believe your husband is a bona fide
> Moore who belongs to this Group. I think the founding haplotype for
> this group is either 71529 or 123490 and your husband is 3 mutations
> away from 123490 and 4 away from 71529.
>
> Group 2 is quite a compact group - I'd love to know how FTDNA
> does the grouping - and I'm pretty sure he's in it. I've also had a look
> at a diagram for all R1b Moores with 37 markers. It's large and
> messy, but Group 2 comes up as a distinct group and well separated
> from other Moores.
>
> I'll send you a message offline so you can see the details of what
> I've done.
>
> Belinda
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
> > To: <>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 10:48 AM
> > Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject) - when is a MOORE not a MOORE?
> >
<snip>
> >
> > Having examined your husband's results, I suspect he either has an
> > NPE in his patrilineal line or he belongs to a rare MOORE family, of
> > which he's the only one so far tested.
<snip>


This thread: