Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268505071

From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Are the testing companies being guided to invest in thewrong things for genealogy?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:31:11 -0800
References: <FBB46A69C034477DB2E43F821688A7A7@PC>
In-Reply-To: <FBB46A69C034477DB2E43F821688A7A7@PC>

Comments, yes, the statement below is not true for all and may reflect a
somewhat narrow focus.

Y line research has been completed in my case. More Y-STRs will not tell me
anything useful (I recognize that others are in a very different boat).
I already have more letters and numbers in my haplogroup (L20) than any
other as far as I know. Until we have full genome testing routinely
available this line of research can be shelved until the $1000 genome is
here. Until then:

mtDNA testing will, as with Bill's well known Kelley sisters, tell me if
my direct line maternal ancestor Mary Bain born 1839 was a biological sister
to the other siblings in the family - seeing as she was born two years
before those identified as her parents in all sources of documentation were
married (in Scotland in 1841). I have a descendant of one of the children
born after 1841 lined up for testing.

Autosomal and X chromsome testing will answer questions and provide
information that cannot be found any other way.

1) Was Dorothy who married Henry Windecker circa 1760 Dorothy Pickert, as
the circumstantial evidence suggests? If so selected family members should
have about 0.78% etc. African ancestry. Five descendants are being tested
and others recruited.

2) Was Catharine who married Lt. John Young biologically Native American -
the genealogical record has multiple sources indicating that she was a Six
Nation Indian but there is "shadowy" evidence that she could have
been adopted into the tribes (perhaps she was an Indian captive). To date
11 members of the family have signed up for autosomal testing (a great great
grandson and those more distantly related), including three who are in the X
chromosome line back to Catharine (as low as three meioses removed).

3) Was the statement made at the funeral of CJY by her brother Ira that the
former was his "half sister" correct? Is the term "half sister" literally
true or is it an aunt adopted after the death of her mother? The statement
was overheard by her great grandaughter JK (still alive 2010) and recorded
in her diary in the 1940s. This is a tricky one but we have three of CJY's
descendants (including a grandson) to compare with 9 other family members -
two who are descendants of Ira's known full sister.

Some of us genetic genealogists are "Y'd out" and are looking to explore new
avenues and answer questions that were impervious to any type of probing
until very recently.

David K. Faux.

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Lancaster-Boon <
> wrote:

> HOWEVER, to come to the point, the fact remains that when genealogists ask
> me whether such testing can help them I generally say no, and that it is
> almost always better to spend your money on Y DNA testing: more STR
> markers,
> and even (increasingly) SNP testing.
> For now, Y DNA is the only type of testing which will consistently help a
> genealogist. There is a lot more we can do with Y DNA, and much of what we
> can do has been obvious now for years.
> Comments?
> Best Regards
> Andrew

This thread: