GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1269750280


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] 23andme cousin results
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:28:53 -0700
References: <CCC182DA-E426-430A-BA37-355BD4D5E8AD@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <CCC182DA-E426-430A-BA37-355BD4D5E8AD@earthlink.net>


John,

The work I conducted was a private study focusing on the descendants of the
son (Adam Young) of a 1709 Palatine immigrant, and this three sons, Lt.
John, Sgt. Daniel who served in Loyalist regiments in the War of the
American Revolution. Things do get complicated due to the rather extreme
tendency of marrying kin of various degrees. My ancestor had two first
cousins as parents and in the previous generation the father's mother was a
first cousin once removed to her husband. My ancestor's brother married a
woman who was a descendant of Adam's brother whose son came to Canada long
after the Revolution but most of his children married into the Canadian
Youngs. This makes calculating cousinship and predicting amount of sharing
something of a nightmare. Perhaps you can guess at the amount of joking
around this "demographic reality" caused in the family.

We have 11 participants to date, and various hypotheses have been tested and
answers are available. The point is if I waited for cousins to magically
appear, it would be my great grandchildren who would be reaping the benefits
and obtaining answers - maybe.

In my experience most (if not all) of my unknown matches that surface on
23andMe are false positives in the sense that they are not relatives within
a close genealogical time frame (5th cousins) and if hundreds of years back
say New Jersey in the 1600s - it may still be more identical by state or
coincidence. In other words we may match but our ancestors in common are
not represented in our genome - they long dropped off the family tree (see
earlier postings by John Chandler).

I have no plans to publish in the sense of placing the results in a peer
reviewed article. I intend, actually within the next few days, to put the
Excel chart on my personal website and the Young Family website associated
with that site. At the Young Family Reunion in Ontario this July I will
present the results and continue my efforts to bring more kin into the DNA
fold.

In summary this exercise has been wildly successful. There is something
almost "magical" seeing a segment of DNA on an autosome shared with someone
selected because they are a known cousin and so what I am looking at came,
without a doubt, from say Lt. John Young (I also have some of the artifacts
he carried in the Revolution - there is a parallel - but more personal).

David K. Faux.

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 3:27 PM, John Carr <>wrote:

> David,
>
> Are you referring to a published study or your own family study below?
>
> Were you a participant in the 'known cousins' study 23andme is conducting?
> With all the testing that you have done with known cousins, your results
> would seem relevant to the 23andme study. If everyone who tested believed
> known cousins pointed this out to 23andme and 23andme compiles these into a
> study, it would probably do a lot to add confidence or discredit the family
> finder results. So far, I have not had anyone from Family Finder that can
> show a shared lineage to my own, despite numerous potential matches at very
> low fractional percentage match levels. Many people do not even respond to
> requests for contact. I have a known cousin whose test sample should be
> available for the lab soon, I am excited to see the level of match between
> us. My paternal great grand 'father and mother' are his paternal great
> great grand 'father and mother'.
>
> FTDNA should provide results from a similar study of known cousins if they
> want to validate their new test.
>
> John Carr
>
>


This thread: