GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-01 > 1294170338


From: Paul Wright <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Recommendations for DNA testing
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:45:38 -0600
References: <5F3B12A4D09E4D70AF3C541871E0610D@NEWGAMES><001e01cbaabb$56d99f20$048cdd60$@dgmweb.net><DD790F8C0FD347BEBAF1382ABD84740F@JohnPC><F6879FDA8B33462599E76242F7F35E76@JimPC>
In-Reply-To: <F6879FDA8B33462599E76242F7F35E76@JimPC>


@Jim White. Your conclusions look reasonable. My only question would
be whether your Whitmore/Whitemore/Wetmore matches make up ALL of your close
Y-37 & Y-67 matches or whether any other surnames are represented which
might indicate NPEs either in your line or those whom appear as matches. If
other surnames are represented and Whitmore/Whitemore/Wetmore is a
geographically based surname, there would remain the possibility of your
direct line having some other surname prior to becoming a point of reference
name when your direct ancestor moved to another location (i.e. direct
paternal line could easily have derived from a "from Whitemore/Whitmore"
name and truncated to White, but could have been part of the another surname
(perhaps patronymic, occupational, or descriptive) before leaving his
original home and one of the other surnames sharing a more recent common
ancestor than those with the Whitemore/Whitemore/Wetmore surname today.

I have had similar results in terms of smaller test marker matches (Y12,
Y25) being of little or no use, but my Y37 & Y67 matches being very useful,
but with non-surname matches which later helped identifying an NPE in my
direct paternal line.

Use of the SMGF, ancestry.com, ysearch, and various surname project websites
have been helpful in identifying other matches that were not available with
the testing company's match results which may not include results from other
testing companies or for individuals who may have limited their match
visibility to surname projects they are enrolled in.





On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Jim White <> wrote:

> Hi:
>
> Am I missing something here ?
>
> My matches at FTDNA are as follows:
>
> a) 12-Exact: 745 Matches (none of which show up in my White Surname
> Group
>
> b) 12-1 : 70 Matches
>
> 3) 25-Exact: 2 Matches
>
> 4) 25-1 27 Matches
>
> 5) 25-2 241 Matches
>
> 6) 37-Exact: 0 Matches
>
> 7) 37-1 0 Matches
>
> 8) 37-2 2 Matches
>
> 9) 37-3 4 Matches
>
> 10) 37-4 7 Matches
>
> 11) 67-2 1 Match
>
> 12) 67-3 1 Match
>
> 13) 67-4 2 Matches
>
> 14) 67-6 7 Matches
>
> 15) 67-7 2 Matches
>
> Of all the above nearly "1200" Matches, only 1 is a White at 12, but falls
> off the map on all other markers.
>
> No close White matches in the 270 25 marker matches.
>
> In the 37 & 67 Marker matches, there are several Whitmore and Wetmore close
> matches, but again, there is no Whites.
>
> I have concluded from the above:
>
> 1) My White line probably originated as Whitmore/Whitemore/Wetmore.
> (possibly "more Whites", at some point in history).
>
> 2) The 12 Exact matches are virtually useless, as there are very few
> surnames even similar to White.
>
> 3) Ditto for the 25 Marker matches.
>
> 4) The 37 close matches, and the 67 close matches are the only ones worth
> considering. All others do not show anything of significance.
>
> Have I misinterpreted the above results ?
>
> Jim White
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alister John Marsh
> Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2011 5:39 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Recommendations for DNA testing
>
> Diana,
>
> You said.
> >>>>>>>
> > A 12-marker test can easily debunk a connection -- and a low
> > correspondence at
> > 12 markers often means you are looking at people in different
> haplogroups.
> > But
> > 12 markers can also be enough to support a match, though I'll grant that
> > is
> > usually not the case. It depends how rare the haplotype and surname are.
> <<<<<<<
>
> I have always been in support of people testing only 12 markers if that is
> all they can afford initially. And I still am. I assumed that "in most
> cases" for same surname matches 12 markers matching exactly would be
> telling
> something useful.
>
> Recently I found two persons of the same surname from the same general area
> who were 12/12, and I though I had found an important connection. However,
> the two were as different as chalk and cheese when later tested at 67
> markers. The two did not have evidence of paper trail connections, but a
> connection would have seemed possible based on geography and moderately
> uncommon surname. I did suspect a testing error I was so surprised
> initially.
>
> So even with a 12/12 match for the same surname in the same area, and a
> moderately distinctive haplotype, there is always that 5% or 1% chance that
> something unexpected will come up.
>
> I would not cross the road if I thought there was a 1% chance I would not
> make it to the other side alive. People just have to make their own
> decision on whether they consider a 95% or 99% probability of relationship
> is acceptable to them. Testing 67 or over 100 markers certainly increases
> the confidence level.
>
> John.
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>

This thread: