Yep, my Armstrong DNA matches some people named Renshaw. We could have been Renshaws who liked the name Armstrong, We could have been adopted into an Armstrong family, we could have had a laddie smitten by a lassie named Armstrong--or the other way around, Renshaw. Maybe we lived next door to Renshaws, maybe we were Armstrongs in trouble with the law (I know---impossible) who hid out with the Renshaws. If I weren't so lazy, I'd write a book about this. I have in my Avery family, one son who left town hurriedly (something about a young lady) and he changed his name to Andrews. If my cousin hadn't been told this by an old aunt he never would have known-----but, he still is now an Andrews, as was his father and grandfather. He says it's a good name and I agree. Marilynn IBSSG ----- Original Message ----- From: Dennis L Armstrong To: Marilynn Masten Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 7:16 PM Subject: Re: Armstrong and Renshaw Hi: I read what David Strong had sent and the other messages attached to it and I HAVEN'T A CLUE, what they are talking about! I will have to go back over what was sent to se if I can make some sense of it! Hope all is well with you. Best Regards Dennis Armstrong ----- Original Message ----- From: Marilynn Masten To: Dennis L Armstrong Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:10 PM Subject: Fw: Armstrong and Renshaw If you know what they are talking about, you're a better man than I am, Dennis. Marilynn IBSSG ----- Original Message ----- From: David B. Strong To: Marilynn Masten ; Dennis Armstrong Cc: Eleanor Gordon (Co-admin Renshaw) Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:56 AM Subject: Fw: Armstrong and Renshaw Hello Marilynn and Dennis... Yesterday I had an interesting exchange of messages with Eleanor Gordon, Co-Admin of the Renshaw project. I thought you should be made aware of the discussion, to make of it what you will. I learned a bit about "RecLOH", or "Recombinational Loss of Heterozygosity"; although I am not sure I understand the science of it very well. Be sure to take a look at the website cited by Eleanor, and then follow the links found in that website... there are fuller explanations there. I am not sure that even given allowance for Eleanor's cousin's "RecLOH", there is a real chance of a match between Dennis and her cousin(s). I suspect we may really be dealing with a case of mutational drift from further apart to a closer result... But, you can and should have the opportunity to evaluate that possibility as well as the suggestion made by Eleanor. Regards Dave Strong Co-Admin, Armstrong DNA Project PS to Eleanor... Marilynn is also an administrator, of the Gardner DNA Project, and Dennis her cousin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:58 PM Subject: RecLOH I can't exactly explain it, but I can tell you what it stands for and what it does. It stands for "Recombinational Loss of Heterozygosity". (Aren't you sorry you asked?!) See Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RecLOH .. What it does in simple terms is to duplicate one of the values in a two-part marker instead of having two different values. So, looking at TDR1, instead of the 15, 16, 16, 16 at #464 a-d which his cousins have, Ted has all 16's. Then at #CDY a-b, instead of showing 36-41 or 36-42 like his cousins, Ted tested 36-36. This is a 6-step change and would be huge if counted that way. Since it is due to a RecLOH event, we can either not count it at all or count it as one mutation. Note that all the cousins in the blue block on the Renshaw website already have the doubling at #459 a-b, which is a third spot where doubling occurs.. Does this give you some understanding of the situation? Eleanor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: David B. Strong To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:25 PM Subject: Re: Armstrong and Renshaw Hi Eleanor... Thanks for your message. I have to admit, however, that I am confused by the term "RecLOH". Can you explain this one for me? Thanks, Dave Strong ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 3:55 PM Subject: Armstrong and Renshaw Hi, David I am the co-admin for the Renshaw Y-DNA project. I noted with interest on your webpage http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~donegalstrongs/armstrong.htm the comparison of an Armstrong who does not match any other Armstrongs with a Renshaw from my project -- with TDR1, one of my cousins. You mentioned that the two men matched 23/25 but the match fell apart at 37 markers. This is because Ted had a RecLOH event somewhere along the line in his branch which caused doubling of his markers. If you will go to our Renshaw website http://www.renshawdna.com/Charts.htm and look at the last three men in the top blue block, you will see that TDR1 has the odd value at 464a and at CDYb. The two men below him in the blue block, also my cousins, have the "real" value for our branch of the family tree. Note that WAR now has 67 markers, so if your Armstrong is a close match he may want to go to 67 markers as well. With the R1b folk, more is definitely better. Eleanor Gordon Renshaw Y-DNA Project Co-Administrator
You know, members of the Graham family in the "old country" got in trouble with the royal authorities. (I think I have this right but if not, somebody will correct me.) Some changed their name to "Maharg" and others took the colors of the tartan for their names...Black, White, Green...I believe this it true. Marilyn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marilynn Masten" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 1:08 PM Subject: Re: [ARMSTRONG] Armstrong and Renshaw > Yep, my Armstrong DNA matches some people named Renshaw. We could have > been Renshaws who liked the name Armstrong, We could have been adopted > into an Armstrong family, we could have had a laddie smitten by a lassie > named Armstrong--or the other way around, Renshaw. Maybe we lived next > door to Renshaws, maybe we were Armstrongs in trouble with the law (I > know---impossible) who hid out with the Renshaws. If I weren't so lazy, > I'd write a book about this. > > I have in my Avery family, one son who left town hurriedly (something > about a young lady) and he changed his name to Andrews. If my cousin > hadn't been told this by an old aunt he never would have known-----but, he > still is now an Andrews, as was his father and grandfather. He says it's a > good name and I agree. > > > Marilynn > IBSSG > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dennis L Armstrong > To: Marilynn Masten > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 7:16 PM > Subject: Re: Armstrong and Renshaw > > > Hi: I read what David Strong had sent and the other messages attached to > it and I HAVEN'T A CLUE, what they are talking about! > I will have to go back over what was sent to se if I can make some sense > of it! > Hope all is well with you. > Best Regards > > Dennis Armstrong > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Marilynn Masten > To: Dennis L Armstrong > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:10 PM > Subject: Fw: Armstrong and Renshaw > > > If you know what they are talking about, you're a better man than I am, > Dennis. > Marilynn > IBSSG > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David B. Strong > To: Marilynn Masten ; Dennis Armstrong > Cc: Eleanor Gordon (Co-admin Renshaw) > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:56 AM > Subject: Fw: Armstrong and Renshaw > > > Hello Marilynn and Dennis... > > Yesterday I had an interesting exchange of messages with Eleanor > Gordon, Co-Admin of the Renshaw project. I thought you should be made > aware of the discussion, to make of it what you will. I learned a bit > about "RecLOH", or "Recombinational Loss of Heterozygosity"; although I am > not sure I understand the science of it very well. Be sure to take a > look at the website cited by Eleanor, and then follow the links found in > that website... there are fuller explanations there. > > I am not sure that even given allowance for Eleanor's cousin's > "RecLOH", there is a real chance of a match between Dennis and her > cousin(s). I suspect we may really be dealing with a case of mutational > drift from further apart to a closer result... But, you can and should > have the opportunity to evaluate that possibility as well as the > suggestion made by Eleanor. > > Regards > Dave Strong > Co-Admin, Armstrong DNA Project > PS to Eleanor... Marilynn is also an administrator, of the Gardner DNA > Project, and Dennis her cousin. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:58 PM > Subject: RecLOH > > > > I can't exactly explain it, but I can tell you what it stands for and > what it does. It stands for "Recombinational Loss of Heterozygosity". > (Aren't you sorry you asked?!) See Wikipedia at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RecLOH .. What it does in simple terms is > to duplicate one of the values in a two-part marker instead of having two > different values. So, looking at TDR1, instead of the 15, 16, 16, 16 at > #464 a-d which his cousins have, Ted has all 16's. Then at #CDY a-b, > instead of showing 36-41 or 36-42 like his cousins, Ted tested 36-36. > This is a 6-step change and would be huge if counted that way. Since it > is due to a RecLOH event, we can either not count it at all or count it as > one mutation. > > Note that all the cousins in the blue block on the Renshaw website > already have the doubling at #459 a-b, which is a third spot where > doubling occurs.. > > Does this give you some understanding of the situation? > > Eleanor > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David B. Strong > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:25 PM > Subject: Re: Armstrong and Renshaw > > > Hi Eleanor... > Thanks for your message. I have to admit, however, that I am confused > by the term "RecLOH". Can you explain this one for me? Thanks, > Dave Strong > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 3:55 PM > Subject: Armstrong and Renshaw > > > Hi, David > > I am the co-admin for the Renshaw Y-DNA project. I noted with interest > on your webpage > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~donegalstrongs/armstrong.htm > the comparison of an Armstrong who does not match any other Armstrongs > with a Renshaw from my project -- with TDR1, one of my cousins. > > You mentioned that the two men matched 23/25 but the match fell apart > at 37 markers. This is because Ted had a RecLOH event somewhere along the > line in his branch which caused doubling of his markers. If you will go > to our Renshaw website http://www.renshawdna.com/Charts.htm and look at > the last three men in the top blue block, you will see that TDR1 has the > odd value at 464a and at CDYb. The two men below him in the blue block, > also my cousins, have the "real" value for our branch of the family tree. > Note that WAR now has 67 markers, so if your Armstrong is a close match he > may want to go to 67 markers as well. With the R1b folk, more is > definitely better. > > Eleanor Gordon > Renshaw Y-DNA Project Co-Administrator > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message
A Marilyn can come up with some good info sometimes. Saying that her Clan took the Tartan names probably explains why my Lamonts have Browns, Blacks, Whites---no greens. Probably hear the warning about Spinach and Lettuce. Marilynn IBSSG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marilyn Otterson" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 7:03 PM Subject: Re: [ARMSTRONG] Armstrong and Renshaw > You know, members of the Graham family in the "old country" got in trouble > with the royal authorities. (I think I have this right but if not, > somebody > will correct me.) Some changed their name to "Maharg" and others took the > colors of the tartan for their names...Black, White, Green...I believe > this > it true. > > Marilyn > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marilynn Masten" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 1:08 PM > Subject: Re: [ARMSTRONG] Armstrong and Renshaw > > >> Yep, my Armstrong DNA matches some people named Renshaw. We could have >> been Renshaws who liked the name Armstrong, We could have been adopted >> into an Armstrong family, we could have had a laddie smitten by a lassie >> named Armstrong--or the other way around, Renshaw. Maybe we lived next >> door to Renshaws, maybe we were Armstrongs in trouble with the law (I >> know---impossible) who hid out with the Renshaws. If I weren't so lazy, >> I'd write a book about this. >> >> I have in my Avery family, one son who left town hurriedly (something >> about a young lady) and he changed his name to Andrews. If my cousin >> hadn't been told this by an old aunt he never would have known-----but, >> he >> still is now an Andrews, as was his father and grandfather. He says it's >> a >> good name and I agree. >> >> >> Marilynn >> IBSSG >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Dennis L Armstrong >> To: Marilynn Masten >> Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 7:16 PM >> Subject: Re: Armstrong and Renshaw >> >> >> Hi: I read what David Strong had sent and the other messages attached >> to >> it and I HAVEN'T A CLUE, what they are talking about! >> I will have to go back over what was sent to se if I can make some sense >> of it! >> Hope all is well with you. >> Best Regards >> >> Dennis Armstrong >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Marilynn Masten >> To: Dennis L Armstrong >> Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:10 PM >> Subject: Fw: Armstrong and Renshaw >> >> >> If you know what they are talking about, you're a better man than I >> am, >> Dennis. >> Marilynn >> IBSSG >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: David B. Strong >> To: Marilynn Masten ; Dennis Armstrong >> Cc: Eleanor Gordon (Co-admin Renshaw) >> Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:56 AM >> Subject: Fw: Armstrong and Renshaw >> >> >> Hello Marilynn and Dennis... >> >> Yesterday I had an interesting exchange of messages with Eleanor >> Gordon, Co-Admin of the Renshaw project. I thought you should be made >> aware of the discussion, to make of it what you will. I learned a bit >> about "RecLOH", or "Recombinational Loss of Heterozygosity"; although I >> am >> not sure I understand the science of it very well. Be sure to take a >> look at the website cited by Eleanor, and then follow the links found in >> that website... there are fuller explanations there. >> >> I am not sure that even given allowance for Eleanor's cousin's >> "RecLOH", there is a real chance of a match between Dennis and her >> cousin(s). I suspect we may really be dealing with a case of mutational >> drift from further apart to a closer result... But, you can and should >> have the opportunity to evaluate that possibility as well as the >> suggestion made by Eleanor. >> >> Regards >> Dave Strong >> Co-Admin, Armstrong DNA Project >> PS to Eleanor... Marilynn is also an administrator, of the Gardner >> DNA >> Project, and Dennis her cousin. >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:58 PM >> Subject: RecLOH >> >> >> >> I can't exactly explain it, but I can tell you what it stands for and >> what it does. It stands for "Recombinational Loss of Heterozygosity". >> (Aren't you sorry you asked?!) See Wikipedia at >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RecLOH .. What it does in simple terms is >> to duplicate one of the values in a two-part marker instead of having two >> different values. So, looking at TDR1, instead of the 15, 16, 16, 16 at >> #464 a-d which his cousins have, Ted has all 16's. Then at #CDY a-b, >> instead of showing 36-41 or 36-42 like his cousins, Ted tested 36-36. >> This is a 6-step change and would be huge if counted that way. Since it >> is due to a RecLOH event, we can either not count it at all or count it >> as >> one mutation. >> >> Note that all the cousins in the blue block on the Renshaw website >> already have the doubling at #459 a-b, which is a third spot where >> doubling occurs.. >> >> Does this give you some understanding of the situation? >> >> Eleanor >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: David B. Strong >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:25 PM >> Subject: Re: Armstrong and Renshaw >> >> >> Hi Eleanor... >> Thanks for your message. I have to admit, however, that I am confused >> by the term "RecLOH". Can you explain this one for me? Thanks, >> Dave Strong >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 3:55 PM >> Subject: Armstrong and Renshaw >> >> >> Hi, David >> >> I am the co-admin for the Renshaw Y-DNA project. I noted with >> interest >> on your webpage >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~donegalstrongs/armstrong.htm >> the comparison of an Armstrong who does not match any other Armstrongs >> with a Renshaw from my project -- with TDR1, one of my cousins. >> >> You mentioned that the two men matched 23/25 but the match fell apart >> at 37 markers. This is because Ted had a RecLOH event somewhere along >> the >> line in his branch which caused doubling of his markers. If you will go >> to our Renshaw website http://www.renshawdna.com/Charts.htm and look >> at >> the last three men in the top blue block, you will see that TDR1 has the >> odd value at 464a and at CDYb. The two men below him in the blue block, >> also my cousins, have the "real" value for our branch of the family tree. >> Note that WAR now has 67 markers, so if your Armstrong is a close match >> he >> may want to go to 67 markers as well. With the R1b folk, more is >> definitely better. >> >> Eleanor Gordon >> Renshaw Y-DNA Project Co-Administrator >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] 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 > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >