Thanks very much, as always, Tim, for your help. Barton On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Tim Janzen wrote: > Dear Barton, > Multi-step mutations can occur. That could account for the move from > 12 to > 9. There could have also been a series of single-step mutations or a > single-step mutation as well as a two-step mutation. Also consider > the > possibility of lab error. Testing out to 67 markers can sometimes be > helpful in situations like this. Testing a paternal first or 2nd > cousin of > Curtis' with a 37-marker test could also help pinpoint where the > mutations > in Curtis' line occurred. However, it would appear that the three > Bennetts > share a common ancestor who lived within the past 500 to 600 years or > so. > You might want to consider doing an autosomal test on Ken, Jon and > Curtis to > see if they share any autosomal segments and also consider testing > some of > their close relatives to see if any of those close relatives share any > autosomal segments with Ken, Jon or Curtis. > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen >