I just want to chime in to say that with these particular folks 12 marker results are not reliable for determining relatedness. For instance, the MD and SC (I'm the MD) are a somewhat close match with the Orange Co. Bradfords on 12 markers, but 25 marker results reveal a lot of genetic distance between us, and show that we are probably not descended from the same Bradford ancestor. On the other hand, I am a very close match even on 37 markers with the SC Bradford line. With WAMH R1b (that's the "variety" of haplotype held by the star group, as all members are a couple mutations away from it), 12 markers is just not good enough to determine a relationship. The haplotype is too common. On 8/22/06, Becky Mosely <beckymosely@comcast.net> wrote: > > Results for participant #66691 are posted at the FTDNA Bradford site. The > results indicate he is related to the Yancey Co., NC Bradfords. We don't > have a lineage... & would really appreciate receiving one. > > Again it is interesting to note that he joins the "English" star group, > which participant #24962 is the center of... It is interesting that not only > Yancey Co. Bradfords show kin (sometime before immigration), but also the > groups of Orange Co NC; MD & SC; Charles D. of SC; & Charles/Ohio... > > At the moment we have one more result in the pipeline... Many people have > enquired but few have actually signed up in recent days. Come on > Bradfords... this is a wonderful way to confirm or eliminate ancestral > trails... > > Results: > http://www.familytreedna.com/public/bradford > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BRADFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >