The results of a several more tests for the Davenport DNA Surname Project have arrived. We are trying to get DNA samples from all of the branches of the various Davenport lines around the world to see how we are related. For more information and to see the results go to >http://www.DavenportDNA.com< So far we have 98 participants with results in for 80. ---------------------- Since three of the results were Pamunkey related, I'll cover them first. Kit # 49734 has done a fair amount of research on his Davenport line, leading him to believe he is a Pamunkey. He traces his ancestry through Davis > Thomas (1688-1775) > James (1712-1780) > Bedford > etc... His DNA results agree with him. He matches the other Pamunkey Davenports 35 out of 37. His two mutations (differences) may be helpful to others in the future. Matching him exactly could indicate a connection to the Davis > Thomas > James branch. The next participant - # 48409 - inherited a paper genealogy from her grandfather that goes back to David Davenport (1795-1877) and his wife Dorothy. From David, the line next comes down to Thomas and then Walter. Recently 48409 discovered David could be a Pamunkey, so she had her father tested. Her father's Y-DNA matched the other Pamunkeys exactly 25/25. Doc has since confirmed they line goes as follows: Davis > Martin > Thomas > Martin > David. Participant # 52798 also tested as a Pamunkey, matching the others 25/25. His first known Davenport was John, born about 1821 in Kentucky. John married Melinda McCarty in Madison, Indiana. The line then goes to William and then Frank. This line has "intrigued" Doc, since it may be one of the missing branches he has been looking for. He is in contact with the participant, and hopefully they can fill us in what they discover. -------------------- This might be a good place to announce a new addition I have placed on the DavenportDNA website. For each of the tested lines, that have more than a couple participants, I have created a "Relationship Tree". This is an attempt to make it easier to visualize how each participant is related to the others in their shared family tree. I have also tagged the branches where we have discovered Y-DNA mutations. There are links to the trees on the Y-DNA Results page. Check it out. -------------------- As you may recall, in my last report, I mentioned that we had our first Altona Davenport - descendents of Abraham, born 1714 in England, coming to America after 1735. His branch started with Abraham > Anthony. Since his Y-DNA didn't match any other tested lines, we needed to verify the results. That's where #47538 comes in. His branch starts with Abraham > Abraham. The two branches split many generations ago, so if the two participants match, then we can be certain of Abraham's(1) "uniqueness". As it turns out - they match exactly 37/37. We now know that the Altona Davenports do not have a biological relationship to the other Davenport lines. -------------------- The next participant, # 48649 had limited information on his ancestry. He could go back to his grandfather Marion Davenport, born about 1875 in Illinois. Unfortunately, as does happen sometimes, his Y-DNA results did not match any other Davenport tested so far. However, there is good news. Testing has stimulated more research. We now know that Marion is descended from William and Comfort (Fisher) Davenport. William was born prior to 1748, probably in England. There are others researching this line, and I would encourage descendents to get tested so we can verify the results and perhaps track William's origins. ------------------- # 50899 belongs to the Thomas of Dorchester line. Thomas (abt 1615-1685) > John > John > John > etc.. John (1) and his many descendents settled in Stoughton (now Canton) and Milton Massachusetts. Once again, the Y-DNA agrees with him. He matches the Thomas line exactly 12/12. ------------------- In other news. We are still looking for descendents of Humphrey of Barbados (1625-abt 1680). Humphrey's Y-DNA is "unique" - much different than any Davenport tested thus far. When the results of any Davenport of unknown ancestry is even remotely similar to this group - we know he is a Humphrey. We currently have a couple of these "unknowns". They match the Humphrey group, but they don't know where they fit in. As a result, we have made a deliberate effort to upgrade our existing Humphrey participants, giving us the ability (we hope) to distinguish between the various branches. We also have someone willing to help pay for a test for a documented Humphrey descendent. Contact me if interested. We are especially interested in the Humphrey > Richard branch. About mid March, we and thousands of other surname projects, heard the news that our testing company has added another level of testing for our Y-DNA studies. They are offering 22 new markers, thereby increasing the total to 59. This is good news. It gives us more tools to work with. One of the most useful features of DNA testing is finding a mutation here or there. Mutations are neither good nor good, they are just minor changes. This mutation is then passed down to all future generations of Davenport males. Thus, if someone tested out to be a Pamunkey, a mutation might help place him into a particular branch. This will be especially useful for lines where few mutations have been recorded, like the Thomas of Dorchester group. We now have more "mutation opportunities". Another announcement, which most will welcome, is a price drop for the DNA tests. You can find more information in the "About the Project" link at >http://www.DavenportDNA.com ------------------ This and all previous reports can be seen on the News page at >http://www.DavenportDNA.com If anyone would like to join the DNA project or has any questions please contact me. Bill Davenport Surname DNA Project Administrator >wbdave@aol.com