We thought we would ask again if any Kincaid lister's have found any interesting information on Joseph Kincaid who became Chief of one district in OK in 1836 according to the below blurb. Same for his alleged brother Robert Kincaid who is also mentioned. Thanks! Don W. On August 24, 1835, eight Indian tribes made a treaty of peace at Fort Holmes among themselves and Mosholetvbbi signed said treaty as the chief of Mosholetvbbi District, and Nitvkechi signed it as the chief of Pushmataha District. This treaty was concluded May 19, 1836. That is the last record of Mosholetvbbi signing any paper as chief. It is said that he died in 1836. No one knows where he is buried. Page 12 Joseph Kincaid was selected to fill out the unexpired term of Mosholetvbbi. It is not known where Joseph Kincaid lived in Indian Territory after he migrated here, but he had a brother named Robert Kincaid who was a student at Choctaw Academy, Kentucky, who migrated to Indian Territory, and located about three miles west of what is now the town of Shady Point, Oklahoma. Last February, 1934, an old log house said to have been built by Robert Kincaid, which had been occupied by his relatives, was burned down. I passed by where it had stood just after it had burned. I assume then that Joseph Kincaid probably lived in that vicinity.

Peter, Do you have an opinion about the Kincaid families of Ardstraw in County Tyrone---which group of the following two Kincaid families did they descend from? Peter wrote in Dec., 2002: Like any other area that people emigrated to you will get a >mix of Kincaids of different lines. In Ireland there does not >appear to have been many Kincaid lines and the locale they >are from is key. In terms of connections back to Scotland >I believe a few can and will be identified. There seems to >be two lines in County Tyrone. The first likely is the oldest >and I believe stems from Andrew and/or John Kincaid, sons of >James Kincaid of that Ilk (m. Christian Leslie). My thoughts >are that their decendants are in the area Donagheady Parish >(which lies on the border with County Derry and Donegal). http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/KINCAID/2002-12/1040339855 Donagheady 1664 Kinkead John Grange p. 12 of Hearth Money Rolls Hearth money rolls In the 1660s the government introduced a tax on hearths as a means of raising revenue. The returns, arranged by parish and usually with townland locations, list the names of all householders paying this tax survive for half the counties in Ireland with coverage most complete in Ulster. The hearth money rolls cannot be taken as a complete record of every household in the areas covered. There seems to have been considerable evasion, while for many houses of a less permanent nature occupied by Irish families no hearth tax was paid. The original hearth money rolls were destroyed in Dublin in 1922, but copies, in many cases typescript versions, had been made of much of them prior to this. For the parish of Donagheady there are two surviving hearth money rolls, one undated, but reckoned to date from c.1664 and the other from 1666. For the parish of Leckpatrick there is only a hearth money roll from 1666. http://www.breadyancestry.com/index.php?id=leckpatrick GRIFFITHS VALUATION DONAGHEDY Name and Lessor Creaghan Gleber Hon and Rev Douglas Gordon F/H Parochial School House Andrew Ferguson Hon and Rev Dougas Gordon David Kincaid Andrew Ferguson John Cooke " " James Baird Hon and Rev Dougas Gordon Moses Tait Hon and Rev Dougas Gordon William Cunningham Moses Tait George Ellis Hon and Rev Dougas Gordon Robert Kays George Ellis John Highland Hon and Rev Dougas Gordon http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/CoTyroneIreland/2001-10/1002486205 No dates were given for the David Kincaid in the Donaghedy Griffiths Valuation above. >Then there is the line the Kinkeads of Baron's Court (ie. >Rev. Joseph Kinkead). Their paper trail goes back to the >late 1600s and the tradition of one branch holds that they >descend from the Kincaids of Auchreoch in Scotland. A >lot of the Virginia Kincaids seem to stem from this family >according to DNA. Barbara Van Hout

Thank you Don for pointing this out. I missed noting that 130629 does have a mutation the others in A-2b do not have. It is a 17 at marker 25 (464d). This is a rapidly mutating site. Until someone else in the subset shows up with it, it does not affect the possibility of ancestry. Sue Liedtke

All of the ordered 1-37 marker test results for 130629 have been returned. He matches the profile for Group A-2b exactly and he has been placed in that subset. 130629 is vetted to Thomas McDowell Kincade of Clay Co. Indiana. Thomas was born 1811 in KY married Martha McNabb. It is suspected that he is the grandson of either Andrew or Archibald who married the Townsley sisters. The DNA bolsters that speculation as he exactly matches 1263 who believes descent from Andrew/Martha Townsley. Sue Liedtke ----- Original Message ----- From: <lewisjo@junct.com> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 6:23 AM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Will of Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana >I found on Ancestry.com, a 1880 Census, Hamilton County Indiana, Fallcreek > twn, an Isaac Humbles hh age 62, b abt 1818, Mary J, wife age 48, and > their children. This could not be the father of Elizabeth who married > Mathew Kincade. Elizabeth was born abt 1813, it could be her brother, > cousin, etc. > > I did find a Land Patent dated Aug. 10, 1837 out of Indianapolis Office, > for the county of Hancock, for a Francis Kincade. ( 40 acres) > > Thank you Barbara for the info, it gives me another direction to start > looking, > Kelly Kincade-Lewis > > > > >> Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana appears to have been the father >> of the Elizabeth Humbles who married Matthew Kincaid. Matthew was >> probably the son of Francis Kincaid/Hannah Viney and grandson of Thomas >> Kincaid/Hannah Tincher. >> >> #480 HUMBLES, Isaac. Will dated 12 Jan 1881; proved 22 Jan 1881. >> Legatees: >> wife Mary Jane HUMBLES and her minor children, names not specified; daus. >> Emma, Francis Abigal and Nellie Humbles; children Joannah/Joan Layton, >> Mary Jane Castetter, Sarah Jane Heady, Elizabeth Kincade, Alice Ledman, >> Floretta Ledman, Vinton Edgar/Edward HUMBLES, William Franklin Humbles; >> Arminta Kincade. Also mentions: John and Elizabeth Humbles; Isaac Wood; >> Belinda Wood; David C. Thompson. No exec named. Wit: William H. Harrison, >> Thomas Clawson. >> Will Record E., pp. 249-253. >> http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.indiana.counties.hamilton/2975/mb.ashx >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >> >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Does this James Woodburn Kinkade have brothers? ----- Original Message ----- From: Margie von Marenholtz<mailto:dieckhorst@q.com> To: kincaid@rootsweb.com<mailto:kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 10:25 AM Subject: [KINCAID] James Woodburn Kinkade/Kinkaid's 7 Sons James Woodburn Kinkade had 7 sons and 1 daughter with first wife Margaret Kuhns. He had 4 daughters with second wife Lydia Dick. His surname was changed to Kinkaid during his marriage to Lydia. All of his children from his first marriage maintained the Kinkade spelling except son James, who used Kincaid, which is what his descendants all carry. His gravestone has Kinkaid. 1841 - Thomas (Philip Thomas) Kinkade, PA>IL>MO (Civil War, 78 IL Inf), 3 sons 1843 - David Kinkade, PA>IL>CA>WA (Civil War, 78 IL Inf), 2 sons 1845 - Samuel Kinkade, PA>IL (Civil War, 118 IL Inf), 4 sons 1847 - John Kinkade, PA>IL>PA/NE? mystery after 1870, possibly 3 sons (not confirmed) 1849 - James Kincaid, PA>IL>CA>WA, 3 sons 1851 - William Kinkade, PA>IL>IA, 4 sons 1854 - Thompson Richison Kinkade PA, died at ten months. To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls> ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com<mailto:KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

KINCAID, Marvin 81, of Sun City, Arizona, formerly of Upper Arlington. Born April 12, 1927 in Trotwood, Ohio. Died October 9, 2008 at Hospice of the Valley, Surprise, Az.. Retired from Vorys Brothers, Inc. after a 37 year career. Preceded in death by wife Marjorie Kincaid, his parents and brother, James M. Kincaid. Survived by sons James of Atascadero, CA, Donald of Albany, OH and Steven (Jennifer) Kincaid of Coquille, OR; grandchildren, Russell, Olivia and Jack Kincaid; sister, Lois Noland of Eaton, OH, several nieces and nephews and dear friend Jeanne Marcus of Sun City West, AZ. A memorial service will be held 1:00 pm Saturday, November 15, 2008 at First Community Church, 1320 Cambridge Blvd., Columbus, OH with James Long officiating. The family will receive friends following the service at church. In lieu of flowers memorial contributions may be made to Hospice of the Valley, 14066 W. Waddell Rd. Surprise, AZ 85379 Dayton Daily News, November 9, 2008 _http://www.legacy.com/Dayton/Obituaries.asp?Page=Lifestory&PersonId=119894529 _ (http://www.legacy.com/Dayton/Obituaries.asp?Page=Lifestory&PersonId=119894529)

Knoxville News Sentinel http://www.legacy.com/KnoxNews/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonID=11982796 2 A photo is in the obit. Alan L. Kincaid KINCAID, ALAN L. - age 72 he was born in Lebanon, Indiana and retired to Kingston, Tennessee in 1997 passed away Wednesday November 5, 2008 at the Methodist Medical Center. He was an active communicant of St. Andrews Episcopal Church, he served on the Vestry, and was the Senior Warden of the Vestry, he was a team leader of the churches Relay for Life Team. He was the founder and president of the Lebanon High School Sports Booster Club, active Rotarian holding several offices including president, he enjoyed working with his hands, golfing, boating, a big sports fan and loved the beach. He was a great father active in his children and grandchildren's lives. Preceded in death by his parents Vivian and Jewell Kincaid and grandson K.C. Kays. Survivors include: wife Judy Bartley Kincaid of Kingston, Tennessee; sons Craig Kincaid and wife Dianna of Lebanon, Indiana, Todd Kincaid of Mooresville, Indiana; daughters Cheri Goodwin and husband John of Lebanon, Indiana, Rene Wynkoop and husband Mike of Thorntown, Indiana, Amy Hruskoci and husband Rob of McCordsville, Indiana; 11 grandchildren. The family will receive friends from 1 until 3 pm Saturday November 8, 2008 at the St. Andrews Episcopal Church with a memorial service to follow at 3 pm with Father Joseph Pinner officiating. In lieu of flowers the family suggest memorial donations to St. Andrews Episcopal Church 190 Circle Drive West Hills Harriman, TN. 37748. Kyker Funeral Home of Kingston in charge of arrangements. www.kykerfuneralhome.com

I did not say that Group A were of Frisian origin. I have been on record as very opposed to this label. Group A Kincaids belong to a haplogroup pattern that has been identified and labeled Frisian by one Ken Nordtvedt, in honour of his Frisian mother, because it is found in greater frequency in the Netherlands. It is also found in greater frequency in parts of Germany and in southwest England. Just because a person has given something a label which has caught on does not make it accurate. I personally think the deep origins of our haplogroup have a greater probability of being in the Doggerland plain (the Baltic sea before it flooded). Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Kincaid To: kincaid@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:52 PM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question Peter once said that he thought members of Group A were of Frisian origen based on the YDNA patterns. I was wondering if any members of Group A had that confirmed with the SNP deep clade tests I listed in my email that indicate Frisian ancestors. Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Don W. Kincaid < donwkincaid1@frontiernet.net> wrote: > Group A # 4073's confirmed haplogroup is R1b1b2 which is identical to yours > at this point. Most of those in Group A have the same predicted haplogroup > that I have looked at. As time goes on the dna scientists will likely find a > way to differentiate between Group A & C haplogroups. I see Whalen's Cheat > Sheet states that R1b1b2 covers a very large group of Europeans. Thanks for > providing the link to Whalen. Don W. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Larry Kincaid > To: kincaid@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:26 AM > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > Hi Everyone, > This is a great thread to add questions about SNP-DNA DEEP CLADE > CLASSIFICATION. A number of us have paid to have these extra tests to > help > us determine more narrowly defined Haplogroups. Since I just received > results from some of the new tests, I share them and then ask what > everyone > else has learned about these so far. > > I'm in Kincaid Group C-2, so presumably the other members of this group > would get similar results and they should differ substantially from Group > A > members. > Here's my test results so far, which can get me only as far as > classification into Haplogroup R1b1b2: > > > Positive Outcomes: M173+ M207+ M269+ M343+ P25+ > > Negative Outcomes: M126- M153- M160- M18- M222- M37- M65- M73- > P66- SRY2627- > > Latest Negative Outcomes: P107- U106- U152- U198- > > Family tree has a nice flow chart to show where everyone's haplogroups > are. There's information about this under "Whalen's Cheat Sheet" at: > > > http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/o/d/a/Donald-K-Odair/FILE/0056page.html > > > > As far as I can make out so far, Group C-2 members can only be identified > as > having Pictian descent in Scotland with connections to northern Ireland > (but > same group). The last four tests were a waste of money for me. All were > negative. Positive outcomes on U106 would supposedly have identified > "Frisian" roots; same for a positive outcome on > > > > *U106* or *S21*--R1b1c9--R1b1b2g--R1b1b2a1 - R1bSTR22Frisian –originally > known as 'Frisian' Invader marker, new research suggests the majority are > more generally Germanic-likely North/West European/Netherlands in origin > with two 'hotspots' in the Netherlands and western Austria. The large > British Isles pop. is likely Germanic invasion legacy-U106/S21 is > estimated > to be found in about 25% of European ancestry men of the R1b-M269 > haplogroup. This makes it the most common subclade of R1b-M269. > *U198* or *S29*--R1b1c9b--R1b1b2g1--R1b1b2a1a - R1bSTR3-branch of U106-- > confined to S. England (pre-Anglo-Saxon?). Known as Frisian 2 in K. > Nordtvedt research-unclear if it's a Saxon invasion marker or earlier > Germanic migration. > > *U152* or *S28* --R1b1c10--R1b1d2h--R1b1b2a2g - branch of P312--Ancient > Celts- Alpine Germany and Switzerland origins - possibly the 'La Tene > culture" Celts, also possibly a pre-roman era 'Invasion' or 'immigration > wave ' marker of the British Isles pop.--moderate numbers in Scotland, > England, Wales, large number in Switzerland, Alpine Germany and Italy, > also > in Greece, France, Poland, Norway, Netherlands-also an Ashkenazi group in > Eastern Europe with Sephardic/Converso members constituting a separate > cluster--L2 appears to be a significant sub-clade downstream of U152/S28, > and may split the group roughly 2/3rds L2+ and 1/3rd L2-. Unknown > relationship to M126 and M160. > Family Tree does the tests and then sends you the plus or minus results, > but > for some reason they don't say anything about what it means in terms of > SUB > haplogroup identification. I had to search google for "SPP U106" to find > a > discussion of what the results mean. Of course, they now want me to get > tested for 3 new "cutting edge" SNPs: L11, P311, and P310. Until they can > tell me more about what a positive result on these three new ones mean, I > don't intend to get tested again. Someone else might learn more about > their subgroups this way, but mine seem to keep coming back "negative," > and > "your still Pictian." So, the question is: Has anyone from Group A done > these tests? And if so, in what SNP haplogroups do group A Kincaids > belong? Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 > > > > P.S. This may all be a waste of money for me, but I find the whole > business > extremely interesting. I don think Family Tree should be giving us more > information before asking us to get tested, however. > > > > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Sue Liedtke <seleaml@actionnet.net> > wrote: > > > Kelly, > > When a mutation appears in only one individual within a set, we cannot > > attach much meaning to it. It is only when others in the set start > showing > > up with that mutation that we can look for possible connections. There > are > > a > > few markers that seem to have many parallel mutations, most notably the > CDY > > complex (markers 34 & 35). A mutation at these markers does not > necessarily > > mean a closer relationship to others who have the mutation but should be > > kept in mind when looking for connections. Marker 30 is suppose to be a > > site > > that mutates more quickly than other sites though so far this doesn't > show > > up in the Kincaid project. > > > > There is one other Group A-1a Kincaid who has a 16 at marker 30 > (DYS456). > > The value of 18 for A-2b and 25710 are the only other incidence (besides > > your line) of mutation at this marker in Group A. 25710 claims descent > from > > Joseph/ Eliz Gray Downing who was born in 1771. The family moved from KY > to > > Crawford Co. IN. Your Mathew Kincaid indicates in the 1850 census that > he > > was b 1807/8 in VA. I don't know whether Joseph's researcher knows when > > Joseph or his family moved to KY or where he was born (Boone didn't lead > > the > > first settlers into KY until 1775) so it is possible that somewhere > there > > could be a connection. However, if your Mathew is proven to be the son > of > > Francis, son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher and Joseph can be vetted as > ancestor > > of 25710, it looks like the 2 mutations to 16 were parallel as the > others > > who have potential to Thomas/Hannah do not have that mutation. Still you > do > > have to keep the 25710's matching mutation in mind and should, along > with > > the researcher for 25710, eliminate any possibility of connection. > > > > Sue Liedtke > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:04 PM > > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > > > > > Sue, > > > Thank you so much for taking the time to explain that. I have another > > > question: You said that group A-2b has a mutation @ marker 30, they > have > > > an 18, when the other groups,(A), have a 17. Since my father has a 16 > at > > > this marker, is that anything significant? > > > Thanks again, > > > Kelly > > > > > > > > > > > >> Peter, thank you for the explaination to the group. > > >> To answer Kelly's question and explain how the chart is organized. > > >> > > >> Each Group in the chart have similar patterns of results within the > > group > > >> and they are very different from the patterns of results for any > other > > >> Group. Each of the members of a group are related to each other but > are > > >> not > > >> related to members of other groups. Each Group has a single ancestor > who > > >> adopted the surname Kincaid or a variance thereof. The 2 most > numerous > > >> Groups in the Kincaid project are Group A and Group C-2. > > >> > > >> The Apparent Ancestral Values for Group A (top string) and Group C-2 > > >> (bottom > > >> string) for markers 1-12/13-25/26-37 are: > > >> > > > 13.23.14.12.11.14.12.12.11.13.13.29/16.9.10.11.11.24.15.18.29.15.16.17.18/11.10.19.23.17.14.16.17.37.39.12.12 > > >> > > > 13.25.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30/17.9.10.11.11.25.15.19.30.15.15.17.17/11.11.19.24.16.15.18.17.36.36.13.12 > > >> > > >> If I have counted correctly there are 18 markers that do not match. > Some > > >> of > > >> those that don't match vary by several steps. There are 19 markers > that > > >> are > > >> the same which would indicate a common ancestor back in the ice age > or > > >> beyond. But for our purposes, these Groups are not genetically > related. > > >> > > >> There are few variances from the Group AAV for C-2. Three members > have a > > >> 24 > > >> at marker 2. Two of these descend from George/Elizabeth Dean. The 3rd > > >> with > > >> this mutation should look for a connection to this line. Because > there > > >> are > > >> so few mutations, it is possible that the common ancestor for this > Group > > >> may > > >> be found in historic times. > > >> > > >> Group A has a number of mutations which are shared by a others in the > > >> Group. > > >> The most significant mutation occurs at marker 15 in the second panel > > >> (13-25), 3rd number. The AAV is a 10. One third of the project > members > > >> have > > >> a 9 at this marker. Those with a 10 are in Group A set 1. Those with > a 9 > > >> are > > >> in Group A set 2/4. > > >> > > >> Group A set 2/4 can be divided into subfamilies. > > >> Set 2a does not as yet have a significant mutation from the set AAV. > > >> > > >> A-2b has a significant mutation at marker 30 in the 3rd panel > (26-37), > > >> 5th > > >> number. This set has an 18 instead of the AAV 17. They should have a > > >> common > > >> ancestor closer in time than any one of them connect to someone who > does > > >> not > > >> have the 18. > > >> > > >> A-4 has several mutations shared by all members of the set. They all > > have > > >> a > > >> 14 instead of the AAV 15 at marker 19 (7th number in the 2nd panel) > and > > a > > >> 36 > > >> instead of 37 at marker 34 (4th from the end of the 3rd panel). > > >> > > >> Group A set 1 can be divided into a subfamily with no significant > > >> variance > > >> from the AAV for Group A (set 1a), a subfamily set 1b that has a 12 > > >> instead > > >> of an 11 at marker 26 (1st number in the 3rd panel) and a set which > > >> contains > > >> our biggest challange. A-1c has one common mutation that > distinguishes > > it > > >> from A-1a. They all have an 11 instead of a 12 at marker 4 (4th > number > > in > > >> the 1st panel). > > >> > > >> What makes this 11 such a challange is that an 11 at this marker pops > up > > >> in > > >> every other Group A set and subset. If everyone could be vetted to > their > > >> claimed ancestor there would have been at least 6 times this marker > > >> mutated > > >> to an 11. Even if they could not be vetted either the mutation at > marker > > >> 4 > > >> to an 11 occured several times or 4 other markers (15, 19, 26 and 30) > > >> mutated twice. The odds that the latter happened are astromomical. > The > > >> value > > >> of 12 at marker 4 is at the top of its range. Very few people have > it. > > >> From > > >> our project data, it appears that the marker is very unstable at this > > >> value > > >> and drops a repetition often. > > >> > > >> In A-4 Peter has isolated the mutation to Daniel, son of his ancestor > > >> David > > >> as the line from another son of David does not have the mutation. > > >> > > >> In A-2a a line from one son of John, son of George, has the mutation. > A > > >> line > > >> from another son of John does not. > > >> > > >> In A-1b 2 lines with probable common ancestor John/Elizabeth Logan > have > > >> the > > >> mutation. No one else in the set does. Either the mutation to 12 at > > >> marker > > >> 26 would have had to occur in 2 individuals or the marker four 11 was > > the > > >> result of a separate event. > > >> > > >> In A-2b the same thing occurs. One individual has the mutation the > rest > > >> do > > >> not. Again the mutation to18 at marker 30 would have had to occur > twice > > >> or > > >> the marker 4 mutation to 11 was the result of a separate event. > > >> > > >> In A-1c an individual with the mutation claims with a great deal of > > >> circumstantial evidence to the same ancestor as several individuals > > >> without > > >> the mutation in A-1a. > > >> > > >> If everyone in A-1c except the individual above, could be traced to a > > >> single > > >> common ancestor, that ancestor was not the same one as any of the > above. > > >> With so many mutations to the 11 on record, it is unclear if all in > this > > >> set > > >> will find a common ancestor before connecting to someone without it. > > >> > > >> Sue Liedtke > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > > >> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 7:02 PM > > >> Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > >> > > >> > > >>> Peter, > > >>> Thank you so much for your detailed information. I'm sure others > will > > >>> find > > >>> it as useful as I have. Besides grouping us together because we have > > >>> similar DNA patterns, (including mutations), can't these markers > tell > > us > > >>> something more in-depth about each of our particular groups, > subgroups > > >>> and > > >>> the mutations that make us distance-1,2,3, etc.? I know that each > > strand > > >>> of DNA is for something, such as eye color, hair color, height, > > >>> diseases, > > >>> etc, so what do these markers tell, or do they even know that info? > > >>> Since > > >>> everyone in the project has such closely matched DNA, does that mean > > >>> that > > >>> everyone of us came from the same exact male ancestor, not one of > our > > >>> lines came from another man who decided to use the Kyncade as their > > last > > >>> name? That the mutations just tell us that we are related, but > > different > > >>> as to how many generations back? > > >>> Am I trying to make it more difficult than it is? I'm sorry for all > the > > >>> questions, I would just like to have a good grasp of all the > > information > > >>> possible. And again, thank you so much for being patient with us > > >>> "newbies". > > >>> Kelly Kincade-Lewis, dau of Robt R Kincade #129770 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Kelly, > > >>>> > > >>>> The following is something I put together a few years ago > > >>>> for my DNA web page. Perhaps this will help with the > > >>>> basics a bit. > > >>>> > > >>>> Everyone of us contain structures called chromosomes. These > > chromosomes > > >>>> usually come in pairs, one inherited from the mother and one from > the > > >>>> father, and humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes altogether. In 22 > of > > >>>> the > > >>>> 23 pairs, the 2 chromosomes are very similar. However, the 23rd > pair > > is > > >>>> made up of two possible combinations of 2 very different > chromosomes, > > >>>> the > > >>>> X and the Y chromosomes. All of us have at least one X chromosome, > > >>>> which > > >>>> we have inherited from our mother. The second chromosome in this > pair > > >>>> is > > >>>> always inherited from the father. If it is another X chomosome then > > the > > >>>> pair readily mixes and the embryo developes into a female. If the > > >>>> second > > >>>> chromosome inherited from the father is a Y chromosome then the > embryo > > >>>> developes into a male. Since a male's 23rd pair are disimilar (X & > Y), > > >>>> genetic material cannot readily exchange between them. The result > is > > >>>> that > > >>>> the Y chromosome of every living man contains portions that > directly > > >>>> resembles that of his father, grandfather, great gra! > > >>>> ndfather etc. and cousins of any degree who also have the same > male > > >>>> ancestor. > > >>>> > > >>>> The Y chromosone is about 60,000,000 base pairs long. One base on > the > > >>>> DNA > > >>>> strand can be one of the following four nitrogen containing > chemicals: > > >>>> A > > >>>> (adenine), T (thymine), C (cytosine) and G (guanine). There are two > > >>>> strands in the DNA chain parallel to each other and connected. They > > are > > >>>> connected because Adenine (A) pairs with thymine (T) and cytosine > (C) > > >>>> pairs with guanine (G). Thus, if you have a A on one strand then > its > > >>>> opposite strand will have a T so they can join. > > >>>> > > >>>> When the DNA within the male Y chromosome is copied from generation > to > > >>>> generation, small mistakes are occasionally made. These mistakes > give > > >>>> rise > > >>>> to differences between Y chromosomes of two individuals called > > >>>> "polymorphisms". An person's combination of polymorphisms > identifies a > > >>>> unique sequence or "haplotype" with which to make comparisons to > that > > >>>> of > > >>>> another individual. > > >>>> > > >>>> STRs (abbreviation for Short Tandem Repeats) are sections of DNA > where > > >>>> a > > >>>> short pattern (2-5 bases) has been identified as repeating a > certain > > >>>> number of times in a row (in tandem). DYS391 is an identified STR > with > > >>>> the > > >>>> 'GATA' pattern repeating at one specific location (repeating > patterns > > >>>> at > > >>>> specific points are called markers). For many Kincaids in our > project > > >>>> it > > >>>> has been determined that the DYS391 marker repeated 12 times. In > that > > >>>> section of the Y-DNA one strand of the DNA looks like: > > >>>> > > >>>> GATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATA. > > >>>> > > >>>> For other Kincaids in the project there was a mutation in one of > the > > >>>> GATA > > >>>> pairs (ie. perhaps a G became a C) resulting in only 11 GATA > repeats > > >>>> being > > >>>> counted for the same marker instead of 12 (ie. a mutation is when > the > > >>>> number of repeats increases or decreases by one or occasionally two > or > > >>>> more). Since we are dealing with more than one base pair (ie. one > > >>>> letter) > > >>>> then mutations can be observed frequently enough in STR markers to > be > > >>>> of > > >>>> use for genealogy. > > >>>> > > >>>> Peter A. Kincaid > > >>>> Fredericton, NB, Canada > > >>>> > > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>>> From: lewisjo@junct.com > > >>>> To: KINCAID@rootsweb.com > > >>>> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:28 PM > > >>>> Subject: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Can anyone tell me what the markers mean? Each one has a value, > but > > >>>> what > > >>>> is the orginal meaning of the marker, does it, in itself mean > > >>>> anything > > >>>> that we can understand? When you say "mutations", do you mean > that > > it > > >>>> is > > >>>> just a different value than the rest of the group has? Isn't > there > > >>>> anything significant about that particular mutation at that > > >>>> particular > > >>>> marker? > > >>>> Kelly > > >>>> > > >>>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> ------------------------------- > > >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >>>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >>> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ------------------------------- > > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >> > > >> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > > > > > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Peter's mention of Doggerland led me to doing a Google search and found lots of info on it and in reading one post by Peter we found out he and his friends had lots of fun when the frozen rivers broke up. Below is a copy of part of one of his posts: Sorry but I couldn't help get into a hoser mode ( it's a Canadian thing - see "Bob and Dough McKenzie" on wikipedia) your eh remark. ;-) We called them icebergs but what we as kids did was ride chunks of ice when the river broke up. We'd ride them like rafts (with poles from tree debris) and spent the bulk of the time trying to smash up the other guys so called iceberg. Don't worry I haven't given my kids the thought! If you would like to read the actual post go to http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-10/1161181385 Don ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter A. Kincaid To: kincaid@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:32 PM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question I did not say that Group A were of Frisian origin. I have been on record as very opposed to this label. Group A Kincaids belong to a haplogroup pattern that has been identified and labeled Frisian by one Ken Nordtvedt, in honour of his Frisian mother, because it is found in greater frequency in the Netherlands. It is also found in greater frequency in parts of Germany and in southwest England. Just because a person has given something a label which has caught on does not make it accurate. I personally think the deep origins of our haplogroup have a greater probability of being in the Doggerland plain (the Baltic sea before it flooded). Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Kincaid To: kincaid@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:52 PM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question Peter once said that he thought members of Group A were of Frisian origen based on the YDNA patterns. I was wondering if any members of Group A had that confirmed with the SNP deep clade tests I listed in my email that indicate Frisian ancestors. Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Don W. Kincaid < donwkincaid1@frontiernet.net> wrote: > Group A # 4073's confirmed haplogroup is R1b1b2 which is identical to yours > at this point. Most of those in Group A have the same predicted haplogroup > that I have looked at. As time goes on the dna scientists will likely find a > way to differentiate between Group A & C haplogroups. I see Whalen's Cheat > Sheet states that R1b1b2 covers a very large group of Europeans. Thanks for > providing the link to Whalen. Don W. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Larry Kincaid > To: kincaid@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:26 AM > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > Hi Everyone, > This is a great thread to add questions about SNP-DNA DEEP CLADE > CLASSIFICATION. A number of us have paid to have these extra tests to > help > us determine more narrowly defined Haplogroups. Since I just received > results from some of the new tests, I share them and then ask what > everyone > else has learned about these so far. > > I'm in Kincaid Group C-2, so presumably the other members of this group > would get similar results and they should differ substantially from Group > A > members. > Here's my test results so far, which can get me only as far as > classification into Haplogroup R1b1b2: > > > Positive Outcomes: M173+ M207+ M269+ M343+ P25+ > > Negative Outcomes: M126- M153- M160- M18- M222- M37- M65- M73- > P66- SRY2627- > > Latest Negative Outcomes: P107- U106- U152- U198- > > Family tree has a nice flow chart to show where everyone's haplogroups > are. There's information about this under "Whalen's Cheat Sheet" at: > > > http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/o/d/a/Donald-K-Odair/FILE/0056page.html > > > > As far as I can make out so far, Group C-2 members can only be identified > as > having Pictian descent in Scotland with connections to northern Ireland > (but > same group). The last four tests were a waste of money for me. All were > negative. Positive outcomes on U106 would supposedly have identified > "Frisian" roots; same for a positive outcome on > > > > *U106* or *S21*--R1b1c9--R1b1b2g--R1b1b2a1 - R1bSTR22Frisian –originally > known as 'Frisian' Invader marker, new research suggests the majority are > more generally Germanic-likely North/West European/Netherlands in origin > with two 'hotspots' in the Netherlands and western Austria. The large > British Isles pop. is likely Germanic invasion legacy-U106/S21 is > estimated > to be found in about 25% of European ancestry men of the R1b-M269 > haplogroup. This makes it the most common subclade of R1b-M269. > *U198* or *S29*--R1b1c9b--R1b1b2g1--R1b1b2a1a - R1bSTR3-branch of U106-- > confined to S. England (pre-Anglo-Saxon?). Known as Frisian 2 in K. > Nordtvedt research-unclear if it's a Saxon invasion marker or earlier > Germanic migration. > > *U152* or *S28* --R1b1c10--R1b1d2h--R1b1b2a2g - branch of P312--Ancient > Celts- Alpine Germany and Switzerland origins - possibly the 'La Tene > culture" Celts, also possibly a pre-roman era 'Invasion' or 'immigration > wave ' marker of the British Isles pop.--moderate numbers in Scotland, > England, Wales, large number in Switzerland, Alpine Germany and Italy, > also > in Greece, France, Poland, Norway, Netherlands-also an Ashkenazi group in > Eastern Europe with Sephardic/Converso members constituting a separate > cluster--L2 appears to be a significant sub-clade downstream of U152/S28, > and may split the group roughly 2/3rds L2+ and 1/3rd L2-. Unknown > relationship to M126 and M160. > Family Tree does the tests and then sends you the plus or minus results, > but > for some reason they don't say anything about what it means in terms of > SUB > haplogroup identification. I had to search google for "SPP U106" to find > a > discussion of what the results mean. Of course, they now want me to get > tested for 3 new "cutting edge" SNPs: L11, P311, and P310. Until they can > tell me more about what a positive result on these three new ones mean, I > don't intend to get tested again. Someone else might learn more about > their subgroups this way, but mine seem to keep coming back "negative," > and > "your still Pictian." So, the question is: Has anyone from Group A done > these tests? And if so, in what SNP haplogroups do group A Kincaids > belong? Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 > > > > P.S. This may all be a waste of money for me, but I find the whole > business > extremely interesting. I don think Family Tree should be giving us more > information before asking us to get tested, however. > > > > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Sue Liedtke <seleaml@actionnet.net> > wrote: > > > Kelly, > > When a mutation appears in only one individual within a set, we cannot > > attach much meaning to it. It is only when others in the set start > showing > > up with that mutation that we can look for possible connections. There > are > > a > > few markers that seem to have many parallel mutations, most notably the > CDY > > complex (markers 34 & 35). A mutation at these markers does not > necessarily > > mean a closer relationship to others who have the mutation but should be > > kept in mind when looking for connections. Marker 30 is suppose to be a > > site > > that mutates more quickly than other sites though so far this doesn't > show > > up in the Kincaid project. > > > > There is one other Group A-1a Kincaid who has a 16 at marker 30 > (DYS456). > > The value of 18 for A-2b and 25710 are the only other incidence (besides > > your line) of mutation at this marker in Group A. 25710 claims descent > from > > Joseph/ Eliz Gray Downing who was born in 1771. The family moved from KY > to > > Crawford Co. IN. Your Mathew Kincaid indicates in the 1850 census that > he > > was b 1807/8 in VA. I don't know whether Joseph's researcher knows when > > Joseph or his family moved to KY or where he was born (Boone didn't lead > > the > > first settlers into KY until 1775) so it is possible that somewhere > there > > could be a connection. However, if your Mathew is proven to be the son > of > > Francis, son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher and Joseph can be vetted as > ancestor > > of 25710, it looks like the 2 mutations to 16 were parallel as the > others > > who have potential to Thomas/Hannah do not have that mutation. Still you > do > > have to keep the 25710's matching mutation in mind and should, along > with > > the researcher for 25710, eliminate any possibility of connection. > > > > Sue Liedtke > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:04 PM > > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > > > > > Sue, > > > Thank you so much for taking the time to explain that. I have another > > > question: You said that group A-2b has a mutation @ marker 30, they > have > > > an 18, when the other groups,(A), have a 17. Since my father has a 16 > at > > > this marker, is that anything significant? > > > Thanks again, > > > Kelly > > > > > > > > > > > >> Peter, thank you for the explaination to the group. > > >> To answer Kelly's question and explain how the chart is organized. > > >> > > >> Each Group in the chart have similar patterns of results within the > > group > > >> and they are very different from the patterns of results for any > other > > >> Group. Each of the members of a group are related to each other but > are > > >> not > > >> related to members of other groups. Each Group has a single ancestor > who > > >> adopted the surname Kincaid or a variance thereof. The 2 most > numerous > > >> Groups in the Kincaid project are Group A and Group C-2. > > >> > > >> The Apparent Ancestral Values for Group A (top string) and Group C-2 > > >> (bottom > > >> string) for markers 1-12/13-25/26-37 are: > > >> > > > 13.23.14.12.11.14.12.12.11.13.13.29/16.9.10.11.11.24.15.18.29.15.16.17.18/11.10.19.23.17.14.16.17.37.39.12.12 > > >> > > > 13.25.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30/17.9.10.11.11.25.15.19.30.15.15.17.17/11.11.19.24.16.15.18.17.36.36.13.12 > > >> > > >> If I have counted correctly there are 18 markers that do not match. > Some > > >> of > > >> those that don't match vary by several steps. There are 19 markers > that > > >> are > > >> the same which would indicate a common ancestor back in the ice age > or > > >> beyond. But for our purposes, these Groups are not genetically > related. > > >> > > >> There are few variances from the Group AAV for C-2. Three members > have a > > >> 24 > > >> at marker 2. Two of these descend from George/Elizabeth Dean. The 3rd > > >> with > > >> this mutation should look for a connection to this line. Because > there > > >> are > > >> so few mutations, it is possible that the common ancestor for this > Group > > >> may > > >> be found in historic times. > > >> > > >> Group A has a number of mutations which are shared by a others in the > > >> Group. > > >> The most significant mutation occurs at marker 15 in the second panel > > >> (13-25), 3rd number. The AAV is a 10. One third of the project > members > > >> have > > >> a 9 at this marker. Those with a 10 are in Group A set 1. Those with > a 9 > > >> are > > >> in Group A set 2/4. > > >> > > >> Group A set 2/4 can be divided into subfamilies. > > >> Set 2a does not as yet have a significant mutation from the set AAV. > > >> > > >> A-2b has a significant mutation at marker 30 in the 3rd panel > (26-37), > > >> 5th > > >> number. This set has an 18 instead of the AAV 17. They should have a > > >> common > > >> ancestor closer in time than any one of them connect to someone who > does > > >> not > > >> have the 18. > > >> > > >> A-4 has several mutations shared by all members of the set. They all > > have > > >> a > > >> 14 instead of the AAV 15 at marker 19 (7th number in the 2nd panel) > and > > a > > >> 36 > > >> instead of 37 at marker 34 (4th from the end of the 3rd panel). > > >> > > >> Group A set 1 can be divided into a subfamily with no significant > > >> variance > > >> from the AAV for Group A (set 1a), a subfamily set 1b that has a 12 > > >> instead > > >> of an 11 at marker 26 (1st number in the 3rd panel) and a set which > > >> contains > > >> our biggest challange. A-1c has one common mutation that > distinguishes > > it > > >> from A-1a. They all have an 11 instead of a 12 at marker 4 (4th > number > > in > > >> the 1st panel). > > >> > > >> What makes this 11 such a challange is that an 11 at this marker pops > up > > >> in > > >> every other Group A set and subset. If everyone could be vetted to > their > > >> claimed ancestor there would have been at least 6 times this marker > > >> mutated > > >> to an 11. Even if they could not be vetted either the mutation at > marker > > >> 4 > > >> to an 11 occured several times or 4 other markers (15, 19, 26 and 30) > > >> mutated twice. The odds that the latter happened are astromomical. > The > > >> value > > >> of 12 at marker 4 is at the top of its range. Very few people have > it. > > >> From > > >> our project data, it appears that the marker is very unstable at this > > >> value > > >> and drops a repetition often. > > >> > > >> In A-4 Peter has isolated the mutation to Daniel, son of his ancestor > > >> David > > >> as the line from another son of David does not have the mutation. > > >> > > >> In A-2a a line from one son of John, son of George, has the mutation. > A > > >> line > > >> from another son of John does not. > > >> > > >> In A-1b 2 lines with probable common ancestor John/Elizabeth Logan > have > > >> the > > >> mutation. No one else in the set does. Either the mutation to 12 at > > >> marker > > >> 26 would have had to occur in 2 individuals or the marker four 11 was > > the > > >> result of a separate event. > > >> > > >> In A-2b the same thing occurs. One individual has the mutation the > rest > > >> do > > >> not. Again the mutation to18 at marker 30 would have had to occur > twice > > >> or > > >> the marker 4 mutation to 11 was the result of a separate event. > > >> > > >> In A-1c an individual with the mutation claims with a great deal of > > >> circumstantial evidence to the same ancestor as several individuals > > >> without > > >> the mutation in A-1a. > > >> > > >> If everyone in A-1c except the individual above, could be traced to a > > >> single > > >> common ancestor, that ancestor was not the same one as any of the > above. > > >> With so many mutations to the 11 on record, it is unclear if all in > this > > >> set > > >> will find a common ancestor before connecting to someone without it. > > >> > > >> Sue Liedtke > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > > >> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 7:02 PM > > >> Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > >> > > >> > > >>> Peter, > > >>> Thank you so much for your detailed information. I'm sure others > will > > >>> find > > >>> it as useful as I have. Besides grouping us together because we have > > >>> similar DNA patterns, (including mutations), can't these markers > tell > > us > > >>> something more in-depth about each of our particular groups, > subgroups > > >>> and > > >>> the mutations that make us distance-1,2,3, etc.? I know that each > > strand > > >>> of DNA is for something, such as eye color, hair color, height, > > >>> diseases, > > >>> etc, so what do these markers tell, or do they even know that info? > > >>> Since > > >>> everyone in the project has such closely matched DNA, does that mean > > >>> that > > >>> everyone of us came from the same exact male ancestor, not one of > our > > >>> lines came from another man who decided to use the Kyncade as their > > last > > >>> name? That the mutations just tell us that we are related, but > > different > > >>> as to how many generations back? > > >>> Am I trying to make it more difficult than it is? I'm sorry for all > the > > >>> questions, I would just like to have a good grasp of all the > > information > > >>> possible. And again, thank you so much for being patient with us > > >>> "newbies". > > >>> Kelly Kincade-Lewis, dau of Robt R Kincade #129770 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Kelly, > > >>>> > > >>>> The following is something I put together a few years ago > > >>>> for my DNA web page. Perhaps this will help with the > > >>>> basics a bit. > > >>>> > > >>>> Everyone of us contain structures called chromosomes. These > > chromosomes > > >>>> usually come in pairs, one inherited from the mother and one from > the > > >>>> father, and humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes altogether. In 22 > of > > >>>> the > > >>>> 23 pairs, the 2 chromosomes are very similar. However, the 23rd > pair > > is > > >>>> made up of two possible combinations of 2 very different > chromosomes, > > >>>> the > > >>>> X and the Y chromosomes. All of us have at least one X chromosome, > > >>>> which > > >>>> we have inherited from our mother. The second chromosome in this > pair > > >>>> is > > >>>> always inherited from the father. If it is another X chomosome then > > the > > >>>> pair readily mixes and the embryo developes into a female. If the > > >>>> second > > >>>> chromosome inherited from the father is a Y chromosome then the > embryo > > >>>> developes into a male. Since a male's 23rd pair are disimilar (X & > Y), > > >>>> genetic material cannot readily exchange between them. The result > is > > >>>> that > > >>>> the Y chromosome of every living man contains portions that > directly > > >>>> resembles that of his father, grandfather, great gra! > > >>>> ndfather etc. and cousins of any degree who also have the same > male > > >>>> ancestor. > > >>>> > > >>>> The Y chromosone is about 60,000,000 base pairs long. One base on > the > > >>>> DNA > > >>>> strand can be one of the following four nitrogen containing > chemicals: > > >>>> A > > >>>> (adenine), T (thymine), C (cytosine) and G (guanine). There are two > > >>>> strands in the DNA chain parallel to each other and connected. They > > are > > >>>> connected because Adenine (A) pairs with thymine (T) and cytosine > (C) > > >>>> pairs with guanine (G). Thus, if you have a A on one strand then > its > > >>>> opposite strand will have a T so they can join. > > >>>> > > >>>> When the DNA within the male Y chromosome is copied from generation > to > > >>>> generation, small mistakes are occasionally made. These mistakes > give > > >>>> rise > > >>>> to differences between Y chromosomes of two individuals called > > >>>> "polymorphisms". An person's combination of polymorphisms > identifies a > > >>>> unique sequence or "haplotype" with which to make comparisons to > that > > >>>> of > > >>>> another individual. > > >>>> > > >>>> STRs (abbreviation for Short Tandem Repeats) are sections of DNA > where > > >>>> a > > >>>> short pattern (2-5 bases) has been identified as repeating a > certain > > >>>> number of times in a row (in tandem). DYS391 is an identified STR > with > > >>>> the > > >>>> 'GATA' pattern repeating at one specific location (repeating > patterns > > >>>> at > > >>>> specific points are called markers). For many Kincaids in our > project > > >>>> it > > >>>> has been determined that the DYS391 marker repeated 12 times. In > that > > >>>> section of the Y-DNA one strand of the DNA looks like: > > >>>> > > >>>> GATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATA. > > >>>> > > >>>> For other Kincaids in the project there was a mutation in one of > the > > >>>> GATA > > >>>> pairs (ie. perhaps a G became a C) resulting in only 11 GATA > repeats > > >>>> being > > >>>> counted for the same marker instead of 12 (ie. a mutation is when > the > > >>>> number of repeats increases or decreases by one or occasionally two > or > > >>>> more). Since we are dealing with more than one base pair (ie. one > > >>>> letter) > > >>>> then mutations can be observed frequently enough in STR markers to > be > > >>>> of > > >>>> use for genealogy. > > >>>> > > >>>> Peter A. Kincaid > > >>>> Fredericton, NB, Canada > > >>>> > > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>>> From: lewisjo@junct.com > > >>>> To: KINCAID@rootsweb.com > > >>>> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:28 PM > > >>>> Subject: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Can anyone tell me what the markers mean? Each one has a value, > but > > >>>> what > > >>>> is the orginal meaning of the marker, does it, in itself mean > > >>>> anything > > >>>> that we can understand? When you say "mutations", do you mean > that > > it > > >>>> is > > >>>> just a different value than the rest of the group has? Isn't > there > > >>>> anything significant about that particular mutation at that > > >>>> particular > > >>>> marker? > > >>>> Kelly > > >>>> > > >>>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> ------------------------------- > > >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >>>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >>> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ------------------------------- > > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >> > > >> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > > > > > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Peter once said that he thought members of Group A were of Frisian origen based on the YDNA patterns. I was wondering if any members of Group A had that confirmed with the SNP deep clade tests I listed in my email that indicate Frisian ancestors. Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Don W. Kincaid < donwkincaid1@frontiernet.net> wrote: > Group A # 4073's confirmed haplogroup is R1b1b2 which is identical to yours > at this point. Most of those in Group A have the same predicted haplogroup > that I have looked at. As time goes on the dna scientists will likely find a > way to differentiate between Group A & C haplogroups. I see Whalen's Cheat > Sheet states that R1b1b2 covers a very large group of Europeans. Thanks for > providing the link to Whalen. Don W. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Larry Kincaid > To: kincaid@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:26 AM > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > Hi Everyone, > This is a great thread to add questions about SNP-DNA DEEP CLADE > CLASSIFICATION. A number of us have paid to have these extra tests to > help > us determine more narrowly defined Haplogroups. Since I just received > results from some of the new tests, I share them and then ask what > everyone > else has learned about these so far. > > I'm in Kincaid Group C-2, so presumably the other members of this group > would get similar results and they should differ substantially from Group > A > members. > Here's my test results so far, which can get me only as far as > classification into Haplogroup R1b1b2: > > > Positive Outcomes: M173+ M207+ M269+ M343+ P25+ > > Negative Outcomes: M126- M153- M160- M18- M222- M37- M65- M73- > P66- SRY2627- > > Latest Negative Outcomes: P107- U106- U152- U198- > > Family tree has a nice flow chart to show where everyone's haplogroups > are. There's information about this under "Whalen's Cheat Sheet" at: > > > http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/o/d/a/Donald-K-Odair/FILE/0056page.html > > > > As far as I can make out so far, Group C-2 members can only be identified > as > having Pictian descent in Scotland with connections to northern Ireland > (but > same group). The last four tests were a waste of money for me. All were > negative. Positive outcomes on U106 would supposedly have identified > "Frisian" roots; same for a positive outcome on > > > > *U106* or *S21*--R1b1c9--R1b1b2g--R1b1b2a1 - R1bSTR22Frisian –originally > known as 'Frisian' Invader marker, new research suggests the majority are > more generally Germanic-likely North/West European/Netherlands in origin > with two 'hotspots' in the Netherlands and western Austria. The large > British Isles pop. is likely Germanic invasion legacy-U106/S21 is > estimated > to be found in about 25% of European ancestry men of the R1b-M269 > haplogroup. This makes it the most common subclade of R1b-M269. > *U198* or *S29*--R1b1c9b--R1b1b2g1--R1b1b2a1a - R1bSTR3-branch of U106-- > confined to S. England (pre-Anglo-Saxon?). Known as Frisian 2 in K. > Nordtvedt research-unclear if it's a Saxon invasion marker or earlier > Germanic migration. > > *U152* or *S28* --R1b1c10--R1b1d2h--R1b1b2a2g - branch of P312--Ancient > Celts- Alpine Germany and Switzerland origins - possibly the 'La Tene > culture" Celts, also possibly a pre-roman era 'Invasion' or 'immigration > wave ' marker of the British Isles pop.--moderate numbers in Scotland, > England, Wales, large number in Switzerland, Alpine Germany and Italy, > also > in Greece, France, Poland, Norway, Netherlands-also an Ashkenazi group in > Eastern Europe with Sephardic/Converso members constituting a separate > cluster--L2 appears to be a significant sub-clade downstream of U152/S28, > and may split the group roughly 2/3rds L2+ and 1/3rd L2-. Unknown > relationship to M126 and M160. > Family Tree does the tests and then sends you the plus or minus results, > but > for some reason they don't say anything about what it means in terms of > SUB > haplogroup identification. I had to search google for "SPP U106" to find > a > discussion of what the results mean. Of course, they now want me to get > tested for 3 new "cutting edge" SNPs: L11, P311, and P310. Until they can > tell me more about what a positive result on these three new ones mean, I > don't intend to get tested again. Someone else might learn more about > their subgroups this way, but mine seem to keep coming back "negative," > and > "your still Pictian." So, the question is: Has anyone from Group A done > these tests? And if so, in what SNP haplogroups do group A Kincaids > belong? Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 > > > > P.S. This may all be a waste of money for me, but I find the whole > business > extremely interesting. I don think Family Tree should be giving us more > information before asking us to get tested, however. > > > > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Sue Liedtke <seleaml@actionnet.net> > wrote: > > > Kelly, > > When a mutation appears in only one individual within a set, we cannot > > attach much meaning to it. It is only when others in the set start > showing > > up with that mutation that we can look for possible connections. There > are > > a > > few markers that seem to have many parallel mutations, most notably the > CDY > > complex (markers 34 & 35). A mutation at these markers does not > necessarily > > mean a closer relationship to others who have the mutation but should be > > kept in mind when looking for connections. Marker 30 is suppose to be a > > site > > that mutates more quickly than other sites though so far this doesn't > show > > up in the Kincaid project. > > > > There is one other Group A-1a Kincaid who has a 16 at marker 30 > (DYS456). > > The value of 18 for A-2b and 25710 are the only other incidence (besides > > your line) of mutation at this marker in Group A. 25710 claims descent > from > > Joseph/ Eliz Gray Downing who was born in 1771. The family moved from KY > to > > Crawford Co. IN. Your Mathew Kincaid indicates in the 1850 census that > he > > was b 1807/8 in VA. I don't know whether Joseph's researcher knows when > > Joseph or his family moved to KY or where he was born (Boone didn't lead > > the > > first settlers into KY until 1775) so it is possible that somewhere > there > > could be a connection. However, if your Mathew is proven to be the son > of > > Francis, son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher and Joseph can be vetted as > ancestor > > of 25710, it looks like the 2 mutations to 16 were parallel as the > others > > who have potential to Thomas/Hannah do not have that mutation. Still you > do > > have to keep the 25710's matching mutation in mind and should, along > with > > the researcher for 25710, eliminate any possibility of connection. > > > > Sue Liedtke > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:04 PM > > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > > > > > Sue, > > > Thank you so much for taking the time to explain that. I have another > > > question: You said that group A-2b has a mutation @ marker 30, they > have > > > an 18, when the other groups,(A), have a 17. Since my father has a 16 > at > > > this marker, is that anything significant? > > > Thanks again, > > > Kelly > > > > > > > > > > > >> Peter, thank you for the explaination to the group. > > >> To answer Kelly's question and explain how the chart is organized. > > >> > > >> Each Group in the chart have similar patterns of results within the > > group > > >> and they are very different from the patterns of results for any > other > > >> Group. Each of the members of a group are related to each other but > are > > >> not > > >> related to members of other groups. Each Group has a single ancestor > who > > >> adopted the surname Kincaid or a variance thereof. The 2 most > numerous > > >> Groups in the Kincaid project are Group A and Group C-2. > > >> > > >> The Apparent Ancestral Values for Group A (top string) and Group C-2 > > >> (bottom > > >> string) for markers 1-12/13-25/26-37 are: > > >> > > > 13.23.14.12.11.14.12.12.11.13.13.29/16.9.10.11.11.24.15.18.29.15.16.17.18/11.10.19.23.17.14.16.17.37.39.12.12 > > >> > > > 13.25.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30/17.9.10.11.11.25.15.19.30.15.15.17.17/11.11.19.24.16.15.18.17.36.36.13.12 > > >> > > >> If I have counted correctly there are 18 markers that do not match. > Some > > >> of > > >> those that don't match vary by several steps. There are 19 markers > that > > >> are > > >> the same which would indicate a common ancestor back in the ice age > or > > >> beyond. But for our purposes, these Groups are not genetically > related. > > >> > > >> There are few variances from the Group AAV for C-2. Three members > have a > > >> 24 > > >> at marker 2. Two of these descend from George/Elizabeth Dean. The 3rd > > >> with > > >> this mutation should look for a connection to this line. Because > there > > >> are > > >> so few mutations, it is possible that the common ancestor for this > Group > > >> may > > >> be found in historic times. > > >> > > >> Group A has a number of mutations which are shared by a others in the > > >> Group. > > >> The most significant mutation occurs at marker 15 in the second panel > > >> (13-25), 3rd number. The AAV is a 10. One third of the project > members > > >> have > > >> a 9 at this marker. Those with a 10 are in Group A set 1. Those with > a 9 > > >> are > > >> in Group A set 2/4. > > >> > > >> Group A set 2/4 can be divided into subfamilies. > > >> Set 2a does not as yet have a significant mutation from the set AAV. > > >> > > >> A-2b has a significant mutation at marker 30 in the 3rd panel > (26-37), > > >> 5th > > >> number. This set has an 18 instead of the AAV 17. They should have a > > >> common > > >> ancestor closer in time than any one of them connect to someone who > does > > >> not > > >> have the 18. > > >> > > >> A-4 has several mutations shared by all members of the set. They all > > have > > >> a > > >> 14 instead of the AAV 15 at marker 19 (7th number in the 2nd panel) > and > > a > > >> 36 > > >> instead of 37 at marker 34 (4th from the end of the 3rd panel). > > >> > > >> Group A set 1 can be divided into a subfamily with no significant > > >> variance > > >> from the AAV for Group A (set 1a), a subfamily set 1b that has a 12 > > >> instead > > >> of an 11 at marker 26 (1st number in the 3rd panel) and a set which > > >> contains > > >> our biggest challange. A-1c has one common mutation that > distinguishes > > it > > >> from A-1a. They all have an 11 instead of a 12 at marker 4 (4th > number > > in > > >> the 1st panel). > > >> > > >> What makes this 11 such a challange is that an 11 at this marker pops > up > > >> in > > >> every other Group A set and subset. If everyone could be vetted to > their > > >> claimed ancestor there would have been at least 6 times this marker > > >> mutated > > >> to an 11. Even if they could not be vetted either the mutation at > marker > > >> 4 > > >> to an 11 occured several times or 4 other markers (15, 19, 26 and 30) > > >> mutated twice. The odds that the latter happened are astromomical. > The > > >> value > > >> of 12 at marker 4 is at the top of its range. Very few people have > it. > > >> From > > >> our project data, it appears that the marker is very unstable at this > > >> value > > >> and drops a repetition often. > > >> > > >> In A-4 Peter has isolated the mutation to Daniel, son of his ancestor > > >> David > > >> as the line from another son of David does not have the mutation. > > >> > > >> In A-2a a line from one son of John, son of George, has the mutation. > A > > >> line > > >> from another son of John does not. > > >> > > >> In A-1b 2 lines with probable common ancestor John/Elizabeth Logan > have > > >> the > > >> mutation. No one else in the set does. Either the mutation to 12 at > > >> marker > > >> 26 would have had to occur in 2 individuals or the marker four 11 was > > the > > >> result of a separate event. > > >> > > >> In A-2b the same thing occurs. One individual has the mutation the > rest > > >> do > > >> not. Again the mutation to18 at marker 30 would have had to occur > twice > > >> or > > >> the marker 4 mutation to 11 was the result of a separate event. > > >> > > >> In A-1c an individual with the mutation claims with a great deal of > > >> circumstantial evidence to the same ancestor as several individuals > > >> without > > >> the mutation in A-1a. > > >> > > >> If everyone in A-1c except the individual above, could be traced to a > > >> single > > >> common ancestor, that ancestor was not the same one as any of the > above. > > >> With so many mutations to the 11 on record, it is unclear if all in > this > > >> set > > >> will find a common ancestor before connecting to someone without it. > > >> > > >> Sue Liedtke > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > > >> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 7:02 PM > > >> Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > >> > > >> > > >>> Peter, > > >>> Thank you so much for your detailed information. I'm sure others > will > > >>> find > > >>> it as useful as I have. Besides grouping us together because we have > > >>> similar DNA patterns, (including mutations), can't these markers > tell > > us > > >>> something more in-depth about each of our particular groups, > subgroups > > >>> and > > >>> the mutations that make us distance-1,2,3, etc.? I know that each > > strand > > >>> of DNA is for something, such as eye color, hair color, height, > > >>> diseases, > > >>> etc, so what do these markers tell, or do they even know that info? > > >>> Since > > >>> everyone in the project has such closely matched DNA, does that mean > > >>> that > > >>> everyone of us came from the same exact male ancestor, not one of > our > > >>> lines came from another man who decided to use the Kyncade as their > > last > > >>> name? That the mutations just tell us that we are related, but > > different > > >>> as to how many generations back? > > >>> Am I trying to make it more difficult than it is? I'm sorry for all > the > > >>> questions, I would just like to have a good grasp of all the > > information > > >>> possible. And again, thank you so much for being patient with us > > >>> "newbies". > > >>> Kelly Kincade-Lewis, dau of Robt R Kincade #129770 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Kelly, > > >>>> > > >>>> The following is something I put together a few years ago > > >>>> for my DNA web page. Perhaps this will help with the > > >>>> basics a bit. > > >>>> > > >>>> Everyone of us contain structures called chromosomes. These > > chromosomes > > >>>> usually come in pairs, one inherited from the mother and one from > the > > >>>> father, and humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes altogether. In 22 > of > > >>>> the > > >>>> 23 pairs, the 2 chromosomes are very similar. However, the 23rd > pair > > is > > >>>> made up of two possible combinations of 2 very different > chromosomes, > > >>>> the > > >>>> X and the Y chromosomes. All of us have at least one X chromosome, > > >>>> which > > >>>> we have inherited from our mother. The second chromosome in this > pair > > >>>> is > > >>>> always inherited from the father. If it is another X chomosome then > > the > > >>>> pair readily mixes and the embryo developes into a female. If the > > >>>> second > > >>>> chromosome inherited from the father is a Y chromosome then the > embryo > > >>>> developes into a male. Since a male's 23rd pair are disimilar (X & > Y), > > >>>> genetic material cannot readily exchange between them. The result > is > > >>>> that > > >>>> the Y chromosome of every living man contains portions that > directly > > >>>> resembles that of his father, grandfather, great gra! > > >>>> ndfather etc. and cousins of any degree who also have the same > male > > >>>> ancestor. > > >>>> > > >>>> The Y chromosone is about 60,000,000 base pairs long. One base on > the > > >>>> DNA > > >>>> strand can be one of the following four nitrogen containing > chemicals: > > >>>> A > > >>>> (adenine), T (thymine), C (cytosine) and G (guanine). There are two > > >>>> strands in the DNA chain parallel to each other and connected. They > > are > > >>>> connected because Adenine (A) pairs with thymine (T) and cytosine > (C) > > >>>> pairs with guanine (G). Thus, if you have a A on one strand then > its > > >>>> opposite strand will have a T so they can join. > > >>>> > > >>>> When the DNA within the male Y chromosome is copied from generation > to > > >>>> generation, small mistakes are occasionally made. These mistakes > give > > >>>> rise > > >>>> to differences between Y chromosomes of two individuals called > > >>>> "polymorphisms". An person's combination of polymorphisms > identifies a > > >>>> unique sequence or "haplotype" with which to make comparisons to > that > > >>>> of > > >>>> another individual. > > >>>> > > >>>> STRs (abbreviation for Short Tandem Repeats) are sections of DNA > where > > >>>> a > > >>>> short pattern (2-5 bases) has been identified as repeating a > certain > > >>>> number of times in a row (in tandem). DYS391 is an identified STR > with > > >>>> the > > >>>> 'GATA' pattern repeating at one specific location (repeating > patterns > > >>>> at > > >>>> specific points are called markers). For many Kincaids in our > project > > >>>> it > > >>>> has been determined that the DYS391 marker repeated 12 times. In > that > > >>>> section of the Y-DNA one strand of the DNA looks like: > > >>>> > > >>>> GATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATA. > > >>>> > > >>>> For other Kincaids in the project there was a mutation in one of > the > > >>>> GATA > > >>>> pairs (ie. perhaps a G became a C) resulting in only 11 GATA > repeats > > >>>> being > > >>>> counted for the same marker instead of 12 (ie. a mutation is when > the > > >>>> number of repeats increases or decreases by one or occasionally two > or > > >>>> more). Since we are dealing with more than one base pair (ie. one > > >>>> letter) > > >>>> then mutations can be observed frequently enough in STR markers to > be > > >>>> of > > >>>> use for genealogy. > > >>>> > > >>>> Peter A. Kincaid > > >>>> Fredericton, NB, Canada > > >>>> > > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>>> From: lewisjo@junct.com > > >>>> To: KINCAID@rootsweb.com > > >>>> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:28 PM > > >>>> Subject: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Can anyone tell me what the markers mean? Each one has a value, > but > > >>>> what > > >>>> is the orginal meaning of the marker, does it, in itself mean > > >>>> anything > > >>>> that we can understand? When you say "mutations", do you mean > that > > it > > >>>> is > > >>>> just a different value than the rest of the group has? Isn't > there > > >>>> anything significant about that particular mutation at that > > >>>> particular > > >>>> marker? > > >>>> Kelly > > >>>> > > >>>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> ------------------------------- > > >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >>>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >>> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ------------------------------- > > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > >> > > >> > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > > > > > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Fredericksburg.com Date published: 10/25/2008 Arden R. Kincaid Arden R. Kincaid Sr., 81, of Lake Panasoffkee Fla., formerly of Fredericksburg, died Sunday, Oct. 5, 2008. Born March. 11, 1927, Mr. Kincaid worked for Earl's Food Market for 15 years and attended Ferry Farm Baptist Church. In 1980, he and his wife moved to Florida, where he was associate pastor of a baptist church there. He later was pastor of his own church until he retired in 1993. After retirement, he continued to serve the community. He had a love of woodworking and was an artist at crafting cabinets and birdhouses. He is survived by his wife of 62 years, Edith; a daughter, Dreama Williams; and a son, Arden R. Kincaid Jr. He also was blessed with five grandchildren and 10 great-grandchildren. Mr. Kincaid was interred in National Cemetery in Bushnell, Fla. _http://www.umwbullet.com/News/FLS/2008/102008/10252008/420508_ (http://www.umwbullet.com/News/FLS/2008/102008/10252008/420508)

Alice has uploaded the new chart to her website. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Alice for hosting the chart. Thank you, Sue Liedtke

Group A # 4073's confirmed haplogroup is R1b1b2 which is identical to yours at this point. Most of those in Group A have the same predicted haplogroup that I have looked at. As time goes on the dna scientists will likely find a way to differentiate between Group A & C haplogroups. I see Whalen's Cheat Sheet states that R1b1b2 covers a very large group of Europeans. Thanks for providing the link to Whalen. Don W. ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Kincaid To: kincaid@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:26 AM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question Hi Everyone, This is a great thread to add questions about SNP-DNA DEEP CLADE CLASSIFICATION. A number of us have paid to have these extra tests to help us determine more narrowly defined Haplogroups. Since I just received results from some of the new tests, I share them and then ask what everyone else has learned about these so far. I'm in Kincaid Group C-2, so presumably the other members of this group would get similar results and they should differ substantially from Group A members. Here's my test results so far, which can get me only as far as classification into Haplogroup R1b1b2: Positive Outcomes: M173+ M207+ M269+ M343+ P25+ Negative Outcomes: M126- M153- M160- M18- M222- M37- M65- M73- P66- SRY2627- Latest Negative Outcomes: P107- U106- U152- U198- Family tree has a nice flow chart to show where everyone's haplogroups are. There's information about this under "Whalen's Cheat Sheet" at: http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/o/d/a/Donald-K-Odair/FILE/0056page.html As far as I can make out so far, Group C-2 members can only be identified as having Pictian descent in Scotland with connections to northern Ireland (but same group). The last four tests were a waste of money for me. All were negative. Positive outcomes on U106 would supposedly have identified "Frisian" roots; same for a positive outcome on *U106* or *S21*--R1b1c9--R1b1b2g--R1b1b2a1 - R1bSTR22Frisian –originally known as 'Frisian' Invader marker, new research suggests the majority are more generally Germanic-likely North/West European/Netherlands in origin with two 'hotspots' in the Netherlands and western Austria. The large British Isles pop. is likely Germanic invasion legacy-U106/S21 is estimated to be found in about 25% of European ancestry men of the R1b-M269 haplogroup. This makes it the most common subclade of R1b-M269. *U198* or *S29*--R1b1c9b--R1b1b2g1--R1b1b2a1a - R1bSTR3-branch of U106-- confined to S. England (pre-Anglo-Saxon?). Known as Frisian 2 in K. Nordtvedt research-unclear if it's a Saxon invasion marker or earlier Germanic migration. *U152* or *S28* --R1b1c10--R1b1d2h--R1b1b2a2g - branch of P312--Ancient Celts- Alpine Germany and Switzerland origins - possibly the 'La Tene culture" Celts, also possibly a pre-roman era 'Invasion' or 'immigration wave ' marker of the British Isles pop.--moderate numbers in Scotland, England, Wales, large number in Switzerland, Alpine Germany and Italy, also in Greece, France, Poland, Norway, Netherlands-also an Ashkenazi group in Eastern Europe with Sephardic/Converso members constituting a separate cluster--L2 appears to be a significant sub-clade downstream of U152/S28, and may split the group roughly 2/3rds L2+ and 1/3rd L2-. Unknown relationship to M126 and M160. Family Tree does the tests and then sends you the plus or minus results, but for some reason they don't say anything about what it means in terms of SUB haplogroup identification. I had to search google for "SPP U106" to find a discussion of what the results mean. Of course, they now want me to get tested for 3 new "cutting edge" SNPs: L11, P311, and P310. Until they can tell me more about what a positive result on these three new ones mean, I don't intend to get tested again. Someone else might learn more about their subgroups this way, but mine seem to keep coming back "negative," and "your still Pictian." So, the question is: Has anyone from Group A done these tests? And if so, in what SNP haplogroups do group A Kincaids belong? Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 P.S. This may all be a waste of money for me, but I find the whole business extremely interesting. I don think Family Tree should be giving us more information before asking us to get tested, however. On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Sue Liedtke <seleaml@actionnet.net> wrote: > Kelly, > When a mutation appears in only one individual within a set, we cannot > attach much meaning to it. It is only when others in the set start showing > up with that mutation that we can look for possible connections. There are > a > few markers that seem to have many parallel mutations, most notably the CDY > complex (markers 34 & 35). A mutation at these markers does not necessarily > mean a closer relationship to others who have the mutation but should be > kept in mind when looking for connections. Marker 30 is suppose to be a > site > that mutates more quickly than other sites though so far this doesn't show > up in the Kincaid project. > > There is one other Group A-1a Kincaid who has a 16 at marker 30 (DYS456). > The value of 18 for A-2b and 25710 are the only other incidence (besides > your line) of mutation at this marker in Group A. 25710 claims descent from > Joseph/ Eliz Gray Downing who was born in 1771. The family moved from KY to > Crawford Co. IN. Your Mathew Kincaid indicates in the 1850 census that he > was b 1807/8 in VA. I don't know whether Joseph's researcher knows when > Joseph or his family moved to KY or where he was born (Boone didn't lead > the > first settlers into KY until 1775) so it is possible that somewhere there > could be a connection. However, if your Mathew is proven to be the son of > Francis, son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher and Joseph can be vetted as ancestor > of 25710, it looks like the 2 mutations to 16 were parallel as the others > who have potential to Thomas/Hannah do not have that mutation. Still you do > have to keep the 25710's matching mutation in mind and should, along with > the researcher for 25710, eliminate any possibility of connection. > > Sue Liedtke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:04 PM > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > > Sue, > > Thank you so much for taking the time to explain that. I have another > > question: You said that group A-2b has a mutation @ marker 30, they have > > an 18, when the other groups,(A), have a 17. Since my father has a 16 at > > this marker, is that anything significant? > > Thanks again, > > Kelly > > > > > > > >> Peter, thank you for the explaination to the group. > >> To answer Kelly's question and explain how the chart is organized. > >> > >> Each Group in the chart have similar patterns of results within the > group > >> and they are very different from the patterns of results for any other > >> Group. Each of the members of a group are related to each other but are > >> not > >> related to members of other groups. Each Group has a single ancestor who > >> adopted the surname Kincaid or a variance thereof. The 2 most numerous > >> Groups in the Kincaid project are Group A and Group C-2. > >> > >> The Apparent Ancestral Values for Group A (top string) and Group C-2 > >> (bottom > >> string) for markers 1-12/13-25/26-37 are: > >> > 13.23.14.12.11.14.12.12.11.13.13.29/16.9.10.11.11.24.15.18.29.15.16.17.18/11.10.19.23.17.14.16.17.37.39.12.12 > >> > 13.25.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30/17.9.10.11.11.25.15.19.30.15.15.17.17/11.11.19.24.16.15.18.17.36.36.13.12 > >> > >> If I have counted correctly there are 18 markers that do not match. Some > >> of > >> those that don't match vary by several steps. There are 19 markers that > >> are > >> the same which would indicate a common ancestor back in the ice age or > >> beyond. But for our purposes, these Groups are not genetically related. > >> > >> There are few variances from the Group AAV for C-2. Three members have a > >> 24 > >> at marker 2. Two of these descend from George/Elizabeth Dean. The 3rd > >> with > >> this mutation should look for a connection to this line. Because there > >> are > >> so few mutations, it is possible that the common ancestor for this Group > >> may > >> be found in historic times. > >> > >> Group A has a number of mutations which are shared by a others in the > >> Group. > >> The most significant mutation occurs at marker 15 in the second panel > >> (13-25), 3rd number. The AAV is a 10. One third of the project members > >> have > >> a 9 at this marker. Those with a 10 are in Group A set 1. Those with a 9 > >> are > >> in Group A set 2/4. > >> > >> Group A set 2/4 can be divided into subfamilies. > >> Set 2a does not as yet have a significant mutation from the set AAV. > >> > >> A-2b has a significant mutation at marker 30 in the 3rd panel (26-37), > >> 5th > >> number. This set has an 18 instead of the AAV 17. They should have a > >> common > >> ancestor closer in time than any one of them connect to someone who does > >> not > >> have the 18. > >> > >> A-4 has several mutations shared by all members of the set. They all > have > >> a > >> 14 instead of the AAV 15 at marker 19 (7th number in the 2nd panel) and > a > >> 36 > >> instead of 37 at marker 34 (4th from the end of the 3rd panel). > >> > >> Group A set 1 can be divided into a subfamily with no significant > >> variance > >> from the AAV for Group A (set 1a), a subfamily set 1b that has a 12 > >> instead > >> of an 11 at marker 26 (1st number in the 3rd panel) and a set which > >> contains > >> our biggest challange. A-1c has one common mutation that distinguishes > it > >> from A-1a. They all have an 11 instead of a 12 at marker 4 (4th number > in > >> the 1st panel). > >> > >> What makes this 11 such a challange is that an 11 at this marker pops up > >> in > >> every other Group A set and subset. If everyone could be vetted to their > >> claimed ancestor there would have been at least 6 times this marker > >> mutated > >> to an 11. Even if they could not be vetted either the mutation at marker > >> 4 > >> to an 11 occured several times or 4 other markers (15, 19, 26 and 30) > >> mutated twice. The odds that the latter happened are astromomical. The > >> value > >> of 12 at marker 4 is at the top of its range. Very few people have it. > >> From > >> our project data, it appears that the marker is very unstable at this > >> value > >> and drops a repetition often. > >> > >> In A-4 Peter has isolated the mutation to Daniel, son of his ancestor > >> David > >> as the line from another son of David does not have the mutation. > >> > >> In A-2a a line from one son of John, son of George, has the mutation. A > >> line > >> from another son of John does not. > >> > >> In A-1b 2 lines with probable common ancestor John/Elizabeth Logan have > >> the > >> mutation. No one else in the set does. Either the mutation to 12 at > >> marker > >> 26 would have had to occur in 2 individuals or the marker four 11 was > the > >> result of a separate event. > >> > >> In A-2b the same thing occurs. One individual has the mutation the rest > >> do > >> not. Again the mutation to18 at marker 30 would have had to occur twice > >> or > >> the marker 4 mutation to 11 was the result of a separate event. > >> > >> In A-1c an individual with the mutation claims with a great deal of > >> circumstantial evidence to the same ancestor as several individuals > >> without > >> the mutation in A-1a. > >> > >> If everyone in A-1c except the individual above, could be traced to a > >> single > >> common ancestor, that ancestor was not the same one as any of the above. > >> With so many mutations to the 11 on record, it is unclear if all in this > >> set > >> will find a common ancestor before connecting to someone without it. > >> > >> Sue Liedtke > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > >> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 7:02 PM > >> Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > >> > >> > >>> Peter, > >>> Thank you so much for your detailed information. I'm sure others will > >>> find > >>> it as useful as I have. Besides grouping us together because we have > >>> similar DNA patterns, (including mutations), can't these markers tell > us > >>> something more in-depth about each of our particular groups, subgroups > >>> and > >>> the mutations that make us distance-1,2,3, etc.? I know that each > strand > >>> of DNA is for something, such as eye color, hair color, height, > >>> diseases, > >>> etc, so what do these markers tell, or do they even know that info? > >>> Since > >>> everyone in the project has such closely matched DNA, does that mean > >>> that > >>> everyone of us came from the same exact male ancestor, not one of our > >>> lines came from another man who decided to use the Kyncade as their > last > >>> name? That the mutations just tell us that we are related, but > different > >>> as to how many generations back? > >>> Am I trying to make it more difficult than it is? I'm sorry for all the > >>> questions, I would just like to have a good grasp of all the > information > >>> possible. And again, thank you so much for being patient with us > >>> "newbies". > >>> Kelly Kincade-Lewis, dau of Robt R Kincade #129770 > >>> > >>> > >>>> Hi Kelly, > >>>> > >>>> The following is something I put together a few years ago > >>>> for my DNA web page. Perhaps this will help with the > >>>> basics a bit. > >>>> > >>>> Everyone of us contain structures called chromosomes. These > chromosomes > >>>> usually come in pairs, one inherited from the mother and one from the > >>>> father, and humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes altogether. In 22 of > >>>> the > >>>> 23 pairs, the 2 chromosomes are very similar. However, the 23rd pair > is > >>>> made up of two possible combinations of 2 very different chromosomes, > >>>> the > >>>> X and the Y chromosomes. All of us have at least one X chromosome, > >>>> which > >>>> we have inherited from our mother. The second chromosome in this pair > >>>> is > >>>> always inherited from the father. If it is another X chomosome then > the > >>>> pair readily mixes and the embryo developes into a female. If the > >>>> second > >>>> chromosome inherited from the father is a Y chromosome then the embryo > >>>> developes into a male. Since a male's 23rd pair are disimilar (X & Y), > >>>> genetic material cannot readily exchange between them. The result is > >>>> that > >>>> the Y chromosome of every living man contains portions that directly > >>>> resembles that of his father, grandfather, great gra! > >>>> ndfather etc. and cousins of any degree who also have the same male > >>>> ancestor. > >>>> > >>>> The Y chromosone is about 60,000,000 base pairs long. One base on the > >>>> DNA > >>>> strand can be one of the following four nitrogen containing chemicals: > >>>> A > >>>> (adenine), T (thymine), C (cytosine) and G (guanine). There are two > >>>> strands in the DNA chain parallel to each other and connected. They > are > >>>> connected because Adenine (A) pairs with thymine (T) and cytosine (C) > >>>> pairs with guanine (G). Thus, if you have a A on one strand then its > >>>> opposite strand will have a T so they can join. > >>>> > >>>> When the DNA within the male Y chromosome is copied from generation to > >>>> generation, small mistakes are occasionally made. These mistakes give > >>>> rise > >>>> to differences between Y chromosomes of two individuals called > >>>> "polymorphisms". An person's combination of polymorphisms identifies a > >>>> unique sequence or "haplotype" with which to make comparisons to that > >>>> of > >>>> another individual. > >>>> > >>>> STRs (abbreviation for Short Tandem Repeats) are sections of DNA where > >>>> a > >>>> short pattern (2-5 bases) has been identified as repeating a certain > >>>> number of times in a row (in tandem). DYS391 is an identified STR with > >>>> the > >>>> 'GATA' pattern repeating at one specific location (repeating patterns > >>>> at > >>>> specific points are called markers). For many Kincaids in our project > >>>> it > >>>> has been determined that the DYS391 marker repeated 12 times. In that > >>>> section of the Y-DNA one strand of the DNA looks like: > >>>> > >>>> GATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATA. > >>>> > >>>> For other Kincaids in the project there was a mutation in one of the > >>>> GATA > >>>> pairs (ie. perhaps a G became a C) resulting in only 11 GATA repeats > >>>> being > >>>> counted for the same marker instead of 12 (ie. a mutation is when the > >>>> number of repeats increases or decreases by one or occasionally two or > >>>> more). Since we are dealing with more than one base pair (ie. one > >>>> letter) > >>>> then mutations can be observed frequently enough in STR markers to be > >>>> of > >>>> use for genealogy. > >>>> > >>>> Peter A. Kincaid > >>>> Fredericton, NB, Canada > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: lewisjo@junct.com > >>>> To: KINCAID@rootsweb.com > >>>> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:28 PM > >>>> Subject: [KINCAID] DNA Question > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Can anyone tell me what the markers mean? Each one has a value, but > >>>> what > >>>> is the orginal meaning of the marker, does it, in itself mean > >>>> anything > >>>> that we can understand? When you say "mutations", do you mean that > it > >>>> is > >>>> just a different value than the rest of the group has? Isn't there > >>>> anything significant about that particular mutation at that > >>>> particular > >>>> marker? > >>>> Kelly > >>>> > >>>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > >>>> > >>>> > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >>>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > >>> > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > >>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > >> > >> > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Everyone, This is a great thread to add questions about SNP-DNA DEEP CLADE CLASSIFICATION. A number of us have paid to have these extra tests to help us determine more narrowly defined Haplogroups. Since I just received results from some of the new tests, I share them and then ask what everyone else has learned about these so far. I'm in Kincaid Group C-2, so presumably the other members of this group would get similar results and they should differ substantially from Group A members. Here's my test results so far, which can get me only as far as classification into Haplogroup R1b1b2: Positive Outcomes: M173+ M207+ M269+ M343+ P25+ Negative Outcomes: M126- M153- M160- M18- M222- M37- M65- M73- P66- SRY2627- Latest Negative Outcomes: P107- U106- U152- U198- Family tree has a nice flow chart to show where everyone's haplogroups are. There's information about this under "Whalen's Cheat Sheet" at: http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/o/d/a/Donald-K-Odair/FILE/0056page.html As far as I can make out so far, Group C-2 members can only be identified as having Pictian descent in Scotland with connections to northern Ireland (but same group). The last four tests were a waste of money for me. All were negative. Positive outcomes on U106 would supposedly have identified "Frisian" roots; same for a positive outcome on *U106* or *S21*--R1b1c9--R1b1b2g--R1b1b2a1 - R1bSTR22Frisian –originally known as 'Frisian' Invader marker, new research suggests the majority are more generally Germanic-likely North/West European/Netherlands in origin with two 'hotspots' in the Netherlands and western Austria. The large British Isles pop. is likely Germanic invasion legacy-U106/S21 is estimated to be found in about 25% of European ancestry men of the R1b-M269 haplogroup. This makes it the most common subclade of R1b-M269. *U198* or *S29*--R1b1c9b--R1b1b2g1--R1b1b2a1a - R1bSTR3-branch of U106-- confined to S. England (pre-Anglo-Saxon?). Known as Frisian 2 in K. Nordtvedt research-unclear if it's a Saxon invasion marker or earlier Germanic migration. *U152* or *S28* --R1b1c10--R1b1d2h--R1b1b2a2g - branch of P312--Ancient Celts- Alpine Germany and Switzerland origins - possibly the 'La Tene culture" Celts, also possibly a pre-roman era 'Invasion' or 'immigration wave ' marker of the British Isles pop.--moderate numbers in Scotland, England, Wales, large number in Switzerland, Alpine Germany and Italy, also in Greece, France, Poland, Norway, Netherlands-also an Ashkenazi group in Eastern Europe with Sephardic/Converso members constituting a separate cluster--L2 appears to be a significant sub-clade downstream of U152/S28, and may split the group roughly 2/3rds L2+ and 1/3rd L2-. Unknown relationship to M126 and M160. Family Tree does the tests and then sends you the plus or minus results, but for some reason they don't say anything about what it means in terms of SUB haplogroup identification. I had to search google for "SPP U106" to find a discussion of what the results mean. Of course, they now want me to get tested for 3 new "cutting edge" SNPs: L11, P311, and P310. Until they can tell me more about what a positive result on these three new ones mean, I don't intend to get tested again. Someone else might learn more about their subgroups this way, but mine seem to keep coming back "negative," and "your still Pictian." So, the question is: Has anyone from Group A done these tests? And if so, in what SNP haplogroups do group A Kincaids belong? Don (Larry) Kincaid, Group C-2 P.S. This may all be a waste of money for me, but I find the whole business extremely interesting. I don think Family Tree should be giving us more information before asking us to get tested, however. On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Sue Liedtke <seleaml@actionnet.net> wrote: > Kelly, > When a mutation appears in only one individual within a set, we cannot > attach much meaning to it. It is only when others in the set start showing > up with that mutation that we can look for possible connections. There are > a > few markers that seem to have many parallel mutations, most notably the CDY > complex (markers 34 & 35). A mutation at these markers does not necessarily > mean a closer relationship to others who have the mutation but should be > kept in mind when looking for connections. Marker 30 is suppose to be a > site > that mutates more quickly than other sites though so far this doesn't show > up in the Kincaid project. > > There is one other Group A-1a Kincaid who has a 16 at marker 30 (DYS456). > The value of 18 for A-2b and 25710 are the only other incidence (besides > your line) of mutation at this marker in Group A. 25710 claims descent from > Joseph/ Eliz Gray Downing who was born in 1771. The family moved from KY to > Crawford Co. IN. Your Mathew Kincaid indicates in the 1850 census that he > was b 1807/8 in VA. I don't know whether Joseph's researcher knows when > Joseph or his family moved to KY or where he was born (Boone didn't lead > the > first settlers into KY until 1775) so it is possible that somewhere there > could be a connection. However, if your Mathew is proven to be the son of > Francis, son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher and Joseph can be vetted as ancestor > of 25710, it looks like the 2 mutations to 16 were parallel as the others > who have potential to Thomas/Hannah do not have that mutation. Still you do > have to keep the 25710's matching mutation in mind and should, along with > the researcher for 25710, eliminate any possibility of connection. > > Sue Liedtke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:04 PM > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > > > > Sue, > > Thank you so much for taking the time to explain that. I have another > > question: You said that group A-2b has a mutation @ marker 30, they have > > an 18, when the other groups,(A), have a 17. Since my father has a 16 at > > this marker, is that anything significant? > > Thanks again, > > Kelly > > > > > > > >> Peter, thank you for the explaination to the group. > >> To answer Kelly's question and explain how the chart is organized. > >> > >> Each Group in the chart have similar patterns of results within the > group > >> and they are very different from the patterns of results for any other > >> Group. Each of the members of a group are related to each other but are > >> not > >> related to members of other groups. Each Group has a single ancestor who > >> adopted the surname Kincaid or a variance thereof. The 2 most numerous > >> Groups in the Kincaid project are Group A and Group C-2. > >> > >> The Apparent Ancestral Values for Group A (top string) and Group C-2 > >> (bottom > >> string) for markers 1-12/13-25/26-37 are: > >> > 13.23.14.12.11.14.12.12.11.13.13.29/16.9.10.11.11.24.15.18.29.15.16.17.18/11.10.19.23.17.14.16.17.37.39.12.12 > >> > 13.25.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30/17.9.10.11.11.25.15.19.30.15.15.17.17/11.11.19.24.16.15.18.17.36.36.13.12 > >> > >> If I have counted correctly there are 18 markers that do not match. Some > >> of > >> those that don't match vary by several steps. There are 19 markers that > >> are > >> the same which would indicate a common ancestor back in the ice age or > >> beyond. But for our purposes, these Groups are not genetically related. > >> > >> There are few variances from the Group AAV for C-2. Three members have a > >> 24 > >> at marker 2. Two of these descend from George/Elizabeth Dean. The 3rd > >> with > >> this mutation should look for a connection to this line. Because there > >> are > >> so few mutations, it is possible that the common ancestor for this Group > >> may > >> be found in historic times. > >> > >> Group A has a number of mutations which are shared by a others in the > >> Group. > >> The most significant mutation occurs at marker 15 in the second panel > >> (13-25), 3rd number. The AAV is a 10. One third of the project members > >> have > >> a 9 at this marker. Those with a 10 are in Group A set 1. Those with a 9 > >> are > >> in Group A set 2/4. > >> > >> Group A set 2/4 can be divided into subfamilies. > >> Set 2a does not as yet have a significant mutation from the set AAV. > >> > >> A-2b has a significant mutation at marker 30 in the 3rd panel (26-37), > >> 5th > >> number. This set has an 18 instead of the AAV 17. They should have a > >> common > >> ancestor closer in time than any one of them connect to someone who does > >> not > >> have the 18. > >> > >> A-4 has several mutations shared by all members of the set. They all > have > >> a > >> 14 instead of the AAV 15 at marker 19 (7th number in the 2nd panel) and > a > >> 36 > >> instead of 37 at marker 34 (4th from the end of the 3rd panel). > >> > >> Group A set 1 can be divided into a subfamily with no significant > >> variance > >> from the AAV for Group A (set 1a), a subfamily set 1b that has a 12 > >> instead > >> of an 11 at marker 26 (1st number in the 3rd panel) and a set which > >> contains > >> our biggest challange. A-1c has one common mutation that distinguishes > it > >> from A-1a. They all have an 11 instead of a 12 at marker 4 (4th number > in > >> the 1st panel). > >> > >> What makes this 11 such a challange is that an 11 at this marker pops up > >> in > >> every other Group A set and subset. If everyone could be vetted to their > >> claimed ancestor there would have been at least 6 times this marker > >> mutated > >> to an 11. Even if they could not be vetted either the mutation at marker > >> 4 > >> to an 11 occured several times or 4 other markers (15, 19, 26 and 30) > >> mutated twice. The odds that the latter happened are astromomical. The > >> value > >> of 12 at marker 4 is at the top of its range. Very few people have it. > >> From > >> our project data, it appears that the marker is very unstable at this > >> value > >> and drops a repetition often. > >> > >> In A-4 Peter has isolated the mutation to Daniel, son of his ancestor > >> David > >> as the line from another son of David does not have the mutation. > >> > >> In A-2a a line from one son of John, son of George, has the mutation. A > >> line > >> from another son of John does not. > >> > >> In A-1b 2 lines with probable common ancestor John/Elizabeth Logan have > >> the > >> mutation. No one else in the set does. Either the mutation to 12 at > >> marker > >> 26 would have had to occur in 2 individuals or the marker four 11 was > the > >> result of a separate event. > >> > >> In A-2b the same thing occurs. One individual has the mutation the rest > >> do > >> not. Again the mutation to18 at marker 30 would have had to occur twice > >> or > >> the marker 4 mutation to 11 was the result of a separate event. > >> > >> In A-1c an individual with the mutation claims with a great deal of > >> circumstantial evidence to the same ancestor as several individuals > >> without > >> the mutation in A-1a. > >> > >> If everyone in A-1c except the individual above, could be traced to a > >> single > >> common ancestor, that ancestor was not the same one as any of the above. > >> With so many mutations to the 11 on record, it is unclear if all in this > >> set > >> will find a common ancestor before connecting to someone without it. > >> > >> Sue Liedtke > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > >> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 7:02 PM > >> Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA Question > >> > >> > >>> Peter, > >>> Thank you so much for your detailed information. I'm sure others will > >>> find > >>> it as useful as I have. Besides grouping us together because we have > >>> similar DNA patterns, (including mutations), can't these markers tell > us > >>> something more in-depth about each of our particular groups, subgroups > >>> and > >>> the mutations that make us distance-1,2,3, etc.? I know that each > strand > >>> of DNA is for something, such as eye color, hair color, height, > >>> diseases, > >>> etc, so what do these markers tell, or do they even know that info? > >>> Since > >>> everyone in the project has such closely matched DNA, does that mean > >>> that > >>> everyone of us came from the same exact male ancestor, not one of our > >>> lines came from another man who decided to use the Kyncade as their > last > >>> name? That the mutations just tell us that we are related, but > different > >>> as to how many generations back? > >>> Am I trying to make it more difficult than it is? I'm sorry for all the > >>> questions, I would just like to have a good grasp of all the > information > >>> possible. And again, thank you so much for being patient with us > >>> "newbies". > >>> Kelly Kincade-Lewis, dau of Robt R Kincade #129770 > >>> > >>> > >>>> Hi Kelly, > >>>> > >>>> The following is something I put together a few years ago > >>>> for my DNA web page. Perhaps this will help with the > >>>> basics a bit. > >>>> > >>>> Everyone of us contain structures called chromosomes. These > chromosomes > >>>> usually come in pairs, one inherited from the mother and one from the > >>>> father, and humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes altogether. In 22 of > >>>> the > >>>> 23 pairs, the 2 chromosomes are very similar. However, the 23rd pair > is > >>>> made up of two possible combinations of 2 very different chromosomes, > >>>> the > >>>> X and the Y chromosomes. All of us have at least one X chromosome, > >>>> which > >>>> we have inherited from our mother. The second chromosome in this pair > >>>> is > >>>> always inherited from the father. If it is another X chomosome then > the > >>>> pair readily mixes and the embryo developes into a female. If the > >>>> second > >>>> chromosome inherited from the father is a Y chromosome then the embryo > >>>> developes into a male. Since a male's 23rd pair are disimilar (X & Y), > >>>> genetic material cannot readily exchange between them. The result is > >>>> that > >>>> the Y chromosome of every living man contains portions that directly > >>>> resembles that of his father, grandfather, great gra! > >>>> ndfather etc. and cousins of any degree who also have the same male > >>>> ancestor. > >>>> > >>>> The Y chromosone is about 60,000,000 base pairs long. One base on the > >>>> DNA > >>>> strand can be one of the following four nitrogen containing chemicals: > >>>> A > >>>> (adenine), T (thymine), C (cytosine) and G (guanine). There are two > >>>> strands in the DNA chain parallel to each other and connected. They > are > >>>> connected because Adenine (A) pairs with thymine (T) and cytosine (C) > >>>> pairs with guanine (G). Thus, if you have a A on one strand then its > >>>> opposite strand will have a T so they can join. > >>>> > >>>> When the DNA within the male Y chromosome is copied from generation to > >>>> generation, small mistakes are occasionally made. These mistakes give > >>>> rise > >>>> to differences between Y chromosomes of two individuals called > >>>> "polymorphisms". An person's combination of polymorphisms identifies a > >>>> unique sequence or "haplotype" with which to make comparisons to that > >>>> of > >>>> another individual. > >>>> > >>>> STRs (abbreviation for Short Tandem Repeats) are sections of DNA where > >>>> a > >>>> short pattern (2-5 bases) has been identified as repeating a certain > >>>> number of times in a row (in tandem). DYS391 is an identified STR with > >>>> the > >>>> 'GATA' pattern repeating at one specific location (repeating patterns > >>>> at > >>>> specific points are called markers). For many Kincaids in our project > >>>> it > >>>> has been determined that the DYS391 marker repeated 12 times. In that > >>>> section of the Y-DNA one strand of the DNA looks like: > >>>> > >>>> GATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATAGATA. > >>>> > >>>> For other Kincaids in the project there was a mutation in one of the > >>>> GATA > >>>> pairs (ie. perhaps a G became a C) resulting in only 11 GATA repeats > >>>> being > >>>> counted for the same marker instead of 12 (ie. a mutation is when the > >>>> number of repeats increases or decreases by one or occasionally two or > >>>> more). Since we are dealing with more than one base pair (ie. one > >>>> letter) > >>>> then mutations can be observed frequently enough in STR markers to be > >>>> of > >>>> use for genealogy. > >>>> > >>>> Peter A. Kincaid > >>>> Fredericton, NB, Canada > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: lewisjo@junct.com > >>>> To: KINCAID@rootsweb.com > >>>> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 3:28 PM > >>>> Subject: [KINCAID] DNA Question > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Can anyone tell me what the markers mean? Each one has a value, but > >>>> what > >>>> is the orginal meaning of the marker, does it, in itself mean > >>>> anything > >>>> that we can understand? When you say "mutations", do you mean that > it > >>>> is > >>>> just a different value than the rest of the group has? Isn't there > >>>> anything significant about that particular mutation at that > >>>> particular > >>>> marker? > >>>> Kelly > >>>> > >>>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > >>>> > >>>> > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >>>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > >>> > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > >>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > >> > >> > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I have sent a November chart to Alice. If she is available she generally posts an updated chart quickly but if she is otherwise engaged it might be a day or two. We have had so many results come in at brief intervals that I have kept waiting for them to be returned so they could be included. We do have tests due in on November 21. I will send another update after all are of these are returned. Sue ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Lou Clegg" <mlclegg@verizon.net> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 6:13 AM Subject: [KINCAID] Results for DNA 130207 & 124250 > When will the Excel chart be updated? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sue Liedtke" <seleaml@actionnet.net> > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 11:42 AM > Subject: [KINCAID] Results for DNA 130207 & 124250 > > >> The 3rd panel results for 130207 have been posted. The only variance from >> the Group A Apparent Ancestral Value in the 13-25 marker range occurs at >> marker 13 (DYS458) where he has a 17 instead of the AAV 16. This places >> him >> in Group A set 1a. >> >> 130207 believes descent from Thomas and Eliza Jane Townsend of Fayette >> Co. >> WVA. Eliza is the 2nd wife of Thomas b 1829 who m Isabella Campbell in >> 1849-50. We can follow him in the censuses from 1850 through 1880. On his >> marriage information for his marriage to Eliza he states his parents were >> Thomas & Mary Kincaid. Thomas appears with Mary Kincaid age 53 widow in >> his >> 1850 census. This is exciting for the Greenbrier/Fayette Co. VA(WVA) >> Kincaids. The paper trail strongly suggests that this Thomas is the son >> of >> Thomas, son of Samuel of the 3 wives and that mother Mary is "Polly" >> Davis >> who is the vetted ancestress of 33001 (A-1c) and the likely ancestress of >> 101753 (A-1a). Of interest also is that 49289's (A-2a) vetted ancestor, >> who >> appears in the same 1850 census, married the sister of Isabella Campbell >> and >> has long been thought to be a brother to this Thomas. A second line from >> 49289's ancestor is being sought in order to confirm or isolate the >> marker >> 15 nine which places him in set 2. The Greenbrieer Co. area is a large >> tangle of Kincaids with several families represented. It is through DNA >> that >> there is any hope of unsnarling the families. >> >> Full results for the 37 marker test ordered by 124250 have been returned. >> He >> matches the Group A AAV in all but the following alelles. He has the >> marker >> 15 (DYS459b) nine which places him in Set 2. He has the marker 30 >> (DYS456) >> 18 which places him in Set 2a. In addition he also has a 16 at marker 22 >> (DYS 460a) instead of the AAV 15 and a 16 at marker 33 (DYS570) instead >> of >> the AAV 17. 51828 (A-2b) also has the 16 at marker 22. 51828 is vetted to >> David/Lucy McCormick b 1795 of Maury Co. TN. I have no ancestral >> information >> for 124250. >> >> Sue Liedtke >> >> >> >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

When will the Excel chart be updated? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Liedtke" <seleaml@actionnet.net> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 11:42 AM Subject: [KINCAID] Results for DNA 130207 & 124250 > The 3rd panel results for 130207 have been posted. The only variance from > the Group A Apparent Ancestral Value in the 13-25 marker range occurs at > marker 13 (DYS458) where he has a 17 instead of the AAV 16. This places > him > in Group A set 1a. > > 130207 believes descent from Thomas and Eliza Jane Townsend of Fayette Co. > WVA. Eliza is the 2nd wife of Thomas b 1829 who m Isabella Campbell in > 1849-50. We can follow him in the censuses from 1850 through 1880. On his > marriage information for his marriage to Eliza he states his parents were > Thomas & Mary Kincaid. Thomas appears with Mary Kincaid age 53 widow in > his > 1850 census. This is exciting for the Greenbrier/Fayette Co. VA(WVA) > Kincaids. The paper trail strongly suggests that this Thomas is the son of > Thomas, son of Samuel of the 3 wives and that mother Mary is "Polly" Davis > who is the vetted ancestress of 33001 (A-1c) and the likely ancestress of > 101753 (A-1a). Of interest also is that 49289's (A-2a) vetted ancestor, > who > appears in the same 1850 census, married the sister of Isabella Campbell > and > has long been thought to be a brother to this Thomas. A second line from > 49289's ancestor is being sought in order to confirm or isolate the marker > 15 nine which places him in set 2. The Greenbrieer Co. area is a large > tangle of Kincaids with several families represented. It is through DNA > that > there is any hope of unsnarling the families. > > Full results for the 37 marker test ordered by 124250 have been returned. > He > matches the Group A AAV in all but the following alelles. He has the > marker > 15 (DYS459b) nine which places him in Set 2. He has the marker 30 (DYS456) > 18 which places him in Set 2a. In addition he also has a 16 at marker 22 > (DYS 460a) instead of the AAV 15 and a 16 at marker 33 (DYS570) instead of > the AAV 17. 51828 (A-2b) also has the 16 at marker 22. 51828 is vetted to > David/Lucy McCormick b 1795 of Maury Co. TN. I have no ancestral > information > for 124250. > > Sue Liedtke > > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Kelly, you might find records for Francis in Hancock, Madison or Marion Cos. as well as in Hamilton Co. Fall Creek is in the area where these 4 counties almost meet. Marion Co. was created from Unorganized Territory in 1822. Hamilton and Madison were created from Marion Co. & Unorganized Territory in 1823. Hancock Co. was taken from Madison Co in 1828. Since the area where Francis lived was Unorganized Territory in 1819-21, records might also be found in the nearest existing Co. A quick look suggests that Wayne Co. (created 1811) might be the best bet as there is a present State Hwy between the Fall Creek area and that county. State Hwys often follow the paths of the earliest roads. Thomas went 1st to Ohio then to Indiana but Francis appears to have gone directly to Indiana. Francis's son Thomas indicated to his son that they came down the Ohio to Indiana so it is possible that there was a short stay in one of the counties that border that River. Dearborn Co. formed in 1803 is next to Hamilton Co. Ohio at the top of a northern loop of the Ohio River. Since Thomas is in Hamilton Co., OH this might be a real possibility especially as the state line separating the 2 counties does not follow a water course. Heirs of Samuel Baldwin vs heirs of Thomas Kincaid papers found in TN list sons Thomas and Francis of Madison (Co?), Ind. There is not a date on the papers found in the TN repository but since Madison Co. wasn't created until 1828 it should be after that. The case was still unresolved in 1835. Thomas Jr. and Francis left Greenbrier Co. VA in 1819. Sue Liedtke ----- Original Message ----- From: <lewisjo@junct.com> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 6:23 AM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Will of Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana >I found on Ancestry.com, a 1880 Census, Hamilton County Indiana, Fallcreek > twn, an Isaac Humbles hh age 62, b abt 1818, Mary J, wife age 48, and > their children. This could not be the father of Elizabeth who married > Mathew Kincade. Elizabeth was born abt 1813, it could be her brother, > cousin, etc. > > I did find a Land Patent dated Aug. 10, 1837 out of Indianapolis Office, > for the county of Hancock, for a Francis Kincade. ( 40 acres) > > Thank you Barbara for the info, it gives me another direction to start > looking, > Kelly Kincade-Lewis > > > > >> Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana appears to have been the father >> of the Elizabeth Humbles who married Matthew Kincaid. Matthew was >> probably the son of Francis Kincaid/Hannah Viney and grandson of Thomas >> Kincaid/Hannah Tincher. >> >> #480 HUMBLES, Isaac. Will dated 12 Jan 1881; proved 22 Jan 1881. >> Legatees: >> wife Mary Jane HUMBLES and her minor children, names not specified; daus. >> Emma, Francis Abigal and Nellie Humbles; children Joannah/Joan Layton, >> Mary Jane Castetter, Sarah Jane Heady, Elizabeth Kincade, Alice Ledman, >> Floretta Ledman, Vinton Edgar/Edward HUMBLES, William Franklin Humbles; >> Arminta Kincade. Also mentions: John and Elizabeth Humbles; Isaac Wood; >> Belinda Wood; David C. Thompson. No exec named. Wit: William H. Harrison, >> Thomas Clawson. >> Will Record E., pp. 249-253. >> http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.indiana.counties.hamilton/2975/mb.ashx >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >> >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes, she could fit within the under 10 females, in the 1820 census, given the age on the later census records, and approx. 17 on the 1830 census. She listed her birth state as KY on one, IN on another, and her son Calvin's death certificate said she was born in NY???? who knows??? Elizabeth and Mathew's first child, Calvin, was born in 1839 in Indiana. So, that, would make her approx. 26 when he was born, unless there were other children before him, or she could have been married previously, that just doesn't really sound right considering the age most young ladies married at and started having children. My guess is that Pleasant is Elizabeth's brother, and Sarah is her mother...since these are the families that Elizabeth/Mathew lived next door too....? What are your thoughts? Kelly > This appears to be the earliest Humble family in Hamilton County, IN, > showing up in the 1830 census several names away from Hiram Coffee. In > 1820, Josiah Humble was in Jefferson > County, IN. In the 1880 Hamilton County, IN census, Fall Creek Township, > Isaac Humble said that both of his parents were born in NC > > ************* > > Josiah Humble b.1780-1790 prob.TN,PENN,KY,VIR > d.abt 1840 Hamilton co IND > Married Sarah ???? Children were; > Pleasant b.1806 Phillip b.1810 Josiah b.1812 John b.1813 > Lucinda b.1821 JulieAnn b.1825 Isaac b.1830 > **************** > > Josiah is found on the 1812 Warren Co. Tenn Tax list and > next appears on the 1820 Jefferson Co. In census, and the > 1830 Hamilton Co. Indiana census. In 1840, Josiah does not > appear, but his wife Sarah is listed next door to Pleasant > > > Josiah is on the 1820 Jefferson Co., Indiana Census Pg. 287 with the > following information: > > Josiah is 26-45,(in 1830 he is shown as 40-50, b.c.1780-1790 > Now, matching the ages of the males in 1820 with the > Humble boys who are in Hamilton Co. in 1830,1840 and > 1850 we have > > Males,: 3 under 10= Phillip b. 1810, Josiah b. 1812, John b. 1813(all born > Tenn) > 1 age 10-16= Pleasant R. b. 1806, b. Tenn > Females: 2 under 10-names unknown > 1 age 10-16 name unknown > His wife Sarah is 26-45 (1830 shown as 40=50 b.c. 1780-1790) > > In 1830 he has one male under 5=Isaac b. 1826 In. 1- 1-10 > 1- 15-20= John,1 20-30=Phillip (he marries in 1835 to Sally > (Sarah) Mc Farland) > > Females: 2- 5-10 (Lucinda b. 1821 and Julia Ann b. 1825) > 1 10-15 and 1-15-20. > http://genforum.genealogy.com/cgi-bin/pageload.cgi?Josiah::humble::440.html > > Could Elizabeth Humble's age fit with the above 1830 Hamilton County, IN > census for the Josiah Humble family? > > > Barbara > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <lewisjo@junct.com> > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:43 AM > Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Will of Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana > > >> Also found on 1880 Census for Hamilton County, Noblesville Twn, a Sarah >> Humbles age 64 widowed, b abt 1816, with a son named Isaac aged 22 >> living >> in the home. >> Kelly >> >> >> >>> I found on Ancestry.com, a 1880 Census, Hamilton County Indiana, >>> Fallcreek >>> twn, an Isaac Humbles hh age 62, b abt 1818, Mary J, wife age 48, and >>> their children. This could not be the father of Elizabeth who married >>> Mathew Kincade. Elizabeth was born abt 1813, it could be her brother, >>> cousin, etc. >>> >>> I did find a Land Patent dated Aug. 10, 1837 out of Indianapolis >>> Office, >>> for the county of Hancock, for a Francis Kincade. ( 40 acres) >>> >>> Thank you Barbara for the info, it gives me another direction to start >>> looking, >>> Kelly Kincade-Lewis >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana appears to have been the >>>> father >>>> of the Elizabeth Humbles who married Matthew Kincaid. Matthew was >>>> probably the son of Francis Kincaid/Hannah Viney and grandson of >>>> Thomas >>>> Kincaid/Hannah Tincher. >>>> >>>> #480 HUMBLES, Isaac. Will dated 12 Jan 1881; proved 22 Jan 1881. >>>> Legatees: >>>> wife Mary Jane HUMBLES and her minor children, names not specified; >>>> daus. >>>> Emma, Francis Abigal and Nellie Humbles; children Joannah/Joan Layton, >>>> Mary Jane Castetter, Sarah Jane Heady, Elizabeth Kincade, Alice >>>> Ledman, >>>> Floretta Ledman, Vinton Edgar/Edward HUMBLES, William Franklin >>>> Humbles; >>>> Arminta Kincade. Also mentions: John and Elizabeth Humbles; Isaac >>>> Wood; >>>> Belinda Wood; David C. Thompson. No exec named. Wit: William H. >>>> Harrison, >>>> Thomas Clawson. >>>> Will Record E., pp. 249-253. >>>> http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.indiana.counties.hamilton/2975/mb.ashx >>>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >>>> >>>> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>> >>> >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >>> >>> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

This appears to be the earliest Humble family in Hamilton County, IN, showing up in the 1830 census several names away from Hiram Coffee. In 1820, Josiah Humble was in Jefferson County, IN. In the 1880 Hamilton County, IN census, Fall Creek Township, Isaac Humble said that both of his parents were born in NC ************* Josiah Humble b.1780-1790 prob.TN,PENN,KY,VIR d.abt 1840 Hamilton co IND Married Sarah ???? Children were; Pleasant b.1806 Phillip b.1810 Josiah b.1812 John b.1813 Lucinda b.1821 JulieAnn b.1825 Isaac b.1830 **************** Josiah is found on the 1812 Warren Co. Tenn Tax list and next appears on the 1820 Jefferson Co. In census, and the 1830 Hamilton Co. Indiana census. In 1840, Josiah does not appear, but his wife Sarah is listed next door to Pleasant Josiah is on the 1820 Jefferson Co., Indiana Census Pg. 287 with the following information: Josiah is 26-45,(in 1830 he is shown as 40-50, b.c.1780-1790 Now, matching the ages of the males in 1820 with the Humble boys who are in Hamilton Co. in 1830,1840 and 1850 we have Males,: 3 under 10= Phillip b. 1810, Josiah b. 1812, John b. 1813(all born Tenn) 1 age 10-16= Pleasant R. b. 1806, b. Tenn Females: 2 under 10-names unknown 1 age 10-16 name unknown His wife Sarah is 26-45 (1830 shown as 40=50 b.c. 1780-1790) In 1830 he has one male under 5=Isaac b. 1826 In. 1- 1-10 1- 15-20= John,1 20-30=Phillip (he marries in 1835 to Sally (Sarah) Mc Farland) Females: 2- 5-10 (Lucinda b. 1821 and Julia Ann b. 1825) 1 10-15 and 1-15-20. http://genforum.genealogy.com/cgi-bin/pageload.cgi?Josiah::humble::440.html Could Elizabeth Humble's age fit with the above 1830 Hamilton County, IN census for the Josiah Humble family? Barbara ----- Original Message ----- From: <lewisjo@junct.com> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:43 AM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Will of Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana > Also found on 1880 Census for Hamilton County, Noblesville Twn, a Sarah > Humbles age 64 widowed, b abt 1816, with a son named Isaac aged 22 living > in the home. > Kelly > > > >> I found on Ancestry.com, a 1880 Census, Hamilton County Indiana, >> Fallcreek >> twn, an Isaac Humbles hh age 62, b abt 1818, Mary J, wife age 48, and >> their children. This could not be the father of Elizabeth who married >> Mathew Kincade. Elizabeth was born abt 1813, it could be her brother, >> cousin, etc. >> >> I did find a Land Patent dated Aug. 10, 1837 out of Indianapolis Office, >> for the county of Hancock, for a Francis Kincade. ( 40 acres) >> >> Thank you Barbara for the info, it gives me another direction to start >> looking, >> Kelly Kincade-Lewis >> >> >> >> >>> Isaac Humbles of Hamilton County, Indiana appears to have been the >>> father >>> of the Elizabeth Humbles who married Matthew Kincaid. Matthew was >>> probably the son of Francis Kincaid/Hannah Viney and grandson of Thomas >>> Kincaid/Hannah Tincher. >>> >>> #480 HUMBLES, Isaac. Will dated 12 Jan 1881; proved 22 Jan 1881. >>> Legatees: >>> wife Mary Jane HUMBLES and her minor children, names not specified; >>> daus. >>> Emma, Francis Abigal and Nellie Humbles; children Joannah/Joan Layton, >>> Mary Jane Castetter, Sarah Jane Heady, Elizabeth Kincade, Alice Ledman, >>> Floretta Ledman, Vinton Edgar/Edward HUMBLES, William Franklin Humbles; >>> Arminta Kincade. Also mentions: John and Elizabeth Humbles; Isaac Wood; >>> Belinda Wood; David C. Thompson. No exec named. Wit: William H. >>> Harrison, >>> Thomas Clawson. >>> Will Record E., pp. 249-253. >>> http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.indiana.counties.hamilton/2975/mb.ashx >>> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >>> >>> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >> >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I am seeking information about Isaac KINCAID, husband of Mary TATUM and father of Louisa E. Kincaide. According to some gedcoms, Louisa was born in Tennessee 06 Dec 1824. Louisa married William M. Lemonds in September, 1849 in Lincoln County, Tennessee (Lincoln Co. Tennessee Marriages 1838-1888; Marriage Book "A", page 182). Louisa and William are found in Gibson Cty. 1850 Census, pg. 36; District 16; #467. I would appreciate any information about Isaac KINCAID, Mary TATUM and their respective families. Thanks, Sharon Hobson