The only difference between the results for 130404 and 15550 is that pesky marker 4 (DYS#391) 11 in 130404's series. If both can be vetted to James Woodburn, we would have yet another instance of a proven parallel mutation to an 11 at this marker. My feeling is, if all lines were vetted, there are at least 7 (if not more) unrelated instances where this mutation has occured. 2519 matches 15550 at all markers except 2519 has a 17 instead of the AAV 16 at marker 32 (DYS570). The match includes both the mutation to 22 at marker 51 and a mutation to 38 (AAV 39) at marker 35 (CDYb). I don't know what records are available from Limerick, Ireland but it is possible that there could be a connection just a few generations back from their respective earliest known ancestors who were both born in 1811. James Woodburn's father could be the immigrant in this line. Sue ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter A. Kincaid" <7kincaid@nb.sympatico.ca> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 6:03 PM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Results for 130404 > Certainly the DNA shows that 130404 and 15550 descend from the same > person; > 130404 being an offshoot.. > > Peter > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sue Liedtke > To: kincaid@rootsweb.com > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 9:03 PM > Subject: [KINCAID] Results for 130404 > > > All results for 130404 are now in. He had ordered 67 markers. The first > 37 > markers came in quite some time ago. The rest were posted today. He > matches > 15550 exactly on markers 38 thru 67. Both have a value of 22 at marker 50 > (413b). The Apparent Ancestral Value is 23. Also in A-2a with the value > of > 22 is 2519. > > Both 130404 and 15550 believe descent from James Woodburn b 1811 PA m > Margaret Kuhns. 2519 believes descent from Saumel b 1811 m Johanna Walch > of > Lachelly, Limerick, Ireland. > > Sue Liedtke > -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

Sample 2519 and 130404 are downstream of 15550. So is my cluster of Kincaids (1256, 1474, 1477, 3817, 44108, 49844 and 57467). My cluster are clearly from County Londonderry, Ireland. Clearly one can't infer the origins of James Woodburn Kincade as being from Londonderry or Limerick. All we can infer is that the participant who contributed DNA for sample 15550 has DNA that represents the earliest branch point for our line of Kincaids. This is clearly an old and significant branch of Kincaids. Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: Sue Liedtke To: kincaid@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 10:22 AM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Results for 130404 The only difference between the results for 130404 and 15550 is that pesky marker 4 (DYS#391) 11 in 130404's series. If both can be vetted to James Woodburn, we would have yet another instance of a proven parallel mutation to an 11 at this marker. My feeling is, if all lines were vetted, there are at least 7 (if not more) unrelated instances where this mutation has occured. 2519 matches 15550 at all markers except 2519 has a 17 instead of the AAV 16 at marker 32 (DYS570). The match includes both the mutation to 22 at marker 51 and a mutation to 38 (AAV 39) at marker 35 (CDYb). I don't know what records are available from Limerick, Ireland but it is possible that there could be a connection just a few generations back from their respective earliest known ancestors who were both born in 1811. James Woodburn's father could be the immigrant in this line. Sue ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter A. Kincaid" <7kincaid@nb.sympatico.ca> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 6:03 PM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] Results for 130404 > Certainly the DNA shows that 130404 and 15550 descend from the same > person; > 130404 being an offshoot.. > > Peter > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Sue Liedtke > To: kincaid@rootsweb.com > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 9:03 PM > Subject: [KINCAID] Results for 130404 > > > All results for 130404 are now in. He had ordered 67 markers. The first > 37 > markers came in quite some time ago. The rest were posted today. He > matches > 15550 exactly on markers 38 thru 67. Both have a value of 22 at marker 50 > (413b). The Apparent Ancestral Value is 23. Also in A-2a with the value > of > 22 is 2519. > > Both 130404 and 15550 believe descent from James Woodburn b 1811 PA m > Margaret Kuhns. 2519 believes descent from Saumel b 1811 m Johanna Walch > of > Lachelly, Limerick, Ireland. > > Sue Liedtke > -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