Mark, You seem to be our resident DNA expert, so I have a question. I am from the Walls family which I believe left Scotland with all of the family and settled in Michigan. Therefore I can not go forward to find current Walls in Scotland and I have been unable to go back. I am also of Irish descent and there I am having even less luck. No first name to match with Kelly. In any case I am interested in The Ireland Reaching Out (IrelandXO) programme. Can you comment. Jim Kelly Sacramento, California -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Sutherland-Fisher (HFH) Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 12:47 AM To: 'Cliff. Johnston'; 'Maisie Egger'; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lanark] Differing DNA tests Morning again, I concur with Cliff's assessment below though he missed out the 37 marker which is the minimum to assist in identifying a specific family grouping unless he was meaning 37 rather than 32. Some of our members have taken the test promoted by the Scotsman newspaper and operated by Scotlands DNA. The aim of this project is really just to identify the haplogroup and therefore origins of the modern Scottish population. It doesnt produce any of the STR markers which is what tells 2 men if and how closely they are related (via 12, 25, 37, 67 or 111 distinct markers). There are a few exceptions in the Scotlands DNA project and that only occurs where a man has such a rare Haplogroup within the Scottish population that the statistical chances of them being related correspondingly increase. For example my uncle from Nairn and 2 other Sutherlands, one from Biggar and the other originally from Thurso were an exact match. The report each received was identical except for their names. However having a Flemish Haplogroup R1b1a2a1a1b commonly known as P312 or DF27, Scotlands DNA state in the report that they do not test most of the downside markers because they are so rare among the Scottish population. In fact it is substantially less than 1%. The other 2 have also taken the FTDNA test. They are the original and current default result against whom I measure all others. They match with one another at 20 generations at 80.92%. To me this indicates one is descended from the Sutherland of Forse family and the other from the Sutherland of Duffus family. They have to go back 20-22 generations to Kenneth 4th Earl of Sutherland whose eldest son's younger son founded the Forse line and whose younger son founded the Duffus line. I am sure other tests are good in their own way but as someone who has not taken a test (since my YDNA is English) but is working with the results, there is currently no test nearly as good as the FTDNA one. Cheers Mark -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cliff. Johnston Sent: 07 October 2013 22:20 To: Maisie Egger; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lanark] LANARK Digest, Vol 8, Issue 165 Maisie, We get what we pay for with Y-DNA testing, only the testing companies do not tell us that ;-) As I have said elsewhere many times, the only company worth testing with is FTDNA. They have the largest and best support system. Period. Here is my take on the different tests available (my opinion only): 12-markers test: just whets your appetite for more testing. About the only ones who get useful information from this test are National Geographic and the I haplogroup Johnston/es [said tongue-in-cheek as we do have a very distinctive Y-DNA signature - I can tell if you are kin by looking at the first 4 markers - the others are a bonus ;-) ] Not worth the effort to take, IMO, for genealogical purposes. 25-markers test: about as useless as the old saying that my grandfather used about bulls, teats and how worthless they were on a bull ;-) 32-markers test: helpful to eliminate more distant connections and reaffirm closer connections. A decent test, but has too many gaps. 67-markers test: the best test to take initially as it will put you on a family branch if enough have tested in your haplogroup for branches to start showing up. 111-markers test: we are still working out the value of this upgrade. So far it appears to be very useful for sorting close kin, say within 2-6 generations. If enough have this number of markers tested in your haplogroup it is very helpful. Should you test with any other company than FTDNA, you need to be aware that the alternative-company tests do not include all of the same markers as those done by FTDNA. This means that in order for one to compare an alternative-source company's Y-DNA results to that of FTDNA's results one will have to buy an additional make-up test from FTDNA in order to make a valid comparison. This takes more time in addition to more money. Good hunting, Cliff. ------------------------------- WHEN REPLYING to a post please remember to snip most of the earlier message. Be sure the reply to address shows as [email protected] You may contact the List Admin at [email protected] or click on the following link to the list information page online: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/intl/SCT/LANARK.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Evening Jim, You flatter me. I suspect there are more knowledgeable DNA scholars in the group! My understanding is that currently the only 2 things which can be identified for certain are if you are male, your yDNA and your mother's mDNA. Your yDNA will plot the direct line of your genetic descent through the purely male line with no female ancestors possible. The mDNA is the female DNA you inherit from your mother, she from her mother and so on up the purely female line, no men possible. It was this route which was used to identify the remains of Richard III found in the Leicester car park. The Canadian carpenter chap they traced and used was the son of a daughter of a daughter of a daughter etc. all the way back to Duchess Cecily mother of Richard III. Richard had the same mDNA from Duchess Cecily as her direct female descendant's present day son derived from her. That was why when the mDNA taken from Richard's skeleton and the mDNA taken from the Canadian chap's mouth swab, they matched identically on the charts. I was about to say I assume your yDNA will come from your Kelly ancestor who presumably was Irish. Somewhat surprisingly we had a Kelly pop up in the Sutherland results at 12 markers which suggests that at some time a distant cousin of a Freskyn settled in Ireland and eventually took or was given the name Kelly. I'm sorry but I hadn't heard of the Ireland Reach Out programme. All the best Mark -----Original Message----- From: James Kelly [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 08 October 2013 15:29 To: [email protected]; 'Cliff. Johnston'; 'Maisie Egger'; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: [Lanark] Differing DNA tests Mark, You seem to be our resident DNA expert, so I have a question. I am from the Walls family which I believe left Scotland with all of the family and settled in Michigan. Therefore I can not go forward to find current Walls in Scotland and I have been unable to go back. I am also of Irish descent and there I am having even less luck. No first name to match with Kelly. In any case I am interested in The Ireland Reaching Out (IrelandXO) programme. Can you comment. Jim Kelly Sacramento, California -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Sutherland-Fisher (HFH) Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 12:47 AM To: 'Cliff. Johnston'; 'Maisie Egger'; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lanark] Differing DNA tests Morning again, I concur with Cliff's assessment below though he missed out the 37 marker which is the minimum to assist in identifying a specific family grouping unless he was meaning 37 rather than 32. Some of our members have taken the test promoted by the Scotsman newspaper and operated by Scotlands DNA. The aim of this project is really just to identify the haplogroup and therefore origins of the modern Scottish population. It doesnt produce any of the STR markers which is what tells 2 men if and how closely they are related (via 12, 25, 37, 67 or 111 distinct markers). There are a few exceptions in the Scotlands DNA project and that only occurs where a man has such a rare Haplogroup within the Scottish population that the statistical chances of them being related correspondingly increase. For example my uncle from Nairn and 2 other Sutherlands, one from Biggar and the other originally from Thurso were an exact match. The report each received was identical except for their names. However having a Flemish Haplogroup R1b1a2a1a1b commonly known as P312 or DF27, Scotlands DNA state in the report that they do not test most of the downside markers because they are so rare among the Scottish population. In fact it is substantially less than 1%. The other 2 have also taken the FTDNA test. They are the original and current default result against whom I measure all others. They match with one another at 20 generations at 80.92%. To me this indicates one is descended from the Sutherland of Forse family and the other from the Sutherland of Duffus family. They have to go back 20-22 generations to Kenneth 4th Earl of Sutherland whose eldest son's younger son founded the Forse line and whose younger son founded the Duffus line. I am sure other tests are good in their own way but as someone who has not taken a test (since my YDNA is English) but is working with the results, there is currently no test nearly as good as the FTDNA one. Cheers Mark -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cliff. Johnston Sent: 07 October 2013 22:20 To: Maisie Egger; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lanark] LANARK Digest, Vol 8, Issue 165 Maisie, We get what we pay for with Y-DNA testing, only the testing companies do not tell us that ;-) As I have said elsewhere many times, the only company worth testing with is FTDNA. They have the largest and best support system. Period. Here is my take on the different tests available (my opinion only): 12-markers test: just whets your appetite for more testing. About the only ones who get useful information from this test are National Geographic and the I haplogroup Johnston/es [said tongue-in-cheek as we do have a very distinctive Y-DNA signature - I can tell if you are kin by looking at the first 4 markers - the others are a bonus ;-) ] Not worth the effort to take, IMO, for genealogical purposes. 25-markers test: about as useless as the old saying that my grandfather used about bulls, teats and how worthless they were on a bull ;-) 32-markers test: helpful to eliminate more distant connections and reaffirm closer connections. A decent test, but has too many gaps. 67-markers test: the best test to take initially as it will put you on a family branch if enough have tested in your haplogroup for branches to start showing up. 111-markers test: we are still working out the value of this upgrade. So far it appears to be very useful for sorting close kin, say within 2-6 generations. If enough have this number of markers tested in your haplogroup it is very helpful. Should you test with any other company than FTDNA, you need to be aware that the alternative-company tests do not include all of the same markers as those done by FTDNA. This means that in order for one to compare an alternative-source company's Y-DNA results to that of FTDNA's results one will have to buy an additional make-up test from FTDNA in order to make a valid comparison. This takes more time in addition to more money. Good hunting, Cliff. ------------------------------- WHEN REPLYING to a post please remember to snip most of the earlier message. Be sure the reply to address shows as [email protected] You may contact the List Admin at [email protected] or click on the following link to the list information page online: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/intl/SCT/LANARK.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message