a good dna site is the one that has "7 daughters of eve" groups. google that. I think they are in UK. They explain a bit better. None are gonna tell you that unless you wear SPF 200, the sun rays etc. mess you up Ftdna actually does little to help anyone analyze anything. Every website I have seen for other surnames, some really nice, are made by the people running them. Some have an ORG like "Marshall Genealogy Org." Just on another note, could we do that? They have a thing called "chip in" and we could all donate a couple bucks like other names. we COULD band together on that!?!? anyway, I only did ftdna because they are in the USA. I also did the "free" Sorensen test but they do not give you much info and then try to make you pay. this will need to be seen wide from the dna site 81462 Marshall I1c 15 23 15 10 15 15 11 13 11 13 12 31 15 08 10 11 11 25 14 20 27 11 14 14 15 me 43076 Marshall I1c 14 23 15 10 15 15 11 13 12 14 12 32 15 08 10 11 11 25 14 19 27 11 14 14 15 * * * * * this is a genetic distance of 1 on certain digits or Y-alleles, not 5 because 5 are different when you go beyond 1-2 digits it is starting to be a different haplogroup, a different people that is why they tell you what group you belong. there are also haplogroup predictor pages that you can type numbers in these are both I1c as well as...... see this page? http://www.familytreedna.com/ftGroups_score_frame_classic.aspx?pass=ZQspFAycOmZvnbXkIjqCFefM6Ma2nXS01tkG0Iak5PURMftastABJRltynkXrpki13Eq6IXMBs6Odx7hi8nczK8MLXfGMapt6GnLm0dwILLnGzqTlAP%2BjEq5ZFgJKqkefwdP2bTjZRA%3D all these people are related at some point in time. If you can not accept that, you can not even begin to work with dna. If you are looking for an exact match you are going to need someone like your uncle. If no one really close to you joins, yours will be a bit unique. I think you sent me yours and I said group P, but part of a bigger group. Not sure, been mailing a few people :) I am the only person in my direct line, but others in group F are father and son etc. that is why some match exactly 100% like on Maury Who's Your Daddy. LOL you might not know what that is. 5 different numbers or mutations is not a genetic distance of 5. You have to look at the whole number and the amount of digits the numbers are off. Those you show are off 1. If one was 12 and one 15 that is 3 and different. you really can not make up numbers and which ones to change. If you do not feel yours matches you need to look at the other numbers. get a longer test like 67 marker I think? Not many have though. But then again I am not sure bacause it never gets updated. Joe Marshall gggg grandson Aaron Marshall b. abt 1750 10th Virginia Militia 1776 ggggg grandson Col. John Marshel r[EVOL]ution calling http://www.MiscellaneaMarescalliana.org rootsweb: http://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=aaronmarshel1740 DNA site: http://www.chipster.us/AaronMarshallDNAline/default.htm marshall DNA: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~marshalldna/MarshallDNA1/ -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Marshall <smarshall@meridianfreight.com.au> To: marshall@rootsweb.com Sent: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 9:00 pm Subject: Re: [MARSHALL] How are family groups determined in the Marshall DNA Project? Hi Joe, Thanks for the detailed reply. Maybe I've been looking in the wrong places but I haven't been able to find answers to my question despite countless Google searches. I'm still puzzled about the criteria used to place testees into family groupings. Following is a set of 12 marker results for 6 fictitious individuals that might be considered as a single family group: 13 22 13 10 13 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 14 22 13 10 13 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 14 23 13 10 13 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 14 23 14 10 13 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 14 23 14 11 13 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 14 23 14 11 14 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 Each person matches on 11 of 12 markers with the person above and/or below on the list and there is a genetic distance of 1 on the marker that is not a match. Various websites explain the % chance of sharing a common ancestor within a certain number of generations where there is a genetic distance of 1. If they share a common surname that % should be the same for each of the 6 testees when comparing results with those immediately above or below but the % decreases as the genetic distance increases. There is a genetic distance of 5 between the first and last person so the chance of them sharing a common ancestor is far less. In isolation the first and last do not appear to belong to the same family group: 13 22 13 10 13 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 14 23 14 11 14 14 11 14 11 12 12 30 When viewed with the results of the other testees the links become obvious. When I compare my personal DNA results with others there are many that are similar but may have a genetic distance of 1, 2 , 3, 4 etc. Maybe I belong in one of their family groups but the people that would provide the necessary links just haven't been tested? Logically though this must mean I potentially belong to many family groups and it just depends on where the arbitrary lines are drawn between families. This is the reason why I doubt that family groupings are relevant except for exact matches. I think this just proves that we are probably all related if you look far enough back in time. Regards, Steve Joe Marshall wrote: > Hi , You won't find those answers on this group or the Marshall DNA > site, it is on other DNA sites and School sites, etc. > > my caps is sticking so sorry if I miss a few > > Our Marshall DNA site is 1999. Still no responses from FTDNA other than > "we will look into it". You would need to look around at other sources > to get the info. There are lots out there. I have a link below to one > page to look at. > > I had more than 12 markers done but he does not add them. I have > people write to me and say they never have been posted. There are a > bunch on there that should be in the Simon Granser Marshall line based > on the numbers > > on one other note first, we could actually find that the ancient > Marshall's did think they were related because of name. Or there could > have been some adoption in 1400 or something that created another DNA > line. It is only a method to see who is blood relative at some point in > time. It could be from 1200's when they first started using last names. > Or in some other case such as a totally different name, there could > have been some adoption in 800 for all we know. We will also all have > other name matches from back in time before the use of last names. > > Remember this, when there were not that many people, they did not use > last names. They were Sir John of Essex, for example. He was the only > one in that town with that name. You have to imagine a much smaller > neighborhood than we have today. > > > The help you get from it depends on when you are stuck in your tree. If > you are stuck 100 years ago, you would want numbers that are nearly > 100% identical. If you are stuck 500 years ago, the branches will have > changed a bit. > the closer you are on the tree, the closer your numbers usually are. > > to find the truth you must read and remember history and facts that > some are not taught > > your haplogroup came from one person long ago, it is a fact > (haplogroup is not even in the spell checker) > WHEN, is another question that can not be scientifically proven > > It is known though, that I1b is the Normans and R1b is the Irish > possibly "Picts" that were there longer than the Normans > > certain markers are prone to genetic mutation. others do not change at > all. it has to do with where you live ie: the sun rays hitting you/ > radiation. this means a higher mutation rate of those certain numbers. > If you live near the equator you will have more mutation. that is a > fact. when you go outside and feel the sun burning you, that is > radiation. You have to take in to account that some base mutation rates > are very low. some match exact because they are a father and son as > noted on the charts. You would probably have to have someone in your > exact branch to be an exact match with no mutation. Now if you get a > lot of Xrays or something, that will possibly do it. > > one mutation in Group F is the first digit 15 to 14 and the 12th digit > > > those certain numbers that do not change or not much, are probably the > ones you match with every one else. > > sometimes those numbers are in red on charts. the ones that change more > > > you can type in numbers here and experiment > > http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility.html?mode=ftdna_mode > > I can not get this page to work on my site at the moment > > > > > > Joe Marshall > > gggg grandson Aaron Marshall b. abt 1750 > 10th Virginia Militia 1776 > ggggg grandson Col. John Marshel > > r[EVOL]ution calling > > http://www.MiscellaneaMarescalliana.org > > rootsweb: http://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=aaronmarshel1740 > > DNA site: http://www.chipster.us/AaronMarshallDNAline/default.htm > > marshall DNA: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~marshalldna/MarshallDNA1/ > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Marshall <smarshall@meridianfreight.com.au> > To: marshall@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 2:06 am > Subject: [MARSHALL] How are family groups determined in the Marshall > DNA Project? > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > Can anyone explain how family groups are determined for DNA test > subjects? > > I used to think that subjects were placed in groups where there was a > high level of marker matches, say 11 of 12, and where the non-matching > marker varied by only 1 or 2. Probably a common haplo group was also > important. I'm now unsure how scientific this process can be (I mean > the > arbitrary grouping of individuals not the DNA testing itself). > > By way of example, on the Marshall DNA Project website, Group A is > shown > as having 5 testees. As I read from testee 1 down to testee 5 I see the > similarities and assume that's why they've been grouped together. If > you > look, however, at 1 and 5 in isolation they match on only 8 of 12. If > results for the remaining testees were not available I presume 1 and 5 > would not be in the same group. > > Logically this then raises the question of whether many other testees > with perhaps only 8 of 12 matches may belong within a common family > group but proof is just not available (ie there may be "linking" > individuals who have not been tested). > > My next query relates to the increased use of 25, 37 and 67 marker > testing. In determining family groups are the first 12 markers given > more weight than remaining markers? Two individuals could match 100% on > the 1st 12 but vary considerably thereafter. Would they then belong in > the same family group? I have had a 67 marker test done for myself. I > match on more than 12 markers with a few other testees but not > necessarily the 1st 12 or even 12 consecutive markers. > > I find this really hard to understand. I'd love to read other people's > views on this. > > Regards, > > Steve Marshall > Sydney > Australia > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MARSHALL-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the > body of > the message > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARSHALL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARSHALL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message