Hi Dennis, John and Kathy have shared some information with me about their line, and you will probably hear from them. Here is some of their shared info: When Guien and his wife Martha Kelsey (Kelso) were married, she lived on her grandfather's farm in West Caln, Chester County, PA. They were in Turbot, Northumberland County, PA around the Revolutionary War and later went to Cumberland County, PA. In 1795, they went to Seneca Lake, NY. Some of their sons moved to Ontario, Yates, Wayne, and Steuben Counties in NY after 1810. Family tradition states that Guien had two immigrant brothers, but little is known about them. Another line in PA boasts at least one participant in the DNA study who traces his line to Lancaster County. That man just got a 12/12 match with another McConnell that was posted to the project tables about a week ago. I don't know anything about the 12/12 match other than what I found on the table. I think www.ysearch.org has information on other PA connections for McConnells in the Clan Donald project.   I hope that you can make a connection. Best wishes, Kirsten Saxe On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:31:33 -0400, Dennis McConell wrote > Can you add some places to the dates for Guien McConnell? I am > Looking for siblings or kin to Denis McConnell who settles in > Western Pa in the Lawrence County area. > > All the best, > > Dennis D McConnell > Managing Member > Healthy House of the South, LLC. > 964 Adair Ave. > Atlanta, Ga. 30306 > O-404-874-6767 > F-404-888-9815 > > http://www.mcconnellhomes.com/ > > Recipient of the 2005 Atlanta Regional Commission's "Exceptional > Merit Award for Context Sensitive Neighborhood Infill Design" > > Builder of the 2006 Southern Building Show show house > > 2004 Winner of the Earthcraft Homes "Custom Home Builder of the Year" > Award > > -----Original Message----- > From: mcconnell-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:mcconnell-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of > CEVaughan412@aol.com > Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 10:34 AM > To: mcconnell@rootsweb.com > Subject: [McConnell] Guian McConnell descendant > > Hi My name is Carol. > My mother was Betty McConnell. > Here is how we descend from Guian: > > Guien McConnell  1725 - 19 Aug 1807 >    -John McConnell  Abt. 1789 - Jun 1859 >      -Guian McConnell  1808 - 12 Sep 1895 >       -Marcus McConnell  Abt. 1841 - ? >        -Mark Albertus McConnell  05 Sep  1862 - 02 Aug 1924 >          -Charles Marcus  McConnell  08 Aug 1892 - 22 Mar 1954 >           -Betty Louise  McConnell  22 Dec 1934 - 17 Mar 2004 > > My mom was an only child, but she had 2 male cousins, who also happened > to   > be "double cousins".  Those two males had male offspring so, I might > be able to contact them about DNA if it would help anyone in the project. > > "If you can't find a paper trail, go for the blood!" > > Carol > > ************************************** See what's new at > http://www.aol.com > > ********* > Visit the threaded archives of this list: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/MCCONNELL > ********* > Messages posted to the RootsWeb/Ancestry MCCONNELL Message Board are > gatewayed to this Mailing List.  Remember that the author of > gatewayed messages may not be a list subscriber so please reply to gatewayed > messages by clicking on the link and replying on the board. > ************ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MCCONNELL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: > 10/27/2007 11:02 AM > > ********* > Visit the threaded archives of this list: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/MCCONNELL > ********* > Messages posted to the RootsWeb/Ancestry MCCONNELL Message Board are > gatewayed to this Mailing List.  Remember that the author of > gatewayed messages may not be a list subscriber so please reply to > gatewayed messages by clicking on the link and replying on the > board. ************ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MCCONNELL- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message -- Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)

Can you add some places to the dates for Guien McConnell? I am Looking for siblings or kin to Denis McConnell who settles in Western Pa in the Lawrence County area. All the best, Dennis D McConnell Managing Member Healthy House of the South, LLC. 964 Adair Ave. Atlanta, Ga. 30306 O-404-874-6767 F-404-888-9815 http://www.mcconnellhomes.com/ Recipient of the 2005 Atlanta Regional Commission's "Exceptional Merit Award for Context Sensitive Neighborhood Infill Design" Builder of the 2006 Southern Building Show show house 2004 Winner of the Earthcraft Homes "Custom Home Builder of the Year" Award -----Original Message----- From: mcconnell-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:mcconnell-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of CEVaughan412@aol.com Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2007 10:34 AM To: mcconnell@rootsweb.com Subject: [McConnell] Guian McConnell descendant Hi My name is Carol. My mother was Betty McConnell. Here is how we descend from Guian: Guien McConnell 1725 - 19 Aug 1807 -John McConnell Abt. 1789 - Jun 1859 -Guian McConnell 1808 - 12 Sep 1895 -Marcus McConnell Abt. 1841 - ? -Mark Albertus McConnell 05 Sep 1862 - 02 Aug 1924 -Charles Marcus McConnell 08 Aug 1892 - 22 Mar 1954 -Betty Louise McConnell 22 Dec 1934 - 17 Mar 2004 My mom was an only child, but she had 2 male cousins, who also happened to be "double cousins". Those two males had male offspring so, I might be able to contact them about DNA if it would help anyone in the project. "If you can't find a paper trail, go for the blood!" Carol ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ********* Visit the threaded archives of this list: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/MCCONNELL ********* Messages posted to the RootsWeb/Ancestry MCCONNELL Message Board are gatewayed to this Mailing List. Remember that the author of gatewayed messages may not be a list subscriber so please reply to gatewayed messages by clicking on the link and replying on the board. ************ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MCCONNELL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02 AM

Earlier today, I mistakenly wrote that Charles Kerchner's Y DNA mutation rate study is for R1b men only.This is WRONG! Members of all haplogroups are eligible for the mutation rate study. Of course, joining any general project for members of your haplogroup is also recommended. Sorry for any confusion caused. You can explore the mutation rate study at http://www.kerchner.com/cgi-kerchner/ystrmutationrate.cgi. Kirsten Saxe > > * Charles Kerchner's project examining variation in mutation rates > is for members of Haplogroup R1b only. Most members of the Clan > Donald project, including John and Robert, are members of this > haplogroup and so would be eligible to join so long as they had > enough family DNA results to establish their ancestral haplotype and > calculate their observed mutation rate. Although the same sort of > family mutation rate study probably does not exist for other > haplogroups, there are haplogroup projects that members of other haplogroups > can join to help them further explore their haplogroups. Charles > Kerchner does also run such a project that is open to all R1b men. > It is not necessary to have results from mutiple family members to > join that project. >

Hi Carol, This is very exciting. I think that test results from one of your cousins would probably help you, John, Robert, and Kathy establish more of Guien's probable haplotype, since your cousins would probably match John or Robert on at least some of the mismatched markers. John and Robert don't have any close matches right now, but having a better idea of Guien's haplotype should be very helpful to them when they compare their results with the distant matches that they have right now and closer matches who join the project in the future. Sharing results from your McConnell family would also be of great benefit to other genealogists using DNA who have a high mutation rate in their families. This applies to all genetic genealogists, not just those in the Clan Donald DNA project. Knowledge about the variation of mutation rates within different families is quite limited. There are probably a number of other genealogists out there whose test results have or will have borderline matches or nearly matched mismatches with relatives who are much closer than calculations based on average mutation rates suggest. For those researchers, understanding that advanced paternal age or other unknown factors may have caused a higher than average mutation rate within their families is very important. I shared some of the results for John and Robert on the DNA Genealogy list, and they attracted the attention of Charles Kerchner. He is a longtime genealogist and genetic genealogist who runs several genealogy projects. Charles was extremely interested in the example of your family because it is provides such a good example of a higher than average mutation rate. He has a special project to collect information from such families on their observed mutation rates.* The data from John and Robert alone is not sufficient to calculate a mutation rate for the family because it is not enough to establish an ancestral haplotype for all 37 markers tested, but adding data from one of your cousins might make that possible, and would certainly give us a better idea of the approximate mutation rate within your family that could be shared with others on forums like the DNA Genealogy list. Because I think that this information from your cousins would be so helpful to other DNA genealogists, I would be interested in making a nominal contribution (at least $20) toward testing one of your cousins. I'd actually contribute more if I wasn't still recruiting members of my McConnell and other families to test. I think that John has been watching this list and probably has seen your post, but I don't know about Kathy. I will make sure that she knows of your interest. I hope to hear more from you about this soon. Best regards, Kirsten Saxe * Charles Kerchner's project examining variation in mutation rates is for members of Haplogroup R1b only. Most members of the Clan Donald project, including John and Robert, are members of this haplogroup and so would be eligible to join so long as they had enough family DNA results to establish their ancestral haplotype and calculate their observed mutation rate. Although the same sort of family mutation rate study probably does not exist for other haplogroups, there are haplogroup projects that members of other haplogroups can join to help them further explore their haplogroups. Charles Kerchner does also run such a project that is open to all R1b men. It is not necessary to have results from mutiple family members to join that project. On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:34:05 EDT, CEVaughan412 wrote > Hi My name is Carol. > My mother was Betty McConnell. > Here is how we descend from Guian: > > Guien McConnell 1725 - 19 Aug 1807 > -John McConnell Abt. 1789 - Jun 1859 > -Guian McConnell 1808 - 12 Sep 1895 > -Marcus McConnell Abt. 1841 - ? > -Mark Albertus McConnell 05 Sep 1862 - 02 Aug 1924 > -Charles Marcus McConnell 08 Aug 1892 - 22 Mar 1954 > -Betty Louise McConnell 22 Dec 1934 - 17 Mar 2004 > > My mom was an only child, but she had 2 male cousins, who also > happened to be "double cousins". Those two males had male > offspring so, I might be able to contact them about DNA if it would > help anyone in the project. > > "If you can't find a paper trail, go for the blood!" > > Carol > > ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com > > ********* > Visit the threaded archives of this list: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/MCCONNELL > ********* > Messages posted to the RootsWeb/Ancestry MCCONNELL Message Board are > gatewayed to this Mailing List. Remember that the author of > gatewayed messages may not be a list subscriber so please reply to > gatewayed messages by clicking on the link and replying on the > board. ************ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MCCONNELL- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message -- Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)

Hi My name is Carol. My mother was Betty McConnell. Here is how we descend from Guian: Guien McConnell 1725 - 19 Aug 1807 -John McConnell Abt. 1789 - Jun 1859 -Guian McConnell 1808 - 12 Sep 1895 -Marcus McConnell Abt. 1841 - ? -Mark Albertus McConnell 05 Sep 1862 - 02 Aug 1924 -Charles Marcus McConnell 08 Aug 1892 - 22 Mar 1954 -Betty Louise McConnell 22 Dec 1934 - 17 Mar 2004 My mom was an only child, but she had 2 male cousins, who also happened to be "double cousins". Those two males had male offspring so, I might be able to contact them about DNA if it would help anyone in the project. "If you can't find a paper trail, go for the blood!" Carol ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: ksaxe Surnames: McConnell Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2482.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: The mismatches for John C. and Robert A. McConnell show an interesting pattern: Marker mutation rate Robert's value John's value 449 .00830 30 31 464c .00566 16 17 576 .01022 17 20 CDY B .03531 40 41 One interesting thing that I noticed is that all of these markers have above average mutation rates. Looking at the large number of steps between the two cousins, it seems natural that the mismatches are on fast markers. However, when I asked experts about what this means for people who don't have a paper trail and are comparing matches, they all said that the speed of the mismatched markers has almost no effect on the expected time to most recent common ancestor statistic in most cases. The exception noted was for very distantly related people whose results suggested a most recent common ancestor who lived about 2,000 years ago or more. So if you are looking at a DNA match with a person who may or may not be related, it may be interesting to look at the speeds of the mismatched markers, but you shouldn't place too much emphasis on them. Whether the mismatched markers are all fast, all slow, or a combination of fast and slow generally doesn't tell you very much about the pro! bability of sharing a recent common ancestor. There's another interesting pattern here. In every case, John has more repeats at the mismatched markers than Robert does. This could be pure coincidence. If you assume that John has a 50% chance of having the higher number of repeats at each marker, there is a 1 in 16 chance that he will have a higher repeat count for each marker. There is also a 1 in 16 chance that Robert will have a higher repeat count for each marker. So it's not all that unlikely for such a pattern to occur by chance. There are also some reasons to suspect that the pattern is not simply the result of blind chance. It turns out that Guian was an older father and may have been as old as 62 when his son Alexander, John's gg grandfather, was born, and as old as 54 when his son William, Robert's gggg grandfather, was born. Anecdotal evidence suggests that older fathers are more likely to generate mutations in their offspring. Furthermore, there is a slight bias toward mutations that add repeats. It is tempting to speculate that Guian may have generated multiple mutations in Alexander leading to much of the difference in the results for John and Robert. Of course it is also possible that some of the difference between John and Robert traces to one or more mutations generated in William by Guian. John and Robert's relative Kathy would like to find a descendant of one of Guian's other sons to test. If such a man can be found and tested, they they would be able to compare results. The results of the third man on markers 449, 464c, 576, and CDY B would be of special interest. If his results matched either John or Robert on any of these markers, the matching values would probably be the same as Guian's were on those markers. The values on all other markers for Guian probably matched those of John and Robert. Wherever two of the men matched and the third mismatched, the mismatch would probably be due to a mutation in the line of the third man. The process of comparing test results for multiple descendants of the same man to deduce his probable haplotype is called triangulation. The results of triangulation are especially interesting in a case where there have been a lot of recent mutations, but it is always helpful to know the ancestral haplotype when comparing results with men who may share the same common ancestor, or, even better, an earlier common ancestor. Comparing the haplotype to the results of the other man, or better yet, a triangulated haplotype for the most recent common ancestor of that man and some male line relatives of his, leads to a more precise estimate of their relatedness than 1 on 1 comparisons alone. If the results of such a comparison suggested that more of the mutations happened in the line of one of the men, testing of another descendant of the same son would be very interesting. In the case of John and Robert, if the two descendants of that son shared the same values at any of the 4 markers, that would suggest that their most recent common ancestor (MRCA) in the line back to Guian probably had those same values, with the mutations separating them from descendants of the other 2 sons most probably having occurred between Guian and the MRCA. Mismatches would be the result of recent mutations in one of the lines. Things get really exciting for genealogists when they are able to use these sorts of techniques to explore their connections with DNA matches that haven't been linked to them by a paper trail. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

To view the message please click on the Link: Thank you http://boards.rootsweb.com/topics.obits/24442/mb.ashx

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: niccinoo Surnames: McConnell/Sheils Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2483/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Searching any details of McConnells of Derry. Edward McConnell, spouse : Mary Toner Children : Patrick Joseph, spouse : Sarah Sheils (her parents Alexander and Mary Bradley) Their children : Richard dob 1919, Mary dob 1921, Alexander dob 1922, Patrick Joseph dob 1924, David dob 1926, James dob 1928. Patrick Joseph's wife Sarah died he then remarried Mary Kathleen Bradley on 18th January 1936 and they had two children, John dob circa 1944 and Sally ? dob circa 1945. Any information regarding this family would be greatly apreciated. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: ksaxe Surnames: Donald, McConnell Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2469.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Update on Ancestry.com's entry into the genetic genealogy field It's been some time since I made the prior post about ancestry.com entering the genetic genealogy business and Relative Genetics ceasing to exist. Since then ancestry.com has launched their genetic genealogy business, and it's called DNA Ancestry. I have hesitated to update readers of this board and list about the transition because it's been a bit controversial, and I've been waiting for some of the controversy to die down before commenting. Genetic genealogists have had a couple of concerns about DNA Ancestry's entry into the business, and of course there is also support for this alternative to the relatively small number of organizations that offer DNA testing for genealogy purposes. First, the warts... 1)DNA Ancestry is offering two Y-DNA tests. One is marketed as a 33 marker test and the other is marketed as a 46 marker test. By looking at sample reports on the DNA Ancestry website, it is possible to learn what markers are used for the tests. It turns out that the 46 marker test is essentially the same as the old 43 marker test used by Relative Genetics, using the same 43 markers and also reporting results for an additional 3 markers, DYS 464e, DYS 464f, and DYS 19b. It turns out that these 3 markers don't even exist in most men. Where they do exist, they are extra copies of other markers and other companies have detected the extra copies of these markers and reported them to their customers. Whether every company has consistently detected and reported these extra markers, I do not know, but clearly the marker count of 46 is misleadingly high for the average genetic genealogy customer who doesn't know that the count of 46 is essentially the same as the count of 43 used by! one of their competitors, DNA Heritage. 2)It turns out that the mutation rates of markers used by DNA testing companies are just as important as the number of markers used anyway. This is a complicated subject and I am not familiar with the mathematics of it, but it turns out that the 37 marker tests are generally considered more informative than 43/46 marker tests. On the other hand, the fastest markers in the 37 marker test generally increase the resolution of the test, but can cause confusion due to their tendency toward parallel and back mutations in different family lines. I believe that for most family groups, the 37 marker tests will be more helpful, but that does not mean that some families would not be better off using the 43/46 marker tests. Without test results from both types of test, it is impossible to tell for sure which markers are most informative for a particular family. One company, DNA Heritage, allows surname projects to chose their own markers, and this is an interesting option for surname pr! ojects that have some idea of what markers are most informative for some of their lines. 3)It appears that the selection of markers for the 33 marker test does not work well for researchers wishing to compare results from other companies. 4)The shutdown of Relative Genetics meant that their database would no longer exist. Of course it would have been unfair to Relative Genetics customers and a disservice to past and future customers of DNA Ancestry and other organizations to abandon the information in the Relative Genetics database. Data was transferred using an opt-out system. Prior Relative Genetics customers and other individuals who had entered data entered into the Relative Genetics database needed to opt out to prevent the transfer of their information. Some individuals who had entered their data into the database did not recall having done so and were very suspicious when they received e-mails notifying them that their data had been or might be transferred. 5)More seriously, individuals with test results from other organizations were invited to enter their information into the new database, and for a brief period, the website at ancestry.com seemed to suggest a connection between FTDNA and DNA Ancestry. This implied connection seemed to have been designed to encourage FTDNA customers who might otherwise not have done so to add their information to the DNA Ancestry database. It's understandable that DNA Ancestry and other companies would like to be able to make connections between their customers and people tested at other companies, but the use of deceptive practices raises concerns. Individuals who want to compare their DNA test results with those of people tested at other companies have options other than entering their data into the databases of every company in the business. Many genealogists really don't want the information that they want to share to become a selling point for particular companies. Databases such as Ysear! ch, which does not require individuals to enter their own data to do searches, are more open and will appeal to genealogists with this concern. And the strengths... 1)DNA Ancestry uses Sorenson Genomics to perform their tests. Sorenson Genomics has been proud of its policy of running all tests twice, at least on their samples tested for a fee through private companies. I'm not clear whether this policy also applies to the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation testing. Other companies follow somewhat different policies. For instance, FTDNA runs tests once, but has them inspected by at least two people before posting final results. If the test results seem ambiguous, the samples are to be retested. So error rates should be low, but the error rate for DNA Ancestry should be lower. Anecdotes posted on the DNA Genealogy list here at Rootsweb suggest that errors are not unheard of at any company, but error rates are generally low for Y-chromosome STR testing. Sometimes errors are detected, especially in surname studies when people with matching results have a suspicious mismatch on a particular marker or markers and rechecks are requested. 2)Marketing by ancestry.com will probably encourage numerous genealogists to have DNA tested for themselves and/or their relatives. This should help genealogists with DNA test results from all testing organizations find and disprove genetic connections. And the unchanged and yet to be resolved, DNA Ancestry was not set up for new surname projects when I last checked. Existing projects were using the old Relative Genetics site. The regular pricing for the 46 marker test is the same, or about the same, as the Relative Genetics pricing for the equivalent 43 marker test. It may be that the addition of surname project options with lower pricing will provide more competitive pricing within the industry. This post may seem a little offtopic for this list, since the Clan Donald DNA project of interest to McConnells has already been established at FTDNA. However, it is possible that members of this list have considered or will consider testing with other companies. Those that do can join the project by contacting the administrators. It is possible that relevant surname projects will be established at other companies in the future to allow participants to take advantage of group rates, and I hope that this post is helpful to some of you considering testing for your McConnell or other family lines. The International Society of Genetic Genealogy has maintained a webpage with information on companies performing Y-DNA STR testing. This page has not been updated recently, but may be somewhat useful now and more useful following updating. You can find it at http://www.isogg.org/ydnachart.htm. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: ksaxe Surnames: McConnell, McDonald, McDonnieal Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2482.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Finding and Understanding "Mismatched Matches" If John C. and Robert A. McConnell had not known that they were related prior to their DNA testing, it really would not have been very hard for them to find each other. The only tricky part would have been to understand that they might be quite closely related, even though there are 6 steps between their 37 marker results, and they are not classified as 37 marker matches for each other by FTDNA. This is a case where a little bit of knowledge might be a dangerous thing. Normally a 25 marker match that "falls apart" at 37 markers doesn't indicate a common ancestor during the last few hundred years. When new results are added to the FTDNA database, e-mail notifications of 12, 25, 37, and 67 marker matches are sent to matching parties so long as both parties have agreed to have their information shared with their matches. The matching parties can also find their 12, 25, 37, and 67 marker matches listed on their personal match pages. If a man matches at a certain level with another man who has had more markers tested, the number of markers tested for that man will be listed next to his name. So with e-mail notifications of their 25 marker match, no notifications of a 37 marker match, and the availability of 37 markers for comparison noted on the match page, John and Robert would wonder what their match meant and why it seems to "fall apart" at 37 markers. Since they were tested at FTDNA, it would make sense for them to visit FTDNA's page on understanding 37 marker matches, which states that 33/37 marker matches are probably related. The moral of the story is that you should check out your McConnell surname variant 25 marker matches, even if they aren't listed as 37 marker matches on your match page. You should contact these matches and compare your results on all available markers. You may find the use of the project tables and/or ysearch.org handy for the comparison of results. If you match on 31 or more of 37 markers, you may share a common ancestor since the adoption of surnames. The probability of such a relationship with a 31 marker match is so low that it is noted only in the fine print. 32 marker matches are classified as possibly related. Matches at the level of 33 markers or above may be classified as mismatches if there are multiple step differences at one or more markers. If you find one of these near matches, y! ou should contact Doug McDonald and/or FTDNA to help you with statistics that can help you assess the probability of a relationship. It's generally recommended that you try to find other persons with test results between yours and your near matches in cases like these. The existence of such matches would suggest a cluster due to a common ancestor whose Y chromosome was probably most similar to the Y chromosome or chromosomes of any men in the middle of the cluster. Men further from the center would probably have experienced recent mutations differentiating them from the rest. Most of these near matches would probably match you at both 12 and 25 markers, allowing you to identify them and begin the process of making comparisons. As always it's a good idea to check databases like ysearch.org and the SMGF database for matches. When using Ysearch, it's good to start out with a genetic distance of 6 on 37 markers. If you have results for 25 markers total, you should at least take a look at 22/25 matches using the same methods. 21/25 matches are extremely unlikely to share a common ancestor since the adoption of surnames, but you should take a look at any 21/25 matches bearing a McConnell surname variant. Another way to find your near matches within the project and easily see your mismatches is to use the comparison function on the project tables since differences from the comparison person are all highlighted on the display. The relationship trees posted on the project website seem to be especially helpful with some of these near matches. Sometimes they show dots for two people very close together on the tree, but on different branches, suggesting that results for their lines have converged. This can happen when both lines experience the same mutations or when mutations in the lines bring them closer together. When this has happened, the men with the convergent lines are not as closely related as a 1 to 1 comparison of their results would suggest. In other cases, the opposite will be true. Two people will be on the same branch of a tree, fairly close to a branch point, but their dots will be relatively far apart due to suspected recent mutations in at least one of the lines. These people will probably be more closely related than a 1 to 1 comparison would suggest. John was tested rather recently, and his results don't appear on the trees, but you can find a dot for Robert on both of the trees. It's interesting to me that the dots for most of the men who appear on both trees seem to have the same neighbors on both of them. This isn't true for Robert, which seems to show how the results for the 26-37 marker panel change the picture for him. There are some other interesting features of the mutations in their lines that I will share with you another time. In the meantime, it's interesting to note that L. J. McConnell on the R1b Yellow table has a similar match with S. H. McDonnieal. They match each other 33/37, with a 3 step mismatch on marker CDY B. These men are not listed on Ysearch, so I have not contacted them and know nothing about their family histories. They probably aren't as closely related as John and Robert, but their match is definitely worth exploring. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: wandabennetts Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/276.360/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hello: My name is Wanda Bennetts (nee McConnell)born in Regina Saskatchewan. My Mothers name was Iva Rae McConnell. My mother birth date is March 16/27. Iva had two older sisters Inez and Unice. Iva's parents were Roy McConnell and Olive Matilda Pratt. I do not have a lot of information about my grand parents. What information I do have is my Grandpa was raised by a stepmother as his mother died at a young age. My grandpa had polio as a young man and had one leg shorter than the other. I heard that he originally came from Oregon and had a brother and sisters. It was said may times that I was a decendant of George Washington. Some of my relatives would visit an Aunt Betty (in Dakota) I was very excited to read up on the McConnell clan, thinking perhaps there was a connection. Thank you Wanda Bennetts Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: ksaxe Surnames: McConnell, McDonald Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2482/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Known Cousins Mismatch on 37 Markers John C McConnell and Robert A McConnell are both descendants of a man named Guian McConnell who was probably born between 1725 and 1740. John descends from Guian's son Alexander (b. 1787) and is just 5 generations removed from Guian. Both Robert and John have been tested on 37 markers, and with just 12 generations between them, they certainly expected to match on 37 markers. What happened? Well, FTDNA's match page and e-mail notifications did report them to each other as matches on 12 markers and 25 markers, but not on 37 markers. After all, isn't a 37 marker test supposed to give a more accurate picture of relatedness than a 25 marker test? It is, and to figure out what is going on here, it helps to look at the mismatches. Marker Robert John 449 30 31 464c 16 17 576 17 20 CDY B 40 41 The first two markers are in FTDNA's second panel of markers (13-25) and the remaining two are in the third panel (26-37), so Robert and John match 12/12, 23/25, and 33/37. 33/37 matches are often reported as matches, but one of the mismatches here is a 3 step mismatch, and when the total number of steps is calculated, the result is 6. The 6 step distance leads to their being classified as a mismatch by the software. What about knowledgable humans looking at the situation? Well, experienced people that I have talked to about this have shared some ideas with me, and these ideas generally lead to the conclusion that a mismatch like this is unusual, but not extremely rare. Sometimes a single mutation can cause a multiple step change in a marker. These mutations are supposed to be rarer than single step mutations, but a single multiple step mutation is much more likely than multiple single step mutations on the same marker. Among individuals who have a multi-step mismatch and agree closely on other markers, it's generally best to assume that a multi-step mutation has occurred and take the contribution to genetic distance from that marker as 1 instead of the actual number of steps. This is the approach taken in the Clan Donald project results tables, and when you click on John's and Robert's Clan Donald codes to compare their results, you find that they are each other's closest matches, with a genetic distance of 4 and a an estimated Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor (TMRCA) of 14 generations. This is still over twice as many generations as the average of 6 back to Guian, but it is in a range where you would expect to find results match. Another approach is to say, hey, 3 step mismatches are quite unusual. There may have been a mistake made in this case, and you should ask FTDNA to review their results and retest on that marker if there is any ambiguity. A review has been requested and FTDNA has agreed to look at the results, as they have done for others with unusual results. The results are pending, and in the meantime we treat the mismatch on 576 as the result of a single multistep mutation. Well, OK, you say, the 25 step mismatch does seem to indicate that John and Robert are related, but even treating the mismatch on 576 as a single step mutation still yields a TMRCA of 14 generations, when a value closer to 6 might be expected. What are the chances of that? Is is very much more likely than John and Robert not being members of Guian's family and matching 23/25? In other words, is it more likely that their paper trail is completely wrong and their match is due to a much more distant common ancestor than Guian, or that the paper trail is right and they just have a rather high mutation rate in their lines? I'm discounting the possibility that John and Robert descend from a common ancestor who was closely related to Guian, because that's a more complex situation and Guian was an immigrant, so it's unlikely that any such error in the paper trail would add more than a generation or two to their lines. In that case, the degree of mismatch in their results wou! ld still be somewhat greater than expected anyway. Project co-administrator Doug McDonald calculated a probability of two men with 3 1 step mutations and one multistep mutation on 37 markers being at least as closely related as John and Robert as 2%. That's a low percentage, but not extremely low. It's also possible that the 2% figure is a little low. He based his calculation on an average mutation rate of .0033 mutations per marker per generation, which is on the low end of current estimates. FTDNA uses higher mutation rates and calculated a 22.76% probability that John and Robert shared a common ancestor born within the 200 year period prior to their births, and a 51.76% probability that they shared a common ancestor born with 300 years of their births. John and Robert are of different ages. If you take their average birthyear and use that, you find that the ~ 23% figure applies pretty well to them. The true probability of men with such a match being as closely related as John and Robert are probably lies between 2% and 23%. The probability of 2 men who don't share a common ancestor within a genealogical time frame having such a DNA match is much smaller than 2%. In the case of Robert and John, they have rare haplotypes and very few matches. In fact, I don't think they have any 37 marker matches other than each other and using Y-Search to search for 25 marker matches yields only a few matches from many thousands of people. So an accidental match in this case is extremely unlikely. John and Robert already knew that they were related, and didn't need FTDNA to put them together, but if they hadn't known of their relationship, they would have had to be careful to recognize the evidence of a relationship provided by their test results. Next time I'll share another example of such a mismatch within the project and some tips for finding, recognizing, and understanding these possibly related "mismatches" in available databases. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

Liz, apparently we have proven that William Larkin McConnell, born about 1860 and married to Nancy Eunice, is the son of Nancy Brown and John McConnell (Jr. or the younger). Would you agree with this? He is a brother of Elafare and brother-in-law of her husband, Bartow Eunice, so this must be true. They were all right there together in the same county of south Georgia. -------------- Original message from "gc-gateway@rootsweb.com" <gc-gateway@rootsweb.com>: -------------- > This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. > > Author: lynnliz2003 > Surnames: McConnell, Eunice, McCoy, Coombs > Classification: queries > > Message Board URL: > > http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2444.3.1.2.2/mb.ashx > > Message Board Post: > > It has finally dawned on me that I never gave "Mar-jan" McConnell's correct > name. Although my grandfather (and others in the family) called her that, her > given name was MARGANE. She married a 'Bostick'. I have a photo of Margane, > and sister Nancy Ellafare McConnell Eunice, I will share (via, e-mail) with > anyone who would like a copy. > > Liz > > Important Note: > The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like > to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond > on the board. > > > > > > ********* > Visit the threaded archives of this list: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/MCCONNELL > ********* > Messages posted to the RootsWeb/Ancestry MCCONNELL Message Board are gatewayed > to this Mailing List. Remember that the author of gatewayed messages may not be > a list subscriber so please reply to gatewayed messages by clicking on the link > and replying on the board. > ************ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MCCONNELL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: lynnliz2003 Surnames: McConnell, Eunice, McCoy, Coombs Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2444.3.1.2.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: It has finally dawned on me that I never gave "Mar-jan" McConnell's correct name. Although my grandfather (and others in the family) called her that, her given name was MARGANE. She married a 'Bostick'. I have a photo of Margane, and sister Nancy Ellafare McConnell Eunice, I will share (via, e-mail) with anyone who would like a copy. Liz Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

Sorry, none of these names appear in the limited family history in New Jersey 1840-1930? Beth -----Original Message----- From: gc-gateway@rootsweb.com <gc-gateway@rootsweb.com> To: MCCONNELL-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 4:07 pm Subject: [McConnell] manicie/nicy/ nicey mcconnell. This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: happyroadrunner Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2480/mb.ashx Message Board Post: i am searching for my great grandmother nicy mcconnell,whose parents ,as far as i know were thomas and sarah mcconnell. nicy was borned in va.abt.1875 and died aft.1920 in ky. she married charlie hart in the 1890s and had two girls,ollie venus hart{my grandmother} and vertie hart who married j.i.taylor in knox co.,ky. nicy had two brothers linseyc.c.mcconnell,and hamilton b.mcconnell. on 2 jan 1897 nicy remarried w.b. smith in knox co.,ky. she and w.b. had ulysses,james b., sarah,linsey, and polly. i don't know what happened to her after 1920, when she died or where she is burried. i would like to know who her mother was before she married tom. can anyone help me? thanks so much happy. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board. ********* Visit the threaded archives of this list: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/MCCONNELL ********* Messages posted to the RootsWeb/Ancestry MCCONNELL Message Board are gatewayed to this Mailing List. Remember that the author of gatewayed messages may not be a list subscriber so please reply to gatewayed messages by clicking on the link and replying on the board. ************ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MCCONNELL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: happyroadrunner Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2480/mb.ashx Message Board Post: i am searching for my great grandmother nicy mcconnell,whose parents ,as far as i know were thomas and sarah mcconnell. nicy was borned in va.abt.1875 and died aft.1920 in ky. she married charlie hart in the 1890s and had two girls,ollie venus hart{my grandmother} and vertie hart who married j.i.taylor in knox co.,ky. nicy had two brothers linseyc.c.mcconnell,and hamilton b.mcconnell. on 2 jan 1897 nicy remarried w.b. smith in knox co.,ky. she and w.b. had ulysses,james b., sarah,linsey, and polly. i don't know what happened to her after 1920, when she died or where she is burried. i would like to know who her mother was before she married tom. can anyone help me? thanks so much happy. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: lynnliz2003 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2444.3.1.2.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Thank you for the response. It is possible the year of marriage transcribed in Maddox & Carter's book, is also incorrect. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: vmountjoy Surnames: McConnell, Detweiler Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2479/mb.ashx Message Board Post: I am looking for information on the first marriage of Sarah W. McConnell--she was born in Halifax, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania in 1862 or '63, daughter of Sarah (Marsh) and George Washington McConnell. She married an Attorney Detweiler from Harrisburg around 1880/1890. I am not sure exactly when he died, but Sarah remarried in Northumberland County in 1897. Can anyone tell me her first husband Detweiler's full name, or the exact date of his death or his marriage to Sarah McConnell? Thanks, V. Mountjoy Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: fjcoppage1 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2444.3.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: I am still leaning toward John E. McConnell (maybe a junior) and 2nd wife, Nancy Brown, being the parents of William Larkin McConnell (and your Ellafare). Some say it is Larkin Solomon, but note the items below. Reasons: (1) In 1880 census, Nancy Brown McConnell, widow of John E., is still in Lowndes County, GA., and listed with son, William L. McConnell, age 19, and daughter, Ellafare, age 20. The step-child. age 28 (son or daughter of John E. and Elizabeth McConnell) is also in the home. (I believe John's first marriage to Elizabeth Tindol/Tindall was in 1849--not 1859 as transcribed on a genealogical site.} (2) In 1880 census, Solomon McConnell and wife, Winnie, (whom some say are the parents of our William Larkin) are still in Wilkinson County, GA. as is their son , William L. McConnell, age 18. Must not be our William L. (3) Bartow Eunice married Ellafare McConnell, daughter of John and Nancy Brown McConnell. William Larkin McConnell (our W.L.), son of John and Nancy Brown McConnell married Nancy Eunice, sister of Bartow Eunice. These couples are buried very close to each other in Fellowship cemetery in Cook County, GA (now the northern border of Lowndes County). IF ANYONE HAS PROOF OF THE PARENTAGE OF WILLIAM LARKIN MCCONNELL, 1860-1950, PLEASE RESPOND. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: ksaxe Surnames: McConnell, McDaniel, McDonald Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.mcconnell/2478/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Learning about them from the project tables and relationship trees Currently, there are 19 McConnell men with results posted on the charts of the Clan Donald DNA project. Most of them, 13 in all, have been classified as members of the R1b Yellow, or R1b unclassified group. This is a group for R1b men in the project who don't clearly fit into any other subgroup. Some of these men will be classified into other groups as new results come in. It looks to me like the 13 men on the table so far represent no more than 10 different families. How many families one counts depends on how closely related 2 men must be for you to classify them as members of one family. For instance, the first McConnell listed on the Yellow table is J. L. McConnell. His closest matches are with McDaniel and McDonald men, and some of those men have been classified into the Magenta and Pale Violet groups. A more distant match of his is a D. E. McConnell. This D. E. McConnell does not have as many matches as J. L. McConnell, and J. L. is D. E.'s closest match with an estimated Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor (TMRCA) of 28 generations. That figure suggests the possibility that their common ancestor did not have a surname. So maybe these two should be counted as members of two different family groups. One way to look at these family relationships is to check out the Relationship Trees generated by Doug McDonald. He used computer software to generate these family tree diagrams which include all R1b men in the project whose results were available at the time. These family trees don't just look at the matches for one man at a time; they fit lines together assuming the smallest number of mutations possible. Doug generated trees for 25 and 37 marker results, and they both show J. L. McConnell and D. E. McConnell more closely related to each other than to any of the men in the Magenta group with results on the trees. So maybe it is no coincidence that J. L. and D. E. share the McConnell surname after all. You can see the relationship trees at http://dna-project.clan-donald-usa.org/R1b37treewrapper.htm and http://dna-project.clan-donald-usa.org/R1b25treewrapper.htm Recent results have begun to add other family groups to the R1b Yellow table. In some cases, these individuals are known cousins of men already on the tables. This is the case with M. F. McConnell and R. H. McConnell, whose estimated TMRCA is 5 generations. J. C. McConnell and R. A. McConnell are also known cousins, with an estimated TMRCA of 14 generations. S. C. McConnell and S. W. McConnell appear to be another family group with a TMRCA estimate of 9 generations. I have not been in touch with the contact or contacts for either of these last 2 men, so I don't know whether they have a paper trail linking them or not. One member of each of these family groups may be found on the relationship trees. Results for the others are not found on the trees because their testing was done recently. It is fun to explore the relationship trees. Members of three of the four family groups mentioned here share common branches on both trees, indicating a common ancestor in the distant past. You can use their Clan Donald codes to find them on the the trees. Here are the Clan Donald codes for some McConnell men on the R1b Relationship Trees: J. L. &UT3VS D. E. &IEVHU R. H. &PBLXR S. W. &GDXCF R. A. &LVCKG C. W. &TTDDW K. &29AJK Once you find these men on the relationship trees, it is easy to identify their neighbors by clicking on their dots to obtain their Clan Donald codes, which you can then look up on the project tables. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.