The YDNA follows the male line. For instance, if an unwed woman has a son and the son takes her name, let's say Caudill, the YDNA would be of the father not Caudill YDNA even though the name is Caudill from his unwed mother. If for instance the father in this example was a Smith, the YDNA would be SMITH even though his name is Caudill. We have an instance in the Caudill DNA Project where this has happened. Any male Joines today that trace back to Thomas Joines (father of Ezekial), let's say, would have the exact same YDNA as all other male descendants of Thomas Joines even though their lines may have split off several generations ago. If you're interested, you can start the project. Write to Familytreedna.com and tell them you're interested in strating the project. Since you're a Joines, you can draft a brother, father, uncle, male cousin as your first sample! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Newman, Joyce Joines" <NEWMANJ@ecu.edu> To: <ncwilkes@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [NCWILKES] Joines Cemetery, Wilkes County, NC > No, I don't know of a Joines DNA project, although it would clarify a lot > of mysteries about relationships if there were one. The test would still > show a common ancestry among any Joineses who were related, even if > various intermarried with other genetic lines like the Caudills, wouldn't > it? > > > >> ---------- >> From: ncwilkes-bounces@rootsweb.com on behalf of Lenny F. Caudill II >> Reply To: ncwilkes@rootsweb.com >> Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2006 10:55 PM >> To: ncwilkes@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [NCWILKES] Joines Cemetery, Wilkes County, NC >> >> I'm a descendant of Jeremiah. He's my 4th great grandfather. The >> Caudill >> DNA Project is a YDNA project which means that we're tracing the male >> line. >> The Joines YDNA and Caudill YDNA is unique even though the families are >> intermarried many times. >> >> There isn't a Joines DNA project listed at FamilyTreeDNA.com. Are you >> aware >> of a Joines Project? >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Newman, Joyce Joines" <NEWMANJ@ecu.edu> >> To: <ncwilkes@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 9:26 AM >> Subject: Re: [NCWILKES] Joines Cemetery, Wilkes County, NC >> >> >> > Lenny, >> > >> > Are you also a descendant of Ezekiel Joines's son Thomas who married >> > Mary >> > Caudill or of Jeremiah Caudill and Sara Jane Adams's daughter Pheroby >> > who >> > married Ezekiel Joines, son of Thomas or of any other Joines? >> > >> > If so, it would be great to see someone compare the Caudill DNA and >> > Joines >> > DNA from various families in VA, MD, GA, NC, KY, TX, etc. >> > >> > Joyce >> > >> > Joyce Joines Newman >> > Fountain, NC >> > >> > >> >> ---------- >> >> From: ncwilkes-bounces@rootsweb.com on behalf of Lenny F. Caudill II >> >> Reply To: ncwilkes@rootsweb.com >> >> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:30 PM >> >> To: ncwilkes@rootsweb.com >> >> Subject: Re: [NCWILKES] Joines Cemetery, Wilkes County, NC >> >> >> >> The Caudill DNA Project traces the Y chromosome passed from father to >> >> son >> >> across the generations. I'm Jeremiah's 4th great-grandson therefore >> >> we >> >> have >> >> a good basis for saying what Jeremiah's YDNA marker values were (same >> >> as >> >> mine). YDNA research can only provide evidence that two descending >> >> males >> >> "were related", or conversely disprove relationship. YDNA can't prove >> >> what >> >> that relationship was. In other words, my uncle and my brother have >> >> the >> >> same YDNA as I do. We can't discern brother from uncle just by >> >> looking >> >> at >> >> the YDNA. >> >> >> >> We have a participant from the Jesse P. line that matches my DNA very >> >> closely. This would, it seems to me, lend credence to Clayton Cox's >> >> suggestion that Jesse P. was very closely related to Jeremiah. (I'm >> >> stopping at this point and measuring my words carefully so as not to >> >> inadvertantly incite a riot). >> >> >> >> We have two samples from the Stephen A. Caudill line and they match my >> >> "Jeremiah" sample to a great extent but there are a few mismatches at >> >> a >> >> couple of fast moving markers. This would strongly imply kinship but >> >> it >> >> MIGHT be more distant than traditionally accepted. We know from the >> >> pension >> >> papers that Stephen A. and James Jr. were brothers. We really need a >> >> sample >> >> from the James Jr. line to bring this more into focus. If the James >> >> Junior >> >> sample matches the Stephen A. samples very closely, then we can start >> >> to >> >> suspect that there was a significant generational difference between >> >> James >> >> Junior and Jeremiah (thereby significantly lessening the PROBABILITY >> >> that >> >> Jeremiah and James Junior Uncle and nephew). At that point, we'd have >> >> a >> >> WILLIAM sample via the Jeremiah line, two STEPHEN A. samples, and a >> >> JAMES >> >> JR. sample. If they do not match, it's highly improbable that they >> >> were >> >> brothers. >> >> >> >> That's why I'm tyrying to get a Grandpa Billy participant sample as >> >> well. >> >> If the Grandpa Billy participant matches my sample precisely, or the > >> >> Jesse >> >> P. sample, then we can deduce that there haven't been many, or any, >> >> marker >> >> mutations in the Jeremiah line since say 1800 or so. If it doesn't >> >> match, >> >> well, more head scratching I suppose. >> >> >> >> It's interesting to note that our CAUDELL participants match very >> >> closely >> >> with the other samples once again implying strongly that the CAUDELL's >> >> and >> >> CAUDILL's are kin. These lines descend from two different Benjamin >> >> Caudill's from the late 1700's. >> >> >> >> To participate you must be a male with a CAUDILL blood line. We'd >> >> love >> >> to >> >> have anyone in the project that qualifies. >> >> >> >> Great stuff. Confused yet? >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Nanalee Wrenn" <nwrenn37@yadtel.net> >> >> To: <ncwilkes@rootsweb.com> > >> >> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:00 AM >> >> Subject: Re: [NCWILKES] Joines Cemetery, Wilkes County, NC >> >> >> >> >> >> > Thanks Jim >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> Sarah (Sally) Jane Adams was born 26 Dec 1780 and died May of !858; >> >> >> some >> >> >> have said she was born in 1787 but she had children in 1799, 1801, >> >> >> 1082, >> >> >> 1803 etc which would mean she was 12 when her first child was born >> >> >> besides >> >> >> census records do not bear out the 1787 date but does the 1780. >> >> >> She >> >> >> was >> >> >> the >> >> >> daughter of John Adams, Jr. and Ann Caudill who was dau of James >> >> >> Caudill >> >> >> Sr> >> >> >> and Mary Yarborough. If this was the case then the father of >> >> >> Jeremiah >> >> >> Caudill (Sarah's husband) who is thought to be William Caudill a >> >> >> son >> >> >> of >> >> >> James Sr then Jeremiah and Sarah would have been first cousins >> >> >> maybe >> >> >> the >> >> >> DNA >> >> >> project on the Caudill line can prove or disprove that theory. Jim >> >> >> Ovendorf >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ------------------------------- >> >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> >> > NCWILKES-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 >> >> NCWILKES-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 >> > NCWILKES-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 >> NCWILKES-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 > NCWILKES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >