Unfortunately, in the world of genetic genealogy, the conventionally researched paper pedigree is the weakest link. The basic reason for this is human frailty, as related to research and biology. When it comes to conventional research we all know all of the things that lead to defective paper pedigree. The Stout discussion gave many examples of the difficulty with the history of Penelope Stout. On the other hand, yDNA does not lie. Two or more individuals are either biologically related, or they are not. The great difficulty, even tragedy, comes when you have someone who has spent 30 years researching a pedigree, only to find out they do not biologically match the surname. Figuring out where the biological line of descent was contaminated by stranger yDNA is some times as easy as checking out the cousins and sometimes requires going back centuries. Among the Scots, rape was a tool of war. I have a project for a lowland Scots surname. One of the subscribers has what would be considered very close matches with 10 different Scots surnames. Two factors determine how far back in time the yDNA transfer might have happened. One factor is the stability or volatility of the yDNA in a particular family line. The other is the number of mutations between matching individuals. The idea being the more mutations, the farther back in time. I know of one project, Bradt, with 17 men who descend from two brother who immigrated to Albany about 1660. Among those men, there are only 3 mutations. If your surname yDNA line of research had been contaminated by someone from this family, you would have a very hard time figuring out how far back in time the yDNA transfer happened. On the other hand if you look at the Van Horne project, you will see that 9 descendants of Matthys Cornelissen, immigrated 1663, have 29 mutations between them. If another family's yDNA had been contaminated by someone from this Van Horne family, by tracking the mutations it might be possible to identify which part of the family the yDNA transfer came from. So, yes, it is possible to figure out, when and where the yDNA transfer happened. It is a matter of checking is the census records for a male with the stranger DNA / surname who lived in proximity with the family you are researching. This happened recently in one of my projects. We had three men with 3 different surnames, who genetically matched one another. One man was born with the surname of the project, the other two were not. Research in the census records identified the two different men with the project surname who very likely transferred their yDNA to two different surnames. One transfer took place in the 1840s and the other in the 1880s. To answer Renee, we actually have two different pedigrees. We have our biological pedigree, which is based entirely on our genetic make up, and we have our social pedigree which are based on the history of the families in which we are raised. Last week, This American Life on NPR aired a program about two baby girls that were switched at birth. I suggest you listen to it. My own experience with genetic genealogy leads me to believe our genes play a much larger role in who we are as individuals than the environment in which we are raised. Our environment probably only fine tunes who we are. Marleen Van Horne

Dear Marleen: That was a very astute and sensitive analysis. I agree that one has both biological and social pedigree, and that both are important. Thanks for that. I've been following this discussion with some considerable interest. I don't have Stout connections, but I am thinking about getting DNA tested to see how it all works. Then I'd like to ask some of my male relatives to be tested. I have a couple of adoptions in my family history. A great-grandfather on my mother's side was fathered by one man in 1890 and later adopted by his mother's husband. I know the surname of his natural father, Strouse, but not the first name. Census records reveal that there were six likely Strouse candidates living near my great-grandfather's birthplace of Nockamixon Twp., Bucks Co., PA in 1900, and I'd like to confirm as much as I can. I'm still a little timid about enlisting the help of male relatives, and even more timid about approaching the Strouse descendants, but I want to act on this at some point in the future. My father-in-law was also adopted, but that is a more sensitive issue so I am treading very lightly there. Is FTDNA the most extensive and reliable company right now? Their $269 package offers both male female lines (I understand that it's only direct male and direct female) with no ongoing subscription fees. The other well known company, 23andme, charges yearly access fees. Has anyone on this list ever purchased the $269 package from FTDNA? Thanks for your comments and advice. Regards, Mary Jo C. Martin