At 11:55 AM 4/8/2000 -0400, you wrote: > >If we have the baseline established and you, or any other male Page, had > >your/their DNA tested, it would establish from which of the Page lines you > >are descended. The baseline results could be used way into the future for > >coming generations to also establish their Page line. > > > >The problem we will have is finding MALE Pages who can POSITIVELY establish > >their pedigree back to one of these early Page immigrants. > > > >George W. Page > > >If you only have a handful of Pages to test then being able to positively >establish their pedigree is a bigger concern, BUT wouldn't it be the case >that if you >had a few dozen and the lines were only PROBABLE that there would still be >a very >good shot at establishing DNA baselines because research would be likely >to show >a number of them with very similar DNA, plus a few others who were >exceptions? >In other words, can you make up for a lack of positive genealogy by having a >larger sample of DNA donors? > >Blyden Potts Testing the PROBABLES before the baselines are established of the PROVEN proves nothing except to produce a number of statistical samples of Pages who have similar DNA. Once those with proven pedigrees have been tested, the PROBABLES and UNCERTAINs will be able to prove, or disprove, their ancestrial Page line. Theoretically it should only take ONE DNA sample of a male Page from each PROVEN line to establish the baseline, except for the possibility of an unknown "skeleton in the closet" (adoption, or non Page father) somewhere in the "proven" line. If two within the line are identical, there is no doubt that the baseline for the line has been established. But if only two are tested in a line and they are different, a problem of identifying the correct markers would present itself; and a third person of the proven line should be tested to determine which two of the three is the correct DNA marker. George W. Page