Thanks for the update Barbara. Judy > > From: "Barbara P. Neal" <bp_neal@earthlink.net> > Date: 2006/02/01 Wed PM 06:19:47 EST > To: POYTHRESS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: DNA Study update > > Dear Poythress-List & DNA Study participants, > > This is a report from your volunteer Group Administrator, Barbara > Poythress Neal, regarding our Poythress/Poytress-Surname Y-DNA Study. > > More participants now: > > Our Study now has 13 participants. The test kits from the 2 most recent > participants have just been received back at FamilyTreeDNA; those 2 kits > will be sent to the lab within the week. Both men are getting the > 37-marker tests, and the company indicates that those test results > require about 6 weeks. > > One of these newest participants, Lee, is from the line of "Jack" > Fredrick Elmo D'Auther Poythress, who we think is descended from James > R. Portis/Poythress & Sarah Crowder. > > The other newest participant, John, is in England (where the surname is > consistently spelled Poytress). He is descended from John, who, in the > early 1600s, owned Ploddy House at Newent, Gloucestershire. Our > participant is descended through John's son, Christopher Poytress, who > was christened 1616. Christopher's elder brother was "our Francis" who > was christened 1609, and who came to Virginia by 1632 -- about 375 years > ago. > > Thus the closest potential "ancestor-in-common" was born more than 400 > years ago. I'm quite interested to see how similar/different the results > will be. > > Other updates: > > The re-examination of the 12-marker test for Victor (first cousin of > BPW) clarified that all 12 of his markers exactly matched those of most > of our other Study participants. You may recall that initially one of > his 12 markers, #393, showed up as having one fewer "repeat" than the > other Poythress men who had then been tested, so we asked that his #393 > be re-examined. The re-examination confirmed that Victor's reading was > "14" -- same as the other participants on #393. > > However, the long-awaited re-examination of a marker for Neil, our > known-descendent of Lewis Poythress, who lived in Virginia from about > 1771 to about 1847) did not have that result. On one of Neil's first 12 > markers (#439) from his 37-marker test, it was finally confirmed that > indeed his reading on #439 is "12" while our other participants' > readings on it are "13" -- indicating that Neil had one fewer "repeat." > > As markers mutate, they repeat themselves one more time. *When* they do > so is random. This marker (#439) is one of the markers having a faster > mutation rate. I don't pretend to be a scientist, so I cannot explain > the logic that Neil's marker #439 has *not* mutated while the other > participants' has. Still surprising to me. Guess that the random nature > of the mutations is the reason. > > There are some other differences in our various participants' readings > beyond those first 12 markers. As we get more participants in the Study, > the groupings of men whose readings are similar to each others' will > give us more insight, especially when we compare what we know about > their lines of descent. > > Thanks again to each of you who are participating in our Y-DNA Study. > Other men who are surnamed Poythress or Poytress (or similar spellings) > are welcome to participate. The website of the company where our Study > is registered is www.familytreedna.com Much information is available > there regarding DNA and DNA testing. > > Cheers, > Barbara Poythress Neal > > > ==== POYTHRESS Mailing List ==== > Poythress Genealogy Research Web > www.poythress.net > >