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

Barbara, I have considered entering my brother before but his surname is not Poythress. His lineage would be: William & Julia Poythress of Greensville Co, VA Edward O'Neal & Martha Poythress Jospehine O'Neal & Charles Johnson him So I am guessing based on your lines at the bottom of your email, that he/we would get nothing out of this DNA test since he does not have the surname Poythress and is actually 3 generations removed from it. Pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara P. Neal" <bp_neal@earthlink.net> To: <POYTHRESS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 6:19 PM 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 >