please send further messages about strong to els1969ham@hotmail.com this was just a message address until he got his comp. thanks, nedinne -----Original Message----- From: Lloyd A. Horrocks <horrocks.2@osu.edu> To: STRONG-L@rootsweb.com <STRONG-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:15 PM Subject: Re: DNA testing, patrilineal lines >The following is taken from the BBC web site. It would be interesting for >all those with the STRONG name to volunteer for a similar test. The upside >is that the patrilineal line would be proved. The downside is that for >some men the patrilineal line established by genealogical research would be >disproved by a different father being involved. Another possibility is >that a STRONG might belong to a different STRONG line than assumed. > >Note that Prof. Sykes did not have a very large sample, but he has done >three other surnames. > >Professor Bryan Sykes, at the University of Oxford, started the research as >"a bit of fun", but it is likely to have an impact in genealogy. > >Professor Sykes used samples from 61 volunteers who shared his surname to >establish a link between the name and the distinctive DNA. He has found >similar results for three other names, but thinks the link may not hold for >the most common surnames like Jones and Smith. > >People sharing a surname may share a single male ancestor. Genealogists had >long assumed that there would be several founders for every family name. >[do you believe this?] > >It has been traditional in England for children to take their father's name >and so Professor Sykes and colleague Catherine Irven looked at the Y >chromosome, which fathers pass to sons but not daughters. > >They randomly chose 250 men with the name Sykes and asked for DNA samples: >61 replied with a swab from the inside of their cheek. > >Half of the group shared four unique sections of DNA which were not found >in control subjects either in Yorkshire or other areas of the UK. [If >there was only one or two differences, this could have been a mutation and >would not be evidence of infedelity. I don't know if Prof. Sykes looked at >this.] > >The other half did not have the Sykes DNA, suggesting some infidelity in >the Sykes dynasty. However, the estimated rate of infidelity over the 700 >years the name has existed for is very low. > >If just 1.3% of the Sykes children in each generation were fathered by >someone other than a Sykes, then the accumulation of "foreign" genes would >mean that about half of today's Sykes would not have the unique DNA. > >The research is published in the American Journal of Human Genetics. > >For the complete story, go to >http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_701000/701286.stm > >Portions in brackets are my comments. >Lloyd Horrocks, Ph.D., <Horrocks.2@osu.edu> >Dept. of Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry >The Ohio State University >matrilineal descent from Abigail Strong (1808-1868), greatgreatgrandmother >She is daughter of Ezra Strong, b 1763, Colchester, CT, d 1833 > >At 11:06 AM 08/30/2001 +1200, you wrote: >>oops, forgot to say it was a Professor SYKES, the gentleman that I am citing >>below. >> >>cheers, >>Brenda >>ajmac@internet.co.nz >> >> > From: Brenda & Tony MacCulloch <ajmac@internet.co.nz> >> > Reply-To: STRONG-L@rootsweb.com >> > Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:01:30 +1200 >> > To: STRONG-L@rootsweb.com >> > Subject: Re: STRONG related families who are politicans >> > Resent-From: STRONG-L@rootsweb.com >> > Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:59:26 -0600 >> > >> > yes I agree, we are indeed all related. >> > >> > I was listening to an Oxford University Professor being interviewed on the >> > National radio. It was fascinating. He is an expert in DNA testing. >> > >> > He was discussing the different types of DNA testing that is now >> possible to >> > be carried out. >> > >> > In particular, the 'M' Gene DNA testing that is specifically carried, in an >> > unbroken form through the female family members. >> > >> > Also the 'Y' chromosome DNA testing that is only carried through the male >> > members of the family. >> > >> > Using the 'M' DNA testing, (it was a long story and I am only giving >> you the >> > outcome of the research here), they found that all women in the world are >> > descended from one African woman. From her there are SEVEN main 'clusters' >> > of 'M' DNA 'types'. >> > >> > Apparently, one can go to the web page he mentioned called Oxfordancestors >> > and apply for a self collection kit to do a 'mouth scraping' to find out >> > which of the seven clusters of the 'M' DNA types one belongs to. Everyone >> > belongs to one of them and only one of them as it is an unbroken line >> > through the maternal line that takes us back there. >> > >> > The 'Y' Chromosome testing is through the male members and several 'One >> name >> > studies' have shown that on a random testing, men with the same name, and >> > not necessarily related in any way, are related back to a single individual >> > male. >> > >> > I stand to be corrected in any way of the above science but its sure >> > fascinating and when I get over this jolly bronchitis i think I will do the >> > test to see which cluster of the seven M types I belong to. >> > >> > Thanks for your kind knowledge and reply. >> > >> > Brenda >> > ajmac@internet.co.nz >> > > > >==== STRONG Mailing List ==== >======================================================== >Address to subscribe or cancel subscription for MAIL-MODE: ><STRONG-L-request@rootsweb.com> > >Address to subscribe or cancel subscription for DIGEST-MODE: ><STRONG-D-request@rootsweb.com> >========================================================== >To subscribe, send 1 word message: subscribe > >To cancel subscription, send 1 word: unsubscribe >========================================================== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >