Y'all, Well, another wild month has gone by and the project continues to grow both in its size as well as its activity. We are quickly approaching the 300 participant mark (290 and counting) which is a tremendous milestone. This update also realizes the addition of 2 new groups and a slew of new matches with existing groups. I have been watching things over the last long while and I drawn two conclusions. First, I am beginning to believe that we have made the turn in the project where we are seeing a good cross-section of Williams families out there. What I mean is that we are beginning to see more matches than non-matches. It used to be that a new participant was more likely to not match any existing participant. Now, judging from the way the numbers are falling out, I don't think that is true any longer. We have over 130 unique and unrelated Williams lineages in the project now and I believe we will continue to see more matches vs. non-matches in the coming future. The second observation is in regards to the mutation rates. As long as the project has been around, there have been challenges in understanding mutations and what they mean to our testing. Specifically, the primary questions have revolved around how the mutations impact how recent our relatedness may be. FTDNA has published estimated mutation rates as well as the Tip calculator to help answer these questions. However, thanks to the huge number of matched groups, I have been able to take a look at the mutations and develop my own opinions about them. In a nutshell, I am seeing that mutations between known related participants (i.e. two matching participants who know where their shared ancestor is) seem to occur at a much quicker rate that what FTDNA has published. In other words, I am seeing that mutations seem to happen much quicker that what is was first thought. I am going to pass these thoughts along to the folks at FTDNA and open a discussion with them, but I'd like to hear your thoughts as well. I am going to open a topic on the Forums about this and would encourage you to add your 2-cents worth. Finally, a word about the new pedigree module. Activity on this has been slow out of the gate...to date, we only have about 18 pedigrees (out of nearly 300) loaded in the module. That equals out to about 6% of our participants. I would like to have your feedback on this. Is there anything I can do to encourage the use of the module? What is keeping you from adding your pedigree to it? Please help me help you!! Anyway, on to the latest results!! Group 5 - has three new members...James, Richard and Nona. I strongly encourage everyone in Group 5 who hasn't already done so to upgrade to the 25-marker kit. A goo point to keep in mind here...first, the upgrade has helped at least one person so far in finding a true match with one of the other groups. Because of your DNA signature, I won't be able to match you up with anyone until the upgrade is done. Group 7 - has a new member...Alva's a perfect 12/12 and has upgraded to the 25-marker kit to be sure. Group 8 - has a new member...James is a 24/25 match with the group! Group 9 - Both Judson and Marvin's panel 3 numbers are in. Group 15 - The IIb marker for Bill has been corrected Group 17 - Donald has a new website link Group 20 - Lawrence is both a new participant and a new matching member of the group. Group 22 - Ward is the latest member to this group. Group 23 - John is the newest matching member of this group. Group 24 - George is an incredible 37/37 match with this group (David) Group 32 - Another NGS project crossover, Robert, is the latest member here. Group 40 - Melvin's panel 2 and 3 numbers are in. Group 41 - Both Bobby and James' panel 3 numbers are in. Group 42 - W.P.'s panel 3 numbers are in. Group 46 - Harvey's panel 3 numbers as well as his SNP results are in. Groups 47, 48 and 49 - NEW GROUPS!! - all with matches out to 25-markers and beyond... No Matches - There are a number of new members in this group: Nick, Paul C., John L, Robert A, Leroy, Michael J, Erban, Sherman, Earl, Victor, and Paul H. Keep the faith y'all...I myself spent about a year in this group waiting for a match and now I have more cousins that I can connect!! I hope everyone has a great weekend and I'll be talking again soon! As always, Adrian Adrian Williams Williams DNA Project Administrator

Adrian, Regarding the pedigree module: can you make some suggestions for uploading part of my tree? I read your instructions (which are very well written), but when I create a file with my earliest known ancestor and his descendents, I still get over 500 individuals. This seems like far too many to upload to the pedigree module. Should I limit the tree to my direct descent only? This would eliminate my ancestor's 9 siblings and their children. Catherine ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Williams" <stickamw@earthlink.net> To: <WILLIAMS-DNA-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 8:49 AM Subject: [Williams-DNA] Latest DNA Results Updated! > Y'all, > > Well, another wild month has gone by and the project continues to grow > both in its size as well as its activity. We are quickly approaching the > 300 participant mark (290 and counting) which is a tremendous milestone. > This update also realizes the addition of 2 new groups and a slew of new > matches with existing groups. > I have been watching things over the last long while and I drawn two > conclusions. First, I am beginning to believe that we have made the turn > in the project where we are seeing a good cross-section of Williams > families out there. What I mean is that we are beginning to see more > matches than non-matches. It used to be that a new participant was more > likely to not match any existing participant. Now, judging from the way > the numbers are falling out, I don't think that is true any longer. We > have over 130 unique and unrelated Williams lineages in the project now > and I believe we will continue to see more matches vs. non-matches in the > coming future. > > The second observation is in regards to the mutation rates. As long as > the project has been around, there have been challenges in understanding > mutations and what they mean to our testing. Specifically, the primary > questions have revolved around how the mutations impact how recent our > relatedness may be. FTDNA has published estimated mutation rates as well > as the Tip calculator to help answer these questions. However, thanks to > the huge number of matched groups, I have been able to take a look at the > mutations and develop my own opinions about them. > In a nutshell, I am seeing that mutations between known related > participants (i.e. two matching participants who know where their shared > ancestor is) seem to occur at a much quicker rate that what FTDNA has > published. In other words, I am seeing that mutations seem to happen much > quicker that what is was first thought. I am going to pass these thoughts > along to the folks at FTDNA and open a discussion with them, but I'd like > to hear your thoughts as well. I am going to open a topic on the Forums > about this and would encourage you to add your 2-cents worth. > > Finally, a word about the new pedigree module. Activity on this has > been slow out of the gate...to date, we only have about 18 pedigrees (out > of nearly 300) loaded in the module. That equals out to about 6% of our > participants. I would like to have your feedback on this. Is there > anything I can do to encourage the use of the module? What is keeping you > from adding your pedigree to it? Please help me help you!! > > Anyway, on to the latest results!! > > Group 5 - has three new members...James, Richard and Nona. I strongly > encourage everyone in Group 5 who hasn't already done so to upgrade to the > 25-marker kit. A goo point to keep in mind here...first, the upgrade has > helped at least one person so far in finding a true match with one of the > other groups. Because of your DNA signature, I won't be able to match you > up with anyone until the upgrade is done. > > Group 7 - has a new member...Alva's a perfect 12/12 and has upgraded to > the 25-marker kit to be sure. > Group 8 - has a new member...James is a 24/25 match with the group! > > Group 9 - Both Judson and Marvin's panel 3 numbers are in. > > Group 15 - The IIb marker for Bill has been corrected > > Group 17 - Donald has a new website link > > Group 20 - Lawrence is both a new participant and a new matching member > of the group. > > Group 22 - Ward is the latest member to this group. > > Group 23 - John is the newest matching member of this group. > > Group 24 - George is an incredible 37/37 match with this group (David) > > Group 32 - Another NGS project crossover, Robert, is the latest member > here. > > Group 40 - Melvin's panel 2 and 3 numbers are in. > > Group 41 - Both Bobby and James' panel 3 numbers are in. > > Group 42 - W.P.'s panel 3 numbers are in. > > Group 46 - Harvey's panel 3 numbers as well as his SNP results are in. > > Groups 47, 48 and 49 - NEW GROUPS!! - all with matches out to 25-markers > and beyond... > > No Matches - There are a number of new members in this group: Nick, > Paul C., John L, Robert A, Leroy, Michael J, Erban, Sherman, Earl, Victor, > and Paul H. Keep the faith y'all...I myself spent about a year in this > group waiting for a match and now I have more cousins that I can connect!! > > I hope everyone has a great weekend and I'll be talking again soon! > > As always, > Adrian > > Adrian Williams > Williams DNA Project Administrator > > > ==== WILLIAMS-DNA Mailing List ==== > Williams DNA Project Information and Results - > http://williams.genealogy.fm/. If anyone has any problems with the list, > please email the moderator (Adrian Williams) directly at > stickamw@earthlink.net > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx >

catcoop@bellsouth.net wrote: > Adrian, > > Regarding the pedigree module: can you make some suggestions for > uploading part of my tree? > > I read your instructions (which are very well written), but when I > create a file with my earliest known ancestor and his descendents, I > still get over 500 individuals. This seems like far too many to upload > to the pedigree module. > > Should I limit the tree to my direct descent only? This would > eliminate my ancestor's 9 siblings and their children. > > Catherine > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Williams" > <stickamw@earthlink.net> > To: <WILLIAMS-DNA-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 8:49 AM > Subject: [Williams-DNA] Latest DNA Results Updated! > > >> Y'all, >> >> Well, another wild month has gone by and the project continues to >> grow both in its size as well as its activity. We are quickly >> approaching the 300 participant mark (290 and counting) which is a >> tremendous milestone. This update also realizes the addition of 2 new >> groups and a slew of new matches with existing groups. >> I have been watching things over the last long while and I drawn >> two conclusions. First, I am beginning to believe that we have made >> the turn in the project where we are seeing a good cross-section of >> Williams families out there. What I mean is that we are beginning to >> see more matches than non-matches. It used to be that a new >> participant was more likely to not match any existing participant. >> Now, judging from the way the numbers are falling out, I don't think >> that is true any longer. We have over 130 unique and unrelated >> Williams lineages in the project now and I believe we will continue >> to see more matches vs. non-matches in the coming future. >> >> The second observation is in regards to the mutation rates. As long >> as the project has been around, there have been challenges in >> understanding mutations and what they mean to our testing. >> Specifically, the primary questions have revolved around how the >> mutations impact how recent our relatedness may be. FTDNA has >> published estimated mutation rates as well as the Tip calculator to >> help answer these questions. However, thanks to the huge number of >> matched groups, I have been able to take a look at the mutations and >> develop my own opinions about them. >> In a nutshell, I am seeing that mutations between known related >> participants (i.e. two matching participants who know where their >> shared ancestor is) seem to occur at a much quicker rate that what >> FTDNA has published. In other words, I am seeing that mutations seem >> to happen much quicker that what is was first thought. I am going to >> pass these thoughts along to the folks at FTDNA and open a discussion >> with them, but I'd like to hear your thoughts as well. I am going to >> open a topic on the Forums about this and would encourage you to add >> your 2-cents worth. >> >> Finally, a word about the new pedigree module. Activity on this >> has been slow out of the gate...to date, we only have about 18 >> pedigrees (out of nearly 300) loaded in the module. That equals out >> to about 6% of our participants. I would like to have your feedback >> on this. Is there anything I can do to encourage the use of the >> module? What is keeping you from adding your pedigree to it? Please >> help me help you!! >> >> Anyway, on to the latest results!! >> >> Group 5 - has three new members...James, Richard and Nona. I >> strongly encourage everyone in Group 5 who hasn't already done so to >> upgrade to the 25-marker kit. A goo point to keep in mind >> here...first, the upgrade has helped at least one person so far in >> finding a true match with one of the other groups. Because of your >> DNA signature, I won't be able to match you up with anyone until the >> upgrade is done. >> >> Group 7 - has a new member...Alva's a perfect 12/12 and has >> upgraded to the 25-marker kit to be sure. >> Group 8 - has a new member...James is a 24/25 match with the group! >> >> Group 9 - Both Judson and Marvin's panel 3 numbers are in. >> >> Group 15 - The IIb marker for Bill has been corrected >> >> Group 17 - Donald has a new website link >> >> Group 20 - Lawrence is both a new participant and a new matching >> member of the group. >> >> Group 22 - Ward is the latest member to this group. >> >> Group 23 - John is the newest matching member of this group. >> >> Group 24 - George is an incredible 37/37 match with this group (David) >> >> Group 32 - Another NGS project crossover, Robert, is the latest >> member here. >> >> Group 40 - Melvin's panel 2 and 3 numbers are in. >> >> Group 41 - Both Bobby and James' panel 3 numbers are in. >> >> Group 42 - W.P.'s panel 3 numbers are in. >> >> Group 46 - Harvey's panel 3 numbers as well as his SNP results are in. >> >> Groups 47, 48 and 49 - NEW GROUPS!! - all with matches out to >> 25-markers and beyond... >> >> No Matches - There are a number of new members in this group: >> Nick, Paul C., John L, Robert A, Leroy, Michael J, Erban, Sherman, >> Earl, Victor, and Paul H. Keep the faith y'all...I myself spent >> about a year in this group waiting for a match and now I have more >> cousins that I can connect!! >> >> I hope everyone has a great weekend and I'll be talking again soon! >> >> As always, >> Adrian >> >> Adrian Williams >> Williams DNA Project Administrator >> >> >> ==== WILLIAMS-DNA Mailing List ==== >> Williams DNA Project Information and Results - >> http://williams.genealogy.fm/. If anyone has any problems with the >> list, please email the moderator (Adrian Williams) directly at >> stickamw@earthlink.net >> >> ============================== >> Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. >> Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx >> > > > ==== WILLIAMS-DNA Mailing List ==== > Williams DNA Project Information and Results - > http://williams.genealogy.fm/. If anyone has any problems with the > list, please email the moderator (Adrian Williams) directly at > stickamw@earthlink.net > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > Catherine, Actually, 500 is not a bad number at all. I would suggest to everyone to include all the descendants of your earliest Williams ancestor. For some folks, this could amount to a very large number of folks...my own is over 3000. So, don't worry about your files size...getting the information out there is more important that how large the file is. I have ton is server space available, so put it out there! As always Adrian