Author Topic: Y-67 DNA Test Result Query  (Read 1273 times)

Offline supermoussi

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,251
    • View Profile
Y-67 DNA Test Result Query
« on: Thursday 28 February 13 08:52 GMT (UK) »
One thing that would be worthwhile, if you can afford it, is to increase the number of markers tested to 111. Sometimes you find people have similiar values for markers 1-67, but then less similar values for markers 67-111. By increasing the numbers of markers you improve the accuracy of calculations of Time to Most Recent Common Ancestors between project members, and may also be able to identify distinctive off-modal values in specific branches of the family.

Another thing to bear in mind is that in years to come we will probably be able to scan our whole genome, and identify many many SNP mutations not known to us now. If you find you have SNPs newer than 700 yrs, it could help identify different branches of your family conclusively.


Moderator Comment: Sorry about this, but we've tried to merge the two topics, but the original question appears later in this thread as it was reposted as a new topic after replies had been put on the older one!

Offline andreabro

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Y-67 DNA Test Result Query
« Reply #1 on: Thursday 28 February 13 09:10 GMT (UK) »
Geno 2 should  help it  will  give  your  terminal SNP.

Offline smudwhisk

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,864
  • Whiskey (1997-2018)
    • View Profile
Y-67 DNA Test Result Query
« Reply #2 on: Thursday 28 February 13 11:25 GMT (UK) »
A probable relative of mine, a fourth cousin to my late grandmother (albeit he's younger than my mother) had a Y-DNA test done a couple of year's ago to try and confirm his paternal line because his ancestor emigrated between the 1841-1851 Census and never married the mother of his children, so no conclusive evidence to confirm his parentage.  Other evidence tends to suggest he is related to us which I'm happy about.

However, none of us can get our heads around the 67 marker test results which was done in conjunction with a surname group.  Of the results, the closest were two gents with a difference of 2, then another two with a difference of 3 and one with a difference of 4.  The two gents who are only a distance of 2 away on the Y-67 test from my relative don't help because to date nobody can confirm their ancestors further back than the 1780s/1790s and our mutual first ancestor was born in 1753 (but where remains an issue), it's not possible to see when we would share a mutual ancestors with them as yet.

The problem we have is that it's difficult to try and work out how many generations back the mutual ancestors between us all might be.

What is also baffling us is the fact that while three of the Gents in the project all share the same ancestor at the same level, Gents A & B are 3 markers away from my relative in the results of Y-67 test, while Gent C is 4 markers away - we can't see how this could be if the results are accurate as their first mutual ancestor is the same person.

I've included a screen shot (minus specific names) which I compiled to see how the generations fitted in.
(KENT) Lingwell, Rayment (BUCKS) Read, Hutchins (SRY) Costin, Westbrook (DOR) Gibbs, Goreing (DUR) Green (ESX) Rudland, Malden, Rouse, Boosey (FIFE) Foulis, Russell (NFK) Johnson, Farthing, Purdy, Barsham (GLOS) Collett, Morris, Freebury, May, Kirkman (HERTS) Winchester, Linford (NORTHANTS) Bird, Brimley, Chater, Wilford, Read, Chapman, Jeys, Marston, Lumley (WILTS) Arden, Whatley, Batson, Gleed, Greenhill (SOM) Coombs, Watkins (RUT) Stafford (BERKS) Sansom, Angel, Young, Stratton, Weeks, Day