Author Topic: Different DNA Test, Different Results  (Read 24045 times)

Offline J.J.

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 9,942
  • Census Crown © www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #9 on: Wednesday 23 August 17 20:18 BST (UK) »
I would never want to take it away from those who would like to have it done, though... Our choices are all ours to make.  :)    I liked Martin's answer I was "almost - maybe - perhaps - possibly " going to get it done, hehe...
"We search for information, but the burden of proof is always with the thread owner" J.J.

Canadian  census  transcribed  data  ©2005 www.AutomatedGenealogy.com

Offline RobertCasey

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Irish research - specially R-L226 (Dal Cais)
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday 23 August 17 21:33 BST (UK) »
After 30 years of research and publishing nine 600 page traditional family history books, I found myself in being reactive to requests to add more distant relatives each year (around 4,000 new cousins came in each year that were unsolicited). These additions were becoming far removed from the surnames of my ancestors and I was making minimal progress on my brick walls of ancestors. Around ten years ago I decided to dive into YDNA testing as it seem to have promise of breaking down brick walls. So I decided to only concentrate on my parent's surnames at birth (Casey and Brooks).

Here is what I have learned to date on my Brooks line: The two oldest children of my oldest proven ancestor were for some reason omitted from an extensive estate of my ancestor, Robert Brooks, Sr. I knew for sure that these two young men actually lived in the same household (via personal property tax listings that revealed their names when poll tax was collected). Also, these two signed several marriage bonds for those included in the will and after the father died, nine of these children moved from Virginia to South Carolina and lived next to where these two omitted sons lived. For years, we just thought that these two older sons must have received funding from their father or moved away to South Carolina and were left out of the will.

There had always been undocumented family history that the maiden of this ancestor, Robert Brooks, Sr. married Brambly "Wade." The given name of Brambly was listed in many deeds but we could not verify this marriage via marriage records or Bible records. So this family lore was only casually mentioned in my sketch of this couple with the additional information that several Wade men were determined to be neighbors of Robert Brooks, Sr.

So along came YSTR testing. As a Brooks admin for several years (now pretty inactive), I became quite discouraged that every fourth Brooks tester was yet another different genetic cluster that was not related to any other genetic cluster in the last 1,000 years. I quickly became much more aware that names based on geography or trade just was not very reliable for relatedness. So, I tested the second Jordan Brooks in the south that lived in the south between 1780 to 1830 who resided within few miles of my ancestor, Jordan Brooks, b. 1765. YDNA testing revealed no genetic connection in the last 4,000 years. This means that common surnames and geography are even not enough to be very reliable. I had already compiled 500 descendants of this second Jordan Brooks - I really had a hard time letting this connection go (and I had become the focal point for the documentation of this line as well).

YSTR markers were upgraded to 111 markers and YSNP testing made many matches even more closely related. Plus the number Wade testers that matched continued to grow and continued to be way under 1,000 years. So, I now believe that Robert Brooks, Sr. did indeed marry Brambly Wade around 1730 but Wade was probably her married name - not her maiden name. They also later named a son Wade Brooks. This would explain why the two oldest sons were omitted from the will as adopted children rarely received in inheritance. This is really only very strong evidence supporting this kind of connection - but as more genetic information continues to become available for even more recent connections this adoption will some day be pretty well confirmed due to YDNA testing.

Casey - Tipperary or Clare, Ireland
Kelly - Ireland
Brooks, Bryan, Shelton (2), Harper, Williamson - England
Tucker, Arrington, Stevenson, Shears, Jarvis - England
Hill (2), Reed, Olliff, Jackson, Potter, Cruse, Charlton - England
Davis. Martin, Ellison, Woodward, Alderson - England
Pace - Shropshire, England
Revier - Netherlands
Messer - Germany
Wininger - Switzerland

Offline RobertCasey

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Irish research - specially R-L226 (Dal Cais)
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #11 on: Wednesday 23 August 17 21:37 BST (UK) »
Part 2 -

For my Casey line, we have between 50 and 75 males living in western South Carolina prior to 1800 and less than a dozen have been connected via traditional research (over 50 researchers have spent time in these counties and archives with very little being added over the last 30 years). More than half these connected lines come from one of the wealthy families that were published during the 1876 centennial. We now have around twenty-five Casey testers from South Carolina tested to date. Here are discoveries:

1) All but one Casey line is genetically related in the last 400 to 600 years, possibly much more recent. The other line is related at about 1,400 years ago - so genealogy will probably never connect these two lines since surnames not used for 400 years of this time frame. But this did validate what we suspected, that these lines were indeed closely related - except for one line.

2) A lot of the Internet genealogy has extended this line back to Virginia based on a manuscript that published in the 1960s. Several of the Virginia lines have been tested are not related in the last 2,500 years. So genetic evidence has really discounted this Virginia connection - yet no updates in Ancestry.com to date.

3) Very early on, we knew that our genetic cluster was extremely isolated from all other testers - anyone who matched our very unique signature with very unique marker values was probably going to be related in the last few hundred years. We had a very active Hanvey researcher that matched our line. After 1830, all his tests matched the Casey cluster and before this date they all properly matched a well defined Hanvey signature. This person did have Casey probate records that gave property to his Hanvey ancestors and we have now concluded that his ancestor was born a Casey, orphaned and then informally adopted by a kind Hanvey neighbor. YDNA is really good at revealing these types of adoptions.

4) Early on, we also discovered that we had one YSTR mutation where half the lines belong to one very unique value and the other half belonged to an even more unique marker value (all ten only belong to our cluster out of 50,000 YSTR testers under haplogroup R). So this is a very well defined branch that splits our cluster into six lines belonging to the older branch and five or so belonging to the younger branch. Due to significant geographic ties, I had compiled around 2,000 descendants of four possibly Casey related lines. Three belonged to my younger branch - but one belonged to the older branch. So I now know that this other line is much more distantly related by several generations. Very recently, a new line that I have never researched now belong to my younger branch.

5) We finally found a solid match that is around 400 to 600 years old. His surname is Kersey and to everyone's surprise, his line has been in England since the earlier 1600s traced back to Oxford, England. We suspect that his line moved from Ireland to England and switched his name from Casey to the English surname Kersey probably to hide his Irish heritage.

Casey - Tipperary or Clare, Ireland
Kelly - Ireland
Brooks, Bryan, Shelton (2), Harper, Williamson - England
Tucker, Arrington, Stevenson, Shears, Jarvis - England
Hill (2), Reed, Olliff, Jackson, Potter, Cruse, Charlton - England
Davis. Martin, Ellison, Woodward, Alderson - England
Pace - Shropshire, England
Revier - Netherlands
Messer - Germany
Wininger - Switzerland

Offline RobertCasey

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Irish research - specially R-L226 (Dal Cais)
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday 23 August 17 21:37 BST (UK) »
Part 3

6) We definitely know that Casey is a Irish surname - the surname according Clan history were supposed to be descendants of King Cas - a direct ancestor of King Brian Boru. This supposed to be the largest sept of the Casey clan. We are very fortunate to have Sir Conor O'Brien tested who is the 40th male descendant to hold the title of being a direct descendant of King Brian Boru. This title has been granted to each generation over the last 1,000 years. Since the South Carolina Casey line is the most closely related to King Brian Boru line, we are now pretty certain that the South Carolina Casey matches Clan history as being a descendant of King Cas. Of course this connection is around 1,100 years old but it does validate the Clan history. Also, the second largest sept of the Casey clan was supposed to be distantly related several hundred years earlier and our second largest genetic Casey cluster is around 1,400 years old.

7) We now have 560 testers at 67 markers that are known or predicted to be L226. We know that King Brian Boru was part of the Dal Cais tribe that originated primarily in County Clare. Around 40 or 50 L226 testers have traced their lines back to counties in Ireland. Around 80 % of these testers list only five southern counties in Ireland as birthplaces. These are Clare, Tipperary, Cork, Kerry and Limerick - all neighboring counties in Munster, Ireland (southern part of Ireland). We also know that the great majority of surnames in the project are Dal Cais surnames according to the history books about the Dal Cais. This information is very relevant as we can know narrow our Irish research to only five counties of Ireland.

8) Around one year ago, we had our second NPE (adoption, etc.) join our genetic cluster. Due to the extreme isolation of YSTR markers (and recent YSNP branches), this person immediately concluded that he must have Casey origins. But this Meredith line was born in the early 1800s in Virginia (the only line tied to Virginia). This is kind of an outlier for our cluster.

9) Around two months ago, we had another major breakthrough as we finally had our first Casey to join this cluster to have no known ties to South Carolina and the only Casey line in this cluster to have very early ties to North Carolina. However, this tester is in the same time frame as the Kersey tester and we have concluded that his line is probably not connected in the last 400 years and probably migrated from Ireland directly to North Carolina independent of the South Carolina migration from Ireland to America in the 1750s.

10) I was the first L226 tester to take the Next Generation Sequencing test which reveal 55 mutations that was unique to me. Over the last two years, eight of these private YSNPs are now permanent branches on the tree of mankind. Over the next few months, there is a very good chance to add two new branches based on my private YSNPs (one that is over 1,500 years old and one in the last 400 years old). You can either be reactive and let others advance this serious research or you can be very proactive. Two years ago, the most recent YSNP branch was L226 which became prolific in offspring around 1,500 years. As of today, we now have 52 branches under (one third are genealogical branches under 1,000 years old and mostly dominated by one surname). We are now finding a branch about every other week now.

11) For my particular part of Caseys under L226, we known have two genealogical branches - FGC5647 (400 to 600 years old) and FGC5639 (300 to 400 years old). If you test positive for FGC5647, you probably have a Casey ancestor and originate from one of five counties in the last several hundred years. With the new North Carolina Casey tester, we could soon add a third genealogical YSNP branch soon.


Many may think that this is minimal progress - but most of these discoveries would never happen with traditional genealogical research. This is just the start of very long discovery process. The long term promise of YDNA testing in truly unbelievable. In only two or three years, YSNP branches will average 1.5 generations and with 500 YSTRs added, each of our ancestors on our pedigree charts will average three or four unique mutations unique to this particular ancestor. Pretty exciting times.

Casey - Tipperary or Clare, Ireland
Kelly - Ireland
Brooks, Bryan, Shelton (2), Harper, Williamson - England
Tucker, Arrington, Stevenson, Shears, Jarvis - England
Hill (2), Reed, Olliff, Jackson, Potter, Cruse, Charlton - England
Davis. Martin, Ellison, Woodward, Alderson - England
Pace - Shropshire, England
Revier - Netherlands
Messer - Germany
Wininger - Switzerland


Offline Nylnasus

  • RootsChat Pioneer
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #13 on: Tuesday 29 August 17 18:59 BST (UK) »
I just now saw that Mr Casey, just above me on this forum, has Ellison in his family tree.  My maiden name was Ellison.  Furthest back is John Ellison born in PA and moved to Green and Cocke Co's, TN.
I have tested at FTDNA and was gifted a 23 and Me kit and then I took my raw data to My Heritage.  Most of the results are fairly close to one another except for a few things, like the amount of Scandinavian, Iberian or trying to place the odd bits that I have in my DNA.  I've seen Middle East, North Africa, Near East and 23 and Me put me in West Africa, which surprised me.  DNA Land just was honest and said, well for about 6 or 7% of you, we haven't a clue!  :D  None of the major admixture surprises me and it's the odd bits that fascinate me the most.  I'm happy to not be 100% European and wishing I had that crystal ball to see my deep ancestry and find out just what those odd bits are for sure.  AND I must say, if I'd never done DNA for my paternal aunt, one of our family mysteries never would have been solved.  I'm happy I spent my money on doing my DNA and the DNA of a few relatives.

Offline RobertCasey

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Irish research - specially R-L226 (Dal Cais)
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #14 on: Tuesday 29 August 17 21:39 BST (UK) »
Nylnasus - My Ellison line is quite remote in my pedigree chart. Here is what I known about my ancestor Polly Ellison who married my ancestor, Ambler Casey in 1809 in Roane County, TN:

http://www.rcasey.net/acrobat/cas0503n.pdf#Page=276

It has been over ten years since I have updated this family history but I have been the FTDNA admin for the Casey project for over ten years and have around 25 testers who are relatives of Ambler Casey.

http://www.rcasey.net/DNA/R_L226/Haplotrees/L226_Home.pdf#Page=28

Unfortunately, I know very little about my Ellison line (including YDNA testing).
Casey - Tipperary or Clare, Ireland
Kelly - Ireland
Brooks, Bryan, Shelton (2), Harper, Williamson - England
Tucker, Arrington, Stevenson, Shears, Jarvis - England
Hill (2), Reed, Olliff, Jackson, Potter, Cruse, Charlton - England
Davis. Martin, Ellison, Woodward, Alderson - England
Pace - Shropshire, England
Revier - Netherlands
Messer - Germany
Wininger - Switzerland

Offline sallyyorks

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,174
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #15 on: Saturday 30 September 17 13:13 BST (UK) »
Part 2 -


...1) All but one Casey line is genetically related in the last 400 to 600 years, possibly much more recent. The other line is related at about 1,400 years ago - so genealogy will probably never connect these two lines since surnames not used for 400 years of this time frame. But this did validate what we suspected, that these lines were indeed closely related - except for one line.

I am a novice at DNA testing but wouldn't everyone in north western Europe have been related in some way '1,400 years ago' ?

3) Very early on, we knew that our genetic cluster was extremely isolated from all other testers - anyone who matched our very unique signature with very unique marker values was probably going to be related in the last few hundred years. We had a very active Hanvey researcher that matched our line. After 1830, all his tests matched the Casey cluster and before this date they all properly matched a well defined Hanvey signature. This person did have Casey probate records that gave property to his Hanvey ancestors and we have now concluded that his ancestor was born a Casey, orphaned and then informally adopted by a kind Hanvey neighbor. YDNA is really good at revealing these types of adoptions.

Wouldn't illegitimacy be a more plausible explanation than being 'orphaned and then informally adopted by a kind Hanvey neighbor...'?


5) We finally found a solid match that is around 400 to 600 years old. His surname is Kersey and to everyone's surprise, his line has been in England since the earlier 1600s traced back to Oxford, England. We suspect that his line moved from Ireland to England and switched his name from Casey to the English surname Kersey probably to hide his Irish heritage.

'The name 'Kersey' seems to heavily cluster (1881) in the Suffolk area of England.

It could also be that the some of the 'Casey's' in Ireland originated from an English 'Kersey'

Why would someone in England 'hide' their 'Irish heritage'? Irish and English names are both found in old records in both countries

Offline RobertCasey

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Irish research - specially R-L226 (Dal Cais)
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #16 on: Monday 02 October 17 01:10 BST (UK) »
Part 2 -


...1) All but one Casey line is genetically related in the last 400 to 600 years, possibly much more recent. The other line is related at about 1,400 years ago - so genealogy will probably never connect these two lines since surnames not used for 400 years of this time frame. But this did validate what we suspected, that these lines were indeed closely related - except for one line.

I am a novice at DNA testing but wouldn't everyone in north western Europe have been related in some way '1,400 years ago' ?

Not at all, just looking at the major very old haplogroups in UK and Ireland, you have R1b, R1a, I, J and E - all of these are well over 5,000 years old. There are dozens of YSTR signatures that are predictable for YSNPs and are fairly prolific in numbers. Most of these are from 1,500 to 2,500 years old. Some of major haplogroups, L21, U106, DF27, U152 and other very large haplogroups are five to twenty percent of UK & Ireland and are generally 4,000 to 5,000 years old.

3) Very early on, we knew that our genetic cluster was extremely isolated from all other testers - anyone who matched our very unique signature with very unique marker values was probably going to be related in the last few hundred years. We had a very active Hanvey researcher that matched our line. After 1830, all his tests matched the Casey cluster and before this date they all properly matched a well defined Hanvey signature. This person did have Casey probate records that gave property to his Hanvey ancestors and we have now concluded that his ancestor was born a Casey, orphaned and then informally adopted by a kind Hanvey neighbor. YDNA is really good at revealing these types of adoptions.

Wouldn't illegitimacy be a more plausible explanation than being 'orphaned and then informally adopted by a kind Hanvey neighbor...'?

Illegitimacy is a certain percentage as well as rape and many other ways - but war, famine, disease, accidents left many orphans. When men died with a young family, the wife really needed to marry again pretty quickly to provide a shelter and food for herself and children - resulting in a lot of informal adoptions where the children just assumed the male's surname early in life.

5) We finally found a solid match that is around 400 to 600 years old. His surname is Kersey and to everyone's surprise, his line has been in England since the earlier 1600s traced back to Oxford, England. We suspect that his line moved from Ireland to England and switched his name from Casey to the English surname Kersey probably to hide his Irish heritage.

'The name 'Kersey' seems to heavily cluster (1881) in the Suffolk area of England.

It could also be that the some of the 'Casey's' in Ireland originated from an English 'Kersey'

Why would someone in England 'hide' their 'Irish heritage'? Irish and English names are both found in old records in both countries.

My particular Kersey in England is L226 where 90 % of testers list Ireland as there country of origin and L226 is around 2,500 years old (when counting branch equivalents). That is so many generations that any other component would become close to zero. It is very common for Irish individuals who were living in England to change to more Anglo sounding names. Gaelic names were converted in mass to English centric names once the English began to colonize Ireland. Casey is not the original version of the surname which was Gaelic "O'Cathasaigh" and became O'Casey. Even the O portion was dropped later as well.

After Cromwell invaded Ireland, things change radically. At least half of the land owned by Irish was transferred to English landowners, so Irish people had to adapt to this new environment. A lot of English surnames are now used by Irish people today. Under L226, you have Lynch, Butler, Smith, Thomas, etc. who are L226 (very Irish) but carry English surnames. There are also many people with Irish surnames that have haplogroups that are rare in Ireland and probably come from other European influences as well. For many haplogroups, it is pretty hard to tell where their origins are, so it could either way for these haplogroups.
Casey - Tipperary or Clare, Ireland
Kelly - Ireland
Brooks, Bryan, Shelton (2), Harper, Williamson - England
Tucker, Arrington, Stevenson, Shears, Jarvis - England
Hill (2), Reed, Olliff, Jackson, Potter, Cruse, Charlton - England
Davis. Martin, Ellison, Woodward, Alderson - England
Pace - Shropshire, England
Revier - Netherlands
Messer - Germany
Wininger - Switzerland

Offline sallyyorks

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,174
    • View Profile
Re: Different DNA Test, Different Results
« Reply #17 on: Monday 02 October 17 03:10 BST (UK) »
Not at all, just looking at the major very old haplogroups in UK and Ireland, you have R1b, R1a, I, J and E - all of these are well over 5,000 years old. There are dozens of YSTR signatures that are predictable for YSNPs and are fairly prolific in numbers. Most of these are from 1,500 to 2,500 years old. Some of major haplogroups, L21, U106, DF27, U152 and other very large haplogroups are five to twenty percent of UK & Ireland and are generally 4,000 to 5,000 years old.

Hi again, thanks for the replies

Being 'related' does not only rely on Y haplo dna. Y haplo is only one direct line

Illegitimacy is a certain percentage as well as rape and many other ways - but war, famine, disease, accidents left many orphans. When men died with a young family, the wife really needed to marry again pretty quickly to provide a shelter and food for herself and children - resulting in a lot of informal adoptions where the children just assumed the male's surname early in life.

The above is conjecture. It is not proof the person in particular was 'adopted'.

The most likely cause for a different surname match is still illegitimacy, it was not unusual and especially in the 18th century

My particular Kersey in England is L226 where 90 % of testers list Ireland as there country of origin and L226 is around 2,500 years old (when counting branch equivalents). That is so many generations that any other component would become close to zero.

I have tried to find more info about 'L226' and the only place I could find it mentioned is in two Irish American family history thread blogs/projects.

It is very common for Irish individuals who were living in England to change to more Anglo sounding names. Gaelic names were converted in mass to English centric names once the English began to colonize Ireland. Casey is not the original version of the surname which was Gaelic "O'Cathasaigh" and became O'Casey. Even the O portion was dropped later as well.

It would not have mattered where they lived or whether someone was English or Irish. All surnames were anglicised. French sounding English surnames were also anglicised. Most people did not know how to spell their own names and so their names were recorded as heard by the recorder and how he thought it should be spelled. It wasn't a 'mass conversion', it was a gradual process

After Cromwell invaded Ireland, things change radically. At least half of the land owned by Irish was transferred to English landowners, so Irish people had to adapt to this new environment.

Yes civil war tends to do that. The English peasantry had to adapt too land enclosure too...

A lot of English surnames are now used by Irish people today.

I see many American family history researchers who say this.

Under L226, you have Lynch, Butler, Smith, Thomas, etc. who are L226 (very Irish) but carry English surnames. There are also many people with Irish surnames that have haplogroups that are rare in Ireland and probably come from other European influences as well. For many haplogroups, it is pretty hard to tell where their origins are, so it could either way for these haplogroups.

The surnames you mention are common and found all over Britain and Ireland

Again, I am not sure what the significance of 'L226' is or why it means that a tester with this result is 'very Irish'. The implication seems to be here that a tester who does not get this special L226 result is therefore NOT 'very Irish'. That they might be 'just a little bit Irish'? That, even though they might have an Irish, or even English/Scots/Welsh surname and  been in Ireland since time immemorial, that they do not quite pass this 'Irishness' test?

I think my point is, as I mentioned in the other topic, that the people of Britain and Ireland are very mixed together, they are the same people. They share the same/similar distribution of Y haplo groups. I think this why people here are sceptical about the tests and how much they can tell us that we don't already know by the paper trail, and also from what we already know about history and migration.

One of my grandchildren has 'Casey' ancestry, this is why I am trying to understand it all btw.