Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Value of Testing Another w/ Same Surname?

Expand Messages
  • Tim Janzen
    Dear Lyn-David, Autosomsal testing is an excellent complement to Y STR testing when you are looking at suspected relationships between someone who could be a
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 25, 2012

      Dear Lyn-David,

                      Autosomsal testing is an excellent complement to Y STR testing when you are looking at suspected relationships between someone who could be a descendent of your ggg uncle.  Y STR testing has definite limitations in terms of TMRCA estimates within the past 200 to 500 years, particularly if you have STR data for only two or three people.  In contrast autosomal testing is highly accurate when looking to confirm genealogical relationships within the past 150 to 200 years.

      Sincerely,

      Tim Janzen

       

      From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lyn-David McMullen
      Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 9:14 AM
      To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Value of Testing Another w/ Same Surname?

       

       

      Don't have the technical expertise of Charles or Tim, so whatever they recommend would probably be the more accurate choice.  What I can tell you is that I used a 37 marker test to confirm the relationship of a surname match individual who I suspected was the descendant of my GGG Uncle.  The result in my opinion would leave no doubt of the validity of that, as even using basic TMRCA methods, the distance plus or minus left no other conclusion.

    • Lyn-David McMullen
      Thanks for that suggestion Tim. In this case the shared grandfather was born 1741, so he might be within the window you describe (200). An interesting
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 26, 2012
        Thanks for that suggestion Tim. In this case the shared grandfather was born 1741, so he might be within the window you describe (200). An interesting comment, as this individual was a perfect match on 37 markers and of course shared both the surname and forename sequences of our family. Have to admit so far I had not encountered a perfect 37 marker match who was not a genetic cousin. Are their some occurances of that?

        --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Janzen" <tjanzen@...> wrote:
        >
        > Dear Lyn-David,
        >
        > Autosomsal testing is an excellent complement to Y STR
        > testing when you are looking at suspected relationships between someone who
        > could be a descendent of your ggg uncle. Y STR testing has definite
        > limitations in terms of TMRCA estimates within the past 200 to 500 years,
        > particularly if you have STR data for only two or three people. In contrast
        > autosomal testing is highly accurate when looking to confirm genealogical
        > relationships within the past 150 to 200 years.
        >
        > Sincerely,
        >
        > Tim Janzen
        >
        >
        >
        > From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com]
        > On Behalf Of Lyn-David McMullen
        > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 9:14 AM
        > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Value of Testing Another w/ Same Surname?
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Don't have the technical expertise of Charles or Tim, so whatever they
        > recommend would probably be the more accurate choice. What I can tell you
        > is that I used a 37 marker test to confirm the relationship of a surname
        > match individual who I suspected was the descendant of my GGG Uncle. The
        > result in my opinion would leave no doubt of the validity of that, as even
        > using basic TMRCA methods, the distance plus or minus left no other
        > conclusion.
        >
      • Tim Janzen
        I am not aware of any perfect 37 marker matches that are in different haplogroups or major subclades. However, I know that there are some very close matches
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 27, 2012

          I am not aware of any perfect 37 marker matches that are in different haplogroups or major subclades. However, I know that there are some very close matches even at 67 markers that are in different subclades.

          Tim

           

          From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lyn-David McMullen
          Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 3:59 AM
          To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Value of Testing Another w/ Same Surname?

           

           

          Thanks for that suggestion Tim. In this case the shared grandfather was born 1741, so he might be within the window you describe (200). An interesting comment, as this individual was a perfect match on 37 markers and of course shared both the surname and forename sequences of our family. Have to admit so far I had not encountered a perfect 37 marker match who was not a genetic cousin. Are their some occurances of that?


        • Lyn-David McMullen
          Thanks for that clarification Tim. I interpret this as; for analysis barring financial resources to order autosomnal or deep subclade, an individual could
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 27, 2012
            Thanks for that clarification Tim. I interpret this as; for analysis barring financial resources to order autosomnal or deep subclade, an individual could consider extreme marker simularity as one sign of likely genetic linkage, but for absolute confirmation would be best advised to order the SNP test.

            --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Janzen" <tjanzen@...> wrote:
            >
            > I am not aware of any perfect 37 marker matches that are in different
            > haplogroups or major subclades. However, I know that there are some very
            > close matches even at 67 markers that are in different subclades.
            >
            > Tim
            >
            >
            >
            > From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com]
            > On Behalf Of Lyn-David McMullen
            > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 3:59 AM
            > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Value of Testing Another w/ Same Surname?
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Thanks for that suggestion Tim. In this case the shared grandfather was born
            > 1741, so he might be within the window you describe (200). An interesting
            > comment, as this individual was a perfect match on 37 markers and of course
            > shared both the surname and forename sequences of our family. Have to admit
            > so far I had not encountered a perfect 37 marker match who was not a genetic
            > cousin. Are their some occurances of that?
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.