Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
I think I may have a triangulated segment or at least a hot spot that goes back to the late 1600s/early 1700s and the Quakers of Henrico Co, VA. (Later descendants were in Surry Co, NC, New Kent Co, VA, and Charles City Co, VA, among other places.)
Below is how the segment on chromosome 2 looks from my end. See what you think.
(These are all people who match both my father and me and, where possible to compare, each other. I'm using data from GEDmatch, FTDNA, and 23andMe. Dad's GEDmatch is A862784 and mine is M201056.)
Person A: Position 11-42. (38.4 cM) Common ancestors are Jesse Stanley and Susannah Turner, 4th-great grandparents. Jesse Stanley has VA/NC Quaker ancestry through both of his parents, including all of the names listed below.
Person B: Position 27-64. (39.3 cM). Strangeman Hutchins and Elizabeth Cox. (Jesse's great-geandparents through his mother.) Unique descent: Hutchins/Cox -> John -> Alice -> Mary.
Person C: Position 29-45 (19.3 cM). John Ladd and Mary Crew. (Jesse's great-grandparents through his father.)
Person D: Position 30-44 (17.1 cM). Strangeman Hutchins and Elizabeth Cox. Unique descent: Hutchins/Cox -> John -> Jonathan.
Person E: Position 33-46 (15.6 cM). Strangeman Hutchins and Elizabeth Cox. Unique descent: Hutchins/Cox -> John -> Susannah.
People F (three close relatives on the same segment): Position 53-60 (5.3 cM). John Crew and Sarah Gattley, parents of Mary Crew (from Person C).
Given the endogamous nature of these Quakers, it's entirely likely that Person C is also descended from Hutchins/Cox, or Persons B, D, E are also descended from Crew/Ladd, or all of us are descended from shared ancestors still unknown. (Or all three scenarios!)
Whatever the case, I feel that this segment almost certainly originates with these Quaker families. When looking at overlaps and whatnot, the entire segment seems to be at position 10-70. I don't now why I'm amazed that all of this may have come from Jesse Stanley when I know full well that recombination is such a lottery. (After all, the segment passed intact from Dad to me.)
If anyone else descends from the Henrico Co, VA, Quakers, see if you match my father and me on GEDmatch.
Maybe this will help put to bed the idea that the amount we inherit from ancestors neatly divides in half each generation, or - the one that really drives me nuts - the idea that an autosomal DNA test can only pick up ancestors from four or five generations ago - argh! (Shame on me for reading comments on Facebook whenever Ancestry posts about their test. So depressing.)
So, has anyone else experienced triangulation this far back? (7th great-grandparents for my father.)
[Edited 28 Sept 2014 to further clarify unique descents.]
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
WOW Shari that is amazing. I'd say it looks like pedigree collapse due to intermarriage within the community. Very nice.
Why is Ancestry saying 4-5 generations and then giving us all this 5 cMs garbage? GRRRRRR
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
Makes perfect sense, Shari! Many congratulations!
So far my best triangulation effort takes me back to a colonial couple around 1700. I found four people descended from four different children of this couple who all share the same DNA segment. However my story only goes back 8 generations (my 5th great grandparents).
I also agree with your pet peeve about DNA neatly dividing. I have far too many instances in my 9 family tests where this is clearly NOT the case!
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
Triangulation at eight generations is great! The more examples of way-back triangulation floating around the genealogy-sphere, the better.
I was going to write about this before Person B came along, so I'm glad I waited. I'm also glad I've invited all of my 23andMe anons, because that's what Person B was. They accepted the share request and told me the (distinctive) name of their father. From there, it was surprisingly easy to work the American parts of their tree back using good sources.
(But then just yesterday I had a really nice match here blow off my GEDmatch request because he didn't see anything in common in our trees. A 96% match... sigh. People continue to not notice their empty branches. I kind of wish Ancestry would display a special version of trees on match pages with a red box in every blank spot and the words "Unknown Ancestor!" Hmm, is there still a feedback button? Off to check, lol..)
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
I have a new match to add to my original list.
Person G: Position 19-46 (31.6 cM). Strangeman Hutchins and Elizabeth Cox. Unique descent: Hutchins/Cox -> John -> Alice -> Mary.
(Person B's unique descent in my original post will be edited to show that they descend from Alice's daughter Susanna, instead of just Alice.)
That's nine-ish people with this Quaker community in their ancestry matching on the same segment, and more than half (at least) with unique descents from Strangeman Hutchins/Elizabeth Cox. Time to hit some of the surname boards and Quaker boards. Maybe it will inspire a few people to test!
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
We have Quakers, including Stanley and Hutchins, but did not get those pieces. I tested myself and my brother at FTDNA. We have about 260 some in common matches and we each have about 460 not in common matches. We share the expected percentages of DNA for full siblings, the same mtdna, and the correct percentages with our father whom I also tested. We each have the same relationship to those other over 900 people, but did not come up as matches. I never expected so many not in common matches.
I love math and statistics, and tested my son at 23and me, and his father at FTDNA. I also tested Y and autosomal a known 3rd cousin on my father's side. That cousin is a Y-match and a cousin match for 2nd cousin once removed, my father, but not a cousin match to either 2 of his known third cousins, myself brother. My husband also has a 3rd cousin and their match is just under the 7cM recommended by GEDmatch.
Toward a more distant connection, my husband and a known 3rd cousin did Y-testing as Hodges. They match each other, but after that match only the surname Crow. The cousin match turned up 2 Crow cousins with some of the Y-DNA matches, and then additional female lines with these Crow families. One of the Crow Y-DNA matches is not a "cousin" match, but his sister and 2 of his cousins are. These people could not be closer than 5th cousins, and looking at their lines we have not found a possible connection even that close.
What I have observed is DNA is very random. What passes can remain an intact segment from grandfather through a daughter to a grandson or become truncated. We know 1/2 is lost each generation. The chances that 2 cousins inherited the same part decreases drastically with each generation, even as recently as 3rd cousins. Triangulation is, like you wrote, exciting.
Joyce (Moore) Hodges
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
I match Shari's dad on Chromosome 2. Just under 9 c.m. I know that most of my matches are with descendants of the Welsh Quakers that went from north and mid Wales. The clearest connections are Jones/Cantrell and Morgan/Boone.I was born in Wales and all my known ancestors are Welsh.
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
PastTime 123, Do you have a Gedmatch kit no. that you might wish to share?
|
Re: Autosomal Triangulation 10 Generations Back (Are you hiding any Quakers on chromosome 2?)
Yes, of course, I'm happy to do so. Mine is F378652 and my brother's kit number is F356230.If anyone is in America and has a match with either of us and cannot identify a recent immigrant from Wales the chances are very high that it's a seventeenth century Quaker family.Not just on Chromosome 2.
|