Check out the updated Wanted! page, it now has more of the families where representatives are need to confirm lineages, or would be very useful/interesting to have in the project.
Until the end of December FamilyTreeDNA are offering Christmas specials on new tests ordered, so if anyone is interested in joining in, now is a very good time to do so.
The discounts only apply if you order via the surname project, so make sure you use the join project link (don't worry, you get to read some things first by clicking on that link and aren't automatically committing yourself), on the Fairbairn project pages
For useful comparisons with other lineages, the minimum test recommended is 37 markers, but 67 would be preferred.
Should you be considering this, and are the first to represent a line, or belong to line where a confirming test is required, there may be a subsidy available. Contact the Project Administrator first if you think this may apply.
Likewise, if you have any questions not answered by the FAQs available on the Fairbairn project pages or at FamilyTree DNA, please don't hesitate to contact the Project Administrator, as we'd love for you to be reassured that this is a completely harmless process, and you wont have police knocking on your door because of your dna, nor any medical conditions exposed. Those are completely different, much more elaborate tests.
Come and join the fun, the more lines represented the better.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Explanation re the larger GD than expected from the 36/37 match
FamilyTree DNA have replied to my query about why the apparent discrepancies between the Genetic Distance (GD) values that you'd count from the 36/37 marker match (GD 1) being reported on the personal pages as GD 3 (this between Doug (F-6) and David (F-7).
The correspondence is below for you to interpret yourself, but my interpretation is that we can take 2 off the GD counts on the personal pages because the mutations are isolated, given how well the rest of the markers match.
I also extrapolated that to the GDs being reported with the rest of Lineage 1 (Martin is shown as GD 6 and Earl and Roy as GD 7), so this would bring them back to 4 and 5 respectively?
Although given the differences are in a range of markers shown as having a faster mutation rate, I'd like to see how this all pans out at 67 markers.
======
From Darren (FT DNA):
The reason this is being thrown off is that we see a genetic distance of 3 happening at CDYb,. David has a 35 where as Douglas has an 18. However this is likely only a genetic distance of on with one the 35 from CDY a copying over the 38 of CDYb, so instead of 15 18, we see 15 15 in one mutation event. If we were to see three individual mutations at this single marker we would expect to see a lot more mutations happening at other markers. So we can likely treat this as a single mutation event and reduce the genetic distance by two to all of his matches at the 37 marker level, based on this single marker. We do not yet have a system implemented to show these types of mutations in the database so far right now it will continue to be read as a genetic distance of three when comparing the two men. We are seeking to improve this.
..
-----Original Message-----
From: FAIRBAIRN DNA
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 6:38 PM
To: darren
Subject: GD numbers?
Hi Darren,
I'm puzzled.
From my FAIRBAIRN GAP pages, clicking on the GD Report for David Fairbairn, to see what his newest set of results do to the GD reports, I get (at 37 markers):
https://www.familytreedna.com/gdrules_37.html
Name Distance
Doug Fairbairn 3
Martin Fairbairn (Y67) 6
G. Roy Fairbairn (Y67) 7
Earl Fairburn (Y67) 7
The GD info at
https://www.familytreedna.com/gdrules_37.html
shows a GD 3 as 34/37, BUT
the results show that
kit 131048 is a 36/37 match.
And the GD 6 and 7 above are 34/37 and 33/37 by my calcs.
What am I missing?
Lorna
The correspondence is below for you to interpret yourself, but my interpretation is that we can take 2 off the GD counts on the personal pages because the mutations are isolated, given how well the rest of the markers match.
I also extrapolated that to the GDs being reported with the rest of Lineage 1 (Martin is shown as GD 6 and Earl and Roy as GD 7), so this would bring them back to 4 and 5 respectively?
Although given the differences are in a range of markers shown as having a faster mutation rate, I'd like to see how this all pans out at 67 markers.
======
From Darren (FT DNA):
The reason this is being thrown off is that we see a genetic distance of 3 happening at CDYb,. David has a 35 where as Douglas has an 18. However this is likely only a genetic distance of on with one the 35 from CDY a copying over the 38 of CDYb, so instead of 15 18, we see 15 15 in one mutation event. If we were to see three individual mutations at this single marker we would expect to see a lot more mutations happening at other markers. So we can likely treat this as a single mutation event and reduce the genetic distance by two to all of his matches at the 37 marker level, based on this single marker. We do not yet have a system implemented to show these types of mutations in the database so far right now it will continue to be read as a genetic distance of three when comparing the two men. We are seeking to improve this.
..
-----Original Message-----
From: FAIRBAIRN DNA
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 6:38 PM
To: darren
Subject: GD numbers?
Hi Darren,
I'm puzzled.
From my FAIRBAIRN GAP pages, clicking on the GD Report for David Fairbairn, to see what his newest set of results do to the GD reports, I get (at 37 markers):
https://www.familytreedna.com/gdrules_37.html
Name Distance
Doug Fairbairn 3
Martin Fairbairn (Y67) 6
G. Roy Fairbairn (Y67) 7
Earl Fairburn (Y67) 7
The GD info at
https://www.familytreedna.com/gdrules_37.html
shows a GD 3 as 34/37, BUT
the results show that
kit 131048 is a 36/37 match.
And the GD 6 and 7 above are 34/37 and 33/37 by my calcs.
What am I missing?
Lorna
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
25th: Sunderland and Ontario match looking good
Full 37 marker results now in for F-7, David with the Trotter F. m. Jean F. 1795 Ladykirk, who moved south into Sunderland.
There's a 36/37 marker match with the representative (Doug, F-6) of the family of James & Helen (GOODFELLOW) FAIRBAIRN , which family emigrated to Spencerville, Ontario in the 1830s.
At 37 markers, David is apparently a Genetic Distance (GD) of 3 from Doug (was GD 0 at the 25/25 match); and has slipped to GD 6 with Martin (F-1), and GD 7 with Earl (F-2) and Roy (F-3), which at 25 markers were all GD 1.
I need to swot up on how this is calculated, particularly as a 36/37 match ended up a GD of 3 instead of the GD 1 I thought it was, and Martin/Earl/Roy ended up at GD 6 and GD 7!!
WFN Results pages updated with the above results.
Sorry about this blog being repeatedly marked as spam. I've requested, yet again, it be unblocked.
But I will persevere with this format for the project diary as I like the label filtering over what the forums offer.
GD findings:
I found the following explanations of Genetic Distance which all seems fair enough, EXCEPT that on the individual GD reports available on the admin pages, the actual GD numbers given are far higher than the marker results appear to be showing.
I'll ask FamilyTree DNA to explain.
There's a 36/37 marker match with the representative (Doug, F-6) of the family of James & Helen (GOODFELLOW) FAIRBAIRN , which family emigrated to Spencerville, Ontario in the 1830s.
At 37 markers, David is apparently a Genetic Distance (GD) of 3 from Doug (was GD 0 at the 25/25 match); and has slipped to GD 6 with Martin (F-1), and GD 7 with Earl (F-2) and Roy (F-3), which at 25 markers were all GD 1.
I need to swot up on how this is calculated, particularly as a 36/37 match ended up a GD of 3 instead of the GD 1 I thought it was, and Martin/Earl/Roy ended up at GD 6 and GD 7!!
WFN Results pages updated with the above results.
Sorry about this blog being repeatedly marked as spam. I've requested, yet again, it be unblocked.
But I will persevere with this format for the project diary as I like the label filtering over what the forums offer.
GD findings:
I found the following explanations of Genetic Distance which all seems fair enough, EXCEPT that on the individual GD reports available on the admin pages, the actual GD numbers given are far higher than the marker results appear to be showing.
I'll ask FamilyTree DNA to explain.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Rideau Canal connection holding up
Preliminary (12 marker) results are now in for F-8, the representative of the line of Thomas & Elspeth (REDPATH) FAIRBAIRN, and they show an exact match with the two last results, F-6 the James (GOODFELLOW) line, and F-7, the Trotter line, and are reported as being a Genetic Distance of 1 from Martin (F-1), Earl (F-2) and Roy (F-3), this latter being a descendant of William (marr. Jean WANLESS) reported to have also worked on the Rideau Canal.
So, on the face of it, there is indeed some connection between the two Rideau Canal workers, William and Thomas FAIRBAIRN (see the Patriarchs page for outline lineages).
So, on the face of it, there is indeed some connection between the two Rideau Canal workers, William and Thomas FAIRBAIRN (see the Patriarchs page for outline lineages).
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
18th: New results, new match info lineage 1
37 marker results are now in for F-6 a descendant of James and Helen (GOODFELLOW) FAIRBAIRN, James probably being the son of George & Janet (MURRAY) FAIRBAIRN.
This has shown that the initial match (11/12) with the existing participants in Lineage 1 is still there, but is now a Genetic Distance of 2 with the representative of the family of Archibald & Alison (CROSSER) FAIRBAIRN and GD 3 with both of the others.
I presume the difference in these Genetic Distance numbers is because Doug is 34/37 with Earl and Roy, and to my untrained eye, looks the same to Martin, BUT one of the mismatches with Martin is on CDY a, a faster mutating marker, so possibly if both have mutated compared to the others, that's one less mark against in the Genetic Distance stakes?
Some web updates to the WorldFamilies.net pages:
- Patriarchs page has had some small edits to the pedigree of William & Margaret (SCOTT) FAIRBAIRN pedigree to add a wife and occupation to son John as I'm now in touch with a descendant, and between us we may find an eligible participant).
- results page updated to reflect the 37 markers referred to above
- discussion pages updated slightly to acknowledge the two new matches on Lineage 1
This has shown that the initial match (11/12) with the existing participants in Lineage 1 is still there, but is now a Genetic Distance of 2 with the representative of the family of Archibald & Alison (CROSSER) FAIRBAIRN and GD 3 with both of the others.
I presume the difference in these Genetic Distance numbers is because Doug is 34/37 with Earl and Roy, and to my untrained eye, looks the same to Martin, BUT one of the mismatches with Martin is on CDY a, a faster mutating marker, so possibly if both have mutated compared to the others, that's one less mark against in the Genetic Distance stakes?
Some web updates to the WorldFamilies.net pages:
- Patriarchs page has had some small edits to the pedigree of William & Margaret (SCOTT) FAIRBAIRN pedigree to add a wife and occupation to son John as I'm now in touch with a descendant, and between us we may find an eligible participant).
- results page updated to reflect the 37 markers referred to above
- discussion pages updated slightly to acknowledge the two new matches on Lineage 1
Sunday, November 9, 2008
9th: New web page
Check out the new Surname DNA Projects Portal web page.
It has been designed as an overview/introduction to assorted Surname DNA Projects, with links to their pages, along with some additional information such as submitted links of interest to the surname concerned.
If you have a web page of interest to FAIRBAIRN researchers, use the email link at the bottom of each page to send the details for it to be included in the Web Pages link.
Very few of the FAIRBAIRN lineages are included as yet, more to come.
It has been designed as an overview/introduction to assorted Surname DNA Projects, with links to their pages, along with some additional information such as submitted links of interest to the surname concerned.
If you have a web page of interest to FAIRBAIRN researchers, use the email link at the bottom of each page to send the details for it to be included in the Web Pages link.
Very few of the FAIRBAIRN lineages are included as yet, more to come.
8th: 3 new results, 2 matches
Result pages updated with several recent sets of results:
a) 2 preliminary 12 marker sets representing the lines of James and Helen (GOODFELLOW) FAIRBAIRN and of Trotter and Jean (FAIRBAIRN) FAIRBAIRN.
These two lines have a 12/12 match with each other, and 11/12 match with all 3 Lineage I representatives. However, at only 12 markers and no records available to show how the lines connect, I'm waiting until the next set of markers come in.
Trotter is a brick wall for David, although I found it interesting that they married at Ladykirk, which is where David, son of Archibald and Alison CROSSER, had one of his daughters baptised.
James married Helen GOODFELLOW at Maxton in 1813, and rather looks like he is the son of George FAIRBAIRN and Janet MURRAY, but they inconsiderately emigrated to Canada before appearing in a Scottish census.
b) Full 67 marker results in for the representative of the line of Robert & Janet (HOGARTH) FAIRBAIRN. No match within project, but several matches with MONTGOMERY families. To be investigated further.
a) 2 preliminary 12 marker sets representing the lines of James and Helen (GOODFELLOW) FAIRBAIRN and of Trotter and Jean (FAIRBAIRN) FAIRBAIRN.
These two lines have a 12/12 match with each other, and 11/12 match with all 3 Lineage I representatives. However, at only 12 markers and no records available to show how the lines connect, I'm waiting until the next set of markers come in.
Trotter is a brick wall for David, although I found it interesting that they married at Ladykirk, which is where David, son of Archibald and Alison CROSSER, had one of his daughters baptised.
James married Helen GOODFELLOW at Maxton in 1813, and rather looks like he is the son of George FAIRBAIRN and Janet MURRAY, but they inconsiderately emigrated to Canada before appearing in a Scottish census.
b) Full 67 marker results in for the representative of the line of Robert & Janet (HOGARTH) FAIRBAIRN. No match within project, but several matches with MONTGOMERY families. To be investigated further.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)