In a message dated 19/11/2002 20:02:30 GMT Standard Time, Cascam627(a)aol.com
writes:
Any chance that Oxford will be able to do the 25 marker test in future? I
really have to think about the cost of this new endeavor. I think I have to
mull it over, on the back burner as it were, and talk myself into it. I'll
probably sign on because I sure would like to know where the Orange County
Cardens came from, but I do have to think on it.
Good work, Arthur.
Thanks,
Carol
Carol (and everyone) -
If you have a look at the Oxford site,
http://www.oxfordancestors.com you
will see that though they have rewritten their site, there is nothing new.
Still 10 markers and no mention of ever testing any more, still 50% more
expensive than FTDNA, even for groups. Even if they did offer more markers
one day, it would not be possible to upgrade a previous test, as they do not
preserve samples under refrigeration in the way FTDNA do, they throw them
away. I am very dissillusioned about Oxford. They were the first to use DNA
for genealogy, but as so often happens, we invent something here in UK, and
in no time you Americans do the same thing twice as well!
So, sorry, the only thing is to start from scratch with FTDNA. I owe
everyone an apology for embarking on the Carden project six months too early!
I hope when you've mulled it over you decide to go ahead. Can you get anyone
to share the cost?
It would make good sense for you (and others) to buy just the FTDNA 12-marker
test as a start (and perhaps upgrade later), as the three extra markers look
interesting enough to justify this decision. Here is something on this
subject -
FTDNA's three extra markers
As more results are received from FTDNA, attention can be directed at the
three extra markers upon which they report. So far the "Cheshire Carden
Haplotype" has only been defined in terms of the 10 markers reported by
Oxford Ancestors.
The following is taken from a message to Peter L Carden's daughter Natalie.
"As more results come in, we will be able to decide what the missing 5th, 6th
and 9th numbers are for the Cheshire haplotype. From Peter's results it
looks as if they are 11, 16 and 12 respectively, but from James E's results
maybe they are 11, 15, 12 and from Peter W's maybe they are 11, 14, 13. You
can disregard mine and Arnold's for reasons explained in the report.
These small differences in the 6th number may be very useful in making
connections between branches. It is clear already that your dad does not
belong to the same branch as James E or Peter W. I am hoping that Ernest and
Tony will each agree to have a repeat test done by FTDNA, and then if either
of them match your dad's 16 for the 6th number then we shall know that either
the Winsford or Bendigo branches (or both) share a more recent common
ancestor with your dad's Randle branch."
Arthur