The question here is not whether FamilyFinder testing is useful, it is. The
question is how useful it will be to descendants of Peter CARRICO - the great
unknown being Peter's origin. (Not to offend or ignore those on the list who
are not descendants of Peter, but it is the American CARRICOs who are at a loss
to prove their origin.)
The Y-DNA test tests the male Y-chromosome, while the FamilyFinder (FF) test
tests autosomal DNA (aDNA), the other 22 pairs of non-sex (non-Y, non-X)
chromosomes. These are two very different aspects of our genetic inheritance.
The reason Y-DNA is so effective for genealogical purposes is that the
Y-chromosome is handed down from father to son, generation after generation,
with only minor changes, back thousands of years. It has the downside that it
only tests one line: the patrilineal line.
The FF test has the advantage that it tests all ancestral lines, with the
difference that it's usefulness starts dropping off after about five
generations. In other words, the Y-DNA test has depth, but no breadth; the FF
test has breadth, but not much useful depth. I say "useful" because *all* of
our DNA goes back millions of years, it's just that the segments become shorter
and less distinguishable with each generation. So, as most of us are nine, ten,
or more generations away from Peter CARRICO, the prospects for FF testing
helping us determine his origin are not hopeful.
It will help us connect with closer CARRICO kin. For example, I have 28 pages
of matches for my FF test, and the only CARRICO matches I have are with four
first cousins, all of whom descend from Charles CARRICO of Sullivan Co., IN, and
a 5th cousin, who descends from Charles's brother, Josiah CARRICO of Green Co.,
IN. Please note that I do not have FF matches with any of the six CARRICO Y-DNA
Surname Project members who have taken the test, probably because none of them
descend from Charles or Josiah, that is, because we connect further back.
I have two brick walls on my father's side that many descendants have been up
against for over a century: Thomas THOMPSON (1797-1871) and his father-in-law,
Isaac DAVIS (c1764-1834). I thought Y-DNA testing would be the answer, but so
far the tested descendants have only a couple of matches who know less about
their genealogy than we do, so we've gotten nowhere, except to prove to whom we
are NOT related.
There is a table on a page about this testing that makes a point that I think is
relevant here. It shows the FF matches between 11 cousins, all descendants of
Col. Henry CLARK, father-in-law of the above Isaac DAVIS. These 11 cousins all
have a common ancestor within eight generations, so in theory all should match
each other, but they don't:
http://dgmweb.net/DNA/aDNA/FF-Descendants_Isaac_DAVIS.html#matches
Please note that most of the matches in this table are among the descendants of
Thomas THOMPSON, who are mostly 4 or 5 generations away from him. And note how
quickly the matches drop off when you add another generation or two (over to the
right). This is what FTDNA means when they say the FF test is most
effective/sensitive within 5 generations. This is the reason it doesn't
surprise me that my only CARRICO matches are either first cousins or, in one
case, a fifth cousin. I'm not connecting with earlier CARRICOs, before mine got
to Indiana.
I would not want to discourage anyone from being FF tested, there are things to
be learned, and the more of us who test, the more all of us learn. I just don't
want anyone to be set up for disappointment when they find FF testing doesn't
connect all of us CARRICOs. Peter is simply too distant for that to happen.
OTOH, it may be very useful closer in.
Diana
P.S. In general, the reason you have matches with people who seem to have no
ancestors in common with you is not so much that the common ancestors are many
generations back, it's because hardly anyone has a completely known pedigree
back even five generations, much less ten. You probably do have a near common
ancestor whom neither of you has connected to on paper - and probably for the
same reason: documentation in that part of your mutual pedigree may no longer
exist.
-----Original Message-----
From: carrico-dna-bounces(a)rootsweb.com [mailto:carrico-dna-
bounces(a)rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Linda Boorom
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 5:54 PM
To: carrico-dna(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [CARRICO-DNA] Carrico DNA
Diana,
You make it sound hopeless :-) BUT, I haven't lost hope yet.
Even FTDNA "suggests" that matches could go back further than you suggest:
***
quote from FTDNA
"I have many Family Finder matches in the "4th - remote cousin" and
"5th -
remote cousin" ranges. I
cannot find the connection. Are these false positives?
faq id: 813No, these are not false positives. You share real Identical by
Descent (IBD) segments
with your match.
You may share some autosomal DNA with cousins beyond genealogical times. Your
relationship may be as
close as 4thcousins. It may also be as remote as 20th cousins. It is not
possible to say exactly
where the relationship falls. Our Advisory team has labeled these cousins
Speculative Relatives."
****
Ah ha. that would explain why I have so many matches that I can't seem to find
anyone in common
with. 20th cousins??? Hope for the Carrico's? YES
But, back up to my own results for a moment. I am 3/4 German, 3 of my 4
grandparents were of german
heritage whose ancestors immigrated in the last 120 years or so to Cincinnati
OH and/or northern KY.
My other 1/4 is my grandmother Christina Carrico whose ancestry is entirely
colonial america,
probably entirely from MD thence to KY
Of my 127 matches, I'll guestimate that at least 90 % are colonial america
with some germans
intermixed and those are few.
Of those 127, I've only been able to confirm 5 so far as relatives, all on my
grandmothers side. The
"suggested relationship" doesn't agree with the "known
relationship". Will
forgo the boring details
on that.
Of those 127 matches, I have 2 who show Carrico's in their ancestry. One is
also a confirmed
relative, not on the Carrico line (he's a brick wall as I also am) but on
another of my
grandmother's ancestors whom we are 5th cousins with 41.85 cM total shared DNA
with the longest
block 14.78 cM. His entire line is also MD to KY ancestors and we have several
matches "in common"
which I am currently studying.
The 2nd Carrico match is a descendant of James Q Carrico, son of Vincent
Carrico >James of Peter>
Peter II > Peter I. I can find nothing in his line that matches with mine
besides Carrico, except
perhaps Clements (Elizabeth wife of James of Peter). In my line, Nancy
Wethington, wife of Henry C.
Carrico was d/o Eleanor Clements & Richard Wethington. She (Eleanor) is said
to be d/o of Henry
Clements an early settler in KY from MD. He is a brick wall. And, as far as I
know, noone knows who
parents of Elizabeth Clements, wife of James of Peter were.
How many early Carrico wives do we even have surnames for? Peter II married
Ann Gates first, but who
was Margaret his 2nd wife? Who was the mother of Peter Carrico I children. Who
did James Carrico b.
ca 1696 marry? and so on.
The paper trail so far hasn't told us. But, perhaps we don't know where (or
whom) to look at/for?
YDNA testing isn't going to tell us. YDNA testing isn't going to tell me who
the parents (mother &
father) were of my Alexander Carrico. It only told me that Alexander descends
from the immigrant
Peter Carrico.
I expect the results of Family Finder DNA testing of my grandmothers sister by
Feb 4, hopefully
sooner. I have here to mail the DNA of both of my parents (to phase my
results). Just completed
yesterday, between their illness, hospitalizations & my dads worsening
dementia, it's taken some
time to get both swabs completed. I upgraded my Carrico cousin's YDNA to
include Family Finder and
those results are due 2/18.
You & I don't have enough (7.? cM) DNA for FTDNA to show us as a match. BUT,
do we have any matches
in common? Can't tell unless we share and//or upload our results to Gedmatch.
Do any of those
matches we might share have any DNA in common with each of
us...................
Yes, I am subscribed to the autosomal DNA list at rootsweb. Posted there
recently. I am a member of
the forums at FTDNA, although haven't posted there, but follow the postings.
Have read most of the
blogs by the "experts". Family Finder is new. There is a lot to learn yet re:
our inheritance. I
have not gotten the impression though, which you seem to suggest, that with
each generation the DNA
gets chopped up, but that we still get some of those larger chunks, just not
all of them and all of
us may not have the same larger chunks to indicate we are related even though
we may be.
So, let me end with this, and I'll get off of my soap box.
It seems to me, that some communication & comparisons between those who have
tested could yeild
further discovery's. I'm not certain that discussions should be in a public
forum such as this or
the Carrico list. But, it would take some "advertiseing" to let others know
how to join in on that
communication etc.
Linda