I haven't been to the Help Desk, but there was a little chatter about it on
listowners and GENEALOGY-DNA. Messages seem to be coming through, now, so let's
hope the delays are over.
As I show on the charts, the unique mutation each member has could have occurred
anywhere in the generations where I've colored the table cell grey and included
a question mark -- indicating we don't yet know the status of the particular
marker in that individual -- yet.
The cost for testing everyone would be "horrendous" if one person had to pay
it,
but the presumption is that most individuals will pay for their own testing,
plus contribute towards the testing of a few other individuals who are
genetically key, but otherwise not interested in genealogy. Viewed from that
perspective, it's a bargain. I've blown far more money on books and microfilms
(and professional genealogists) that gave me less in return.
Look what you have proven with one test: that John Alexander CARRICO *is* a
descendant of Peter I, something years of paper research had not proven. Not
that anyone seriously doubted that he did, but now you have proof that he did.
And if CDYb=38 does turn out to be the modal value, then we've also proven he
descends from Peter II. How much money have you spent trying to get that far?
I think it's a pretty fair assumption that all the early (pre-1900) CARRICOs in
the U.S., at least the ones in the states where we know the Maryland ones
migrated, are descended from Peter I. As it stands, with Peter I having such a
rare haplotype, anyone can prove his connection to Peter I with a 12-marker
test. If someone wants to prove something more specific than just descent from
Peter I, then we're talking 67 markers (or more).
Yes, our highest priority subject would a proven patrilineal descendant of James
I, but every CARRICO added to the project helps in one way or another.
Diana
-----Original Message-----
From: carrico-dna-bounces(a)rootsweb.com On Behalf Of Linda Boorom
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 10:53 PM
To: carrico-dna(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [CARRICO-DNA] Node Chart for Peter CARRICO I
Amazing that we haven't seen anything on the Rootsweb Help Desk or even the
listowners list (last I
checked) about this current issue with some (or all) of the lists.
But yes,
some seem to take 24 hrs
or more, so one hesitates to even respond :-) It's Tues 10:41 PM
EST here, so
I'll give it a shot,
go to bed & see if this comes through by the time I wake up or
get home from
work tomorrow.
But, back to the DNA, so it is possible with the few mutations we have in the
few
individuals tested
thus far, that those mutations could be with more recent generations
(6-9)
rather than the earlier?
I can see where it could/would be interesting to test all living
individuals
to see where it leads,
but the cost could be horrendous.
So, to get some other lines, perhaps some whose probable ancestor is James I.
1783
Assessment
in Charles Co. MD indicates that:
James of James had 7 white inhabitants
Joseph of James had 6 white inhabitants
Some of these surely sons who at present are fatherless Carrico's or of
unproven ancestry to Peter
the immigrant.
Linda B.