Hi Lists, (& see1722 will from which Benj RICE took, & 1751 Carruthers will
IDed Carruthers dau Sarah RICE, excerpts below)
Periodically, I have brought information to you about the place of dna in
Genealogy. The Rice-L List has an advanced Rice Gen program of research into its
ancestors, the primary ancestor of which it identifies as Edmund Rice (1638). It
has now undertaken a dna project to determine 'the ancestors of Edmund Rice and
other Rice and Royce families.' It will also necessarily include discoveries of
descendancy of those providing samples. The cost seems to fall at the hundred
dollar level.
I host a number of Surname Lists:
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/w/witherington.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/w/widdrington.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/w/wetherington.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/d/dare.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/e/easterling.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/f/fitchett.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/c/carruthers.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/w/wetherton.html
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/surname/c/cleverly.html
and follow messages in a few more, including Bangs-L, Hodges-L, and of course,
Rice-L, and maintain a cursory interest in Smith (a principal in the 1722 will)
and (Eliz) Lewis (md Wm With), the ancestorships of which could be significantly
and likely positively affected by the determination of a few key ancestors.
In my judgment, the most important ancestor we could research would be Robert
Widdrington(e)/ Witherington d 1722 w/will in Calvert Co MD (from which Benj
RICE took), (& to a lesser extent, the John Carruthers Craven Co will of 1751,
in which dau Sarah RICE identified ). The following add'l surnames were IDed in
the below respective wills:
============
Robert Widdringtone Will 1722 Calvert Co MD
appoint Henry EASTERLING Gurardian sons Solomon & John
appoint Walter SMITH guardian Dau Dorcas
apppoint Aunt Mary DARE Guardian Dau Mary
give Benjn RICE Cyder Casks.
give Dau Elizabeth EASTERLING
(Not IDed wife Eliz DARE or CLEVERLY)
==========================
JOHN CARRUTHERS WILL (1751), Craven Co NC
Dau Rocksolannah Witherinton,
dau Frances Hodges
dau Sarah Rice...
Sons in law Francis Hodges John Witherinton.
Wife Content Carruthers...
Rebekah McCarthy...
Sarah Betsworth
Abiah Bangs Sol. Rew
============
Learning whether/how & from where Robert came and who are his descendants
would answer many questions we have been studying w/o results for quite some
time. This would require involved participation by many interested researchers.
It is not fully clear, altho seems intuitively valuable, whether there would be
benefit to enlisting other surnames, such as Dares, Easterlings, & Cleverlys who
md Wi'tons and produced male descendants.
We also have the recent Md Genealogical article suggesting that our Gen
assessment of the wife of Robt was wrong, and that Robt's wife was Elizabeth
Cleverly not Eliz Dare as we have heretofore assigned.
To gauge interest, I'd like all readers to answer the following questions to
show interest. This is only a poll of interest. No money is sought and no
samples are requested. If we see enough interest, we will recommend sending a
check for $120 to a 'treasurer' [to be determined later - not me] . If there is
sufficient interest, ie if enough checks are received, the program will proceed.
If not, the 'proceeds' will be returned (less a couple bucks for the Bank's
costs/charges if expenses are actually incurred). We will later designate an
address to which you should send the check.
While we will know who and how many are participating, we will not have access
to any individual results (unless a participant releases his/her own results - I
expect very few but some will). We WILL be advised by the actual program
director of the study what the results were in gross, ie without knowing any
individual's result, we will know by an unidentifiable code how the coded
participants are related. This will all be explained by the actual program
director of the study. Be confidant your specific results will be known by only
you and the program director, and the program director is under strict
disciplinary requirements (like Dr/patient privilege) to never release the info
to anyone else. You will deal directly with the program director for sampling,
etc. See the actual coded Rice results posted below, altho the results are
posted in color on the websites identified below.
As I understand it, a sample is a swab taken by a wrapped cotton swab on a stick
from your inside check, altho you will know more before proceeding. The testing
will apparently be seeking the 'Haplotypes' for the sought ancestor.
QUESTIONNAIRE
For us to gauge interest, please reply to this email ASAP and answer these
questions:
1) Type your full name here: ( )
2) What is your sex Male? Female? (Type answer here: ( ) [Male or Female]
3) Will you pay $120.00 for a dna determination as such is possible by
submitting a sample? (Type answer here: ( ) [Yes or No]
4) Do you believe you are dna related to Robert Widdrington(e)/ Witherington d
1722? (Type answer here: ( ) [Yes or No]
5) If you could, would you also seek info of Gen relationship regarding other
potential ancestors? (Type answer here: ( ) [Yes or No]
6) If your answer to the previous question was Yes, Please type the name and
date of the potential ancestor here - only one more name: ( )
7) Type your email address here: ( )
8) Type your best telephone #(s) here: ( )
If there are others in your household or others who might also like to
participate, please duplicate entirely the questionnaire above and have them
type their reply, either separately or with this response.
More information follows:
This dna project by the Rice-L is primarily one to identify characteristics of
male descendants. There are also projects to discover key female traits, the
type of approach that discovered the local English female descendant of a 5,000
year old female mummy. That was a dna study identified as a Mitochondrial dna
study, see for ex, from a Pennington family dna Gen study
http://penningtonresearch.org/rc/DNA/dnastudy.htm
Q&A# 6. Can we analyze female descent? Yes, but not in the same way.
Mitochondrial DNA is passed from the mother . . . .
Pennington dna Gen study Q&As:
"1. How much does Y [Male study] chromosome analysis cost? About $... for each
individual tested. (NOTE: This amount has been lowered to $105 as of 9/26/02).
2. How is the DNA sample obtained? DNA can be obtained from any cell, but one of
the easiest samples is obtained by swabbing the inside of the cheek with a
sterile cotton swab.
3. Why do we analyze the Y chromosome? The Y chromosome is the only chromosome
passed unchanged from father to son, and therefore indicates the paternal line
of descent. All males in a patriarchal line have the same Y chromosome. The Y
chromosome is not present in females.
4. What is analyzed? We look at specific parts of the Y chromosome to obtain a
"signature". Two or more males whose Y chromosome signatures match come from
the
same paternal line of descent. Those whose signatures do not match are from
different lines.
5. Exactly what does a Y chromosome match demonstrate? A Y chromosome match
shows that two males have a common male ancestor. This ancestor could be their
father, or it could be a male from a thousand years ago.
6. Can we analyze female descent? Yes, but not in the same way. Mitochondrial
DNA is passed from the mother but, unlike the Y chromosome, it is passed to both
male and female children. Mitochondrial DNA from either sex can be analyzed to
see if two people have a common female ancestor. The present study will not
analyze mitochondrial DNA.
7. If no Y chromosome match is found, what does that show? It demonstrates to a
very high degree of probability that the two males analyzed do not share a male
ancestor. Although this is true for the two individuals tested, it may not be
true for the family groups of the individuals who were tested, because there are
a number of sources of "non-paternal events".
8. Does a Y chromosome match prove this relationship? Although no evidence is
ever absolutely certain, the confidence level for such a match is very high.
Typically, there is less than one chance in a million or more that the
demonstrated relationship is in error.
9. Couldn't it be embarrassing if an individual's Y chromosome does not match
when it should? Yes, and for this reason no individual volunteer's Y chromosome
analysis will ever be revealed except by a code. The individual volunteer will
receive a confidential personal report unless he specifies otherwise, but he
will not be given his code. Names of volunteers will not be published or
released in any way. No one will know the names of participants except the
project director.
10. Do Y chromosome analyses sometimes match, but not at every point? Yes. Over
a period of many years, a small number of mutations can be counted on to appear,
so there may be one or more points where the Y chromosome analysis does not
match exactly."
========================================
Read the 3 paragraphs from the Rice website:
http://www.widomaker.com/~gwk/era/haplotype.htm (dna project)
http://www.widomaker.com/~gwk/era/assoc.htm (List & site info)
below for more of an understanding.
The Edmund Rice (1638) Association has a project underway seeking to discover
the ancestors of Edmund Rice and other Rice and Royce families. (There was a
tendency in past centuries to regard these two spellings as interchangeable.)
Y-chromosome DNA analysis offers exciting opportunities to learn more about
early family roots. With the assistance of three genetics testing labs, we
compared the DNA of many descendants of Edmund Rice of Sudbury and Marlborough
and reconstructed the genetic "fingerprint" or haplotype of our immigrant
ancestor (see Table 1). For the details of how we did this, see the article
entitled "How We Obtained the Rice Haplotype" in our newsletter.
Knowing the haplotypes of Edmund Rice and several other progenitors, we can now
invite all Rice/Royce males to compare your DNA against Edmund's and against
each other's. For those of you who wonder whether you may be his descendants,
such a comparison can help to investigate that possibility. A match with
Edmund's haplotype will confirm that you are indeed related (though not
necessarily a descendant) and will encourage and aid you in further genealogical
research to discover your Rice ancestral line. On the other hand, a big
difference from Edmund would indicate you are not related to him at all, but
might reveal a similarity to other Rices who are related instead. For male Rices
who already have reason to believe you are not Edmund Rice's descendants, the
comparison may reveal whether or not the separate Rice families have some
connection back in the British Isles. In either case, it should be clear that
some conventional genealogical research will be needed in order to get the most
out of the DNA results. Table 1 below has all the DNA results we have obtained
to date.
You, too, can participate. We have arranged with FamilyTree DNA (FTDNA) to offer
a 12-locus DNA analysis for a reduced rate of $99 to those who join our project.
(Note: there is a similarly reduced rate for the expanded 25-locus test from
FTDNA as well.) If your haplotype matches our reconstructed haplotype for Edmund
Rice, we will be very keen to learn more about your Rice/Royce ancestral
pedigree.
==================
Edmund Rice Homestead
East Sudbury, MA Edmund Rice (1638) Association
Rice Family DNA Project
http://www.widomaker.com/~gwk/era/haplotype.htm
return to: [Information page]
Highlighted technical terms are explained in the Glossary.
Last updated: 2003 Jun 11
For more information contact our project administrator/coordinator: Bob Rice.
Results
The following are the DNA test results we have obtained so far. As additional
information becomes available, members of the "other" group may be separated
out
into new groups with identified common ancestors. In cases of ambiguous DNA
results, we will depend in part on lineages supplied by the test subjects for
determining how the groups should be constructed.
In Table 1, each line begins with a unique ID. The 4-digit ID's refer to FTDNA
results; ID's beginning with the letter "S" refer to Sorenson/Relative
Genetics
results. Note: ID 1673 in Group 1 includes results from FTDNA, Relative
Genetics, and Oxford Ancestors. We show here only the results for loci with DYS
designations. Note: the table includes the update to nomenclature for the DYS464
complex introduced by FTDNA on 2003 May 19.
The reconstructed ancestral haplotype, if known, of each group is given as the
first entry in the group, with the common ancestor's name (if known) as the ID.
Individual mutations from the relevant ancestral haplotype are printed in red
boldface. We recognize that mutations are inevitable, given enough test subjects
and/or the passage of enough time since the progenitor. Nonetheless, these
mutations are rare, as the table shows, and the appearance of any discrepancy
between the haplotypes of putatively related individuals is cause for concern.
(See the discussion of Group 2.) The question is always whether we are so
"unlucky" that a rare-but-inevitable event occurred right here, or so
"lucky"
that a rare coincidence gave two unrelated persons very similar DNA. To resolve
that question, we need conventional genealogy (as we do indeed have for the
individuals assigned to Group 1).
Test Verification
Subjects 1668, 1669, 1670, 1672, 1673, 4188, 5128, and 5129 all were tested
twice independently, once through BYU/Sorenson/Relative Genetics and once
through FTDNA. We therefore have cross-checks for 73 of the numbers in the
table. Unfortunately, there are systematic calibration questions that complicate
the comparison for 25 of those numbers. However, 48 of the numbers are
straightforwardly comparable, and we find that 46 of the 48 agree between the
two labs. This is moderately encouraging, though by no means as good as we
expected. In cases of discrepancy, we show the FTDNA result in the table.
Group 1
As indicated already, Group 1 consists of descendants of Edmund Rice of Sudbury
and Marlborough. This was the first group set up for study and remains the
largest and the only one with members firmly placed by conventional genealogical
evidence in spite of mutations. Indeed, all the members of this group, aside
from 6220, were placed there because of the conventional evidence. 6220 has at
present no conventional link to the rest of the group, but further research may
reveal one, especially with the new motivation provided by the DNA evidence.
A tree diagram of the haplotypes in Group 1 shows the majority haplotype at the
center and the four mutated haplotypes each on a spoke radiating from the
center -- a classic "star-shaped" diagram indicative of evolution from a common
ancestral type.
Group 2
Group 2 has been added on the basis of a single sample, mainly because of a
lesson it has to teach. Since it has only one representative so far, we cannot
yet reconstruct the haplotype of the progenitor Thomas Rice, but it is sure to
be very similar to the one shown here. It is sobering to compare this haplotype
with that of Edmund Rice. In the first 12 loci (the basic DNA test), these two
differ by just one step at one locus, but the additional 13 loci of the expanded
test reveal four more differences. (See the contrasting colors in entry 3109.)
Looking only at the basic test, one would be tempted to conclude that the two
lines are closely related, but the expanded results show that notion to be
false. It is clear now that Group
2 is unrelated to Group 1.
The same hazard may be lurking for other testees. In that case, it may be
routinely necessary to upgrade to the expanded test whenever the basic test
indicates a probable match. Without the backing of conventional evidence, the
DNA results can obviously be misleading. A similar problem (and the same
solution) can be seen in the Jarman-German study.
Group 3
The members of Group 3 are now identified as descendants of Robert Royce
(?-1676) of New London, CT. Four of these have been traced back with reasonable
certainty by conventional means; four are not yet documented, while two others
descend from two males who were apparently adopted by Gershom Rice of Groton,
CT, and their true parentage is not known. However, the near-exact match of all
the samples that have been tested on 25 loci makes it seem likely that at least
these are closely related, and probably all of them. Since the testees with
documented genealogies back to Robert Royce agree 25/25, and incidentally
descend from two different sons of Robert, the group as a whole is now quite
firmly established, even though the other members have not traced their lineage
back to the founder. We have therefore reconstructed the ancestral Royce
haplotype and included it in the table. In any case, this group shows the
beginnings of the same sort of "star-shaped" tree diagram as seen in Group 1: a
central consensus haplotype with several adjacent ones showing one or two
members each.
Group 4
Group 4 was created based on the exact matches at 12 loci for three samples, now
grown to five, plus two further samples that match the others 11/12. Five have
now been extended to 25 loci, and two of those match exactly 25/25, but one
differs by a step at one locus, and two others differ at two loci (although one
of the latter could also be said to differ at only one locus because his two
differences are both in the DYS464 complex). For one of the discrepant loci,
DYS464c, it is not clear what the consensus value actually is. That level of
discrepancy is still consistent with a moderately close relationship, especially
if DYS464 is subject to a higher-than-average mutation rate, as some have
claimed. Although three of the
donors have tentatively been traced back to Rices of Virginia, and another to
Rices of Kentucky or North Carolina (and probably to Virginia
ultimately), the identification of the progenitor remains uncertain, as are
their lineages. Indeed, some other testees who do not match seem to be
contending for the same progenitor (Thomas Rice of Gloucester Co, Va., c1650 -
c1716). It will be necessary to test more descendants to firm up this group.
Given the uncertainty in the connections among these testees, we are unable to
discern which of the two variants is ancestral at each of the two discrepant
loci. We therefore leave those two loci blank in the reconstructed ancestral
haplotype.
Group 5
This second Virginia Rice group represents agreement between DNA and
conventional genealogical evidence. The common ancestor is not documented and
depends on circumstantial evidence, but the lines from the next generation after
him to the present day seem well established.
The DNA evidence was at first inconclusive, since there was one discrepancy
among the first 12 loci. However, extending the tests revealed a perfect match
among the 13 additional loci for the two subgroups. This overall 24/25 match is
a fairly convincing demonstration of relatedness. The only remaining question is
whether the circumstantial evidence identifying William Rice as progenitor can
be confirmed.
Note: we are assuming that the two subjects 5894 and 6838 represent a side
branch of this group, since their lineages have not been traced, as the others
have. Therefore, we show the discrepancies as mutations in these two haplotypes.
However, given the small number of testees in the group, we have to entertain
the possibility that the four original members represent the "side" branch of a
larger group with the two latest members representing the "main" branch. This
issue would be resolved if we knew how the new members are related to the rest.
Group 6
This third Virginia group has only three representatives so far and includes
only 12-locus tests, but it seems to be pretty well documented all the way.
Group 7
This fourth southern Rice group has been designated on the strength of its
growing numbers. Reports of the earliest known ancestors range from Tennessee
and Kentucky to North Carolina. Some members of this group match each other
23/25 to 25/25, but there is a growing list of exceptions (more about them in a
moment). These test subjects thus appear to constitute another group, even
though there is as yet no agreement on a common ancestor.
5796 was the first exception. He differs from the others by two ordinary
one-step mutations plus some anomalous results for the DYS464 marker, which
require confirmation. The identification of 5796 with this group is marginal,
and will remain tentative until further conventional research can shed light on
the connections of the group as a whole. The fact remains, though, that 5796 has
no other possible matches in the study so far, except 6977 (who is also a
marginal member of the group and who is a third cousin once removed) and 7897
(whose results include only 12 loci).
6977 also has unexplained (and different) anomalous results for DYS464.
Group 8
In the "other" group, we are finding considerable diversity, with sixteen more
distinct haplotypes identified already, and only two matches among them. One
match, an identical match between 4090 and 5070, is no surprise at all because
those two are brothers. The other match is 11/12 between 5106 and 6851 and could
be the nucleus of a new group. The two subjects do not agree on a common
ancestor, but they do both trace back to Virginia.
There is one subject (7648) who falls just short of matching marker comparisons
(more than one, but fewer than four steps of difference). A 12-marker difference
of three steps is ordinarily enough to show two subjects are unrelated on a
genealogical time scale, and even two steps of difference would be very unusual
within the same family. However, a large enough population will inevitably
include a few outliers, and the best way to detect such outliers as such is to
test more markers. We have consequently extended the test of 7648 to 25 markers.
With this broader base, we find that 7648 differs by five steps (including a
two-step difference on one marker) from Group 1 and by six steps from 5204, thus
giving a much more statistically secure indication that no close relationship
exists among them.
There was briefly just a hint of a possible larger grouping of subjects 4283 and
4809 with what subsequently became Group 7. At the time, only one member of
Group 7 had been found, and that one, along with these other two subjects,
appeared to fall into that same "gray area" between one and four steps of
difference. In that case, there was no pair as close together as two steps
apart, but it was still intriguingly close. Just as in the case of 7648, we
relied upon an expanded test to cast further light on the situation. The two
candidate extra members of Group 7 were both extended. and they showed large
differences between each other and also between them and the members of Group 7
who have similarly been extended. Thus, the suggestion of a connection fizzled
here as well.
There is yet another hint of a possible distant connection between subjects 4798
and 6510, who differ by one step at each of three loci in the 12-marker test.
4798 has now been extended to 25. If 6510 does likewise, and they still have
only the three differences, or if intermediate subjects come to light who bridge
the gap between these two, then we would probably have a new group identified.
Meanwhile, however, we are counting these two as distinct.
Mutation Rate
This study, although too small to provide a statistically significant
measurement of the mutation rate in Y-DNA STR markers, does at least provide an
estimate of that poorly-known parameter. We have recently expanded the mutation
study to include the confirmed lineages in Groups 5 and 6.
Samples from Group 1 (1670-3, 4188, and 5128-9) and Group 5 (3869, 4765, 4808,
5022, and 8850) represent 90 separate father-to-son transmission events with 25
loci measured; Group 1 (3111-3113, 5300, and 6336) and Group 6 (4046, 4641, and
5032) have 44 more with 12 loci; and S002-S009 have 40 more with 9 loci. There
are thus 90x25 + 44x12 + 40x9 = 3138 mutation opportunities. The mutation seen
in both 1673 and 3111 is undoubtedly one and the same mutation, since these two
men share several generations of common ancestry. The mutation in 5129 is an
astonishing three steps. There is no way to be sure whether this is one mutation
of three steps all at once or three separate events of just one step each that
coincidentally happened to fall on the same locus and in the same sense, but the
latter possibility is so unlikely (five-in-a-million) as to be scarcely worth
considering. In contrast, the chance of a triple mutation in this line is
probably on the order of one in a thousand. Pending further investigation, then,
we will treat this as a single event. Thus, we derive a mutation rate of 5/3138
= 0.0016, with a broad uncertainty. A combination of many such studies based on
deep-rooted pedigrees could yield a significantly more precise result.
Note: it may eventually be possible to include the results from other groups in
this analysis of the mutation rate, but their ancestral haplotypes are still too
uncertain at present.
Table 1. Rice Haplotypes: measured marker lengths. DYS
Locus: 3
. . . . . .
ID
Group 1 (Edmund Rice, c1594 ENG - 1663 MA)
Edmund 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
1670 13 24 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
1671 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
1672 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
1673 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 12 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16 12
8 10 12
3111 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 12 12 11 28
3112 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28
3113 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28
4188 14 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
5128 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
5129 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 20 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
5300 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28
6220 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16
6336 13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28
S002 13 23 14 10 14 14 .. 14 .. 12 11 ..
S005 13 23 14 10 14 14 .. 14 .. 12 11 ..
S006 13 23 14 10 14 14 .. 14 .. 12 11 ..
S007 13 23 14 10 14 14 .. 14 .. 12 11 ..
S009 13 23 14 10 14 14 .. 14 .. 12 11 ..
Group 2 (Thomas Rice, c1800 NC - 1860 KS)
3109 13 23 15 10 14 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 20 29 12 14 14 15
Group 3 (Robert Royce, ? - 1676 CT)
Robert 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
1668 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 16
1669 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
3156 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
3730 14 23 15 10 15 17 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
3758 14 23 16 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
5333 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32
6061 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
7242 14 23 15 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
7628 14 23 16 10 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
7360 14 23 15 11 15 16 11 13 11 14 12 32 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 26 11 14 14 15
Group 4 (Rice of Virginia)
? 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28 18 9 9 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17
3110 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28
4131 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28 18 9 9 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17
4086 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28 19 9 9 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 16 17
4897 14 24 14 10 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28 18 9 9 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17
5076 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28 18 9 9 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 17 17
5332 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 12 12 12 13 28 18 9 9 11 11 25 15 19 31 14 15 15 17
6276 14 24 14 11 12 15 12 13 12 12 13 28
Group 5 (William Rice, 1756 VA? - c1856 KY)
William 13 25 14 10 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16
17
3869 13 25 14 10 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 17
4765 13 25 14 10 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 17
4808 13 25 14 10 11 16 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 17
5022 13 25 14 10 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 17
5894 13 25 14 11 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 17
6838 13 25 14 11 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15 15 16 17
8850 13 25 14 10 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 17
Group 6 (James Rice, c1740 - 1817 Loudon Co, VA)
James 14 22 14 10 13 13 11 16 11 12 11 28
4046 14 22 14 10 13 13 11 16 11 12 11 28
4631 14 22 14 10 13 13 11 16 11 12 11 28
5032 14 22 14 10 13 13 11 16 11 12 11 28
Group 7 (Rice of mid-South)
? 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 12 25 15 19 30 15 15 17
4091 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 12 25 15 19 30 15 15 17 17
4165 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 12 25 15 19 29 15 15 15 17
4462 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 12 25 15 19 30 15 15 17 17
5796 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30
5820 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 12 25 15 19 30 15 15 15 17
6977 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30
7897 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29
8232 13 24 14 11 12 14 12 12 12 13 13 29
Group 8 (other)
3145 13 24 14 10 11 15 12 12 14 13 13 29
3387 13 25 15 11 11 14 12 12 11 14 11 32
4090 14 21 15 10 13 13 11 12 11 12 11 29
5070 14 21 15 10 13 13 11 12 11 12 11 29
4283 13 24 15 11 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 26 15 19 29 15 15 17 18
4507 13 25 14 11 11 13 12 12 12 13 14 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 16 16 17
4798 13 23 14 11 11 14 12 12 11 13 13 28 16 9 10 11 11 24 15 19 29 15 15 16 17
4809 13 24 14 10 12 15 13 12 12 13 13 29 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 18
5106 15 23 15 10 12 15 11 13 11 14 12 31 15 8 10 11 11 25 14 20 27 11 14 14 15
6851 15 23 15 10 12 15 11 13 11 14 12 32
5204 13 22 14 10 13 15 11 14 11 13 11 30 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 20 29 12 15 15 16
5888 13 26 14 10 11 13 11 12 12 13 13 29
6093 13 24 15 10 11 15 12 12 12 14 13 31
6510 13 23 14 11 11 13 12 12 11 14 13 30
6933 14 21 15 10 13 15 11 13 11 12 11 28
7648 13 22 14 10 13 14 11 14 11 12 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 24 16 20 28 12 14 15 16
7875 13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 30 16 9 10 11 11 25 14 19 29 15 16 17 18
8234 13 23 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 31
© Copyright 2002, 2003 by the Edmund Rice (1638) Association
Back to ERA main page
Other resources:
The Rice-L site sponsors an annual reunion, a newsletter, etc.
http://arnold-history.org/dna/background.html
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/Melungeon/2002-06/1024535276
http://dorakmt.tripod.com/evolution/mtdna.html
http://www.ich.ucl.ac.uk/cmgs/ymito.htm
Using genetic variation on the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA to study
populations and their migrations.
As both the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA show uniparental inheritance they
are particularly useful for tracing the separate ancestry of maternal and
paternal lineages in human populations. Y chromosome markers and their genetic
diversity can be used to give information on male-specific patterns of migration
in the past, and the origin and diversity of specific populations. Likewise
studying mitochondrial DNA variation can give the equivalent information on
female migration patterns and diversity. Haplotypes based on polymorphic markers
are easily constructed because of the lack of recombination in these genomic
regions.
http://forum.lowcarber.org/t96270.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2909803.stm
New DNA evidence suggests "African Eve", the 150,000-year-old
female ancestor of every person on Earth, may have lived in
Tanzania or Ethiopia.
A genetic study has shown that the oldest known human DNA
lineages are those of East Africans. The most ancient
populations include the Sandawe, Burunge, Gorowaa and Datog
people who live in Tanzania.
Researchers found a very high amount of genetic variation, or
diversity, between the mitochondrial DNA of different
individuals in these populations.
Mitochondrial DNA is passed down exclusively through the
maternal line. The longer a population has existed, the more
variation accumulates in its DNA lineages.
========================
Translation excerpts of the Robert Widdringtone Will of 1722, Calvert Co MD
Maryland State Archives
I Robert WIDDRINGTONE of Christ Church Parish in Calvert County (MD) planter
appoint Henry EASTERLING Gurardian two sons Solomon & John
appoint Walter SMITH guardian Dau Dorcas WIDDERINGTONE
Dau Mary WIDDRINGTONE apppoint her Aunt Mary Dare Guardian
give Benjn RICE my Cyder Casks.
give Dau Elizabeth EASTERLING wife Henry Easterling
==========================
Excerpts of:
JOHN CARRUTHERS WILL (1751), Craven Co.,NCJohn Carruthers,
Daughter, Rocksolannah Witherinton,
daughter, Frances Hodges
daughter, Sarah Rice...
two Sons in law, Francis Hodges and John Witherinton...
Wife, Content Carruthers...
Rebekah McCarthy...
Sarah Betsworth
Abiah Bangs Sol. Rew
Craven County, NC February Court, 1752