Hi Patty,
How to link Fathers to daughters? The good old fashioned way.
*******
Here is a brief analysis of the R320 line:
(Note that "0, zero" is an exact match; higher numbers are *very* distant.)
Hi Folks,
For those of you who didn't get the original message regarding the Reddoch
and Redditt matchup, here's what we now have to work with.
--------------------
Hi Folks,
I've combined information from the reports for James F. Reddoch and James F.
Redditt. I've taken the information provided by Richard in his several
messages and placed it all in this single message.
Dale
----------
Y-DNA Alleles. Report as of April 20, 2004: James F. Reddoch has been
given R1b Haplo (Northern European model).
Y-DNA Alleles. Report as of April 21, 2004: James F. Redditt has been
given R1b Haplo and is 10/12 with James F. Reddoch!
Genetic Distance Analysis: James F. Redditt. Close to James F. Reddoch, also
given R1b Haplo. A distance of 0 is an exact match, 1 is a single step
mutation, 2 is two step mutation, etc...
[Without the next 13 markers it is indicated that James F. Reddoch and James
F. Redditt more than likely have a common ancestor. A more accurate assessment
can be ventured with more markers.]
After Paul, Tex and Richard received their 25 marker results the experts
pointed out that two of the markers differentiating the three were in the
fast-mutating category and a relationship was highly likely.
As more join the project the probability increases that there will be a
"center" R320/Reddick to which all in this Scot line will connect back to. Now
we
will compare 37 markers.
REDDOCH & REDDITT - The two James should consider expanding to 25, it's worth
the 50 smackers, And recruiting a couple of distant cousins each to join the
project.
Recommended for Ruddick/Ruddock, Rettig/Reddig, as well as Riddick lines.
Dale and Terry are going to benefit and link up with others as the Georgia
project expands.
----------
WOO - HOO!
It's very, very good news to see these new DNA analysis results for both
James Folmar Reddoch, III and James F. Redditt. We are now viewing another
combining of what have been separate lines with quite distinct spellings.
----------
Utilizing what Richard has provided in the past, here's an update showing all
results for Reddick / r320 Y-chromosome results to date. The completion
dates for some samples seem to have been pushed back.
The interesting part about James Folmar Reddick, III's results is that they
don't match up with the results of Terry Readdick and me (Dale Reddick).
Terry's folks have been in Camden County, Georgia since sometime circa 1800. In
the 1780s & '90s the family of William and Mary Rose Reddoch (ancestors of JFR,
III) was residing in Camden County. Their son William Rose Reddoch (Reddock)
was even a surveyor for the county in that period and appears to continued
with his residence in that county. Until now we had no way by which to
differentiate the Reddoch and the Readdick lines of Camden County - we simply did not
know whether they were one or two lineages. Now - this result for JFR, III
demonstrates that his Reddoch line is not the same line as that of the Readdicks
of Camden County. Unless, of course - something like an adoption occurred in
the ancestry of JFR, III. I only mention this as a possibility. It would be
nice to get another one or two male Reddochs of relatively distant relatedness
to FJR, III to undertake the DNA analysis. We are already getting several
Reddicks originating out of Burke and Screven Counties to undergo addictional
testing so as to confirm the Reddick and Readdick connection. It would be
helpful to have additional Reddoch analyses performed to positively and fully show
a matchup -within- the Reddochs and thus demonstrate a distinct separation
between the Readdick / Reddick lines and the Reddoch lines (where both were
present in Georgia during the period between the 1780s and about the 1840s).
Dale
________________________________________
Y-DNA *Alleles*. Report as of April 5, 2004:
1st 12 DYS#: Haplo a - l:
393 390 19 391 *385a *385b 426 388 *439 389-1
392 389-2
12 to 25, m-y:
*458 *459-a *459-b 455 454 447 437 448 *449 *464a
*464b *464c *464c
a b c d e* f* g h i* j k l m n o p q r s t
u* v* w* x* y*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Name
Richard Daly Reddick - 13.23.16.10.12.12.11.13.12.14.11.29.16.8.
8.11.11.26.14.20.28.11.14.14.14
Paul Douglas Reddick - 13.23.16.10.12.12.11.13.12.14.11.29.16.8.
8.11.11.27.14.20.27.11.14.14.14
Emmer Tex Reddick,II - 13.23.17.10.12.12.11.13.13.14.11.29.16.8.
8.11.11.26.14.20.27.11.14.14.14
James F Redditt - 13.24.14.10.11.14.12.13.12.13.13.29 (R1b)
James F Reddoch,III - 13.24.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30 (R1b)
Lewis McNair Ruddick - 14.23.15.11.15.15.11.13.13.13.12.29
James W Rettig - 13.23.15.10.15.15.11.13.13.12.12.30
Terry Lee Readdick -
14.24.14.10.14.15.12.12.13.13.13.29.19.10.10.11.11.25.15.20.29.15.15.17.17. 11. 11. 19.
23. 16. 15. 18. 16. 38. 38. 12. 12
Dale Elliott Reddick -
14.24.14.10.14.15.12.12.13.13.13.29.19.10.10.11.11.25.15.20.29.15.15.17.17. 11. 11. 19.
23. 16. 15. 18. 16. 38. 38. 12. 12
Terry's and Dale's analyses are the only ones yet to have completed the 37
marker testing. And both are -boringly- identical. ;-)
DYS 19 is also known as DYS 394.
It is obvious from our observation of 1000's of samples that some markers
change or mutate at a faster rate than others. While that actual 'faster rate'
has not yet been definitively calculated, not all markers should be treated the
same for evaluation purposes.
The markers in *red have shown a faster mutation rate then the average, and
therefore these markers are very helpful at splitting lineages into sub sets,
or branches, within your family tree.
Explained another way, if you match exactly on all of the markers except for
one or a few of the markers we have determined mutate more quickly, then
despite the mutation this mismatch only slightly decreases the probability of two
people in your surname group who match 11/12 or even 23/25 of not sharing a
recent common ancestor.
The first three above have Scot roots, Ruddick is Irish, Rettig is German.
Dale and Terry are "unknown," but according to what Dale and others have found
-might- be German (not yet proven).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Pending shipments from the lab, estimated dates:
*Y-Refine25to37 PP5 Richard Daly Reddick 78 3/30/2004 *
*Y-Refine25to37 PP5 Terry Lee Readdick 78 (3/30/2004) - delivered.
*Y-DNA12 STR James F Redditt 81 (4/18/2004) - delivered
*Y-DNA12 STR James Folmar Reddoch, III 79 (4/7/2004) - delivered
Y-DNA12 STR Charles Randle Reddick 81 4/18/2004
Y-DNA12 STR Niles M. Reddick 81 4/18/2004
Y-DNA12 STR Gerald Edward Reddick 82 5/2/2004
Y-DNA25 STR Unknown RIDDICK of VA or NC (We are collecting contributions
for a Y volunteer)
--------------------
<A HREF="mailto:reddick2130@comcast.net">reddick2130@comcast.net</A>
wrote:
Hi all,
If those of you in the Reddoch line and those of you in the Redditt line
have a DNA match, it seems to me that you all might now combine your efforts.
James Reddoch can certainly give you all the Reddoch book reference material,
and the Redditts also have a well documented book about their branch of the
family.
Of course, those of us from the Georgia Reddick/Readdick line have read
these books earlier in an effort to find which branch we belong to, and as Dale
as so eloquently articulated, we are basically now barking (sometimes howling
actually) up the Radick/Readick tree (a German Palatinate tree).
Anyway, both the Reddoch book and the Redditt book reveal incomplete
pictures and mention various pieces of the family puzzle missing, but these two
books together could answer some of the questions both families probably have.
Niles Reddick
>> ----- Original Message -----
>
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 10:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Compendium of Reddick / r320 DNA analyses results to date.
>
>
> Hi Dale,
> I'm sure that one of the major reasons our relatives aren't getting tested
> is the expense. I know that $99 for a 12 marker test isn't much money, but
> it is an obstacle.
> Have you, Niles, Richard, or Ed considered applying for grants, through
> the Universities where you teach, that will help pay for these DNA tests?
> Certainly if other professors have gotten grants to study why men and women like
> each other, you should be able to get a grant for a worthy project like
> this.
> For all you Mississippi Reddoch males, scroll down to the bottom half of
> this page. We surely would like to see your DNA test results next to the name
> of Cousin James Folmar Reddoch III.
> Jim, thank you so much for sharing your test results with us.
> James Allen Reddoch
>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: Compendium of Reddick / r320 DNA analyses results to date.
>>
>>
>> Hey James,
>>
>> You hit the nail on the head in regards to similar-sounding surnamed
>> families living near to one another. There were perhaps three, four, or even
>> five Reddick / r320 surnamed lineages in Georgia between the 1780s and the
>> 1840s.
>>
>> I am -really- not surprised about this outcome. This ws the result that I
>> had expected. I base this upon the differences in name usage. The
>> Readdick / Reddick lines keep on using those given names of Peter and Francis,
>> whereas the Reddochs appear to have a different set of naming practices.
>>
>> But, I cannot emphasize this enough - we need multiple tests from each
>> line to ensure that we don't have a single 'ringer' of a test result.
You
>> know, there is the possible problem of the un-acknoledged adoption into the
>> surname family that might mislead us. That could make what -seems- to be two
>> lines out of a single lineage. So, we need more male Reddochs to have
>> tests conducted (we're already awaiting additional Georgia Reddick test
>> results, so that part of covering the Georgia problem will be covered). Please -
>> if some of you male Reddoch folks are 5th to about 9th cousins of James
>> Folmar Reddoch, III - then we need your male Y-chromosome DNA analyses to
>> confirm what JFR, III's results appear to tell us.
>>
>> Dale
>> _______________________________________
>>
>> James Allen Reddoch wrote:
>> >>>> Hi Everybody,
>>> This is a surprise! I really thought Richard and Paul would be a closer
>>> match to us than that. This tells us that we aren't kin to any of you.
>>> There must have been a lot of families with similar surnames who lived near
>>> one other who weren't kin.
>>> James
>>>
>>> Subject: Compendium of Reddick / r320 DNA analyses results to date.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> It's very good to see the new DNA analysis results for James Folmar
>>> Reddoch, III.
>>>
>>> Utilizing what Richard has provided in the past, here's an update showing
>>> all results for Reddick / r320 Y-chromosome results to date. The
>>> completion dates for some samples seem to have been pushed back.
>>>
>>> The interesting part about James Folmar Reddick, III's results is that
>>> they don't match up with the results of Terry Readdick and me (Dale
>>> Reddick). Terry's folks have been in Camden County, Georgia since
sometime circa
>>> 1800. In the 1780s & '90s the family of William and Mary Rose
Reddoch
>>> (ancestors of JFR, III) was residing in Camden County. Their son William
>>> Rose Reddoch (Reddock) was even a surveyor for the county in that period and
>>> appears to continued with his residence in that county. Until now we had
>>> no way by which to differentiate the Reddoch and the Readdick lines of
>>> Camden County - we simply did not know whether they were one or two lineages.
>>> Now - this result for JFR, III demonstrates that his Reddoch line is not
>>> the same line as that of the Readdicks of Camden County. Unless, of
>>> course - something like an adoption occurred in the ancestry of JFR, III. I
>>> only mention this as a possibility. It would be nice to get another one or
>>> two male Reddochs of relatively distant relatedness to FJR, III to
>>> undertake the DNA analysis. We are already getting several Reddicks
originating
>>> out of Burke and Screven Counties to undergo addictional testing so as to
>>> confirm the Reddick and Readdick connection. It would be helpful to have
>>> additional Reddoch analyses performed to positively and fully show a
>>> matchup -within- the Reddochs and thus demonstrate a distinct separation
>>> between the Readdick / Reddick lines and the Reddoch lines (where both were
>>> present in Georgia during the period between the 1780s and about the 1840s).
>>>
>>> Dale
>>> ________________________________________
>>>
>>> Y-DNA *Alleles*. Report as of April 5, 2004:
>>>
>>> 1st 12 DYS#: Haplo a - l:
>>>
>>> 393 390 19 391 *385a *385b 426 388 *439 389-1
>>> 392 389-2
>>>
>>> 12 to 25, m-y:
>>>
>>> *458 *459-a *459-b 455 454 447 437 448 *449
>>> *464a *464b *464c *464c
>>>
>>> a b c d e* f* g h i* j k l m n o p q r s
>>> t u* v* w* x* y*
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------------------------
>>>
>>> Name
>>>
>>> Richard Daly Reddick - 13.23.16.10.12.12.11.13.12.14.11.29.16.8.
>>> 8.11.11.26.14.20.28.11.14.14.14
>>> Paul Douglas Reddick - 13.23.16.10.12.12.11.13.12.14.11.29.16.8.
>>> 8.11.11.27.14.20.27.11.14.14.14
>>> Emmer Tex Reddick,II - 13.23.17.10.12.12.11.13.13.14.11.29.16.8.
>>> 8.11.11.26.14.20.27.11.14.14.14
>>>
>>> James F Reddoch,III - 13.24.14.10.11.14.12.12.12.13.13.30
>>> (R1b)
>>>
>>> Lewis McNair Ruddick - 14.23.15.11.15.15.11.13.13.13.12.29
>>>
>>> James W Rettig - 13.23.15.10.15.15.11.13.13.12.12.30
>>>
>>> Terry Lee Readdick -
>>> 14.24.14.10.14.15.12.12.13.13.13.29.19.10.10.11.11.25.15.20.29.15.15.17.17.
11. 11. 19. 23. 16. 15. 18. 16. 38. 38. 12.
>>> 12
>>> Dale Elliott Reddick -
>>> 14.24.14.10.14.15.12.12.13.13.13.29.19.10.10.11.11.25.15.20.29.15.15.17.17.
11. 11. 19. 23. 16. 15. 18. 16. 38. 38. 12.
>>> 12
>>>
>>> Terry's and Dale's analyses are the only ones yet to have completed
the
>>> 37 marker testing. And both are -boringly- identical. ;-)
>>>
>>> DYS 19 is also known as DYS 394.
>>> It is obvious from our observation of 1000's of samples that some markers
>>> change or mutate at a faster rate than others. While that actual 'faster
>>> rate' has not yet been definitively calculated, not all markers should be
>>> treated the same for evaluation purposes.
>>> The markers in *red have shown a faster mutation rate then the average,
>>> and therefore these markers are very helpful at splitting lineages into sub
>>> sets, or branches, within your family tree.
>>> Explained another way, if you match exactly on all of the markers except
>>> for one or a few of the markers we have determined mutate more quickly,
>>> then despite the mutation this mismatch only slightly decreases the
>>> probability of two people in your surname group who match 11/12 or even 23/25
of
>>> not sharing a recent common ancestor.
>>> The first three above have Scot roots, Ruddick is Irish, Rettig is
>>> German. Dale and Terry are "unknown," but according to what Dale
and others have
>>> found -might- be German (not yet proven).
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------------------------
>>>
>>> Pending shipments from the lab, estimated dates:
>>>
>>> *Y-Refine25to37 PP5 Richard Daly Reddick 78 3/30/2004 *
>>> *Y-Refine25to37 PP5 Terry Lee Readdick 78 (3/30/2004) - delivered.
>>> *Y-DNA12 STR James F Redditt 81 4/18/2004 *
>>> *Y-DNA12 STR James Folmar Reddoch, III 79 (4/7/2004) - delivered
>>>
>>> Y-DNA12 STR Charles Randle Reddick 81 4/18/2004
>>> Y-DNA12 STR Niles M. Reddick 81 4/18/2004
>>> Y-DNA12 STR Gerald Edward Reddick 82 5/2/2004
>>>
>>> Y-DNA25 STR Unknown RIDDICK of VA or NC (We are collecting
>>> contributions for a Y volunteer)
>>>