YDNA confusion, surnames, sales hype

[Ruskie]

Don't get too caught up with your Littles, and don't think that because you have no obvious matches, that you have the "wrong" surname.

Just for interest, my OH's surname is within the top 15 in the UK. His Y-DNA test has the following matches:
11 @ 12 markers
3 @ 25 markers
0 @ 37 markers
2 @ 67 markers

None of these men share his surname.

I have joined the surname project, they have looked at his results, and claim he is a "singleton".

I have not investigated further testing to enhance these results, however I have just purchased an autosomal test to see what matches that throws up. 

For contrast, my father is one of only 5 (known) men worldwide who have the same surname. His matches:
0 @ 67
4 @ 37
334 @ 25
1242 @ 12

Of course, none have the same (or even a possible variation of) his surname. 

I believe that matches at 12 markers are usually not very useful or traceable.

I have purchased an autosomal test for him too as he has an interest in "cousin" matches. 

[Yonnie3]

guess I just wasted $200

[sugarfizzle]

In your original post you said you were hoping to find your father's and grandfather's family.

As I said at the time, autosomal testing would be the best to find such recent ancestors, which you have already had done.

I hope that y testing proves helpful to you for researching information about your patrilineal line, I hope you have ordered a suitable test as suggested.

Read up about it before your results get back, also read up a little more about autosomal DNA to help you understand how it works.

Good luck.

Regards Margaret

[diplodicus]

I took the plunge (sorry more colloquialisms) and purchased FTDNA's Y111 test some time ago. I am R-M269 like most males in the bottom half of England. In terms of matches

Marker Level      Qty

12.                  816
25                   406
37                     54
67.                      5
111                 zero

What use has it been to me in adding to my family tree? None whatsoever.

Do I regret it? Not at all. It has motivated me to consider the emerging combination of Genome analysis and Anthropology to rewrite the history of modern humans that I find fascinating. I know I need to get out more!!

My mtDNA results show that my earliest maternal ancestors originated in the Altai Mountains of Siberia 15,000 years ago and the 12 matches to my (very) Welsh mother's haplogroup are all in Sweden!! Given that I know that my mother's forebears were living along the River Tywi in Carmarthenshire back at least to the late 1700s, this is interesting but does not inform my tree searches.

My own experience indicates that for either Y-DNA (male line) or mtDNA (female line) I would have to be luckier than a lottery winner to find anything that will help me with my tree which goes back the mid-1700s. Thus it seems reasonable to conclude that such tests are of almost no value in assisting the search for near-family connections within the past four hundred years.

As a previous poster said, for 'recent" relatives, any nuggets that might be found will be lurking in the "shared matches" function for autosomal tests. Whilst this requires more hope than expectation, there are at least several million people that have taken these tests. I used Ancestry and have 250+ matches that share greater than 15 cM of dNA with me. Just know I found another 3rd cousin twice removed and would still be looking except that Ancestry is clearly overloaded and has locked me out... again.

[Ruskie]

Maybe you could see if there is a surname project associated with the Little surname? It might be worth joining to see if you can get some help from them.

Although I was frustrated by the lack of useful matches on the two Y-DNA tests I had people take, I don't think it was a waste of money. There is a lot to learn and it is a good hobby, and keeps the mind active, (though far too complex for me to get my head around.) 

I have purchased both of them both autosomal (Familyfinder) tests, (with FTDNA) and will be interested to see what comes of those. 

[pughcd]

@diplodicus

I was very interested to see your Y-DNA results breakdown.

I am I-M253+, Z63+, BY151+ and my matching data is;

111 markers = 0 matches,
 67 markers = 2 matches (genetic distance 7),
 37 markers = 0 matches,
 25 markers = 1 match (genetic distance 2),
 12 markers = 1180 matches (x25 genetic distance 0)


No useful names and I know of at least three NPE in my paternal line
pughcd

[diplodicus]

Hello cdpugh 

I have yet to really get to grips with FTDNA's SNP/Haplogroup mapping but I think mine is:

M269 + L23 + L51 + P310.

Am I correct that in FTDNA you scan down the SNP display locating the major branches in mauve from which lots of blue SNPs are displayed? My final SNP is R-Y81357?

111 markers = 0 matches
67 markers = 5 matches (genetic distance 7... 3 of which have McWilliams as earliest known ancestor.)
37 markers = 49 matches (not including the 67 marker matches).
25 markers = 354 matches (not including the 37+67s).
12 markers = 411 matches (not including all the above).

I have only match at genetic distance =1 and all the rest are zero. This is with the earliest known ancestor of the chap who runs my surname's one name study here in England.

What's an "NPE"?

[sugarfizzle]

http://dgmweb.net/DNA/General/NPE_Resolutions.html

In genealogy, the acronym "NPE" stands for "non-paternity event" (a.k.a., non-paternal event, false paternal event, mis-attributed paternity, etc.) meaning an individual is not the child of the father shown in the family's "paper" genealogy. 

The term, "non-paternity" may seem to not make sense as surely the child did have a father, but the event is viewed from the perspective of the father, who turns out not to be the parent of the alleged child, making him a "non-pater."

Regards Margaret

[pughcd]

NPE can also stand for "Not Parent Expected"

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/dna-test-upends-identity-family-secret-facebook-group-124208111--abc-news-topstories.html

https://www.npefellowship.org/