DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2009-04 > 1239354344


From: "Sandy Paterson" <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Quiet on the List?
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:05:44 +0100
References: <bfc.576a22a6.370fdc22@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <bfc.576a22a6.370fdc22@aol.com>


>
I'd be interested in seeing who you group next to the Doherty/McLaughlin
cluster.
>

There are really only 6 surname groups that are large enough draw any conclusions and the conclusions are very tentative. I initially excluded Dunbar but at a push you could add them as a 7th. Dunbar actually seems closer to McLaughlin than O'Dohertys. So the ranking goes

Dunbar1.28
O'Dougherty0.84
Ewing0.59
Cowan -0.23
Byrnes -0.24
McCord -0.24

Dunbar, O'Doherty and Ewing all seem closer to McLaughlin than to M222+ as a whole.
Cowan, Byrnes and McCord all seem marginally closer to M222+ than to McLaughlin.

The above is based on GD's.

As a check, this time using an 'off-modal match index' the rankings are

Dunbar4.71
O'Daugherty3.91
Ewing2.85
Cowan2.51
Byrnes2.14
McCord2.05

I don't suppose the tables will come out as intended but I hope they may make sense.


Sandy





-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of
Sent: 10 April 2009 00:18
To:
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Quiet on the List?

In a message dated 4/9/2009 6:16:41 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
writes:

Having gone through this exercise, one may conclude that Maclaughlins and
O'Doherty's should be grouped together. So you then combine them and go
through the whole exercise again, seeking the family that seems closest to the
combined Maclaughlin/O'Doherty grouping. I doubt whether one will end up
being able to allocate every single M222+ person to a given sub-group, but I
think it's progess.

Sandy, I reached the same conclusion on Dohertys and McLaughlins quite a
while ago by DNA analysis. I think they're showing up in your methods as
related for the same reason. Both share a few marker values almost unique in
M222 to these two specific families. Mostly the shared modal values are
DYS 458 = 18 and DYS 447 = 24. Not all in each group have these specific
values - and both have a few markers unique to themselves, such as the Doherty
YCAIIab = 19-22. There is a some overlap in the family modals for these
two Irish septs.

If nothing else this could be a geographical DNA pattern in M222. Both
Dohertys and McLaughlins lived in the Inishowen Peninsula of Donegal at least
since 1300 A.D. when the O'Dohertys first moved into the area and became
the chieftains of Inishowen. That's a very small part of Donegal close to
the city of Derry where the Mclaughlins were most strongly associated.
Another possibility is their common descent from two different sons of Nial,
Conal gulban and Eoghan. This same DNA markers pop up occasionally in other
surnames said to descend from Nial in the NW. One Gallagher matches; one
O'Boyle; a couple of O'Neills. There are a few other typically Donegal
surnames that match as well.

The problem I have in determining if this is a valid connection is there
are so few samples out there for comparison purposes. The Dohertys and
McLaughins are basically the only two NW Irish surnames with decent sized
population samples. There are almost no O'Donnell samples to be found; few
Gallaghers and even less O'Boyles. Few Cenel Eoghain surnames can be located
with certainty. The O'Neills pose their own special problem with a large
group of non M222 matches.

I didn't mention this in my post because I've said it before and didn't
want to overly emphasize my own specific areas of interest.

But I think it's interesting you've arrived at the same conclusion using
different methods.

I'd be interested in seeing who you group next to the Doherty/McLaughlin
cluster.


John








This thread: