DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2011-04 > 1304154637


From: "Sandy Paterson" <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] M222 Chart
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 10:10:37 +0100
References: <5b67f.3ed14c52.3aeca66a@aol.com><COL122-W994CA9722ED86A44D7E46E59D0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <COL122-W994CA9722ED86A44D7E46E59D0@phx.gbl>


Also missing is the Grier/Greerson group, which the previous attempt had
split in two.

Having had a close look at their haplotypes recently, I have to say that
they form probably the neatest, most distinctive family grouping that I've
seen, comparable with Ewing in distinctiveness, but with even more off-modal
matches, ranging (by memory) from 5 to 9. Any methodical process that splits
this group in two is deeply flawed.

I think John will probably weigh in about the Ewing that is close to
McLaughlin/Doherty. But there is something very interesting to me about
these Ewings (there are 5 Ewing M222's, I think by now, who don't exhibit
typical Ewing M222 haplotypes). I consider them to be Ewings incognito, but
I think David Ewing and John may have other views.

What struck me about them is that over 37 markers, one of them is far closer
to one of the Lamonts than he is to the main group of Ewings, or to the
McLaughlin/Dohertys.

What also worries me about the latest chart is that the closest surnames
that I can find to Ewing (ignoring Lamont which at this stage has very
little M222) is a group of Cains/McKanes (amongst the O'C group) which in
the chart is well removed from Ewing, as well as the Cowans, which the chart
shows at almost the complete opposite end to Ewing.


Sandy





-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Thomas Tucker
Sent: 30 April 2011 08:39
To:
Subject: Re: [R-M222] M222 Chart


Bill Howard is the one making the charts. I think he is removing
singletons from the list because surname clusters seem to occupy a better
defined
position in the charts.

John I believe Bill Howard did an excellent job with his new chart. He
removed at least 173 names from the original tree to make his illustration.
I would call it the cluster bomb. It is a good tool for the larger numbers
but I also see nothing that it gains in perspective. When he puts a single
Ewing (121513) [who does not fit the larger group of Ewings of 22] in with a
Doherty, McLaughlin, grouping what does that suppose to signify? What is the
value? There were names that were selectively left out to make this point?
This new chart is very subjective. I can understand the definitive view but
it is skewed with subtractions that are arbitrarily created in this chart to
create who's history? Is one of the Ewings with the Northwest Irish, Doherty
and Mclaughlin group related to the other Ewing group from Scotland?
Therefore, the Doherty and McLaughlin groups could be, might be. What does
it mean? Its deep.

Thomas Tucker








> From:
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:40:26 -0400
> To:
> Subject: Re: [R-M222] M222 Chart
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 4/29/2011 9:29:54 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> writes:
>
> My number is 83687. I believe John is grouping names of two or more to add

> more defintion to his work. I believe nothing was done intentionally but
> scientifically it was done to be more definitive to group relationships
that
> have more blood donors... to work with larger similarities. MHO
>
>
>
> Bill Howard is the one making the charts. I think he is removing
> singletons from the list because surname clusters seem to occupy a better
defined
> position in the charts.
>
>
> His original chart which included everyone or almost everyone in the
> project is still online:
>
> _http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/M222592.pdf_
> (http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/M222592.pdf)
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> R1b1c7 Research and Links:
>
> http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

R1b1c7 Research and Links:

http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


This thread: