DNA-R1B1C7-L ArchivesArchiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2012-01 > 1326014163
From: J David Grierson <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Dohertys in M222 table
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2012 20:17:11 +1100
I have not examined the Doherty project (perhaps I should), so I may be
way off beam here, but................
Do not rely on the FT genetic distance standards when trying to
establish relationships. They date from the beginning of the enquiry
into YDNA, and grew out of the notion that haplotypes rule. That is no
longer the accepted state of play. We now recognise that variables in
mutation rates can lead one astray using that methodology. The game now
(outside of the common or garden NW Irish) is Haplogroups and off-modal
In three Griersons tested to 111 markers, all carry 8 off-modal markers,
and two have another. All carry a rare count on a particular marker, and
given the combination of off-modals, there is no doubt that they descend
from the same man, about 600 years ago. Using A (me) as a base line, B
has a GD of 11/111, or 8/67, and C has a GD of 15/111, or 9/67. B and C
have a GD of 13/111, or 9/67. FTDNA shows no relationship at all between
these men, but they are unquestionably related within the time of surnames.
Indeed, using this methodology, we can deduce a fairly reliable modal
for the MRCA, and when we compare that haplotype with the M222 norm (I
hesitate to call it the base modal) which presumably hasn't changed
since the MRCA for the Irish model (as distinct from the Scots model),
we get an M222 CA for the two lines that predates Niall by quite a
stretch when one takes the tolerances into account.
So, if the Dohertys are tightly held within the NW Irish model, GD has a
part to play, particularly in finding families within the cohort. But I
believe you should be looking also at the off-modal similarities when
trying to identify relationships.
On 8/01/2012 6:55 PM, Bob Doherty wrote:
> I have noticed a lot of messages referring to the Doherty Y-DNA markers
> recently. So I thought I would join in since I have been working with
> others on the Doherty Surname Project.
> There are 155 Y-DNA participants in the Doherty Surname Project. Half of
> the 155, or 77, are not related per FTDNA standards (based on genetic
> distance depending on the number of markers tested). When I say not
> related, I mean they do not match up with the Doherty Modal (or base
> haplotype) - i.e. genetic distance greater than 7 at the at the 67 marker
> Of the 77 participants who do not 'relate' to the Doherty modal, all but 13
> have a Doherty (or variant) surname. Of the 78 participants who do relate
> to the Doherty modal, 9 do not have a Doherty surname (NPEs, adoptions,
> etc?). So the surname project participant pool is a mixed bag of markers.
> I think the discussion about the "purity of y-chromosomes in clanns" in
> Digest Vol 6. Issue 3 (and earlier) supports that even those with
> significantly different Y-DNA markers can be members of a clan, but not
> directly related by descent from the founding male of the clan. I remember
> a discussion at one of the O'Dochartaigh reunions in Buncranna about the 7
> races (branches?) of Doherty's.
> I have been trying to follow along with what members of the M222 discussion
> group are trying to achieve regarding TMRCA. So I took a look at the M222
> table just before the new one was posted and noticed the following:
> In the M222 table there are 55 Doherty, O'Dogherty, Daugherty, Dougherty,
> Doritty, Docherty (all valid variations of Ui Dochartaigh). However 14 of
> the 55 fall into the 'not related' group (genetic distance greater than
> FTDNA standard). At the same time there are 26 Doherty project participants
> who should be in the M222 data set, but are not.
> Is it worth the effort to update the M222 data to reflect a more defined set
> of participants who line up with the Doherty modal? If you want to make
> that happen, let me know who I have to work with.
> Bob Doherty
> Doherty Surname Project Co-Administrator
> R1b1c7 Research and Links:
> 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
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4728 - Release Date: 01/07/12
|Re: [R-M222] Dohertys in M222 table by J David Grierson <>|