Carol Redd - Apr 10, 2011
Hello everyone, I've updated the DNA spreadsheet and you can find it in the File Cabinet section.
I'll try to clarify some things here about DNA testing:
IF Rick, and only Rick, has tied back to Anderson via a paper-trail, then to have any useful results for comparison purposes, he needs to upgrade to 67. Darlene (Matthew), Angie (Berry Carter) and I (John Preston Sexton) are the only other ones who have 67-marker results and none of us can say with any certainty who we descend from. Therefore, our 67-marker results matching with anyone who has fewer markers tested is pretty well worthless.
In my opinion, there is no reason to have only 25-marker test results. Matches at that level mostly only prove you share the same last name. At 37-markers, you develop a better kinship assurance. I think Angie told me that until she upgraded to 67-markers, she did not even know they matched us (but, I could be wrong about that).
For instance... I was showing an exact match w/ a Robbins at 25-markers. And, I jumped the gun, emailed her and when she responded that they didn't know of anyone in Morgan/Scott Co, TN, I looked again and saw that she dropped out from my matches list after 25. She had tested at least 37, but there were too many mutations in those next 12 markers that FTDNA deemed her no longer a match.
Right now, Richard has only tested at 25. He could easily drop out from being a match with me at either 37 or 67 markers. So, while I suspect his John (1836 TN) as the father of my John Preston Sexton, until he shows as an exact match w/ me at 67 or at least w/in 2 or no more than 3 mutations, I will have to be content that some Lewallen in Morgan/Scott Co, TN fathered my John Preston.
As for Matthew... Darlene can't prove behind Matthew. She's taken the 67-marker test, but she's 7 away from me at even the 25-marker level. It's possible that even though she carries the Lewallen name, her closer match might possibly be the Davis/Davies group. I've advised her to join that group just like Angie joined our Llewellyn. That will allow the Davis group to show how she matches up with some of theirs. It's at least a place to start.
DNA does NOT answer all the questions. I'm sorry to have to use my Brooks group again, but it's my only example. In my Brooks group, we all KNOW we're related because we can trace back to a core group of Brooks who were living in Cocke Co, TN 1830-forward both via paper-trail and most have had the 67-marker test and we're all an exact match. We believe we descend from Matthew Brooks (1742 VA - 1797 Newberry SC) who was the son of Matthew Brooks (1711 VA). Along comes ONE fellow, AstroBobby, and he proves his line (and I've verified) via paper-trail back to Matthew Brooks (1711 VA) who md Elizabeth Warren. Their children mostly followed the Quaker faith, and we have GREAT documentation by the Quakers. So, we can be assured ONLY that Matthew (1711 VA) shared a common ancestor. He may BE the granddaddy of us all, but without a paper trail, we can only lay claim that he was at least related to our granddaddy.
So, IF Richard DOES have documentation that he descends from Anderson (Billie wasn't sure), and IF he could find another Anderson descendant who is equally-well-documented, then we could compare our results against him, but only if he has a thorough testing. Up til now, 67-markers were the most we could test. I'm fine limiting to that level and not going to the 111. But, without having 67-marker results to compare against which has a proven paper-trail, it doesn't do any of us who can't say positively who our gr. gr. granddaddy was much good at all.
John, while I can appreciate the need to not spend funds unnecessarily, the minimum I recommend is 37. Billie's right they usually only discount about $30. In my case, I asked several of my Sexton cousins to contribute $25 each so it wasn't so hard on any of us. But, to test less than 37-markers I believe is a complete waste of money. It just doesn't tell you anything much.
Hope this helps.
Billie Harris - Apr 10, 2011
For the record and to reiterate what Carol wrote , I said I THOUGHT Rick, if anyone, could connect to him because of all the extensive research he has done, but he didn't have his test done through the same testing company we have.
However, today I tried to find my DNA file here - finally found it - and there is a descendant who can actually trace the line back to Anderson. Carol Lewallen had a male Lewallen do a test. Her line goes:
William Jasper Lewallen (1863 Wayne County, Kentucky)
Walter Davis Lewallen (1831 Wake County, N.C. - 1896 Scott County, TN)
Andrew L. Lewallen (1793 Wake County, N.C.)
Anderson Lewallen (1764 Prince Edward Co. VA - 1845 Morgan Co. TN)
John Carter - Apr 10, 2011
Hi, Billie.
This is very interesting--thanks! I am happy to see there is at least one other DNA test subject whose line is descended from Anderson Lewallen. Do you recall offhand what number of markers were used on their test? (I am planning to go to the File Cabinet that Carol mentioned in another thread as soon as I get caught up on reading the various messages, and perhaps I'll find the answer to my question there. So, please forgive me if I'm asking a question about something which is readily explained somewhere else).
Thanks,
John
John Carter - Apr 10, 2011
UPDATE: Hi, Billie.
I just viewed the pdf chart that Carol posted in the File Cabinet, showing the latest DNA data. However, I see nothing about the Anderson Lewallen line on it. I seem to recall that you and/or Carol had mentioned that there are two different collections of Lewallen DNA test results (one here on this site, relating to our MyFamily group members and one out on the internet somewhere, pertaining to Lewallen testees from other groups/independent/wherever. Is this correct?) Sorry, but I find this all very confusing. Isn't there a way to combine ALL known Lewallen DNA info onto one chart, whether pertaining to members of our MyFamily group or not?
Sorry if I'm missing something obvious or just not understanding.
John
Billie Harris - Apr 11, 2011
John, I looked and there have only been 12 markers tested and we should get them upgraded to more. She has traced the line back to Andrew though.
John Carter - Apr 15, 2011
Hi, Billie.
By "back to Andrew" I'm assuming you mean the Andrew L(eutian) Lewallen mentioned in your April 10th post (above) of this thread, right?
Billie Harris - Apr 16, 2011
Right.
I'm working on the descendants of Anderson. It's taking me a while and there are so many blanks in that genealogy but once I finish, I'll post it.
Carol Redd - Apr 16, 2011
John,
No, there are not two separate sets of dna results. I pull the results from the Family Tree DNA Llewellyn Project and post those results here.
Possibly the confusion comes from the fact that not ALL dna testees in the FTDNA Llewellyn Project are members of this DISCUSSION group here on MyFamily.
Billie Harris - Apr 10, 2011
Carol, are there any Smiths that connect through DNAs with any of the Lewallens? In particular, does it match with Darlene's DNA for Matthew Lewallen? Got a specific reason for asking that.
John Carter - Apr 10, 2011
Thanks, Carol!
(I presume I'm the "John" you're addressing in the final paragraph of your opening post in this thread). The 37-marker test is the one I'd initially thought might be the most economical and still provide useful results, at least at this point. If new developments occur between now and the actual time of testing (pending my cousin's agreement, of course), we can certainly discuss/re-visit.
Thanks again!
John