GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-03 > 1046713676


From: "Earl Beaty" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Is geographic or haplogroup information useful for genealogy?
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:47:56 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4b.2b72a9fe.2b90ed91@aol.com>


Ann,

I am a little behind with my reading and so a little slow about responding
to your query. The Beatty Surname Project has at least a small success
flowing from haplogroups.

We now have 16 completed 25-marker tests on men name Beatty/Beaty/Beattie.
The haplotypes fall into three distinct groups, two of which have only one
sample each. The large group clusters around a common ancestor living about
20-30 generations ago. Evidence from other sources indicates that this
ancestor lived in southern Scotland. It is no surprise that both Garvey and
now FTDNA put all of these men in the R1b haplogroup. The other two
haplotypes are very different from the main group and from each other. Now
FTDNA says that one of them is in haplogroup Q3.

Most of the Beattys were part of the Scots-Irish migration early in the 18th
century. The Scots-Irish tended to live on the frontier, and traditional
genealogy led us to believe that the Q3 family was among them. The
statement on the FTDNA website indicates that the Q3 haplotype is strongly
native American. It is plausible that on the American frontier a boy
received a Beatty name and an Indian Y. We will see how this plays out. In
the meanwhile it looks like a valuable clue.

I want to ask if someone here can tell us more about Q3. I had not
encountered that haplotype before the FTDNA announcement. Is it a clear
indicator of native Americans? Are there other, better tests for native
American ancestry? FTDNA indicates that Q3 is defined by a mutation at
locus M3. What fraction of native Americans have this mutation? Do people
in other parts of the world have it?

I am posing these questions here before sending them to FTDNA because others
on this list will be interested in the answers.

--Earl Beaty, Group Administrator
Beatty DNA Project



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:]
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 9:51 AM
> To:
> Subject: [DNA] Is geographic or haplogroup information useful for
> genealogy?
>
>
> Does anyone have stories about genealogical successes achieved by knowing
> haplogroup designations or geographic distributions of names such
> as you find
> in the Y-STR database or the Recent Ethnic Origins (REO) database
> at FTDNA? I
> don't discount the sheer intellectual pleasure of satisfying
> one's curiosity
> about "deep" ancestry. It really stretches our imaginations to
> imagine what
> paths our ancestors travelled thousands of years ago. But what about
> practical benefits for your "shallow" ancestry, AKA genealogy,
> where the goal
> is to forge links generation by generation back to a common ancestor?
>
> As Nancy Custer mentioned recently, it would probably be more fruitful to
> search telephone directories or IGI records to study geographic
> origins of
> surnames. And haplogroup designations are far broader and more
> generalized
> than the specific haplotypes you get with STR testing. You'd think the
> mutation rates on STRs were almost custom designed to be useful
> for genealogy
> :)


This thread: