DNA Lineages(Eckford:F-27)
#1160
| Father | Fairbairn |
| Intro (Matches) | (F-27) is showing an excellent match to those in a sub grouping of "clump 2", those sharing marker 570 = 18. At 37 markers it looked like Robert who married Elizabeth YOUNG (and possibly a.n. other earlier), was going to be closest to that for James and Helen (GOODFELLOW) Fairbairn, but with the full 67 markers now available, his marginally closer match is now to the other two in the sub group, descendants of Robert and Margaret (PATERSON), and James and Elspeth (TROTTER). A review of "known" and "believed" information follows: Assuming that the James married to Helen GOODFELLOW, is indeed the James, son of George and Janet (MURRAY) born Kelso 1788, he has a brother Robert. However that Robert is fully accounted for in census and death records, so cannot be this Robert. Some trees believe the George who married Janet MURRAY is the son of the John who married Helen ANDERSON, which would make him brother to the schoolmaster William (married Margaret SCOTT). I'm jumping to several conclusions here. William had a second string to his bow, as a surveyor. This Robert of Eckford appears in records as a surveyor (for the Duke of Hamilton). William is not known to have had a son Robert however, and to the best of my current knowledge, nor do any of his brothers, but maybe this has just changed? At least one other tree however has the GOODFELLOW line as descendants of John's brother Robert (b 1716). Jury still out, at least all are in the same small sub set of "clump 2". Inherited family information for the line of Robert and Margaret (PATERSON) shows Robert as born 1749 to a Robert born 1716 to John 1688, which does look promising. |
| GeneticDistance (Testee12Markers) | At 12 markers the theoretical Genetic Distance (GD) calculations from (Eckford:F-27) show: an exact match to 10 in Lineage 1 "clump 2", and GD1 to 8 in "clump 1." |
| GeneticDistance (Testee25Markers) | At 25 markers the theoretical Genetic Distance (GD) calculations from (Eckford:F-27) show: an exact match to 9 in Lineage 1 "clump 2" (we've lost (F-8) from exact match, slipping to GD1 because of marker 447 which he has a unique value of for all of Lineage 1), and GD1 to 7 from both "clumps", and GD2 growng to 3, all from "clump 1". The next panel is the most interesting however, and should aid Robert of Eckford's placement in the jigsaw. |
| GeneticDistance (Testee37Markers) | At 37 markers the theoretical Genetic Distance (GD) calculations from (Eckford:F-27) show: zero to F-35; 1 to LE(F-31), NJ(F-30), Doug(GOODFELLOW) and Tom; 2 to David(CAMPBELL), (F-8), David(TROTTER), (F-11), Joe and Charles(Elliott); 3 to Ron and Mike(IRWIN); 4 to (Irwin), John(JOHNSTON) and Martin; 5 to Earl, Roy and Michael; 6 to Doug(BLAKEY) and Michael(Simpson); 7 to William; with FT DNA TiP showing a 93% probability that (F-27) and ( F-35 share a common ancestor within 6 generations,98.9% by 10, 99.5% by 12 - but 67 marker results would be more revealing, given that this match includes cdyb=37, also exhibited by F-30 who is within the sub group of "clump 2" with 413a=25, one of the markers in panel 38 to 67. |
| GeneticDistance (Testee67Markers) | At 67 markers the theoretical Genetic Distance (GD) calculations from (Eckford:F-27) show: 2 to Charles(Elliott), (F-8), David(TROTTER) and Joe; 3 to Mike(IRWIN) and (F-25); 4 to John(JOHNSTON) and David(CAMPBELL); 5 to Michael(Simpson), Doug(GOODFELLOW) and LE(F-31); 6 to Martin; 7 to (F-11), Michael, Tom, Earl and Roy; ie he firmly belongs to the sub group in clump 2 with marker 570 = 18, being marginally closer to (F-8) and (F-7) than to the James & Helen (GOODFELLOW) line in the same sub-group. |
| Lineage (PaperTrail) | The research paper trail for (Eckford:F-27) shows him to be part of Fairbairn Lineage 1i (see here for chart). |
| Charts | Wanted: Robert and Elizabeth (Young) Fairbairn Fairbairn Lineage 1i Lineage 1 DNA Theoretical "Signature" for "clump 2" |
| Last Edited | 26 Aug 2010 |