Y DNA match/mismatch

[Derek Baker]

I did a Y DNA test last year (only 37 marker for now) I got 9 matches and a Family Finder test 3 years ago both with Family Tree DNA.
Today I got an email from them saying they had found a new Y DNA match.
Indeed we both have the same Y DNA Haplogroup.
But with different surnames and Genetic distance of 2.
In discussion with the contact we both think our paternal origins are from different places. Both west country England but in different counties.
I have an other Y DNA match with a person with genetic distance of 1 with the same surname as mine in the same general location (Exmoor) where I believe my paternal tree originates. Contact pending.

As we could not establish a common origin I checked my Autosomal matches to see if the Y DNA match was listed. Searching for the contacts name in my Autosomal matches gives no match.
FT DNAs search is not very helpful as if it does not find a match it just shows the whole list again.

Could this be a case where checking a larger number of Y DNA markers will resolve the issue?
If we are related then is the common ancestor too far back in time for an autosomal match to register?

 

[Katie Bee]

Hi Derek,

My male cousin tested with ftDNA and his Y DNA matches did not show up in his autosomal matches either.

At 37 markers he had a number of zero, one and two Genetic Distance matches, but those that tested for 67 markers went further out at the 67 level.
For example
37 marker GD zero CCK changed to GD5 at 67 marker
37 marker GD2 MJL changed to GD5 at 67 marker
37 marker GD2 CMC changed to GD6 at 67 marker
All of these matches had done family finder, but none showed up in the results.

Don't forget the YDNA match has to have done a family finder test to show up in your autosomal matches.
If they have FF beside their name in the YDNA matches then they have done the test.
As you increase your YDNA markers you only match with others that have also done that marker test.
Again each match shows which marker test they have done.

Have you joined any of the groups at ftDNA? They might help with interpretation of your results. Eg a common surname group.
Also, other members of the forum have better DNA expertise than I have, so I hope that they can help you further.

 

[Derek Baker]

Hi Katie,

I got no genetic distance 0 matches.
I am aware the one has to do the FF test for the Autosomal results to show.
Both parties here have FF showing.
I would expect that the more Y markers tested the closer to the truth you get.
Some of the larger genetic distance matches will drop out and some of the different name ones also.
I am a member of the Devon Group.
Regards

 

[Tim]

Derek, as Katie is saying, the genetic distance on the smaller markers like 12, 25, 37 etc are not very accurate.
Here is an example for the same person from my results.

 

[peter]

Derek, it is quite unlikely that you'll have an autosomal match with someone who is a Y-DNA match because almost all Y-DNA matches are so far back that the chance of sharing detectable atDNA is small. (FTDNA's predictions of how far back the MRCA is seem quite optimistic.)

I wouldn't worry too much about the difference in surnames - you only need one illegitimacy or adoption to change a surname. Or about the different counties.

But unfortunately Y-DNA tests rarely produce useful results - because so few people have tested. That isn't likely to change in the foreseeable future.

 

[PeterM]

Hello Derek. Like you I originally took a 37 marker Y-DNA test. There were no matches to my family name, Coates, but about one third of the matches were to a family name of Mobley/Mobberley. I have now upgraded to 111 marker. I have 12 matches at this level and 8 are to the family Mobley. Still the same proportion as other levels. The Mobley tree matches that are provided all go back to Cheshire about 1600. I have traced my Coates tree back to the late 1600's using baptism records and my family is always in Hampton, Middlesex. I am beginning to wonder how accurate Baptism records are. Like other people I have no Mobley matches in my At-DNA (or Coates).

 

[peter]

Hello Derek. Like you I originally took a 37 marker Y-DNA test. There were no matches to my family name, Coates, but about one third of the matches were to a family name of Mobley/Mobberley. I have now upgraded to 111 marker. I have 12 matches at this level and 8 are to the family Mobley. Still the same proportion as other levels. The Mobley tree matches that are provided all go back to Cheshire about 1600. I have traced my Coates tree back to the late 1600's using baptism records and my family is always in Hampton, Middlesex. I am beginning to wonder how accurate Baptism records are. Like other people I have no Mobley matches in my At-DNA (or Coates).

It seems quite likely that your Coates line is really a Mobley line. Whilst there are mistakes in baptism registers as there are in any other records, that couldn't explain the difference in surnames, which is likely to be the result of adoption or an extra-marital affair. (A name change to escape debt or conform with the terms of a will is another possibility.)

Your post suggests that none of your atDNA matches have Mobley or Coates in their tree, which seems overwhelmingly unlikely. Perhaps you're searching the user names instead?

 

[PeterM]

It seems quite likely that your Coates line is really a Mobley line. Whilst there are mistakes in baptism registers as there are in any other records, that couldn't explain the difference in surnames, which is likely to be the result of adoption or an extra-marital affair. (A name change to escape debt or conform with the terms of a will is another possibility.)

Your post suggests that none of your atDNA matches have Mobley or Coates in their tree, which seems overwhelmingly unlikely. Perhaps you're searching the user names instead?

I agree that my family name is most likely Mobley but where/when did the name change. I only have birth records for my father and grandfather. Beyond that it is baptism records. I have no atNDA matches to either Coates or Mobley in this country that I can confirm beyond my grandfather. I am searching both user name and ancestor name in AncestryUK. I have downloaded my results with the other major companies with the same results. I am assuming there is an 'adoption' at some time. The Coates tree was largely drawn up by an ancestor, possibly my father and the Coates family was always working in Hampton Court. There is a marriage in the Chapel Royal and also a birth in the Palace. It seems that either my Great grandfather is the problem baptism or it is back in the 1600's.

 

[peter]

Now that you've told us that someone else researched the Coates line it seems very likely that their research was not as meticulous as yours would have been. The fact that you don't know who carried out the research makes it even more suspect.

where/when did the name change.

When the illegitimate child was baptised, and took his mother's surname rather than his father's name.

 

[PeterM]

Now that you've told us that someone else researched the Coates line it seems very likely that their research was not as meticulous as yours would have been. The fact that you don't know who carried out the research makes it even more suspect.

When the illegitimate child was baptised, and took his mother's surname rather than his father's name.

Thanks Peter. I did wonder if the tree was drawn up to 'Legitimise' the family. I have checked all the baptisms (and wills and census records where available). Interesting what yousay about taking the mothers name.

 

[peter]

Interesting what you say about taking the mothers name.

It's what almost always happens in the case of illegitimacy - the exception would be when the mother was previously married.