Awards

Navigating the DNA Pages

About this site

Primary Research

DNA - Frequently Asked Questions

1.Clan MacLeod Project Overview / 2. Clan MacLeod Project Modal Haplotype (Hypothetical) / 3. Ancestral Modal Haplotypes /

4. Understanding the Markers and Mutation Rates / 5. Our Participants Results / 6. A Closer Look at our matches / 7. Current Conclusions

NEW PAGES : Full Result Table / Sub Group B Results Table / Branching Table / LCF Rates Table / Frequently Asked Questions / Mutation Rates

Over the past month, many new kits have either joined the MacLeod Surname Project at FTDNA or have upgraded their 12 or 25 marker tests to the higher levels of 37 or even 67 markers. Each new participant will find they have questions about their results and how best to interpret them. As I correspond with them, the same questions are asked repeatedly and hence, deserve a place on the website.

It is important to remember that the science of genetic DNA is itself changing as new markers (STR's) and new Sub-Clade identifiers are found (SNP's) just as our project continues to evolve as kits are added and upgraded. This page reflects the current findings as of May 31 2009.

1. Do my results tell me how closely I am related to my matches? YDNA can tell you if you ARE related to someone but it cannot tell you HOW you are related. YDNA is a companion to good old fashioned paper researching. If you suspect that your branch of South Carolina McLeods are related to a branch of North Carolina MacLeods, the results can confirm this relationship or disprove it. If the results confirm it, you still need to find the records that will show you how your two branches are related. Working together, the chances of proving the degree of relationship are enhanced. See My Family results for further explanation.

2. How can I be as "equally related" to a descendant of the Harris Branch of MacLeod as I am to someone who descends from the Lewis Branch of MacLeod? This question is asked when results show that you are the same genetic distance from men of those two branches - i.e. a 37 marker level test distance of 3 from a MacLeod of Harris and also a distance of 3 from a MacLeod of Lewis.

The easiest answer is this: You are not as equally related to your father as you are to your Uncle - likewise your cousins are not as closely related to your father as they are to their own father (your Uncle) - BUT, those cousins and you ARE equally related to the MRCA of the two branches of your family - in other words, your grandfather who was the founder of the two branches. Therefore, the YDNA results show that you are related to both branches of MacLeod (confirming our Clan's History) - and although not equally related to both branches you are equally related to the Founder of those branches.

Genetic Distances do not tell you how closely you are related to someone - a distance of 3 only signifies that there were 3 markers out of 37 markers that did not match between your results and those two men....however, it is unlikely that you missed the same markers with each man. We must look at more than the genetic distances of our matches. The actual markers missed and matched are important to interpreting your results.

But we must also look at our genealogical history - i.e. the Harris and the Lewis Branches of the Clan MacLeod last shared an ancestor cr. 1300. In the case of the two men in our project who represent those two branches, it has been 18 generations since their last common ancestor. During those 18 generations there were thousands of birth events (BE's) and in each BE, the opportunity for a mutation (miss) was there. In fact, there are three markers that have mutated in those 18 generations and as already stated, provide a Genetic Distance of 3 between the two men. (See this page for an example of how to view birth events)

Therefore, to the extent of whether you are equally related to both the Lewis and the Harris branches of MacLeod, it is only in the shared ancestry in the Founder of both branches that you share an equal footing. Whether you descend from the Harris branch or the Lewis branch and shared a MORE RECENT common ancestor with one branch over the other branch is determined by old fashioned genealogical research. Obviously, if you are related to both men, you would share a MORE recent common ancestor within the last 18 - 22 generations with one of those men....that man is the "in betweener" that dictates your degree of relationship to each branches representative (i.e. 10th cousin to one while 18th cousin to the other).

3. I have four mutations from the Project Modal Haplotype. How do I determine when those mutations occurred (or the age of my mutations)? By testing some of your known, documented cousins and determining your Ancestral Modal Haplotype. When you test three people from one documented family you can determine the most common allele (numeric value) on each marker that has been tested among the three of you. Where one of you has a different allele, you know that the mutation occurred since your last common ancestor with your cousins. Therefore, the evidence is that the CA had the same allele as your two cousins do.

This method also allows you to ignore your mutation when comparing your results to another kit - in the Harris and Lewis example above, our two representatives missed three markers from each other. We know that those three mutations occurred somewhere in the past 18 generations and can ignore those mutations and concentrate on the markers they match to each other (and the remainder of the project); by testing cousins of each one of those men, we will be able to determine more closely WHEN those mutations occurred (in what generation) in each branch. This will give us a better understanding of the many founders of the various branches that exist today. See Ancestral Haplotypes and My Family for additional information.

4. I have a 3rd cousin in the project and we miss three markers from each other, but he only misses two markers from someone else. How can that be when I am obviously more closely related to my cousin than that other man is? Assume that you and your 3rd cousin last shared an ancestor cr. 1770 and there are 6 generations between each of you and the common ancestor - your three mutations occurred during those 6 generations. But, now you have to look at what markers were missed not only between you and your cousin, but also between the two of you and the project modal. If your cousin missed a faster, less stable marker from the project modal but matches that other kit on that same marker, it is what is called convergence. Both families experienced the same directional mutation from the project allele that caused them to "land" on the same allele (number). One family could have mutated upwards and one family downwards which would have avoided their sharing that allele but the mutation was in the same direction causing convergence. See Understanding Markers and Mutations for additional information.

5. I have a 3rd cousin in the project and he and I both miss Marker 4 - this looks like a two step miss from each other but we are told to count it as a one step - what does this mean? This has occurred in our project and the cousins were informed by FTDNA that they had experienced a "double" mutation from the project allele. The project allele = 11 - which means that the majority of the men in the project have that allele (11) at marker 4. Our 3rd cousins each experienced a mutation at that marker but went one step each in an opposite direction. One cousin has an allele of "10" at marker 4 while the other cousin has an allele of "12" at that marker. While they are a two step mutation away from each other, they are each a one step mutation away from the project allele of "11". Since the cousins know that their Most Recent Common Ancestor was born cr. 1772, they know that the mutation each experienced was most likely since that time. Their double mutation at this marker can be safely ignored when comparing themselves to other kits in the project and to both the Project and the Sub Group B Related MacLeods Haplotypes.

6. When should the YDNA results cast doubt on documentation that two men are closely related? This is covered in detail on my family's results page, but there are basically two scenarios where you would have to doubt whether your documentation is correct:

1) when you don't match haplogroups - i.e. you are an R1b and the other testee is an R1a.
2) when you share a haplogroup but miss more than 4 markers at the 37 marker level of testing

a) do you share a surname and common ancestral location(s)? Then your documentation may still be correct and one of you experienced a higher rate of mutation in your paternal line then did the other. This can be determined by the testing of additional known cousins from each paternal line to determine the Ancestral Modal Haplotype of each branch. The ancestral modal haplotype will allow you to determine the age of mutations (in what generation they most likely occurred).
b) do either one of you match another kit who is closer to the center haplotype of the Project or the Related Haplotype within allowable distances of 4 @ 37 markers or 7 @ 67 markers? If so, this again indicates that that paternal line has a higher rate of mutation then do other paternal lines and again, ancestral modal haplotypes help define this.

7. I have a mutation that is not shared by any other kit in the Sub-Group B Related MacLeods or even in the R1b Project Modal haplotype itself. How should I interpret this mutation? Dr. Charles F. Kerchner refers to this as a Unique Mutation Event. While some markers are more prone to mutate, ALL markers can mutate. When you are the only one in a project to have a mutation at a certain marker, it simply means that it occurred in a generation SINCE you last shared a common ancestor with any other kit in the project - it can be ignored when looking at the project modal haplotype and the Sub Group B Haplotype and when looking at your genetic distance to another kit. This is covered in more detail on the following pages:

Understanding Markers / Mutation Rates / Sub Group B Related MacLeods Table

8. Are we able at this point in the project to point to one haplotype and state that that is the haplotype of Leod - the founder of Clan MacLeod? The short answer is "No". The why is a bit more complicated.

Looking at the two representatives of the Harris and Lewis Branches of MacLeod, one finds three mutations that separate them at a genetic distance of 3 from each other; since it has been 18 generations since they last shared a common ancestor 3 mutations is not unusual. A new mutation can happen at any time but a 37 marker haplotype can typically survive unchanged since the generation of the prior mutation event for 4.7 - 12.5 generations (between 141 and 360 years). Dr. Charles F. Kerchner

The kits have a genetic distance of 3 (Harris) and 4 (Lewis) from the R1b Project Modal Haplotype and a genetic distance of 2 (Harris) and 3 (Lewis) from the Sub Group B Related MacLeods Haplotype. When we combine their YDNA results, we get a third haplotype that differs on one marker from the Sub Group B Related MacLeods Haplotype....but we have to "manipulate" the YUtility tool to do even that.

The YUtility Tool has a built in mechanism that chooses the highest allele between two kits as the modal allele and in cases of a tie in evaluating many kits, chooses the higher of the two as the modal allele. This indicates a current theory that downwards mutations occur more frequently then upwards mutations. Since we know that the modal allele for both the R1b MacLeod Project and the Sub Group B Related MacLeods at the markers each man has missed, the evidence is that neither of the alleles these men carry at those markers are the "true" allele of Related MacLeods or of the Founder of the Related MacLeods. Additionally, where one man misses an allele from the haplotypes, the other does not miss that same allele. When comparing Lewis to Harris in YUtility, it would default to the Harris ' "13" at DYS 439 but the science states that the true allele for the Related MacLeods is a "12" which Lewis carries. So, we have to manipulate their results to show that the true modal allele is the "12" carried by the majority of the related kits.

In example:

Note the last two markers in the table above - DYS 459b and DYS 389 i & ii - these two markers are less clear in the R1b Project Haplotype and the Sub Group B Related MacLeods haplotype.

Both Lewis and Harris share the "11" of the Sub Group B Related MacLeods haplotype at DYS 459b - however, Glendale carries a "10" of the R1b Project Haplotype showing that those who carry either the "10" or the "11" at that marker can be related to either of the two branches and that it is most likely a recent mutation.

At DYS 389 both Lewis and Harris have the 14/30 combination - in Sub Group B Related MacLeods haplotype the allele split at this marker is 23 kits 14/30 and 22 kits 13/29 (after removing the 12 marker kits who may fall away at higher levels of testing) and due to the number of related kits who have yet to upgrade to 37 markers, this is "too close" to call at this point.

There is evidence that both of these markers mutate more rapidly in the various paternal lines of Sub Group B Related MacLeods and while it would be easy to state that "Leod carried the 14/30 and 11" - it doesn't clarify the distinction between the Lewis and the Harris branches. In other words, DYS 389 is an very unstable marker which can cause a tandem mutation at DYS 459b - therefore, although these two branches both share the combination of 14/30 and 11, without additional information we cannot be certain that they did not arrive there through convergence resulting from mutations which occurred over the last 18 generations...... testing of known cousins of each man (3rd or 4th) could clarify the branches and those two markers.

For more information see - and Understanding the Markers and Mutations and Mutation Rates

1.Clan MacLeod Project Overview / 2. Clan MacLeod Project Modal Haplotype (Hypothetical) / 3. Ancestral Modal Haplotypes /

4. Understanding the Markers and Mutation Rates / 5. Our Participants Results / 6. A Closer Look at our matches / 7. Current Conclusions

NEW PAGES : Full Result Table / Sub Group B Results Table / Branching Table / LCF Rates Table / Frequently Asked Questions / Mutation Rates

visitors to this page

(counter below is for web site traffic)

Sideline Research