Update - 11/08/13

To begin to use autosomal DNA results, we need to understand the standards that have been offered to us by the experts.  We need to be flexible, as this is still a new science and it changes constantly.  In the very beginning the supposition was that the “larger the segment shared” the closer the relative.  Now it is becoming apparent that there are exceptions to this “rule”.  When we share multiple lines, it is becoming apparent that we may share larger segments with an individual.  

But let us work with the best scenario and leave the exceptions to when we can prove that they apply.  As a general rule, we will find our most recent relatives with the larger segments.  I like to work with “5”, “3” and “1” for the most distant.  For this example I have decided to use “3cm”.

Where do we find out matches?

We must begin with the company that we used for the testing.  I can only talk about 23&me and Family Finder.  The information that we need to find is the mathematical data.

23&Me:  Log in

1.       Family and Friends

2.       List view

3.       Search, enter desired surname

4.       Write down results

5.       My Results

6.       Ancestry Tools

7.       Family Inheritance: Advanced

8.       Compare, enter yourself in the left side

9.       Enter three of your results in the right side (start with first name)

10.   View in table

You now have the chromosome and segment numbers and enter these into a spreadsheet

                Family Finder Log In

1.       Family Finder, Matches

2.       Click on Name and enter surname

3.       Under the name there is a small arrow, click on it

4.       Click on Triangulate

5.       Select In Common With

6.       Write down all these names

7.       Family Finder…Select Chromosome Browser

8.       In the Compare List set to 1+cM

9.       Enter up to five of your names from your list

10.   Select either Download to Excel or view in table

11.   Enter into a spreadsheet

Now that we have our first group of matches, email each one to see if they will exchange family information.  Both programs allow the user to upload a tree or surname list but this is not always available.

This is an example of what your spreadsheet will look like.

	Vivian				Seaver				Rogers
1	158,756,598	161,158,673	3.8	1	51,807,655	54,665,329	3.3	1	156,324,315	158,165,537	3.6
3	173,854,623	176,416,047	4.2	12	24,410,776	26,227,678	3.2	4	169,836,208	172,670,009	3.1
8	118,547,283	121,954,642	3.1	13	27,313,344	28,932,813	3.3	6	149,352,370	151,504,339	3.6
12	120,876,421	127,803,723	17	15	55,853,982	57,294,971	3.8	9	15,372,572	17,627,196	4.2
13	73,514,955	75,637,403	3.6	18	14,795,376	20,331,033	3.3	12	100,311,739	102,667,212	3.2
15	68,302,207	72,247,928	3.8	20	53,032,288	54,725,950	3.9
	Lacey				Davis				T'ce
4	106,253,927	110,011,156	3.3	1	243,020,188	244,833,058	5.4	9	16,977,379	18,823,547	3.1
4	142,032,095	147,108,788	4	1	115,711,947	118,185,784		2	222,201,673	224,641,143	3.6
4	167,900,239	171,471,365	4.1	2	900,327	8,146,182	17	4	79,502,667	83,315,548	3.3
4	168,752,070	172,355,024	4.2	2	115,802,934	121,173,329	4.2	11	63,088,630	68,737,364	4.6
5	36,672,573	39,475,736	5	3	25,296,239	27,825,729		12	64,401,326	66,237,533	3.3
5	137,995,633	141,408,284	3.2	3	129,986,222	134,844,999	4.5	12	77,580,544	80,923,788	3.1
6	106,397,898	108,427,889	3.4	4	86,543,070	90,335,455		15	24,885,965	27,592,476	7.9
8	52,662,702	55,299,106	3.3	7	138,468,079	140,650,779		15	89,928,716	91,094,879	4.3
12	77,038,924	79,914,155	3.3	8	49,992,695	54,000,624	3.7	20	36,324,098	39,047,713	3.1
13	92,132,507	94,190,488	3.8	15	92,085,646	93,505,041	5.1
14	100,822,472	103,552,390		18	22,569,191	26,869,734	4.7
17	29,068,391	30,865,850		17	34,176,036	39,043,136
20	1,675,964	3,095,024	3.4	17	53,118,652	56,718,515
20	51,999,678	53,612,204	3.5	20	51,986,187	53,690,324	3.6
				21	19,623,560	21,434,555	3.7
	Phyliss			Steve	Steve				Rutledge
8	43,515,717	53,917,714	4.4	1	243,020,188	244,833,058	5.4	1	145,860,034	150,747,278	3.2
7	145,998,726	147,842,073	3.1	2	900,327	8,146,182	17	3	24,883,674	27,825,729	3.8
15	86,135,284	88,240,964	3.3	2	115,802,934	121,173,329	4.2	5	147,341,097	149,471,027	3.2
				3	129,986,222	134,844,999	4.5	5	32,503,741	34,771,107	3.9
	Bennett			8	49,992,695	54,000,624	3.7	7	89,225,562	92,861,504	3.2
3	118,635,492	127,209,770	7.2	15	92,085,646	93,505,041	5.1	9	128,521,053	131,149,449	3.9
4	85,127,183	89,107,137	3.5	18	22,569,191	26,869,734	4.7	12	77,608,737	81,939,715	3.9
6	11,722,606	13,315,352	3.3	20	51,986,187	53,690,324	3.6	15	89,808,801	90,867,745	3.7
6	100,740,059	105,597,956	3.7	21	19,623,560	21,434,555	3.7	17	70,428,636	72,550,034	4.1
10	56,440,442	60,864,440	3.2					19	53,060,589	54,885,243	4.7
17	11,990,422	13,481,243	3.4					21	20,691,564	22,894,194	3.8
17	54,915,321	58,976,435	3.8
	Lynn				Hogan				Foster
1	179,602,130	182,174,845	3.3	1	38,333,555	41,062,822	4.5	1	78,984,517	81,934,589	3.4
2	14,940,202	17,836,578	5.9	2	166,869,666	169,757,175	3.7	1	119,565,063	148,420,574	4.1
2	134,316,407	138,614,699	3.5	2	154,204,396	158,150,251	4.1	3	18,905,129	21,367,311	3.5
5	92,899,283	96,057,851	3.2	2	192,779,683	197,786,195	3.2	3	173,659,634	175,895,375	4
9	9,000,662	10,487,345	3.3	3	184,903,843	187,325,217	4.4	4	984,414	3,774,084	4
9	124,631,247	127,832,155	3.1	7	25,194,640	28,348,671	3.4	4	85,127,183	89,107,137	3.5
10	111,602,656	114,538,944	3.2	9	16,205,744	18,248,312	3.8	6	11,722,606	13,315,352	3.3
10	116,034,715	118,557,662	3.3	9	133,803,249	135,474,113	3.6	6	100,740,059	105,597,956	3.7
12	20,269,484	22,209,722	3.2	10	87,528,599	92,008,818	4.1	18	71,034,991	72,410,800	3.8
13	107,635,592	109,102,058	3.6	12	64,695,982	66,442,193	3.2
14	101,268,349	104,784,494	4.3	13	35,322,630	37,261,450	3.2
				17	58,127,473	62,868,639	5.1

Now you will have to “ find the matches”

Make a color system of 22 colors.  I then change the font color for different segments on the same chromosome.

	Vivian				Seaver				Rogers
1	158,756,598	161,158,673	3.8	1	51,807,655	54,665,329	3.3	1	156,324,315	158,165,537	3.6
3	173,854,623	176,416,047	4.2	12	24,410,776	26,227,678	3.2	4	169,836,208	172,670,009	3.1
8	118,547,283	121,954,642	3.1	13	27,313,344	28,932,813	3.3	6	149,352,370	151,504,339	3.6
12	120,876,421	127,803,723	17	15	55,853,982	57,294,971	3.8	9	15,372,572	17,627,196	4.2
13	73,514,955	75,637,403	3.6	18	14,795,376	20,331,033	3.3	12	100,311,739	102,667,212	3.2
15	68,302,207	72,247,928	3.8	20	53,032,288	54,725,950	3.9
	Lacey				Davis				T'ce
4	106,253,927	110,011,156	3.3	1	243,020,188	244,833,058	5.4	9	16,977,379	18,823,547	3.1
4	142,032,095	147,108,788	4	1	115,711,947	118,185,784		2	222,201,673	224,641,143	3.6
4	167,900,239	171,471,365	4.1	2	900,327	8,146,182	17	4	79,502,667	83,315,548	3.3
4	168,752,070	172,355,024	4.2	2	115,802,934	121,173,329	4.2	11	63,088,630	68,737,364	4.6
5	36,672,573	39,475,736	5	3	25,296,239	27,825,729		12	64,401,326	66,237,533	3.3
5	137,995,633	141,408,284	3.2	3	129,986,222	134,844,999	4.5	12	77,580,544	80,923,788	3.1
6	106,397,898	108,427,889	3.4	4	86,543,070	90,335,455		15	24,885,965	27,592,476	7.9
8	52,662,702	55,299,106	3.3	7	138,468,079	140,650,779		15	89,928,716	91,094,879	4.3
12	77,038,924	79,914,155	3.3	8	49,992,695	54,000,624	3.7	20	36,324,098	39,047,713	3.1
13	92,132,507	94,190,488	3.8	15	92,085,646	93,505,041	5.1
14	100,822,472	103,552,390		18	22,569,191	26,869,734	4.7
17	29,068,391	30,865,850		17	34,176,036	39,043,136			Hogan
20	1,675,964	3,095,024	3.4	17	53,118,652	56,718,515		1	38,333,555	41,062,822	4.5
20	51,999,678	53,612,204	3.5	20	51,986,187	53,690,324	3.6	2	166,869,666	169,757,175	3.7
				21	19,623,560	21,434,555	3.7	2	154,204,396	158,150,251	4.1
								2	192,779,683	197,786,195	3.2
	Phyliss							3	184,903,843	187,325,217	4.4
8	43,515,717	53,917,714	4.4	Steve	Steve			7	25,194,640	28,348,671	3.4
7	145,998,726	147,842,073	3.1	1	243,020,188	244,833,058	5.4	9	16,205,744	18,248,312	3.8
15	86,135,284	88,240,964	3.3	2	900,327	8,146,182	17	9	133,803,249	135,474,113	3.6
				2	115,802,934	121,173,329	4.2	10	87,528,599	92,008,818	4.1
				3	129,986,222	134,844,999	4.5	12	64,695,982	66,442,193	3.2
	Bennett			8	49,992,695	54,000,624	3.7	13	35,322,630	37,261,450	3.2
3	118,635,492	127,209,770	7.2	15	92,085,646	93,505,041	5.1	17	58,127,473	62,868,639	5.1
4	85,127,183	89,107,137	3.5	18	22,569,191	26,869,734	4.7
6	11,722,606	13,315,352	3.3	20	51,986,187	53,690,324	3.6
6	100,740,059	105,597,956	3.7	21	19,623,560	21,434,555	3.7
10	56,440,442	60,864,440	3.2
17	11,990,422	13,481,243	3.4
17	54,915,321	58,976,435	3.8
	Foster								Rutledge
1	78,984,517	81,934,589	3.4	1	179,602,130	182,174,845	3.3	1	145,860,034	150,747,278	3.2
1	119,565,063	148,420,574	4.1	2	14,940,202	17,836,578	5.9	3	24,883,674	27,825,729	3.8
3	18,905,129	21,367,311	3.5	2	134,316,407	138,614,699	3.5	5	147,341,097	149,471,027	3.2
3	173,659,634	175,895,375	4	5	92,899,283	96,057,851	3.2	5	32,503,741	34,771,107	3.9
4	984,414	3,774,084	4	9	9,000,662	10,487,345	3.3	7	89,225,562	92,861,504	3.2
4	85,127,183	89,107,137	3.5	9	124,631,247	127,832,155	3.1	9	128,521,053	131,149,449	3.9
6	11,722,606	13,315,352	3.3	10	111,602,656	114,538,944	3.2	12	77,608,737	81,939,715	3.9
6	100,740,059	105,597,956	3.7	10	116,034,715	118,557,662	3.3	15	89,808,801	90,867,745	3.7
18	71,034,991	72,410,800	3.8	12	20,269,484	22,209,722	3.2	17	70,428,636	72,550,034	4.1
				13	107,635,592	109,102,058	3.6	19	53,060,589	54,885,243	4.7
				14	101,268,349	104,784,494	4.3	21	20,691,564	22,894,194	3.8

Lynn has the most matches so I am starting the analysis with her.  She has 6 matches and she descends from James/Lydia Sizemore, James/Elizabeth Wells

1.       12   Me,

2.       15 Rogers, Fields, Sizemore

3.       17 Rutledge

4.       18 Sizemore

5.       19 Cathy Bennett, Celeste Hogan, Davis

6.       21 Cathy Bennett, Sizemore

I descend from Nathan Blevins brother of James who married Lydia Sizemore, so that is our most recent shared grandparents

1.       Lynn has more matches to Sizemore than to me but is one generation more recent.  Also, several of the Sizemore families have Blevins ancestors but so far the marriages are in the 1750 time period.

Lydia Sizemore George Edward 1750 Annie Hart

The Sizemore sisters descend from William 1798 and Anna Asher (Dillon Asher/Collett) Clay Co Ky, Dillon is the son of William Asher and Margaret Blevins

Cathy Bennett descends from  Keziah Sizemore 1829 daughter of John R and Nancy Bowling (James Boling and Sarah Blevins).  She also descends from Dillon Asher/ Collett

The most recent Sizemore grandparents are Old Ned Sizemore.

The remainder of the group share Blevins ancestry but the most recent shared grandparent is undetermined at this time.

Rutledge is a descendent of Elisha Walling1707/Mary Blevins and Elisha Walling Jr and Catherine Blevins and both of these wives need confirmed. The shared Blevins most recent grandparent has to be from  1720 back due to the known James Blevins  grandfather was born 1740 and has to go back at least one more generation.

These Blevins might connect at any point back to 1720 or this is the common grandparent. 

Celeste Hogan is a descendent of Richard Blevins 1785 and Mary Jones of Arkansas.  This line is on the Old Settlers Roll. Minimum 65 years gap.

Wash. Co. Court Pleas and Quarterly Sessions,1778-1798 Vol. 1,pg 363. Ordered to lay off a road from Greasy Cove to the head of Limestone Cove,on the road to Burke Co.,NC. John Blevins,William Blevins,Jonathan Blevins,Daniel Blevins,Elisha Blevins,Richard Blevins,also named was William Lewis(my ancestor),John Hales,Isham Hales,William Hales,James Ward,William Samms,Joseph Culbertson and others.  Could one of these be the father of Richard 1785

JACaltonDavis descends from Hugh Torbett Blevins 1804 and Anna Looney of Rhea Tn. His father is very likely David 1776 and Sarah Torbett .  Controversy exists  surrounding his father but it is accepted that Hardin same age 1810 Wash Va is a brother.  Next door to each other in that census and then the families migrate to Rhea Co Tn.  Census records support this location for this family.

Mr Rogers is Anna Foster another Elisha Walling and Mary Blevins descendent but though son John Allen 1734 and Millicent Jones.

Anna Foster and I match on the same Chromosome#1 segment.  Since the first Blevins match for Anna is the Elisha Walling and Mary Blevins whose children begin about 1732 and my James was born 1740 he is most likely a nephew and his father would most likely be a brother to Mary.  Elisha Walling, John and Daniel Blevins are in the 1733 Ann Arundel Tax lists.  Clement Redd in his correspondence with Lyman Draper states that Mary Blevins is the daughter of John Blevins and the sister of William.  I would suggest that my James is also a brother, supported by the fact that my line stayed close to the Skaggs and Wallen family and my Nathan first wife was Lydia Skaggs, daughter of Longhunter  Charles Skaggs. 

Next week, I will show how to add the spreadsheets of JACalton Davis and  Celeste Hogan to see if we can find any Chromosome segments that might fill in the gaps back to 1725.