About us
Note to participants. Thanks to all who have joined with me in this endeavor. Because this project is autosomal, there are no y-DNA or mtDNA results to show. There are no haplogroups. The information is processed offline in Genome Mate Pro. The objective is to narrow or resolve distant cousin matches to ever more refined degrees, with the hope of finding of finding a common ancestor for the many segments shared by the participants.
Lists of distant cousin matches will not be published. If a participant would like to see a list of his matches & how they have been narrowed to a side of family, send me an e-mail (TEPeter100@aol.com) and I will produce a list showing side of family.
On May 18, 2016, the admin downloaded Match lists & Chromosome Browser (ie, segment) data for 80 participants and imported into Genome Mate Pro for analysis. The total count of Relatives was 73,153 and the number of segments to analyze was 136,545. The analysis is still in progress...
On July 26, 2017, preliminary results can be offered. Of the 73,153 relatives, not including the 80 participants, 9,416 have been resolved to be related to Timothy Peterman in some way. The analysis is purely segment based. The family trees of others have not been included in this analysis. The breakout is as follows:
Side of Family Relative Count Paternal Maternal Unresolved
Myself 9,416 4,002 5,155 259
Parents:
Father’s side 4,002 1,200 2,000 802
Mother’s side 5,155 3,022 914 1,219
Grandparents:
Joe Peterman, Jr. 1,200 7 909 284
Clara Lenora Hall 2,000 460 927 613
Roy Ronald Robinson 3,022 897 775 1,350
Elvessa Ellis 914 206 564 144
Great Grandparents:
Josef Petermann 7 0 0 7
Lydia Margaret Eagleton 909 117 302 490
Edwin Hall 460 0 34 426
Sarah Elizabeth Eggleson 927 209 230 488
Perry Allen Robinson 897 70 9 818
Lena Leota Coffey 775 398 18 359
Jefferson Sullenger Ellis 206 37 0 169
Ida Lee Wilson 564 213 55 296
Great-great grandparents:
Jakob Petermann 0 0 0 0
Katharina Gunz 0 0 0 0
Alexander Malcolm Eagleton 117 5 112 0
Fanny Bauguess 302 0 56 246
James William Hall 0 0 0 0
Sarah Benjamin Horr 34 0 0 34
Asa William Eggleson 209 27 0 182
Sarah Margaret Roley 230 0 0 230
John Kivet Robinson 70 0 0 70
Martha Jane Aten 9 9 0 0
Benjamin Coe Coffey 398 274 2 122
Lucy Barbre 18 0 18 0
Isaac Newton Ellis 37 35 0 2
Thomas Hedges Wilson 213 31 51 131
Sarah Ann Lovell 55 17 38 0
Great-great-great grandparents (with resolved matches):
James Eagleton 5
Margaret (Montgomery) Eagleton 112
Lydia (Sparks) Bauguess 56
Asa Eggleson, III 27
Aaron Kimble Aten 9
Newton Eli Coffey 274
Martha Louise (Vermillion) Coffey 2
Susan (Weeks) Barbre 18
John J. Ellis 35
James Scott Wilson 31
Charity Cross Hedges 51
James Badgett Lovell 17
Jestina (Smith) Lovell 38
The above match or relative counts reveal the importance of getting participants that are at the 3rd or 4th cousin level. Such participants pull matches from what would be an unresolved pool and resolve them to the next generation. Matches need to be resolved to the earliest degree possible. When we find a common ancestor within the tiny remaining sliver of one’s ancestry, the chances of this being mere coincidence are reduced.
Moreover, we can identify clusters of matches within each side of family across the 22 chromosomes. These clusters are of great importance, because each centers on a far earlier ancestor. The identity of that ancestor may not be determined yet. These clusters could prove to be of great importance in identifying the earlier ancestor. Every line of ancestry, no matter how far back it has been traced, ends in a brick wall. Yet, if the brick wall has appeared within say the last 300 years or so, cluster analysis offers the means to peak behind the brick wall.