Go to Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Diana, Goddess of the Hunt — for Ancestors!
 
Go to Every-Name Index
Every-Name Index
 
Lineages and Results of Y-DNA Testing for Some Related Hg R1b-Z209 DAVIS'es
Please Note:  seeking a male DAVIS for Y-DNA testing who descends from this William DAVIS on a patrilineal line.  We have one such male already tested (see #110564 below), but we need another.   Likewise a male DAVIS who descends from this Stewart DAVIS on a patrilineal line.  Please contact me if you are such an individual or if you know of one.
Update (May 2015):  we have crossed the pond!

These DAVIS'es now have a strong Y-DNA match with an American descendant of a DAVIS with a known origin in Gloucestershire, England, whose parents were of Wales.  I have added his results to the table below (first row).

Update (Sep 2013):  we have broken through our brick wall!

It has long been asserted that our Isaac DAVIS was a son of James DAVIS (1744-1822) & Hannah RAMSEY.  The circumstantial evidence has always been strong, but no direct paper connection has yet been found.  Such a vacuum results in many clearly wrong connections having been claimed, but we can now relegate all of them to the dust bin because... 

Y-DNA test results have returned for a male DAVIS descended on a documented patrilineal line from Joseph DAVIS, son of James & Hannah (RAMSEY) DAVIS, who is thus said to be a brother of our Isaac.  At 111 markers, he is a solid genetic match with the two tested descendants of Isaac.  So, we have unequivocal proof that these three individuals have a near common ancestor, and the circumstantial evidence says that common ancestor is James DAVIS.  

There is also a case to be made that John DAVIS (1810-1859) of KY and Clark Co., IL, is a son of Joseph.  Certainly, the Y-DNA test results support it.

Caveat:  Do bear in mind that this DAVIS family has been in the United States for a very long time, since at least 1623.  We also don't know if there have been additional immigrations of this family since 1623.  This is time for there to have been many descendants down many lines, both in Britain and the USA, so a match with this family does not necessarily mean a descent from James DAVIS (1744-1822).  We still need to do the paper genealogy.

To view more of the page without scrolling, temporarily reduce the text size or page size in your browser.  Red labels indicate markers that typically mutate more frequently than those labeled in black.  (Empty cells that are darkened indicate tests not ordered.)  Keywords for search engines: genetic genealogy.
To view lineages, please scroll to the right.
Genetic Distance is from the family's modal haplotype, not the R1b-P312 modal, and it's per panel, not cumulative. FF = FamilyFinder.
Genetic Distance
(per panel)
Name Kit# FF Ysearch
UserID
  Panel 1 — Standard Markers 1-12   Panel 2 — Standard Markers 13-25   Panel 3 — Standard Markers 26-37   Panel 4 — Standard Markers 38-67   Panel 5 — Standard Markers 68-111   Known Lineage
STR PP3 PP5 MP6 MP7 MP8 MP9 [mixed] MP10 [EA] MP11 [SMGF] MP12 [all new] MP13 [mixed]
12 25 37 67 111 3
9
3
3
9
0
19
/
3
9
4
3
9
1
a
|
3
8
5
b
|
3
8
5
4
2
6
3
8
8
4
3
9
i
|
3
8
9
3
9
2
ii
|
3
8
9
4
5
8
a
|
4
5
9
b
|
4
5
9
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
4
7
4
3
7
4
4
8
4
4
9
a
|
4
6
4
b
|
4
6
4
c
|
4
6
4
d
|
4
6
4
e
|
4
6
4
f
|
4
6
4
4
6
0
H4
|
G
A
T
A
IIa
|
Y
C
A
IIb
|
Y
C
A
4
5
6
6
0
7
5
7
6
5
7
0
a
|
C
D
Y
b
|
C
D
Y
4
4
2
4
3
8
5
3
1
5
7
8
a
|
S1
3
9
5
b
|
S1
3
9
5
5
9
0
5
3
7
6
4
1
4
7
2
S1
4
0
6
5
1
1
4
2
5
a
|
4
1
3
b
|
4
1
3
5
5
7
5
9
4
4
3
6
4
9
0
5
3
4
4
5
0
4
4
4
4
8
1
5
2
0
4
4
6
6
1
7
5
6
8
4
8
7
5
7
2
6
4
0
4
9
2
5
6
5
7
1
0
4
8
5
6
3
2
4
9
5
5
4
0
7
1
4
7
1
6
7
1
7
5
0
5
5
5
6
5
4
9
5
8
9
5
2
2
4
9
4
5
3
3
6
3
6
5
7
5
6
3
8
4
6
2
4
5
2
4
4
5
A10
|
G
A
T
A
4
6
3
4
4
1
1B
07
|
GG
AA
T
5
2
5
7
1
2
5
9
3
6
5
0
5
3
2
7
1
5
5
0
4
5
1
3
5
6
1
5
5
2
7
2
6
6
3
5
5
8
7
6
4
3
4
9
7
5
1
0
4
3
4
4
6
1
4
3
5
R1b-P312 Modal Values XQJ7H   13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 17 17       11 11 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12   35 15 9 16 12 26 26 19 12 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 21 15 19 13 24 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11    
This DAVIS Family's Modal Values     13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12   33 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 11 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 23 15 18 11 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 16 9 12 11   Counting only core DAVIS family:  n = 7 at 67 markers; n = 5 at 111 markers 
                                     
0 2 0 0 2 DAVIS 363465       13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   16 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17 16 17   11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12   33 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 11 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 24 15 19 11 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 16 9 12 11   Pvt13 Pvt12 Chas Raymond11 John Elihu10 John9 Silas8 Silas7 William6 William5 John4 Thomas3 John2 Thomas1 DAVIS (c1568- ) of GLS
0 1 1 1 3 DAVIS 234206 Y     13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 16 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 37 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 17 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12   33 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 11 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 20 15 18 11 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 16 9 12 11   Pvt8 Pvt7 James Emmitt6 Emmitt Clark5 John Clark4 Isaac Jr.3 Isaac2 James1DAVIS (1744-1822) — of Augusta [now Wythe] Co., VA,
then Christian Co., KY [now Montgomery Co., TN], then Randolph Co.,  MO
1 0 0 1 1 DAVIS 143566 Y 63SRD   13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 30   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 17 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12   33 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 11 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 22 15 18 11 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 16 9 12 11   Pvt7 Pvt6 Paul Campbell5 Felix Grundy4 Benjamin3
0 0 2 0 0 DAVIS 235005 Y     13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 21 15 36 37 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12   33 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 11 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 23 15 18 11 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 16 9 12 11   Pvt7 Pvt6  Uriah Chasteen5 Thos Emmett4 Uriah Williams3 Joseph2
1 0 0 1 0 DAVIS 145288 Y     13 24 14 10 11 13 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 10 11 12 12   33 15 9 16 12 25 26 19 12 11 11 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 23 15 18 11 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 16 9 12 11   Pvt6 Harold R5 Edward Emory4 William Riley3 Benj Franklin2 John1 DAVIS (1810-1859) — of KY > IL
0 0 0 1   DAVIS 674696       13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 16 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12                                                                                             Pvt4 Pvt3 Samuel Patrick2 Isaac1 DAVIS
0 0 0 0   DAVIS ? Y     13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12                                                                                             [Earliest Ancestor blank; unresponsive to emails]
                                     
0 0 4 0   DAVIS 110564       13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 15 15 18 15 36 37 12 12   11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12                                                                                             Pvt7 George Archibald6, William Leroy5, Stewart Archibald4, Archibald3, William2, William1 DAVIS (c1760-c1827) — of Ireland? and Black Lick Twp., Indiana Co., PA 
          DAVIS SMGF         24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12   13       9 10   11 25   18                 11 10 19 23 15             12                                                                                                                                                           Pvt6 Ernest5 John Wesley4 James3 John Lewis2 John1 DAVIS (c1780-1865) — of PA > KY > IN
                                     
0 0 0     LOCKE 33787   CG744   13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 20 15 36 36 12 12                                                                                                                                                           Pvt… Ebenezer2, William1 LOCKE (1628-1720) — of England > Woburn, Middlesex Co., MA
0 0 1     THOMAS     BH5DD   13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29   17 9 10 11 11 25 14 18 30 15 15 16 17       11 10 19 23 16 15 19 15 36 36 12 12                                                                                                                                                           Pvt… THOMAS
                                     
Summary:
UPDATE (16 May 2015):  we have a new DAVIS matching this family, shown in Row 1 of the table (Kit #363465), who is a solid match (107/111) with the model for the next five DAVIS'es in the table.  He has a known origin in Stroud, Gloucestershire, England, so we have crossed the pond!  Thank you #363465!  His immigrant ancestor was John2 DAVIS who made the crossing with his brother, Thomas2 DAVIS, in 1623 on the ship, John & Francis.  They settled in what is now York Co., VA, making it plausible that either of them is the ancestor of James1 DAVIS of Wythe Co., VA.
We've tested two paper descendants of Isaac DAVIS, Rows 2 and 3 in the table (#234206 and #143566); and we've tested a paper descendant of Joseph DAVIS, son of James DAVIS & Hannah RAMSEY, Row 4 in the table (#235005).  They are a strong match supporting the long-held assertion that Isaac DAVIS is a son of James & Hannah (RAMSEY) DAVIS.
The descendant of John DAVIS, Row 5 in the table (#145288), is a tight genetic match with the descendants of Isaac and Joseph, the two sons of James.  We've known from census records that James's son, Joseph, had an unidentified son the same age as John, so there's a strong case to be made that this John is Joseph's son.
James had a third son, Edward, and we very much need to test at least one of his descendants to resolve some questions about which values are ancestral for the family.
These five DAVISes have a match in the FTDNA database (Row 6, without Kit#) whose earliest ancestor field at FTDNA is blank.  So far, he has not responded to emails, but if you are this DAVIS or his contact and you are reading this, please contact me. 
Discussion:
To understand the color-coding of the markers in the table, I recommend studying this page on Signature Markers.  But, in a nutshell…

The most important markers here, for uniting the family, are the columns in yellow.  These are the "signature markers" for the family.  We would expect to find all or most of these markers in anyone related to us in genealogical time.  The scattered red table cells are "private" mutations, that is, mutations acquired somewhere, literally, "along the line" of their descent from their common ancestor.  Private markers become useful if they are shared by one or more other descendants, in which case, they become "branch markers."  Branch markers indicate a common ancestor nearer to these individuals than the progenitor for the entire family.

We do appear to have found one good branch marker (magenta table cells), that is, a value of 17 at DYS557 uniting the two descendants of Isaac, which mean the mutation had to have occurred in Isaac.

#363465 has six alleles at DYS464.  DYS464 is a volatile marker, with some people having as few as three or as many as eight alleles — only about 1.5% of people tested have a number other than four.  While uncommon, these differences are not a cause for alarm as they are simply random mutations on the tails of the statistical distribution curve.  Because multiple changes at this marker can happen in a single mutation event, for purposes of calculating GD (genetic distance), these differences cannot be counted literally — as is blindly done by the FTDNA computer.  In this case, the extra 16 and 17 alleles almost certainly appeared in a single mutation event that duplicated the existing 16 and 17 alleles; so, in terms of GD, these two extra alleles are tallied as a single mutation event, not two.
#143566 has taken the DYS464X test, with the result that he is 15c-15c-16c-17g.  Most R1b men are cccg, so this is an expected result.  There's no need for anyone else in the family to take the test.
#110564 probably has a common genetic ancestor with the above, but he needs to upgrade to 111 markers to be certain.  He hasn't responded to my emails, and now he has removed his contact information from FTDNA.   If he will contact me and join our project, I will pay for his upgrade to 111 markers.
Their only significant DAVIS match in the SMGF database is a 17/17 match with the individual in Row 8.  Unfortunately, there is no way to contact a test subject at SMGF.  (UPDATE May 2015: Ancestry.com has bought SMGF and taken the database offline, which is a tremendous loss to — and betrayal of — the genealogical community.)  If you are reading this and you are this test subject or know who he is, please get in touch with me.  I'm willing to pay for his testing at FTDNA if he will join our project and share his results and lineage with us.
#143566 [YSearch UserID 63SRD] has, as yet, no significant DAVIS match in the Ysearch database (I would urge those of you who have not uploaded to YSearch to do so).  However, at Ysearch, there is a LOCKE who has a 37/37 match with the modal for the family.  He is a member of the LOCKE project (Group 1, Family #3), and he is not a match with four others claiming descent from William LOCKE of Woburn, so it does appear he's the one with the NPE.
Also at Ysearch, there is a THOMAS who has a 36/37 match with the family modal.
I have contacted both the LOCKE and the THOMAS through the form at Ysearch urging them to upgrade to at least 67 markers, to see if this match holds up.  If it doesn't, it's another lesson that 37 markers is simply not enough in R1b; if it does hold up, we are looking at two different NPEs.
SNP Test Results:
#143566   P312+ M65- M153- U152-   L21- DF27+ Z196+ L1231- L176.2- SRY2627- L165- Z209+ Z220+ Z278-
#234206 U106- P312+ M65- M153- U152- M126- M160- L2- L4- L21- L193-   L176.2-    
Although these two descendants of Isaac haven't tested exactly the same SNPs, there are no differences betweeen them that would rule out a match, nor would any be expected.  The family's current haplogroup designation is R1b-Z209 because Z209 was, at the time, the most downstream positive SNP tested.  The Y-DNA SNP haplotree is rapidly changing due to increasing numbers of individuals taking advanced testing (e.g., Geno2, BigY, etc.), so while the designation R1b-Z209 is not "wrong," it will soon, if not already, be out-of-date as new downstream SNPs are discovered.
  Discussion (cont'd):
CDYb (a.k.a., DYS724), on Panel 3, is an extremely volatile marker, so the same mutation can happen more than once in a family, which appears to be the case here.  The marker is so volatile, I hesitate to call any value "modal," but for now, I'll go with 36. 
While Panel 3 (Markers 26-37) tends to be the most variable panel, Panel 4 (Markers 37-67) is the most stable.
  Discussion (cont'd):
DYS712 (Panel 5) may be the single most volatile of all markers, so having multiple mutations in a few generations is not unusual.

I urge each of these descendants with a mutation at DYS712 to test cousins to determine the location of his mutation (see testing strategy).

The fact that the descendants of John and Joseph match on this marker supports that John is Joseph's son.  However, we don't know at this point whether a value of 23 at this marker constitutes a shared mutation (a branching marker), which would very strongly support that John is Joseph's son, or whether this is simply the modal value for the family, which is still supportive of the connection to James, but not necessarily support for the connection to Joseph.  What is needed, here, is to test more cousins, in this case not ones descended from Isaac or Joseph, but especially from James's third son, Edward.

 
Thomas1 DAVIS was of Gloucestershire (GLS), England; his parents are said to be of Wales (WLS).  His two sons, John2 and Thomas2, emigrated to the Virginia Colony in 1623 on the ship, John & Francis.  They settled in Elizabeth City, on the Southern Neck (southernmost of Virginia's three peninsulae on Chesapeke Bay).  In 1634, part of Elizabeth City became Charles River Shire, and in 1642/3, the name of the shire was changed to York County, which it remains to this day.

What constitutes a match?
Matches in other surnames are usually mere coincidence, so please ignore them — I'll let you know when you shouldn't!
For 12 markers: 9 or less is a non-relative; for 10-12 markers, please see this table compiled by FTDNA.
For 25 markers: 21 or less is a non-relative; for 22-25 markers,
For 37 markers: 31 or less is a non-relative; for 32-37 markers,
For 67 markers: 59 or less is a non-relative; for 60-67 markers,
For 111 markers: 100 or less is a non-relative; for 101-111 markers,
For any test:  0 matching markers, please contact NASA.

 
Contact Home
Page
Table of
Contents
DNA
Hub
Biddle
DNA
Carrico
DNA
Corbin
DNA
Cupp
DNA
Danish
DNA
Ely
DNA
Lyon(s)
DNA
Rasey
DNA
Reason
DNA
Rose
DNA
Straub
DNA
Pedigree
Charts
Census
Hubs
Every-Name
Indices

Table of Contents
Go to Table of Contents
Privacy Policy ______
Every-Name Index
Go to Every-Name Index