R1b Hub Linking to Lineages, Results and Analyses of ROSE Y-DNA.

Diana, Goddess of the Hunt — for Ancestors!

Links Hub to Lineages, Results, and Analyses of Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b ROSE's

Haplogroup R1b is the most common haplogroup in western Europe reaching a frequency of 70-80% in the British Isles (please see distribution map). One 12-marker haplotype, in particular, is the most common haplotype in western Europe, and it's called the "Western Atlantic Modal Haplotype" or WAMH. If you have one of the top four most common R1b 12-marker haplotypes, you will have a "WAMH" logo on your member page at FTDNA, and you will have hundreds, if not thousands, of 12/12 matches in various Y-DNA databases, with few, if any, having any genealogical significance for you.

The most common subclade (subgroup) of R1b is R1b1b2, and the most common haplotype of R1b1b2 is R1b1b2a1b5. The modal haplotypes of R1b, R1b1b2, and R1b1b2a1b5 (R=L21) are therefore the same.

Being R1b is the genetic equivalent of being surnamed SMITH. To tell one SMITH from another, with certainty, you need more information beyond just the surname, in fact, as much additional information as possible. DNA testing is similar: testing more markers is the genetic equivalent of gathering more information to determine conclusively that a possible match is a true match. If you are Haplogroup R1b1b2 and have a common haplotype, you are definitely a genetic "SMITH."

Anyone who is Haplogroup R1b1b2 needs to test at least 37 markers to be confident of a match because I have seen a 23/25 match in R1b drop to 28/37 (please see "What Constitutes a Match" at the bottom of the page to appreciate the significance of such a drop).

The ROSE DNA project only shares results through its_Bulletin and then only up to 37 markers, so ROSE researchers, especially those who've found no ROSE family member to test, will find utilizing the DNA results difficult. I hope by sharing our data we can make up for this difficulty. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or want to share data and lineages.

Below are the groups of R1b ROSEs that I have worked on, so far:

Unassigned

SUMMARY

Group G: Kilravock ROSE

Progenitors

Test subjects with known paper connections to the Barons of Kilravock:

Rev. Robert ROSE (1703-1751) — immigrant to Virginia

Donald ROSE (c1727) — immigrant to Nova Scotia

Hugh ROSE (1738- ) — of Inverness, SCT

Alexander ROSE (1738-1807) — of Inverness, SCT, then VA, then NC

James ROSE (1762- ) of Inverness, SCT, then NY

John ROSE (c1775- ) of Angus, SCT

Alexander ROSE (c1860- ) of Nova Scotia

Johannis ROSE (c1650s- ) of Warwickshire and Kent, ENG

John ROSE (c1804- ) of Peebleshire, SCT

Group K: R-U198

Progenitors

John ROSE (c1700-1755) of Salem, NJ

Samuel ROSE (c1700- ) of Tuckerton, Ocean Co., NJ

Ezekiel ROSE (c1710-1768) of Hunterdon Co., NJ

David ROSE (c1724-1781) of Long Island, NY, Lancaster Co., PA, and MD

Matthias ROSE (1727- ) of Albany and Saratoga Cos, NY, and ON, Canada

Abraham ROSE (1729- ) of Cumberland Co., NJ

Robert ROSE (c1731- ) of Frederick Co., VA, and possibly Hunterdon Co., NJ

Israel ROSE (c1739-179) of Orange Co., NY

William ROSE (1747- ) of Orange and Onondaga Cos., NY

John ROSE (1764-1825) of Greene Co., PA

William ROSE (c1790- ) of Otsego Co., NY

Daniel Darius ROSE (c1792- ) of York Co., ME, and Randolph Co., AR

Abraham Lacy ROSE (1794-1869) of Seneca Falls, NY, and Marion Co., IA

Emanuel ROSE (c1794- ) of Cherokee Co., NC, and Fannin Co., GA

Stagton ROSE (c1802- ) of NJ and Somerset Co., PA

Henry ROSE (1804- ) of NY

Benjamin F. ROSE (1806/7- ) of Long Island, NY, OH, and WI

Alexander SMITH (1839- ) of PA and New Orleans, LA

The descendant of Alexander SMITH appears to have an NPE in his patrilineal line because he is a 37/37 match with the modal haplotype for Group K.

Group K1: R-U198

Progenitors

John David ROSE (1761-1843) of Hampshire Co., (W)VA, and Wolfe Co., KY

Alexander BROWN (c1740s-1791) of Lancster and Luzerne Cos., PA

Group K1 Node Chart (STR Cladogram)

All of the ROSE members of Group K1 descend from John David ROSE. Their modal haplotype has a GD of only one from the modal haplotype of Group K, so there's no doubt they have a common ancestor.
These descendants of Alexander BROWN are a 36/37 match with the descendants of John David ROSE, so apparently, these BROWNs have an NPE in their line. Neither can be the descendant of the other, so the MRCA must be somewhere upstream of both of them.

Group K2

Progenitors

Jeremiah ROSE (c1729-1754) of St. Mary's Aylesbury, England

James ROSE (1755-1816) of England and Prince William Co., VA

The ROSE project suggests that Group K2 bears a relationship to Groups K and K1. While the K2 individuals match each other 37/37, they have only a 28/37 match with the modal haplotype of Group K and only a 27/37 match with Group K1, which are decided non-matches.

Group L: ROSE - SANDY - HORTON

Progenitors

John ROSE (1706- ) of King George Co., VA

William ROSE (c1710s-1752) of King George Co., VA

John ROSE (1802-1890) of Centre Co., PA

William Hamer ROSE (1816-1888) of VA

Unknown ROSE & Nancy SANDY of Westmoreland Co., VA

Nimrod A. HORTON (1771/2-1851) of Lincoln Co., NC

All of the above are closely related and have a near common ancestor, including the SANDY and HORTON families who apparently have NPEs in their lines. The alleged connections of this family to the Kilravock, Invergordon, and Perthshire ROSEs are not supported by the DNA evidence, nor do I see any particular relationship between the Group L ROSEs and the Group L1 ROSEs (see below).

Group L1: five unrelated families

Progenitors

L1a	Alexander ROSE (1750-1815) of Invergordon, SCT
L1b	William ROSE (c1750s-1807) of Frostburg, Washington Co., MD
L1c	William A. ROSE of NJ and Stamford, CT
L1d	Donald R. ROSE of Perthshire, SCT
L1e	Isaac ROSE (c1753-1829) of Birch River, Nicholas Co., (W)VA

With the possible exception of L1a and L1b, the above five families are not closely related, which is the reason I've given them individual subgroup designations. With the exception of the three Invergordon ROSEs, each of the other families should, in my opinion, remain in the "unassigned" category because grouping them together is misleading.

Groups T / T1 / T2: ROOSA of Holland > ROSE of Ulster Co., NY

T / T1 / T2 Progenitor

T	Gijsbert Geurts¹ ROOSA (c1550- ) of Holland
T	Aldert Heymanse³ ROOSA (c1621-1679) of Herwijnen, NL, and Ulster Co., NY
T1	Johannes⁵ ROOSA (1742- )
T2	Samuel⁵ ROSE (1725- )

All of the Group T, Group T1, and Group T2 ROSEs are the same family. Of the 26 individuals tested, most have a GD from the modal haplotype of only 0 or 1 (just one has a GD of 2 and just one has a GD of 3). The one tested individual of a ROOSA line still resident in Holland is modal at 37 markers. Americans all descend from Aldert³, grandson of Gijsbert¹. Group T1 is modal, except for one shared mutation. Group T2 is not genetically distinct from Group T; they were apparently spun off based on their paper genealogy. Four individuals with paper descents from Aldert³ apparently represent two different NPE events.

Group TX: ROSE of Sullivan Co., NY

Progenitor

Groups TY:

Progenitor

Group Unassigned: ROSE - GRONAUER NPE

Progenitors

Bazil ROSE (c1764-1826) of Callaway Co., MO

Mr. GRONAUER of Germany

These two individuals are closely related. As the ROSE has no match in the ROSE project, the odds are he's the one with the NPE. Certainly, he is not a biological descendant of John ROSE of Group L, as formerly alleged.

In the data tables, I have supplied two different modal haplotypes for R1b, based on the value of marker DYS391. About 55% of R1b's have a value of 11 at this marker, and about 45% of R1b's have a value of 10 at this marker. DYS391 seems to vary in a narrow range, and to consider 10 at DYS391 a meaningful departure from the modal of 11 by highlighting that column in the data tables would be mis-leading because it would make it appear to be a significant marker uniting the families, which it isn't.

One reason I have used the R1b modals and colored their table cells blue (well, technically, cyan) is to emphasize that we are mostly modal — as we would expect because that's the definition of modal — and to encourage you to ignore the "sea of blue" as background noise. Instead, concentrate on the differences from the modal, especially, the consistent differences. These consistent differences are the values that characterize families (please see my page on "signature markers" for a further discussion).

Before you start examining the details of the charts, and if you have a large enough monitor, I recommend leaning back and getting an overall impression of the consistencies (or inconsistencies) between the blocks of rows by looking at just the color patterns. When you have grouped results correctly, the consistency within families is striking — and the jumble of non-related individuals is equally apparent.

In the tables, if the Ysearch UserID is in blue, it means I was the one who created the account. I will be creating these accounts for ROSE family modal haplotypes, so ROSEs who upload to Ysearch will quickly see which modal they resemble.

Modal ROSE Haplotypes in Haplogroup R1b

GD = Genetic Distance, the number of mutation events separating two haplotypes. In this case, it's the GD from one or the other of the top two R1b modal haplotypes.

Listed below are the modal haplotypes of each of the separate R1b families I've so far examined from the data sent to me or gleaned from Ysearch. If they seem to be a hodge-podge of mis-matches, they are, which is the reason they've been identified as separate families. If you are R1b and want to peruse the possibilities for your match, you can compare your haplotype to the ones below in light of the values in the "What Constitutes a Match" listing below. If you don't come close to any of them, then you would need to send me your data, so I can add your family to the table.

Please note that you can easily match someone perfectly at 12 markers, even another ROSE, and still not be a related to them, at least not in a genealogical time frame — we're all related if you go back far enough. Likewise, you can have a near match to someone at 25 markers, even another ROSE, and still not be related to them. Only in cases where the R1b haplotype is rare can you have any confidence in a match at less than 37 markers, and even then I would want to be entirely certain and upgrade to 37 markers and preferably 67.

For example, the value of 16 at DYS437 is quite rare (see the ROSE-SANDY-HORTON family below). But even in a case such as this one, with one rare value, I would still want to go to 37 markers because, at 25 markers, this haplotype has a genetic distance of only two from one of the R1b modal haplotype.

I've given the groups descriptive names to make them easier (at least for me) to remember. These names may change as earlier progenitors are identified. If you can think of better names, please feel free to suggest them.

G R O U P	GD (*cummulative*)				Family	Ysearch UserID	Haplotype — as determined by STR testing																																																																Sample Size
	GD (*cummulative*)						Markers 1-12												Markers 13-25													Markers 26-37												Markers 38-67
	at 12	at 25	at 37	at 67			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	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
Primary R1b Modal 55%						55GU9	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	Modal values per Charles Kerchner, admin of R1b Project (n=1000+).
T	0	4	6		Dutch ROOSA	WAD6V	13	24	14	11	11	14	12	12	12	13	13	29	18	9	10	11	11	25	15	19	28	15	15	16	16	11	11	19	23	16	15	18	18	36	38	11	12																															n=6 at 12 markers; n=5 at 25 markers; n=2 at 37 markers
K	2	6	12		Long Island ROSE	S8WP7	12	23	14	11	11	14	12	12	12	14	13	30	17	9	10	11	11	25	15	18	31	15	15	16	17	11	11	19	22	16	14	18	17	38	40	12	12																															n=31 at 25 markers; n=15 at 37 markers
K2	2	5	13		English ROSE	8MQZ2	13	24	14	11	11	14	12	12	11	14	13	30	17	9	10	11	11	25	15	18	29	15	15	16	16	11	11	19	21	16	15	18	19	38	40	11	12																															n=3
G	4	10	19		Kilravock ROSE	Z5EAR	14	25	14	11	10	14	12	12	12	14	13	30	16	9	9	11	11	25	15	19	32	14	15	17	17	11	11	19	23	15	15	19	18	38	42	12	12																															n=8 at 12; n=7 at 25; n=5 at 37; values for CDYb = 39, 41, 42, 42, and 43, so 42 may not be the actual modal

Secondary R1b Modal 45%						8EHXE	13	24	14	10	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																															Modal values per Robert Hughes for "Genetic Distances" (n=?).
L	0	2	7		ROSE - SANDY - HORTON	5Z7SF	13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	12	13	13	29	17	9	10	11	11	25	16	19	29	15	15	16	17	10	11	19	23	16	15	18	17	35	36	12	13																															n=10 at 25 markers; n=5 at 37 markers
L1d	1	2			Perthshire ROSE	TRC8U	13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	13	13	13	29	17	9	10	11	11	25	15	19	29	15	15	17	18																																											n=1 at 25 markers
L1a	1	3			Invergordon ROSE		13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	12	13	13	30	17	9	10	11	11	25	15	19	31	15	15	17	17																																											n=3 at 25 markers
?	0	4	9		ROSE - GRONAUER	6M9WY	13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	12	13	13	29	16	9	10	11	11	24	15	19	29	15	16	16	17	11	11	19	23	15	15	19	17	37	37	11	12																															n=2 at 25 markers; n=1 at 37 markers
L1b	0	3			Frostburg ROSE		13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	12	13	13	29	17	9	10	11	11	25	15	19	31	15	15	15	17																																											n=1 at 25 markers
L1c	1	5	8		Stamford ROSE	68PSS	13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	11	13	13	29	17	9	9	11	11	25	15	19	31	15	15	17	18	10	11	19	23	16	15	17	17	36	37	12	12																															n=1 at 25 markers
L1e	1	8	14		Birch River ROSE	3EKUC	13	24	14	10	11	14	12	12	13	13	13	29	17	9	10	11	11	26	15	19	33	15	15	15	17	10	11	19	23	17	15	17	19	37	38	12	12																															n=1 at 37 markers

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; 10-12, please see this Chart compiled by FTDNA.
For 25 markers: 21 or less is a non-relative; 22-25, please see this Chart compiled by FTDNA.
For 37 markers: 31 or less is a non-relative; 32-37, please see this Chart compiled by FTDNA.
For 67 markers: 55 or less is a non-relative; 56-67, please see this Chart compiled by FTDNA.
For any test: 0 matching markers, please contact NASA.

Contact

Home
Page

Table of
Contents

DNA
Hub