[Reynolds-L] DNA testing

[William G. Bates]

I am not a candidate because I am not in the Reynolds male line though I am directly linked to the Reynolds family through my Mother who was the daughter of John Thomas REYNOLDS Sr (1896-1976) and there are no living male descendants in his line.

I have come to understand a little about Y-DNA results over the years since I first tested (BATES Project) in 2003 at 25 markers and have upgraded that over the years to 37 then 67 markers.  At present on the 67 marker results, there are only TWO results when compared against the entire databases at FTDNA and Y-Search.  The closest result, full match, is in the family history database and the other at 7 markers off has been ruled to be so distant that it is doubtful if we will ever discover the link since it will probably be through a female BATES marrying a PLUMMER male (the family name associated with this connection).  From my years of association with all three organizations, FTDNA, Y-Search, and BFOOV (BATES Project coordinator, historian, and Researchist) it seems to me that anything below 67 marker tests become so broad as to be all but impractical other than to say they are Possibly linked somewhere in the distant past which may be so distant that there are no genuine records that records the connection.  However, since there are so few, only about 15-20 out of 200+ testers above the 37 level, this also leads to further complications except to say that certain lines cannot be determined as linked during recorded history but maybe linked sometime before 1500.  As a conclusion to this, it has been determined by several other tester, myself and the Coordinator that anything below 67 markers is highly questionable as to its usefullness for highly fragmented family lines when those lines were scattered sometime well before the 1300's and where then surname probably even originated in more than one geographical location which then migrated to other locations where the name may have been spelled (phonetically) differently whereby they were then associated with that family line solely by pronunciation.  I do remember somewhere in the past when I was doing full database matching that there was a mention of the Reynolds family which I think was on the 37 marker test but did not follow up on it at the time because of focus on trying to link my predecedent (at the time GGG GF) back to England.

Incidentally, I also have Ancestry's Family Finder DNA done but so far they have only generated "Hits" in the 4-5 Cousins range which it all but unusable since I am only back to 3rd cousin range with very little expectation of finding concrete documentation of my connection to England even though my predecedent (GGGG GF - I am fifth generation from him) is known to have been born there, there are several recorded instances by his children, both in legal documentation and family stories, that state this claim.

I do not claim to be anything close to an expert but am only an observant researchist (mid level) who has been through the process of trying to find the claimed links from those lesser marker tests only to discover there was no way they could be linked through documentation in the recent past thereby leaving only the far past to exhibit a possible link IF documentation could be found to prove the assertion.  incidentally, there are just enough BATES testers in the 37-111 marker range to definitively state my family line cannot be linked with them unless it is in the very remote past, probably before 1000ad.  At present there are three known distinct BATES family lines in England but then you have to add Scotland (McBates), Ireland (Batte/Bette/Betts/etc...), Wales, and probably the entire coastal area of Europe, we know of at least one BETTE line in France and another in Germany.

In conclusion, use the DNA tests as guide ONLY until there is adequate proofs and documentation one way or the other.  While it is extremely remote, there are instances where two, or more, individuals have testes as related where the documentary proof absolutely refute there being a connection OTHER than a regional link (my FamilyFinder indicates I am 96% ENGLISH with 4% undetermined but does not show my KNOWN Native American ancestry [1 absolute and 2 probable]).

Sparkgapper