Version 2, June 2, 2011

Analysis – Other clusters - Non-Irish Haplogroups (E and J haplogroups)

Step 1) - Select candidate for cluster / grouping analysis

There are two Casey clusters that have deep ancestry that does not originate from Ireland as all other Casey clusters. There are three submissions for the Sinclair Casey (b. 1799) line (haplogroup E1b1a) and one submission for the Thomas C. Casey (b. 1782) line (haplogroup J2). There are only two scenarios that could explain this unusual deep ancestry for an Irish surname: 1) during the last 200 to 600 years, there could have been a Non-Paternity Event (adoption, out-of-wedlock or surname change to Casey). This is the most likely scenario; 2) One or both of these clusters could have been in Ireland for over 600 years and could be one of the original six septs of the Casey clan. All it would take is one non-Irish deep ancestral immigrant that arrived in Ireland before surnames were established. This is a lower odds scenario. These are the smallest clusters in the Casey DNA Project.

Step 2) - Validate submissions that belong to the cluster

Since non-Irish haplogroups are very unique for the Casey surname, it is extremely easy and valid to declare two more clusters solely based on unique haplogroups. These unique deep ancestries provide a unique fingerprint for these two clusters.

Step 3) - Determine possible NPE submissions

Assuming that both clusters originated as NPE events, the analysis is dependent on when the NPE event happened. If the NPE event happened relatively close to the oldest proven ancestor, these lines should look at other surnames with similar DNA and that also have common ties via traditional research. Assuming the NPE could have randomly occurred in the next couple generations earlier than the oldest proven ancestor is a relatively low odds scenario – but very possible. For the last 200 years, the line of Sinclair Casey is known to be a Casey line for this time frame since multiple descendants of Sinclair Casey have the same DNA fingerprint. For the J2 cluster, only one submission is available and the NPE event could be recent (more submissions are required to determine that the NPE happened prior to the oldest proven ancestor). Assuming that we can only connect an NPE event that happened in the previously couple of generations, this means the researching for NPEs is only valid if they happened between 200 and 250 years ago. The NPE event could have occurred between 250 and 600 years ago. This means that there is only a 14 % chance that the NPE was close enough to oldest proven ancestor to be connected by DNA evidence (50 years / 350 years). However, the introduction of the non-Irish haplogroup is much more likely to have happened in the United States – a melting pot of DNA and cultures. These NPE events are much less likely to have occurred in Ireland where there was much less infusion of non-Irish DNA into the Irish lines.

ANALYSIS OF HAPLOGROUP E1b1a

Assuming that the Sinclair Casey line is a relatively new NPE event, there are several possible NPE candidates:

Obviously, the Miller submission is 97 % probability at 12 generations and represents the best candidate for the NPE connection. The Sinclair Casey line should contact the sponsor of this Miller DNA submission and determine if there are any possible traditional connections (geography, intermarriages between lines, etc.). With four surnames having similar DNA, there is evidence of common DNA marker values (overlapping haplotypes).

Only one Y-Search match was found which was also a Perry (SZG6B). Y-Search ID SZG6B states it is a FTDNA submission - probably the same FTDNA submission found in the FTDNA search above. Since the Perry submission does not belong to the Casey DNA Project, the marker values can not be determined. Two other FTDNA submissions for Sinclair Casey line were found in the Y-Search database: 57086 (DQDDA) and 173482 (DSZZ8). Submission 56851 needs to be added to Y-Search as it matches the MRCA for the three Sinclair Casey submissions and would make a better base for searching Y-Search since it matches the DNA of the oldest proven ancestor.

The MRCA of Sinclair Casey contains several rare marker values which provide a DNA fingerprint for this line. The chart below shows the most rare and most common marker values for the MRCA of Sinclair Casey. This table shows the distribution of marker values for the haplogroup E1b1a (formerly E3a). Unique marker values and very common marker values for this cluster include:

Since the Miller submission is an exact match at 37 markers, the Miller submission shares all the less common marker values shown above. For the Carr and Perry submissions, the markers for these submissions are not available to the admin since they do not belong to the Casey DNA project at Family Tree DNA.

ANALYSIS OF HAPLOGROUP J2

Assuming the Thomas C. Casey line is a relatively new NPE event, there are several possible NPE candidates:

The Hunter lines could possible NPE candidates, however, having a probability of 74 % to 88 % at 12 generations is less encouraging. The Hunter line has a GEDCOM file that indicates that the Hunter line originated from New Jersey and moved to Indiana. Submission 38646 has submitted very limited traditional information concerning their line, therefore, it is not possible to determine if there are any common geographic ties between these two lines.

The MRCA of Thomas C. Casey contains several rare marker values which provide a DNA fingerprint for this line. The chart below shows the most rare and most common marker values for the MRCA of Thomas C. Casey. This table shows the distribution of marker values for the haplogroup J2. Unique marker values and very common marker values for this cluster include:

RARE MARKER VALUES PROVIDE DNA FINGERPRINTS

The rarity several marker values of the two non-Irish haplogroups provide two unique DNA fingerprints for our Irish surname, Casey. This provides an excellent opportunity to test other suspected Casey lines being actually related. The best usage of funds would be to locate the best possible Casey lines for candidates that could be related. This would be an excellent Yes / No answer to quickly determine if these lines are indeed genetically related.

Having a non-Irish haplogroups for an Irish surname, these two clusters are much less likely to have random Casey submissions match their submissions. These clusters must be more proactive in searching out possibly related Casey lines and letting DNA validate connections between these lines. Since it is not possible to determine when the NPE event happened between 200 years ago and 600 years ago, searching for NPE connections may not be a good usage of time. However, if possible NPE candidates show extremely good traditional connections, NPE connections should be pursued.

Step 4) - Looking at submissions at 600 years

Since the two clusters have non-Irish haplogroups and also have very different DNA from any other Casey submissions, comparing these clusters to other Casey submissions would not be productive as there a way too mutations to be even remotely related.

Step 5) - Determine MRCA HAPLOTYPES

Determine the MRCA haplotype of these two clusters based on all submissions in each cluster. The most common methodology for determining the MRCA haplotype is the common used "majority rules" methodology. It is assumed that the MRCA would contain DNA marker values that the majority of submissions in the cluster have. Since there are three submissions for the Sinclair Casey line, the MRCA was very easy to verify. For the Thomas C. Casey cluster, the MRCA can not be accurately determined since there is only one submission for this cluster. Several of the marker values could be recent mutations and more submissions are required to verify the MRCA haplotype. For the time being, the MRCA is estimated to be the same as the single mutation (this will probably be off on two or three markers).

Below is a summary of all marker values for the non-Irish deep ancestry clusters:

DNA Results (Non-Irish deep ancestry clusters)

Note 1) Since there is not sufficient traditional documentation for all three Sinclair Casey submissions, the mutations found in this cluster can not reveal possible branches. With only one submission for the J2 cluster, no analysis comparing multiple submissions is possible.

Step 6) - MAPPING DNA TO TRADITIONAL DOCUMENTATION

This step requires traditional genealogical information to be reviewed in light of the DNA submissions. Review of traditional genealogical research could allow several mutations to be eliminated from any DNA descendancy chart as recent mutations that are not genealogical significant. The analysis of this step assumes that traditional research is correct. If speculative information is entered as fact, the DNA analysis from this point on could be incorrect. Since are not enough submissions and traditional documentation of these clusters, it impossible to create any DNA descendancy charts. Here are the family histories for these two clusters:

Family Trees (non-Irish clusters)

Step 7) - CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions that can be reached with current submissions:

1) With three submissions for the Sinclair Casey line, the MRCA haplotype can be estimated and more accurately compared to other submissions. With only one submission for the Thomas C. Casey line, determining the MRCA haplotype of this cluster is very approximate and comparison to other submissions is much more problematic.

2) Both clusters are somewhat unique clusters from a DNA point of view. A search of the Y-Search database tends to confirm the uniqueness of these marker values as only a few submissions can be related even in the distant past.

Possible Action Items for grouping:

1) Definitely need more traditional information concerning the Casey submissions for both non-Irish deep ancestry clusters. Please look Casey Family Histories and send the admin more detail concerning your lines. Without more complete traditional information as outlined in the introduction of the Family History (How to Submit) section, a complete analysis of this cluster will not be possible.

2) The J2 cluster only has one submission and it is not possible to accurately estimate the MRCA haplotype of this cluster. A second submission of a different son or grandson of Thomas C. Casey is required to more accurately analyze this cluster.

3) Researchers of these two Casey clusters should seek out currently non-related Casey lines that they feel could be connected to their line and get their DNA submissions. Around half of these submissions will mostly prove unrelated - but this will eliminate possible related lines that are no longer worthy of attempting to connect to this cluster.

4) It appears that the deep ancestry of the Thomas C. Casey submission was analyzed quite some time ago. Today, there are many more new J2 branches discovered. Re-testing the deep ancestry of the Thomas C. Casey will more accurately reveal more deep ancestry branches that have been recently discovered. For the Sinclair Casey submissions, no more testing of deep ancestry is available currently.