mtDNA news

Well, good news!   I received my mtDNA test results from Argus BioSciences on Sept. 28.   They are:  Polymorphisms: A263G 315insC T16519C, Haplogroup: H.   You would more commonly see the results written as HVR1 16519C & HVR2 263G, 315.1C.   They're posted on the Project mtDNA Results page (mtResults) with details linked from there.

In our previous discussions of mtDNA we talked about how slowly it mutates and how that makes it relatively useless for genealogical investigation.   Not completely useless, just relatively useless.   An illustration of this is found in a comparison of my mtDNA with that of Carol Vass.   Her haplogroup is H6a and her markers are HVR1 16519c and HVR2 152C, 263G, 315.1C.   Pretty close but she differs from the CRS at 152C and I don't.   Just for the sake of illustration, let's include her with the Berry mtDNA folks and look at some of the tables and a cladogram.

Here are all the Berry mtDNA markers, with Carol's included:
and here is the distance table:
and finally, the cladogram:
As you can see Carol and I are only a distance of one apart but her matrilineal line back to 1790 goes to the Kershaw Dist., of South Carolina and mine in 1780 is in Mercer Co., Kentucky, nor do they ever seem to get near one another in the intervening years.   I expect that there is a connection somewhere but whether it happened since the adoption of surnames some 700 or so years ago, we can't tell from what we know at this point.   Interesting but not too helpful.

That is not to say, however, that you can't come across a match that does turn up someone that you can connect with and knock down all sorts of brick walls -- it just won't help as often with mtDNA as it will with yDNA.

To see the current Tables and cladogram only for the Berry mtDNA folks, Click Here.

I'm sure you recall that I told you about the great mtDNA testing offer by Argus BioSciences.   If you think you might need, or just want, one I'd suggest taking a look at them.

The Tribe of the Twelve Benjamins (part 1)

Note:   Following in four installments, posted as other news permits, is a paper written by Gerald Jones of Tucson, Arizona concerning the Berry Plain Berrys family, posted with his permission in the hope that it may be of assistance in the resolution and determination of which Benjamin Berry was where, and when.

*    *    *    *    
Twelve is a rather magical or mystical number.   There are the twelve Apostles, the twelve days of Christmas, the twelve months of the year, and twelve hours in the day, or at least one-half a day.   And, of course, there were the twelve tribes of Israel, which included the youngest and most beloved son of Jacob, Benjamin.

The Berry family must have had many beloved sons because they named many of them Benjamin.   From 1720 to 1820 we find at least twelve closely related Benjamin Berrys, a number of whom often congregated in the same place.   Since there are two Benjamins in our ancestry, we must try to untangle who is who.   Failure to untangle has created a number of mistakes in attributing events to the wrong Benjamin.   This is particularly true of our earliest Benjamin ancestor born in 1724, second son of Joseph and Catherine.

These are some of the erroneous events attributed to him:
   -He was the founder of Berryville, now the county seat of Clark County, Virginia.
   -He went to Kentucky with Daniel Boone before the Revolutionary War and was
     lucky to escape massacre by Indians.
   -He was in Boonesboro, Kentucky before 1790.
   -He went with his son, Benjamin, Jr., to Kentucky in the 1790s.
   -He died in Henderson KY in 1820.

Some of these events did occur, but they did not involve our Benjamin ancestor, just other Benjamin Berrys. To sort this all out, I will describe each of the Benjamins perhaps reducing confusion (probably an unattainable goal).   To keep them straight in this paper, I will assign them each a number 1 to 12.   This is not in order of their births, but only in the order described here.

Benjamin 1, sometimes referred to as Benjamin Prince Berry, is our first ancestral Benjamin born in Stafford County, Virginia in 1724.   He married Elizabeth Thornley before 1758 when they made a deed selling property in King George County on the Rappahannock.   This sale was in concert with a sale by his older brother Joseph, who then left for Frederick County in the northwest of Virginia.   Benjamin apparently stayed in King George until 1770 when he sold additional land there and left to join his brothers Joseph and Thomas in Frederick.
Benjamin 1 had seven sons who lived to maturity and several daughters, one of whom was Winifred who will later play a part in this report.   Benjamin remained in Frederick until after the 1810 census.   He died there in 1814-1815.   This is proved by the Frederick County personal and real estate tax lists and a lease document of 1792 regarding which the children of Benjamin 1 assigned their interests on 15 March 1815.      (to be continued...)
_____________
Responsibility for this report is solely with the author, Gerald Jones.   Please send any additions or corrections to jones64k@msn.com or phone me at (520) 825 0728 in Tucson AZ.
Copyright January 2006, Tucson AZ
Revised:   23 Sep 2006

I'm sorry

Please forget everything I said yesterday!   I was working with bad data.   I had Robert's (#75) DYS 464a,b,c,d as 15,16,17,17 when it is actually 15,16,16,17.   Carol Vass is a kind and generous person.   She suggests that perhaps FTDNA changed the numbers in the middle of the night after I'd copied them.   Right.      I expect that I simply miscopied them and I apologize.   I don't yet know whether it will make a difference to my conclusion, but let's take a look.

O.K., the Faires markers, including Robert's correct markers are:
And their distance table using the corrected markers is:Not much change.   It still indicates that Paul, #36, and David, #59, are related; that Paul and Dennis, #31, are probably related; that David and Robert are possibly related; that David and Dennis are unrelated (still probably too few markers); and that Dennis and Robert are unrelated, but now says that Paul and Robert are probably related.   Robert's distances calculated by Dean McGee's Y-Utility are now confirmed by FTDNA:Notice that there are others in the Project just as close to Robert but who are not Faires Berrys.

Again, here's their time to Most Recent Common Ancestor table based on a somewhat liberal 55% standard.   In other words, slightly more probable than not:A little closer but Robert still doesn't seem to be within a genealogically significant time frame with any of the others except perhaps Paul.

And the cladogram:Still suffers from lack of markers.

Well, at least the distance 'mystery' seems to have been cleared up.   In response to my question to the list yesterday about the seeming discrepancy in the count, David Wilson explained that "You count one step for each of the two 464 copies that are different and one step for the difference at 389i.   You do NOT count the difference at 389ii because 389ii is a compound value that already incorporates the value for 389i. (That is, in each case 389ii-389i = 16, so there is no change in the second part of the marker.)"   Now, all I have to do is remember that.

So, what do we have?   I think we just have to ignore David because he simply doesn't have enough markers to tell anything from.   So we have Dennis and Paul probably related, and Robert probably related to Paul but unrelated to Dennis.   Too uncertain for me.   Without more markers I'd still have to call Robert unrelated to the Faires Berrys, especially if Dennis is.

Upon further reflection, particularly in view of Robert's results, I may no longer even think that Dennis is shown to belong in the Faires family.

Whada'ya think?

Houston, we have a problem.

Robert Leo Berry, #75, got his YDNA-37 results last night.   Robert's first markers were estimated to be here on Oct. 6 and the balance by Oct. 20.   So that's not the problem.

The problem is I can't tell if he's related to the Faires Berrys, color coded Fuscia, or not.   First, his haplogroup is predicted R1b1, as their's is.   Here's that family's markers, including Robert's:
Now here is their distance table:As you can see, this indicates that Paul, #36, and David, #59, are related; that Paul and Dennis, #31, are probably related; and that Paul and Robert are possibly related; that David and Robert are possibly related; and that David and Dennis are unrelated (probably too few markers); and that Dennis and Robert are unrelated.   Say what?!

Now here's their time to Most Recent Common Ancestor table based on a somewhat liberal 55% standard.   In other words, slightly more probable than not:
Only a couple of these seem to be within a genealogically significant timeframe, i.e., since the adoption of surnames!

Well, we always have our cladograms to fall back on to explain everything:
Oops!   Only three people compared and then at only 25 markers.   What's going on here?

Folks, we have here the extreme example of the need for more markers.   Maybe if everyone were at 37 markers we could tell that they were related or that they weren't.   Or, maybe it will take 67 markers.   The one thing that is certain is that we can't tell now.

Paul and David have a paper trail that says they're related.   If it is correct their match should hold up as David gets more results.   Dennis does not have a paper connection.   Nor does Robert.   Are they related?

And, if insult need be added to injury, as an illustration that I may have no idea what I'm talking about, FTDNA's 25 Marker Distance Analysis has Robert and Paul as a distance of 2, Dean McGee's distance table has Robert and Paul as a distance of 3, the cladogram indicates a distance of 4 and I count a distance of 4 comparing their markers!   I doubt a relationship but what do I know?

Remember, if any of you are thinking about upgrading you should do it before 5 P.M. Mountain Time today in order not to lose a week in the process!   Read 'FTDNA Upgrade timing (revisited)'.

Whada'ya think?

New member, new view

Rodney Berry, #81, and our 85th participant, joined us yesterday with both yDNA and mtDNA results through the Genographic project.   Rodney is a Y haplogroup R1a1 and an mt haplogroup K.   In addition, he may be a match for our Benton Co. Berrys, color coded Gold.   I say 'may' because he's only tested 12 markers and, as we all know by now, you can get a lot of false matches at 12 markers.   We'll just have to wait for confirmation until he decides to upgrade his test to at least 25, or even better, 37 markers.

The 'new view' is a new yResults page that I've just put on line.   We've always had a 'numerical' view of yDNA Test Results, that is, a seriatim listing of each participant's results.   Now I've added a 'Family' view of yDNA Test Results so that you can now see the results of all the folks in any genetic family grouped together.   Both pages have links on them to be able to toggle back and forth between them.

This 'n That

Not too much going on yesterday so I think I'll post a couple of scenes from last Friday evening's dog walk on the mall.Winchester, Virginia, where I live, is one of those old towns that attempted to save its downtown by turning it into a pedestrian mall.   Quite a number of years ago, now.   I guess there are too many empty storefronts for it to be termed any better than a 'moderate' success.   Anyway, the two dogs you saw on Saturday, Phantom and Edn  -  each gets a walk (most) every day.   Just under two miles for each and it includes the mall to try to acclimate them to people and other animals.   People has been pretty successful, other animals a little more problematical, especially with Edn, the younger one.

The old County Courthouse fronts on the mall and they often have concerts on its steps on Friday evenings during the summer.   This was a somewhat more impromptu one the other day.

Sunday funnies

We have a new member!   Kenneth R. Berry, who has previously tested with Oxford Ancestors (10 markers) and based on that appears to possibly match the Culpeper Co. Berry family, has ordered his 67 marker test!   He is Y-DNA Participant #80 and the 84th member of our Project.

If he does, in fact, turn out to be a Culpeper Co. Berry that family will have some interesting connections to explore.   Only two of the seven trace to a common ancestor.   Two of the seven have tested 25 markers, two have tested 37 and three will have tested 67 markers.

Ah, yes.   Larry, #9, did confirm his pedigree mentioned in yesterday's post and his new SMGF markers have been posted to the yResults page.

In addition, results seem to be starting to arrive from Argus BioSciences.   I wrote them again the other day for my monthly inquiry about my test (order #28 submitted May 16, 2006) and Dr. Whyte replied, "I hope to clear the entire backlog in two weeks or so.   Some samples are delayed because the quality of the sequence is very good, but not excellent, in the region around polyC tracts.   We work hard to ensure that we have excellent sequencing reads in both directions, so it takes longer than we would like.   I hope you can be patient with us a bit longer."   And I have, in fact, started seeing reports of folks having received results.   Not mine, yet, but hopefully soon.

On the subject of Argus BioSciences, I noticed that they have now announced that their DNA analysis of the entire mitochondrial genome (16,569 bases) is now available at an introductory price of $345.   This includes sequence data for the hypervariable region as well as the coding region as illustrated by this diagram from their website -
You will recall that the test that I ordered, and which is still available for $75, was an analysis of the region containing the mitochondrial D-loop, including hypervariable regions HVR1 and HVR2, a total of 1145 base pairs as illustrated by this diagram of theirs - This is the typical 'full' test offered by most other labs as including hypervariable regions HVR1, HVR2 and HVR3.

Deja Vu, all over again!

I don't understand why I wouldn't have seen this before.   I don't believe that Sorenson has added more data so soon after their release earlier this month, but ---

Here's another Pedigree posted to SMGF:
Now here's the yAncestry listing for Laurence Jay Berry, #9:
I will say it this time.      I rest my case.

Here are the SMGF results for the pedigree, above:I'll try to confirm that this is, in fact, Laurence, and then post his 13 new (free) markers.

To repeat, EVERYONE should participate in the Sorenson program.   Here's the link again.   Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation   Read about it.

Remember I told you Monday that I'd just ordered a new camera?   Well, it came Thursday and I've been trying it out.Edn and Phantom

Yet again!

Spending entirely too much time sniffing around the SMGF Y-Chromosome database.   But  --  It seems to have paid off again!

Here's the Pedigree posted to SMGF:

Here's Dennis Doyle Berry's, #30, yAncestry listing:
I won't say it again.   I'll just post his 16 new (free) markers and make sure it was him.

In the meantime, ta-da!   Yesterday's post was identified by John Allen Berry, #39, as his SMGF submission.   He now has ten additional markers in his haplotype.   You can see them posted to his yResults.

EVERYONE should participate in the Sorenson program.   Here's the link again.   Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation   Read about it.

Orange Co., NC Berrys redux

I believe that I have just come across another of our Project members who has partial results at SMGF.   It appears to be one of the Orange Co., NC Berrys.   Here's the evidence.

First, the Orange Co., NC yAncestry postings:
Next, the SMGF pedigree:
I rest my case.

It looks like either John, #39, or Jeffry, #44, has some additional markers:
There is one other possibility.   It could be some other descendant through Ode Berry who is not one of our participants.   I guess we can explore that eventuality if neither John nor Jeff claim the test.

I'm emailing each of the Orange Co., NC Berry Participants and I'll let you know what I find out.

Unrelated

Scott Enfield Berry, #66, got the last of his 67 markers in yesterday, almost a month past due.   I'm not thinking that a lot of folks were waiting with bated breath for these last few markers since Scott represents an entirely new and separate haplotype (family).   At 37 markers his closest matches are distances of 11, 12 and 13, and at 67 markers the only other Berrys with results back are 22 and 26 markers distant.   We certainly have a lot of unrelated folks with the same surname!   Don't think I would have won any money betting on the number of separate Berry families when we started this Project.

I used to be able to count the number of unrelated (to each other) Berry families we had in the Project but we now have enough participants that I've lost that ability.   I can still count how many separate haplotypes we have (46) but....   Well, maybe....   I should be able to physically count them on the yResults page.   OK, I count 38 for the folks who have received results, with four still awaiting results.   Not so hard.

38 separate and unrelated Berry families represented in the Project.

Oh, a reminder.   Remember, if any of you are thinking about upgrading you should do it before 5 P.M. Mountain Time today in order not to lose a week in the process!   Read 'FTDNA Upgrade timing (revisited)'.

Where in the World is Roger Dale Berry?

I've been trying to locate Roger Dale Berry since February of this year when I first discovered how to extract data from the SMGF Y-DNA results page and recognized his lineage posted there.   At least I believe it was he that did the test.   I based my conclusion on my research of the Benton County Berrys which could be in error.

Here's what I found:
associated with this pedigree:which I compared with this pedigree from my Benton Co. Berrys database:
Now granted, William Thomas Berry did have other male children but I'm not aware that any of them besides Roger Francis married an Anderson.   The other thing I don't know for sure is that Roger Francis Berry had no other male children.   Roger Dale Berry is the only one I think I know about.

Since Roger Dale Berry already had his results posted at SMGF and I think I know his male line, I want to invite him to join the Berry Family DNA Project, but I can't locate him to ask.   Using the internet I think I tracked him to Hayti, Missouri but can't be sure and all inquiries and postings have gone unanswered.

Since I have his information I suppose I could just 'conscript' him as a Project member, but that somehow doesn't seem exactly cricket.

Anyone know him?

Hard Times

You may have noticed that I'm having some difficulty recently.   I feel a responsibility to the dozen or so of you who check in here somewhat regularly to see what's going on in Berry DNA.   Trouble is, not much is going on.   We've had no new members since about August 23 and no new results since September 5!   Makes it really difficult to come up with subjects that may be of interest to anyone.

Oh, I did add a new 'search' box to the blog site last week.   Seems to work pretty well.   I just used it to find the date when our last new member ordered.   Just type in the phrase you are looking for and it will search all the blog posts for that phrase.   It's located just below the Archives.

I also just ordered a new pocket camera.   A Casio Exilim EX-Z850.   It's one of those very small cameras that you should always carry with you to record things of interest.   I'll use it to help me over this 'writer's block' by adding some 'slice of life' posts.   Hope you all won't mind.   At least it will give me something to offer you during these dry spells.

I'll probably wish for some of this down time when all the new results start coming in the first of October, or so.

yAncestry page(s)

Thanks to Carol Vass we have four new bios for the Project.   They are short biographical sketches for the earliest known ancestors of Charles Henry Berry, #70, Todd Andrew Berry, #72, D. F. Berry, #76, and C. E. Berry, #77, and may be found on the yAncestry pages.

I say pages, plural, because I'm also in the process of doing a bit of revamping there.   With almost 80 Y-DNA participants the yAncestry page was getting a bit jumbled to try to find whomever you might be looking for.   I've broken the various listed male ancestries out into 'familys', color coded as they are on the yResults page.   So if you don't want to just browse around and are looking for a particular person, first go to the Participants page to determine his participant #, then go to the yResults page to determine his 'family', then go to the yAncestry page and click on the link for that family.   I've just finished putting these together so please let me know if something doesn't seem to be working quite right.

Two of our 'Familys' are actually a bit of a stretch.   The Spartanburg Co., SC Berry family and the English Berry family each have just two people in them who match at only 12 markers and do not have a paper genealogy link.   12 marker matches are so common that the best they could be called would be 'possible' based on the common surname.   A 12 marker match with a paper genealogical link I label 'probable' and reserve the 'verified' label for those having matches of 25 or more markers. I actually prefer a match at 37 markers.

FTDNA Upgrade timing (revisited)

Well, very little DNA is happening currently of interest to Berrys.   I think I'll just tell you the results of my recent investigation into FTDNA batch shipments and then post the current unreceived lab tests schedule.

You will recall a couple of weeks ago I thought that FTDNA shipped its new tests to the lab each week on Wednesday or Thursday.   With little better to do I decided to investigate and here are my results:

wednesday at 12:25 a.m.  -- still here
              1:25 a.m.  -- still here
              4:12 a.m.  -- still here
             10:45 a.m.  -- still here
              2:10 p.m.  -- still here
              4:50 p.m.  -- still here
              5:30 p.m.  -- still here
              6:21 p.m.  -- still here
              7:03 p.m.  -- gone

FTDNA Corporate headquarters is in Houston, Texas and the lab work is done by the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona.   Let's see  --  7:00 p.m. Eastern would be 6:00 p.m. in Houston and 5:00 p.m. in Tucson.   I wonder.   O.K.   It's my opinion that if you are thinking about upgrading it would behoove you to make the decision before 5:00 p.m. Mountain Time on Wednesday if you want to avoid your sample sitting around Houston for up to a week before shipment to the lab.

Things don't look too good for Berry results during September.   Here's our list of tests that are presently in process and their estimated completion dates:

 Kit      
Product              Test               Name                    Batch EstResultDate 
13030   
Y-Refine37to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   James Leon Berry,#7        167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   James Leon Berry           167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   James Leon Berry           167   10/09/2006
15097   
Y-Refine25to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   Jonathan K. Berry,#12      168   10/16/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   Jonathan K. Berry          168   10/16/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   Jonathan K. Berry          168   10/16/2006  
                 Y-DNA26-37 Markers   Jonathan K. Berry          168   10/18/2006 
22287   
Y-Refine37to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   Charles Redmon Berry,#27   167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   Charles Redmon Berry       167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   Charles Redmon Berry       167   10/09/2006  
22442   
Y-Refine25to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   James Dennis Berry,#28     166   10/02/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   James Dennis Berry         166   10/02/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   James Dennis Berry         166   10/02/2006  
26075   
Y-Refine25to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   Walter Michael Berry,#34   167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   Walter Michael Berry       167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   Walter Michael Berry       167   10/09/2006  
                 Y-DNA26-37 Markers   Walter Michael Berry       167   10/11/2006  
37201   
DeepSNP-R1b      DSNP-R1b             Brian Joe Lobley Berry,#49 149   06/09/2006
50278   
DeepSNP-R1b      DSNP-R1b             Keith Thomas Berry,#54     144   05/01/2006  
50372   
Y-Refine37to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   John Edward Berry,#55      168   10/16/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   John Edward Berry          168   10/16/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   John Edward Berry          168   10/16/2006  
64855   
Y-DNA67          Y-DNA61-67 Markers   Scott Enfield Berry,#66    159   08/23/2006  
65968   
Y-DNA12          Y-DNA1-12 Markers    Michael J. Beery,#69       168   10/13/2006  
67364   
Y-Refine37to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   Todd Andrew Berry,#72      169   10/23/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   Todd Andrew Berry          169   10/23/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   Todd Andrew Berry          169   10/23/2006  
69491   
Y-DNA37          Y-DNA13-25 Markers   Robert Leo Berry,#75       167   10/20/2006  
                 Y-DNA26-37 Markers   Robert Leo Berry           167   10/20/2006  
                 Y-DNA1-12 Markers    Robert Leo Berry           167   10/06/2006  
69605  
Y-Refine37to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   C. E. Berry,#77            170   10/30/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   C. E. Berry                170   10/30/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   C. E. Berry                170   10/30/2006  
71367  
Y-DNA12+mtDNA    HVR1                 Michael Curtis Berry,#78   169   11/01/2006  
                 Y-DNA1-12 Markers    Michael Curtis Berry       169   10/20/2006  
N8296  
Y-Refine37to67   Y-DNA38-47 Markers   William A Barry,#79        170   10/30/2006  
                 Y-DNA48-60 Markers   William A Barry            170   10/30/2006  
                 Y-DNA61-67 Markers   William A Barry            170   10/30/2006

As you can see, except for the three tests that are tardy, we can only hope that some are completed early to have more results during September.

SMGF matching

Well, I finally ran into the search limitation at SMGF (Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation).   You will recall that SMGF is a scientific endeavor to link DNA with genealogical lines, is free, and that I believe is something everyone should participate in.

I've written about Sorenson before:

• more DNA news
• Sorenson -
• Other Tests

and, as I said, everyone should do it.

Well, back to my subject.   I wasn't counting but I was using the 'trial and error' method to determine the haplotype of one of the Berrys whose results had been posted to the Y-Chromosome database.   I was just beginning to input different values for the last of 34 markers when I got this message:

Sorry, your query limit for today has been reached.
The number of searches you may perform each day is limited as a security measure to prevent commercial exploitation of the Sorenson Database.

I guess I'll have to be aware of that if I'm trying to retrieve someone's markers for the Project.

Searching the Mitochondrial database at SMGF is much more difficult.    Presently you almost have to already have markers from some other source to compare with.

I'm not 100% certain about this but I think you should be able to tell whether your results might be available or not by checking to see that all the surnames in your matrilineal line are listed in their Maternal Surnames listing.   The part I'm uncertain about is whether 'Protected' (likely living) surnames are included in their listing, or how far back you must look.   I suspect that it might be easier to tell that you are not yet included than that you are, especially if you have a somewhat unusual surname in that line.

Other than checking this listing, there is presently no actual way to search the mitochondrial database by surname.   I do understand, however that they are planning to add that capability at some point and are already working on it.

To Arms!

My friend and (hopefully) cousin, Patrick Fleetwood Berry in Australia has uncovered the Arms of the descendants of Thomas Berry, 1737-1815, of Clonehane, King's County, Ireland.   I can't show them yet because we do not yet have permission from the present owners of the Confirmation but I have seen them and they are, surprisingly, very similar to the emblazonment that I did back in February of this year from the armorial blazon provided me by Patrick at that time.   Neither of us had then seen the actual rendition.   Here's what I did then and a [pretty close] transcription of the confirmation.
   THOMAS BERRY ARMS

These are not, nor are there, a generic Berry Arms.   Arms were typically awarded to a person and his descendants for some noteworthy act or service by that person or, as apparently is the case here, confirmed to a family after long usage having "their origins in the designs used by medieval knights to make their armour and shield stand out in battle or tournaments and enable quick recognition by allies or spectators".   Coat of Arms.

These particular Arms belong, as I said, the the descendants of Thomas Berry who, if their genealogy is correct, include Project members Patrick, #60, and Cameron Berry, #58.

Maria

Well, she's got one to go.   I'm glad to see that she made it.   Seems to me that she's pretty focused for as many distractions as you know she must have.

Actually, I was rooting for Jelena Jankovic in the other match, too, but her head got the best of her after her disagreement with the referee who, in my opinion, wasn't doing his job.   Too bad.

Oh, Yeah.   DNA.

I just discovered last night that I now have partial results posted on the the SMGF site.   Apparently only 14 markers used but eight of them were new!   I've posted them to the Website, jim, #7.   I don't recall when I sent my kit back but I'm sure that it has been at least a year.

I guess that you just have to keep looking.   I had signed up to be notified of updates but have never received one.   If any of you think you might have results there but don't know how to look, just email me and we'll work it out.

I believe that I can glean this much information.   These will be father/mother surnames and perhaps a location.   There are results for Berry/Bowen, maybe Maine;  Berry/Schoonover, Illinois;  Berry/Lamoreaux, Utah;  Berry/Berry, Tennessee;  Berry/Swigard, Pennsylvania;  Berry/Anderson, Tennessee;  Berry/Bracey, Georgia;  Barry/Thomas, North Carolina, and Beery/Yates, North Carolina.   If any of those are your parent's surnames, click here to email me.

Upgrade timing

Our newest member, Bill Barry, #79, and our member whose result discovered him, C. E. Berry, #77, have both just ordered their 67 marker upgrades.   We now have two members whose 67 marker results have been returned and by the end of October we should have twelve!   Well, maybe early November for Bill and C. E. since their orders haven't been sent to the lab yet.

Speaking of that, I've been trying to determine FTDNA's schedule for sending off batches.   I can't really tell from the short time that I've been observing whether it's a set schedule or whether it depends on how many orders have accumulated.   As near as I've been able to determine it seems to be that batches are shipped off on Wednesday evenings or Thursday mornings.   If I can observe anything different I'll post it but if that is correct it means that upgrade decision making ought to be done by Wednesday if you don't want your sample sitting around for several days  --  up to a week  --  before being processed.

Jubilee

After that whirlwind of DNA activity on Tuesday, yesterday was an absolute blank.   No new members.   No new results.   No new anything!   Actually, that's ok.   It gives me a chance to tell you about Jubilee.

I wanted to give a sense of what Jubilee was about and I guess it's sort of a hodge-podge cross between a county fair, a juried craft show, a forest festival and an old-time music festival, with doses of steam show, carnival and battle reenactment thrown in.   It's a four day affair, Friday through Monday, over Labor Day Weekend in central West Virginia.

We camped across the road from a back gate:
The music is in the auction barn.
With dancers -
Singers,
and a professional (really) sound crew.
Outside there's jamming -See, I really was there.
You'll also find forestry contests -
with students from the School of Forestry at West Virginia University.

and the bee-beard guy.I would ordinarily have cropped this photo more, but noticed my grandkids in the lower left corner.

Well, maybe today will have something new about our DNA quest.   I got a little excited on Tuesday when we got two results that were a month before they were predicted to be completed.   The reason for my excitement was that, except for the 2 or 3 past due tests, we have NOTHING that is estimated to be completed in September.   Without new results to report and comment on it's going to be tough to come up with subjects for this blog post each day.

Singing in the Rain

Wow!   Both Norman Berry, #74, and C. E. Berry, #77, received their 37 marker results yesterday afternoon.   A full month ahead of schedule!

Norman has no matches at any level.   C. E. Berry exactly matches David Scott, #59, and Paul Dean Berry, #36, at 12 markers.   But, alas, David has only tested 12 markers and C. E. is a distance of 6 from Paul Dean at 25 markers!   Not related!   Another illustration of the fact that the 12 marker test may be able to tell you that you're not related to another person, but it cannot tell you that you are.

More news!   I asked C. E. to change his Setup Preferences from the restrictive 'display my matches only to my Surname Project' to the more expansive, 'set my matches against the entire database', and he did so.   When I then took a look at his matches, he is a perfect 37 marker match with someone outside the Project named William A. Barry!   I've written him inviting him to join the Project.   Hope he responds!

You will recall that I wrote about Setup Preferences back on June 14.   This is a prime illustration of the importance of making your information as widely available as possible if you hope to find those hitherto unknown but closely related folks out there.   I will repeat what I said then: "If you have difficulty figuring out how to do this and want me to set it for you, either way, just let me know and I'll be happy to assist."

Boy!   When it rains, it pours!   Late last night new results were posted for James Dennis Berry, #28.   Markers 26 to 37 of his upgrade to 67 markers were posted, again, a month early.   This brings three of the five Berry Plain Berrys to 37 markers.   Another Berry Plain Berry, Todd Berry, #72, has also just ordered his upgrade from 37 to 67 markers.

I wonder if FTDNA is still having some kind of problem with its new 67 marker test?   Jay's showed up yesterday right on time but Scott's, #66, is about 2 weeks past due.   I suppose that it's probably just some tricky marker in the new additions.

News Flash!   This morning I woke up to an email from William Anthony Barry!   Remember?   The 37 marker perfect match to C. E.?   He's either a very early riser or a late night guy like me because he sent his email at 2:00 a.m. from Oregon.   And he's our newest member, #79.   Bill started with the Genographic Project and expanded his Y-DNA markers to 37 and has also tested his mitochondrial HVR1 region.   I'll have his info on the website shortly.   Welcome, Bill.

Post labor day post

Got back late enough yesterday to decide to finesse the blog post.   Not much DNA happened while I was gone, anyway.   Edward Jay Berry, #71, got 13 more markers back, apparently on the first, and the balance of his 67 marker test came in this morning.   He's the second Project member to have gotten his 67 marker results, and the first of his Culpeper Co. Berry family.   Others are in the pipeline.   Seven more Project members, to be precise.   The yResults page got updated to include all the ySearch, SMGF and EA YSTR-18 markers for the new results.   Actually, I'd done most of the work before I left but just got the finishing touches done and put it online last night.

The dogs seemed happier than usual to have us back, and we were glad to see them.   I'll try to get a post up about the Jubilee in the near future so you all can see what you're missing.

* * * HIATUS * * *

This time, so I know you can't skip it, I'm putting the bad news first.

We should be ashamed.

Since we invaded Iraq on March 20, 2003:

      2,641 U.S. service members killed.

     19,323 U.S. service members wounded.

 but the Iraqis must be much better off for our being there, right?

  - Iraqi civilian deaths estimated at between 41,041 and 45,613 

          in "W"'s War.

Click here to Think Peace

O.K., enough mea culpa.   This will be a fairly short trip.   Leaving this morning for 'Jubilee' at Weston, WV, and will return sometime Monday.   Actually, it's the Stonewall Jackson Heritage Arts & Crafts Jubilee.   No musical instruction here.   I'll get to hear some good playing and get into a few jams, amongst 'Bum the Wonder Horse' and the man with the bee beard, plus the usual assortment of rare and exotic foods one finds in events such as this.   We're van-camping here and my daughter and her two kids are tent camping beside us.   Should be a good time!