hello all,after many years of research I think ive got as far as I can, however I do have one last brickwall, having had productive help from here in the past here goes.my great grandfather x3 james tune born circa 1806 crowle Lincolnshire and died 1886 kimberworth, I have him provisionally being the son of William tune and sarah meggott james being one of 10 children and the only one not to be baptised, I have tried absolutely everything to prove his birth, I did the family finder dna test(can highly recommend) I then got a gentleman in Australia a descendent of one of james tune siblings to take the dna test and prove once and for all if my findings were correct. whilst waiting for the results sods law a random search FMP I found a poor law removal order Epworth to crowle 1816, for William tune wife sarah and children james and George, all the ages were correct, me thinks could have saved my money but it would become doubly proven. now heres the bit id like help with if there is someone with dna knowledge, to my dismay the test came back completely negative, the recommended parameter for reliable matches is 7cms, I reduced to 3cms and got the following results, 11 shared half segments totalling 41.8 cms the largest one being 5.3. could it possibly be that sarah could have been his mother but William not his father. thankyou for taking the time to read my post as its a little long winded.kind regards to all.stuart.
Stuart,
From what you say it looks like James was the oldest. Have you considered that he may have been illegitimate? Do you have the marriage date of William and Sarah? Could James have been baptised as Meggott?
Dave
hello dave, james was next to the youngest, George who was also on the removal order being the youngest, im definitely thinking james was illegitimate, just looking for someone that could confirm the half match dna results would suggest this to be the case. but thanks for your thoughts dave. stuart.
You dont say how far removed the relative in Australia is, but it is possible for distant cousins to be genetically related but have very low or even no matching cms. This is down to the completely random way in which DNA is passed down and diluted over generations.
So, descended from your 3 x GreatGrandfather, if your relative in Australia was your 4th cousin you're only looking at inheriting an average of 0.2% of DNA. Thats on average, so back to the random nature of DNA around 50% of 4th cousins wouldnt share enough DNA to provide a match even though they might actually be related. It terms of cms a 4th cousin could actually be 0.
So I'm not too sure you can rely too much on the DNA results to determine whether James might be illegitimate!
hello denise, many thanks for that explantion, probably im reading to much into the readings showing up as half matches, it does seem that although dna is so reliable to confirm relationships it is not consistent as I have had quite a few other 4th cousins that do show a lot more dna connection. many thanks stuart.