The DENNISON DNA Project: Patrilineage 1

DENNISON DNA Patrilineage 1

The DENNISONs of this patrilineage who came earliest to America were evidently Scotch-Irish, since they first appear on the western frontiers of Pennsylvania and Virginia in the 1730s and 1740s, and bear the characteristic Scottish given names of this group, as well as the original Scottish form of the surname: “Denniston”. With the addition of two new project members (D-12 and D-13) whose ancestors, possibly brothers, emigrated from Ireland to Canada about 1825, we have for the first time, definite evidence of an Irish origin for this patrilineage. Both these DENNISONs emigrated from Ireland to Canada, not the US, one of them (somewhat oddly) from Cork, at Ireland’s southernmost tip, and the other from County Leitrim in the north, near Ulster. There is also circumstantial evidence that these two had both a third brother and a father who also emigrated to Canada from county Leitrim, and there are records for a DENNISON family in Leitrim which match all the Canadian immigrants in a general way.

The DENNISONs of Ireland and Scotland have been extensively researched by new project member Barry Bradfield, who has shared with me much of his evidence, the most exciting single piece of which for current project members is the record of two children baptized to Daniel and Margaret Dennison of St Mary’s Dublin: an Andrew, baptized in 1721 who died the same year, and a Daniel baptized 15Jun1722. Since this latter record corresponds almost exactly with my estimate (say 1720) of the birth date of Daniel, son of Daniel Denniston of Beverley Manor, and given the comparative rarity of the surname, this piece of evidence from surviving Dublin parish records may well be the “smoking gun” descendants of the SW Virginia lines have been looking for as a guide to further research in Ireland. Only the name of the Dublin wife is wrong—the immigrant Daniel’s wife was named Sarah—but a far-flung emigration to the western wilderness of America, and a much later second marriage there, would go a long way toward explaining why Daniel Denniston of Beverley Manor appears to have had only two surviving children.

Although I have seen a few DENNISONs in the records of the western PA counties (Chester, then its derivative counties, Lancaster and York, and later in the far western counties of Washington and Allegheny) I think it likely that all the other tested project members so far (besides these new Canadian ones) descend from one of two related families who settled in the westernmost VA county of Augusta by 1760. And even though the two family heads, Daniel and John, probably came first to PA, they appear to have left no trace there in the records.

The Southwest Virginia DENNISONs

Daniel1 Denniston, the ancestor of members Alan-05 and Randle-22, purchased land in heart of Augusta County, Virginia, in 1739, and was one of the first few hundred settlers of upper Valley of Virginia, and John1, whom I think was probably the ancestor of Lane-01 and Russell-07 (and perhaps also of John_A-04) was there by 1757. If I am right about John, he was the father of the Robert Denniston who removed from Augusta deeper into SW Virginia, into the VA panhandle, and it was this Robert whom I think more thorough research will show to be the father of Scott Dennison.

The genealogical evidence strongly suggests that Cindy-02 is of the same line as Lane-01, thus a descendant of John1 of AugustaCoVA, but the DNA evidence belies this. However, DENNISON surname project member John G. Denison, who from the genealogical evidence appears to have descended from the same TN Dennistons as John_A-04 (John_A also being a likely descendant of John1) has brought forward evidence linking Scott, the ancestor of Lane-01, to the paterfamilias of a JeffersonCoTN family, one John Denniston who married there in 1794. Ironically, John_G-15 himself is an NPE, but his research still breaks new ground. The DNA haplotypes of Cindy-05 and John_A-04 appear to have a certain affinity with each other, and raise the possibility that Cindy, after all, belongs to the John1 line, though it still all but rules out the possibility that she is a close cousin of Lane. Since this JeffersonCoTN family of DENNISONs has been heretofore neglected, it is likely that further research will suggest that its head was yet another cousin of Daniel1 and John1, and that Cindy’s ancestor was adopted into one of Scott’s descendant families from the JeffersonCoTN line.

Meanwhile, we have three tested DENNISON descendants whose extensions to 111-markers makes it more than probable that they too descend from Daniel1, and I have grouped them into the Daniel1 “closer cousin cluster” accordingly. Yet there is at least one missing link in their genealogies that makes it impossible at this point to attach them with any confidence to the right branch of Daniel1’s descendancy. For Chris, the link may be Wiley4 (David3, Daniel1, Daniel1), and his ancestral pedigree has been attached at that point, but more research needs to be done on this line in the hopes of turning up more convincing evidence and dispelling certain contradictions.

As for the other two likely Daniel1 descendants, these are Scottie-06, and MaryJane-34, and the DNA is screaming at us that these two are very close cousins indeed, while both of their genealogies trace back to AugustaCo, Virginia, where after 1800, only John3 of Daniel1’s descendancy remained. This area has been pretty exhaustively researched by myself and by project member Randle Dennison, and there are only a few remaining resources to be plumbed: it is to be hoped that this will be done at some point, and that we will be able to make the definitive genealogical connection that the DNA tells us must be there.

Other American DENNISONs

There is a well-known family of early New England DENNISONs, descended from William Dennison, baptized 3Feb1571 in Bishop’s Stortford, Hertfordshire, and in fact most DENNISONs were clearly of English, and not Scottish origin, as the surname distribution maps on the DENNISON Surname page indicate. Correspondingly, only a small minority of American DENNISONs came in with the Scotch-Irish of PA, and then migrated south to greater AugustaCoVA, and I consider it extremely unlikely that they are of the same blood as the New England DENNISONs. However, none of the latter has apparently been tested, and only DNA-testing can tell us about that for sure.

DENNISON Patrilineage 1 Descendancies

These patrilineal descendancies closely follow what the members of this project have submitted, and are both plausible and generally backed by evidence. They are also generally consistent with the best published secondary sources listed in the project bibliography. Although there are areas of weakness in these lineages, due to less than exhaustive research, or to inherently sketchy records, a significant and ongoing effort is being made to ensure that what is posted here in abbreviated form represents the best current thinking on these patrilineal descent trees.

Each descendancy begins with the earliest known patriarch of a particular line, and follows the patriline down as far as it is known, and at least to its culmination in a DNA-tested descendant. Since this DNA patrilineage project is focused on tested or testable males of the patriline, these descendancy trees have generally been pruned of daughters or stepchildren of previously married wives. On the other hand, known brothers of project member’s ancestors have been included, and in some cases their patrilineal descendancies have been followed as well, to facilitate the identification of testable patrilineal descendants (living males who in most cases bear the focal surname). Where one of these collateral male lines is known to have petered out (or daughtered out), it will be flagged “no known sons”, NKSons, or words to that effect.

The information provided for each male DENNISON should be just sufficient in most cases to uniquely identify him in the USCensus and other readily available sources. They are not meant to be complete genealogies. The headnotes for each patriarch identify the principal researcher(s) of that line, and often contain links to relevant webpages, compilations, or more complete genealogical material.

The data posted below for each male of the patriline comprise (insofar as is known): his date and place of birth, date and place of death, the name(s) of his wife (or wives), and the date and place his marriage(s). The data are presented in a standardized abbreviated format designed to facilitate scanning and CTL-F searching.

Specific dates (where known) are abbreviated to year dates. Dates that aren’t known specifically, or which aren’t backed by uncontroverted evidence are qualified as either approximate (“abt”, “bef”, “aft”, or “by”), or where they are merely guesstimated, by (“say”). Approximated dates imply supporting evidence which merely fails of complete accuracy, while “say” dates are guesstimates based on typical patterns of the time, place, and social group.

Places are abbreviated to the most important jurisdictional place where records are to be found: for most US states/colonies these are counties; for New England, towns. Places should be specified only where there is either direct evidence, or overwhelming circumstantial evidence, that a vital event occurred in that place and none other, and they shouldn’t be over-specified with respect to the actual supporting evidence.

The yDNA-tested male descendants in whom these descendancies culminate are flagged below with the ShortName of the Principal Researcher of their line (the person who represents the descendant’s haplotype), and by the Project# for the membership, for example, Alan-05.

Notes about the ySTR DNA mutations that mark particular lineages have been interwoven below in red text. Notes about upstream mutations distinctive of particular family sub-branches have been inserted in the descendancy at the point at which they begin to be relevant, and where those same mutations have been inherited by tested descendants, this has been noted right after the name(s) of the tested descendant and Principal Researcher of the line. Please note, however, the careful qualifications in these DNA notes. Most inferences drawn from DNA evidence are probabilistic in nature and one needs to keep an open mind about alternative interpretations, just as one does with the genealogy itself.

Doubtful ancestral links or children are outlined in yellow, e.g. |.

SOUTHERN DENNISONs

1--Daniel Denniston of Augusta County, Virginia, born say 1688

Sources: Alan Denison, Randle Dennison (see RD), and John Robb (see JBR-DENNISON).

Chris Dennison’s line has been attached, below, to that of Wiley4 (David3, Daniel2, Daniel1), and he, Randle, and John Robb, are the sources for that. However, based on Chris’s DNA results, there is virtually no chance that he descends from the immigrant, Daniel1. Chris has been placed here simply because it still appears that Wiley4, and an unknown portion of his descendancy, does belong here, and it facilitates analysis to keep this line together for now.

1--Daniel Denniston (say 1688 - bef 1Dec1749 AugustaCoVA)  m. Sarah c1717

The mutation DYS439+ links Daniel’s line to the patriarch [Robert?], below.

The mutation DYS576- marks the descendancy of Daniel himself.

|--2-Ann Denniston (abt 1718 -);  m. Patrick GILLESPIE;

|--2-Daniel Denniston Jr (say 1720 - abt 1793 FayetteCoKY)  m. Elizabeth _?_

|   |--3-Margaret Denniston (bapt Jan1745/1746 AugustaCoVA -)

|   |--3-Ann Denniston (bapt 2Aug1747 AugustaCoVA -)

|   |--3-Mary Denniston (bapt Feb1748/1749 AugustaCoVA -)

|   |--3-John Denniston (abt Jan1751 AugustaCoVA - 1824)  m1. Mary KING

|   |   |--4-John Dennison (abt 1779 RockinghamCoVA - 1834 AugustaCoVA)

|   |   |   ---m1. abt 1800 Hannah HENDERSON

|   |   |   |--5-Washington H. Dennison (say 1805 AugustaCoVA -)  m. Rebecca GEATING 1826

|   |   |   ---m2. 1811 Martha PARRIS

|   |   |--4-Daniel Dennison (abt 1787 AugustaCoVA - bef 1860 [KY?])  m. Nancy McFALL

|   |   |--4-Samuel M. Dennison (say 1792 AugustaCoVA - aft 1830)

|   |   |   ---m1. Betsey PARRIS 1816, m2. Nancy PARRY 1828 (4 sons in 1830, all by 1st wife)

|   |--3-Sarah Deniston (abt 1754 AugustaCoVA -)  m. James DAVISON

|   |--3-Elizabeth Dennison (abt 1757 AugustaCoVA - bef 1824);  m. Andrew DOUGLAS

|   |--3-David Dennison (abt 1759 AugustaCoVA - 1Oct1823)  m. Mary Ann DOUGLAS

|   |   |--4-James [D|B]. Dennison (1794 KY - 1879 BatesCoMO)

|   |   |   ---m. 1817 Elizabeth WARE, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |--5-Allen B Dennison (1827 MadisonCoOH - 1906 MadisonCoOH)

|   |   |       ---m1. Isabella DOUNTZ

|   |   |   |   |--6-Robert Anderson Dennison (1861 MadisonCoOH - 1916 AlbertaCAN)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. Emma Jane VanSYCKEL

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Harrison Allen Dennison (1889 FayetteCoOH - 1949 FranklinCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. Anna Ruth JUSTICE—sons: Robert Allen, Roger McGill

|   |   |--4-John Dennison (1798 BourbonCoKY - 1853 FranklinCoOH)

|   |   |   ---m. 1824 Jane MOREHEAD, in FranklinCoOH

|   |   |   |--5-James W. Dennison (1830 FranklinCoOH - 1903 FranklinCoOH)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1852 Catharine WARD, in FranklinCoOH

|   |   |   |    sons with NKSPD: Milton W.(1858), William W., James Albert, & Charles

|   |   |   |--5-Burr Wright Dennison (1834 FranklinCoOH - aft1885)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1854 Leah Jean DEMOREST, in FranklinCoOH

|   |   |   |   sons with NKSPD: John Wiley(1859), Isaac Willie, James Albert, & Irwin Wright

|   |   |   |   |--6-Edwin Burr Dennison (1862 FranklinCoOH - 1943 BourbonCoKS)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1885 Lois Ann HARTLEY, in BourbonCoKS

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-William Irl Dennison (1888 KingmanCoKS - 1962 BourbonCoKS)

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1910 Annie Maglin HOGUE; several sons

|   |   |   |--5-Milton White Dennison (1837 FranklinCoOH - 1882 FranklinCoOH)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1866 Mary Ann MYERS, in FranklinCoOH; son John R (1871)

|   |   |--4-Huston Dennison (1802 BourbonCoKY - 1846 FultonCoIL)

|   |   |   ---m. 1825 Sarah ROBEY, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |--5-Martin Dennison (1826 MadisonCoOH - 1905 WashingtonCoIA)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1852 Sarah HOXWORTH, in KnoxCoIL

|   |   |   |   sons with NKSPD: John W.(1859), Francis Marion (1864), Lewis Harley (1874), Baseol Everett

|   |   |   |   |--6-Edward Huston Dennison (1856 WashingtonCoIA - 1934 ScottsBluffCoNE)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1877 Mary ORBAN, in WashingtonCoIA; son William w. at least 1 grandson

|   |   |   |   |--6-David Milton Dennison (1866 WashingtonCoIA - 1945 JohnsonCoIA)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1892 Jane Ann RICE, in WashingtonCoIA; sons Charles Martin, Cecil Maude, Max Dale

|   |   |   |--5-John Huston Dennison (1836 FranklinCoOH - 1924 KnoxCoIL)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1862 Theresa Callie HUBER, in KnoxCoIL; sons Silas H. (1865), Amos L, Leven W.

|   |   |--4-Wiley Denison (say 1800 - say 1834)

|   |   |   ---m. 1827 Sally WILSON, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   | --5-John Denison (abt 1830 - by 1900)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1852 Margaret WICKELL, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--6-William Roland Denison (1853 MadisonCoOH - 1920 PrattCoKS);

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. Margaret J. LEWIS; son William H.(1873 in IA)

|   |   |   |   |--6-George McDowell Denison (1858 ClarkCoMO - 1926 KeokukCoIA);

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1880 Ella Emma ROWE, in KeokukCoIA

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-James Burton Denison (1881 IowaCoIA - 1954 VermillionCoIL);

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. 1905 Emma Gertrude ECKHART, WashingtonCoIA; sons Claude Wayne, Carl Everette

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-John Elmer Denison (1890 PrattCoKS - 1954 VermillionCoIL);

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1914 Carrie Crawford PLECKER in JohnsonCoIA;

|   |   |   |   |        sons Boyd Elmer (1918), Dallas Eugene, Donald Irvin, Richard Dean

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-George Wiley Denison (1892 PrattCoKS - 1974 IA)

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. 1916 Bessie Mae AGGSON; sons George Sherm (1921), Ross Dale (1923, KeokukCoIA)

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Otto Willie Dennison (1898 KeokukCoIA - 1983 LinnCoIA);

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1917 Celesta Flossie HRADEK, in JohnsonCoIA;

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--8-Merlin Otto Dennison (1918 WashingtonCoIA - 1969 JohnsonCoIA)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. 1946 Sylvia Ann KRCHMAR

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |--9-Gary Allen Dennison    *** Chris-23 ***
                                                        (has mutation DYS439- (not +), and lacks DYS576-)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |-10-Christopher Allen Dennison    

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Wayne Denison (1901 JohnsonCoIA - 1973 KeokukCoIA);

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1923 Gladys E. HALL; son Gerald Wayne

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Henry Evert Denison (1903 KeokukCoIA - 1968);

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1923 Hazel Esther HARRIS; no known sons

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Earl Denison (1906 IA -)

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1926 Maud Laura HALL; several sons

|   |   |   |--5-McDowell White Denison (1831 FountainCoIN - 1905 SheridanCoKS)

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1854 Lucinda CLARRIDGE, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--6- Savernus Augustus Denison (1855 WashingtonCoIA -)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1880 Clarissa Saline WALKER; son Ray (1895)

|   |   |   |   |--6-William Wiley Denison (1856 WashingtonCoIA - 1941 WashingtonCoIA

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1881 Mary Minerva MEEKS, in WashingtonCoIA; sons Elmer Linn, Russell Theodore

|   |   |   |   |--6-Luther Courtney Denison (1858 WashingtonCoIA - 1922 WashingtonCoIA)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m1. Sarah Anna McMURRAY; no known sons

|   |   |   |   |--6-Denver Harvey Denison (1866 WashingtonCoIA - ? WashingtonCoIA)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. Rilla JARVIS; no known sons

|   |   |--4-Nancy Mille Dennison (1810 MadisonCoOH -)

|   |   |   ---m. 1829 Samuel C. CREATH, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |    Samuel CREATH was a brother of John Creath, guardian to John & McDowell Dennison

|   |--3-James Denniston (abt 1761 - abt 1831)  m. Hannah FULTON

|   |   |--4-Daniel David Dennison (1794 - 1832 BourbonCoKY)  m. Elizabeth MORROW

|   |   |   |--5-John Dennison (1827 BourbonCoKY - 1878 FayetteCoKY)  m. Malinda MORROW

|   |   |   |   |--6-John J. Dennison (1854 BourbonCoKY - 1925 KY)  m1. Julia Ann RENICK

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Abraham Renick Denison (1886 BourbonCoKY - 1967 ButlerCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |        ---m1. Tinnie Emma COLLINS

|   |   |   |   |   |   | --8-Woodrow Wilson Dennison (1919 BourbonCoKY -)  m. Ellen Jane BEYER

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   | --9-Robert Dennison  m. Kim PITCHER

|   |   |   |   |         ---m2. Margaret CASTATOR—sons: William Gobel, Howard Herman

|   |   |--4-John Dennison (abt 1790 - 1829 BourbonCoKY)  m. Rebecca MARSHALL

|   |   |   |--5-Shelby James Dennison (1815 BourbonCoKY -)  m. Susan BARKER

|   |   |   |   |--6-Jacob S. Dennison (1842 MonroeCoMO -)

|   |   |   |        ---m. Sarah Jane _?_;  sons: James, Eddie, George

|   |   |   |   |--6-also sons: Dillard, Thomas, Willard Filmore, Robert

|   |--3-Eleanor Dennison (abt 1763 - bef 1825)  m. William RICE

|   |--3-Isabella Helena Denniston (1765 - bef 1833)  m. Hamilton ATCHISON Sr.

|   |--3-William Denison (1767 AugustaCoVA - 1838 LawrenceCoIL)  m. Margaret DUNLAP

|   |   |--4-Robert Denison (1794 - 1863)  m1. Nancy EASTHAM

|   |   |   |--5-Braxton Eason Denison (1823 LawrenceCoIL - 1903 LawrenceCoIL)

|   |   |   |   ---m. Harriet Malinda JORDAN

|   |   |   |   |--6-Victor M. Denison (1870 LawrCoIL - 1942 LawrCoIL)  m. Emma STIVERS

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Owen Foster Denison (1893 LawrenceCoIL-1947 LawrenceCoIL)  

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m1. Jennie Rae COLEMAN

|   |   |   |   |   |   | --8-Robert Patrick Denison  

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Hugh Braxton Denison (1899 LawrenceCoIL-1952)  

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. Dorothy HOOD—son Braxton

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Ellis Mack Denison (1903 LawrenceCoIL - 1953 WabashCoIL)

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. Hazel Frances BUCHANAN—sons Ellis Mack Jr, Donald

|   |   |--4-Daniel (1795 FayetteCoKY - 1868 WapelloCoIA)  m. Sally Scott RIGGS

|   |   |   |--5-William S. Denison (1830 IL - aft 1900)  m. Hannah J. _?_

|   |   |   |   |--6-Elvadus Scott Denison (1857 IA - 1912 KS)

|   |   |   |        ---m. Harriettia Maye RICARDS

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-John Francis Denison (1900 ChaseCoKS - 1989 MorrisCoKS)

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. Harriet Daisy EDWARDS;  sons: John Francis Jr., Charles Scott

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Benjamin Scott Denison (1905 ChaseCoKS - 1987 JoaquinCoCA)

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. Frances Victoria ALBIN;  son: Benjamin Scott Jr.

|   |   |--4-Alexander D. Denison (1807 FayetteCoKY - 1871 LawrenceCoIL)  m. Mary Ann CRANE

|   |   |   |--5-William Dunlap Denison (1850 LawrenceCoIL - 1931 LawrenceCoIL)

|   |   |        ---m. Sallie Sappington RYAN

|   |   |   |   |--6-Raymond Ryan Denison (1885 LawrenceCoIL-1943 RichmondCoVA)

|   |   |   |        ---m. Barbara CROW

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Raymond Robert Denison (1913 CrowWingCoMN - 1987 HennepinCoMN)

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. Pauline Marie FARMER

|   |   |   |   |   |    |--8-sons Robert John, Thomas Haigh, William Walter, Charles Raymond

|   |   |   |   |--6-Roy Everett Denison (1892 LawrenceCoIL - 1947 LawrenceCoIL);  m. Ruth ADAMS

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Roy Adams Denison (1918 LawrenceCoIL - 1977 ChampaignCoIL)

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m1. Ruth Melva HUMPHREY

|   |   |   |   |   |   | --8-Alan Jay Denison    *** Alan-05 ***
                                                                 (mutations DYS439+, 576-)

|   |   |   |   |--6-Walter Harold Denison (1895 LawrenceCoIL - 1953 LawrenceCoIL);  m. Nina M. LOWE

|   |   |   |--5-Henry Howard Denison (1856 - 1902);  m. Mary E. SAUMS

|   |   |--4-George Madison Denison (1809 - 1846)  m. Isabella UNDERWOOD

|   |--3-Thomas Denison (abt Dec1768 - d.aft 1844)

|   |   |--m. 1792 Jane DOUGLAS, in BourbonCoKY

|   |   |--4-James Henry Denison (1794 BourbonCoKY - 1845 MadisonCoOH)

|   |   |   |--m. 1819 Margaret ALKIRE

|   |   |   |--5-Griffin A Denison (1819 MadisonCoOH - 1863 Nashville, MadisonCoTN)

|   |   |   |   |--m1. 1842 Catherine WICKELL, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--6-John William Dennison (1842 MadisonCoOH - 1924 ClarkCoMO)

|   |   |   |   |   |--m. 1868 Rozilla THOMAS, in PickawayCoOH

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Edgar Griffin Dennison (1869 MadisonCoOH - 1935 StClairCoMO)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--m1. Lenora NEWMAN

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--sons: John Ernest, John Dale, Elmer Newman

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Francis Joseph (1871 MadisonCoOH - 1945 LeeCoIA)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--m. 1897 Virginia MOSLEY

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--son: Raymond Mosley

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Warner Huston Dennison (1875 MadisonCoOH - 1953 MorganCoIL)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--married twice—NKSons

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Ernest Howard Dennison (1877 MadisonCoOH - 1955 SchuylerCoMO)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--m. 1898 Lutie Myrtle RANDLE

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--8-Ernest Howard Dennison

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   | --9-T. Randle Dennison     *** Randle-22 ***
                                                                             (mutations DYS439+, 576-)

|   |   |   |   |--6-Samuel Huston Denison (1851 MadisonCoOH - 1920 BlaineCoOK)

|   |   |   |   |   |--m. 1879 Melissa Belle BLANTON

|   |   |   |   |   |--sons: Howard Griffin, John William, Franklin Houston, Leonard Green

|   |   |   |   |--6-Greene Henry Denison (1854 MadisonCoOH - 1908 MadisonCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |   |--m. 1877 Susan A BAUGHMAN, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |   |--son: Robert N

|   |   |   |   |--m2. 1859 Isabella SCHNELL, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--6-Joseph McClelland Denison (1862 MadisonCoOH - 1940 MadisonCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |   |--m. 1889 Louisa B GRAHAM, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |   |--son: Griffin Denison

|   |   |   |--5-Henry Green Clay Denison (1820 MadisonCoOH - 1907 MadisonCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |--m. 1848 Ellen J COOK, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--sons: William H, John W

|   |   |   |--5-John William Dennison (1822 OH - 1920 MadisonCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |--m. Hester A SCHRIVER

|   |   |   |   |--sons: James A, John A

|   |   |   |--5-Thomas Denison (Aug1825 - Oct1825)

|   |   |   |--5-James Monroe Denison (1827 MadisonCoOH - 1921 PickawayCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |--m. 1849 Sevena WARREN, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--sons: William H, Henry Harrison, Abraham Jonathan, Albert Sherman, Charles, George

|   |   |   |--5-William H Dennison (1831 MadisonCoOH - 1906 FranklinCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |--m. 1857 Alice Emeline SALE, in MadisonCoOH

|   |   |   |   |--son: Isaac M

|   |   |   |--5-Harvey Denison (1832 MadisonCoOH -)

|   |   |   |--5-Abraham Denison (1835 MadisonCoOH - 1863 at Chickmauga)

|   |   |--4-Thomas Denison (abt 1798 - abt 1823 MadisonCoOH)  m. 1818 Elizabeth KERR—NSons

|   |   |--4-Joseph Denison (abt 1800 BourbonCoKY - 1849 SchuylerCoIL)

|   |   |   |--m. 1825 Martha MOORE, FayetteCoOH

|   |   |   |—sons: George W, Benjamin, and Jasper Moore Denison

|   |   |--4-John Denison (abt 1802 BourbonCoKY - aft 1800)

|   |   |   |--m. 1832 Barbara MOORE, FayetteCoOH

|   |   |   |--5-Philip Moore Denison (1833 FayetteCoOH - 1913 DarkeCoOH)

|   |   |   |   |--m. 1864 Rhoda WARREN

|   |   |   |   |—sons:Sherman Moore, John E, William Anthony, Edward Harry, & Clark A Denison

|   |   |--4-George Washington Denison (1813 MadisonCoOH - 1843 MadisonCoOH)—NSons

|   |--3-Catherine Denison b.1770, d.aft 1850

|   |--3-Daniel Dennison b.abt 1772, d.Nov1824

invisible writing

1--James A. Denison of Augusta County, Virginia, born abt 1829

Source: Scottie Dennison, who has published key source material
  for this family on her DENNISON website.

1--James A. Denison (abt 1829 - 1859)  m. Jane GIVEN 1854

|--2-John Elliot Denison (1858 NicholasCoWV - 1922 RockbridgeCoVA)

|   ---m. Fannie Shelton HENDERSON

|   |--3-Walter Elliot Bruce Denison (1900 RockbridgeCoVA - 1984 StauntonVA)

|   |   ---m. Vernie B. McCRORY

|   |   |--4-Boyd Emory Dennison (1921 RockbridgeCoVA - 1978 StauntonVA)

|   |   |   ---m. Rose Chambers GOODE

|   |   |   |--5-John Emory Dennison     *** Scottie-06 ***
                                                                         (mutation DYS576-)

invisible writing

1--John Dennison of Augusta County, Virginia, born abt 1820

Source: MaryJane Michael

1--John Dennison (abt 1820VA - Mar1856 AugustaCoVA)

---m. 1840 Sarah LANDES, in AugustaCoVA

|--2-William Harvey Dennison (1843 VA - 1929 AugustaCoVA)

|   ---m1. 1870 Sarah Caroline REEVES, in AugustaCoVA

|   |--3-William R Dennison (1872 VA - 1942 StLouisMO)

|   |--3-John Emet Dennison (1874 VA - 1935 JeffersonCoWV)

|   ---m2. 1880 Margaret Vance WILLIAMS, in BathCoVA

|   |--3-Charles William Dennison (1886 VA - 1925 MontgomeryCoOH)

|   |--3-Odis Benjamin Dennison (1887 RockinghamCoVA - 1946 PiattCoIL)

|   |--3-Walter Franklin Dennison (1890 - 1969 AugustaCoVA)

|   |--3-Hensel Givens Dennison (1892 AugustaCoVA - 1983 AugustaCoVA)

|   |   ---m. 1916 Nellie Irene SHULL

|   |   |--4-Garland Cornell Dennison     *** MaryJane-34 ***
                                                                                    (mutation DYS576-)

|   |--3-James Warren Dennison (1894 - 1895)

|   |--3-Roy Holt Dennison (1897 - 1992 BerksCoPA)

|   |--3-Elwood Friend Dennison (1907 VA - 1996 BotetourtCoVA)

|--2-M J Dennison (abt 1846 - aft 14Jul1860)

|--2-John M Dennison (abt 1849 - 1853 AugustaCoVA)

|--2-David A Dennison (abt 1852 - 1853 AugustaCoVA)

invisible writing

1-[Robert?, Joseph??] Denniston of Washington County, Virginia, born abt 1750

Robert was likely the (grand)son of the John1 Denniston found in AugustaCo by the mid-1750s.

Sources: John Robb, on John1 of Augusta and his sons (Appendix A of JBR-DENNISON),
and on Robert of WashingtonCoVA; Cindy Denniston’s extensive descendancy for Scott;
and Lane Teaff with material on his son, James.

1--[Robert?, Joseph??] (abt 1750 - bef 14Jan1817)

---m1. Margaret Dougherty abt 1777

The mutation DYS439+ links this descendancy of [Robert?] to that of Daniel Denniston, above.

However, because these descendants lack the DYS576- mutation, they’re not descendants of Daniel.

|--2-William Denniston (say 1785 -)  m. Rachel _?_ say 1810

|--2-Samuel Denniston (say 1790 -)

---[m2. Rachel SCOTT?] say 1793

|--2-Scott Denniston (1794 WashingtonCoVA - 1882 RussellCoVA)

|   ---m. Sarah Hannah UMBARGER 3Sep1820

|   |--3-Leah Denniston (abt 1821 - abt 1836 SmythCoVA)

|   |--3-Robert Denniston (abt 1823 WashingtonCoIN -)  m. Annie Eliza PATRICK

|   |   |--4-John L Denniston (abt 1855 SmythCoVA -)

|   |   |--4-James W Denniston (abt 1857 SmythCoVA -)

|   |   |--4-Margaret Ann Denniston (1861 KY - 1934 MenifeeCoKY)

|   |   |    ---m. James Philip DENNISTON (son of her Uncle James)

|   |--3-Rachel Denniston (1824 WashingtonCoIN- 1890 RussellCoVA)  m. Hezekiah PATRICK

|   |--3-Sarah J. Denniston (abt 1826 WashingtonCoIN - 1890)  m. William Samuel MOORE

|   |--3-Philip Jefferson Denniston (1828 WytheCoVA - 1908 MenifeeCoKY)

|   |   ---m. Martha Vermillion JOHNSON 1853

|   |   |--4-George Washington Denniston (1855 RussellCoVA - 1902 MenifeeCoKY)

|   |   |   ---m1. Nancy HOGAN—son George

|   |   |   ---m3. Martha MORAN

|   |   |   |--5-Elbert Franklin Denniston (1878 - 1958 MenifeeCoKY)  m. Melinda CASTLE

|   |   |   |   |--6-Otha Charles Denniston (1904-1982)  m. Evaline Esther MARTIN

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-sons: George Franklin, Charles David, & Ronald Martin

|   |   |   |   |--6-George Onan Denniston (1910-1977)  m. Mabel STINNETT

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-sons: George Robert & Billy G.

|   |   |   |--5-Forecher B. Denniston (1892 KY - 1958)  m. Nancy COURTNEY

|   |   |   |   |--6-Fred Denniston Jr  m2. Frances WAGONER—son Fred G.

|   |   |--4-Christopher Columbus Denniston (1858 RussellCoVA - 1920)  m. Madge WELLS

|   |   |   |--5-Thomas H. Denniston (1878 - 1920)  m1. Hazel GREEN

|   |   |   |   |--6-Edward Denniston  m. Ruth BRADLEY—son Charles Edward

|   |   |   |--5-Sewall Moody Denniston (1880 - 1950)  m. May Lou CAMPBELL

|   |   |   |   |--6-Jack Denniston (1904-1964)—son Sewall

|   |   |   |--5-Leonard W Denniston (1882 - 1925)  m. Rosie RUTHERFORD

|   |   |   |   |--6-Patrick D.—sons: Leonard,Michael,Denny,Omer,Homer,Robert,Jack,Donald

|   |   |   |--5-Richard J Denniston m. Mildred—sons: Robert &James

|   |   |   |--5-Charles Oren Denniston (1894-1958)  m. Eunice _?_—sons: Stanley &Jack

|   |   |   |--5-William Arthur Denniston—son Gene Carl

|   |   |   |--5-James Bruce Denniston  m. Alice Gertrude HUTTON—son Thomas Bruce

|   |   |--4-Joe Clinton Denniston (1870 - 1962)  m. Nancy Anne GRIFFEY

|   |   |   |--5-Arlie Denniston (1892 - 1972)  m. Lula BROWN—sons: Norval & Thomas C.

|   |--3-Mary E. Denniston (1831 WytheCoVA -1811)  m. Thomas Preston Jones 1858

|   |--3-Margaret Denniston (abt 1832 SmythCoVA -);  m. William TAYLOR

|   |--3-John R. Denniston (abt 1834 SmythCoVA -);  m. Anna Eliza THOMAS

|   |--3-Regina Denniston (1836 SmythCoVA - 1892 RussellCoVA)  m. John William STALLARD

|   |--3-James W. Denniston (abt 1837 SmythCoVA - 1864 FtDelawareDE) 1858

|   |   ---m. 1858 Sarah Jane McGRAW

|   |    |--4-William Robert Denniston (1861 SmythCoVA - 1941 RedRiverCoTX)

|   |         ---m. 1884 Sarah Ellen PAXTON

|   |   |   |--5-Paul Arthur Denison (1889 AdamsCoIL - 1955)  m1. Ida Bell DISKER

|   |   |   |   |--6-sons: Charles Tracy, Leroy Paul, James Robert

|   |   |   |--5-Glenn Davis Denison (1891 AdamsCoIL - 1950)  m. Dorcia BARNHAM

|   |   |   |   |--6-sons: Philip Eugene, Ray Glenn

|   |   |   |--5-Carl William Denison (1896 RedRiverCoTX - aft 1963)  m. 1919 Beulah EAVES

|   |   |   |   |--6-Carl William Denison Jr (1921 CrosbyCoTX - 1991 WilliamsonCoTX);

|   |   |   |        ---m. Emily Violet SITTON—son Robert Lawrence

|   |   |   |   |--6-Howard Gilmer Denison   *** Lane-01 ***   
                                                                  (mutations DYS439+, 449+, CDYa-)

|   |   |   |--5-Dallas Denver Snavely Denison (1900 RedRiverCoTX - 1892 TerryCoTX)

|   |   |        ---m. Ida Gladys CONDRON

|   |   |   |   |--6-James Dickey Denison

|   |   |   |--5-James Russell Paxton Denison (1904 RedRiverCoTX - 2003 AR)

|   |   |        ---m. Glenda CRAWFORD

|   |   |   |   |--6-John Shannon Denison

|   |   |   |   |--6-Russell Paxton Denison   *** Russell-07 ***
                                                                (mutations DYS439+, 449+, CDYa-, CDYb+)

|   |   |--4-James Philip Denniston (1862 RussellCoVA - 1932 MenifeeCoKY)

|   |       ---m. 1863 Margaret Ann DENNISTON (dau of his Uncle Robert)

|   |   |   |--5-James Edgar Denniston (1893 MorganCoKY - 1878 LuzerneCoPA)

|   |   |       ---m1. Stella LITTLE

|   |   |   |   |--6-Raymond Denison (1901 PowellCoKY - 1989 GreeneCoOH)  m. Imogene PECK

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Chuck Denniston

|   |   |       ---m2. Eva STAPLETON

|   |   |   |   |--6-John Henry Denison (1925 PowellCoKY - 1989 AllenCoIN)

|   |   |   |        ---m. Dorothy POWERS

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-John Allen Denniston

|   |   |   |   |--6-Levi Denison (1932 BathCoKY - 2004 WabashCoIN)  m. Sheila Ann SALYER

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Jeffrey A. Denniston

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Steven J. Denniston   *** Cindy-02 ***
                                                            (mutations DYS464, 456+, 570+, CDYa-, CDYb-2)

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Rodney K. Denniston

|   |--3-Helen C. Denniston (1840 SmythCoVA -1922)  m1. Fullen TAYLOR, m2. Preston JONES

|   |   |   |--5-Russell G. Denniston (1895 KY - 1969 MenifeeCoKY)  m. Ada Bell HUR

|   |   |   |   |--6-Willard Denniston

|   |   |   |   |--6-Wilburn Denniston

|   |   |   |   |--6-Milburn Denniston

|   |   |   |--5-Leonard Denniston (1899 KY - 1969 KY)

|   |   |   |--5-Robert F Denniston (1887 KY -)  m. Mary Lee

|--2-John Denniston (say 1798 -)

invisible writing

invisible writing

1--John Denniston of Virginia, say 1770

SourcesJohn A. Dennison and John Robb,
with important evidence provided by John G. Denison.

1--John Denniston (say 1770 VA - bef 4Jul1842)

|--m. 1794 Phebe Williams, in JeffersonCoTN

|--2-James Dennison (abt 1812 TN - after 1880)

|   |--m. 1833 Emeline MILLIKEN, in GraingerCoTN

|   |--3-Samuel M Dennison (abt 1835 TN -)  m. bef 1890 Lizzie _?_

|   |--3-William Dennison (abt 1849 TN - aft 10Oct1887)

|   |--3-[James?] Allen Dennison (1851 TN - aft 1920)

|   |   |--m1. 1873 Mary A[gnes? or “Nancy”] HILL, in HamblenCoTN

|   |   |--4-Samuel Lillard Dennison (1881 BristolTN - 1942 New OrleansLA)

|   |   |   |--m3. abt 1921 Angeline _?_

|   |   |   |   |--5-John Allen Dennison (1924 FtWorthTX - BeaumontTX 2006)

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--6-John Allen Dennison   *** John_A-04 ***
                                                                                    (mutations DYS439+, CDYa-, 570+, 456--)

|   |   |--m2. 1890 Mary E. TRAVIS, in HamblenCoTN

|   |   |--m3. 1904 Maggie MEADOWS, in HamblenCoTN

NORTHERN TIER (& IRISH) DENNISONs

invisible writing

1--[?John Dennison of county Leitrim, Ireland, born abt 1758]

Source: Barry Bradfield, who has researched DENNISONs extensively in Ireland
  and elsewhere)

1--[?John Dennison (abt 1758 Ireland - 1842 NewBrunswickCAN)]

|--m. say 1780, Mary CAMPBELL]

The mutation DYS446- links this line to that of Barry-13, below.

|--2-John Dennison (say 1785 co.LeitrimIRE - 1851 OntarioCAN)

|   ---m. 1819 Catherine ALEXANDER, in IRE

|   |--3-Alexander Dennison (1817 co.LeitrimIRE -)

|   |--3-John Dennison (1819 co.LeitrimIRE -)

|   |--3-Robert Dennison (1820 co.LeitrimIRE - 1905 HuronCoCAN)

|   |--3-James Dennison (1826 IRE - 1897 CalhounCoMI)

|   |--3-Thomas Dennison (abt 1838 OntarioCAN - OntarioCAN)

|   |--3-Ingram Dennison (1843 OntarioCAN - 1925 ShiawasseeCoMI)

|   |--3-William Dennison (1844 PeelCo,OntarioCAN - 1915 HuronCo,OntarioCAN)

|   |   |--m. 1873 Martha Ann INGRAM, in DetroitMI

|   |   |--4-William John Dennison (1874 HuronCo,OntarioCAN - 1945 OntarioCAN)

|   |   |--4-Alexander Isaiah Dennison (1878 -)  m. 1900 Clara Edith CLARK

|   |   |--4-James Thomas Dennison (1880 HuronCo,OntarioCAN -) m. 1910 Maude JOHNSTON

|   |   |--4-Alfred Wesley Dennison (1883 HuronCo,OntarioCAN -) m. 1903 Lillian M. WILTSIE

|   |   |--4-Joseph Edward Dennison (1885 OntarioCAN - 1960 OntarioCAN)

|   |   |   |--m.1907 Mable Clara COLLINS, in Palmerston,OntarioCAN

|   |   |   |--5-Louis Claire Dennison

|   |   |   |   |--6-Robert Edward Dennison     *** Barry-13 ***
                                                                                    (also downstream mutations DYS458+, 481-, and 576-)

|   |   |--4-Robert Edwin Dennison (1896 OntarioCAN); m. 1920 Marjory HILBORN

invisible writing

1--[_?_]

Source: Barry Bradfield, and Elaine Baker, who is a direct descendant of 2-James.

1--[_?_]

The mutation DYS446- links this line to that of Barry-12, above.

|--2-James Dennison (abt 1801 CorkIRE - 1869 PeelCo,OntarioCAN)

|   ---m. 1843 Mary Ann McBRIDE, in OntarioCAN

|   |--3-William Alexander Dennison (1851 YorkCo,OntarioCAN - 1922 PeelCo,OntarioCAN)

|   |   |--m. 1879 Anne Elizabeth DOSEWELL, in PeelCo,OntarioCAN

|   |   |--4-William Wesley Dennison (1883 PeelCo, OntarioCAN - 1968 Hope, BritishColumbiaCAN)

|   |   |   |--m. 1907 Annie Josephine BROWN, in PeelCo,OntarioCAN

|   |   |   |--5-Sidney Dennison

|   |   |   |   |--6-Sidney Robert Dennison     *** Barry-12 (Sidney Dennison) ***
                                                                                    (still the RPH, despite mutation DYS446-)

|   |   |   |--5-George Alexander Dennison (1910 SaskatchewanCAN - 1959 AlbertaCAN)

invisible writing

1--Hugh Denniston of County Tyrone, Ireland, abt 1784

SourcesTee Branch and Barry Bradfield, who has contributed this research paper
on the Dennistons of County Tyrone, Ireland, and possible relatives.

1-Hugh Denniston (abt 1784 CoTyroneIRE - 1871 WashingtonCoNY)

|--m. say 1808 Ann GALBRAITH in CoTyroneIRE

|--2-Andrew Dennison (abt 1816 CoTyroneIRE - 1881 WashingtonCoNY)

|   |--say 1840 Jane McFARLAND

|   |--3-Thomas Henry Dennison (abt 1844 CoTyroneIRE - 1884 SenecaCoNY)

|   |   |--m. 1867 Mary GALBRAITH, in WashingtonCoNY

|   |   |--4-Thomas Arthur Dennison (1868 IL -)

|   |   |   |--m. 1889 Delia BROUSSEAU, in WebsterMA

|   |   |   |--5-Thomas Arthur Dennison (1890 WorcesterCoMA - 1956 HampdenCoMA)

|   |   |   |   |--m. 1909 Nettie Margaret TRAVIS, in ColumbiaCoNY

|   |   |   |   |--6-William Dennison (1913 WindhamCoVT - 1984 SaratogaCoNY)

|   |   |   |   |   |--m. Rose BAIRD

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Wayne Dennison

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--8-William Dennison   *** Tee-20 ***
                                                                                    (mutations DYS437-, 570+)

invisible writing

invisible writing

1--Alexander Denniston of County Longford, Ireland, born abt 1663

SourcesBarry Bradfield, whose extensive research on this line is presented in his paper “Ronald Denniston of Longford”. Despite the title, this paper covers also the descendancy of Ronald’s American cousin Wayne Denniston (project member #19), and both Wayne and Ronnie of Ireland have assisted with information on their particular lines of descent.

1-Alexander (abt 1663 - 1723 Drummeel, LongfordIRE)

The mutation DYS446-, shared by Wayne-19 and Barry-25(Ronald), below, links them also with their cousins Barry-13(Robert), and Barry-12(Sidney), who likely descend also from Alexander or his close kin.

|--m1. abt 1685 _?_ LEWIS, dau Samuel LEWIS, merchant of London

|--2-Samuel Denniston (abt 1687 - abt 1747) of Drummeel, LongfordIRE)

|   ---m. _?_

|   |--3-Edward Denniston (abt 1715 - aft 1782) of Drummeel, LongfordIRE

|   |   ---m. _?_

The mutation CDYb+ shared by Wayne-19 and Barry-25(Ronald), below, is consistent with their common descent from Alexander’s great-grandson, Samuel Denniston (c1744-1804), of County Longford.

|   |   |--4-Samuel Denniston (abt 1744 - 1804) of Drummeel, Drumnacross, LongfordIRE

|   |   |   ---m. Rebecca _?_

|   |   |   |--5-Edward Denniston (abt 1770 Longford - aft 1834) of Drumnacross, LongfordIRE

|   |   |   |   ---m. 1804 Ellen _?_

|   |   |   |   |--6-Samuel Denniston (1804 - 1876) of Drumncross, LongfordIRE

|   |   |   |   |   ---m. Fanny SPEIR

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Edward Denniston (1850 - 1917) of Drumnacross, LongfordIRE

|   |   |   |   |   |    ---m. 1894 (3rd cousin) Margaret Ann DENNISTON, in County Mayo

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--8- Samuel Denniston (1896 -) of Drumnacross, LongfordIRE

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1920 Georgina GREY

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |--9-Edward Samuel Denniston

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |-10- Ronald Samuel Denniston   *** Barry-25 ***
                                                                                    (mutations DYS446-, CDYb+)

|   |   |   |--5-Samuel (“Perpetual Motion”)Denniston (say 1772 LongfordIRE - say 1852 WayneCoMI)

|   |   |   |   ---m. abt 1797 Margaret _?_

|   |   |   |   |--6-Samuel Denniston (abt 1820 GrandIsland (ErieCoNY) - 30Jul1885, Eckford, CalhounCoMI)

|   |   |   |   |   ---m1. 19Oct1845 Elizabeth RAYMO, Nankin, WayneCoMI

|   |   |   |   |   ---m2. 10Nov1847 Rosanna FENTON, Nankin, WayneCoMI

|   |   |   |   |   |--7-Elmer Augustus Denniston (1871 CalhounCoMI - 1945 AlleganCoMI)

|   |   |   |   |   |   ---m. 1896 Estella Adeliah PARKER, in CalhounCoMI

|   |   |   |   |   |   |--8-Asahel Samuel Denniston

|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |--9- Wayne Earl Denniston   *** Wayne-19 ***
                                                                                    (mutations DYS446-, CDYb+, 439++)

|--m2. 1715 Catherine MONTGOMERY

-

-

Navigating from here

The menu buttons at top right take you to other pages on this site, while the nav panel above targets other points on this page, or brings up other resources (papers I’ve written, and the like). If you find yourself lost, the browser BACK button will take you back to where you were (some people also have a convenient BACK button on their mouse, right under their thumb). Or hitting the HOME key of your keyboard will take you back to the top of this page where you are now.

Some Key Terms: CCC, haplotype, haplogroup, NPE, patrilineage, RPH.

DENNISON Patrilineage 1 Directory of Researchers

Active researchers of this DENNISON patrilineage are shown below. Those with highlighted names may be e-mailed by clicking on their names, and their posted descendancies may be viewed by clicking on their highlighted Patrilineage Project#s. Satellite members of the project are listed immediately after the principal researcher for the sublineage they are interested in, and their names are preceded by a dash. Where the person tested is not also the principal researcher, the former’s name appears under the latter’s, in parentheses.

Proj#  “Handle”         Researchers      
      (Test Subject)        
Test
Panel
FTDNA
Kit# 
D-05 Alan Alan Denison F67 64558
D-13 Barry(Robert)   Barry Bradfield
(Robert Edward Dennison)
F67 182046
D-25 Barry(Ronald)   Barry Bradfield
(Ronald Samuel Denniston)
F67 179330
D-12 Barry(Sidney)   Barry Bradfield
(Sidney Robert Dennison)
F67 179645
D-12a Elaine —Elaine Baker
D-23 Chris Christopher Allen Dennison
(Gary Allen Dennison)
F37 220222
D-02 Cindy Cindy Denniston
(Steve Denniston)
F37 20617
D-04 John_A John Allen Dennison F67 58472
D-01 Lane Lane Teaff
(H. G. Denison)
F67 17970
D-34 Mary Jane Mary Jane Michael
(Garland Cornell Dennison)
F37 316168
D-32 Patrick Patrick Balfour F111 185262
D-22 Randle T. Randle Dennison F37 216370
D-07 Russell Russell P. Dennison F67 143588
D-06 Scottie Scottie Dennison
(John E. Dennison)
F67 64729
D-29 Sean John Patrick Dennison F67 241226
D-20 Tee Tee Branch
(William Dennison)
F37 212273
D-19 Wayne Wayne Earl Denniston F37 200149

-

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PUBLISHED SOURCES

-

BARRY-TREE(1250-present)
Barry Bradfield,
“The Dennistons of the Barony of Danielstoun in Renfrew and Of Colgrain in Dumbarton and afterwards Ireland.”
(published by the author in PDF format 29Nov2014)

This report, by Irish researcher Barry Bradfield, consists of a summary in descendant tree form of his Irish and Scottish research on the main line of titled and gentry Dennistons from their earliest appearance in the records of Scotland, down through their identifiable DNA-tested descendants.

-

BARRY-LONGFORD(Alexander1663)
Barry Bradfield,
“Ronald Denniston of Longford”
(published by the author in PDF format 20Jan2012)

This report, by Irish researcher Barry Bradfield, presents a partial descendancy for Alexander Denniston of Drummeel, County Longford, Ireland, that focuses on the ancestries of DNA-tested DENNISON Patrilineage 1 project members Wayne-19, and Ronald-25. It is based on reasonably exhaustive search of the Irish records, and presents much of the scant Irish evidence, along with some from America as well. Although the report is focused particularly on the ancestry of Irish member Ronald Denniston, it ought to be of interest to any serious researchers of DENNISONs in Ireland.

-

BARRY-TYRONE
Barry Bradfield,
“The Early Dennistons of Tyrone”
(published by the author in PDF format 20Mar2011)

This report, by Irish researcher Barry Bradfield, presents extensive evidence on DENNISONs in County Tyrone, Ireland, and it ought to be of interest to any serious researchers of DENNISONs in Ireland.

-

RD
T. Randle Dennison and Rachel E. Dennison,
Scotch-Irish Dennisons of Virginia, Kentucky, and Points West
(published by the authors, 2002)

This is a very well researched descendancy of the immigrant, Daniel Denniston, the pioneer settler of AugustaCoVA in the 1730s, and ancestor of project members Alan-05, and Randle-22 (the author himself). It takes into consideration all the principal sources on the early generations in AugustaCo and its derivative, RockinghamCo, and follows the descendants of Daniel as most of them migrated to Kentucky and “points west” in subsequent generations. Some lines are worked out in full, and carried down to the present day.

This work stands out from the mass of published amateur genealogies in at least two respects. First, and most important, the research on the early generations (the ones of the greatest interest to the greatest number of people) has been quite thorough, and partly for that reason, the conclusions are both judicious, and largely sound.

Second, and most unusually for a work of this kind, detailed citations are provided for specific facts adduced. However, these are heavily abbreviated, and it is often far from clear whether the original primary (manuscript) source has been examined, or instead, the evidence has been gleaned from secondary sources of compiled abstracts. While for the most part such compilations are of fairly high quality, since they are, after all, abstracts, errors of both transcription and interpretation can creep in, and few collections of abstracts do an adequate job of describing, or even considering, the actual records context. It’s not always necessary to consult the actual primary sources, but it is always necessary to cite to the exact source one has consulted, so that those who make use of the published work can properly appreciate the thoroughness of the research, and make their own judgements about whether they had better check the primary sources themselves.

-

JBR-DENNISON
John Barrett Robb,
The Daniel Dennistons of Beverley Manor and Descendants
(published by the author in PDF format initially in 2008, but subject to ongoing revisions)

This report, commissioned by project member Alan-05, focuses on the early generations of Alan’s descendancy from the same Daniel Denniston whose descendancy is the subject of Randle and Rachel Dennison’s book, RD, above. However, despite the fact that both the matter and the sources for these two studies substantially overlap, the present work is in no way based on the former, but represents a fresh look at the evidence, often at the primary records level, and includes detailed citations and analytical argument not found in the previous work, as well as a more detailed bibliography. The two works are linked in just one respect: after working out his own conclusions, the author carefully examined the corresponding parts of RD, and where supplemental material of interest was found, included this in quoted form, usually without comment, in his own work. Virtually all of this supplemental quoted material from RD concerns the grandchildren of Daniel the immigrant after they had migrated to Kentucky.

The scope of JBR-DENNISON was largely confined to greater AugustaCoVA from the period of settlement in the 1730s until about 1800, though the one DENNISON family that remained in Augusta, that of John Dennison of Naked Creek, grandson of Daniel the immigrant, is followed down to about 1830.

However, in addition, an effort was made to locate and account for all occurences of the surname DENNISON in the records of Augusta and it’s immediately derivative counties, and this expansion of scope has provided the basis for a reconstruction of the family of the John1 Denniston, a younger contemporary of Daniel1, and like him an early settler of AugustaCo. The author believes that this immigrant John1 to be the ancestor of project members Lane-01, her first cousin Russell-07, and other DENNISONs who moved on from early AugustaCo SW into the Virginia panhandle. This John may also have been the ancestor of John_A-04, whose line traces back to NE Tennessee, but further DNA testing, as well as additional genealogical research, will be needed to classify him. While the dovetailing of the circumstantial evidence for these two pioneering AugustaCo immigrants strongly suggests a close family relatioinship, the latest round of extensions of the DNA haplotypes of their descendants belies this supposition: it appears instead, that their mutual relationship was very remote indeed, as they evidently belong to two different DNA clusters within the Patrilineage 1 descendancy.

Analysis of Patrilineage 1 DNA

Principles of ySTR DNA Analysis

Now that 10 of the 16 project members have extended their yDNA haplotypes to 111-markers, and since we also now have a comprehensive genealogical tree contributed by project member, and expert Irish genealogist, Barry Bradfield, that shows the deep ancestral relationships between a number of the members, it is time to take stock of this new information, and provide a comprehensive analytical re-evaluation of the DNA results and what they tell us about the overall DENNISON Patrilineage 1 descent tree from the MRCPA of all members.

First, though, I feel obliged to provide a few words to correct persistent misunderstanding of the correct principles of DNA interpretation, fostered and encouraged in large part by FTDNA’s misguided emphasis on TMRCAestimates as a guide to genealogical inferences, but also by the company’s simplistic criteria for determining which haplotypes in their ySTR DNA database are close enough to be reported as such to each of us, their customers.

Particularly to be deplored are the merely pairwise TMRCA estimates that FTDNA offers with its TIP calculator, and the practice of referring to, say 35/37 matches, or even 109/111 matches, as an indicator of closeness of relationship.

All TMRCA calculations are predicated on the assumption that markers and marker panels mutate at a predictable rate, like the ticking of a clock: thus by counting the number of mutations that have accumulated in each haplotype since they diverged from a common ancestor, and multiplying this number by the average number of years between mutations, one hopes to arrive at an estimate for when the common ancestor lived.

Unfortunately, the application of this plausible-sounding model for deriving TMRCA estimates from actual pairs of haplotypes, or citing paired numeric haplotype comparisons as a measure of closeness of relationship (or Genetic Distance)—which amounts to the same thing—is so problematic as to be genealogically worthless.

In the first place, the number of marker value divergences isn’t necessarily the same as the number of mutations that have occurred. There are half a dozen different kinds of mutation, some of which affect more than one marker value (mutations to the multicopy marker DYS464; reclOH events), and others for which a marker value might be changed by more than one in a single mutation (multistep mutations). Then there are “deletions”, in which a chunk of DNA is simply lost in the replication process. Besides this, the standard test for the important multicopy marker DYS464 often produces inaccurate results.

Determining what kind of mutation has occurred is often a matter of interpretation, yet it’s important to make the attempt, because each of these types of mutations, and in fact each individual marker, has it’s own mutational clock. Furthermore, the rates at which these many clocks run are very imperfectly known, and experts have different ideas both about mutational rates, and about how to recognize and account for unconventional mutations.

The good news is that the vast majority of ySTR mutations are single-step mutations for which at least halfway accurate mutational rates are known, and inaccuracies in our estimates for individual marker mutation rates can be assumed to more or less average out across a panel of 37 or more markers.

Nonetheless, individual haplotypes may have one or two, or even three, fewer (or more) mutations than it might seem just from counting up the number of marker divergences. If you’re going to pay any attention to pairwise haplotype comparisons at all, it’s best to stick to the FTDNA TIP calculator, because there is reason to believe that it is fairly sophisticated in counting mutations, and it follows reasonable, conservative, policies where there are too many unknowns. For example, since there is little data on the frequency of deletions, although they certainly represent a kind of mutation, and affect the pairwise comparisons, TIP simply leaves them out of the TMRCA calculation.

But these are minor problems compared to the fatal flaw in comparing two haplotypes: mutations are so rare, and their occurrences so sporadic, that pairwise comparisons are too small a sample of the mutational process to provide meaningful estimates of closeness of relationship.

For example, even a pair of 111-marker haplotypes that diverged from a MRCPA who lived 10 generations ago, provides only 111 x 9 x 2 = 1998 opportunities for mutation, and if one were to make, say, ten such paired comparisons, one could expect to find a range of 3-8 mutations separating any given pair. Translating this range back into TMRCA estimates would yield a range of birth dates for the MRCPA between 1525 and 1800, which is genealogically quite useless. But it’s no less meaningless than supposing that a 108/111 match is necessarily “closer” than a 103/111 match; these and all the numbers in between are within the range of normal variability.

For a more extensive real-world example of the meaninglessness of pairwise haplotype comparisons, consider my ALLEN Patrilineage 1 project, for which about 20 haplotypes have been extended to 111 markers. All of these lineages converge backwards to a handful of closely related patriarchs who were born in Virginia between 1680-1710, and probably to a single immigrant ancestor born between 1620-1650. Genealogical knowledge of this patrilineage is both extensive and deep, and although many of this group remain unconnected to any of the deep ancestral lines, we do know that none of them converge with any of the others within the last 7 generations, and most converge at about 9 generations. This large number of highly diverse 111-marker haplotypes has made it possible to calculate a TMRCA for the MRCPA of the whole extended group that is probably accurate to within a generation, or at most two, either way. In fact the predicted birth date of the father of them all is say 1620, which dovetails almost perfectly with what the genealogical evidence suggests.

Now look at the range of pairwise GDs in the 111-marker GD matrix for this patrilineage, where the actual differences in closeness of relationship vary only from 8-11 generations. These GDs range from 0 (identical haplotypes) through 12 (which are “Unrelated” according to FTDNA’s matching criteria). Even if we exclude the half dozen outliers in this group, the range of GDs still runs from 1-8. There is, in fact, no good reason to suppose that a pair of these patrilineage cousins who are 110/111 are any more closely related to each other than are a pair who are 103/111.

Deriving closeness of relationship from the ySTR DNA evidence

Although individual pairwise GD comparisons are of little or no genealogical value, constructing a matrix of all the pairwise comparisons across a large patrilineage can shed light on the overall depth and shape of the patrilineage yDNA tree as a whole, and it can help identify the subsets of members who are more closely related to each other than the group as a whole, or what I’ve dubbed “closer cousin clusters” (or CCC for short). The ultimate objective of the project is to be able to associate these CCCs with particular family sub-branches of the patrilineage known from the genealogy, or conversely, by making use of CCC relationships inferred from the DNA to direct the search for the ancestors of unconnected CCC members, toward the right branches of the genealogical tree of the connected members.

GD matrices come into their own, however, at the 111-marker level, and 7-10 extended haplotypes of descendants who are known not to be cousins for at least 7 generations back can provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the TMRCA of the most recent common patrilineal ancestor of all of those who have extended to 111 markers. Alse, large GD matrices can provide a rough (though sometimes misleading) idea of the clustering within the patrilineage, where the patches of green and low GD numbers (both indicative of closer relationships) mark apparent clusters.

However, even the assemblage of pairwise GD relationships into a matrix which suggests clustering is insufficient for accurately identifying CCC relationships within the patrilineage. Closer cousin clusters are ultimately defined by the common mutation(s) they share, and for that purpose the project haplotype chart, which shows the specific mutations for all the member haplotypes is the indispensible tool.

Unfortunately, determining whether two haplotypes share an inherited mutation isn’t just a matter of scanning the project haplotype chart for matching values in the colored cells that denote mutations. There is always a chance that if two haplotypes share the same mutated value, that they each came by it through independent mutations in different lines of descent, rather than through inheritance from a common ancestor—a MRCPA whose descendants constitute a closer cousin cluster.

The likelihood that identical mutations have occurred in two different lines is in turn a function of the widely varying mutational probabalities of the individual markers, with some being more than 50x more likely to mutate than others. And since, therefore, most of the markers that do in fact mutate are the highly mutable markers, there are bound to be, in a good sized patrilineage, a few cases where shared mutations are not indicative of inheritance from a more recent common ancestor and membership in a corresponding CCC.

Reasonably reliable definition of a CCC depends, therefore, on finding a shared average or slow mutator, or more than one fast mutating marker. I’ve color coded the marker column headers in the project haplotype chart to provide a rough idea of the individual marker mutation probabilities, with the fastest mutators indicated by the brightest reds, shading off to the background text color for the average mutators, and to blue for the exceptionally slow mutators. I use the more exact (but still only approximately known) numeric probabilities for each marker in my probability calculations.

Now that 10 of the 16 project members have extended their yDNA haplotypes to 111-markers, and since we also now have a comprehensive genealogical tree contributed by project member, and expert Irish genealogist, Barry Bradfield, that shows the deep ancestral relationships between a number of the members, it is time to take stock of this new information, and provide a comprehensive analytical re-evaluation of the DNA results and what they tell us about the overall DENNISON Patrilineage 1 descent tree from the MRCPA of all members.

First, though, I feel obliged to provide a few words to correct persistent misunderstanding of the correct principles of DNA interpretation, fostered and encouraged in large part by FTDNA’s misguided emphasis on TMRCA estimates as a guide to genealogical inferences, but also by the company’s simplistic criteria for determining which haplotypes in their ySTR DNA database are close enough to be reported as such to each of us, their customers.

Particularly to be deplored are the merely pairwise TMRCA estimates that FTDNA offers with its TIP calculator, and the practice of referring to, say 35/37 matches, or even 109/111 matches, as an indicator of closeness of relationship.

All TMRCA calculations are predicated on the assumption that markers and marker panels mutate at a predictable rate, like the ticking of a clock: thus by counting the number of mutations that have accumulated in each haplotype since they diverged from a common ancestor, and multiplying this number by the average number of years between mutations, one hopes to arrive at an estimate for when the common ancestor lived.

Unfortunately, the application of this plausible-sounding model for deriving TMRCA estimates from actual pairs of haplotypes, or citing paired numeric haplotype comparisons as a measure of closeness of relationship (or Genetic Distance)—which amounts to the same thing—is so problematic as to be genealogically worthless.

In the first place, the number of marker value divergences isn’t necessarily the same as the number of mutations that have occurred. There are half a dozen different kinds of mutation, some of which affect more than one marker value (mutations to the multicopy marker DYS464; reclOH events), and others for which a marker value might be changed by more than one in a single mutation (multistep mutations). Then there are “deletions”, in which a chunk of DNA is simply lost in the replication process. Besides this, the standard test for the important multicopy marker DYS464 often produces inaccurate results.

Determining what kind of mutation has occurred is often a matter of interpretation, yet it’s important to make the attempt, because each of these types of mutations, and in fact each individual marker, has it’s own mutational clock. Furthermore, the rates at which these many clocks run are very imperfectly known, and experts have different ideas both about mutational rates, and about how to recognize and account for unconventional mutations.

The good news is that the vast majority of ySTR mutations are single-step mutations for which at least halfway accurate mutational rates are known, and inaccuracies in our estimates for individual marker mutation rates can be assumed to more or less average out across a panel of 37 or more markers.

Nonetheless, individual haplotypes may have one or two, or even three, fewer (or more) mutations than it might seem just from counting up the number of marker divergences. If you’re going to pay any attention to pairwise haplotype comparisons at all, it’s best to stick to the FTDNA TIP calculator, because there is reason to believe that it is fairly sophisticated in counting mutations, and it follows reasonable, conservative, policies where there are too many unknowns. For example, since there is little data on the frequency of deletions, although they certainly represent a kind of mutation, and affect the pairwise comparisons, TIP simply leaves them out of the TMRCA calculation.

But these are minor problems compared to the fatal flaw in comparing two haplotypes: mutations are so rare, and their occurrences so sporadic, that pairwise comparisons are too small a sample of the mutational process to provide meaningful estimates of closeness of relationship.

For example, even a pair of 111-marker haplotypes that diverged from a MRCPA who lived 10 generations ago, provides only 111 x 9 x 2 = 1998 opportunities for mutation, and if one were to make, say, ten such paired comparisons, one could expect to find a range of 3-8 mutations separating any given pair. Translating this range back into TMRCA estimates would yield a range of birth dates for the MRCPA between 1525 and 1800, which is genealogically quite useless. But it’s no less meaningless than supposing that a 108/111 match is necessarily “closer” than a 103/111 match; these and all the numbers in between are within the range of normal variability.

For a more extensive real-world example of the meaninglessness of pairwise haplotype comparisons, consider my largest ALLEN patrilineage project, for which about 20 haplotypes have been extended to 111 markers. All of these lineages converge backwards to a handful of closely related patriarchs who were born in Virginia between 1680-1710, and probably to a single immigrant ancestor born between 1620-1650. Genealogical knowledge of this patrilineage is both extensive and deep, and although many of this group remain unconnected to any of the deep ancestral lines, we do know that none of them converge with any of the others within the last 7 generations, and most converge at about 9 generations. This large number of highly diverse 111-marker haplotypes has made it possible to calculate a TMRCA for the MRCPA of the whole extended group that is probably accurate to within a generation, or at most two, either way. In fact the predicted birth date of the father of them all is say 1620, which dovetails almost perfectly with what the genealogical evidence suggests.

Now look at the range of pairwise GDs in the 111-marker GD matrix for this patrilineage, where the actual differences in closeness of relationship vary only from 8-11 generations. These GDs range from 0 (identical haplotypes) through 12 (which are “Unrelated” according to FTDNA’s matching criteria). Even if we exclude the half dozen outliers in this group, the range of GDs still runs from 1-8. There is, in fact, no good reason to suppose that a pair of these patrilineage cousins who are 110/111 are any more closely related to each other than are a pair who are 103/111.

Deriving closeness of relationship from the yDNA evidence

Making use of a set of patrilineage haplotypes to shed light on the genealogical tree of descent comes, not from pairwise haplotype comparisons, but from analyzing the full set of patrilineage haplotypes for shared mutations inherited from a common ancestor. Subsets of patrilineage members who share an inherited mutation constitute what I have dubbed “closer cousin clusters” (or CCC for short). The ultimate objective is to be able to associate these CCCs with particular family sub-branches of the patrilineage known from the genealogy, or conversely, by making use of this known CCC relationship to broaden, but also to focus, the search for the ancestors of unconnected CCC members, on the known ancestors of other CCC members.

Unfortunately, determining whether two haplotypes share an inherited mutation isn’t just a matter of scanning the project haplotype chart for matching values in the colored cells that denote mutations. There is always a chance that if two haplotypes share the same mutated value, that they each came by it through independent mutation in their particular line of descent, rather than through inheritance from a MRCPA whose descendants constitute a closer cousin cluster. The chances of independent mutation vary with the mutational frequency for each individual marker, and some markers are more than 50x more likely to mutate than others.

invisible writing

DNA Analysis of the patrilineage as a whole

Although pairwise haplotype comparisons are genealogically meaningless, by extending all the most diverse (mutationally replete and/or genealogically outlying) haplotypes of the patrilineage to 111 markers, then creating a Genetic Distance matrix for the full set of diverse haplotypes, it becomes possible to arrive at a reasonably accurate TMRCA estimate for the ancestor of the whole set of tested haplotypes. Such a matrix can also provide a sense of the overall depth and shape of the patrilineage, and it can yield rough estimates as to when outlier haplotypes branched off of the main tree. I would like to emphasize that the accuracy of these overall patrilineages estimates is a function of the number of diverse haplotypes: it’s important to weed out all but one representative of each low level (recent) cousin cluster, lest they bias the overall result in their favor. One doesn’t want to do this with deeper sets of cousins, though, because too much weeding reduces the number of haplotypes, and with it the number of opportunities for mutation per generation.

The 111-marker GD matrix I’ve constructed for this patrilineage includes all the haplotypes that have been extended to 111 markers: it has not been weeded, so should not be used as is to calculate TMRCA. Besides that, estimating TMRCA from a weeded matrix is less than straightforward: for maximum accuracy one needs to tabulate as accurately as possible the number of generations for which each haplotype has descended on its own, as well as the number of generations for which it has shared descent with others.

However, the plenary 111-marker GD matrix can provide a sense of the clustering within the patrilineage—in fact I always organize the constituent haplotypes in my GD matrices precisely to bring out such clustering patterns. The complete matrix also throws the outlying haplotypes into relief, and with the additional haplotypes to compare to, with their inherent mutational variation, an average across the GDs for an outlier can provide enough mutational data to support a rough TMRCA estimate for when the outlier branched off of the main tree.

It’s evident from this plenary 111-marker GD matrix that both Patrick Balfour and Russell Dennison (and other members of the CCC that he represents) are quite considerable outliers within the complete set of DENNISON Patrilineage 1 members. However, if we were to extend and include the very diverse haplotype of Cindy-02, and pare the matrix back to exclude all but one representative of the AugustaCoVA Daniel Denniston line, I expect that these apparent outliers wouldn’t stand out so much, and that we would have a more accurate picture of the patrilineage as a whole.

Working with such an augmented and reshaped matrix, I expect that it would be possible to calculate a TMRCA estimate for the whole tested set that would probably be accurate to within a couple of generations either way (i.e. to within 150 years or so), and I will do this if we can get Cindy, and perhaps also John Allen Dennison and Tee Branch extended to 111 too.

For now, I’ve just calculated, purely on the basis of the DNA, that the widest outlying haplotype, that of Patrick Balfour (using his average GD of 10 from all the others), branched off of the DENNISON tree with an ancestor born say 1430, which I would estimate is accurate to within 2-3 generations either way. As it happens, this estimate appears to be quite snugly consistent with Barry’s theory of the BALFOUR/DENNISON overlap back in the 15th century Fifeshire, Scotland, and it falls well within the range of dates suggested for the Malcolm Denniston, who belongs to the 4th generation on his DENNISON tree, and who might be the branching ancestor for this BALFOUR/DENNISON line.

In summary, the more diverse 111-marker haplotypes there are to work with (after weeding out all but one representative of known closer cousins), the more accurate such overall TMRCA estimates can be expected to be, and the better sense a pared down 111-marker GD matrix would provide of the overall depth and shape of the DNA patrilineage tree.

invisible writing

Analysis of the patrilineage by CCC (Closer Cousin Cluster),
with consideration for the genealogical evidence

Before digging into the this more genealogically relevant analysis, I would suggest that you open the project haplotype chart in a new window, so that you may better follow along with the references made below to the specific colored mutations in the chart.

The specific mutational patterns of the 10 extended DENNISON haplotypes define several different clusters of cousins who are more closely related to each other than to all the other members of the project. Stated a different way that takes the genealogical knowledge into account, each of these cousin clusters descends through a particular family branch off of the main patrilineage tree. Each of these branching points in turn is defined by a set of one or more mutations characteristic of the branch, though what appears as a set of mutations in a descendant haplotype actually represents an historical sequence of mutations down the generations of a descendancy tree.

Because markers vary by a factor of more than 50x in their propensity to mutate, and because the most mutable can be occasionally expected to mutate more than once when the tree is as deep as this one is, only the few less mutable markers can be considered definitive by themselves of family branches. The highly mutatable markers, which are much more prevalent, sometimes mutate independently the same way in more than one lineage, so cannot be as confidently relied upon to flag family branches, since their presence in a descendant haplotype may point backwards to more than one ancestral line; or it may be that one of these highly mutatable markers mutated independently since the line of a particular haplotype branched off from its next closer cousin. Regardless of the mutational frequency of the defining mutation(s) of a CCC, it is always desirable to find auxiliary mutations that are also shared by the members of the same cluster.

The best (because least mutable) marker mutations are those whose columnar headings in the haplotype chart are colored blue, and the next best are those colored black (or actually a very dark red). The least desirable, but also most prevalent, mutated markers are those whose headings are colored various shades of red, with the brightest reds representing the most mutable markers: the CDYs, the multicopy marker DYS464, DYS576, and (in the 68-111 band) DYS710. These most mutable markers cannot by themselves be considered definitive, but they can add a bit to the weight provided by mutations to less mutable markers.

invisible writing

The Mainline Irish Cluster

Defining mutation: DYS446=12 (a somewhat above average mutator)

The members of this cluster are: Sean Dennison (member# 29, who is also the project RPH); Sidney Dennison (#12), Robert Dennison (#13), and Ronald Denniston (#25), whose haplotypes Barry Bradfield is managing; and Wayne Denniston (#19). Wayne and Ronald also probably constitute a sub-cluster of even more closely related cousins based on their sharing of the highly mutable marker CDYb=38. Three of these five (Robert, Ronald, and Sidney) also share the mutated value DYS439=13, which they may have inherited from their common ancestor William, but in that case, it would have had to mutate back two in the four generations for which Wayne diverges from Ronald, and this is highly improbable, not only because there is only 1 chance in 100 of a single step mutation to DYS439 in four generations, but because multistep mutations are at least 20x rarer than singlestep mutations.

This CCC corresponds perfectly to the ancestry shown in Barry’s tree, with Sean descending from Robert, the son of John Denniston (born abt 1590), and the other four descending from Robert’s brother (and John1590’s son) William. We may therefore infer that the defining DYS446=12 mutation occurred just upstream of John1590, perhaps even in the genetic transmission to John from his father, Walter.

This deep genealogical tree, and the 111-marker results we have for three of the five members of this cluster, provides an instructive example of the limitations of present day TMRCA calculators. The 111-marker GD matrix shows that the average GD between Sean and his cousins Ron and Side, from whom he is known to be separated by 11 generations, is 3. Using that average number, the straightforward little TMRCA calculator I often use predicts a convergence between Sean and his cousins at 4.5 generations back, to a patriarch born say 1800. FTDNA’s TIP calculator, which is much more sophisticated, but not necessarily more accurate, since the company hasn’t exposed the mutation rates its uses to public scrutiny, projects a 57% chance that Sean and Ronald’s ancestors converge at 5 generations, and 91% chance that they converge at 9 generations, and only a 3% chance that the MRCPA goes back the 11 generations that he actually does; the corresponding numbers for Sean-Sidney are far worse: a 50% chance of convergence at 3 generations, and a 90% chance of convergence at 7. Of course, if we take advantage of TIP’s ability to be instructed that we know that the Sean and Ronald’s lineages don’t converge over the last 10 generations, it obligingly resets its prediction to a 38% chance that the common ancestor occurred by the 11th generation, and an 86% chance that he occurred by the 13th, but while this is closer to the reality, in this case the genealogy, not the DNA, is doing all the work.

As I’ve noted elsewhere, TMRCA estimates only begin to become accurate enough to be genealogically interesting when they are considered across a set of many, diverse, 111-marker haplotypes—where by diverse, I mean that the bearers of these haplotypes have only very remote cousinship relationships with each other. At present, though 10 members have extended to 111 markers, they represent only about 5-6 diverse lines. If we were to extend project members Cindy-02 and John_A-04, and also perhaps Tee-20, it is probable that we would be able to add at least one additional diverse haplotype to the set of diverse extended haplotypes, thus improving the accuracy of a TMRCA calculation for the patrilineage as a whole, as well as, quite likely, uncovering an additional project CCC.

invisible writing

The DANIEL1 OF AugustaCoVA Cluster

Defining mutations: DYS533=14 and 549=3 (above average mutators)

Auxiliary mutation: DYS576=17 (a high probability mutator)

This cluster, known to be descended from Daniel1 Denniston, the American immigrant, who first appears in Augusta County, Virginia, in the 1730s, also comprises five project members: Alan-05, Randle-22, Chris-23, and we can now say almost for sure, Scottie-06 and Mary Jane Michael-34. Of these five, only one, Chris, lacks the auxiliary mutation, DYS576=17, but being a high mutator, and matching the two defining markers, which are much less prone to mutate) we must presume that Chris’s DYS576 mutated back to its original value of 18 in the generations since his line diverged from that of the others.

As it happens, we don’t know for sure when Chris did branch off from the others, nor can we answer that question definitively for Scottie and MaryJane, but since Scottie and MaryJane also share the mutated value DYS505=13, for a marker which is quite disinclined to mutate, we can say almost for sure that they belong to a sub-cluster within the Daniel1 cluster, and all the circumstantial evidence points to Daniel1’s grandson, John3, and or one of his sons, as their common ancestor(s), since this John3 is the one of Daniel1’s descendant who remained in AugustaCo, where both Scottie’s and MaryJane’s DENNISON ancestors have roots. All that we need is one more research push to try to find evidence of mutual relationship, and of specific linkage for them to this line of John3.

invisible writing

The BALFOUR Cluster

Defining mutation: DYS463=25 (a very low probability mutator)

Auxiliary mutation: CDYa=35 (a very high probability mutator)

This interesting, but disparate, cluster comprises members Russell-07, his first cousin Lane-01 (whose haplotype hasn’t been extended to 111 markers), and Patrick Balfour. It may also include any or all of the three as yet unextended members, Cindy-02, John_A-04, and Tee-20. John_A shares the highly mutable marker mutation CDYa=35 with Russell and Patrick, and his earliest known ancestor traces back to the same area as Russell’s—the SW Virginia panhandle, and bordering NE Tennessee. Cindy’s genealogy appears to be tightly connected to that of Russell, but otherwise her haplotype diverges so much (and she lacks the CDYa=35 mutation) that one must think of other possibilities. There is further discussion of this trio of might-be BALFOUR Cluster haplotypes under “Other Unclassified Member Haplotypes”, in the next section.

As noted above, the 111-marker GD matrix shows both Russell and Patrick to be outliers with respect to all the other members of this patrilineage project. And it also indicates that their mutual relationship is GD=10, which, according to FTDNA’s flawed haplotype matching criteria, means that they aren’t “related”—i.e. that they don’t even belong to the same patrilineage. And given the fact that these two have different surnames, each of ancient derivation, there is superficial plausibility to this view, but it can nonetheless be dismissed out of hand just on the basis of their haplotypes, which are, after all, tightly enough related that two other members of the project qualify as "possibly related" to Patrick Balfour, and on top of that because Patrick and Russell Dennison share the defining marker mutation DYS463=25.

Unlike the vast majority of markers that turn up with variant (mutated) values, DYS463 hardly ever mutates. In fact it mutates on average just once in over 1400 generations. Thus if, as in this case, it turns up in two different, otherwise reasonably closely related haplotypes, there is only a negligible chance that it wasn’t inherited from a common ancestor—that lightning happened to strike twice within the same genealogical patrilineage.

In fact I’ve calculated that, given the existence of the mutation in Patrick’s haplotype, the odds that the same mutation, in the same direction, would have occurred in ANY of the other 9 extended 111-marker haplotypes of this patrilineage as 1 in 33, which for me at least, shows that they are patrilineage cousins beyond any reasonable doubt. I also note that the DNA relationship between Russell and Patrick is at least weakly reinforced by the fact that they also share the CDYa=35 mutation.

There is one major anomaly with respect to Patrick Balfour’s haplotype: he also shares the mutated value DYS504=17 with Sidney-12 of the Mainline Irish CCC. Since DYS504 is one of the better (less mutable) markers in that it has an average mutation rate, if it weren’t for the match between Patrick and Russell on DYS463, we should have to try to fit Patrick into the Mainline Irish cluster. However, not only does the relative immutability of DYS463 enormously outweigh that of DYS504 (for which there’s about a 1 in 8 chance of independent mutations across the 9 other haplotypes), but Patrick also lacks the defining mutations of the Mainline Irish cluster: consequently, we must conclude in this case that the improbable (an independent mutation to DYS504) has in fact transpired.

On the genealogical side of things, Barry has found evidence for a BALFOUR-DENNISON overlap in the ancient BALFOUR stomping grounds of Fifeshire, Scotland. He has reason to believe that one Malcolm de Gatemilk who lived in the 1300s in the Fifeshire neighborhood of the extensive BALFOUR landholdings, was Malcolm Denniston—presumably the same Malcolm de Danzielstoun who appears in the 4th generation of Barry’s tree—and that this Malcolm of Fife, and/or one of his sons, became a de Balfour on account of the Balfour lands that they came into. Malcolm de Denzielstoun, meanwhile, was a brother of the Sir William de Danzielstoun, who was the 9th generation ancestor of the John Denniston (born abt 1590), who, as we have seen, was the ancestor of the members of the Mainline Irish Cluster, some 11 generations back from the present. Thus, Malcolm’s sons would have been some 19 generations back from the present.

This ancestral reconstruction is consistent with the failure of Russell DENNISON to inherit the characteristic mutations of the Mainline Irish cluster, and with the extremely remote GD relationships between these members of the BALFOUR cluster and all the other yDNA-tested DENNISONs. Unfortunately, so far, the ancestry of Russell and his SW Virginia cousins can only be plausibly traced back as far as the 1750’s AugustaCoVA immigrant John1 Denniston (who arrived within 20 years of his distant cousin Daniel1 of the DANIEL1 cluster), who appears to have died in BotetourtCoVA about 1774, while his sons migrated from the Augusta area down into the SW Virginia panhandle, and thence (some of them) to Tennessee. The possibilities for this John1’s Irish and/or Scottish ancestry, are consequently wide open.

If Barry is right about this DENNISON-BALFOUR connection, Russell and his DENNISON cousins figure to descend from Malcolm, through his father, Sir John de Danzielstoun, who is some 21 generations back from the present, and a grandson of the first known patriarch of this patrilineage, Sir Hugh de Danzielstoun (23 generations back), who was born about 1250. Using the best cross-cultural estimate for the typical number of years between generations, 34 (see my paper on this subject), we get a rough projection back from 1950 (my estimate of the average age birth year of the tested members of this project of 1950 - (23 x 34) = 1168 for the birth year of Sir Hugh. Or if we use 30 years/generation instead (the lowest credible number that I’ve yet seen), the math comes out to 1260—almost right on the button.

invisible writing

Other Unclassified Member Haplotypes

Of the 6 member haplotypes that have’t been extended to 111 markers, and can’t, therefore, be classified by CCC solely on the basis of their DNA, project member Lane-01 clearly belongs to the BALFOUR cluster since she is Russell-07’s known first cousin.

Unextended project members Robert-13 and Wayne-19 both have Irish ancestry that credibly link up with Barry’s descendancy tree, and both of these gentlemen also share the defining haplotype of the Mainline Irish cluster, DYS446=12, as well as othr more volatile mutations with their genealogically closer cousins, Sidney-12, and Ronald-25, respectively: these two can therefore also be with confidence classified as descendants of the Mainline Irish Cluster.

The remaining three unextended members, Cindy-02, John_A-04, and Tee-20, cannot, however, be classified by cluster, and all three would benefit from extending their haplotype to 111 markers to ascertain where they may fit in.

It seems likely that these three may consitute a CCC (or perhaps a subcluster of a CCC) of their own, because they share the mutation CDYa=38, which is found in none of the other project haplotypes. Unfortunately, the CDYs are the most mutable markers of all (except for the multicopy DYS464 marker, taken as a whole) and one of these is insufficient by itself to be considered a defining mutation for a cluster.

One the genealogical side, Cindy appears to belong to the same SW Virginia DENNISON line as Russell, who is now a confirmed member of the BALFOUR cluster, but her haplotype through the first 67 markers diverges from Russell’s by no fewer than 6 marker values, even though she is putatively separated from him bu just four generations. FTDNA’s TIP calculator says there is just a 1% chance that Cindy descends from Russell’s line at the point where the circumstantial genealogical evidence says that she does, and only an 8% chance that she descends from Russell’s probable immigrant ancestor, John1 Denniston of AugustaCo.

John_A’s genealogy runs back to the same time and place that Russell’s ancestor, Scott DENNISON’s does—both left footprints in JeffersonCoTN in the early 1800s, not far from the SW Virginia panhandle where Russell’s ancestors remained.

It therefore seems likely that Cindy and John_A belong to the same CCC as each other, or perhaps they are a sub-cluster within the BALFOUR CCC, and since they share the CDYa=38 mutation with Tee, her piece of the genealogical puzzle may be relevant too. Tee, as it happens, is Irish, and none of her DENNISON ancestors migrated to America, so unless Tee’s line picked up the same CDYa=38 mutation independently (which is possible), her Irish ancestry may be the place to look for the origins of the immigrant John1 of AugustaCo.

Before investing too deeply in that genealogical research pathway, it would be desirable to get all three of these unclassified haplotypes extended to 111 markers. We would hope, in extending them, to discover a better (less mutatable) marker mutation in the 68-111 band that might serve as a defining mutation for their own CCC, or perhaps for their closer cousin sub-cluster within the BALFOUR cluster.

Cindy and John_A have already extended to 67 markers, so the cost of their further extension to 111 would be just $129 each (the regular price), or $109 or $119, if one were to wait for the next FTDNA testing sale (there’s usually one in the spring or summe). To extend Tee would cost either $220 or $188, however.

DENNISON Patrilineage 1 Project NEWS

17Jul2011

Project member Alan-05 has agreed to be available as backup project administrator in case something happens to me, and he may also be involved with special project that may arise. However, all business of the project will continue to flow through me unless you are otherwise advised.

The DNA results for new DENNISON Patrilineage 1 project member Wayne Earl Dennison (Wayne-19) have been posted, and his genealogy, which goes back to Grand Island, Erie Co NY, and thence (probably) to County Longford, Ireland, will be posted in due course.

The DNA results for Scottie-06 are being extended to 67 markers. Scottie’s extension is thanks to Alan-05, who has made a donation to the General Fund for that purpose. If you are interested in helping to further the DNA side of the project by making a donation yourself, please read what I have posted on the General Fund, here.

A couple of NPE matches have turned up to the haplotypes of patrilineage members Scottie-06, and Wayne-19. We may say that they are NPEs because they have different surnames than DENNISON (Balfour and Stone), and because there is now, courtesy of project member Barry, pretty good evidence that the Dennison-Denniston surname that runs in this bloodline goes back to the original gentry line of Scotland. Both of these NPEs have 67-marker results to compare to, so that when Scottie’s extension to 67 become available, we should have confirmation that they belong to the patrilineage, and I will contact them and offer them membership at that point.

10Sep2011

The DNA test results of extending Scottie-06, and Barry-13(Robert) from 37 to 67 markers have come in, and I have updated all the charts, and provided a new Patrilineage 1 Analysis, above. I have also added a few earliest known ancestral names to the Mutation History Tree.

The ancestral pedigree (descendancy) for Wayne-19 has been posted.

2Nov2011

Please welcome new member Tee Branch (Tee-20) to the project. Her DENNISON ancestor appears to have emigrated to the U.S. from County Tyrone, Ireland, after 1850, settling in upstate New York.

Please welcome new member Randle Dennison (Randle-22) to the project. Randle is the author of RD, a valuable book that follows the descendants of Daniel1 Denniston of Beverley Manor to Kentucky and “points west”. His DNA test results have proved to be identical to those of Alan-05, his fifth cousin once removed, and establish the paired mutations of DYS439=14 and DYS576-17 as markers for the descendancy of Daniel1.

26Feb2012

Please welcome new member Chris Dennison (Chris-23) to the project. Chris’s genealogy seems to show that he is a descendant of Daniel1 Denniston of Beverley Manor, through great-grandson Wiley4 (David3), but his DNA results essentially rule out a descendancy from Daniel1.

Cindy-02’s haplotype has been extended to 67-markers and the results go some way toward bringing her back into the fold of SW Virginian DENNISONs, despite its still inordinate number of mutations, and the fact that it lacks the DYS439=13 mutation that is characteristic of this line. In particular the new results tighten her Genetic Distance relationship to John_A-04, who does have the DYS439=13 mutation, bringing John_A and Cindy solidly into the circle of probable relations.

Consequently, I have significantly revised the mutation history tree to show Lane-01, her cousin Russell-07, John_A-04, and even Cindy-02, as descendants of a common ancestor—a contemporary of the Daniel1 Denniston of AugustaCo who is the ancestor of Alan-05, Randle-22, but probably not Scottie-06.

30May2012

Please welcome new member Ronald Denniston (a.k.a. Barry-25) to the project. Project member Barry Bradfield, who sponsored Ronald’s test, has traced Ronald’s line back to 1-Alexander (born abt 1663) of Drummeel, County Longford.

invisible writing

11Feb2015

Since my last update of this page there have been many new developments respecting DENNISON Patrilineage 1. First, we have acquired three new members: Sean Dennison (member# 29), who is Irish; Patrick Balfour (#34) who is a DENNISON despite an NPE that has affected his surname; and Mary Jane Michael, who is the genealogist for her husband’s Augusta County, Virginia, DENNISON ancestry, which evidently dovetails genealogically with that of Scottie and John E (member# 06). All three of these new members have turned out to be important keys to realizing this project’s ultimate goal: reconstructing the entire DENNISON Patrilineage 1 tree of descent from the ancient Scottish line—at least for the subset of its DNA-tested descendants.

Of even greater importance than the mere acquisition of these new members is that these three and seven others have now extended their haplotypes to 111 markers, which has made it possible to identify several new shared mutations, which, with the ones already discovered, makes it possible to sort most of the members into what I have termed CCC (closer cousin clusters). Even better, these DNA-determined clusters correspond nicely with the extensive genealogical research that has accumulated for this patrilineage. Besides adding these individual DNA haplotype results to the project haplotype chart, I’ve created a 111-marker Genetic Distance matrix that shows the overall structure of closeness of relationship across the patrilineage. I’ve also rewritten my analysis of the DENNISON Patrilineage 1 DNA from scratch to reflect the CCC organizing concept, and I will be revising the Mutation History Tree (which presents the same DNA data in a graphical outline form) accordingly.

Also of great importance, our expert Irish member, Barry Bradfield, who has extensively researched the Irish and Scottish roots of this ancient patrilineage, has provided us with a comprehensive ancestral tree that outlines the deep Irish and Scottish ancestries of many project members, and I have made use of this in my analysis of the new DNA results. I will also be drawing heavily on Barry’s chart in reworking the project Descendancies section (which comprises the posted ancestral pedigrees of the members), wherever possible extending backward and unifying individual pedigrees to bring them into line with what Barry has come up with. Because the volume of this Descendancies material has become so large, I intend to split it off to a separate “Descendancies” page, with an index that lists the members grouped by CCC under the heading of their most recent common patriarchal ancestor (MRCPA). I won’t be able to get around to this for a while though.

Finally, we anticipate the addition of another member of the DANIEL1 CCC—apparently a descendant of the same John3 (Daniel2, Daniel1) line that it seems project members Scottie and MaryJane descend from—although the additional research that might finally indicate how to make their connection, remains to be done. The DNA test of this new member is supposedly in progress (though there are continuing difficulties getting him connected as a member to the project), so watch this Project NEWS space for updates on that.

The DENNISON Patrilineage 1 Haplogroup: R-Z307* (Z304-)

A man’s yDNA may be classified according to a deeper, broader, ancestral tree schema by testing ySNPs instead of ySTR markers. These ySNPs are unique point mutations to the yChromosome that occur so much less frequently than ySTR mutations that they are of no use in sorting people into patrilineages, but by the same token they are ideal for sorting patrilineages into the various haplogroups and subclades of the broad human population. And by correlating the haplogroup subclades of both modern descendants and of their ancient ancestors (by testing their remains) with geographic population flows, and with archaeological evidence signifying cultural groupings, the whole broad history of homo sapiens is gradually being reconstructed. Each SNP mutation represents a further branching of the human tree, defining a new subclade.

DENNISON Patrilineage 1 falls in the broad classification of Haplogroup R1b, and within that into one of its two main subdivisions, defined by the mutation U106. This branch of the human population tree is therefore referred to as “R-U106+”, where “R” stands for Haplogroup R, and the “U106” for the most recent known SNP mutation in a particular descendancy. The “+” at the end means that additional SNPs have been found to have occurred downstream of U106 in the genomes of some members of the R-U106 subclade, and that these SNPs haven’t yet been tested for. Or, if all the next level SNPs had been tested for a particualar individual and found to be negative (i.e. that no further known mutations had occurred subsequent to U106), the haplogroup subclade for that individual would be termed “R-U106*”.

The U106 mutation itself is estimated to have occurred about 4200 years ago.

R1b, the broader subclade into which R-U106 falls, is the most prevalent haplogroup in northwest Europe, and in all its varieties it is shared by about 65% of all those with patrilineal British ancestry. R-U106 follows the main line of R1b, but it has a bit more of a Continental background than its main alternative line, R-L21, which is especially prevalent amongst the Celtic population of Ireland and Scotland.

R-U106 accounts for about 21.4% of all English haplogroups (though only 5.9% of Irish—there are no statistics for Scotland), but it is even more prevalent in the Netherlands (37.2%), Germany (20.5%), and Denmark (17.7%)— or in a word: Frisia. These are precisely the areas of Europe from which the Anglo-Saxon tribes staged in their takeover of England. Consequently, while Britain is today predominantly Celtic in its DNA (at least on the male side), the DENNISON Pat1 DNA probably represents a different, more Germanic strain.

However, this sort of talk is in reality a bit anachronistic because when U106 was differentiated about 2000 BCE, these cultural differences were still inchoate. You can glean a few more details about R-U106 from this Wiki article, which instead of talking Celts and Germans, contains a reference to the Bell Beaker culture.

The Latest Haplogroup Developments for Patrilineage 1: R-Z307* (Z304-)

Project member Alan (D-05) ordered FTDNA’s Big Y test on behalf of the patrilineage, and the results he has obtained, according to the most recent (as of 15Oct2014) analysis, indicate that DENNISON Patrilineage 1 may fall into a relatively small sub-clade of the human population haplotree. Big Y samples all or many of the ySNPs, and as more people undergo this test, and comparative analysis is undertaken on the results, we can expect an acceleration of the working out of the haplotree.

The DENNISON Patrilineage 1 haplogroup is now known to be positive for the following mutations within Haplogroup R1B (in order of descendancy): U106, Z381, Z156, and both Z306 and Z307 (so far all those who are positive for 306 are also positive for 307), and negative for Z304.

So far, many people have turned up Z306 postive, but of these only Alan is also Z304 negative. The latest version of the ISOGG Haplotree for Haplogroup R shows the ySNPs Z306 and Z304 to be on the same level (in the old nomenclature, R1b1a2a1a1c1a), but thanks to Alan’s result, which are so far unique, this section of the tree will now have to be revised to place Z304 on a subordinate level, and to make room for a category of hapolotypes that doesn’s follow the Z304 pathway.

The FTDNA haplotree guesses that Z307 is subordinate to (occurred after) Z306, so I’ve used Z307 as the designation for DENNISON Patrilineage 1. FTDNA reports SNPs p89, M93, L1, and L128 as subordinate to Z307, and suggests that L128 be tested next. The ISOGG tree puts SNPs DF96 and DF98 subordinate to Z306/307, but FTDNA doesn’t offer tests for those SNPs.

The possible genealogical relevance of this interesting result, and its utility for classifying people into DENNISON Patrilineage 1, are indeterminate at this point. If an estimate could be made of when the Z306 mutation occurred, and when the Z304 mutation (which so far all the others with Z306 positive share), we would be able to say that DENNISON Patrilineage 1 split off from this branch of the haplotree between those times. Chances are that this occurred during the period before surnames became general, but given that Patrilineage 1 has such ancient roots, it’s just possible that the Z304 mutation happened this side of the Norman Conquest, and thus within historical time, at least, if not family historical time. However, given that at least two subclade levels below Z304 have been identified (probably involving multiple surnames) this would seem to be quite unlikely.

Nonetheless, if one were to test a male surnamed DENNISON on Z306 and Z304, and find that he was postive for the first and negative for the second, that by itself would make it overwhelmingly likely that he belonged to DENNISON Patrilineage 1. However, since we are way beyond mere patrilineage classification now, and well into sorting Patrilineage 1 descendants into sub-branches of the family, there would be little utility in skipping the basic 37-marker ySTR test, unless the only goal of testing was to rule out the possibility that an untested genealogically indicated cousin of a DENNISON Patrilineage 1 member had experienced an NPE (Non-Paternity Event) somewhere up his ancestral tree.

At the rate progress is being made in this field, before too many more years have passed, some of these subclades will be brought down into genealogical time, and may even become a shortcut means of identifying patrilineages. In the meantime, you can read more about haplogroups and their distribution across the continents at this site.


DENNISON Patrilineage 1 ySTR DNA Haplotypes Compared

The following matrices, one for 37-marker comparisons, and one for 111-marker comparisons (for those project members who have extended to 111) provide some idea of the closeness of relationship across the full set of tested members of this patrilineage. The cell at the intersection of each column/row pair shows the GD (Genetic Distance) between the pair—this is an imperfect count of the total number of mutations that have occurred in both lines of descent since their MRCPA (Most Recent Common Patrilineal Ancestor) walked the earth.

It’s also possible to create corresponding matrices that show TMRCA (Time back to the MRCA, expressed either in generations or in years), but I’ve decided to forgo such charts because they are just too misleading as indicators of when a particular MRCA lived. Mutations are so sporadic and infrequent (even when a large number of markers is tested) that such estimates can easily be off by many hundreds of years. If one has the irresistable urge to play around with TMRCA estimates between particular haplotype pairs, the best way to indulge it is to run the FTDNA Tip calculator for that pair from one’s personal page—but be sure to input the number of generations for which one knows, genealogically, the bearers of these haplotypes cannot have had a common ancestor.

-

37-Marker Haplotype Genetic Distance Comparison Matrix

Genetic Distances, DENNISON Patrilineage 1 37-marker yDNA Matrices

Color-coding shows whether a haplotype pair Definitely, Probably, or just Possibly belongs to the patrilineage.

The number in each cell is the number of divergent mutations between each pair of haplotypes.

The lowest numbers represent the closest relationships.

Whether an outlier haplotype belongs to the same patrilineage should be judged by its lowest GD number.

However, the color-coded categories and the GD numbers don’t take account either of the common surname that most of these haplotypes share,
     or of the possible convergence of their genealogical evidence at a particular time and place, and where either of these conditions obtain,
     1 or 2 can reasonably be subtracted from the indicated GD in assessing whether an outlying haplotype belongs to the patrilineage.

-


-

111-Marker Haplotype Genetic Distance Comparison Matrix for DENNISON Patrilineage 1

Genetic Distances, DENNISON Patrilineage 1 67-marker yDNA Matrices

Color-coding shows whether a haplotype pair Definitely, Probably, or just Possibly belongs to the patrilineage.

The number in each cell is the number of divergent mutations between each pair of haplotypes.

The lowest numbers represent the closest relationships.

Whether an outlier haplotype belongs to the same patrilineage should be judged by its lowest GD number.

However, the color-coded categories and the GD numbers don’t take account either of the common surname that most of these haplotypes share,
     or of the possible convergence of their genealogical evidence at a particular time and place, and where either of these conditions obtain,
     2 or 3 can reasonably be subtracted from the indicated GD in assessing whether an outlying haplotype belongs to the patrilineage.


DENNISON Patrilineage 1 Mutation History Tree

*** THE MUTATION HISTORY TREE IS BEING RECONSTRUCTED TO ACCOMODATE ALL THE EXTENSIONS TO 111 MARKERS ***

DENNISON Patrilineage 1 yDNA Haplotypes

The chart below shows the haplotypes for each tested project member of this patrilineage. I’ve decapitated most of the marker names (truncating “DYS393” to just “393”) to improve readability. The colored markers mutate slower or faster than the norm. Thus, [DYS]439 is fast, [DYS]458 is faster, and CDYa&b are blazing, while [DYS]393 is slow. Shared mutations to slow markers are the most valuable as they are almost sure to have been inherited from a common ancestor, whereas shared mutations to fast markers may have occurred independently in two or more ancestral lines.

Haplotype Identifiers FTDNA 37-Marker Panel FTDNA Markers 38-67 FTDNA Markers 68-111 Haplotype Identifiers

Proj
#
 Principal
 Genealogist
Earliest Known Patrilineal Ancestor
(DENNISON surname omitted)

(Birth - Death)
c=circa   s=say
3
9
3
3
9
0
1
9
/
3
9
4
3
9
1
3
8
5
a
3
8
5
b
4
2
6
3
8
8
4
3
9
3
8
9
I
3
9
2
3
8
9
I
I
4
5
8
4
5
9
a
4
5
9
b
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
4
7
4
3
7
4
4
8
4
4
9
4
6
4
a
4
6
4
b
4
6
4
c
4
6
4
d
4
6
0
Y
G
-
H
4
Y
C
A
I
I
a
Y
C
A
I
I
b
4
5
6
6
0
7
5
7
6
5
7
0
C
D
Y
a
C
D
Y
b
4
4
2
4
3
8
5
3
1
5
7
8
3
9
5
S
1
a
3
9
5
S
1
b
5
9
0
5
3
7
6
4
1
4
7
2
4
0
6
S
1
5
1
1
4
2
5
4
1
3
a
4
1
3
b
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
7
1
0
4
8
5
6
3
2
4
9
5
5
4
0
7
1
4
7
1
6
7
1
7
5
0
5
5
5
6
5
4
9
5
8
9
5
2
2
4
9
4
5
3
3
6
3
6
5
7
5
6
3
8
4
6
2
4
5
2
4
4
5
Y
G
-
A
1
0
4
6
3
4
4
1
Y
G
-
1
B
0
7
5
2
5
7
1
2
5
9
3
6
5
0
5
3
2
7
1
5
5
0
4
5
1
3
5
6
1
5
5
2
7
2
6
6
3
5
5
8
7
6
4
3
4
9
7
5
1
0
4
3
4
4
6
1
4
3
5

Proj
#
 Principal
 Genealogist
D-19  Wayne Denniston Alexander (c1663 - coLongfordIRE) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 15 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 38 12 12 22 12 D-19  Wayne Denniston
D-25  Barry (Ronald Den.) Alexander (c1663 - coLongfordIRE) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 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 12 12 11 15 11 11 13 12 37 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 14 10 10 9 13 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-25  Barry (Ronald Den.)
D-13  Barry (Robert Den.) John (1758 IRE-1842 NB,CAN) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 18 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 37 12 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 21 20 12 12 11 15 11 11 13 12 D-13  Barry (Robert Den.)
D-12  Barry (Sidney Den.) James (c1801 CorkIRE - 1869 OntarioCAN) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 37 12 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 12 12 11 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 14 10 10 9 13 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-12  Barry (Sidney Den.)
D-29  Sean Dennison ---pedigree under construction--- 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 37 12 12 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 12 12 11 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 14 10 10 9 13 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-29  Sean Dennison
D-23  Chris Dennison John (c1830 OH - 1932) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 36 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 13 10 10 9 14 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-23  Chris Dennison
D-05  Alan Denison Daniel (s1688 IRE - by 1749 AugustaCoVA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 13 10 10 9 14 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 18 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-05  Alan Denison
D-22  Randle Dennison Daniel (s1688 IRE - by 1749 AugustaCoVA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 13 10 10 9 14 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-22  Randle Dennison
D-06  Scottie Dennison James A (c1829 VA - 1859 VA 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 13 12 13 10 10 9 14 12 10 11 11 29 12 13 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-06  Scottie Dennison
D-34  Mary Jane Michael John (c1820 VA - 1856 AugustaCoVA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 13 12 13 10 10 9 14 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 24 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-34  Mary Jane Michael
D-01  Lane Teaff Scott (c1794 Wash.CoVA-1882 RussellCoVA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 35 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 D-01  Lane Teaff
D-07  Russell Denison Scott (c1794 Wash.CoVA-1882 RussellCoVA) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 35 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 25 26 19 12 12 14 10 10 9 13 12 10 11 11 29 12 14 25 13 10 11 18 15 19 13 23 18 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-07  Russell Denison
D-32  Patrick Balfour William BALFOUR (1734 Glasgow SCO -) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 14 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 17 35 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 35 15 9 17 12 26 26 19 12 12 14 10 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 29 12 13 25 13 10 10 19 15 19 13 23 17 12 16 24 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11 D-32  Patrick BALFOUR
D-04  John Allen Dennison John (say 1770 VA - by 1842) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 14 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 15 15 18 18 35 37 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 15 11 11 13 12 D-04  John Allen Dennison
D-20  Tee Branch Hugh (c1784 coTyroneIRE - 1871 NY) 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 14 19 29 15 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 16 15 18 18 36 37 12 12 22 13 D-20  Tee Branch
D-02  Cindy Denniston genealogy says Scott; DNA says otherwise 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 14 15 16 16 11 10 19 23 17 15 18 18 35 35 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 15 11 11 13 12 D-02  Cindy Denniston

You may click on highlighted Project#s (like D-05) to see the posted pedigree for a particular test subject. Click on highlighted Researcher names, like Alan Denison to go to the project directory that shows the full names of the members, and provides clickable e-mail links for the names highlighted there.

The test subject whose “Earliest Known Ancestor” is colored red is the one whose haplotype differs the least from all the others and is therefore designated the Root Prototype Haplotype (RPH)—the haplotype that is likely to be the closest to that of the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) of the group. Marker values that deviate from those of the RPH are deemed to be mutations, and are highlighted in lime green—or tomato, for multistep mutations. Markers with null values, due to deletions, are rendered in dark seagreen.

Where the multicopy markers DYS464 and YCA (each taken as a whole) diverge in value from those of the RPH, the whole adjacent set of values will be colored yellow green, and will be counted as a single mutation. In the same way, reclOH mutations, which may affect several blocks of separated markers, will be colored orange and treated all as a single mutation for purposes of calculating Genetic Distance.

*** THIS CONTENT WAS STOLEN FROM JOHNBROBB.COM IN VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT LAW ***


Last updated 15Mar2015
© John Barrett Robb
Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict Valid CSS 3

*** THIS PAGE WAS STOLEN FROM JOHNBROBB.COM IN VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT LAW ***