ENDERLIN "DEEP" ANCESTRY
(Genetic Genealogy of our Enderlin Line)
by
Dean A. Enderlin, January 2005
(updated April 2005, January 2006)
For recent addenda to the main report, click
here
Introduction
A new and
rapidly developing field
of genealogy is genetic genealogy or "deep ancestry." This is the
analysis of certain parts of an individual's genetic code to determine
a family's place in the human genetic tree. For a scientist
(geologist) like
myself, this is a fascinating bridge between our modern ancestral
research and anthropological studies in Ice Age Europe. The
science of genetics has its own
nomenclature, which can be difficult to understand. Like all
sciences, special terms are used to simplify and standardize
communication between specialists in the field. Often, acronyms
are used in place of complicated terms. A common example of this
is "DNA", which is short for "deoxyribonucleic acid."
DNA is made up of complexly interconnected sugar and
phosphate
molecules, connected by nitrogen-bearing molecules called bases. The bases form the
so-called "rungs" of the well known DNA "double helix." There are
four types of base, each symbolized by a letter: G = guanine, C =
cytosine, A = adenine, and T = thymine. Bases occur as pairs (base pairs), and
combine with each other according to certain rules. Base pairs
form repetitive
sequences, which can be measured and counted by means of special
tests. Excellent and more detailed discussions of the basics of
genetics in genealogy can be found at the following URLs:
(see Tutorial and
Masterclass tabs)
The goal of
genetic testing in
genealogy is quite different than that of forensic DNA testing, which
is often seen in popular television series. In forensics, the
goal is to analyze areas of human DNA that are unique to an
individual. In genealogy, the goal is to analyze areas of human
DNA that are common to a related group. As genealogists, we are
less interested in those characteristics that make us unique, as we are
in those characteristics that show how we are related to others.
To accomplish this, specific areas (
loci)
of the human chromosome are analyzed. These areas are typically
portions of the chromosome known as "junk DNA." They are
artifacts of our past evolution, that appear to serve no function in
modern humans. It is said that about 97% of the human genome is
designated as "junk." There are many theories as to why so much
of the human genetic code appears to have no function. A
discussion of the theories is well beyond the scope of this
essay.
Suffice it to say, that "junk DNA" is of great value to genealogy,
because it can theoretically be passed down through hundreds of
generations with a low likelihood of mutation. Mutation is a
natural process of random change in the genetic code. It is an
essential part of survival and adaptation of all species. In
genealogy, we look for those areas where the least amount of mutation
has occurred, because it is there that the legacy of our human
ancestors is stored in its theoretically least altered form.
Y-Chromosome
DNA
Each of us
inherits combined or "shuffled" genetic attributes from our mother and
father, so it is necessary to separate
areas in our
genetic code that are unique to our paternal and maternal lines.
In other words, we want genetic material that is non-recombinant or haploid. Y-chromosome DNA
(Y-DNA) is
used to analyze the genetics of a male's
paternal line, while mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is used for the mother's
line. Only males inherit the Y-chromosome, so it is a
valuable means of looking at paternal ancestry. Because I am a
male in the Enderlin line, I carry the Y-chromosomes of my father, my
father's father, my father's father's father, and every male ancestor
of the paternal line infinitely far back into the genetic past.
For practical purposes, there is a limit to how far back one can
reasonably trace a male line, because mutations do occur even in the
so-called "junk DNA." The frequency of mutations is derived
statistically, which opens plenty of room for debate. It is
generally believed (but not universally
accepted), that the rate of change in the loci used in Y-chromosome
tests is about 1 mutation in 500 generations. Using my own
ancestral Enderlin line as an example (12 generations spanning 418
years, or 34.8 years per generation), there
is a high statistical likelihood that my Y-chromosome results would be
identical to those of my paternal ancestor who lived about 17,000 years
ago (assuming 34.8 years per generation multiplied by 500
generations). This, of course, assumes that the average number of
years per generation has remained constant through time. Many
believe that, prior to the Dark Ages, the average number of years per
generation was conservatively on the order of 20.
Because a surname (family name) is usually passed on
from father to
son, the surname and the Y-chromosome DNA characteristics are closely
tied
together. For our Enderlin family, this opens the possibility of
comparing our Y-chromosome results to those of other lines whose
relationship to ours has not yet been established. For genealogy
purposes, certain loci in the
Y-chromosome have been designated
as standard sites for study. The segments that are analyzed,
known as
markers, reveal
repetitive and distinctive patterns in base pairs at that
location. Markers are assigned alphanumeric names called DYS
numbers (
DNA
Y-Chromosome unique
Segment). DYS
standards are controlled and administered by a committee under the
Human Genome Organization (HUGO). Combinations of base pairs in
varying lengths are
tested to see how many times they consecutively occur with the same
combination in a defined
marker. The repeats, called STRs (
Short
Tandem
Repeats) are counted for
each marker and reported as a whole number. This number is also
known as an
allele.
My Y-chromosome
DNA was analyzed by
FamilyTreeDNA (
www.familytreedna.com
) in 2003. The test establishes
allele values for twenty-five (25) DYS markers.
The results are tabulated below:
Marker:
|
393 |
390
|
19
|
391
|
385a
|
385b
|
426
|
388
|
439
|
389-1
|
392
|
389-2
|
458
|
459a
|
459b
|
455
|
454
|
447
|
437
|
448
|
449
|
464a
|
464b
|
464c
|
464d
|
Allele:
|
13
|
22
|
14
|
11
|
13
|
14
|
11
|
14
|
12
|
12
|
11
|
29
|
15
|
8
|
9
|
8
|
11
|
24
|
16
|
20
|
30
|
12
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
Additional Y-chromosome DNA analyses
were
made by FamilyTreeDNA on the same sample in April 2005. This
expands the number of markers to thirty-seven
(37). The additional twelve markers include
those using the DYS nomenclature (i.e., DYS460, DYS456, etc.) and
other standard markers
with somewhat different naming conventions (i.e., TAGA-H4, YCA II a,
etc.). The
results are tabulated
below:
Marker:
|
460
|
TAGA
H4*
|
YCA
II a
|
YCA
II b
|
456
|
607
|
576
|
570
|
CDY a
|
CDY b
|
442
|
438
|
Allele:
|
10
|
11
|
19
|
21
|
15
|
14
|
16
|
20
|
34
|
38
|
12
|
10
|
* Note:
The original value reported by FamilyTreeDNA was for the marker
GATA-H4. The nomenclature is currently undergoing a change, due
to the establishment of a new NIST standard. The GATA-H4 marker
is being redesignated as TAGA-H4, with the allele value adjusted upward
by one. The originally reported allele value for GATA-H4, was
10. For TAGA-H4 (as shown above), the value is 11.
According to FamilyTreeDNA, certain markers in the
above tables tend to have a higher mutation rate than average.
These markers are identified with an underlined value. For
comparison between related family branches, these would be the most
likely to show variability.
My tabulated
results can also be viewed and compared against other world results at
the following URLs:
Enderlin
Origins in the Great Ice Age
The combination
of allele values
listed above establishes my
haplotype,
which should be identical or nearly identical to most of my close male
Enderlin cousins.
Mutations occasionally creep into the DNA, but the likelihood is very
low. The haplotype will hopefully help us understand our Enderlin
family's connections to other Enderlins and families with the spelling
variants Enderle, Enderli, Enderl, Enderlein and Anderlini.
Of equal interest is how the Enderlins fit into the
human family
tree (called the
phylogenetic
tree). This is a part of the research that I find particularly
interesting, because of my geology background. It takes the story
of the Enderlins all the way back to a period in geologic time commonly
called the "Great Ice Age."
Before continuing with the discussion of the human
phylogenetic tree, a
quick primer on Europe in the Pleistocene Epoch is in order. The
Pleistocene was a period in geologic time that commenced about 1.6
million years ago. It ended about 10,000 years ago, and was
followed by
the Holocene Epoch (which continues to this day). Geologic time
periods are subdivided for the most part by major transitions of life
on
earth, and the Pleistocene was characterized by large mammals (
megafauna) which had evolved in
response to the cold conditions. Modern humans also arose in the
Late Pleistocene, in an
archeological time frame known as the Upper (Late) Paleolithic.
It is
in the Upper Paleolithic that most of our focus will be given.
The Pleistocene is generally viewed as a period in which the earth's
climate was colder and
wetter than average. It corresponds roughly with a paleoclimatic
period called an
ice epoch,
which can be further subdivided into
ice
age cycles. Even in
an ice age cycle,
the climate is in constant change. As a result, any given ice
age cycle can be subdivided into colder periods (
glacials) and warmer
periods (
interglacials).
In Europe, there were at least
four major glacial stages during the Pleistocene.
In the vicinity of the Alps, these were (from oldest to most recent)
the Günz (Guenz), Mindel,
Riß (Riss)
and Würm (Wuerm), named after various river valleys where glacial
deposits of
varying ages were originally studied. Climate was generally dry
and cold in the ice age glacials, with winter temperatures in Europe
probably averaging 15° to 20° C lower than today's
temperatures.
When one considers that the average winter temperature in present-day
Germany is 0° C (freezing), it makes one realize how harsh the
climate
was during a glacial maximum! It is also thought that surface
winds were much more severe in the cold periods.
The Würm glacial stage (called the Wisconsinan
in
North America, and
the Weichsel in northern Europe/Scandinavia) began about 75,000 years
ago.
It was the last of the great glacial advances of the Pleistocene, and
it was the most important in terms of human migration patterns in
Europe and Asia. It saw the rise of anatomically modern humans (
Homo sapiens sapiens), and the
extinction of one of the most famous branches in the Ice Age human
family tree, the Neanderthals (
H.
sapiens neanderthalensis or
H.
neanderthalensis). Although the Würm is considered
to be a period of
general glacial advancement throughout Europe, it experienced transient
periods of warming within its time frame. These brief warm
periods, called
oscillations
or
interstadials, are key
milestones in European anthropological and genetic research.
Interstadials are
different from interglacial periods, in that they are too brief to
allow significant ecosystem reversals in glaciated areas. The
climate in the interstadials was sufficiently mild to permit humans to
migrate out of genetically isolated areas (
refugia) in southern Europe, only
to be
turned
back by the return of the impenetrable cold. The gene flow
corresponding with each of the "warm spells" is traceable in the DNA of
modern
humans.
Eight interstadials are recognized in the Würm.
The Würm interstadials and consequent
migrations
brought with
them milestones in human culture. Each migration introduced (more
or less) cultural change which is apparent in the archeological
record. The four main cultural periods for anatomically modern
humans in the Upper Paleolithic
are (from oldest to most recent):
Aurignacian, Gravettian, Solutrean and Magdalenian. The
Aurignacian overlaps somewhat with another cultural industry called the
Chatelperronian. The latter is thought to be the last vestige of
the Neanderthal culture prior to their extinction. The four
cultural revolutions are thought to represent
influxes of new (or returning) human populations into central and
western Europe, each with its own genetic and cultural history.
Cladistics
Armed with a
clearer picture of the anthropological/archeological setting in Ice Age
Europe, let's return to the matter of genetics. My haplotype in
itself does not
clearly establish the placement of the Enderlin paternal line in the
human
phylogenetic tree. To do that, one must perform additional tests,
which are discussed below. This is an especially fascinating part
of understanding one's genetic origins, because it relates the family
to the greater human population. The science of subdividing
related groups
within a population based on genetic characteristics is known
as
phylogenetic systematics
or
cladistics. It is
not an easy science for non-geneticists to comprehend, and its
assumptions are subject to scientific debate. Nevertheless, the
concept of tracing branches of the human tree backwards in time using
mutation events is fascinating and quite realistic. Cladistics,
as the science relates to humans, relies on the following assumptions:
1) That the various branches of the human family tree are
descended from a common ancestor.
2) That the human family tree branches (bifurcates).
3) That lineages undergo changes in characteristics over time.
When
different populations of humans became isolated from each other in the
Ice Age, they tended to develop genetic traits that were distinctive
within each group. Nature is constantly experimenting with
mutation, and the longer a population is genetically isolated from
other populations, the greater the likelihood that distinctive genetic
characteristics for each population will develop. Cold periods
(stadials) within the Würm glacial stage would have been times
when
humans
retreated to areas that were sanctuaries from the harsh climate.
In fact, it is thought that humans were forced away from all or most of
northern
Europe during especially cold periods in the Würm (wouldn't you,
if a
four kilometer high wall of ice was coming at you?). Just as
continental ice sheets advanced and retreated (oscillated) during the
Ice Age, so
did human populations. During periods of renewed westward and
northward migration, previously isolated human populations
introduced their distinctive genetic characteristics (
mutations or
polymorphisms) as they populated
the lands that
they ventured into. Certain markers in the Y-chromosome DNA are
attributed to different waves of humans who ventured into central and
western
Europe in the Paleolithic and Neolithic archeological periods. At
least 18 of these major genetic groups have been identified
and named. Humans of European descent usually fall into one of
these groups, called
haplogroups
or
clades.
To determine the haplogroup to which the Enderlin
family belongs, I had
an additional test performed by FamilyTreeDNA in August 2003.
This test is called the SNP test,
where SNP (pronounced "snip") stands for
Single
Nucleotide
Polymorphism. A SNP
is different from a STR (Short Tandem Repeat), in that it involves the
replacement of only one element in a base pair. The element that
changes is a nucleotide molecule containing one of the bases (guanine,
cytosine, adenine or thymine). STR's, on the other hand, have to
do with repetitive patterns in combinations of base pairs. Major
human migration events are thought to be represented by certain SNP
markers. Mutations in these areas of the DNA are thought to occur
about every 7,000 years. These diagnostic mutations are called
"unique event polymorphisms", because they represent significant
milestones at which the human phylogenetic tree (
cladogram) branched. The
presence or absence of a given marker can establish where one's
ancestors were and who they were related to at a given time in
prehistory. Most Europeans
possess the old markers that represent the original humans that
migrated from Africa to the Middle East, and then to southwest
Asia. These migrations are thought to have begun about 150,000
years ago. The specific mutations that represent these events are
called (from oldest to youngest) the M94, M168 and M89 mutations.
The M89 mutation is thought to have occurred about 50,000 years
ago. It is the "launching point" from which almost all of the
European clades emerge.
The SNP
test for my
Y-chromosome DNA reveals that
our Enderlin
line
belongs to Haplogroup I. This haplogroup classification is
part of a new nomenclature developed in 2002 by the Y Chromosome
Consortium (YCC). In the earlier nomenclature, our Enderlin
branch would have been assigned to
Haplogroup HG2.
The table
below lists the common haplotype for the (now abandoned) Haplogroup
HG2, and compares it to my own results. The first six markers
(left to right) are the early standards for genetic studies. The
table also includes two additional markers that are diagnostic for HG2
(shown in the two right-hand columns):
DYS:
|
388 |
393
|
392
|
19
|
390
|
391
|
426
|
438
|
Most common HG2 allele:
|
14
|
13
|
11
|
14
|
22
|
10
|
11
|
10
|
Enderlin results (Haplogroup I):
|
14
|
13
|
11
|
14
|
22
|
11
|
11
|
10
|
Not surprisingly, there is a mismatch for DYS-391,
but all other alleles
match. DYS-390 and DYS-391 show some variability in the old HG2
classification. The allele for DYS-391 is most often 10, however,
about 10% yield a value of 11. The Enderlin lineage obviously
falls into that less frequent group. The above table gives an
interesting historical comparison to haplogroup assignments, however,
I'll restrict my terminology to the new nomenclature in the following
discussions.
Members of Haplogroup I
possess a
shared distinctive characteristic (
synapomorphy)
known as the M170 mutation (an adenine-to-cytosine transversion).
Haplogroup I members account for about 18% of all European paternal
lineages. Today, Haplogroup I occurs throughout central Europe
and northward into Scandinavia. The M170 mutation is one of two
mutations
that trace back to Upper Paleolithic times in central Europe. The
other
mutation, known as M173, has an older origin. It is assigned to
Haplogroup R1b. It is believed that these two haplogroups
represent the earliest of the Upper Paleolithic
anatomically modern
human cultures in Europe. Thus, Haplogroup R1b represents
the humans who introduced the Aurignacian culture (circa 40,000 to
30,000
years b.p.), while Haplogroup I represents those who introduced the
Gravettian culture (circa 28,000 - 22,000 years b.p.).
The association of these changes in "cultural industries" to
human genetic dissemination is somewhat controversial, even
though there appear to be close temporal ties that support this
conclusion. Some argue that cultures like the Gravettian spread
too rapidly throughout Ice Age Europe to be associated with one
migratory wave. Instead, it is suggested that the innovations of
the Gravettian were readily adopted by preexisting populations, who
recognized and were willing to forego their existing technology for
Gravettian improvements. This is a valid argument which deserves
continued scientific debate, but the
coincidence of cultural revolutions with periods of human migration
and assimilation is, to me, a simpler hypothesis.
When discussing cultural change, one issue to
consider is how many
people were involved in this change. Most researchers agree that
the late Paleolithic was a time of major human population expansion,
and it may well be that it is population pressure that influenced the
migratory waves of humans to the west and north from areas near the
Black and Caspian Seas. Estimates of the population of Europe in
the Upper Paleolithic are naturally highly speculative, ranging from
50,000 to 500,000 individuals. Whichever total one uses, it's a
far cry from today's European population of about 700 million!
Haplogroup I
branched into several
subclades (I*, I1, I2 and I3, with further divisions I1a, I1b,
etc.).
These apparently evolved when Gravettian populations were forced
southward into isolated glacial refugia during the Last Glacial Maximum
(LGM)
in the Late Pleistocene.
At present, the resolution of SNP tests performed on our Y-DNA confirms
that the "backbone" haplogroup is I. Further analyses are pending
to determine if mutations associated with a particular subclade
exist. For now, so no
further discussion of subclades will be made here.
The
Gravettian Culture
So, what exactly
is the Gravettian
culture? It is an Upper Paleolithic culture that extended as
far west as Wales, as far east as the Russian Plain, and as far south
as the Iberian Peninsula. The Gravettian industry existed from
about 28,000 years b.p. to 22,000 years b.p. It is sometimes
subdivided into
two groups: Western (Upper Périgordian) and Eastern
(Pavlovian). The culture is
named for the type locality, the La Gravette rockshelter, located in
the Dordogne region of southwest France. Gravettian remains are
widespread in Europe. One of the most significant sites (Hohle
Fels, the "cave rock", near Ulm) is located only 140 km (87 miles) east
of Köndringen, where our earliest known Enderlin ancestors
lived.
Gravettian cultural artifacts are
characterized by a number of technological innovations, the most
distinctive being the Gravette point (a small, pointed blade with a
characteristic blunt straight back). Gravette points occur in
tightly-defined ranges of size, shape, and weight, suggesting that this
culture adhered to a technology that relied on precise
specifications. Gravettians are also believed to have invented
the bow and arrow and tanged arrowheads.
Gravettians were hunter-gatherers who occupied
the great periglacial plains (steppe-tundra) during the period just
prior to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) of the Würm glacial
stage.
Trees were rare in this environment, and
Gravettians concentrated most of their hunting skills on hunting herd
animals
in the vast grasslands of the Ice Age plains. Their prey included
mammoth (
Mammuthus primigenius),
reindeer (
Rangifer tarandus),
woolly rhinoceros (
Coelodonta
antiquitatus), steppe bison (
Bison
priscus), wild cattle or "aurochs" (
Bos primigenius),
horse (
Equus sp.), and smaller
animals. Cave
bear (
Ursus spelaeus) remains
have also been found in association with hearth sites, indicating that
they were probably also hunted. Gravettian settlements were large
and
well organized, suggesting that their society may have had a leadership
hierarchy. Eastern Gravettians built tents or yurt-like
structures for
habitation, while westerners appear to have been more partial to
caves. In the eastern Gravettian structures,
mammoth bones (especially jaws) and tusks were often included in their
foundations. Gravettian hunting skills were so efficient that
they were able to generate surpluses of food, which were stored in
special pits near their dwellings. Some Gravettians apparently
wore woven and knotted fabrics, as evidenced by clay impressions dating
back 27,000 years, and by representations of fabric in their
artwork. Their artwork was especially noteworthy for its small
carved figures and bas-reliefs of the exaggerated female form, known as
"Venus
figures." One of the more famous of these Aurignacian/Gravettian
carvings is the limestone
figure called the "Venus of Willendorf," which was found near the
village of Willendorf (near Krems) on the Danube River, Austria.
Gravettians continued and improved on earlier
techniques of cave painting and etching, although some say the
Gravettian style is a bit "stiff." In addition to depiction of
prey animals and predators, Gravettian cave art also includes finger
tracings and renderings of the human form. As with earlier
cultures, Gravettians used ochre as a coloring agent. This
substance appears to have been an important part of rituals and
burials, possibly tied to shamanism. Ochre is a red or yellow
pigment, usually derived from the iron oxide minerals hematite,
goethite or limonite. When mixed with clay, blood, fat or another
binding agent, it can be applied to skin, rock or other
materials. The use of ochre in the Upper Paleolithic cultures is
somewhat mysterious. It was probably used for symbolism and
ritual, but it may have had more practical uses as well (i.e., as a
tanning agent for hides, abrasive in jewelry manufacture, etc.).
Gravettian art was not limited to Venus figures and
cave
painting. They were excellent bead makers and sculptors, using
bone, ivory, calcite, hematite and steatite. Many of their
carvings display elaborate geometric patterns, some of which may depict
patterns related to their weaving skills. Eastern Gravettians
fired
ceramics in specialized kilns, but not for the purpose of making
vessels. Instead, their ceramics were probably used in
ritualistic acts. Thousands of fragments of ceramic human and
animal figures have been found at some eastern sites, all fragmented by
having been thermally shocked in cold water while hot. Gravettian
culture also produced flute-like instruments, as did earlier cultures
in the region.
Summary
As we delve
deeper into the Enderlin ancestry, we continue to learn more about
ourselves. Combined with a documented history spanning nearly 500
years, our genetic research enhances what we know about our family
origins. Still, there is much that we don't know. Our
family name stems from the Alemannic dialect, but does that mean we are
descended from the 3rd Century Germanic tribes known as the Alemanni or
the Suebi? The answers to such questions are lost in history.
Y-chromosome DNA results may someday reveal how we
are connected with other Enderlin lines in central Europe. We
have yet to connect our line to the 15th Century Alsatian Enderlin line
from the Haut-Rhin region of France, or to the Enderlins of the
Italian/Swiss Alps who trace their ancestry to 13th Century
Walser culture. Nor can we yet connect to the German Enderlin
lines from
17th Century Zeuthen in Brandenburg, 16th Century Lörrach in
southernmost Baden-Württemberg, or 15th Century Zwickau in Saxony
(Sachsen). Perhaps, in time, we will be able to establish
connections to these other families through genetic research. I
would welcome contact from anyone who may be interested in pursuing
these connections.
My Enderlin Line
|
( ? ) Enderlin
(before
1523 -? )
|
|
|
Christman Enderlin
(c.1543
-1630)
|
|
|
Jacob (der Junge) Enderlin
(c.1574
- 1628)
|
|
|
Geörg Enderlin
(1607
- 1678)
|
|
|
Hanß Jacob Enderlin
(c.1650
- ? )
|
|
|
Elias Enderlin
(1674
- 1712)
|
|
|
Johann Georg (Hannß Georg) Enderlin
(1712 -
1747)
|
|
|
Georg Michael Enderlin
(1741 -
1792)
|
|
|
Georg Michael Enderlin
(1775
- 1834)
|
|
|
Johann Georg Enderlin
(1807 -
1859)
|
|
|
Wilhelm Enderlin
(1846 - 1914)
|
|
|
George Jacob Enderlin
(1891
- 1979)
|
|
|
Roy Dean Enderlin
(living)
|
|
|
Dean Andrew Enderlin
(living)
|
ADDENDA
Related Families: Heuchert
6 January 2005
Since posting
the 37-marker Y-DNA data in early 2005, one close match has
surfaced. This is
an exciting development, especially because the related family has a
different family name. The connection was made in September 2005,
between my Y-DNA results and those of the late Rudy C. Heuchert (1920 -
2005) of
Shoreline, Washington. Sadly, Mr. Heuchert passed away only a few
days before his results were received. I contacted the Heuchert
family after
receiving notice of the match, and they generously shared a great deal
of information on their family's paternal ancestry. Further
information on
the Heuchert Y-DNA results can be viewed at
Ysearch
(User ID TQQ5S).
My Enderlin data and those of Rudy Heuchert are
presented and
compared in the tables
below. Alleles for Heuchert Y-DNA that differ from
those for Enderlin Y-DNA are highlighted in pink. Note that, of
the 37 markers tested, all alleles match with the
exception of three (DYS389-2, DYS458, and CDY b). Such a
close match is quite rare for families with differing
surnames. Thus, there is an extremely high probability that our
Enderlin paternal ancestry and that of the Heuchert family converge in
the not-too-distant genetic past, probably shortly before the time that
surnames were first coming into use.
Marker:
|
393 |
390
|
19
|
391
|
385a
|
385b
|
426
|
388
|
439
|
389-1
|
392
|
389-2
|
458
|
459a
|
459b
|
455
|
454
|
447
|
437
|
448
|
449
|
464a
|
464b
|
464c
|
464d
|
Enderlin:
|
13
|
22
|
14
|
11
|
13
|
14
|
11
|
14
|
12
|
12
|
11
|
29
|
15
|
8
|
9
|
8
|
11
|
24
|
16
|
20
|
30
|
12
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
Heuchert:
|
13
|
22
|
14
|
11
|
13
|
14
|
11
|
14
|
12
|
12
|
11
|
28
|
14
|
8
|
9
|
8
|
11
|
24
|
16
|
20
|
30
|
12
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
Marker:
|
460
|
TAGA
H4*
|
YCA
II a
|
YCA
II b
|
456
|
607
|
576
|
570
|
CDY
a
|
CDY
b
|
442
|
438
|
Enderlin:
|
10
|
11
|
19
|
21
|
15
|
14
|
16
|
20
|
34
|
38
|
12
|
10
|
Heuchert:
|
10
|
11
|
19
|
21
|
15
|
14
|
16
|
20
|
34
|
36
|
12
|
10
|
Based on the
results for the 37 markers, the "genetic distance" between our two
families is 4. Genetic distance is calculated by subtracting the
numeric values between the two sets of nonmatching alleles, and
totaling the results. The following table summarizes the
calculation:
Marker:
|
389-2
|
458
|
CDY
b
|
Enderlin:
|
29
|
15
|
38
|
Heuchert:
|
28
|
14
|
36
|
Difference:
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
Sum = 4
|
A genetic distance of 4 for 37 markers implies that
a total of four
mutation events have occurred in one or both of our family lines since
the time of our MRCA (
Most
Recent
Common
Ancestor). Mutations
are expected over the course of many centuries, so these results come
as no surprise. It is noteworthy that two of the three
mismatching markers are known to mutate at a higher rate than average
(note the underlined values). This has to be taken into account
when estimating the number of generations back to the MRCA. The
Enderlin paternal family line can be reliably traced back 13
generations
from the tested individual, while the Heuchert paternal family line can
be reliably traced back 8 generations from the tested individual (D.
Berg, personal communication, 2005).
To assist in estimating the time since the MRCA,
FamilyTreeDNA offers a special utility called the FTDNATip
TM
Report. This utility takes into account the variability in
mutation rates for the individual markers. It also allows the
user to take into account documented research, which in our case
suggests that the two family lines do
not share a common ancestor
for at least 13 generations back in time. Selected results, based
on these
factors, are presented below (courtesy FamilyTreeDNA):
95.92% probability that the MRCA
between the Heucherts and Enderlins was within 625 years
98.79% probability that the MRCA between the Heucherts and Enderlins
was within 725 years
99.66% probability that the MRCA between the Heucherts and Enderlins
was within 825 years
99.91% probability that the MRCA between the Heucherts and Enderlins
was within 925 years
Although
statistical comparisons can be a bit "dry," these results are quite
significant. They tell us that the probability is greater than
99.9% that
our two families branched from a common ancestor within the last 925
years. That estimate would take us back to around the 11th
Century
A.D., when surnames were just developing (our individual paternal
pedigrees are documented back to the 1600's). What is especially
interesting, is that our earliest documented paternal ancestors lived
very near
to each other! My earliest known Enderlin ancestor, Christman
Enderlin (born circa 1543), lived in
Koendringen in the Breisgau area of what is now the state of
Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. Rudy Heuchert's earliest
known Heuchert
ancestor was Johann Peter Heuchert, who was born circa 1685 in
Ensheim, in the Rheinhessen area of what is now the state of
Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany (D. Berg, pers. comm., 2005).
The two villages are about 120 miles (193 km) apart, both being located
in the Upper Rhine (Oberrhein) region of Germany. This remarkably
close geographic
relationship suggests that the ancestries of the two families may be
deeply rooted in that particular region.
Spelling variants of the Heuchert name include Heichert, Heichard, Haychert, Heychert, Heihert, Hiichert, Heigert, Auchert and others. It
is said
that the present-day Heuchert family of Hannoversch-Muenden, Hessen,
Germany, originated as Basques from northern Spain (D. Berg, pers.
comm.,
2005). Further research is necessary to confirm this. If it
proves true, then the Enderlin deep ancestry may have a similar
origin.
Contact
Information: