Asturian-American Migration Forum

I started by doing my genealogy. And noticed that the surname Cienfuegos started in Asturias, Spain. Then discovered by talking to others with the surname Cienfuegos that not only my branch but others as well have a rumor that a lot of the Cienfuegos families say they are related to one another.. That is when I decided to have my DNA tested. So now we have this project started.. Lets find out how true this rumor is…And start building our family tree..
A Surname Project traces members of a family that share a common surname. Since surnames are passed down from father to son like the Y-chromosome, this test is for males taking a Y-DNA test. Females do not carry their father's Y-DNA and acquire a new surname by way of marriage, so the tested individual must be a male that wants to check his direct paternal line (father's father's father's...) with a Y-DNA12, Y-DNA37, or Y-DNA67 marker test.
Here is a link to the site if your surname is Cienfuegos please join or if you know someone with the surmane Cienfuegos please pass this information onto them..Thank you
Link:
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Cienfuegos/

Traducido mal:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_ur ... x&lp=en_es

This type of search is likely to lead you nowhere due to rec-LOH mutations .

If, while doing normal genealogical research you find a family that appears to be related to yours but there is no documents that prove that, i/e a Carlos Cienfuegos in your family tree and you know of a man by the same name in another tree but there is no way to prove that these two are the same person then have them tested. IF their markers match yours you can say with certain degree of certainty that it is likely these are two branches of the same family.

For instance you and I match on 34 out of 43 markers, not counting the FTDNA markers I've not been tested for. It is more than likely that those matches are the product of parallel random mutations and not the result of a common ancestor within genealogical time frames.

"If, while doing normal genealogical research you find a family that appears to be related to yours but there is no documents that prove that, i/e a Carlos Cienfuegos in your family tree and you know of a man by the same name in another tree but there is no way to prove that these two are the same person then have them tested. IF their markers match yours you can say with certain degree of certainty that it is likely these are two branches of the same family."

That’s what I want to do.. That’s why I said there are rumors that we are all related...If we are our markers will match, except for mutations. But the Y chromosome does not change that often and we should be able to find some that will match...

They say the average mutation speed is one for every 500 generations, each male being one generation. I have found that, that varies considerably. For instance in my family the average tends to be about one mutation every 80-86 generations we will need more testing to narrow this further but that appears to be the ratio for us. Now, there are two things things that might have influenced this considerably (this is not scientific by any means, just my imagination), one while the 'average' male reproduces at 28 the average male in my family reproduced much later. Two, they have always indulged in spicy foods, and the chemicals in some spices are known to alter DNA. I believe that the combination of having children later in life and heavy exposure to spices might've influenced the mutation rates. Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that it would help to first identify the average mutation rate for your family, that would give you a greater confidence in the results.

I have a match off by only two out of 43 markers in Texas. At first glance it would appear that we are related, however given the known rate of mutations in both families we've proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that a common ancestor is not unlikely but impossible within the last 400 years (theirs is one every 300 generations).

If in fact all those with your surname are related you should (like you say) find a match, or more.

Best of luck in your search

Okay.. First where are you getting your science from? I'm not truing to be rude its just a question (my partner studied biotechnology and understands DNA quite extensively and FTDNA explains a lot to you as a customer)... Second if you have a mutation every 80 generations and you think males produce children at the age of 28 that’s 28x80=2240 years ago was your last mutation? That seems a little off to me. What company did you test with? Did you upload you result to y search .org? If so my results are on there 59JDM, lets compare... Look me up anyway if you want. Also thanks for wishing me luck. Later

Hi Vin,

Just to clarify I said "each male being one generation", that's how they count it when doing YDNA testing. For instance, if a man has three children normally that would be considered two generations but in YDNA testing they refer to that as four generations again "each male being one generation". That threw your math off a bit, one mutation every 80 generations in this case means that we've been able to identify one mutation every 80 male relatives more or less. For the most part my second cousins and I are one mutation apart, third cousins and I two mutations, fourth cousins and I three mutations (except for one that has his own mutation him and I obviously 4 mutations) and so on.

You are right, FTDNA explains a lot but that is designed with the man who's never heard of this before. If you'd like to read more in-depth discussions on the matter browse through these archives truth be told, sometimes they get too technical for me to follow. Lastly, yes I've uploaded my results but not to Ysearch as that is FTDNA and proprietary their intent is to make you dependent on them so that once there you are forced to keep on using them in the future. I prefer Ybase.org they are open to all labs everybody regardless of where he is tested can use all the functions, they are here

That said, my apologies, clearly I've upset you. It was my intent to help, not get in the way. I'll bud off now.

Wow, that's an interesting (and confusing) definition of "generations."

Given that definition, could it also be when a family has mutations more "quickly" (in fewer generations) that this is a result of having fewer male children (or perhaps also children of any gender)?

----------------------

Vaya, esa es una definición de "generaciones" interesante (y confusa).

¿Dado esa definición, es posible también cuando una familia tenga las mutaciones más rápidamente (en menos generaciones) que es el resultado de tener menos hijos machos (o quizás también niños del cualquier sexo)?

Yes that is a confusing use of the word 'generation', my guess is that because in cloning our own YDNA with each individual act (creation of spermatozoid), it acts (or behaves rather) as a 'generation' with each new spermatozoid. Fortunately we count only those spermatozoids that become people. So the amount of children a man has wouldn't matter as far a mutations go. That said, the more children he has the more likely any mutations he might've engendered would survive. As I type this I can't help but wonder is a mutation (like the ones we look for in YDNA testing) 'engendered'?...

Females don't inherit this type of YDNA (while we get a clone of our father's YDNA they get a clone of their mother's MTDNA) so they don't count for these purposes.

I'm a geneticist, but I'm going to stay out of this for a while, other than to express my view on the meaning of generation, which this thread seems to use in more than one way.

In one sense, a generation is the number of sibships back to a common ancestor. So from me to my father is one generation, to my grandfather two generations, to my great-grandfather three generations, etc. In this (and most commonly accepted sense of the word, if we could trace our ancestry back 10 generations, there are in the direct line of descent leading to us 10 opportunities for a new mutation or mutations to occur. If we wish to trace forward from that remote ancestor 10 generations forward in time in a different individual line of descent to one individual who is ten generations removed from the common ancestor, the same argument applies.

If we are talking about the number of individuals in a sibship as related to the number of opprtunities from mutations in their common Y chromosome, we could look at this as the number separate generations of sperm (idetical twins, etc, excluded), but this is not generations as it is usually used in genealogical or genetic studies.

Of the course the issue can be confused by the simple fact that marital fidelity does not always prevail, and that the father of record may not be the biological father. The biological father could, of course, also share a common male ancestor with the father of record. It is very difficult to accurately estimate the rate of infidelity across time.