I know intuitively that I should get just as excited and interested in our mitochondrial DNA results as I do about the Y-DNA results. But for some reason this test has not yet aroused my curiosity nearly as much. The explanation may be as simple as this is not from the surname of Whitehead. This is the DNA of my mother's mother's mother's mother, etc..., and maybe that is my problem. Tracing this back through time I know the associated surnames would be Peacock, then Boland, then Lowe, then Vinson, then Reed, and then it is lost in time to us around 1794.

For whatever reason I have more difficulty with what I perceive to be an easier analysis. Unlike Y-DNA, mitochondrial DNA is less complex and can be sequenced in its entirety rather than just looking at specific markers.

Basically our mtDNA has been analyzed and then compared to a standard mitochondrial sequence established in 1981 at Cambridge. That analysis is known as the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS). Our analysis was then compared to this standard to find sequencing differences. On my charts to the right, differences between my mtDNA and the CRS are highlighted in red. Another source of change in the sequencing of your mtDNA is the addition of an extra nucleotide between the normal sequence, and those are highlighted in green. Finally there can be deletions from the standard, but our analysis shows no deletions.

Two regions of mtDNA can be tested and these are known as HVR1 and HVR2. We tested both regions. These are used because they reveal no medical data and because they mutate more often than other areas of the mtDNA. Also, it is the combination of these two that gives more actionable information for genealogical information.

The Hypervariable Region 1 analysis is also known as a "low resolution" analysis. and identifies 259 different markers starting at position 16001 of the model. I have five variations to the Cambridge model in our results, all shown in red in the table above.

Testing the low resolution of the mtDNA helps because it will identify whether or not two people are related. However, the timeframe identified by the low resolution analysis is no better than about 52 generations.

So I think you need to put your low resolution results and matches in the category of "interesting but not helpful within the genealogical timeframe most of us are studying."

Another problem with this analysis is that a perfect match in the HVR1 test only produces a 50% likelihood of a common ancestor.

When you couple the HVR1 results with the results from a HVR2 test, then perhaps you have some helpful information because the combination of the two can reduce the matches from the analysis back to a genealogical timeframe.

An HVR1 test can only tell you if two people are related within 52 generations or about 1,300 years. Combining the two tests can reduce that timeframe to 28 generations or about 700 years.

Further complicating this analysis is the accuracy noted in the HVR1 discussion at the bottom of the first column. White a perfect match in both tests reduces the timeframe to common ancestor, it does not improve the accuracy. So even a perfect match on both tests produces only a 50% likelihood of a common ancestor in 28 generations.

Our results actually produce more exact matches to individuals to people in the J1 haplogroup when you look at the HVR1 results, which shows the lack of specificity of those results. Perhaps it is due to testing volume, but so far we have only matched one idividual in the combined HVR1/HVR2 testing and with the low probablilty of common ancestry the value of the testing seems somewhat suspect to me.

The mitochondrial haplogroup "J" is common in Europe and may have originated in the Near East as long as 50,000 years ago. Sub-lineages of this haplogroup disbursed to some identifyable areas of Europe. Within the J haplogroup, J2 is interesting because it can be found is such diverse locations as Iberia, Iceland, Italy, Sardinia, and Turkey. Looking at these locations on a map would also lead us to assume that the migratory path between these countries would also be lesser locations where they can be found.

Although there may be other common factors linking these countries, they all have or have had significant fishing industries. Throughout history people within this haplogroup may have migrated to follow populations of fish, or to pursue new opportunities related to fishing. To me Iceland seems to be of particular interest as a stepping stone to America from Europe.

To extend the Hypervariable Region 1 study and refine your knowledge of the mtDNA analysis you need a second test known as a Hypervariable Region 2 test. This test starts at position 1 of the Cambridge model and compares the results for 580 positions of the mtDNA map.

The substitution rules for the HVR1 and HVR2 tests are the same. In my test I have 10 variations (shown above in red) and two additions to the Cambridge model (shown above in green). So I actually have 582 markers in the range analyzed (580 + 2 additions).