A Second Bush Branch

The Duggan DNA Project was initially formed to assist in grafting back onto the family tree the many
severed branches of Hugh Duggan, b. about 1740, d. Sevier Co., TN (Hugh1). The Project has expanded its
focus over time, although Eastern Tennessee Duggans remain the center focus. A new cousin contacted
us. He has a Grandfather, GF, whose father was uncertain. He had his male line as follows:
K → Dad → GF → UNKNOWN Father
On AncestryDNA, K shares DNA with a cluster of descendants of Sarah Bush and AJ Duggan (the MRCAs),
otherwise unrelated to his known family tree. This led him to the Bush family, in investigating that
unknown father. The Bush family, having recently established conclusively that that the father of Andrew
Jackson Bush, b. 1867, was Andrew Jackson Duggan, b. 1843, referred K to the Duggan DNA Project to
review his autosomal DNA results. His shared DNA with his closest Bush matches, expressed in
centimorgans (cMs) is as follows (in yellow Highlight, the white matches above are Allen, our first kit)

• 408 cM of DNA shared with Allen Bush;

• 486 cM with Tina Hamm,1 suggestin K and Tina’s mother would have shared close to 900 cM;
• 99 cM with Eamon Rigsby – suggesting that K could have shared 400 cM with Jack Tucker, Eamon’s
grandfather (on average, shared cMs decreases by half at each generation); and
• 245 cM with Tom Bush who is on the same generational level as Allen Bush.

The first step was to review K’s ‘matches’ and catalog the degree to which he matched others with various
surname ancestry. IF he was a Bush-Duggan descendant, we would expect to see him matching others in
this group, and their cousins on each side. If he matched the group, but the cousins on only one side, the
match would more likely be on that side – or a more complex situation might present. The Bush-Duggan
descendants already on our radar all showed ties to both Bush-Thornton cousins and Duggan-Dunn
cousins. K’s connection to those remote cousins is generally smaller than Allen’s – suggesting that he is a
generation removed. K is about 22 years younger than Allen, so that looks right.

1
Allen and Evelyn are first cousins, thus Allen and Tina are first cousins, once removed (1C1R). On average that would
suggest around 450 cM of shared DNA between Allen and Tina, but they share 523 cM – well on the high end. This
may in part be explained by the fact that Tina’s maternal grandmother was Eula May Thornton. The mother of Sarah-
1846 Bush was Sarah Thornton. Her brother Jesse Thornton was Eula’s great-grandfather, so Alger and Eula were
third cousins, and Allen and Evelyn were fourth cousins on their Thornton line, as well as being first cousins on their
Bush line. Similarly, Allen and Tom are second cousins. We expect to see about 225 cM shared between them. Oscar
Bush, Tom’s grandfather married Dicey Hill. Her line has not been fully settled, but she may be related to Sarah Hill,
the mother of Sarah Bush’s grandmother. Here again, a second line on which to match may account for some of the
‘bonus’ shared DNA between K and Tom.
The initial take-away is that (i) K is related most closely to the Duggan-Bush cluster, (ii) he is also related
to the Thornton-Bush descendants2 (descendants of the siblings of Sarah Elizabeth Bush), and (iii) he is
also related to the Duggan-Dunn cousins, with the best matches beginning with cousins on the level of
Robt3, son of Robt2, 3 all consistent with K being a Duggan-Bush descendant. K appears to be a direct
descendant of AJ Duggan and Sarah Bush. We checked to be sure there was no other common link (other
than Bush-Duggan) that explained why each of these Bush descendants would be related to K. We found
no line, other than the Bush-Duggan connection, that could possibly explain these results. Given his
confirming ties to both the Bush-Thornton cousins and the Duggan-Dunn cousins,4 K’s placement under
the Bush-Duggan line was confirmed in all respects.

The next step was to place K within that Bush-Duggan group. The most striking initial observation is the
disproportionate shared DNA with Tina, although she is a generation more distant from Sarah Bush and
AJ Duggan, the apparent most recent common ancestors (MCRAs) for the entire group. If K were not a
descendant of AJ Bush, we would expect his shared cMs to be roughly cut in half with each generational
step. Because they are not, this suggests strongly that he is a descendant of AJ Bush, and most closely
related to Tina; it suggests that K is descendant of Alger Bush.

Let’s say that K was a descendant of Wm Bates Bush. We would expect the size of his matches to Allen
and Tom to be similar, assuming Bates was a full sibling to both or a half-sibling to both.5 And regardless
of whether Bates was a full or half sibling to AJ Bush, we would expect K’s match to Tina to be about half
of his match to Allen, and the match to Eamon to be about half the match to Tina. But instead of seeing
the matching cMs stepping down with each generational step -- 400, 200 and 100, Tina’s match is
disproportionately high. At first glance this suggests strongly that K is more closely related to Tina than
to the others, which suggests that he is a descendant of Alger Emert Bush. There are several ways to test
this theory, and to work towards an exact placement.

2
See Appendix-1. The list is not exhaustive, and it omits matches for Allen that are not also shared by K. It is
important to note that matches that appear higher than they should may represent inclusion of collateral line
matches in the total cMs shared. K’s Emert-McMahan line. and his Layman-Baker line, both from his paternal
grandmother, were prolific families in the area, and there are some intermarriages with the Duggan and Bush-
Thornton descendants.

3
See Appendix-2, a simple list of AncestryDNA kits that matched K and had a family tree showing descent from
Hugh Duggan b. 1740, but this list excludes all matches that also had Emert, Reagan, McMahan or Byrd Ancestry,
or any other known collateral lines (Bush, Ketner, Inman, Hill, Baker, etc.) and it is limited to matches with at least
14 cM on a single segment or 15 cM in two total cM. As expected, the better matches are to Robt2 descendants,
but there are also descendants of John2 Duggan and Marg2 Duggan. Keep in mind that all descendants of Dan2
through Dan3 m. McMahan should be eliminated under this standard (if any slipped through the cracks, it was
because their McMahan lines were not tagged).

4
While not documented here, stepping back yet another generation we also found additional confirmation
through Dunn and Thornton cousins.

5
We have no kits available to the project from a descendant of Bates, thus we cannot project whether he is a full
or a half sibling to AJ Bush, but placement in his line can still be theorized.
If Alger was in K’s direct line, then K should share a Y-Haplogroup assignment with Alger, AJ Bush, AJ
Duggan, and the rest of the Duggans. It turns out that he does. K tested at 23andME hand has a mid-level
Y-Hap assignment, which is consistent with
the Y-Hap of the Duggan men. The Duggan
DNA Project started a Y-DNA project for
descendants of Hugh1, who have
consistently tested as I-M223 (I-2a2a). This
was also the preliminary Y-Hap result given
to K and to Allen Bush. Male line
descendants of each son of Hugh1 have
contributed to the Y-study, all with
consistent results. Some have gone through
the deeper studies to identify more refined
Y-Haplogroup designations for the Duggan
men. The chart that follows reflects the
most advanced level of subclades that have
been verified by multiple descendants of
Hugh-1740:

The I-Y7273 subclade has now been

assigned to descendants of three different
sons of Hugh-1740, and NO assignment has
been inconsistent with the chain of
subclades set forth above.

K’s very close relationship to the Bush-

Duggan family, reflected by autosomal test
matching (total cMs) and the shared mid-
level Y-Hap results6, combine to suggest that K will connect with them on the Duggan (Y-DNA) male line.

That means that either K, or his father (F), or his Grandfather (GF) was a Duggan male-line descendant –
apparently through AJ Bush or one of his sons or grandsons. Our first theory is Alger, simply because of
the autosomal matching results.
The common Y-Hap does not prove a Duggan straight-line male ancestor for K, but it is consistent with it,
and given the autosomal results, it creates a strong presumption of a shared male line.7 K’s family tree, as
submitted originally, showed GF, b. 1901 with an unknown father. A man named Sherrod was rumored to
have been GF’s father, but K’s DNA matching shows no Sherrod connection. GF’s mother, a Jones, was b.
1882 and was living in Knox Co., TN when GF was b. in 1901. Could GF’s “uncertain” father have been a
Duggan?

6
K’s assignment shows that he is in the “I” Haplogroup. His test was adequately refined to further place
his assignment at I-M223, which is also known as I-2a2a. A chart of all Y-DNA submissions by Duggan
descendants is set out on Appendix-3.

7
Because K’s Y-DNA test is mid-level, the testing is not deep enough to prove the same deeper Y-Haplogroup
assignment as the Duggans, but it is nonetheless consistent with it.
 I. In Search of a Point of Entry to the Bush-Duggan Male line
A. Option 1 – GF Jones’ father was a son of AJ Duggan
GF Jones’ father is uncertain, and in the male-line, so we begin by looking to that spot in the
family tree as a place to insert a Duggan-Bush male line ancestor for K. GF was b. in 1901, The
oldest Bush-Duggan grandson was not born until 1892, so GF’s dad was not a Bush-Duggan
grandson. Munsey Jones, who was about 19 when her son GF was born, lived in Knox Co. AJ
Duggan had three sons with Sarah Bush and one with Eliza France:
• AJ Bush b. 1867
• Wm Bates Bush b. 1873
• Oscar Leroy Bush b. 1877
• Walter Campbell Duggan b. 1889
Walter was not even 12 years old when GF was born, and K has ample autosomal matches with
the cousins of Sarah Bush to dispel any suggestion that Walter was GF’s father. In 1900 Walter
was listed as 10 years old in Cocke Co. with his parents. GF’s mother, not yet 18, was in Knox Co.
with her parents. Walter is not a candidate. So we look at the three Bush-Duggan sons. We have
some DNA information to help.
IF Oscar L. Bush b. 1877 was the father of GF, then Oscar’s son JD would have been GF’s ‘half’
brother, and F and Tom Bush would have been ‘half’ first cousins. So that would make K and Tom
Bush half first cousins once removed (H1C1R). Generally (on average) we would expect to see
about 1800 cM of shared DNA between half siblings, 900 cM between the ‘half’ uncle and
nephew, 450 cM between the ‘half’ first cousins, and 225 cM when the relationship is H1C1R.
Tom and K share 245 cM – well within averages. If that were all we had to look at, we could easily
say that OSCAR could be the father of GF. But we do have a broader picture. And we have a
problem with this placement, for the size of the matches with the descendants of AJ Bush are
then wildly ‘off’ --

Jesse Lindsey Bush + Sarah C Thornton

Sarah Bush 1846 + Andrew Jackson Duggan 1843
Andrew Jackson Bush 1867 m. Sarah Ketner (Inman, Hulver, Smelcer, Eay, Chilton,
Wm BatesDavis,Bush
McPheeters, McDowell) Oscar Leroy Bush
Henry Cl a ude Bus h 1895 Al ger Emert Bus h +Fred
Eul a Cha
Ma yrl Thornton
es 1892 GF 1901 H-Bro 1800 JD
Allen Bush Evelyn m. Sligle Jack Tucker 1920 F H-1C 450 Tom Bush
2C1R TinaHamm6624 Mom K H1C2R
3C Eamon Rigsby
3C1R
110 60 30 225
408 486 99 245

If Oscar were the father of GF, then GF and Henry Claude (AJ Duggan-1, AJ Bush2, HC Bush3),
Allen’s father, would be first cousins (no ‘half’ involved here), and Allen would be 2C and K and
Allen would be 2C1R – we would expect around 110 cM shared (on average), but the result was
wildly ‘off’ of that estimate, for Allen and K shared 408 cM – more like what you would see for a
1C1R or a H1C. Likewise, Tina would be a third cousin, so we expect even less, but she shares
MORE, with 486 cM. And Eamon, still further removed as a 3C1R (expect 30 cM) shares more
than 3 times what we would expect (actual was 99 cM).
Although the numbers appear to work (with GF as a son of Oscar) when comparing only to Tom,
the shared DNA between K and descendants of AJ Bush makes it clear that this placement is
simply wrong, absent a VERY close second line of connection on all of these kits with the wife of
AJ Bush (and there is no such evidence of close Inman line in K’s tree). The DNA doesn’t suggest
a collateral line explanation pointing to other ‘matches’ triangulating with K and Allen/Tina/Tom.
K does have Ketner, Inman, Smelcer, Chilton, and Davis matches upline. He does have VERY close
ties to the descendants of AJ Bush, and he has close ties to the cousins through his wife Sarah
Ketner. The numbers tell us that K has to be a descendant of AJ Bush, and the shared Ketner
matches tell us that he is also a descendant of AJ Bush’s wife, Sarah Ketner.

But let’s walk through this systematically. First note that the results would be equally wrong if
we placed GF as a son of Wm Bates Bush, for the ties to AJ Bush’s family would still be too high.8

Jesse Lindsey Bush + Sarah C Thornton

Sarah Bush 1846 + Andrew Jackson Duggan 1843
Andrew Jackson Bush 1867 m. Sarah Ketner (Inman, Hulver, Smelcer, Eay, Chilton, Davis, McPheeters, McDowell) Oscar Leroy Bush 1877
Henry Cl a ude Bus h 1895 H-Bro 1800 GF 1901 H-Bro 1800 Al ger Emert Bus h 1897 Fred
+ Eul Cha
a Marl yesThornton
1892 JD
Allen Bush H-1C 450 F 1923 H-1C 450 Evelyn m. Sligle Jack Tucker 1920 Tom Bush
H1C1R K Tina Mom 2C1R
H2C Eamon Rigsby
3C1R
Estimated 225 110 55 110
Actual 408 486 99 245

So let’s place GF as a son of AJ Bush and see if that cures the problem. Will that adequately level
out the numbers? Let’s start with Tom Bush, just to be sure that the result is not too far off with
this new placement, then we will look at the kits for AJ Bush’s descendants. If GF were the son of
AJ Bush:
• Tom would be K’s 2C1R. We expect to see around 110 cM, but we see over twice that.
Tom’s relationship is lessened by this move, but the shared cM are now too low.
• Allen would be K’s H1C1R. We expect to see around 225 cM, but we see almost twice that.
Despite making K more closely related, Allen’s relationship is still not close enough.
• Tina would be K’s H2C. We expect to see around 110 cM, but we see well over four times
that, as she shared 486 cM with K. She is clearly more closely related.
• Eamon would be a H2C1R. We expect to see around 55 cM. We see about twice that.

8
We would welcome descendants of William Bates Bush into the Project, but for now we can
only infer results. If Bates had been the father of GF, JD would have been GF’s first cousin, Tom
would have been F’s second cousin, and Tom and K would have been 2C1R. The expected
shared DNA would have been around 110 cm, but it was actually 245 cM. The numbers with AJ
Bush’s descendants would still be ‘off’ to the degree stated above, in the same manner as if
Oscar were the father of GF. So placing GF with Bates is even worse.
Something is rotten in Denmark. These numbers still are not right. Either K is more closely related
on this Duggan-Bush line, or there is a collateral line match that we are missing. But a collateral
line match of that magnitude should be clear itself from the DNA matches. What if AJ Bush were
himself the father, at age 67. What would the numbers look like on that?

B. Option 2 – AJ Duggan as the father of GF

It looks like K must be closely related to this cluster of Bush-Duggan descendants. There appears
to be an intersection on the male-line from AJ Duggan, and it appears that K is also a descendant
of Sarah Bush. It looks like all of the grandsons are too young to be GF’s father. It does not work
for AJ Bush or either of his brothers to be the father of GF, and their sons are all too young to be
the father of GF. AJ Duggan was himself about 67 when GF was born. Could he have been the
father? Would taking the DNA out to him level out the discrepancies?
Again we look at the math. If AJ were the father of GF, then GF would be a half-sibling to each
of the three Bush-Duggan sons. That means that we would measure half-cousin relationships for
everyone. The end result is that Tom’s disparity would stay the same and everyone else’s would
get even worse.
• Allen and K would be H2C (expect 110 cM, actual is 408).
• Tina and K would be H2C1R (expect 55 cM, actual is 486).
• Eamon and K would be H2C2R (expect 30 cM, actual is 99).
• Tom and K would be H2C (expect 110 cM, actual is 245).

Jesse Lindsey Bush + Sarah C Thornton

AJ Duggan 1843 Sarah Bush 1846 + Andrew Jackson Duggan 1843
GF 1901 H-Si bl i ng Andrew Jackson Bush 1867 m. Sarah Ketner (Inman, Hulver, Smelcer, Eay, Chilton, Davis,
Oscar McPheeters,
Leroy Bush 1877McDowell)
F 1923 H1C Henry Cl a ude Bus h 1895 Al ger Emert Bus h 1897 Fred
+ Eul Cha
a Marl yesThornton
1892 JD
K H2C Allen Bush Evelyn m. Sligle Jack Tucker 1920 Tom Bush
H2C Tina Mom H2C
H2C1R Eamon Rigsby
H2C2R
Estimated 110 55 30 110
Actual 408 486 99 245

Going OUT to AJ caused more disparity. We have excellent matches to work with, and it is clear
this family is related, but the math tells us that AJ Duggan is not the father of K’s grandfather,
AJ Bush is not the father of K’s grandfather, and neither are his brothers.
Have we painted ourselves into a corner where the only answer is that an 8-year old Bush boy is
the father of GF? (Spoiler alert – the Math does not work on that one either, so the point is to
look elsewhere).
 C. Considering F, rather than GF, as the one with the Bush-Duggan Father.

Sometimes when you start out thinking you know what you are looking for, it can blind you. In
this case, knowing that GF had an ‘unknown’ father, it made perfect sense to look for the missing
link in that part of the family tree. But the numbers tell us that is wrong. So where else can an
intervening paternal act occur? The only place where it can occur and make K MORE closely
related is with F’s father, rather than GF’s father.9 Let’s assume for a moment that this has
nothing to do with GF. Let’s consider the possibility that GF was not F’s biological father, but
rather that a Bush-Duggan was the biological father of F.
The first stop was to K’s family tree, then a bit of little record checking. F’s parents married in
March 1923. F was born in July 1923. F’s mom was about five months pregnant when she wed. If
one were envisioning the story, it is possible that GF, having himself been a child born without
benefit of his father in the picture, may have been sympathetic to the situation and comfortable
raising a child that was not his biological child. By all accounts from the family, GF was a wonderful
father to F, to the point that no one ever expected that their connection was not biological.
DNA can help us sort out whether this theory is a possibility. Keep in mind, as mentioned in
passing earlier, K has a strong set of matches to the Ketner upline, suggesting that he is also a
descendant of Sarah Ketner, the wife of AJ Bush. This further supports the notion that one of
sons of AJ Bush and Sarah Ketner was the father of F. Let’s change the family group chart.
TINA has the strongest match to K, despite being a generation removed, so it looks like she and
K share a common grandfather – that points to Alger Emert. Alger was born in 1897. He was over
25 when F was born, and he was not yet married. The results were stunning.
ALL kits under AJ Bush now are within roughly 10% of average expectation for shared cMs. The
only anomaly is Tom Bush, who has twice the cMs expected—which could be accounted for in
part by random chance, and in part by upline collateral connections on a maternal line.
Regardless, this discrepancy for a 2C1R is far more reasonable than the three huge discrepancies
resulting with other placement options. If Alger was F’s father, then K was Allen’s 1C1R, Tina’s
H1C, Eamon’s 2C1R, and Tom’s 2C1R. The ‘estimated’ cMs in yellow below are what we expect,
on average, for the given relationships, the actual cM’s shared are on the bottom line.

The first three kits are very close to estimated results. Tom alone is about twice as high as we
would expect, but more distance generates more variance. Studying both trees for collateral

9
We know that F was K’s father, because K has strong DNA ties to descendants of F’ siblings.
line matches, we find that K as a second line that descends from Joseph Hill, b. 1735. If Alger is
inserted as F’s father, then F’s family tree will look like this:

Sarah Thornton’s grandfather was Joseph Hill, b. 1735. He was also the grandfather of Samuel
Baker, upline from F’s mother. It is possible that F passed out more than an average amount of
his Hill DNA, with it coming from both strands, and it is possible that F and Oscar just happened
to have received and passed on some of the same Hill segments, leading to more than average
Hill DNA being shared between K and Tom. A detailed review of the shared segments between
Tom and K would help shine light on the source of the bonus DNA, and whether it was from
collateral sources, or simply above average in the amount shared.10

Jones is one of the most common family names. EVERYONE has Jones matches, even if Jones is
not in immediate family tree. But if your great-grandmother was a Jones-Davis, roughly one-
eighth of your DNA would have come from that Jones-Davis line, and it would easily match up
with Jones-Davis cousins. IF GF’s mother and a Bush-Duggan father produced GF, then the Jones-
Davis DNA contribution would have been roughly equal to the DNA contribution from the Bush-
Duggan line. Yet there is no evidence of a Jones-Davis line.

10
Blaine T. Bettinger has conducted a long-term study to measure the reported ranges of shared cMs between
various kits, cataloging them by degree of relationship. It is possible that some of the highs and lows on the extreme
may reflect an error in the attributed relationship (e.g.., your aunt was really your mother is easy enough to figure
out, but sometimes it is hard to distinguish between an anomoly and a misreported event. Bettinger appears to
simply record the data as reported, and hope that the misreports on both ends even out the numbers. The objective
is to find the averages. Bettinger’s table of expected cMs (based on mathematical averages) and actual reported
shared cMs, along with the average, as reported, is attached as Appendix-4. A more recent version may be available
online.
The failure to see ANY DNA connection to the Jones-Davis upline ancestors or cousins strongly
undermines the possibility that GF was the biological Grandfather of K.

We all have four grandparents, and eight great-grandparents. Our first cousins share two of those
four biological grandparents with us, and our second cousins share two of our eight great-
grandparents - unless they are ‘half’ cousins. If the parents are ‘half’ siblings – sharing only one
parent, the first cousins can share only one grandparent with a ‘half’ first cousin, and a half
second cousin can share only one great-grandparent.

• A first cousin will share about 450 cM in common with you, for each shared grandparent.
• So a ‘full’ 1C shares about 900 cM, and a ‘half’ 2C shares about 450 cM.
• A second cousin will share about 110 cM for each shared great-grandparent.
• So a ‘full’ 2C shares about 220 cM, and a ‘half’ 2C shares about 110 cM.

If our theory about F’s alternate paternity is correct, then it is helpful to visualize the impact
this has on K’s family tree.

1. Half of K’s DNA came from his mother. Her half of K’s tree is all consistent with his DNA
matching. The maternal half of K’s DNA can be further broken down into subparts. The maternal
half of K’s total tree is represented by these four separate groups, all of which are represented
in his DNA matching:

▪ Booth-Schaeffer
▪ Lyons-Harris
▪ Kirk-Stapleton
▪ Parsons

2. K’s paternal grandmother is also easily confirmed with DNA matching. She and her
uplines represent one-fourth of K’s DNA. This part of K’s tree includes his Emert-McMahan and
his Layman- Baker lines (each surname representing about 1/16th of K’s total DNA). IF GF were
indeed K’s paternal grandfather, then his DNA would be the final quadrant, and half of that
would be from his mother (the Jones-Davis eighth) and half would be left for the Bush-Duggan
group. But that is not what we see. First, we don’t see a Jones-Davis group. Those matches
simply are not there. Second, the Bush-Duggan group does not look like one-eighth of the
composition of K’s DNA, it looks more like one-fourth. This further indicates that F’s father must
be the Bush-Duggan, rather than GF’s father.

3. If Alger Bush was F’s biological father, then roughly one-fourth of K’s DNA was contributed
by Alger. That placement also affects the composition of that quadrant, for if a SON of AJ Bush
were the father of F, then his DNA contribution would include the following family lines:
• Duggan-Dunn (and all uplines from there)
• Bush-Thornton (and all uplines from there)
• Ketner-Smelcer (and all uplines from there)
• Inman-Davis (and all uplines from there)
These four groups are full of very prolific families, so if our theory is correct, we should find matches to all
of these groups, and we should expect roughly one-fourth of K’s DNA to map out to segments contributed
by these families.11 In fact, all four groups are generously represented among K’s matches.
Couple that with the size of the matches and what relationships are suggested by those matches, and that
too supports the theory that the Bush-Duggan group represents a quadrant, not an octant. A match of
400-425 is almost always a 1C1R, or a H1C. A match of 900 (implied for Tina’s mom, Evelyn) is almost
always a H1C or a H-Aunt/Nephew. You simply cannot get to those numbers if GF’s dad is the MRCA. To
be clear, roughly half of matching DNA is eliminated at each generation. The DNA matches we have can
therefore be worked backwards, to the same level generation, interpolating how K matches them, and
the results – including the placement with Alger - are easier to see:
Jesse Lindsey Bush + Sarah C Thornton
Sarah Elizabeth Bush 1846 + Andrew Jackson Duggan 1843
Andrew Jackson Bush 1867 m. Sarah Ketner (Inman, Hulver, Smelcer, Eay, Chilton, Davis, McPheeters, McDowell) Oscar Leroy Bush
Henry Cl a ude Bus h 1895 Al ger Emert Bus h + GM Al ger + Eul a Ma y Thornton Fred Cha rl es 1892 JD
Allen Bush F - 1923 Evelyn m. Sligle Jack Tucker 1920 Tom Bush
1C1R K H-Aunt 1C1R 2C1R

Estimated 425 900 425 120

Actual or
Interpolated 408 972 396 245

II. Evaluating the Halves and the Wholes.

Another way to test the theory is to examine the size of matches to closest kin – those whose relationship
distance is known – to see whether those matches suggest ‘whole’ or ‘half’ kin. IF the Bush-Duggan group
only represents one-eighth of K’s DNA, then there should be 7 additional groups of equal prominence. But
there aren’t. If the Bush-Duggan Group were only one-eighth, of K’s DNA, there would not be room for
matches like the one’s he has with Bush family. There simply are not enough 400+cM matches to suggest
any closer groups.
But the big matches that are there speak volumes about halves and wholes. Remember that a full cousin
will typically share around 900 cM. Half 1Cs will on average share closer to 450. On K’s maternal side, his
aunts and cousins should all be ‘whole’. On his paternal side, they should be ‘half’ – for in this case F would
(under this theory) have had only half-siblings. His Bush siblings were half-siblings, thus his Bush cousins
were half-cousins. His Emert siblings were half-siblings, thus his Emert cousins were half-cousins. He was
equally related to both sides, on his paternal line, but each of these quadrants (assuming an equal
relationship) will share roughly half the DNA of the counterpart on the maternal side. Let’s look at that.
Assuming the relationships sprang from full siblings, on average we would expect to see roughly 1800 cM
shared with an Aunt, 900 with her daughter, a 1C, 450 with each 1C1R (grandchild of the Aunt, child of a
cousin), 225 with a 2C. There will be above and below average results, but they will usually average around
those estimated averages for shared cM. K’s largest matches with maternal relatives included these:

11
The number of matching kits will relate more to which families have the most children, and which are testing. If
25% of your DNA comes from a family that has 1000s of descendants and 100s of them have tested, you will find far
more matches than you would with another 25% of your DNA that descends from a family with very few
descendants. And if none of them test, you will find no matches. That doesn’t change the fact that 25% of your DNA
was contributed by that family. Recent immigrants find far fewer matches, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have
DNA from a given family. Painting programs, designed to graphically ‘paint’ segments based on who contributed
them, are a much better representation of the roughly equal contribution that each family group makes to the DNA.
 Kit For Rela Actl cM Est-Full Est-Half
Matrnl. Aunt Aunt 1650 1800 900
Aunt's Dau 1C 765 900 450
Aunt's GC 1C1R 565 450 225
Aunt's GC 1C1R 385 450 225

Erin 1C1R 285 450 225

Daryl 2C 460 225 115
DebROB 1C1R 490 450 225
Heather 2C 175 225 115
Aker 2C1R 195 115 60

Although a little under average, most in the top group have actual shared cMs with K that are close to the
average estimated in the “Full” column. In the next group of maternal matches, Daryl and Aker are well
above average (there could be an extra line in play there), some are low, otherwise very close to
expectation. Looking at this array, it strongly suggests that the relevant siblings are ‘full’ siblings.
Generally, absent late immigration or unusual circumstances, we will see matches for all eight octants in
the 100 cM + range. To show how this works, let’s take K’s maternal side and break his maternal tree
into four groups (each being an octant in his own tree).
1. Shaeffer-Booth
2. Lyon-Harris
3. K-Stapleton
4. Parsons-Smith

After applying a surname tag Lyon to kits with Lyon and Lyons in the chart (not checking for same-line
matches), there were 128 kits tagged with at least 14 cM. Some of the better matches are noted below,
all were Lyon-Harris descendants.

F.A. (1_Jamm) 192 cM

R.B. (clarerannigan) 136 cM
Tresia Stroupe (Andrea Grubb) 128 cM
C.C. (LLegere4) 107 cM
ClareAnnigan 105 cM

Similar results were found for each line. The objective was to go out past the Aunt and the immediate
family and look out to second and third cousin range.

Let’s shift to K’s best matches on his Emert quadrant. If our theory is correct, this quadrant compares to
the Bush quadrant and the cousins are half-cousins.

• Faith, K’s first cousin, is a daughter of GF’s child, JR. If Faith were a ‘full’ first cousin, she and K should
share close to 900 cMs – on average about 450 cMs per shared grandparent. They share 552 cM. This
suggests strongly that they share an above average amount of DNA from the Emert side only, but
none from the Jones side. The numbers look like ‘half’ numbers. Reviewing shared matches confirms
this, for the matches all appear to be from the Emert family.
• Jennifer shares 378 cM, which is low for 1C1R, but it is not exceedingly. It is high for H1C1R, so this
one is in the middle. Often when a HC has above average matching (a “tweener”) they have a line on
their seemingly unrelated side(s) that contribute additional shared DNA – a collateral line match. If
more of F’s siblings and their descendants test, this evaluation will be more thorough.
• The BEST evidence, by far, would be a test for JR. If Jr. and F were half-siblings, we would expect
them to have shared between 1600 to 2200 cM. K and JR should therefore share between 800 and
1100 cM. If JR and F were full-siblings, then K and JR should share closer to 1800 cM.
• If JR had a Y-DNA test done as part of his DNA package, that too would give us a quick answer as to
whether JR and F shared a father. The Y-Test can not be done by transfer. If JR is now deceased and
has no sons, the opportunity to test with Y-DNA may be lost.

III. Segment Analysis

Often we drill down on specific segment analysis to identify the segments that connect a group of
matches, if needed to identify the MRCA. Frankly, it isn’t needed here. The Bush kits provide the data we
need to identify the missing quadrant, and to place the point of origin. The segment analysis in this case
may be reserved for another day, and a far more interesting topic may be to sort out the Hill lines. As
alluded to earlier, K’s tree includes a Baker-Layman line on his maternal side, that ultimately leads to
James Baker and Mary Hill b. 1765. On K’s paternal side Sarah Bush’s grandmother was Sally Hill, sister of
Mary Hill.

The Hill family is complex and is intricately tied to many of the Eastern Tennessee families of interest.
Other Baker children also married descendants of their youngest sister Hannah Hill. Oscar Bush’s wife
Dicey Hill was a descendant of what appears to be another Hill family, but the ‘extra’ DNA shared between
Tom and K gives reason to question that. Research on Dicey’s Hill family seems to be scant, and would be
a worthy project.

Some of the Hill and Baker lines tie back to the Fox, Emert and Duggan families in Sevier Co. It would be a
huge project to tackle but would likely benefit family historians from many angles. Another wonderful
find was the Pate upline on Dicey Hill. Many family trees have Hannah Pate (a sibling of Dicey’s Pate
ancestor) mixed up with Hanna Davis (a Hill descendant). The DNA relationships make it clear that Hanna
was a Pate, not a Davis, should anyone want to take that on.

The following clip sets out K’s dual Hill lines, one buried within his Emert quadrant, the other upline from
Alger Bush.
 IV. Epilogue

This is the second major review done by the Duggan DNA Project for our Bush cousins. This one was
simpler in some respects, because of the foundational work we did on the first. We have one more coming
in this series. A British citizen has contacted us about strong ties to the Bush-Duggan group. Her
grandmother had a war-time baby with an American serving in England at the time. She told the family
that the baby’s father died in the War. We’ve been asked to see if we can figure out who this grandfather
was. That installment is forthcoming.

We are pleased to find our Bush cousins, and to include them in the Duggan family. We appreciate their
contribution to our database of DNA kits and their help with the underlying research.

Anytime a new kit is introduced to the project, we bring it in in layers. First step may be look for matches
and see if any important segments warrant a separate segment study. Even when nothing ‘pops’ on that
first review, simply integrating the kit into our database of kits means that every time a new kit comes in,
we have more to compare it to. Some kits that we first touched three years ago may have had only 10
others to compare with. But as the project has grown, even those early kits continue to produce new
matches, as new kits come in.

Don’t give up on us. Don’t turn us off. Your kit may sit quietly by for ages, and then ONE day a segment
match comes to our attention that your kit shares… and suddenly it is front and center again. plays a role
in building our database, so we benefit from the submission of the Bush kits, which will also be included
in the project in the future, to help others find their place in the family. As more kits are added to the
project, more matching segments are cataloged, we have better results. We were better with our second
Bush branch, because we had done the first. The third was more refined, because we had already done
two.

The insights that K’s kit provides us – and each kit that we work with -- may show up this year, next year,
or years down the road. ALL of our cousins, participating in this long-term project, help us understand our
history and reconstruct our family tree. It truly does take a village, and we appreciate your willingness to
take the slow train with us. Anyone interested in doing the traditional research, or working more with the
DNA studies, please advise the Admin. Help is always appreciated.
 Appendix-1
Bush-Thornton Matches for K and Allen
(Top line in each group is a Sibling of Sarah Elizabeth Bush. Matching cMs are for Allen[top] and K)
Samuel Fain Bush 1860
Ruth Zena Bush 1897 Marg. Leona Bush 1901 Jacob 1893
Dorothy Hel en Burney 1934 Ha zel Burney Ma ri e Arnol d 1926 Opa l 1919
RachzR Dan Burney Melody Prine Gavina Charl. Ann Wallum ShirleyMidgett1
Cary Duston Hinson
D.H.

65 44 19 65
50 42 43 30 41

Eliza Jane 1852

Jesse Burns Bush 1887 + Derrick
Mary Ethel Bush 1884 m. Dockery Margaret Cordielia Bush
Zol a Ma e + Ketner Ci s co Dockery 1903 Lotti e Dockery 1913 Granville Brian Bush 1897 m. RhodeIsland Dilen Hensley [1]
DKA1131 Dad Mom Mom
also Ketner-Inman Douglas Dockery ddockery1943 R. B. Dawn Schwarz Thetingishere
also Duggan-Martin rgballard53 [1] Desc. of Hill, Jos2

155 42 16 35 39 29
92 10 16 35 17 17

Daniel Thornton Bush 1850

Aurora 1882 John Jesse Bush 1879
Da ni e l Bus h Cockrum Je s s e Woodrow Bus h 1912 Eni d Ka thl e e n Bus h
Alleyoop1940_1 Mom Eni d F Da ve nport
Carrie Geltemeyer Vanessa Deaton

19 25
97 11 22

Margaret Bush 1854 m. Webb

Emma Josephine WebbChas
1881 Newton Webb 1877
Geo W Webb Benj. 1890 Wm McKi nl ey Webb 1895
El i Bra na m Ra i nwa ter 1904 Ma rs Newton Webb Ethel G Webb 1906 Wm Edga r Webb 1909 Lotti e Wa l ker Herbert Ki ng Webb Joni
1915Marg. Webb 1927
C. Rainwater Glenda Webb GM Wa nda Ja ne Webb Ha rol d Da l e Wa l ker Barbara Boots David Vanderpool
Dad MBHent99991 Da d
Matthew Holt KJ Brody

49 10 70 38
16 33 25 19 10 11 28

Mary Ellen Bush 1859 + Wm P. Henderson 1841

Mary Edith Henderson 1888 m. Bailey Lotus A 1891 m. May
Ina Bailey 1916 Carlos Clarence 1913 Patricia Pearl May 1931 m. Harrell Gene Earnhart
Mom P.R. Peggy Smith Gloria Bailey Johnson VE Earnhart PM Earnhart
1_cdavis62 Jennifer DeCavia

37 35 39 57 56 54
14 39 48 60 20 28 36
 Appendix-2
K’s “Duggan” Matches on AncestryDNA (excluding kits with collateral line matches)

Name2 TcM Admin2 Segs P-Duggan

Billie Don Cody 41.10 Deborah Cody 4
Billie Cody 40.04

Lori Johnson 37.44 1

John Robin Adams 35.60 Margaret ADAMS 1
Danny Loveday 32.43 Maria Clark 1
Nancy Duggan Adams 30.90 Margo Adams 1
Billie Cody 26.40 debbiecody 3
John Robin Adams 24.44 John Adams 1
teresavance8001 21.40 teresavance8001 1
Ailene Hert 20.90 Ailene Hert 1
Ailene Hert 18.45 Ailene 1
Cathey Langford 23.00 Cathey Langford 1
Richard Cameron III 22.86 Cathey Langford 1
Mina Miller 19.25 Dalton Smith 1
Martha Bernice Kingery 18.41 Martha Bridgers 1
EsauBass 18.28 EsauBass 2
Amy Mylander 18.21 Amy Mylander 1
Alice Hannah 17.95 bdangelo1957 1
MIchael D'Angelo 17.91 bdangelo1957 1
Joy Palmer 16.78 Joy Palmer 1
Janis Duggan 16.07 Amy Mylander 1
Helen Maddox 15.96 bjenn1455 1
edith Duggan 15.48 edith Duggan 2
charles_spotts 14.72 charles_spotts 1
agnt1965 14.51 agnt1965 2
Robert Gariner 14.10 Robert Gariner 1
jack_burnett75 34.54 jack_burnett75 1
 The list that INCLUDES kits with multiple matching lines is even more impressive.
Name2 TcM Admin2 P-Duggan P-Bush P-Ketner P-Inman P-Emert P-McMahan
P-Layman P-Baker
tinahamm6624 485.73 tinahamm6624
Allen Bush 424.87

tom bush 244.92 tom bush

jlk7476 101.19 jlk7476
Eamon rigsby 98.93 miltz88
alleyoop1940_1 97.43 alleyoop1940_1
totsybook58 90.40 totsybook58 Dunn Hill
Franklin Proffitt 61.21 Franklin Proffitt
E.A. 43.24 mike atchley
Elaine Thompson 42.19

B.W. 40.65 azeliea

Anthony Travis 40.21 Juliette LaRue-Travis
Roxanne Brindle 39.65 Roxanne Brindle Lindsey
Deborah Wilson 37.16 azeliea
ruslaw32 36.81 ruslaw32
jack_burnett75 34.54 jack_burnett75
Amanda Robinson 34.40 Amanda Robinson
Donald Comstock 34.16 Donald Comstock
Ph.D. Compton 34.04 Ph.D. Compton Lindsey
Adrienne (Talbert) Kush 30.39 Adrienne Kush
Judy Connolly 27.74 Judy Connolly Lindsey
Amanda Robinson 25.11 Amanda Williams
W.B. 24.88 ako819
J.T. 24.66 CKT96
Elaine Thompson 23.79 Kim Thompson
Wayne Allen 23.09 nancyallenbaker Hill
nancyallenbaker 22.84 nancyallenbaker Hill
Christopher Finchum 21.68 Christopher Finchum
K.T. 17.71 CKT96
R.B. 12.30 ako819
L.T. 12.12 CKT96
 Appendix-3
Duggan Y-DNA Tests

Generations
Basic Y-DNA Advanced Advanced
FtDNA Name Beg. w/ Ancestor (Line from Hugh1) GedMatch
Haplogroup Test Test II
Hugh1

428332 Tim Dugan (His father)

8 Frank2, GeoWm3-1810 m. Nancy Coe
Y-37 I-M223 A222498
Timothy Duggan
7
Y-37 I-M223
Robt2, Wils3-1803 m. Eliz Keeler
Carlton H Duggan
Unk I-M223
Y-67
Allen Bush 7 JJ3684832
Stephen (Allen's son) 8
Douglas (Allen's son) 8 Robt2, Robt3 m. Cassandra Dunn I-M223 I-Y7273
K 8 JW5030378
Y-DNA at 23andME

919525 Charles Duggan 7 John2, Jas3-1807 m. Laura McKenzie I-M223 I-Y7273 I-FT165298 EN5702900
Y-DNA111, Big-Y
Gary Duggan 9 T163071
Hugh2, John3-1790 m. Jemima Martin
Y-37 I-M223
896987 Richard W. Duggan 7 A830454
Dan2, Abs3-1811
Y-DNA111, Big-Y I-M223 I-Y7273 I-FT165298
283763 Edward Brooks Burke 8 EJ9800050
Wm2, Hugh3-1790 I-M223
Y-DNA12

Donald Duggan n/a John Dougan born circa 1785 Dromore,

Y-111 Down, Ireland I-M223
 Appendix-4
Estimated/Expected cMs shared, based on Relationship