SPRENKEL DNA PROJECT
RESULTS RECEIVED

 

                                        DYS Marker Number                           

[Move Mouse Pointer over number to show lineage]

Kit #

3
9
3

3
9
0

3
9
4
/
1
9

3
9
1

3
8
5
a

3
8
5
b

4
2
6

3
8
8

4
3
9

3
8
9
|
1

3
9
2

3
8
9
|
2

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

G
A
T
A

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

4
6
1

4
6
2

G
G
A
A
T
1
B
0
7

Y
|
G
A
T
A
|
A
1
0

Y
|
G
A
T
A
|
C
4
=
6
3
5

4
4
1		 4
4
4		 4
4
5		 4
4
6		 4
5
2		 4
6
3

16217

14

23

15

10

15

17

11

15

11

14

12

32

           
17435

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

                                                                       

16254

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

17

9

10

11

11

26

14

19

30

15

16

17

18

           
16430 13

24

14

11

11

13

12

12

12

13

13

30

                                           
18975 13

24

14

11

11

13

12

12

12

13

13

30

19

9

10

11

11

25

15

19

30

14

15

17

17

                                             
16247 13 22

14

10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29                                                                        
21839

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

13

13

13

29

17

9

10

11

11

26

14

19

30

15

16

17

18

           
18398

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

                                                                       

16298

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

           
16228

13
13

23
23

14
14*

11
11

11
11

14
14

12
12

12
12

12
12

13
13

13
13

29
29

18

9

10

11

11

26

14

19*

30

11

12

19

23

13

12*

11

10

12

23

           
16975

13
13

23 
23

14 
14*  

11
11

11
11

14
14

12
12

12
12

12
12

13
13

13
13

29
29

17

9

10

11

11

25

14

19*

30

11

12

19

23

16

12

13

12*

11

10

12

23

13

12

12

15

11*

22*

16535

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

17

9

10

11

11

26

14

19

30

15

16

17

18

           

16261

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            

20978

13

23

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

38687**

 13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 11 12 14 29 16 9 10 11 11 25 15 18 29 15 16 17 -- 11 13 20 21 17           12 11 12 11 10 13 23 13 12 12 14 12 22

29212

13

24

14

10

11

14

12

13

12

13

13

29

18 9 10 11 11 24 15 19 27 15 15 16 17 11 11 19 22 18 15 18 18 34 37 12 12                      

Sprunger

12

23

15

10

13

15

11

15

11

13

11

30

           

Springer

13

25

14

11

11

14

12

12

12

13

13

29

16

9

10

11

11

23

15

19

28

15

15

17

18

 

                                            

Springle**

 13 22 14

12

 11 14 12

13

13

 13 13

28

       11 11

25

15

            

10

 12 19 23              

12

 12 11 10

13

 23            

Underlined type – non-matching values
Gray Background - Non-matching values not determined - more data
            needed.
Red – markers with faster mutation rates
Black - Test results from FamilyTree DNA
Blue - Values from Sorensen Molecular Genetics
               Project (*corrected values)
** - Analysis done by Relative Genetics Lab

Project Note (29 Feb 04):

Two project participants had previously donated DNA samples to the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Project [their FamilyTreeDNA (FTDNA) results have not yet been received].  Those results are now included in a searchable on-line database on their web site.  The data are linked to the earlier generations of their pedigrees, and by querying the database repeatedly, it was possible to determine the results of their samples.  That project uses some of the same markers that FTDNA uses, however, some of their markers are unique to that project.  Two of their values, for DYS394/19, and DYS448, require a correction factor for comparison to the FTDNA values used in this project.  The corrected values are shown in the table above. 

Analysis of Results:

Nine of the Twelve known Sprenkle descendants tested matched at all 12 of the 12 markers tested.  This indicates a close relationship (see below), but does not prove that the three immigrants were brothers.  It will require testing of the same individuals at additional markers to determine how close the relationship probably was.  This result does support the tradition that Michael, William and Peter were brothers.

One person tested (16247) matched the "Sprenkel" DNA profile on 10 of 12 markers and one (21839) matched at 11 of 12 markers.  These results are most likely due to one or two random mutations having taken place on that line somewhere between the immigrant William and the person tested.  Statistical calculations of the probability of a difference in two markers indicate that it is about 30 times more likely for this difference to have resulted from mutations than from a random match on 10 of 12 markers with a non-relative.

One of the people tested (16217) did not match the "Sprenkel" DNA profile (only 1 of 12 markers matched), indicating no "genetic" relationship even though they are equally a part of the "Sprenkel family."  This result can be due to a variety of factors.  Possible explanations for this include adoption (which was often informal in the early years and didn't generate a paper trail), name changes, illegitimacy, children from a wife's previous marriage who took the next husband's surname, and other causes.  Additionally, it could be because of a genealogical error (we have incorrectly "attached" a Sprenkel family from a different Sprenkel line).   [My calculations indicate that it is over 27,000,000,000,000,000 times more likely that this result is from a random match than from 11 mutations on 12 markers.]

The two persons tested by the Sorenson Molecular Genetics Project (16228 and 16975) show two, one-step differences in their markers beyond the first 12.  This yields a 29/31 match.  These are apparently due to mutations that have occurred in the generations after William (the immigrant) and his son Peter.  Which generation the mutations occurred in can only be determined with additional testing of other descendants on those lines.

The results for the Hugh Sprinkle descendant are unfortunately not conclusive with just this one test.  A match on only 9 of 12 markers is an unlikely result for two close relatives, but it is not an impossible result.  Hugh Sprinkle has been assumed to be an illegitimate son of one of the Sprinkle daughters.  The question being asked here is was Hugh a son of a Sprinkle daughter (Charity, daughter of Peter, granddaughter of Peter, and great granddaughter of the immigrant Peter; with a non-Sprinkle biological father) or the son of an unknown son of Peter, with Charity being his widow.  A second test result has been received from a descendent of a different son of Hugh (#18975).  His scores are a 12 for 12 match with the other descendant of Hugh.  This confirms that this profile was the one that Hugh had (and no mutations or other "problems" have happened on that line since Hugh).  Participant #18975 took the 25 marker test and the additional results have now been received.  Comparing the additional markers to the results from the SMGF-tested subjects, there are nine markers that FTFNA and SMGF both test.  Subject #18975 appears to differ on two of the nine markers (although this is just a preliminary score since we don't yet have enough data to determine the "True Sprenkel Pattern" for these markers.  Additional participants have ordered the 25 marker test, and those results should help confirm what the values for the immigrants were.  [Statistical calculation indicate that it is very close to an equal probability of this difference in 3 markers out of 12 being due to either three mutations or a random match with a non-relative.]

The test subject on the John-James Benjamin line is a prefect 12 for 12 match for the other matching Michael/William/Peter descendants.  This most likely indicates that he is descended from one of those lines (but probably not Peter since John and James Benjamin lived near York County in nearby Adams County, PA while Peter's descendants were in North Carolina).

The 25 marker test results show that there is much more variation in the 13th to 25th markers than were found in the first 12 markers.  We don't yet have sufficient data to define the "25-marker DNA pattern" for the immigrants.  Our next goal should be to upgrade more of the tests to clarify the results.

More results are on the way, and more volunteers are needed for the project.  Please consider participating.  See details on the main page on how to contribute towards this project.

Two additional Sprenkle/Sprinkle lines have now been tested.  One is the line of John Henrich Sprenkle who was in Maryland in the late 1700's.  The other is from George Lewis Sprinkle, who was a later immigrant to Menard County, IL, having arrived there in the 1830's.  Neither of these two lines appear to be related to the immigrants Michael, William and Peter.

A 12/12 match indicates a 50% probability of having a "most recent common ancestor" within 14.5 generations - the people tested represent about 8-9 generations from the immigrants.

See http://www.familytreedna.com/tr_Y12M.pdf for more details.

Lineages:

16217

Peter-Michael-Moses
17435 Peter-Michael-William

16254

Peter-Peter

16430 (Peter-Peter??) Hugh Sprinkle of NC-Hugh
18975 (Peter-Peter??)
Hugh Sprinkle of NC-Benjamin
16247 William-Daniel-George
21839 William-Daniel-Charles
18398 William-Henry

16298

William-William

16228 William-Peter-Frederick
16975 William-Peter-Peter

16535

Michael-George

16261

Michael-Henry

20978

John-James Benjamin (not yet connected)

38687

 George Lewis Sprinkle, later immigrant (1830's) to Menard Co., IL

29212

 John Henry of MD

From Y-base.org

Hans Sprunger, from Bern, Switzerland

From Ysearch.org

Lawrence Springer of Newport, RI

Return to Sprenkel DNA Project Homepage

Last updated 29 March 2005