Baucum genealogy

Maud Johnson's Heritage

Analysis of the results from mtDNA testing

These are the test results of one of Maud Johnson's direct female line grand-daughters. Since this descendant is only two generations from Maud and since mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) changes very slowly (typically one change in 10,000 years) it is safe to assume that these results replicate those that would be obtained by testing Maud's mitochondrial DNA directly if it were available. At the outside there is a statistical probability that a change could have ocurred between Maud and her grand-daughter but this is a tiny possibility and a single change would not in any event affect the analysis and conclusion.

These are Maud Johnson's HVR1 and HVR2 results (quoted as differences from the CRS - Cambridge Reference Sequence, according to convention).

HVR1  16519C
HVR2  263G, 315.1C, 477C

Maud's determined Haplogroup: H

To see what these results mean, let us first briefly review mtDNA. The letters mtDNA stand for mitochondrial DNA. This is not the double-helix type DNA we learn about in school. The double-helix type which splits and recombines is called autosomal DNA, also known as nuclear DNA. From this we get some characteristics from one parent, some from the other parent. By contrast, mtDNA is a smaller molecule, present in every cell in the body, and we inherit it only from our mother. She gets it from her mother and so on. Males have mtDNA in their cells, but they cannot pass it to their children.

Within the mtDNA are two regions called HVR1 and HVR2. These are regions of the molecule which change, at fairly well understood rates, but slowly enough to be of use in tracing female genetic lines. The meanings of the G, C, T, A letters in the changes in your results just indicate what type of 'base pair' is present at that place on the molecule. For most purposes we don't care about what exactly that means here, except that they work in pairs (C and G, A and T).

Let us now mention haplogroups. An mtDNA haplogroup defines a population group. A person is assigned to a haplogroup based on their HVR1 and HVR2 results and additionally and critically on changes from the CRS that are found in the 'coding region' of the mtDNA molecule. The 'coding region' is where mtDNA determines genetic features, that is we can think of it as where the 'work is done'. The HVR1 and HVR2 regions can be considered on the other hand to be 'junk' or 'non-useful' DNA. That is all we need to know - that haplogroup is not determined just by HVR1 and HVR2 but by other information on the molecule. So the haplogroup is not 'estimated' from HVR1 and HVR2 - it is separately tested and assigned. By being assigned a haplogroup one can begin to uncover how, over tens of thousands of years, a female ancestors mtDNA evolved and how it maps to current population groups.

Haplogroup H, Maud's haplogroup, is a western Eurasian haplogroup. About 40-50% of Europeans are mtDNA haplogroup H and it is also common in North Africa and the Middle East. Is it Native American ? No. Only the mtDNA haplogroups A, B, C, D and some of X would indicate Native American maternal line heritage. The H result tells us definitively that Maud Johnson Baucum's maternal line was not Native American and it tells us more. It tells us specifically that Maud's maternal line is most likely European, or (somewhat less likely based on known family tree) eastern European, near middle Eastern or North African in the most recent past (10-20,000 yrs ago to present).

There is a very good map of the present-day distribution of mtDNA haplogroup H on page 7 of the document at this address: World haplogroup distributions, by Doug McDonald (PDF format, opens in a new window) and another one showing migrations here: mtDNA migrations map (PDF format, opens in a new window)

Looking at Maud's HVR1 and HVR2 results specifically:

In the HVR1 region there is a change from 16519G to 16519C. What does that mean? Back in 1981 in Cambridge, England, a woman was chosen to have her mtDNA sequence decoded. She just happened to be a random choice for the experiment. Her identity is not public but her sequence was called the 'Cambridge Reference Sequence' (CRS for short) only because she was the first one tested - there is nothing else special about her. mtDNA sequences are now compared to that sequence (the CRS) and only the differences are reported - otherwise you would get a very long sequence of numbers, most of which you'd have to ignore. So for 16519C - the CRS sample had a G at that place on the molecule and Maud's line has a C.

It turns out that for the HVR1 region 16519C is the most common difference from the CRS. About 50% of all people in haplogroup H have it (ie some 20-25% of western Eurasians).

Looking at Maud's HVR2 results - what do these mean? 263G means that the CRS has 'letter' C at position 263 on the molecule, but Maud's line has G instead. 315.1C means an extra C has been inserted at position 315. In both these cases the CRS sequence actually had very rare values - as more tests have been done in the years since 1981 it has turned out that almost everyone, of any haplogroup, has these changes from the CRS.

The 477C means that G has changed to C at position 477. In all the searches I have done so far this has only been found in haplogroup H people of European origin (ie no current-day Indians, no current-day Siberians etc ). (Of course not everyone on the planet has been tested). It does not seem to be a particularly unusual or special value for European Hs.

Let us put this in the context of Maud's documented family history. Maud's birth certificate states her mother was Mary Dollar, daughter of Cornelius Dollar and Saray Ivey/Ivy. Maud's maternal grandmother Sarah Ivey/Ivy was born approximately 1800-1809 somewhere in Tennessee and she died between 1910 and 1920 (she and Cornelius Dollar are buried near Mena, AR). We have not so far linked Sarah Ivey/Ivy to a specific Ivey/Ivy family. Ivey/Ivy could be, and most likely is, indicative of Scottish, English or Irish origin. Dollar indicates possible Scottish or Irish origin, and the Johnson line of Maud's father is known to originate in Scotland (in fact this line of Johnsons were proud of their Scottish heritage).

We have corrresponded with several related Johnsons and Dollars and have found no rumors of Native American in their lines. In the 1800s and early 1900s Maud's parents and uncles, her grandparents, her siblings etc were not considered to be Native American by their contemporaries. They considered themselves to be of Scottish origin. Maud Johnson's father John T. Johnson was not considered either minority or majority Cherokee nor of any other tribe. None of the Johnsons or Dollars descendants were aware of rumors of adoption of Native American children, including those who knew John T. Johnson and his children. This evidence taken with the mtDNA results discount the possibility of direct lineal paternal or maternal Native American heritage.

Could there be some Native American in lines other than the direct lineal female or male (that is, other than father's father's father's father etc and similarly mother's mother's mother and so on)? It is possible but we have no evidence either direct or indirect. The Ivey grandmother was probably the best hope for uncovering any Native American in Maud's history because of a hint in the Ivey research that some of the Ivey/Ivy lines of Tennessee might have included some Native American. But there is no documentation of any such Native American nor even any suggested Ivey family members who were non-European and such a hint is again unsubstantiated by any evidence at this time, it is more a rumor than a story. But the mtDNA result from Maud's descendant specifically rules the Sarah Ivey female line out, the Ivey male line is thought to be Scottish from published genealogy, and together this gives a most likely western European origin for Maud's grandmother Sarah Ivey/Ivy. Taken with the surname (British) and all published Ivey/Ivy lines, the prospect of Native American in Maud's maternal line is vanishingly small. Any minority Native American autosomal DNA (nuclear DNA), for example from a remote great-great...grandmother/grandfather would be so far distant in time and relationship that the likelihood of it leaving any trace in Maud's descendants' nuclear DNA would be so small as to be near impossible and clearly would not be enough to validate the tale of Native American heritage. Additionally we have no evidence of the Dollar and Johnson lines being among the earliest arrivals to the United States from Europe. The census evidence points, though not yet conclusively and further research remains, to fairly late arrival (late 1700s-1800s) leaving little room for generations of marriage to or interaction with, Native Americans. The DNA and preponderance of documentary evidence show that she was of European extraction.

What of the rumors of Native American heritage

It has been said that Maud sometimes stated that she wasn't sure of her exact date or place of birth. Whether Mary Dollar was correct in the information she and Maud supplied for Maud's 1945 delayed birth certificate application, they stated that she was born 12 Oct 1881 in Atkins, AR. Maud married Joel Eli Baucum on 26 Sep 1896 in Conway Co, AR. Joel Eli's half brother Sam Hooper was witness and Maud's age was stated as 18. Clearly from the birth certificate she could not have been 18 but was 14. (Lying about age was not unheard of where one party was not of age to marry). Joel Eli was 26 years old. In later years a marriage at 14 to a much older man could have been looked at somewhat unfavorably. It is a possibility that Maud and Joel Eli found it easier to muddy the waters concerning Maud's precise age.

It has also been said that Maud turned down an offer of 40 acres of land based on her Native American lineage. There are no known documented sources for this story. Based on Maud's known history she was not eligible at any time for any official offerings of land. In order to have claimed land in the timeframe under consideration (such as in Oklahoma) Maud would have had to be a documented and verified member of a named tribe and her family would have had to provide (before 1909) written information on their origin, their Indian names, and their exact component of Indian 'blood'. There are no such record for any of the Johnson or Dollar families, not even any filed but disallowed claims. By her birth certificate application Maud specifically disavowed any such claims by stating her parents as John T. Johnson and Mary Dollar, who were white and not documented Native American. Again, this is only reinforced by the DNA results. Maud Johnson was not Native American to any degree currently resolvable nor according to any firm evidence.

Please feel free to direct any questions, or requests for clarification or further detail, to me via the email address at the bottom of this page. The above article is necessarily brief (to avoid boredom) but I hope addresses the salient points. If anything is unclear I am happy to provide further information.