Log in
Sign up

Cook Surname DNA Project

< DNA tests
Member Count: 484
Surnames
Cook, Cooke, Koch and variants
Description

COOK(E)-KOCH DNA: Thank you for your interest in the Cook/Cooke/Koch DNA Project. We have just recently started Phase I of this project with the following objectives -

Phase I Objectives -

1)To determine where folks would fit within various Cook/Cooke/Koch genetic lines.

2)To compare the various DOCUMENTED lines, and find possible placement for undocumented participants.

3)To separate German, Irish, English, Scottish, etc., Cook/Cooke/Koch lines.

Please visit our website above and learn more about the project!
Background
Haplogroup & Allele Mutation Info:

Comments from FTDNA May 2003

It is obvious from our observation of 1000's of samples that some markers change or mutate at a faster rate than others. While that actual 'faster rate' has not yet been definitively calculated, not all markers should be treated the same for evaluation purposes. Markers 385a, 385b, 439, 458, 459a, 459b, 449, and 464a-d have shown a faster mutation rate then the average, and therefore these markers are very helpful at splitting lineages into sub sets, or branches, within your family tree. Explained another way, if you match exactly on all of the markers except for one or a few of the markers we have determined mutate more quickly, then despite the mutation this mismatch only slightly decreases the probability of two people in your surname group who match 11/12 or even 23/25 of not sharing a recent common ancestor. Note - On May 19, 2003 FTDNA reassigned the values for 464a, b, c, and d. Dropping each by one. Because of a change in Lab nomenclature. These results reflect those changes.

G
This lineage may have originated in India or Pakistan, and has dispersed into central Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. The G2 branch of this lineage (containing the P15 mutation) is found most often in the Europe and the Middle East.

R1a
The R1a lineage is believed to have originated in the Eurasian Steppes north of the Black and Caspian Seas. This lineage is believed to have originated in a population of the Korgan culture, known for the domestication of the horse (approximately 3000 B.C.E.). These people were also believed to be the first speakers of the Indo-European language group. This lineage is currently found in central and western Asia, India, and in Slavic populations of Eastern Europe.

R1b
Haplogroup R1b is the most common haplogroup in European populations. It is believed to have expanded throughout Europe as humans re-colonized after the last glacial maximum 10-12 thousand years ago. This lineage is also the haplogroup containing the Atlantic modal haplotype.

I
The I, I1, and I1a lineages are nearly completely restricted to northwestern Europe. These would most likely have been common within Viking populations. One lineage of this group extends down into central Europe.


I1b
This subgroup of Haplogroup I is found within the Balkans countries at it's greatest frequency and diversity. These countries probably harbored this subset of Haplogroup I as a refuge during the Last Glacial Maximum.


J2
This lineage originated in the northern portion of the Fertile Crescent where it later spread throughout central Asia, the Mediterranean, and south into India. As with other populations with Mediterranean ancestry this lineage is found within Jewish populations.


E3b
This haplogroup is believed to have evolved in the Middle East. It expanded into the Mediterranean during the Pleistocene Neolithic expansion. It is currently distributed around the Mediterranean, southern Europe, and in north and east Africa.


As additional information becomes available, members may be separated out into groups with identified common ancestors. In cases of ambiguous DNA results, we will depend in part on lineages supplied by the test subjects for determining how the groups should be constructed. All participants will be notified by email when new test results are posted.
Goals

Thank you for your interest in the Cook/Cooke/Koch DNA Project. We area few years into this now and have 50+ distinct Cook(e)-Koch lines. We started with and continue to have the following objectives -

Phase I Objectives -

1)To determine where folks would fit within various Cook/Cooke/Koch genetic lines.

2)To compare the various DOCUMENTED lines, and find possible placement for undocumented participants.

3)To separate German, Irish, English, Scottish, and other variants, etc., Cook/Cooke/Koch lines.

4) Drilling deeper, align lineages with newest Haplogroup standards.

News
Dear Cook Group Participants,
ADDITIONAL RESULTS PAGE: www.worldfamilies.net/surnames/c/cook/results.html
With the help of Terry Barton and "World Family Network", we are re-evaluating the Sub Groups and have created a new page.

NOTE 2: Please take a look at your ancestors on the Y-Results Page. IS IT CORRECT?? COMPLETE??? If not, email me, OR: Go to "MyFTDNA" [your personal results page]; Click on "User Preferences"; Scroll down to "Paternal Side"; Correct or update your data in the field; Click on The info you put in this field will display directly to the new page. Be Advised: the space in the field is limited, so be brief and abbreviate where possible. ALSO, don't forget to update this info to show on the new interactive maps!!

Jim Cooke, administrator
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

DNA Real-World Examples........

DNA & Genealogy: A real-world example 

So you are a genealogist, have encountered that inevitable “brick-wall”, & are at your wits-end. You’ve pounded your fists, raised your arms to the sky, and yelled “Cook(e)/Koch!? It may as well be ‘Smith’! What now!!??” I’ve been there. And then I found “Y-Chromosome DNA”. The great thing about Y-Chr. DNA is that it parallels our genealogical paper trails. Like the records you’ve poured over,Y-Chr. DNA passes from grandfather to father to son, just as genealogy follows the paternal surnames. But, practically speaking, does it work? YES! 

Example #1: Adding Further Proof of Paper-Trail Theories: John Cooke died in Cumberland County, VA in 1775. I had longsuspected that William Cook(e), a neighbor & fellow patentee of 24 March 1740, was a relative, a brother, of my John Cooke. I had ample deed & landgrant evidence for each, plus I had accounts from the records of the store of Thomas Partridge, Hanover County, VA, that listed “William Cook”, “your brother John Cook”, & “your son Claten”. I found Edgar Forrest Cook of Louisiana. He was descended, per paper trial, from a “Clayton Cooke” of Virginia. He was tested, I was tested, and we matched! Further, we added additional evidence through the test that our assertion that Abraham Cooke married Martha Clayton, & that William & John were sons, was probably true. 

Example #2: Different Surname Matches- Michael Williams was tested in the “Williams DNA Project” and his results we reposted. I was tested in the Cook(e)/Koch Project”, and my results were posted (R1b-LINEAGE 2, John Cooke). FTDNA contacted the two of us by email: we matched. However, a disclaimer was also posted (paraphrased): “matches between different surnames likely represented a Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) before the emergence of surnames, about 1000+ years ago” Not very useful in common genealogical pursuits, huh?

Let’s face it:we ARE related to other males with differing surnames. For example, say that, 1000+ years ago, Thomas the millwright of Green Acres had 3 sons: John, the “cooper”, Robert the “blacksmith”, & James “the cook”. Potentially, Thomas “MILLER” had sons John COOPER, Robert SMITH, & James COOK.

But there was more to the Williams-Cooke match than meets the eye……… After further digging,and much correspondence, I learned the following: Michael Williams was descended from Jacob Marion Williams, eldest son of Phillip Williams & Catherine Miller. The couple resided, for a short time, in Botetourt County,Va. “Botetourt? (pronounced ‘Bot-eh-tot’)”. That sounded familiar, somehow. So I learned more. Jacob had brothers, and descendents of those brothers were also tested in the Williams DNA Project. HOWEVER, their DNA results did NOT match Michael’s, though they did match each other’s. The same male did NOT father Jacob as these brothers! I visited the Botetourt courthouse. I found Millers,Williams, and a few Cooks. And then it hit me: William Cooke of Prince Edward County, VA was listed on a deed, ca1830, in which he deeded his interest in his father’s estate to brother John Cooke III. On that deed, William was listed as“OF BOTETOURT COUNTY”! (William’s father was John Cook, Jr (d1801). And this John Cook, “jr” was a son of MY John Cooke, “Sr” of Cumberland County, VA).

No, the DNA results do not prove relationships (cousin, brother, uncle), but they DO prove relatedness. Did William Cooke of Prince Edward father that first Williams child? Did the Williams family adopt “Jacob”? We may never know. But Michael Williams is a “DNA COUSIN”.

The Cook(e)/Koch DNA Project has connected me with multiple Cooke cousins, a Williams cousin, numerous other “different surname” cousins, and, a “Johnson” cousin (his father was adopted). We haven’t sorted the paper trails, yet, but we are much closer to expanding, greatly, this Cook(e) family tree.

Further, we know from mismatches in the Project (lines that do not match ours) that pursuing this line or that line is now fruitless. Think of the times you’ll save!! 

Jim Cooke, Admin, Cook(e)/Koch DNA Project 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

Genealogists will tell you that there were 4 major Cook(e)/Koch lines that settled in Virginia in the 17th & 18th centuries: 
1. Cookes of Gloucester, VA-progenitor, Mordecai Cooke of “Mordecai’s Mount” (tested and more below)
2. Cook(e)s of Isle of Wight-Surry, VA- progenitorin Virginia: William Cooke, Sr. (tested and more below)
3. Cook(e)s of Loudoun-Fairfax, VA- progenitor, Dr. Stephen Cooke 
4. Kochs of Germanna, VA – a German line whose settlement was established by Gov. Alexander Spottswood of VA. 

Other lines also existed, certainly, and manylines passed through Virginia, but the above 4 lines tend to be those from whichothers try to prove descent.

Some of these other lines include (earliest “father” shown): 
*Shem Cookes & John Cook(e)s of Amelia County, VA (brothers) - thought by some to descend from the"Gloucester" line of Mordecai Cooke;
*Abraham Cooke, Sr. of New Kent-Hanover (believed he married Martha Clayton) & the Cookes of Cumberland County,VA –although descent from a particular line was unproved, most paper trails seemed to lead to “Gloucester”. 

Use of the DNA Kits offered by the Cook-Cooke-Koch DNA Project, and the posted results thereon, has helped to untangle these lines and to dispel much of the “assumption” that has occurred over the years in Virginia Genealogy; particularly, that they were all related to and descended from Mordecai Cooke the Immigrant of Gloucester Co, VA.

We can NOW say, based on the results and the paper trails of the participants, that Lineage 2 & Lineage 3 are NOT related to one another and are NOT descended from Mordecai. Further, neither are they related to the Cookes from Isle of Wight.

So, these are the specific, distinct lineages discovered and confirmed via Y-DNA testing:
        1. R1b-LINEAGE 3: Descendants of Shem Cooke & descendants of John Cooke were tested. 
These participants are related, and the belief that John & Shem were brothers (or at least related) appears to be confirmed. 

        2. R1b-LINEAGE 2: Descendants of John Cooke of Cumberland, VA (d1775) & a descendant of Clayton Cooke [son of William Cooke (d ca1750) of St Martin’s Parish, Hanover, VA] were tested. Their results confirmed their relatedness. It further confirmed the belief that (i) John Cooke & Clayton Cooke were related; (ii)appears to confirm the belief that Abraham Cooke married Martha Clayton and that John & Clayton were related to the couple.      NOTE: Descendants of three ‘believed” sons of Abraham & Martha have been tested and do indeed match each other.

        3. I2b-LINEAGE 1: Multiple descendants of Mordecai Cooke of Gloucester, VA have been tested, to include a participant with a direct, unbroken paper trail (a lineage also shown in the book by William Carter Stubbs). All match one another. IN FACT, this lineage from Gloucester County, VA also matches a participant who claims descent from Francis Cooke of The Mayflower!! This was an unexpected finding. 
NOTE: Because The Gloucester Line is well-documented, and therefore a major line, many researchers set out to prove descent from Mordecai Cooke. It is always possible that the paper trail is flawed. 

        4. I1-LINEAGE 1 & 1a: Descendants of Richard Cooke of Bristol, England, thought to be the English “father” of the Cookes that went to Isle of Wight-Surry, VA, were tested. Their results confirmed that they were indeed related to one another.

        5.  HELP! TheCook-Cooke-Koch DNA Project Site has yet to identify a descendant of Dr.Stephen Cooke of Loudoun-Fairfax, VA. 
He married Catherine Esten of Bermuda. From this line come such notables as: General Phillip St. George Cooke, USA cavalry;General John Rogers Cooke, CSA infantry; John Esten Cooke, CSA & author; Flora Cooke, daughter of General P. St. G. Cooke, and wife of General James Ewell Brown “JEB” Stuart, CSA cavalry 

Jim Cooke, administrator, Cook/Cooke/Koch DNA Project
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

An invitation to all G Haplogroup Cook/Cooke/Koch DNA Project Members (Email from Bill Van Hemert): 

Dear Cook/Cooke/Koch DNA Project Members - My name is Bill Van Hemert, and I am assisting our Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) Haplogropup 'G' Project Administrator, Peter Christy, with membership. We believe that surname projects and haplogroups are two sides of the same 'DNA coin'. I believe that a surname project teaches us all about our known, recorded history while our haplogroup helps us to discover our unrecorded, unknown history as part of the human family. We have identified a possible candidate for the COOK Surname Project as a member of our haplogroup. We would be happy to share that information with you. I wonder if it would be possible to notify all your 'G' members of the existence of our Project ? Since it's possible to belong to more than one y-DNA project at FTDNA, I would hope that membership in both Projects would add to your members' knowledge of DNA genealogy and add to the value that they received from their testing. IF they are interested in the project, they may seek additional information: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/G-YDNA IF they are interested in joining, this is the procedure: "Any FTDNA or National Geographic Genographic Project client who had their Y-DNA tested to predict or confirm that they are a member of Haplogroup G is welcome to join. IF they know their FTDNA Kit Number and Password, go directly to the public page at the above link and click "Request to Join this Group", on the left-hand side of the page, enter the FTDNA Kit Number and Password, and finally click on the "JOIN" button. They will receive an email confirmation from our Admin. If they have questions or problems, please have them email me at wgvh2@yahoo.com. Thanks for your time, Bill
Results
**********************************************************

NEW PAGE:
http://www.worldfamilies.net/surnames/c/cook/results.html

FOR THIS SITE:
The Y-DNA results are found by clicking on the Y-Results button; mitochondrial results (female line) are visible by clicking on the mt-Results button.

Genealogical DNA Tests

Y-Chromosome DNA Tests

Y-DNA 12 Marker Test: Tests the Y chromosome for genetic matches between males. Results are placed in the Y-DNA database and when 2 people show the same identical results, both parties will be notified if they have both signed the FTDNA Release Form. The participant receives a Certificate & report generally describing Y-DNA sequencing and the meaning of the probability between matches.

Y-DNAPlus 25 Marker Test: Tests the Y chromosome for genetic matches between males. Results are placed in the Y-DNA database and when 2 people show the same identical or near identical results, both parties will be notified if you have both signed the FTDNA Release Form. A perfect match of 25 markers means a lesser number of generations before a Most Common Recent Ancestor (MRCA) can be determined. The customer receives a Certificate & report generally describing Y-DNA sequencing and the meaning of probability between matches.

Y-DNA37 - 37 Marker Test: tests the Y chromosome for genetic matches between males. Results are placed in FTDNA's Y-DNA database and when 2 people show the same identical or near identical results, they will inform both parties if you have both signed the FTDNA Release Form. A perfect match of 37 markers means a lesser number of generations before a Most Common Recent Ancestor (MRCA) can be determined. The customer receives a Certificate & report generally describing Y-DNA sequencing and the meaning of probability between matches.

How many markers should I test?: The question asked the most often by people considering the Y-DNA test is ‘How many markers are enough?’

The place to start is to define the term ‘marker.’ A marker is a location on the Y chromosome that may be tested for Genetic Genealogy. These locations, or markers, have names, such as DYS #19 or DYS #385a or DYS #439. When a marker is tested, the result is reduced to a number, which represents the number of repeated patterns of the DNA protein sequence at a specific location on the Y chromosome.

The Lab we use, Family Tree DNA, offers a 12 marker Y-DNA test, a 25 marker Y-DNA test, and a 37 marker Y-DNA test. The difference is that the more markers tested for results, the further the reduction in the time frame to the Most Recent Common Ancestor, or MRCA. For all tests, the number of markers that match can determine whether you and another participant share a common ancestor and how many generations ago that common ancestor might have lived.

If two individual's test results match exactly (12/12) in the 12 marker test, there is a 90%+ probability that they are related. The issue then becomes: when did this common ancestor live? Unfortunately, science cannot pinpoint the exact generation, but science can provide a range of time when the common ancestor might have lived.

If two individuals match in the 12 marker test for either 10 out of 12 (10/12) or 11 out of 12 (11/12), they are also considered related, but the time frame to the common ancestor, MRCA, is more distant than if they had a 12/12 match. Where the matches are less that 10/12, the two individuals are not considered to be related.

If your 12 marker test results match another participant’s exactly, 12/12, your common ancestor occurred between 1 and 62 generations ago, with a 50% probability that the common ancestor lived 14.5 generations ago or less. There is a 90% probability it was within 48 generations and a 95% probability it was within 62.

You can shorten this time span by increasing the 12 marker test to a 25 or 37 marker test.
Get a DNA Test and Join this Project!
After purchasing a DNA test, you will be able to join this surname project and collaborate with its members at Family Tree DNA.
DNA projects create opportunities for people to work with others to explore their common genetic heritage. Project membership is free and voluntary. Members may join or leave a project at any time.
About DNA For Genealogy
Watch Family Tree DNA President & CEO Bennett Greenspan discuss DNA testing for Genetic Genealogy.
The test kit
Watch an instructional video of How to Take Our DNA Test.
Project Background, Goals, Results and News are copyright of the specific Surname Project as described at Family Tree DNA.
 
Loading...
Loading...