When is a male Prog not an SV?

I have added the following caveat under Biological Progenitor (PROG).

NB: A biological progenitor (PROG) will, in certain cases, lack the necessary cultural criteria for Stamvader (SV) status.

Let wel: 'n Biologiese stigter (PROG) sal nie in elke geval aan die nodige kulturele kriteria vir Stamvader (SV) status voldoen nie.

Seems good to me, Alex

Wrt <is she married to the SV?> Yes or No? as the rule of thumb question; the more accurate question is <Is she the mother of her SV husband's Surname line?> Yes or No?
but I ditched that option long ago because we were having such a difficult time getting some people to understand the non-biological nature of the SM category. Once the word mother goes in there, we're lost with people who only half accept that there are two constructs being applied on geni - and that the Stammoeder is a cultural construct only.

Alex alles reg maar dit is ......sal nie in alle gevalle ...............
Net die twee woordjies.
Dankie
Judi

I think we should look at some examples.. anyone have a profile they want debated?

Thank-you Judi!

Dr Jean Prieur du Plessis, SV/PROG

He introduced the Du Plessis family name to SA = Stamvader

He introduced the Du Plessis Y-DNA haplogroup to SA = Y-PROG

His progenitor status should therefore be: SV/Y-PROG

Dr Jean Prieur du Plessis, SV/PROG

He is a biological progenitor yes, but there is no unbroken Y-DNA path from a living person, so no, according to our definitions he is not a Y-PROG..

Are du Plessis males not direct-line descendants of Jean Prieur du Plessis?

Aah, but not yet on GENi, so yes you are probably right..

I have written a brief overview in Afrikaans:

Daar het die afgelope tyd baie DNS resultate op GENi bygekom en van die Suid-Afrikaanse kurators het besluit dat die vorige stelsel wat Stamouers (SV/SM) met Progenitor (PROG) vergelyk te eenvoudig is en dat progenitor eerder as BIOLOGIESE STAMOUER 'stigter' beskryf moet word.

Die GENi kurator-span is besig om 'n Biologiese Stamouer (Biological Progenitor) stelsel te bespreek. Die etiket PROG sal as verkorting hiervoor staan.

'n Manlike PROG wat as Biologiese Stigter van 'n Y-DNS haplogroep bewys kan word (met moderne afstammelinge) sal as Y-PROG bestaan. Die vroulike ekwivalent hiervan sal as mtPROG bestaan.

Daar word beklemtoon dat die nuwe biologiese stelsel by die vorige stamvader/stammoeder stelsel bygevoeg moet word. Twee-stelsel sisteem!

Die dubbele-stelsel wat bespreek word sal biologiese (PROG) en kulturele (SV/SM) etikette aan stamouers voorsien. In die geval van Y-PROG en mtPROG voorouers sal die spesifieke DNS groepe onderaan die profiel staan as daar direkte-lyn afstammelinge is wat hul DNS resultaat op GENi opgelaai het.

Die SA GENi kurator-span

Alex, PROG has always meant 'biological' - that's not new at all. See here: https://www.geni.com/projects/South-African-female-Progenitors-Stam... (which project would really benefit from your translation skills :-))

Donovan, wanted to address (as an aside) something you raised before:
"There are no Y-DNA results yet for relatives in the paternal line for..."

I think part of the reason why so many SV/PROG profiles are appearing without Y-DNA results is the 10 generation cap currently imposed by Geni.com. I wonder if it's too taxing computationally?

Donovan, we can look at Robert Thomas Bird Dixon and Elsje Aletta Cecilia Petronella Burr-Dixon. He's SV/PROG (being born in Ireland and first (known) of the Bird-Dixon, Burr-Dixon, Bordixon line) and having sired more than 2 generations. She'd be SM, being the wife of an SV, but not PROG since she's locally born Viljoen. SV-PROG/SM combination?

I'm not sure which is more significant: the presence of the SM or the absence of the PROG. However, so much meaning is construed by the concatenation! The cultural implication is also clear: they are Irish-Afrikaners.

Drummond, You are probably correct about the 10 generation limit.. There are other wsys to find our special PROGs though... manually or using an app developed by an American curator. .. Sharon has played with it extensively,, so will I leave it to her to explain.

I think your Dixon - Viljoen combination is 100% correct.

I received a good question regarding NPE (non-paternal event) situations.

The Y-PROG is the first male to enter South Africa and introduce his specific Y-DNA lineage along an unbroken path to a living male descendant.

Therefore, the child born of an NPE scenario will cease to carry the same surname as his biological father. On GENi he will be placed in his biological lineage/tree with a note clearly explaining the reason why he does not carry his biological father's family name.

I expect there will be a few GENi users that may feel their NPE ancestor should be a part of their cultural STAM as they prefer the surname relative over the biological relative.

In such a case a note on the NPE child's profile clarifying the scenario around why exactly the uploaded Y-DNA group of the child born out of a non-paternal event does not match the NPE child's non-biological father or his particular Stamvader.

Ideally, one would want to follow the DNA to the child biological founder Y-PROG.

You don't change names in the case of a NPE.. but you can add the biological father to the tree if he is known. .. The Botha- Appel case is a prime example.

The small Appel became a Botha.

Theunis Botha

Thank-you for the example Don.

Showing 2 sets of parents (biological and "adoptive") is a fairly new feature on GENi.. there is a very rough estimate that Non Paternity Events are 10% of all births.. highly dependant on culture of course... Amongst our Calvinist ancestors it would be much lower I guess.... but it still shows how special a Y-PROG is..
especially considering some go back over 10 generations.. maybe a statistician can work out how special...

I've read that it's actually around 3 percent or lower: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/06/the-paternity-myth-t...

If you read stories about how our Calvinist ancestors behaved at the Cape, it gives you pause to imagine a very high rate of possibility of non paternity events indeed :-) cf June McKinnon's book 'Wine, women and Good Hope' Sooo funny :-)

I am referring to the comment by Don Penaluna on 30 September. If, say, five or more Du Plessis men can be found who have had their Y-DNA analyzed by Family Tree DNA, and if their Y-DNA results should be the same, then it can be concluded, by using 'triangulation', that they had inherited that selfsame Y-DNA haplotype via the male lineage from Jean Prieur du Plessis, i.e. their Y-DNA haplotype would have been the haplotype of J.P. du P. If the Y-DNA haplo's of those five or more Du P. men should be the same, then it will also mean that there were no 'non paternal events' in their male lineages. Using this method it has been concluded that the Y-DNA haplo of SA Venter men is R1a1a1g, and that this would also have been the Y-DNA haplo of Hendrik Venter, the SA Venter Stamvader/Progenitor. It will be found that each family will have it's own distinct Y-DNA haplotype. Men who have the same surname, and who have had their Y-DNA haplo's 'done' by FTDNA can form a 'Surname DNA Project' on FTDNA.

Yes 100% Piet, This is the usual way that PROG DNA is confirmed.

We have Surname projects and Haplogroup projects on GENi too..