HIGHLIGHTS. We have now been able to identify the DNA profiles of nine genetically different branches of our name including, provisionally, a second Irish branch and, most importantly, the Drum branch. Towards the end of 2008 our Study was joined by our 150th participant, and four participants have kindly made contributions to our General Fund, enabling the recruiting of participants with long-established pedigrees to add to our understanding of our DNA test results. But the economic downturn has led to a marked slowdown of new participants and donations, so progress during 2009 will be at a slower rate.

INTRODUCTION. Many genealogists are finding DNA tests useful. The test itself is simply a saliva sample. The privacy of each participant is protected by analyses being limited to the “ancestral line” rather than to the full personal DNA “fingerprint”. Participants’ names are not disclosed, and their e-mail addresses are not released to non-participants.

The interpretation of DNA test results depends on the transmission of DNA remaining unchanged from generation to generation, apart from small and occasional changes (“mutations”) in one or more of the “markers” that make up the genetic elements of the DNA profile of each individual. The DNA profiles of individual participants can be compared to establish the likelihood of common ancestry, but DNA test results are never 100% conclusive. Confidence in the interpretation of test results increases as more individuals participate and as the testing and analysis techniques continue to improve.

Three applications of DNA tests are popular:

1. yDNA Surname Studies. These exploit the characteristic of both y-chromosomes and surnames to only descend by the male line. Such studies have three important limitations: females can only participate through a male relative, surnames only go back a millennium, at most, and surnames occasionally do not follow the male line.
2. mt (mitochondrial) DNA Studies. These follow the female line.
3. Deep Ancestry Studies. These use yDNA or mtDNA haplogroups to explore ethnic origins going back several millennia. For background see, for example, www.familytreedna.com > Site map (at foot of home page) > Understanding Haplogroups; and www.ethnoancestry.com/links.htm#haplogroups ).

This Study only addresses the first of these three applications.

Since 2000 many Scottish Clans have launched surname studies and associated websites. Such studies offer opportunities for:

• enabling DNA tests at group discount rates with directly comparable results;
• helping genealogists whose conventional research has met a “brick wall”;
• ascertaining the probability of two participants being related;
• identifying branches within a Clan;
• exploring and developing and promulgating new ideas.

This webpage does not attempt to describe in detail the principles and terminology of DNA tests for genealogists. For further guidance see www.familytreedna.com and other DNA surname web sites.

GOALS OF THE CLAN IRWIN SURNAME DNA STUDY.

1. To facilitate and co-ordinate cost-effective y-chromosome DNA ancestry tests for all those bearing surnames sounding like Irwin, Irvine or Irving, and individuals related thereto.
2. To combine the results of these tests with available genealogical data.
3. To identify DNA profiles of the Bonshaw and Drum branches and sub-branches thereof.
4. To promote, co-ordinate and publish analysis and discussion of the results through the Clan Irwin Association’s website and its quarterly journal, the Holly Leaf Chronicle.

JOINING THE STUDY. All adult males whose surnames sound like Irwin, Irvine, or Irving are invited to participate. Females are welcome to join our Study if they can first persuade an adult male relation with such a surname to undergo a yDNA test on their behalf.

Our Study has chosen Family Tree DNA (“FTDNA”) as our testing company because, in the absence of any international standard for yDNA tests, it has the largest data pool. FTDNA was established in Houston, Texas in 2000 and has now conducted over 150,000 yDNA tests, many more than all their competitors combined. It hosts over 5,000 registered surname studies, and provides useful support. No participant in our Study has any personal or financial connection with FTDNA.

For most prospective participants we recommend FTDNA’s 37-marker test at $149, plus a $4 shipping charge ($6 outside USA). FTDNA also do 12-marker, 25-marker and 67-marker tests, but we do not normally recommend these for our Study. Individuals may reduce their costs by persuading other members of their family to share the test fee. Alternatively, if they can identify a 17th century paternal ancestor, they may apply to the Study Administrator for financial help (see ‘Donations’ below).

To participate in the Clan Irwin Surname DNA Study at discounted Group rates, go to www.familytreedna.com> “Irwin” > “Search” > “Irwin Clan”, and complete the Group Application Form.

When FTDNA receive your application they will send you a sample test kit and simple instructions on its use. On receipt of your two saliva samples they will undertake the relevant analysis, send you a certificate, enter your results in their confidential genetic database, compare these results with those of other participants in this database, and advise you of any participants with exact or close matches. If you complete FTDNA’s Election Form you gain access to the e-mail addresses of these participants, and to quantified probabilities of how closely you are related to them. Uploading to “Y-search” posts your results on the web and enables non-FTDNA participants to contact you without your name or e-mail address being disclosed. One participant in the Study serves as Administrator, seeking to identify family branches, to co-ordinate research and application of Donations, and to promulgate results and associated issues without compromising confidentialities.

STUDY PARTICIPANTS. Our Study includes participants from the Erwin, Genographic and Irish Heritage projects, and participants with other surnames who appear to be close genetic relatives. As of end February 2009 details of our 157 participants are:

Participants have volunteered the name, date of birth and place of origin of their earliest confirmed paternal ancestor:

The “Other” spellings are participants’ surnames unlike Irwin but whose DNA indicates their ancestors were genetically related to Border Irvings. (see below)

INTERPRETING DNA TEST RESULTS. The DNA test result of a single participant is meaningless until it is compared with that of another participant. From such comparisons the probability of the two participants sharing a common ancestor can be assessed. While determining the marker counts is a strict scientific process, determining and expressing the probabilities of these comparisons is still a developing art. The probabilities are complex mathematical functions dependent on many variables, including the number of markers tested, the different rates of mutation of individual markers (slow mutating markers are useful in ethnology, fast mutating markers in genealogy), and the number and magnitude of the mismatching markers. And alas some assumption is needed of the possible number of generations elapsed since the most recent common paternal ancestor (MRCA). Several tools may be used to assess comparisons of two participants' profiles:

1. Haplogroups, the DNA profiles associated with basic ethnic groups used in Deep Ancestry Studies. It is unlikely participants with different haplogroups are genealogically related.
2. Mathematical graphs of time since the MRCA. These are a useful educational tool, but indigestible to many and unsuited to multiple individual comparisons.
3. Genetic distance, such as ‘0/12’ or ‘1/37’. Relatively simple to determine, but ignore different mutation rates of individual markers. The following “rule of thumb” is a qualitative indication of whether two participants are related, assuming their MRCA was within the last 24 generations:

   Distance	12-marker comparison	Distance	37-marker comparison
   0	Probably related	0-1	Very probably related
   1-5	Possibly related	2-9	Probably related
   6-10	Probably not related	10-16	Possibly related
   >10	Not related	>17	Not related

   “Distance” is the sum of the magnitudes of the mismatches of individual marker values, e.g. a distance of 3 may include three 1-step mismatches, or one 2-step mismatch plus one 1-step mismatch. Special rules apply for DIS markers 385, 464 and YCA.
4. FTDNA’s ‘TiP’ probability. Simple to express, but dependant on time since MRCA. TiPs respond to the number of makers analysed; as these are increased from 12 to 37 to 67, so the TiP probabilities of common ancestry of two participants tend to polarise: thus TiPs of 10% or 90% with 12 markers may move to 5% or 95% with 37 markers, and to 2% or 98% with 67 markers. But there are many exceptions to this generalization, and the movement of 12-marker TiPs nearer 50% are even less predictable if the number of markers analysed is increased.
5. Conventional genealogical research is still a major input. The number of generations since a possible MRCA is important. For most people with the same or similar surnames this is typically a maximum of 24 generations, the “fallback” used by FTDNA. Coincidentally this is the number of generations since the Irvine traditions of the time of Robert the Bruce. TiP probabilities reduce if genealogical research has shown the common ancestor must have been more than, say, 8 generations ago.

Another problem is the massive number of comparisons that can be attempted within a large surname study. To manage this the Study Administrator selects the DNA profile which best represents the different branches of a family, the “modal haplotypes”. In our Study the DNA profiles of individual participants in each branch are then compared with these haplotypes using FTDNA’s “TiP” algorithm for 24 generations.

Alas in practice surnames do not only pass through the male line, and in Surname DNA studies instances of such events are euphemistically termed as Non Paternal Events, or ‘NPEs’. Examples of NPEs are:

1. A formal change of surname, typically a 20th century event.
2. An informal change of surname, typically in the 13th to 19th centuries, for example when a young boy's father died and he was given the surname of his mother (in Scotland females retained their maiden names until the 19th century) or, if she remarried, of his step-father; or if a boy was orphaned or a waif, and was given the name of his guardian.
3. A change of surname before these had become strictly hereditary, typically in the 12th to 17th centuries, for example a patronymic when a boy was given the forename of his father (e.g. Adamson), or a man became known by his nickname (e.g. Redman) or occupation (e.g. Smith), or by where he lived (e.g. Park) or where he had moved from (e.g. Hampton), or when a clan member, tenant or servant took the surname of his chief, laird or master.
4. An illegitimacy or covert infidelity, at any period, and the child was given the name of the mother or the mother's husband.

Prospective participants must therefore be aware that some DNA test results prove disappointing. This can occur for several reasons:

• if there has been a NPE;
• if the results contradict some cherished genealogical research or tradition;
• if there has been a mutation in recent generations and two known relatives have different DNA profiles. So while most near relatives have identical DNA profiles, brothers and close cousins may have mismatches of 1/37 or even 2/37;
• if the comparisons are indeterminate, for example if a participant appears genetically unrelated to any other participant in the study.

So much for the theory!

TEST RESULTS. These are shown in two tables, each of three sheets:

ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS. The full test results for each participant are listed in Table B, sequenced in nine groups, and within each group in order of probability of relationship with the modal haplotype.

Table A gives background data and analysis:

• columns (1) & (2), identify the haplotypes and groups;
• columns (3) - (6) relate to the participants: identifers that preserve their anonymity, the country they live in, and if they have submitted a Family tree;
• columns (7) - (12) list details of the Earliest Confirmed Paternal Ancestor;
• column (13) shows the number of markers analysed;
• columns (14) - (19) show “distances” and TiPs from modal haplotype ‘BA’;
• columns (20) - (27) show TiPs from other modal haplotypes;
• columns (28) and (29) show genealogical relationships and closest matches;
• column (30) shows the deep ancestry haplogroup, predicted or actually tested.

Analysis to 37 markers has proved the most popular and cost effective:

12 markers (for most participants) and 25 markers (for some) have proved too few, while the benefits of going to 67 markers have proved disappointing.

By end February 2009 it has been possible to identify the DNA profile of nine branches of the name. The results in our Study can be grouped thus:

The Borders branch of the name nearly two thirds of our participants who evidently share a single paternal ancestor who came from the Scottish Borders, probably Dumfriesshire in the 13th or 14th century. Many of these participants who live in USA were previously unsure of their distant paternal ancestry and are gratified this has now been established. Most of these participants had an ancestor who migrated via Ireland, some migrated direct from Scotland, some have remained in Scotland. 'The “modal haplotype” of this group has been designated ‘BA’, and this may well be the DNA profile of the common ancestor. ‘BB’ is a senior paternal representative of the Bonshaw branch. ‘BD’ and ‘Bd’, two brothers, are senior representatives of the Dumfries branch, the current owners of Bonshaw Tower and allegedly the 10th cousin of ‘BB’. But as they have genetic distances of 3/37 and 5/37 respectively from BB, DNA has not helped to clarify the traditional genealogical relationship between the two branches.

Some participants whose test results imply a close genetic relationship (0/37 or 1/37) have contacted each other to seek genealogical relationships. These initiatives have identified one pair of 5th cousins (at 1/37) and one pair of 6th cousins (at 2/67). This demonstrates the difficulties in combining genetics and conventional genealogy, but more relationships will emerge as more participants join - so far our Study has only attracted about 0.2% of the Irwins etc. alive around the world today!

Several participants with surnames unlike Irwin are included in this branch as they evidently share this common ancestry and so are NPE's. The Cahill and Hamblen participants know their relevant recent ancestry included such events. Armstrong and Elliot are common Borders surnames, while Byers was a common name in Annan. Errand may be a name change.

The two Drum participants, second cousins, are members of the senior line of Drum. One of the prime objectives of this Study has been to test the tradition recorded by Dr.Christopher Irvin in 1678 that William de Irwyn, to whom Robert the Bruce gave the forest of Drum in 1323, was a son of Bonshaw. At face value these DNA results now imply the present senior male representatives of the Bonshaw and Drum lines do not share a common male ancestor.

This is not the first time the traditional relationship of Bonshaw and Drum has been questioned. In 1672 Sir George Mackenzie suggested the Irvines of Drum took their name from the town of Irvine in Ayrshire. Recently it has been suggested that William's mentor may have been Chancellor Bernard whom modern historians believe came from Kilwinning, 3 miles from the town of Irvine. And although there were Irvings in Dumfriesshire in 1376, the earliest surviving contemporary reference to Bonshaw is not till 1506. Dr.Christopher's account was not written till over 300 years after William de Irwyn.

But while the Drum DNA results show Dr.Christopher's traditions need further investigation, they do not disprove the connection:

• In 1688 Dr.Christopher, Historiographer Royal in Scotland, was chosen to serve on the jury to confirm the 12th Laird as heir of Drum, and his account was accepted by the Lairds of Drum for many years.
• Both Bonshaw and Drum used holly leaves in their heraldic arms before 1600, and in 1588/9 it was suggested that the 8th Laird of Drum stood surety for the Irwings of Annandale. Both such practices are indicative of consanguinity.
• It remains possible that there was a Non-Paternal Event (see above) in one of the two lines, and descent passed through a female line.

So we have the paradox that while DNA might have confirmed Bonshaw and Drum shared a common male ancestry, it now seems unlikely that it can confirm they did not.

Three participants claim descent from ‘Orkney’ ancestors. Two have a genetic distance of 4/37 from BA, but, contrary to tradition, they now appear unrelated. The third participant appears unrelated to any other participant.

Although participants in the small 'NPE - Bell, Carruthers and Dodd' branches today carry the surname Ervin/Irvin/Irvine/Irwin, their DNA tests show they share a common ancestor with many in the Borders clans of Bell, Carruthers and Dodd respectively, implying a NPE in their ancestral lines, probably in the 13th-17th centuries. There is also a family of Bell-Irvings descended from Thomas Bell and Mary Irving who married in 1743. Some of their descendants may have changed their name, but if so they have not yet joined our Study.

The small '?Irish - Leinster' branch (formerly 'S.E. Ohio') share a common ancestor whose haplogroup 'I1a' is quite different to other participants. The origin of this group may be the gaelic family O'Hirewen from Leinster in Ireland, that was later anglicised to Irwin, but further evidence is needed to substantiate this.

The small ‘Irish Munster’ branch share a common ancestor who evidently lived in Co. Limerick and whose gaelic surname O’Ciarmhachain was anglicised to Irwin. It is clear this branch never had Scottish connections.

The small ‘Germany/Netherlands’ branch share a common ancestor who evidently had the surname Arwine or Arnwine and migrated from Germany or the Netherlands (see http://www.jowest.net/Genealogy/John/Arnwine/Arnwine.htm ). Subsequently, perhaps in the 18th century in New Jersey or SE Pennsylvania, it seems the name became confused with unrelated neighbours named Erwin. A fifth participant shares Arnwin and German traditions but is less closely related. It seems likely none of these participants ever had Scottish connections.

Not included in these tables are the many individuals whose surname does not sound like Irwin but who have “close” y-DNA matches with participants. Such “matches” can probably be attributed to random mutations, and have no genealogical significance.

PEDIGREE CHARTS. Participants are encouraged to post their pedigrees for other participants to view. To date fewer than a quarter of participants have done so. Instructions for uploading GEDCOM files are given under the second orange point on the Personal FTDNA page. Some Family Tree Maker files can be exported to GEDCOM thus: under “File” select “Copy/Export”, give the file a name, and change the “Save as type” to “GEDCOM (*.GED)”.

DONATIONS. To help expand our Study some existing participants have very kindly made contributions towards funding yDNA tests for other potential participants who can trace their paternal ancestries back to the 17th century or earlier, or for existing participants to upgrade the number of markers. Our ‘Clan Irwin Surname DNA Study General Fund’ is held by FTDNA and applied at the discretion of the Study Administrator.

To make a donations go to http://www.familytreedna.com/contribution.html

Participants can make donations to this Fund by credit card, PayPal or cheque. You may elect to be named as the donor, and for what purpose (within our Goals) you wish your donation to be used, but we suggest donations be made anonymously and their application be left to the discretion of the Study Administrator.

All contributions will be much appreciated. They will help to attract further participants, upgrade existing results, and speed the achievement of our goals.

CONCLUSIONS. Several points are emerging from our Study:

1. The continuing increases in the numbers of participants and of separate branches of our surname now identified demonstrates the value of DNA tests in advancing our understanding of the backgrounds and genealogies of the name.
2. 37-marker analyses are usually the most cost-effective. 12 and 25 markers are insufficient for most participants; 67 markers have yielded little additional information.
3. Although the spelling of our surname still has locational significance in parts of the UK (Irving in the Scottish Borders, Irvine elsewhere in Scotland, Urwin in Northumberland), in USA the spelling of our surname is not a reliable indicator of ancestral origins. In earlier times, and even at Ellis Island less than a century ago, surnames were often recorded by clerks who were unfamiliar with traditional spellings.
4. Over 60% of all participants in our Study, and about 80% of those whose DNA test results that can be categorized, share a common ancestor who evidently lived in the Scottish Borders in the 13th or 14th century. Some of these participants still live in Dumfriesshire, some now living in USA had ancestors who migrated from Scotland direct, but most had ancestors who migrated via Ireland. This proportion of our Study's participants sharing a single common ancestor is higher than found in many other Scottish clan surname DNA studies.
5. The recently identified DNA profile of the Drum branch appears to be genetically different from the Borders branch. However this development does not disprove the tradition that Drum and Bonshaw were once related.
6. We have now identified seven other branches of participants who each share common ancestors unrelated to other branches or to the Borders branch. This diversity of origins of our surname challenges the tradition that all Irwins, at least in Scotland, shared a single common ancestor regardless of how the name was spelt. In retrospect this “discovery” is probably an inevitable consequence of establishing this DNA study. But this finding should not be interpreted to infer in any way that participants in these unrelated branches of our name do not “belong” to this Study, to the CIA or the Clan. On the contrary, we (for your Administrator is one of these participants!) contribute to the diversity of the Clan and its heritage. For example, several participants not in the Borders branch have ancestors whose arms incorporated the holly leaf motif and were matriculated at the Court of the Lord Lyon.
7. About one in seven participants cannot yet be categorized for various reasons.

Despite some of these findings being less positive than many participants had hoped, I remain optimistic that our Study can continue to make substantive progress:

• New participants are continuing to join, including an increasing number from UK and some with “interesting” genealogical backgrounds. Further contributions to our General Fund will enhance this progress.
• As more participants join, further trends are likely to emerge, the DNA profiles of branches of the family such as Drum to be established, new branches of our surname be identified and their genealogical origins clarified, genealogical relationships with other participants identified, and diasporas explained.
• In parallel with these developments within our Study we can anticipate further advances in the analysis and understanding of DNA test results in general.

ADMINISTRATION. This Study is administered by James Irvine, to whom all queries should be addressed:

Note that The Clan Irwin Surname DNA Study is an independent study undertaken on a zero cost basis. The Clan Irwin Association endorses its goals but not necessarily the views expressed on this webpage. Furthermore, neither the Association nor the Administrators of this Study, past or present, claim expertise in genetic studies; they have no involvement with FTDNA nor have they independently verified the claims of this organization, and they take no responsibility for any results, analyses or disclosures of private information that may arise directly or indirectly from this Study. Participation in this Study is welcome but strictly voluntary, and each participant remains responsible for satisfying themselves on issues of reliability and confidentiality, as neither the Association nor the Administrators undertake any representations or assurances thereon.