Page heading

Click on Home button or Site Map for more navigation details

Home Page Join Name Origins Name Distribution Distribution Maps DNA Testing Canada Plant settlers USA Plant settlers Journal Plant records Reunion Contacts

DNA testing of Plant and related names

Plant DNA

Introduction to Y-DNA testing and the Plant project

Plant is the 617th most common surname in England and Wales, where it represents 0.022% of the total population, and it is the 5729th most common name in the USA, where the figure is 0.002%. In North America, there may be some confusion of spelling with the French-Canadian name Plante, but tests in this study indicate that the different spellings largely correspond to two entirely different genetic families.

The Y-DNA evidence was soon quite persuasive that Plant is an `effectively single origin' surname, despite being populous. It had previously been held to be multi-origin (i.e. that it descended from many genetically distinct ancestors who adopted the Plant surname independently). It now seems that it is probably plural-origin with a few, rather than many, origins and with around 75% of the living popluation of Plants descended from a single male ancestor in fourteenth-century SE Cheshire.

A sufficient number of results is now avaiable at the 37-marker level to begin to piece together closest matches between the different Plant branches, within the main Plant family for which there appear to be four major branches that formed in the centuries before when adequate documentary evidence is available. Using just documentary evidence, most Plants do well if they manage to trace back their male-line ancestors as far as 250 years ago. Useful Census data is available back as far as around 160 years ago and, before then, ambiguities between such names as several possible William Plants or John Plants can quite often become a problem. Geographical proximities can sometimes help but the Y-DNA evidence shows that these are not always a reliable guide to building the Plant descent tree. For a male Plant, a 37-marker test will help to reveal the closest Plant matches to your own ancestral Plant line. With the help of Y-DNA evidence, some main features of the Plant descent tree are beginning to emerge.

If you are not suitable to be tested yourself, you can recruit suitable relatives for the Plant project.

You may be a female who is interested in a Plant line of descent. If you are familiar with genealogy, you will already be accustomed to the idea that you often need to look for collateral relatives (brothers, cousins, etc.) in order to make progress with tracing back your family lines. Only men have a Y-chromosome, which descends purely down the paternal line (i.e. from his father's father's etc. father): this carries information about this male-line of descent (which usually coincides with the descent of a surname).

Click here to see how to sign up yourself, or someone else, for the test.

The person whose address is entered in the on-line form will receive a testing kit with very simple instructions (for him painlessly to take a swab from inside his cheek). You may, for example, select the 12-marker Y-DNA12 test and, if necessary, upgrade to more markers later. Taking the 37 marker Y-DNA37 test, however, will more probably identify your own particular branch of the family more uniquely. Payment (e.g. by invoice) goes direct to the testing laboratory: I take no payment myself. I (JSP) am available to offer advice, however, and to help with analysing the results - click here for further advice for participants, such as about how to contact me.

Open to all `Plant like' names

Some preliminary results are becoming available for various surnames, including Plant. Characteristic Y-line DNA signatures have been measured for Plant, Plantt, Plants, Plenty and Plante, and the study is yet to be extended to other `Plant like' names such as Planty, Planta, Plantard, Planterose, etc.

This project started early in this century in Y-DNA investigations of names (such as Warren, Cornwall and Somerset) associated with possible male-line descents from the Plantagenets (since Plantagenet is another "Plant-like" name). However, only many mismatching Y-DNA signatures were found amongst these claimed Plantagenet descendants. (This same situation has been found again in more recent and more widely publicised investigations in connection with the skeleton of the Plantagenet king Richard III). These mismatches suggest that there were false claims of royal or noble descent in earlier centuries or that there were, for example, wifely infidelities introducing non-Plantagenet Y-chromosomes into these lines. (The more sensational newspapers have pointed in particular to the long-debated possibility that there were infidelities in the supposed male-line of the successive Plantagenet kings themselves). More clarity might eventually emerge with more testing.

Early planning and progress for the Plant Study

Starting in 2001, volunteers were sought for studies on Plant-like names (any spelling). It was initially unclear what to expect. The earliest study for the name Sykes had shown it to be essentially a single-ancestor name despite the fact that it had been held to be a multiple-ancestor topographical name. Some have since questioned the reliability of this early Sykes study however. It now seems that Sykes is plural-origin albeit with perhaps a dominant family in the geographical region around West Yorkshire.

An early focus for a DNA study of the Plant name related to:-

In Britain, the R1b clade is widespread but found particularly down the western side (i.e. in so-called "Celtic regions" though its ancestral origins in Britain are now believed mostly to have predated the so-called "Celtic era"). Scandinavian clades (often too simplistically called Anglo-Saxon or Viking) are found more often to Britain's east. The ancestral line of the main Plant family was found to belong to the R1b-P312+ sub-clade, which is rarer in England than in Spain and Portugal. More recently, the sub-clade of the ancestral line has been identified more precisely as R1b->P312->DF27->L617->FGC14951+ which apparently migrated from SW Europe to England around 3,500 to 700 years ago. Rapid advances are currently being made with this so-called "deep ancestry" testing.

Y-DNA testing does far more than just identify the clade, or haplogroup, of the person being tested. It identifies a unique signature for the particular branch of his surname, and so helps with the genealogy of the different descent branches and twigs of a surname.

For the abnormally large main Plant family, the challenges are greater than for a rare surname. However, valuable progress is now being made with dividing up the branches of this large descent family, as well as with the earlier distinctions that were more readily made between the main Plant family and some smaller descent families (such as an apparently separate-origin Lincolnshire Plant family and the North American Plante family). The progress now being made with the abnormally-large main Plant family is in some ways more valuable as it divides the large Plant population into more personal chunks.

Plant and possibly-related name sub-branches so far

As well as adult male Plant volunteers from further sub-branches, additional adult male Plant volunteers from the same sub-branch are sought in order to check the branching genealogies. Volunteers with other similar names are also welcome.

Location/spelling Code for Earliest known ancestor of sub-branch Testing company,
volunteerkit number
Main matching Plant family
Sheffield, England. Plant P1aThomas Plant of Clowne, ?b 1745 Sutton-cum-Duckmanton in NE Derbyshire son of William Plant of Duckmanton. Descent apparently through William (bap 1772), William (b 1803) OA + FT 11830 + YSEQ 410 + YF4268(BigY) + YF12704(YElite EUDKM)
Humberside, England. Plant P1b ?ditto - i.e. ?Thomas Plant of Clowne, as above, but descent apparently through Benjamin (bap 1782) and John (Bark) Plant (b 1812) FT 18329
Sheffield, England. Plant P1c ?ditto with descent from John Bark Plant through George Plant FT 141186 + YSEQ 5426
London, England. Plant P2aWilliam Plant of Market Harborough, Leicestershire, c1720 (born 1716 Tur Langton). cf. P40a for possible earlier ancestral connection. OA + FT 277384 + YSEQ 2849
Northants, England. Plant P3aJoseph Plant, b c1794 Ashton Under Lyne, Lancashire, subsequently of Duckinfield (1815) and Denton (1821-35). OA
South Cheshire, England. Plant P5aEdward Plant of Siddington, c1565; with a line possibly from 15th century Rainow in east Cheshire. OA + FT 11858
Livingston, NJ, USA. Plant P7aJohn Plant, b c1646 England, d 1691 Branford, Ct, USA (married Betty Roundkettle). FT 7818
Austria. Plant P7b ditto FT 105871 + YSEQ 13295
Houma, LA, USA. Plant P12aJames Plant, b c1839 Ireland, moved to New York City. FT 22839
Vancouver, Canada. Plant P14aRichard Plant bap 27.4.1740 Brewood, son of Richard Plant of Chillington, Brewood, Staffs. FT 43911
Davis, California. Plant P19a Edward Plant b 1787, Birmingham, England FT 96105 + YF4270 + YSEQ 4019
York, England. Plant P20a John Plant, b 1700, Old Swinford near Stourbridge, Worcestershire FT 119000
Hampshire, England. Plant P23a Alec P Plant; b 1914 Sheffield, England FT 144948
Waterford, Ireland. Plant P25a John Plant b c1808 Donoughmore Parish, Co Wicklow, Ireland (likely related to earlier Plants in parish register dating back to 1720) FT N83079
Dudley, England. Plant P26aEdward Plant, b 1779, Brewood, Staffordshire FT 182593 + YF4839 + YSEQ 5995
Texas, USA. Plant P27a AN
Queensland, Australia. Plant P28a Samuel Plant b 1768 m Mary Dignan b 1776 County Cavan, Ireland. Descent through James, Samuel, Sidney. FT 230023
Queensland, Australia. Plant P28b Samuel Plant b 1768 m Mary Dignan b 1776 County Cavan, Ireland. Descent through Samuel (ca.1800-81), Samuel (1836-1917). FT 248032
Narellan, NSW, Australia. Plant P29a James Plant b Buglawton/Macclesfield circa 1830 Cheshire, m Mary Ann Colyer and moved to London. Earlier descent possibly from William Plant (son of William) bap 2.3.1777 Knutsford, Cheshire. FT 232765 + YSEQ 5898
Gosford, NSW, Australia. Plant P30a Benjamin Plant (Master Potter) 1754-1823 at Lane End, Longton, Staffs, m Ann Clewlow 1762-1828 on 9 Jul 1781 at St Giles church in Newcastle, Staffs - had seven sons at Lane End; descent through 4th son John Plant b.1796, another John 1833-99, James Bradley Plant b 1858, John Thomas Plant 1885-1959. FT 273914
New York state, USA. Plant P31a FT 280105
Florida, USA. Plant P32a Williamson Plant b 1763 m Frances Watts b 1760, a grandson of John Plant of county Caroline, Virginia who was possibly a son of William Plant resident of the "Pamunkey Neck" territory of Virginia prior to 29/1/1677. FT 280384
Davidson, NSW, Australia. Plant P33a William M Thomas Plant b 1871 Sheffield, Yorkshire, possibly son of William b 1841 Sheffield who was possibly son of Benjamin b 1817 Clowne Derbyshire d 1861 as in Figures 9.1, 9.3 and 9.4 of Chapter 9 (cf. P1a). FT 295512 + YSEQ 4554
Canada. Plant P36a Joseph Plant (1840-1919). Descent through his son Harry Campbell Plant, who emigrated to Canada with his brother Joseph Eugene Plant in 1910. (Supplied ancestry suggests origins in Leicestershire circa 1720 with a possible link back to Staffordshire circa 1550; cf. P2a and P40a). FT 372698
Aukland, New Zealand. Plant P39a William Plant, b 1770 in Norton le Moors, Staffordshire, d 1830; son Daniel, b 1788 Norton le Moors m Phebe. Their son William Plant (potter and chemist, worked for Plant bros) b 1838 in Tunstall, Staffordshire moved to New Zealand. FT B68907
Toronto, Canada. Plant P40a John Plant, b ca. 1667 Swynnerton, Staffordshire, considered to be grandfather of William Plant b 1716 Tur Langton, Leicestershire, England (cf. P2a and P36a). FT 436455 + YF5854
Port Augusta, Australia. PlantP43a Francis I Plant (1849-1921) Barossa Valley, Australia with probable ancestry back to John Plant, b ca.1778, Manchester, m 31.7.1797 Ellen Diggles Manchester Cathedral, England (see details here). FT 453216 + YF5858 + YSEQ 7681
Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Plant P46a ?William Plant (1550-1614 Muckelstone, Staffordshire, England) m.1582 Elizabeth Byrchenhaugh, Macclesfield, Cheshire, UK. FT 487651
Epsom, Surrey, England. Plant P49a George Plant, b 1739 Cheadle, Staffordshire; descent through John Plant (1785-1859). Deeper ancestry likely back through John (1719) and William Plant (1679-) of Leek, Staffs and John Plant (1659-) and Francis Plante (1640) of Shropshire (see further details here). FT 684179 + YSEQ 12243
USA. Plant(t) PT1aWilliam Plantt, b c1655, lived in Virginia, USA. Descent through John, William (fought with brother Williamson in the 1775-83 Revolutionary War and then moved to South Carolina), Lewis Henry, Wesley Henry, James Henry, Joseph Enoch, Robert Henry OA + FT 18227
Ontario, Canada. Carr PT1bNow believed to be a lost son of the late PT1a above FT 40279 + YSEQ 5897
Florida, USA. Plantt PT2aFT 60092
Ontario, Canada. Plantt PT3a Robert Plant, b circa 1780 County Longford, Ireland and son Thomas; Thomas and his family emigrated to Orillic area of Ontario in 1855 FT 235642 + YF4841 + YSEQ 5696
Matching south-Lincolnshire Plant
Brough, Yorks. Plant P9aWilliam Plant b 27.5.1832 Leake East Fen Allotment (south Lincs, England) to John and Eliz (b 1791) FT 17015
NSW, Australia. Plant P18a Robert Plant m Isaat Warner 1.7.1650 at Winthorpe, Lincolnshire, England; descent through Thomas Plant, bap 25.3.1666 Winthorpe, will 2.10.1734 Sibsey, Lincolnshire; ...down to James Plant b 5.6.1792 Sibsey, son of Richard Plant and Sarah Waltham; James's sons emigrated to Australia FT 86357
Other Plant
(P4a, P10a and P15a are non-Plants who thought they might be descended from Plants)
London, England. Not Plant. P4a?James Plant b 1806 Cheadle, Staffordshire. OA
Ohio, USA. Plant P6aGeorge Plant, b 1819, Stafford England, son of Richard. Living in Finney Green, Keele, Staffordshire in 1840 when he married Dinah Grocott. Migrated to USA in 1882. FT 6948
Manchester, England. Plant P8aJonathan James Plant born of Martha Plant (spinster) at Leek on 25.10.1852; descent via Mark Ernest Plant b 1.May.1877 d 1.May.1951 Manchester (i.e. probably not a Plant by genetic male-line descent but by descent from Martha) FT 16102
Bedford, England. Brown P10a?John Plant b c1813 Laxfield, Suffolk (hitherto uncertain whether a Plant by genetic descent) FT 19112
Norwich, England. Plant P11aJoseph Plant father of Alfred Plant b 1839 Lichfield, Staffs. FT 22831
London, England. Plant P13aEdmund Plant, b Yorkshire c1900 FT 32239
Anglesey, Wales. Booth P15a?Henry Plant b 1814 Bidulph son of John Plant - descent through his son Daniel Plant b 1860 Astbury, Cheshire who married Mary Ellen Booth (nee Harding). FT
Newport, Wales. Plant P16a Charles Plant, b 1916 Birmingham, England. FT 59162
Stamford, Lincs. Plant P17a George Plant b 1670 Wrangle, Lincs m Ann Skelton, descent through: Thomas b 1695 Wrangle; Thomas b 1720 Greetham, Rutland; John Plant b 1741 Gretham m Sarah Barsby at Morcott Church Rutland 31 March 1761. FT 67159
Portland, Oregon. Plant P21a Uriah Edward Plant; b 1849 Cork, Ireland; d 7.9.1911 York, Canada; possibly a son of Uriah Plant b 1821 Cheshire who was a merchant involved in a lawsuit in Clare in 1849, possibly coal merchant Uriah Plant b 1821, d 1868 Poplar London, son of Uriah Plant b 1768, lived in Leicester, 5th son of Samuel Plant of Lach Dennis near Northwish Cheshire, moved to Wicham, son of William Plant of Winsford, Cheshire FT 124512
Melbourne, Australia. Plant P22a John Plant (labourer) emigrated unmarried, aged 17, to Australia in 1868 from County Cork, Ireland; son of John Plant (labourer) and Johanna Keiley FT 133135
Cheadle, Staffordshire, England. Plant P24a Thomas Plant, b c1699 Leek who settled with his wife Margaret (nee Walker) in Cheadle c1722. Descent through John (1726-98), Thomas (1750-??), William (1783-1862), James (1806-59), James (1831-89). FT 165936
Reading, England. Plant P34a Evidently, Thomas Plant, b c1585 Bucks, descent through: John b 1632 Wooton Underwood, Bucks; William b 1677; Charles b 1704 Marsh Gibbon, Bucks; William b 1727; Edward b 1771 Charndon, Bucks; James b 1816; John b 1849; Thomas James (or James Thomas) b 1879 Appleton Whisk, Yorks; James Herbert b 1913 Manchester FT 299895
Aukland, New Zealand. Plant P35a George William Plant, b 1875 Madeley, Shropshire, England; descent through George Geoffrey Plant, b 31.5.1910 Aukland, NZ. Earlier descent evidently from Francis Plante, b Jul 1626 Sheriff Hales, Shrops; via John Plant (1659); John (1695); William (1725) Stanton upon Hine Heath, Shrops; William (1758); Joseph (1794); James (1843) Wrockwardin Wood, Shrops. FT 332860
Utah, USA. Plant P37aHenry Plant b 1835 (cf. P45a). Henry was the son of Catherine Plant, a single woman, hence unsurprisingly not a match to the male-line main Plant family. Henry took on his mother's maiden name and was raised by his grandfather, John Plant and uncle John Plant. He was born in Cadeby, Leicestershire. (AN) FT B12091
California, USA. Plant P38a Louis Jefferson Plant, b Mussel Shoals, Alabama 1832 or 1835. Descent through Forrest Plant, attorney, Sacramento. FT 402360
co. Durham, England. Plant P41a John Plant bc 1775 descent through John bc 1815 Burslem,Staffs d 1867 St Marlebone, London; John Robert (1838-82) Marlebone; Harry b 1876 St Pancras d 1922 Goole (m E. Alice J. Simonette b 1884 Coundon, Co.Durham) professional musicians FT 444929
Hebden Bridge, England. Plant P42a FT 446600
Leek, Staffordshire, England. Plant P44a George Plant, b 1816 Appleby (in the Asby-de-la-Zouch district of Leicestershire), descent in Black Country through Joseph then Mark. Possible ancestry of George back through 3 generations called William to 1726. FT 470746
Salt Lake City, USA. Plant P45aHenry Plant b 1835 (cf. P37a) FT 366463
Western Australia. Plant P47aWilliam Plant, b 1844 Stone, Staffordshire, England (see further details)
Australian territory. Plant P51a (cf.P17a) George Plant b ca.1670 Wrangle, Lincs, England, descent through: Thomas b 05 July 1695 Wrangle; Thomas b ca.1720 Greetham, Lincs; John Plant b 14 Feb 1741 Gretham d. 1805 Haringto, Northamptonshire; William Plant b 8 Apr 1765 Harringworth, Northamptonshire, d ca.15 Aug 1822 Nassington, Northants; Thomas Plant b 1798, Nassington, d ca.1865; Thomas Plant b 11 Jun 1834 Castor, Northants, d ca.Sep 1898, Huntington; George Plant b 28 Mar 1859 Huningdon; Vivian George Plant b 20 March 1889 Yoxford, Suffolk, England d 28 Mar 1916 Harwich (drowned at sea); Vivian George Plant b 19 Jan 1916 Gillingham, Kent, England, emigrated to Sydney Australia.  FT IN10279
New South Wales, Australia. Plant P50a John Plant of Stepny, Middlesex, England, sea captian, sailed and joined in 1852 by wife and 3 children in Melbourne, Australia. FT 732760
Matching Quebec Plante family
Quebec, Canada. Plante PE1bJean Plante, sailed to Canada in 1647 from La Rochelle-Laleu, France, landed at Quebec City, settled at Chateau Richer just to its east. (Descent through Francois b 1668 C.R. and Jos- Ambroise b 1697 C.R) FT 5420
Idaho, USA. Plante PE1cditto (Descent from Jean through his son Jean, then Louis, Joseph Marcel, Antoine, Jean Baptiste, Thomas, etc.) FT 13484
NJ, USA. Plante PE1efrom Quebec FT 101225
New York, USA. Plante PE1fJean Plante, sailed to Canada in 1647 from La Rochelle-Laleu, France, landed at Quebec City, settled at Chateau Richer just to its east FT 232920
Richmond, Virginia, USA. Plante PE2a Ernest Plante (1918-91) Burlington, Vermont FT 76595
Illinois, USA. Plante PE3a Joseph Plante father of George Plante b 1871 Kanakee, Illinois FT 116202
Ames, Iowa, USA. Plante PE4a ?France FT 62516
Portland, Maine, USA. Plante PE6a Jean Plante, sailed to Canada in 1647 from La Rochelle-Laleu, France, landed at Quebec City, settled at Chateau Richer just to its east FT 718769
Hickory, NC, USA. LaPlante LPE1a Jean Charles Plante, b. 1560, d. 1611, Pouance, France FT B144379
Other Plante
Ontario, Canada. Plante PE1aJean Plante, sailed to Canada in 1647 from La Rochelle-Laleu, France, landed at Quebec City, settled at Chateau Richer just to its east. (Descent through Francois b 1668 C.R. and Pierre b 1702) FT 5469
Michigan, USA. Plante PE1dAdolphe Ovide David Plante of Quebec (3.5.1841-1907, son of Louis Plante and Marie Anne Gingras); descent through David's 10th child Wilfrid Nazaire Leopold Plante (24.2.1880-1924) FT 92735
Indiana, USA. Plante PE5a ?from Quebec FT 168281
Other Plant-like names
Zaragoza, Spain. Planter PR1a Ramón Planter (Goser) b 17 Dec 1844 Zaragoza (Descent through Antonio Planter (Sangorrin) b Jun 1905 Zaragoza) FT N11991
West Virginia, USA. Plants PS1a Christian Plants, b 21 Apr 1747 Bavaria, Germany; descent through Jacob Plants, b c1807 Washington County, Pensylvania, USA. FT 71599
Somerset, UK. Plenty PEY1a Theophulis Plenty, Walton, Somerset. Descent through his son John Francis Plenty. FT 399575
Western Australia. Pianta Pi1a Pietro Pianta lived in Brusio, Switzerland; father of Pietro (Peter) Angelo Pianta, b. 5 Feb 1895 Brusio, d. 13 Apr 1959 in Western Australia. FT 640196
Warren/Waring-like names
Illinois, USA. Waring WG1aJohn Waring, father of Emanuel Waring, bap 4.Oct.1807 Dewsbury, W.Yorkshire, UK. FT
NSW, Australia. Waring WG2aWilliam Waring, b Lancashire, England; d Kilkenny, Ireland, will 1709 proved 1713. FT
Jacksonville, Arkansas, USA. Waring WG3a Sampson Waring 1617-68, born in Shropshire, England, died in Maryland, USA. FT
Memphis, Tennesse, USA. Waring WG4a Thomas Waring, Essex County, Virginia, USA, early 1700s. FT
Cornwall, England. Wearing WEG1a Henry James Wearing, b Whitechapel, Middlesex, England 1828, d Nova Scotia 1909, son of James Wearing m Sarah Bignold 1824 St Mary, Whitechapel. FT
Columbia. Wareing WREG1a Harry Wareing, b Gainsborough, Lincolnshire 1899 FT
Suffolk, UK. Warren W1a James Warren, b 28.12.1716 Marnhull, Dorset FT
Warren (VNFSM, 66386) W2aGeorge Warren, England FT
Warren (70059) W3a FT

Samples not received by Labs

Location/spelling Code for Earliest known ancestor of sub-branch Testing company,
volunteerkit number
Rotherham, S Yorkshire, England. Plant P48a John Plant, bap 28 Aug 1804, Adwick on Dearn, d 1874, son of William Plant No sample received as yet for YSEQ 8042

New volunteers awaiting results from Lab

Location/spelling Code for Earliest known ancestor of sub-branch Testing company,
volunteerkit number
Congleton, Cheshire, England. Plant P2b William Plant of Market Harborough, Leicestershire, c1720 (born 1716 Tur Langton). Descent through Thomas Plant (b 1753 Little Bowden, Northamptonshire), then John Plant (b 1785 Ringstead, Northamptonshire) Only OA results so far, awaiting FT 475951 and YSEQ
Hull, Yorkshire, England. Plant P52a William Plant 1706-1768 of Duckmanton (cf. P1a), descent through John (1733-1816) FT IN20394
Cornwall, Ontario, Canada. Plant P53a FT 823410
Aukland, New Zealand. Plant P54a FT IN22746
Anglesey, Wales. Plant P55a FT IN25817

Each volunteer has been given a code (e.g. P1a, P2a, etc.) and the above table relates each code to an "earliest known ancestor" based on documentary evidence and also, where appropriate, to a FT kit number of the testing company Family Tree DNA (FTDNA), a YF number of the analysis company YFull, a YElite code of the testing company Full Genomes Corporation (FGC).

Links to details of DNA Results

Early presentations only of early results. The very first results for those marked with the Testing Company "OA" (Oxford Ancestors) in the above table of volunteers are summarised under Initial Results. Some further results, for those tested with the Testing Company "FT" (FTDNA), appear under Some futher Results where there is also included one tested with the company "AN" (Ancestry). More results have been added more recently however. Most results, including the most recent ones, are given as follows.

Standard Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) and YSEQ presentations of nearly all the Results

A kit number is given in the above table of volunteers for each FTDNA testee (i.e. for nearly all those who have been tested). Hence, almost complete Y-DNA results (Y-SNP and Y-STR) for each FTDNA kit number appear in these listed FTDNA Results though it is necessary to be logged into a FTDNA account to see the results for every kit number in our project.

Some supplementary YSEQ Results (no login required) use different Sample codes which are also given in the above table of volunteers - these are also summarised here as: P1a is 410, P1c 5426, P2a 2849, P7b is 13295, P26a 5995, P29a 5898, P33a 4554, P43a 7861, P48a 8042, P49a 12243, P19a 4019, PT1b 5897 and PT3a is 5696 . To help with browsing the YSEQ results, there is a filter symbol near the bottom of the page which can be used to pick out the Sample number of a particular person, or a particular marker such as Y22430 or DYS710.

Y-DNA matching to the Main English Plant family

The quality of the matches to the main English Plant family is tabulated in terms of genetic distance and discussed here.

YSEQ extra measured markers

Branch A
P1a, #FT11830, #YSEQ410, FGC22149+, Y22430+, (M5778=PF1031+ though, in YFull, P43a and PT3a both + while P1a, P19a, P26a, P40a all no call), DYS552=23, DYS650=18, DYS710=33.2 (33.2 represents a rare 2 base micro-allele at 19436836-7)
P1c, #FT141186, #YSEQ5426, Y22430+, FGC22149-, DYS552=23, DYS650=19, DYS710=33.2
P33a, #FT295512, #YSEQ4554, FGC22149-, DYS552=23, DYS650=18, DYS710=33.2
Branch B
P26a, #FT182593, #YSEQ5995 (#YF04839), PF428-, (PF6726 tested but ambiguous Y+, Y means C or T)
PT3a, #FT235642, #YSEQ5696 (#YF04841), PF428-, (PF6726 tested but ambiguous Y+, Y means C or T)
Branch D
P2a, #FT277384, #YSEQ2849, Y22430+, A10650+, A10964+, A10965+, DYS710=34, DYS485=17, DYS504=16, DYS513=13, DYS532=13, DYS552=24, DYS561=15, DYS593=15, DYS650=18, DYS712=22, DYS715=22
P7b, #FT105871, #YSEQ13295, Y22430+, A10650-
P29a, #FT232765, #YSEQ5898, F3085-, A10650-, Y22430+
P40a, #FT436455, A10965+, Y22430+
P43a, #FT453216, #YSEQ7681. DYS504=16, DYS513=13, DYS532=13, DYS552=24, DYS561=15, DYS593=15, DYS650=18, DYS712=22, DYS715=22
Uncertain Early Branch I
P19a, #FT96105, #YSEQ4019, F3085+, Y22430-
PT1b, #FT40279, #YSEQ5897, F3085-, Y22430-
Uncertain Early Branch II
P49a, #FT684179, #YSEQ12243, Y22430-

YFull extra measured markers

Branch A
P1a, #FT11830, #YF04268(BigY), #YF12704(YElite); SNPs (Y22430+=877613-A-T), FGC22149+, (A21072+=Y139502=8072280-T-C) [YFull analysis #YF04268 indicated that the following were either positives or false positives but YSEQ then clarified that they were negatives: A10165, CTS11688, PF374]; 498 reliable BigY Y-STRs including DYS710=33.2; 470 reliable YElite2.1 Y-STRs including DYS710 n/a.
Branch B
P26a, #FT182593, #YF04839; SNPs (YFS1211490=8084397-C-A+, YFS1211919+); 526 reliable Y-STRs
PT3a, #FT235642, #YF04841; SNPs (YFS1212991=15237869-G-T+, YFS1213002=18024409-C-T+, ?YFS1212707=8805116-T-A+); 514 reliable Y-STRs
Branch D
P40a, #FT436455, #YF05854; SNPs (Y22430=877613-A-T, A10650, A10964, ?A10965); 496 reliable Y-STRs
P43a, #FT453216, #YF05858; SNPs (Y22430=877613-A-T, A10650, A10960, A10962, ?A10961, ?A10963, ?YFS1770187=15791020-C-A); 496 reliable Y-STRs
Uncertain Early Branch I
P19a, #FT96105, #YF04270; SNPs (F3085+, YFS529117+, YFSS529118+, YFS529119+, 13211302-C-T+, 13239222-T-A+); 497 reliable Y-STRs

DNA matching diagrams for Plant and migration maps

I (JSP) am grateful to Prof Richard E Plant for producing the diagrams and maps in this and the next section, from the available FTDNA data.

12 marker Y-STR results

Early volunteers (OA) had only 10 markers measured. The following Network diagram includes only Plant volunteers who have had at least 12 markers measured (with FTDNA). It shows differences in the measured values of these 12 markers. The labels in the diagram correspond to the same labels as those used to identify different Plant males in the table of volunteers above. However, where more than one volunteer matches exactly (larger circles in the following diagram), only one label is shown.

12 loci Network

The largest red circle above shows that many of the Plant volunteers have exactly matching DNA signatures, at the 12 marker level. There are other smaller red circles almost matching the large one. Red indicates that these volunteers belong to a single descent family (as judged by these and further DNA results including some illustrated below).

Though measuring 12 markers gives a good indication of the various Plant families most of the time, some imperfections in the above diagram can arise because 12 markers can be insufficient to distinguish between real and accidental matches between some of the tested Plant individuals. For example, the red/yellow circle labelled P37a is a superposition of Y-DNA12 results for three different Plant men - it turns out that P37a and P45a (father and son) match with P43a only by accident. Further testing confirms that P43a remains a close match to the main Plant family (red circles) but that P37a-P45a are only close at this 12-marker level by accident - they separate off too far to be real matches to the main family when more markers are measured - this indicates that P37a-P45a belong to a separate small Y-DNA Plant family, matching just one another, consistent with being father and son.

The above automated Network diagram gives a quick identification of who are near and distant matches but occasionally it misrepresents the data. In particular, the small red circles for P33a and P49a have been placed, by the Network algorithm, further away from the other red circles than the raw Y-DNA12 data actually indicates. Further investigation (e.g. 37 markers) shows that, though they are not an exact match, they remain in fact close enough to belong to the main Plant family.

Apart from the complication for P37a, the yellow, blue and green circles in the above diagram do not even nearly match the large red one, even at this 12-marker level. Such mismatching can be explained by one of two possible reasons: an NPE (see next subsection); or, an entirely separate medieval origin to the Plant surname. The two green circles P9a-P18a still almost match each other when upgraded to the 25-marker level and they might be from a separate south Lincolnshire origin of the name. The same can be said for the two blue circles P17a-P51a which we hence call the 'South Lincolnshire B' family. The yellow circle labelled P16a corresponds to an exact match of P16a with P21a but no extra markers have been measured for P16a and unfortunately we have lost contact with him to investigate this further. The circle labelled P44a is a 12-marker match to P50a and this could be investigated further.

Mismatching circles arising from NPEs

NPEs arise when the DNA signature has not been inherited from a Plant ancestor but from a different father, perhaps because of a wifely infidelity, or adoption, or any other mechanism by which the Plant surname is passed on in a different way from that of the y-chromosome signature of the true father. Though it is generally estimated that there is only about a 1% or 2% chance of a NPE at each generation, this can accumulate to around a 40% chance when all the generations of descent are taken into account throughout Plant surname history. This can explain most, if not all, of the significant number of yellow, blue and green circles. As already indicated, the alternative explanation of grossly mismatching circles is that the descent is from an entirely separate medieval origin, as is likely for the green and/or blue circles.

Migration beyond Staffordshire

Some of the Plant volunteers have traced their paternal origins back only as far as ancestors overseas, such as in Ireland or the USA. However, for those who have traced their ancestry back to around the main Plant homeland of Staffordshire, England, the following map shows the location and date of their earliest known male-line ancestor.

Local distribution of matching Plant ancestors

The darker the brown of the background colour, the higher the proportion of Plants in the county in 1881. The darkest brown corresponds to the county of Staffordshire. The proportion of Plants to the general population of each county is derived from 1881 Census data.

Superimposed on this brown background, the DNA data show that a single Plant family (red circles) extends beyond the county boundaries of Staffordshire by the eighteenth century. The colours of the circles have the same significance as in the above Network diagram.

37 marker Y-STR results

In the diagram below, 37 DNA markers are compared. (Hence, needless to say, those who have had only 25 or less markers measured do not appear in this diagram).

37 loci Network

At each generation, there can be an occasional mutation of a Y-DNA marker. With more markers measured, more mutations can be expected to show. There is accordingly more separation of the red circles in the above 37-marker diagram than was apparent at the 12-marker level. These separations represent accumulated mutations, down the generations, from the Y-DNA signature of a male ancestor of the main Plant descent family.

Detail of some amendments.The large red circle for the 12-marker results (shown in the 12-marker Network diagram above) is here differentiated into quite closely matching smaller red circles, nearly all of which are singletons when 37 markers are considered. There are slightly larger circles for PT1a (includes PT1c), P28a (incudes P28b) and P25a (coincides with P46a). However, three of the markers are fast changing and, though they are useful for studying the detail of close family "twigs" in the last few centuries, they tend to distort the overall picture for the main Plant family (red circles) which has developed over perhaps around seven hundred years. The effects of these three fast-changing markers are hence omitted from the 37-marker Network diagram above. Also, the link to P38a is omitted since it is even more distant from the red circles than all the other yellow circles which are included.

In the above diagram, there is now only one green circle (P18a towards the right of the diagram). This corresponds to one of the pair (P9a and P18a) of volunteers who, as well as having geographically close ancestry in south Lincolnshire, had a close genetic match at the 25-marker level.

Measuring more Y-STR markers and their stability

The above diagram was obtained using the Flexus Engineering Network software package and further diagrams were obtained using the MEGA6 software package.

MEGA6 analyses were carried out at the 37-, 67- and 111- Y-STR marker levels. Also, these analyses were repeated leaving out some of the relatively unstable markers. Some aspects of the resulting branching, in the descent of the main Plant family, were resilient throughout these various analyses whereas others were not. See here for the details of the initial MEGA6 analyses. Though not necessarily entirely reliable, they provided a start for estimating the major branches in the descent of the main Plant family.

Those Plant volunteers who do not belong to the main Plant family appear well over to the right of these MEGA6 diagrams whereas those in the main Plant family appeared well over to the left. The smaller horizontal distances from the left corresponds to relatively small genetic distances from the PMH, i.e. from the estimated ancestral DNA signature of the main Plant family. The DNA evidence that these Plants descend from a single medieval man is outlined more directly elsewhere.

Because of the limited number of Plants who have been tested, it is not always clear in which order the Y-STR mutations from the ancestral signature have occurred. Put simply, when only those in the main family are included, the MEGA6 diagrams can be regarded as representing an average of the guesses at how the mutations down the centuries of the main Plant family have progressed in going from left to right (though, in detail, the algorithm is complex).

Because of the averaging, the horizontal lines can correspond to fractional genetic distances. For example, averaging genetic distances of 1 and 2 would give an average value of 1.5. At face value, such an average would seem to imply that one can have fractions of a mutation though, of course, that would be a false interpretation that does not make physical sense.

Four or so major branches of the main Plant family

The following branching model takes account of the aforementioned MEGA6 diagrams and it also seeks to identify specific mutations which identify some particular branches in the descent of the main Plant family.

Such branching helps to break down the abnormally large main Plant family into rather more manageable sub-populations. Further genealogical connections within these sub-populations can then be investigated using a combination of documentary and DNA evidence.

The branches differ in how much Y-STR testing is required in order to gain a relatively clear idea of which major branch is theirs. The following discussion applies initially only to those who have taken at least the Y-DNA37 test, and so have results for the standard 37 Y-STR markers or more. However we are now recommending a cheaper Y-DNA12 test, at least as an initial possibility, which can then be followed by some more-tailored further testing if appropriate. This can form the basis of an alternative possible testing strategy that can be more cost-effective than just blindly measuring more and more Y-STR markers by means of standard FTDNA tests. Towards this end, some additional Y-STR and Y-SNP information is being appended for each branch listed below, as shown in small italics.

Branch A
Identified by DYS570=20 in a Y-DNA37 or YSEQ test: P1a, P1c, P23a, P33a
(Also, P1a, P1c and P33a have rare micro-allele value DYS710=33.2 as well as DYS552=23; P1a also has FGC22149+ unlike P1c and P33a; but P23a is no longer available for such further testing.)
Branch B
Identified by DYS534=16 in a Y-DNA67 or YSEQ test: P20a, P25a, P26a, PT3a
However, either DYS458 or DYS534 is a parallel mutation for PT1a making him somewhat ambiguous between Branch B and a tentative Early Branch I.
Also, at the over 400 Y-STR level, P26a is only 0.044 from PT3a whereas both are 0.094 or 0.096 from Branch A [P1a] and 0.085 or 0.074 or 0.084 or 0.083 from Branch D [P40a and P43a] and 0.069 or 0.074 from Early Branch I [P19a].
After splitting in Branch B, P26a has YFS1211490 (8084397-C-A) whereas PT3a has instead YFS1212991 (15237869-G-T), YFS1213002 (18024409-C-T) and perhaps ?YFS1212707 (8805116-T-A).
Branch C
Identified by DYS385b=13 in a Y-DNA12 test: P28a, P28b, P30a, ?P39a
Branch D
Indicated by DYS710=34 (Y-DNA111 or YSEQ test): P2a, P7b, P29a, P36a, P40a, P43a
(P2a, P7b, P36a, P40a, P43a also have DYS456=17 and DYS712=22 with P2a having had DYS712 determined by YSEQ and P40a and P43a having had it determined by YFull; P43a has also tested DYS456=17 by Y-DNA37; P2a, P40a and P43a have also tested A10650+ but P7b has tested A10650-)
Super branch A+D
YFull and/or YSEQ results indicate that P1a and P1c (Branch A) and P2a and P7b and P29a and P40a and P43a (Branch D) share Y22430+ and DYS650=18
Uncertain Early Branch I
Suggested by DYS458=19 in a Y-DNA25 test: P19a, PT1a
However, either DYS458 or DYS534 is a parallel mutation for PT1a making him ambiguous between Branch B and this tentative Early Branch I
(Also, P19a has F3085+ unlike PT1b. P19a also has 13211302-C-T, 13239222-T-A, 17577432-A-C, 17577433-C-A, 17680770-C-T)
Uncertain Early Branch II (none of the above)
All of the above branches have been eliminated (assuming no back mutation): P49a

The Y-DNA tests identified above are in the first instance standard tests that are available from the testing company FTDNA. However, tests for some specific markers (such as DYS712) can be bought more cheaply at the testing company YSEQ. Those who are not yet tested are advised that they could begin with a realtively cheap Y-DNA12 test at FTDNA and then we are always available to advise on what further testing could be the most cost effective options leaving, of course, the final decision to you.


  • The markers DYS385b, DYS570, DYS534, DYS458 and DYS712 are used as defining mutations even though there is a moderate chance of parallel mutations in the descent lines. A mutation rate for DYS712, in particular, is not well known and it might be faster than for some of the others and perhaps hence less reliable. Though DYS456 is omitted from some of the above MEGA6 diagrams, the value (17) might be adequately stable to be useful as a proxy (as well as confirmation) for DYS712=22.
  • It is possible that Branch A might be quite well defined by a rather unusual (8%) value (20) for the marker DYS570 as well as by the rare micro-allele 33.2 for DYS710.
  • PT1a has both of our so-called "defining markers" DYS458 and DYS534. At least one of these must be a parallel mutation. It is hence debatable whether the marker DYS534 should be given precedence in placing PT1a in Branch B, instead of DYS458 for the tentative Early Branch I.
  • At the Y-DNA111 (or explicit YSEQ) level, the marker DYS650 cuts across and disconfirms the above branching model, in so far as this marker has inconsistent results. The value DYS650=18 brings together four out of five tested in Branch D (P2a and P29a and P36a and P40a, but not P7b) with two of the three tested in Branch A (P1a and P33a but not P1c). Since branches A+D form a very credible super-branch, one might suppose that DYS650=18 might have occurred early in Branch A+D and the value for P1c and P7b could be back mutations. The value DYS650=19 for Branches B (P26a and PT3a), C (P28a), and I (P19a) could then be ancestral. Further testing in connection with this marker is underway.
  • Currently, we have that Branch C (P28a, P28b, P30a) is defined by DYS385b=13. This also brings in P39a. Howecer, as well as the Branch C defining marker DYS385b=13, P39a has DYS456=17 which also appears quite early in Branch D. Also, this individual P39a (Branch C or perhaps D) shares the value DYS449=29 with P26a (Branch B).
  • P43a (Branch D) shares DYS570=12 with P30a (Branch C).

In the following 37-marker Network diagram, P39a (perhaps branch C or D) and P49a are left uncoloured pending further investigation. The branches are denoted: yellow (A); grey (B); green (C); purple (D); blue (I) and white in particular for P49a (II).
Coloured branches in 37-marker
Network diagram
This automated survey shown above is for just a part of the DNA evidence. Even so, it shows a moderate degree of separation between the branches apart from branch C being intermingled within branch D. Including more markers adds to the evidence though fewer DNA participants have tested for more and more of the standard Y-STR markers.

The automated survey in the 67-marker MEGA6 diagram below shows the branches reasonably well separated. Starting from the bottom of the diagram, there is branch I (P19a and PT1a/b); branch B (P25a, P26a, P20a, PT3a); branch II (P49a); branch A (P1a); branch D (P7b and P29a); and branch C (P28a, P30a, P39a). However, P36a is not clearly associated in this diagram with branch D which we currently believe is better identified at the 111-marker level (not withstanding that we have fewer results with that many markers).
67 loci MEGA6 tree

The scale at the bottom of the above diagram indicates a genetic distance of 0.5 in going from left to right. The label PMH, near the bottom left, indicates one possible estimate of the ancestral Y-DNA signature of the main English Plant family.

The results of some further analyses of the branching are described below.

Current state of the Art (Mar 2018). The prospects for making progress with the branching of the descent lines in the main Plant family are now good, as both the Plant project and the available DNA tests have advanced. As well as the above-mentioned Y-STRs, more-reliable Y-SNPs are now being identified to help confirm the major branching. Some Plants have upgraded to the FTDNA BigY test, which can be expected increasingly to help. When a specific Y-SNP is associated with a branch, others can test for this single SNP using the testing company YSEQ. In turn, better results for the major branches will no doubt lead on to progressively further identification of the sub-branching. Once the major features are identified, DNA testing of a new volunteer's place in the descent tree should become more straightforward and useful. The current state of this art is indicated in the following diagram.

Emerging branching within Main Plant Family
SNP details

So far, the following individuals have upgraded to the BigY test thereby pioneering the way to cheaper and more effective DNA testing: Branch A, P1a; Branch B, P26a and PT3a; Branch C, P28a; Branch D, P40a and P43a; Branch I, P19a.

BigY testing forms a basis for further testing of other individuals in the same branch. For example, the following diagram shows the outcome of testing further individuals in the same branch as P1a: in this case, YSEQ testing of P33a and P1c was carried out.

Emerging branching within Branch A

Thus, in the blue boxes, the mutation of the Y-STR marker DYS650 for example, from the value 19 to 18, apparently occurred early in Branch AD followed by a back-mutation to 19 in the descent of the Plant volunteer P1c. The possibility of back mutations such as this for the Y-STR DYS markers underlines the value of more stable Y-SNP markers such as R-Y22430 for the apparent super-branch A+D. However, the rare micro-allele value DYS710=33.2 for Branch A seems likely to be sufficiently distinctive to have occurred only once so that it can be reliably placed as shown. In the white boxes, the William Plant designated Wm(1) for example is described in more detail in a number of places, including Figure 17.6 of Chapter 17 which is available in Journal 17 on the Plant website at the location shown in red.

Migration maps for some Main Plant Family branches scattered amongst other Plants

The evident fourteenth-century homeland of the main Plant family is indicated by the black star on the following map. Documentary evidence for the earliest known Plant ancestor of each Y-DNA tested man is not adequately available until several centuries after this main Plant family first formed. The details of the Plants' first surname bearers are largely shrouded in mystery. A clear documentary ancestral male line, for living Plant men, typically reaches back only through around a couple centuries or so. Before then, there might be records for several Williams or Johns, leading to a lack of certainty about which belonged to which branch of the Main Plant Family descent tree. The growing body of Y-DNA evidence can provide further indications, as outlined below.

In the following two maps, all the circles and triangles belong to the Main Plant Family, with high certainty, whereas the squares are not Y-DNA matches to this main family.

By the times that the earliest known male-line ancestor of a Plant man is known to have lived, with some certainty, that ancestor had typically migrated. Some had gone far whereas others were still local. As already indicated, in the case of the Main Plant Family, that known ancestor had likely migrated from a location near the black star that is included in the maps below. For example, the earliest known ancestors of PT1a (Uncertain branch I) and P7b (Branch D) are in the USA: hence they do not appear in the following two maps. Such a distant migration can sometimes lead to a lesser concentration, with apparently less confusion concerning many similarly named Plants in the same region. However, the Y-DNA evidence can still help by providing information to identify a living man's ancestral Plant branch or family in England. Careful checking by DNA is advisable, even when there are only a few Plants in a distant region, because they might not all be from the same Plant family or branch. Some examples are outlined below.

Descent Map including Four or more Branches
    See also close-up map of main homeland below.

The DNA data indicate that geographic proximity does not always correspond to a close family relationship between the Plants in a particular geographical region. For example, there is evident migration of the main Plant family across the Irish sea. The ancestors of PT3a and P25a in Ireland evidently belong to Branch B (grey circles) of the Main Plant Family, whereas P28a and P28b have a rather different ancestral male line: to wit, a branch that has separated from others to become Branch C (green circles). The closest geographical proximity in Ireland is evidently between Plants of these two different branches: P28a/b, which belong to Branch C, are not far from PT3a of Branch B. Relying on geographical proximity, for assuming a close family connection between these quite close Irish neighbours, would hence have been misleading in this case.

Although they are found in quite well separated places in Ireland, the earliest known ancestors of PT3a and P25a are both linked through Branch B (grey circles) to P20a and P26a in England (see the close-up map below for the details of these two Plants towards the south of the main Plant homeland in south Staffordshire). These two grey circles are not far from the ancestry (grey triangle) of P49a (Uncertain branch II) and also not far from P19a who evidently belongs to a different early branch (Uncertain branch I) as is denoted by his blue triangle. Further north, the earliest known ancestry of Branch C (green circles) is in the main homeland (P30a and P39a), near Stoke on Trent, as well as having reached into Ireland (P28a and P28b).

On the other hand, the yellow circles in both the above and the following map show that the DNA-tested Plants whose earliest-known male-line ancestors were near Sheffield (P23a, P1a, P1c, P33a) were not only geographical neighbours of one other but are also sufficiently genetically linked to belong to the computed Branch A of the main Plant family's ancestral descent tree. P1b is shown as a yellow triangle, indicating that it belongs to the main Plant family but not sufficiently many DNA markers have been measured to confirm that it belongs to the same branch, Branch A, though that is expected from the genealogical documentation. Taken together, this suggests that a particular branch (Branch A) of the main Plant family found its way, presumably from near the black star of the main ancestral homeland, across the Dark Peak to reach NE Derbyshire and Sheffield around or before 1700. This was already suspected for the genealogically-linked P1a, P1b and P1c but not necessarily for P23a or P33a. The more recent addition, P33a, has since been considered to have a similar genealogical descent to that of P1a.

    See also wider view of British Isles above.
Close up Map including Four or more Branches

The ancestors of Branch D men (pinkish-mauve circles) are quite widely spread, being near the black star in England (P29a) as well as to its north and south (P43a and P40a); and also having spread to the south east of Leicestershire (P2a, P36a). The ancestral line of P40a apparently descended through the ancestry of the others (P2a, P2b, P36a) and it is possible, but not certain, that the ancestry of all of these men was ealier at the location shown for P40a (at Swynnerton in north Staffordshire). The documentary evidence indicates that P2b belongs to the same branch though only a few of his Y-DNA markers have been measured, just enough to confirm that he belongs to some unknown branch of the Main Plant Family (hence he is denoted by a yellow triangle).

All of the branches A, B, C, D, I and II belong to the Main Plant Family as do also those men tested and represented by yellow triangles. The yellow triangles belong to undetermined branches because an insufficient number of their DNA markers have been measured. On the other hand, the so-called Uncertain branches, I and II, have had sufficiently many markers measured, as many as would normally be expected to be needed to determine their branch. These two Uncertain branches have not been identified as belonging to branches A, B, C or D though, technically, that might perhaps still be possible because of a back mutation from a defining marker of Branches B or C though, much less likely, a back mutation from the super-branch A+D.

In order to reach its large population, the Main Plant Family can be expected to have had many early branches, descended from not-so-very-distantly related early cousins within this single main family. Some of these early branches might not have proliferated much beyond the confines of their early locations. However the Uncertain Branch I might have migrated early from the black star at the northern-most tip of Staffordshire to the vicinity of Birmingham. Such an early migration south seems possible in so far as there is a record of a Plant by 1401 at Overton not far from the blue triangle in the above map (for more detail, see the map showing early locations in both north and south Staffordshire). Turning to the Uncertain Branch II, it appears that it might have belonged to a Sheriff Hales family branch in Shropshire by around 1640, whose location is indicated by the grey triangle labelled P49a. The ancestral line of P49a then apparently returned from there back to Leek in the main Plant ancestral homeland (black star) by 1679 and his line was still there in 1719. It should be added however that, since many early records for Leek parish are missing (as evidenced here), it is in general difficult to know whether unknown lines, in fact, had remained in Leek parish throughout the early centuries of this main Plant family.

Other tested Plants have been found not to match to the Main Plant Family, nor do they match one another. These are represented in the maps by white squares. Nor do the coloured squares match the Main Plant Family. As already indicated, P9a and P18a (green squares) belong to a genetically distinct Plant family with ancestry in SE Lincolnshire which likely had a separate medieval origin there (assuming that it did not have an early NPE from the Main Plant Family). A second such family (grey squares) belongs to P44a and P50a. Though only 12 Y-DNA markers have been measured for P50a, these two Plants appear to belong to the same family as one another, though not to the Main Plant Family. Though well separated geographically, P50a has ancestry back to a mariner based in London whereas P44a has traced back his ancestry apparently to Appleby in NE Leicestershire.

The L617 haplogoup of the main Plant family

The following diagram combines data assembled by John Marsh with 37 marker Y-STR data for the main Plant family. Though the details of Network diagrams are sensitive to the chosen markers and to who is included (see above) it shows some main family groupings for some initially tested individuals who are known to belong to the R1b-L617+ haplogroup.

Network diagram of surnames within the L617 haplogroup

In the above diagram, the label T1 corresponds to four individuals from the surnames Teague, Westmoreland, Spink and Marsh and it can be seen that this closely clusters with other individuals from the surname Marsh (labels prefixed M); the other nearby circle T2 is for Tyndal. The labels prefixed P are for Plant, R is for Rogers and O is for Oreel (which is found in northern France and Flanders). The R1bMod circle represents the R1b modal DNA signature which can be used to approximate the DNA signature of a much earlier ancestor from whom individuals in the R1b-L617+ sub-clade have descended. The Plant cluster is well separated to the left of the diagram and its ancentral line evidently diverged from those others in this diagram perhaps around three thousand years ago.

Increasingly many L617+ individuals are currently being identified beyond those in the above diagram. The following MEGA6 diagram shows some individuals who have been identified as L617+. Tight groupings, such as Marsh-Westmoreland-Teague are likely to be resilient whereas looser groupings, such as Plant-Warren-Coursey-Dunstan, are more likely to be revised as more data become available.

MEGA6 diagram of surnames within the L617 haplogroup

Living individuals in the parent clades of R1b-L617+ are found mostly in Iberia. In particular, individuals in the parent clade R1b-DF27+, perhaps originating a few hundred years before R1b-L617+, are found mostly around the Pyrennees. Though we cannot be certain, it is reasonable to suppose that these locations may be near where these clades first formed and that most of their descendants have not migrated far from their ancestral origins, near the Pyrenees.

Those so far found for L617+ might well represent a biased dataset. It might so far be noted that they are mostly for surnames further to the north. It seems that the ancestors of these individuals had migrated northwards between around 3000 to 1000 years ago.

In the above diagram, there are surnames for Poland and Lithuania (Sobolewski and Puras), ones from evidently around the Netherlands (Oreel and Strydom) and Normandy (Coursey) as well as several English surnames. There is also one for Iberia (Ortiz) though he does not have the additional Y-SNP mutation FGC14591+.

For the English surnames, there might have been an early arrival of a shared ancestral line from western Europe which then branched out in England before the formation of these English surnames. Alternatively, the ancestral lines of some of these surname descents might have arrived separately in England at different dates between the Bronze Age and late medieval times.

The deep ancestral descent of the male line leading down to the main Plant family is discussed further elsewhere in the website.

Matching Diagram for Plante

Similarly as was outlined above for Plant, the following is a 12-marker Network diagram for the French Canadian Plante family. So far, all those tested with this spelling live in North America. Their locations are shown in this map though, as shown in another map, untested men with the Plante name live also in SW France, with a few also elsewhere. In the Network diagram below, it is clear that the green circles do not match with the main Plante family (yellow circles). All men with the Plante name that have been tested so far are genetically distinct from all those tested with the Plant(t) name.

12 loci Network for Plante

Some statistical considerations

Y-DNA test results are often clear cut; but, in some cases, it is appropriate to consider their statistical basis:

Summary of Results for Plant-like names so far

A characteristic Y-line DNA signature has been found for 35 of the 61 Plant (and Plantt) volunteers tested so far. Different results have been obtained for 1 volunteer called Plants and for 1 called Plenty and for 10 volunteers called Plante (though 8 of the 11 called Plante match one another along with 1 more spelled LaPlante). Largely consistent results with at least half of the volunteers matching, such as has been found so far for Plant (and separately for Plante), can be considered to be expectable provided that one supposes each name, Plant or Plante, descended mostly from its own main single family. The Canadian Plante family is of different male-line stock from the main English Plant family. Either might be fantastically imagined to have descended from the fictionally-supposed 7th century Plantard family in France; or, fiction aside, from Eimeric de la Planta (alias de Plant') in Anjou in 1202. Alternatively, the main Plant family could be just an English family from around 1200-1400

Other evidence, taken with these Y-DNA findings, suggests that the name of the main English Plant family may have originated as that of perhaps polygynous children in the Welsh Marches in the 13th or 14th centuries and have the Welsh meaning `[many] children'. Alternatively, the surname might have been ascribed to several related men with the topolgical meaning `living near the newly planted (i.e. established) vaccary (of the Black Prince)' which is where the name is first found in its main homeland of Cheshire/Staffordshie in England. Yet another possibility is that the name might have been associated with the placename le Plantis in Normandy which is consistent with a Longspee-Audley hypothesis for the name's arrival in its main homeland. Leaving aside such conjecture, this single medieval family has more certainly grown to an unusual extent. Uncertainties concerning the origins of the Plant and Plante families are not helped by the fact that, for example, no Plante in France has yet been Y-DNA tested to try to investigate further the belief that the main Canadian Plante family came from France. Also, though the main Plant family is generally regarded as English, it has an ancestral clade R1b-DF27 which is found mostly in the same region as the Plante name in SW France; slow progress is being made in investigating this further.

Though research is ongoing, some major branches have been tentatively identified for the main Plant family. Since these branches evidently split early, the details are difficult to ascertain. However, geographical considerations suggest, for example, that `Branch A' might be associated with the sixteenth-century (Tudor) Christopher Plant of the Bakewell Old House Museum (Derbyshire, England). Some of the other branches include early links to America. Though medieval peasants were generally tied to their local plot of land, it seems there was mobility that could have been as early as a fifteenth-century Sir John Plant of Dublin in Ireland, who seemingly also had a link to the main Plant homeland of Cheshire in England. The possibilty of distant travel can be hightlighted further by a thought that Sir John Plant in Dublin, head of the household of the Primate of Ireland, could have had links to a faltering English rule in France. More particularly, a tentative Branch D of the main family includes a Y-DNA indication of ancestral migration to the USA in the seventeenth century.

The characteristic Y-DNA signature for the main Plant family has been found to agree with one for Plantt. Plantt appears in early records in England and it is sometimes written Plantt . This might be fancifully imagined to point to a possibility that Plant was an abbreviation of a French surname such as Plantinet (rare) or even Plantagenet (see also further details about Plantt). The Plantagenets can also be associated with the surnames Somerset, Cornwall and Warren/Waring-like names (see also evidence for a Plant-Warenne affinity) and the Plants had early proximities to the Warren Earls in particular as well as, for example, the Lancastrians. The nineteenth-century claim that the Plants are illegimate descendants of the Plantagenets, much doubted since the twentieth century, has been disconfirmed by Y-DNA. In the course of investigating this, it emerged that, unlike Plant(t), Warren and Waring are multiple-ancestor surnames, perhaps mostly descended from various unrelated individuals with the common Norman personal name Warin. Neither has there been any Y-DNA match to the surnames Corwall, Somerset nor to the skeleton of Richard III. Any possible connection to the Plantagenet name is hence more likely cultural, perhaps relating to contemporary belief in the nutritive, augmentative and generative powers of the plant soul, which could have been important in contemporary belief at, for example, the aforementioned vaccary of the Black Prince.

Grossly inconsistent results, unlike those found so far for Plant(t), could have been expected if there had been many false paternity events down the centuries or if there had originally been many different Plant families that had grown to similar extents. In as much as the evidence indicates otherwise, the DNA results so far do not confirm such suppositions as ones that there were many different Plant families who happened to be called Plant simply because they were (a) all `gardeners' or (b) all influenced into calling themselves Plant out of respect for the Plantagenet name. It is possible of course that they descend largely from one family that was so influenced, with most other Plant lines having died out or grown little. Our computer simulations suggest that there is probably just a handful of surviving Plant families, with in particular one dominant one that has grown abnormally, in keeping with the Y-DNA results. Another possibility that can not yet be entirely ruled out is that the English Plant name was sanitised from Plente (meaning abundant or fertile). There is only a single Y-DNA result so far for the surname Plenty, which may have derived from the early spelling Plente, and this does not match any similar name tested so far.

Further Y-line testing of Plant-like names, such as for the Plante name in Gascony (SW France), or the Plantard name in Brittany (NW France), or the noble Planta/Von Planta family of Switzerland, as well as many with the name Planta in the Phillipines and South America, might shed further light in due course.

The Plant project was begun in late 2001 and initial accounts of its implications for the Plant and Plantagenet names have been published as:

Further advice for participants

The test involves the volunteer simply taking a swab of cells from the inside of his mouth. A summary of the results may be published here, with the personal names of each testee being kept anonymous.

The Plant Family History Group has a project with the FamilyTree-DNA (FT-DNA) Testing Laboratory. The standard FT-DNA test measures 12 markers for 59 US dollars, though 25 markers can be measured instead for 109 US dollars or 37 markers for 149 US dollars or 67 markers for 248 US dollars. You can take the 12-marker test and then subsequently upgrade to more markers, only if appropriate. That test will tell you if you belong to the abnormally large main Plant family, for example. Then we are always happy to advise on the merits of any further testing, beyond the basic Y-DNA12 test, in any given particular case.

If you are interested in participating in the Plant DNA Testing programme, you can either:

It would be helpful to the project if you could supply me with the earliest known male-to-male Plant ancestor of the intended testee and that ancestor's historical location.

You may send your message with questions and/or comments to me (JSP) by whatever method you prefer..

(email: or by postal address: Dr J.S.Plant, 7 Ontario Close, Trentham, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST4 8TG, England).

Plant Name
Distribution PagePlant Name Distribution Page