More Sibling Clusters at MyHeritage

So far, I have looked at AutoClusters at MyHeritage (MH) for myself, my mom and two siblings. I have been a bit surprised in how different the clusters look. In addition, Genetic Affairs (GA) has used different parameters and gotten different results. At the end of this Blog, I will have looked at my mother’s results and her six children’s clusters.

My Brother Jon’s Clusters

John has 7 clusters. They look a lot like my sister Heidi’s 7 clusters:

Emily In Jon and Heidi’s Clusters

Emily appears in Jon’s Theory of Family Relativity like this:

Here is Emily in Jon’s red Cluster 1:

Note that she also matches Clusters 3 and 7. In fact, Emily matches every person in Cluster 7, including another 2nd cousin once removed who descends from the same common ancestors as shown above (Frazer and McMaster). That raises the question as to why was Emily not in Cluster 7?

Here is Emily in Heidi’s clusters:

Here Emily is on the last row in Cluster 7. She matches many people in what seems to be a red over-match Cluster 1. Emily Matches orange Cluster 21 with people that have McMaster ancestors. Emily also matches Paul who is in yellow Cluster 3. I note the following:

  • Emily matches Heidi by Frazer and McMaster
  • Cluster 2 has people in it that match on the McMaster line but not the Frazer Line.
  • Cluster 3 has Paul, but as he is not in the orange McMaster Cluster 2, that the yellow Cluster 3 may be a Frazer Cluster.

Jon’s Cluster Inputs and Outputs Compared

I gave Heidi and Jon the same highlight color as their results were so similar.

Let’s ID Jon’s Clusters

I have already started to do this thanks to Emily and others. After doing a few of these, I can pretty much look at the people in the clusters and ID them:

For some reason, Jon had a better mix than Heidi. Jon has all four of his grandparents represented, where Heidi only had two grandparents’ DNA represented.


I’m not so concerned about Cluster 1. Although it is large in size, in a way it is not as important due to the over-matching. In fact, some of my most important matches are not in clusters at all.

Moving On to My Sister Lori’s Clusters

Lori has a good number of Clusters:

She has what appears to be a Chromosome 20 super-over-match Cluster 1.

Here are some of the AutoCluster input/output numbers for Lori:

Lori’s MH Clusters are similar to Heid’s and Jon’s.

Lori’s Chromosome 20 Super-Cluster

Here is the Chromosome mapping for my family on Chromosome 20:

This shows that Jim and Sharon (who I haven’t looked at yet) don’t have Frazer DNA in the area of the over-matching. Jim doesn’t have a super-cluster and I expect Sharon will not either. However, I also didn’t have an super-cluster. I did have a large Chromosome 20 cluster shown below that seems to be split in two:

Perhaps looking at the different sides of this ‘super-cluster’ will help explain what it is all about. That will be a future project.

Lori’s 11 Clusters Revealed

By looking at Lori’s matches’ names, I can get this far:

After that, I will have to look at cluster matches to see if they match my mother or not. Then I can check Lori’s chromosome mapping to get the right grandparent.

Lori’s Cluster 3 Example

Lori’s Cluster 3 matches have very German-sounding names. That makes me suspicious as I have no German on my paternal side – only on my maternal side. I pick a match with a good-sized largest match of 48.3 cM:

My guess is Rathfelder as that side is all German – though they lived in Latvia.

I was right:

Lori is the most likely of the six siblings to have a good Rathfelder side match in this location of Chromosome 3. Actually, I should have the same match as Lori. So she is most likely after me.

And the Answer Is…

Here is another bit of surprise in that Lori has no clusters with Lentz grandmother DNA. Lori also has more Rathfelder than Frazer clusters which  is unusual.

The Last Sibling, Sharon’s Clusters

First, I’ll look at the input/output for Sharon’s Clusters:

I had mentioned previously the effect that Chromosome 20 had on these matches as that was where the super-clusters were for all but Jim and Sharon. Here, we see that Jim and Sharon should have similar results as predicted above.

ID’s for Sharon’s 22 Clusters

Out of Sharon’s 22 clusters, these are the ones that had match names that I recognized:

Parental Phasing and Chromosome Mapping

For the rest of Sharon’s clusters, I’ll see if the matches are on my mother’s side or not and where the matches show on Sharon’s Chromosome map. I’ll start with Bobbijo who matches Sharon from Cluster 1:

Here is Sharon’s Chromosome 10 Map:

This doesn’t line up perfectly, but it is mostly over Sharon’s Hartley DNA. The match is from position 32 to 61M on Chromosome 10. There are a lot of crossovers in the area between 57 and 61M on Sharon’s Chromosome Map. Bottom line is that Cluster 1 is Hartley.

Sharon’s Cluster 2

Here is a match Sharon has with Anya at Cluster 2 on Chromosome 15:

This appears to be right before a pileup area:

I don’t know if that is significant. That is probably why the area before the match has the hatch marks. Cluster 2 matchAnya is on Sharon’s Frazer side:

Cluster 3

Sharon’s Cluster 3 has matches on different chromosomes. I recognize Patrick as a German cousin. I match Patrick on Chromosomes 6, 12, and 13. Here is Cluster 3:

Sharon’s first match is Ursula. Note that she matches everyone in the Cluster. The other people with yellow squares going right across the Cluster are Silvia and the last match – Patrick. Ursula matches me on Chromosomes 1, 12, and 22. My assumption is that the common matches are on Chromosome 12.

Cluster 7 and Cluster 2 Revisited

Note that Clusters 2 and 7 both match at the beginning of Chromosome 15:

Here is Cluster 7:

Valerie, Sharon’s second match matches everyone else in the Cluster:

  • Sharon matches Valerie on Chromosomes 10 and 15
  • Sharon matches the first person in the Cluster on Chromosomes 10 and 15
  • Sharon’s third match has the same last name as Sharon’s first match – they both match on Chromosomes 10 and 15
  • Sharon’s last match is on Chromosomes 1, 15 and 22

That means the common match must be on Chromosome 15

From what I can tell, Cluster 2 also matches on Chromosome 15. This begs the question as to why they are not all in one group. Is this due to intermarriage? Or is this due to over-matching aka pile-ups?

Sharon’s Cluster 9

Sharon matches Lisa from Cluster 9 mostly on Chromosome 7. That matches up with Sharon’s maternal Lentz side. I haven’t gotten many Lentz matches, so I built out Lisa’s tree. Turns out Lisa has a Lentz ancestor.

However, Conrad is Lisa’s 8th great-grandfather. That is going back far in time. Lisa’s ancestors go from a Linz to a Lintz to a Lentz. Whether this is coincidence or not, I cannot tell. Even Conrad does not link up with my ancestors. You can’t say I didn’t try.

Confusing Clusters 17 and 18

Sharon has two Donna’s and a Justin in Cluster 17. One Donna matches my mom, so would be on the Rathfelder side. The other Donna and Justin don’t match my mother and appear to be on the paternal Hartley side. I have a similar split on Cluster 18.

Sharon’s Cluster 22 and a Lancashire Tree

Cluster 22 had a match from England with no tree and a match from the US with an ancestor from England. As I am interested in my Hartley English roots, I thought I would look at Jill’s Hoyle tree and  build it out a bit.

Jill’s grandfather was John Richard Hoyle. He married Isabella Hargreaves in Accrington:

This shows that Isabella was living in Derby at the time they married.

Here is John Richard Hoyle Sr. in the 1861 Census. He was elderly at the time, but with a young son – also John Hoyle.

Of interest to me is that this family lived at Higher Booths, Goodshaw, Lancashire. I have traced one of my Emmet ancestors to Goodshaw.

Here is Goodshaw in relation to Bacup where many of my Hartley ancestors ended up:

Coincidence? I’ll continue on with the Hoyle tree. Here is the marriage of John Hoyle to Mary Lord:

John Hoyle is a widower. That means he was married before:

I assume that this is the same John Tailor, son of a John Tailor. Now I need to find another marriage for John. Here is another:

However, this marriage is in Bury. Here is another Bury marriage to a John the Tailor:

However, note that this John is son of James, so I will propose a guess that he was the father of the other John the tailor.

Here is Edenfield – not far from Goodshaw:

Shuttleworth is just to the South of Edenfield.

Tracing the Hargreaves Family

We saw above that Isabella Hargreaves’ father John was a tailor. This is likely John Hargreaves in 1851, before Isabella was born:

John and his wife were said to be born in Ropendale – maybe Rossendale makes more sense. The children who are just initials were born in Rochdale.

The family was living on Oldham Road in Castleton. Castleton is to the SW of Rochdale. My guess is that John Hargreaves and Elizabeth married about 1841 based on the age of the eldest daughter of 9.

This is the suggested wife of John Hargreaves from Ancestry:

This John was a sexton who is someone who takes care of a Church. If this is the right person, it means that he must have changed his occupation. This appears to be Isabella’s death certificate giving her parents’ names.

Fortunately, I was able to find John Hargreaves in the 1841 Census. This shows that he was married to an Elizabeth at that time. They were living at the same place they were living in 1851 – Oldham Road, Castleton:

The census was taken on June 6, 1841, so that narrows the birth of Mary.

This tells me that Mary Ellen was about 4 months old when she was baptized. When I put these records together, it appears that John Hargreaves was married to an Elizabeth. The lived at Castleton and had a daughter Mary Ellen there. Elizabeth died and John became a sexton in Burnley where he married Elizabeth Dobson. The family moved back to Castleton and John regained his Tailor business. He had at least three more children there with Elizabeth Dobson.

I may go back to this tree later.

Sharon’s Summary

  • I had problems in Clusters 17 and 18 due to matches on maternal and paternal sides.
  • I didn’t bother with Cluster 21 as the matches were small.
  • I built out a Lentz Cluster match’s tree and found a Lentz but the first name and places didn’t match up.
  • I built out a Cluster 22 match’s tree from England, and found some places where those ancestors lived that were similar to my ancestors, but didn’t match on the names. I got bogged down with the genealogy and may revisit the tree at some poin.

Summary and Conclusions

I have now looked at all of my siblings’ and my own MH AutoClusters. I have also looked at my mother’s results.

  • I was surprised to find that one of my sister’s autoclusters only cover two of her grandparents’ side DNA
  • I should be able to look at the results for my siblings and update the results for my mother and myself
  • In the past, with AutoClusters from other companies’ DNA results, I have used MS Access to compare the results. I did not do that analysis with the MH Cluster results. That would be a good cross-check.
  • These AutoClusters have given me places to look for common ancestors and birth areas, but so far, I have not found any new discoveries.
  • It was interesting to see the clustering effects of Genetic Affairs using different input parameters on my families’ DNA results.





Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *