BigY Update On R1a Frazers

The Frazers originating from North Roscommon, Ireland are R1a in YDNA terms. That makes them a bit of an oddball compared to other Frazers. Most other Frazers spell their name Fraser and are R1b. Our Frazer branch is L664 under R1a. That group of people lived around the North Sea according to the L664 YDNA Project administrator.

That means that at some time our Frazer ancestors probably moved from the Netherlands or Germany up to Denmark or Norway and then over to Scotland. Or they may have gone directly to Scotland or up through the England. We don’t know. We do know that this probably happened before the time when surnames were used. Once in the area of present day Scotland, they mixed with the earlier Britains who were R1b. Perhaps this is the area where they lived when they took on the Fraser/Frazer name:

The map above shows Fraser, Chisolm, Grant and Stewart. All these names have been found to be related to Frazer by YDNA. Hayes is also related by YDNA, but I think Hayes may actually be a Grant around the year 1600 or after. Here is a closeup of the Fraser Lands in 1587, showing proximity to the Chisolm and Grant Lands:

Stewart Update

In my previous Blog on BigY, I had drawn a STR tree without Stewart. Here is the new one with him included:

Stewart/Stuart is in red above. He is important, because his STR signature is the same as the common ancestor for Grant, Hayes and Stewart. If I had room, I would draw another line to the bottom of the page with Stewart showing no STR changes. Here is Stewart added to the SNP Tree:

The Stewart on the chart has expressed interest in BigY testing, so there should be more updates to come.

Grant Update

I was pleasantly surprised to see the results of a recent Grant BigY test. In the SNP tree above, the bolded names have taken the BigY, so I will need to update Grant. In my STR tree, I had two Grants. The one that took the BigY test had his most distant ancestor as:

James GRANT “of Carron”, 1728 – 1790

Here is my STR update for Grant of Carron. All I did was make it more clear which Grant was which:

Grant of carron BigY

The Grant BigY test threw me off a bit as the results showed that he was one SNP away from Paul and Jonathan. Usually, I am looking for a zero SNP difference. Grant of Carron shows a L1012 SNP that Paul and Jonathan do not have. Unfortunately, I don’t know why that is the case. Also I don’t know much about the L1012 SNP. It could be that the L1012 SNP was tested in error, or that Paul and Jonathan should have that SNP or that the L1012 SNP is branching below the green box where I have Grant on my SNP tree. The last option does not seem likely as I don’t have named SNPs in the green box, so there shouldn’t be named SNPs below the box.

Grant matched Paul and Jonathan on Variant 23614618. However, Hayes did not match on that variant. That could lead to this tree:

This change pointed out an earlier mistake I had made. I had 23619535 in the Archibald Line and in the orange box. I should have had 23614618 in the orange box. At any rate, that variant is now moved up to the Frazer/Grant mustard colored box. Another option would have been to move 23614618  to the green box of Hayes, Grant and Stewart. This would be assuming that Hayes should have been positive for 23614618 but had a poor test result. All these trees are preliminary until I wait for the R1a Administrators to come up with a more official tree. Another option would be to wait for the YFull analysis. However, that is dependent upon testers using their service. At any rate, it is good to have fewer SNPs in the orange box as we are bumping up against a likely Frazer date of 1690. The final change in the SNP Tree has to do with Chisolm. We don’t have a BigY for this YDNA relative. That means I don’t know if Chisolm goes with the mustard box or the orange one. I’ll leave him with the orange right now as there are so many SNPs there.

Summary and What’s Next

  • I have added Stewart to my SNP Tree and STR Tree
  • A BigY Test for Grant pointed out a mistake I made earlier for one of the variants on my proposed tree
  • The Grant BigY results may result in a small node where the Grants and Frazers had a common ancestor.
  • Once the R1a and L664 administrators are done with their analysis, I would like to see three or four levels below the official level of R-YP432 for Frazer. These would include branching for Hayes and Grant also.
  • I’m a bit unsure of Patton. He tested positive for R-YP5515 but is missing some of the other variants that are seen in other BigY results. However, that would not make a difference in the overall structure of the SNP Tree.
  • I am looking forward to a BigY test for the Stewart/Stuart in the group.

Comparing Frazer Big Y Tree With STR Trees

Recently, I have written some Blogs on Frazer BigY results. Here is the most recent BigY Blog. My cousin Paul’s results are in and Jonathan’s results are in. These two people represent the major Frazer lines from North Roscommon, Ireland in the early 1700’s. Maurice Gleeson was one of the first people to compare BigY results and STR results. His video on the subject is here:

Building a Family Tree with SNPs, STRs, & Named People (Maurice Gleeson)

BigY Frazer Results: Looking Into the Future

I have built a tree based on the initial two Frazer BigY results. I call this looking into the future as the variants shown as just numbers below, will be the future SNPs which people will test to find out what branch of the YDNA tree they are in. Here is the SNP tree I have so far:

This is a compressed zig zag tree to save space. The tree is with the reference of the Frazers as those are the tests I’m familiar with. This doesn’t mean that Frazer descended from Hayes who descended from Patton. Patton and Hayes should have their own branches descending down also. This tree means that at the Hayes level, Frazer and Hayes shared the same ancestor (and variants). Likewise, at the R-YP5515 level, Patton, Hayes and Frazer all shared the same common ancestor in the quite distant past.

STR Trees: What About the Grants?

My distant cousin on the James Line of the Frazers wondered what happened to the Grants after we did the BigY test. She wondered because the Grant name was the one that came up quite consistently as a Frazer STR match. Well, I don’t think that the Grants that matched Jonathan have taken the BigY test, so they didn’t show up there. However, the closest non-Frazer match in the BigY test was a Hayes. Here is a first shot at a Frazer/Grant/Hayes STR Tree with dates:

The idea behind making a STR Tree is to find the common STR values. These become the ancestral STRs at the top of the tree. Then find the fewest changes going down to create a tree. Finally, make a guess as to the dates. At the 67 STR level, I think there is a chance of a new STR every 150 years or so. However, this varies. Also, as in the SNP tree above, I know that the common ancestor between Paul and Jonathan is about 260 years ago. This STR tree should correspond roughly with the SNP Tree up to where the Hayes come into the picture. That means the 700 year guess for my STR tree corresponds with the SNP tree of 260-760 years plus 348-900 years or 608-1660 years. What the second tree does is to help calibrate the dates. As the SNPs are more set in stone than the STRs, the SNP tree also sets the structure for the STR tree. The STR tree has to follow the SNP tree.

The STR tree also points out that Paul and Jonathan should be equally related to Grant1, Hayes and Grant2. That is because, if the tree is drawn correctly, they all have the same Frazer/Grant/Hayes ancestor. This is despite the fact that Grant1, Hayes and Grant2 have different genetic distances to Paul and Jonathan. This is also assuming that they all have about the same number of generations to the common ancestor.

The other thing that the STR tree shows is that Hayes should be more closely related to Grant than the Frazer family.

On the Chisolm Trail

Now that I see that the SNP tree supported the Frazer/Grant/Hayes STR tree, I will add Chisolm to the STR Tree. Two names that are on Paul and Jonathan’s STR match list are Chisolm and Stuart. I had looked at Stuart before and the Stuart STRs seem to fall in line with Grant and Hayes. However, after my first look at the Chisolm STRs, it appears that Chisolm is more aligned with the Frazers.

Chisolm STRs

Here are some of the Chisolm STRs at the Chisolm YDNA Project page:

The first line is the Chisolm mode. The mode is the most commonly occurring STR value. The next four lines are R1a Chisolms. The Chisolm that matches the Frazers is on the bottom line. Note that any of the highlighted STRs indicate a variation from the mode. That means that this Chisolm is not a very good match to the other Chisolms. Here are some of the Chisum/Chisolm STRs on the bottom row compared to Frazers, Grants and a Stuart:

Most notably, Chisum is aligning with Frazer at position 389b = 30 and 534 = 14 rather than with Grant, Hayes or Stuart. This appears to be leaving 447 – 24 as a signature Frazer STR.

New STR Tree with chisolm

This is a bit of odds and sods tree with four different surnames.

Paul/Chisolm Parallel mutation

Paul and Chisolm have a parrallel mutation at 576=19. This has the effect of the STR test making it look like Paul is a closer match to Chisolm than he really is. Chisolm shows up as Paul’s closest STR match after Paul’s match with his cousin Jonathan. FTDNA show that both Paul and Chisolm have a value of 19 for STR 576. However, assuming the STR Tree is correct, Paul and Chisolm both developed that STR mutation independently. Regardless, if my STR tree is correct, then Chisolm is a closer match to Frazer than to either Grant or Hayes. I had not expected this result.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Ideally, a BigY test for Grant and Chisolm would sort things out.

Based on the STR tree, I have put in where I think Grant and Chisolm would be on the SNP tree. If Chisolm were to take the BigY test, then it would be clear which of the orange variants are Frazer variants and not Chisolm and which new variants are Chisolm and not Frazer. A BigY test by one of the Grants would also sort out the Grants and Hayes variants. By the way, a Stuart match STR match should be included with Hayes and Grant on the above SNP Tree.

Summary and Observations

  • In broad strokes a SNP change should happen about at the same rate that a 67 STR marker would happen. This means that a SNP tree should mimic a STR tree in both shape and the rough number of mutations of both STRs and SNPs.
  • A SNP tree should be the undisputed tree when comparing SNP trees and STR trees. This is because a SNP is a one-time event. A STR mutation may be a one time event, a back mutation or a parallel mutation.
  • Comparing SNP trees and STR trees can be helpful in calibrating dates of trees. A known common ancestor date is certainly helpful also.
  • When considering dates, it is important to know when the use of surnames became common practice. One reference I read for Scotland was that the date was the 16th century. That date is interesting as my STR tree guesses at a common ancestor for Chisolm and Frazer at about 1400 A.D.
  • The same reference says that in the Highlands and northern isles of Scotland surnames did not fully take root until the year 1800. If Hayes and Grant were from the Highlands, this could explain the different surnames.
  • This late date of adoption of surnames could explain why the surnames are not matching well with the YDNA testing. A late-adopted surname would not have time to build up a head of steam or a large amount of descendants.
  • I will be looking forward to FTDNA adopting the R-YP5515 SNP. FTDNA also needs at least two more levels of SNPs. One at the Hayes/Frazer level and one at the Frazer level.

Frazer Big Y Results: Archibald Line and James Line

I have previously written Blogs on my cousin Paul’s Big Y results here and here. Paul is my 2nd cousin once removed. He is from the Archibald Line. Archibald and James are believed to be two Frazer brothers living in North Roscommon in the early 1700’s. Just yesterday, Jonathan’s Big Y results came in. Jonathan is from the James line.

Paul is two steps below Hubert on the left and Jonathan is one step below Walter on the right hand side.

What is a Big Y?

The Big Y is an expensive YDNA test that looks at SNPs. SNPs are stable locations where mutation occur on the male Y Chromosome. These mutation happen around every 150 years. The could happen more quickly or more slowly, but 150 years would be an average. Like a laser beam, these SNP mutations make a map straight down the Frazer male line heading toward the distant past. The special feature of the Big Y is that it discovers new SNPs that have not been previously discovered. These newly discovered SNPs are helpful in verifying genealogical trees – especially when taken in tandem like we did with Paul and Jonathan.

In my previous Blog, I had looked at these SNPs for my cousin Paul and came up with a tree that looked like this:

FTDNA that does the Big Y testing has Paul as R-YP432. They don’t yet have listed YP5515 which YFull has. YFull is a service that looks a Big Y and similar results for a fee. Using that information, they create YDNA trees, date the connections, and do other things. Just yesterday I sent Paul’s Big Y results to YFull for analysis.

All the numbers in the green boxes above are SNPs. The numbers with no letters are SNP positions that haven’t been named yet. The bottom green box is for Paul. He has more unique SNPs that I didn’t include in the bottom box. I would expect that out of these SNPs, Paul will share some with Jonathan and that Jonathan and Paul would have their own unique SNPs that happened since the two branches split in the early 1700’s.

Let’s Compare Paul and Jonathan’s SNPs

According to FTDNA Paul and Jonathan share 36 Novel Variants. However, many of those shared between Paul and Jonathan are not uniquely shared. In other words they would be shared with Patton or especially Hayes above the Frazers. First, I’ll add in the SNPs that were only Paul’s before Jonathan’s results came in:

I compressed the tree above to save space. There is still a Patton block of SNPs and under that a Hayes block of SNPs. The orange SNPs under Hayes were Paul’s unique SNPs before Jonathan had his Big Y results. When I compare the 36 SNPs that Paul and Jonathan share, only six of those are in the orange block above. When I separate out Paul’s newly unique SNPs, I get the Archibald Line:

The brown box labelled Archibald Line is Paul’s version of the Archibald Line. If others were to do this test in the Archibald line, there would be some shared and some unique SNPs again. Those SNPs would represent the different branches in the Archibald Line. The orange box shows all the SNPs that are shared by the Frazers in the DNA Project. These SNPs represent the father of the Archibald and James Lines who was probably another Archibald. Note that Paul has 5 mutations since the lines split. That would be more than expected. If we use the average of 150 years, that would put the common Frazer ancestor at 750 years ago. As we believe that the common ancestor lived about 300 years ago, then there must have been a mutation in Paul’s line about every 52 years or every other generation. I am guessing that there will be fewer mutation on Jonathan’s James Line side.

Jonathan’s SNPs

I’m curious to see how these come out. Jonathan has 28 Novel Variants (the same number that Paul now has). From what I can tell, FTDNA calls the unnamed SNPs Novel Variants. Here is my spreadsheet showing the overlaps and unique SNPs between Jonathan and Paul:

Paul’s 5 unique SNPs are shown in blue. Jonathan’s 5 unique SNPs from Paul are shown in yellow. However, I have a note. The note is that Hayes shares 9510807 with Jonathan. Hayes is upstream from the Frazers SNPs. That means that Paul should have also had 9510807. That means that Jonathan has 4 unique SNPs compared to Paul.

Now For the Complete Frazer Y SNP Tree

I put the SNP that Jonathan had in common with Hayes up in the Hayes Block with an asterisk. That is the SNP that Paul should have had but didn’t test positive for.

A Problem With Dating the Frazer Common Ancestor

Let’s assume that the common Frazer Ancestor, the parent of Archibald and James was born in 1690. Let’s further assume that Paul and Jonathan were born in 1950. That leaves 260 years. I will double that for the two lines and divide by the total number of unique SNP which is 9. That gives me roughly 58 years per mutation. That seems to push down the rough estimate of 150 years per mutation quite a bit.

I do get a little consolation in the fact that if our genealogy is right, Paul is 8 generations from the Frazer common ancestor and Jonathan is 7 generations away. That means that Paul’s line had one more generation to form an extra SNP compared to Jonathan – which he apparently did.

Let’s assume that 150 years per mutation is correct. That would mean that the common Frazer ancestor would be 6-700 years ago. To me, this seems unlikely. We have two male Frazers living in North Roscommon in the early 1700’s. We also have a documented Frazer widow, believed to be the mother. Family tradition has the father of Archibald and James as an Archibald born around 1690. Also we have autosomal DNA matches between the Archibald and James Lines. These have not been proven to be linked to the Frazer common ancestor, but seem likely.

It figures that this Big Y test created additional questions! We will have to await more analysis from YFull and the R1a YDNA Project Administrators. Here is one more try at adding dates using the 58 years per mutation versus the 150 years per mutation:

Oddly enough, this makes me feel better. The reason is, that even with 150 years per SNP, I am getting up to 4200 years ago up at the YP432 Level. This is more than the 2800 years what YFull currently has for a most likely time to a common ancestor at YP432.

Summary

  • The Big Y test for Paul and Jonathan resulted in more unique Variants than expected for both Paul and Jonathan
  • Using average years per SNP mutation, this would push back the common ancestor for the James and Archibald lines quite a way into the past.
  • Future analysis may resolve this issue. YFull will be one company analyzing the Frazer Big Y test. I will also ask for advice from others.
  • There is one other Frazer from Canada who is expecting YDNA STR results. These results may also help
  • Once the James Line and Archibald Line SNPs are named and tests developed for those SNPs, male line Frazer descendants will be able to determine their Line by testing the new SNPs. Certain SNPs could also define sub-branches below the Archibald and James Lines.

 

First Frazer Big Y Results in a YP4415 SNP

In my last Blog, I wrote about my cousin Paul’s BigY results. The BigY takes a look at a large region of YDNA looking for existing SNPs and new SNPs. SNPs are what define the Y tree going back to genetic Adam. As a refresher, YDNA looks at the father’s father’s father’s line only. So if you are a Frazer, your father is a Frazer. At some point two different Frazer lines merge into one. That merging point is the two lines’ TMRCA or Most Recent Common Ancestor. (I don’t know what the T stands for – the?) Then at some point all the Frazers tested bump into a common ancestor. For Paul and Jonathan who took the BigY test, that bumped-into Frazer would be the father of the Archibald and James Lines. However, the YDNA doesn’t stop there, it keeps going back and back and back.

Paul’s YDNA Matches

In my last Blog, I had mentioned that Paul had been designated as YP432 by FTDNA. That SNP has common ancestors, but they go back to 2800 years ago. As such, others that are YP432 will be from diverse background. I had mentioned some Norwegian and Swedish names. This makes sense as the L664 SNP which YP432 comes from is Germanic. These Germanic people moved into Scandinavia, England and apparently Scotland at some point.

FTDNA R1a Projects: L664, YP432, YP431 and YP5515

In my previous Blog, I had looked at matches at the R1a and all Subclades Project. However, FTDNA has another YDNA Project called simply the R1a Project. I find it a bit confusing that there are two R1a projects, but here is what the R1a Project has under YP432:

This shows some of the people that have tested positive for YP432. There are two branches shown here. The larger branch looks to mostly have ancestors from Norway and Sweden and is the YP431 Branch of YP432. The Frazers are on the YP5515 Branch. The Grants are also listed under YP5515. This is likely due to STR similarities as the Grants have not had their SNPs tested – just the STRs. In my previous Blogs, I had mentioned similarities between the Grants and the Frazers in the YDNA.

This doesn’t mean that the Frazers came from Norway or Sweden. Perhaps one branch of YP432 went to Norway and Sweden (YP431) and our branch of YP5515 went to Scotland and/or England.

The Hayes that I mentioned in my previous Blog is also listed, but in a separate group. Our Frazers are called YP5515 – x and Hayes is plain YP5515. I’m not sure why.

another YP5515 Match – Patton

The YP5515 SNP Group is a very select group so far. There is Hayes and Patton. Assuming that these were the first two YP5519, then Frazer is the third. Patton shares YP5515 according to Paul’s BigY Match List:

I highlighted in gold the SNPs that Paul shares with Hayes and Patton and not the other YP432 matches. I haven’t seen Patton in the R1a Project, so he probably never joined it. Two of those SNPs have no name yet – just a position number. As far as I know, all YP5515 people share these 7 gold SNPs.

What Are the SNPs Unique to Frazer?

We will know that better when Jonathan’s BigY results come in. However, for now, I can guess. The BigY tells me the SNPs that Paul has that Hayes doesn’t have. There are 11 of these SNPs. The SNPs that Paul has that Patton doesn’t have are quite a bit more. Paul has 20 SNPs that Patton doesn’t have. What does this mean?

First, here are the 11 SNPs that Paul has that neither Hayes nor Patton has:

These would be the SNPs unique to Paul. I would expect to see some of these in Jonathan’s results.

Additional Shared SNPs With Hayes – A New Branch?

Recall that I said that Paul had additional SNPs not shared with Patton. There were 20 altogether. Here are the SNPs Paul doesn’t share with Patton that are different than the ones he doesn’t share with Hayes. I know, there are a lot of negatives here.

I have marked those 9 SNPs in blue. It turns out that those SNPs Paul doesn’t share with Patton, he does share with Hayes. To me, that means that Paul and Hayes should be in a new branch together.

In my new tree, I’ve simplified the YP431 Branch. In YP5515 there are 7 SNPs shared by Patton, Hayes and Frazer. Below that are the 9 SNPs shared by Hayes and Frazer. Below that are the 11 SNPs that Frazer has that appear to be unique. I say appear because there could be others that share at least some of these SNPs. All these SNPs together add up to 27 SNPs. I’m not sure how to date the SNPs. If these 27 SNPs were since 2800 years ago, that would be about 100 years per SNP on average. If I’m right, then that would mean around 1100 years up to the Frazer/Hayes common ancestor. That should be 900 A.D or before the time of surnames. It will be interesting to see if all my guesses are right.

Another interesting point is that Paul and Jonathan’s TMRCA was around 300 years ago. That means that there should be a few SNPs different between Paul and Jonathan. They will each have their own branch off the Frazer Tree.

 

 

A New Frazer Big Y Test Is In

I found out today that the Big Y results are in for Paul. He is my second cousin once removed on my Frazer side. So far, I can see that his SNP now is R-YP432. The Big Y will tell you what your lowest known FTDNA accepted SNP is. It will also tell you your SNPs that don’t even have a name yet.

L664

R-YP432 is a branch of L664 which is part of a much larger R1a YDNA group. The chart below shows the L664 people as “Germanic”. Who knew? Wouldn’t one think that the Frazers would be Scots – not Germanic?

A more likely guess would have been that the Frazers would be with the Norsemen at Z284. The Norsemen probably made their way to Scotland. However, the YDNA seems to see it differently. The insert map above gives possible routes of migration. It shows the L664 coming out of the area of Germany and going up to England or Denmark. My history is not the best, but I do know that the Danes invaded the British Isles at some point. Could this have been related to the start of our branch of Frazers? Or perhaps some R1a ancestors joined up with the Norsemen. The Frazers could have even come in with the Anglo Saxons or William the Conqueror. Who knows?

Previous Predictions Based on STRs

Back in November 2015, I had written a Blog on Frazer YDNA. At that time, I had talked to an R1a administrator, Martin. He was quite sure, based on the STR testing, that our Frazers were L664. Further, based on values of specific STRs that Martin knew about, I had shown this Chart:

Martin had thought it unlikely that the Frazers would be in crossed out SNP areas based on their STR values. Notice that they turned out to be in YP432 on the bottom right.

How Old Is YP432?

YFull is a service that dates SNPs among other things. Here is their date for R-M198:

FTDNA previously had put Paul into the R-M198 Group. This is a very general R1a Group. Comparing Paul with other M198’s would put their most recent common ancestor at 8500 years ago. Aah, the good old days. The YFull Tree above brings us through 4,400 years of Frazer history – up to 4100 years ago. This is where I left off on the last Blog. The L664 Administrator for the R1a Project could tell that is where the Frazers should be based on their STR testing.

The YFull YP432 Tree

YFull shows a common ancestor for YP432 at 2800 years before present. I’m sure that gave the Frazers plenty of time to go from wherever they came from to Scotland and then to Ireland.

I plan to submit Paul’s Big Y results to YFull for further analysis. People that have submitted their Big Y results to YFull show up as ID’s. For example, it appears that id: YF09214 has English ancestors. Once YFull has a chance to look at the results, they may show a new branch of the YP432 Tree. One goal would be for the Frazers to have their own family SNP identified.

Competing Trees

The YFull Tree is above and appears to be the better tree. Here is the FTDNA Haplotree which seems to be lagging in the YP432 Department:

One next step would be to compare the FTDNA “Novel Variants” to see if any of them are named SNPs on the YFull Tree. The other, as I mentioned is to submit Paul’s Big Y results to YFUll for analysis. I note that FTDNA does have YP431, but Paul is not listed under that SNP.

Where Are Our Frazers On the YP432 Tree?

I have trouble seeing the YFull Tree, so I drew my interpretation of it:

Our Frazers, according to FTDNA are at YP432*. However, as I’ve shown above, FTDNA doesn’t have as many SNPs listed as YFull does. All the ‘YP’ SNPs, in fact, are YFull identified SNPs. According to ISOGG:

YP = SNPs identified by citizen scientists from genetic tests, then submitted to the Y Full team for verification.

Who Are Some Other YP432 People?

The Frazers are part of the R1a YDNA Project. That project appears to have two small YP432 groups.

These five YP432 people appear to have ancestors from Norway or Sweden.

Other Big Y Matches

It took a little while for Paul’s matches to show up. It appears that the closest ones have a zero known SNP difference, so I chose them. Then the list is sorted by those that share the most Novel Variants. My question is, how novel could they be if they are shared? I think that what they mean is unnamed SNPs.

The numbers on the right are the SNPs that do match.

Paul’s matching Novel SNPs with Hayes

As noted above, Paul shares 30 Novel SNPs with Hayes. I looked up all the positions at ybrowse.org and many of those ‘Novel’ SNPs have names. Here are the first 26:

I was especially interested in the YP5500 series SNPs as that sounded like the YP5515 SNP which forms one of the branches of the YP432 Tree.

I did find YP5515. It was the 27th Shared Novel Variant between Paul and Hayes.

That is good news as that further defines the Frazer Branch. When I go back to the YFull Tree, I see that the one person there that is YP5515 is also YP5516, YP5517, YP5518 and YP5519. This is what is called a block of SNPs. Both Paul and Hayes are positive for these SNPs. YP5515 was probably chosen as representative of these SNPs and likely because it was the best quality SNP for testing.

What About Jonathan?

Jonathan’s test should be coming in shortly. His Big Y was ordered not too long after Paul’s. I had a bit of a scare, because I was looking at my old Blog. In that Blog, Jonathan was listed as R-M458. When I compared that to Paul’s R-L664, they were no where near each other. However, sometime since my old Blog and now, Jonathan has been stealthily changed by FTDNA to the more generic R-M198. I fully expect FTDNA to have Jonathan as R-YP432 when his Big Y results come out.

Next Steps

The Big Y’s strong suit isn’t in predicting the YP432. There are other tests that could have done that. The next step is to look at the private SNPs. Jonathan’s Big Y should be coming in next. That test should show some shared SNPs that should create a new branch off the YP432 tree. In fact, I’ve shown one branch already. I expect that there will be more branching off from R-YP5515.

It is interesting that the YDNA goes so far back. We wanted to find out where the Frazers were in Scotland. Instead, at this time, we’ve skipped Scotland and appear to be somewhere in Noway or Sweden! However, I feel like the Hayes match at YP4415 will reel us back into the area of Scotland and England at least.

The Frazers of North Roscommon, Ireland: STR Tree and Signature STRs

Now that a DNA sale is on at Family Tree DNA, my mind has turned to Frazer YDNA. I had thought that I had mentioned STR Trees and signature STRs for the Frazer family before. But after looking at my old Blogs, apparently I have not. I have talked about STR signatures, but will go into more detail here.

Present YDNA Testing of North Roscommon Frazer Descendants

At this time two male Frazer descendants have tested for YDNA. They are Paul and Jonathan.

Paul is two generations below on the left side and Jonathan is one generation below on the right side. If I have this chart right, that would mean that Paul and Jonathan are 6th cousins once removed. Their common ancestor was probably another Archibald Frazer born around 1690 who married a Mary. Both Paul and Jonathan have tested their YDNA for 67 STRs. YDNA tests male only lines – in this case if focuses on the Frazer Line .

A Signature STR

It would be interesting to know what the signature STR is for this Frazer ancestor born in 1690. How could we discover that? If we had  many Frazer testers, we would like take the most common STR values and assume that those would be the oldest values. However, we only have two testers, so that would be difficult.

The problem with STRs is that they could go up or down. We would like the older STR signature to go to our 1690 Frazer. That means we have to go back in time a step to try to see which way the STRs are moving. The other thing is that we hope that they are moving in one direction only!

Jonathan represents the older Frazer line

In my past Blogs on the subject, I have assumed that Jonathan’s STRs represented the common Frazer ancestor more than Paul’s STRs. My reasoning was that Paul had very few matches at all levels. Usually at a lower STR level one has more matches. That said to me that Paul’s line’s STRs had mutated away from the ancestral signature. Here are the three differences between Jonathan’s and Paul’s STRs:

Jonathan’s results are on the top and Paul on the bottom. None of these STRs are very slow moving STRs. CDYa is a very fast moving STR. So fast, that some genetic genealogists don’t like to use this STR in their analyses.

The L664 Mode

It is my assumption that our Frazers are part of the R1a-L664 Haplogroup. That is based on the fact that usually this group has a value of the 388 STR of 10. That is the case for Paul and Jonathan. The mode is the STR value that is the most common. The mode is also assumed to the be representative of the oldest values. The L664 mode for the 391 STR is 10 and the mode for 576 STR is 18. That confirms my hunch that Jonathan has the oldest STRs. The mode for the CDYa STR is 33-39, which is a little more like Jonathan than Paul. However, as I’ve noted that STR can be unreliable – especially over long time frames.

Here are some of the other SNPs under the L664 Haplogroup:

This is to give the reader an idea that there are many SNPs under this Haplogroup. It looks like there are 4-7 levels below L664. More SNPs could be discovered by the Big Y test.

How old is L664

It’s quite old. Here is the YFull Tree with dates:

Note that a common ancestor with another L664 person could go back 4100 years. That’s a long time. And our Frazer testers are not even confirmed to be L664. That means that their Frazer SNPs are still in the cave man ages. That is one reason why Big Y tests are needed. This YFull Tree above follows one branch down to where the common ancestors are 300 years ago. That is closer to where I would like to see our Frazer SNPs. Note that the YP1168 is also shown on the pink tree above. So while these SNP trees look quite innocent, it is not always obvious that they could represent close to 4,000 years.

The North Roscommon Frazer mode based on the l664 mode

In order to get our Frazer mode, I would just have to look at the STRs that the Frazer have that are different than the L664 Mode. The L664 is the going back in time Haplogroup that I mentioned above.

Above, I left out those Frazer STRs that were the same as the L664 mode. Of these STRs, the 450 is likely the most significant as it has the lowest likelihood of mutating. That is shown in orange with a value of 0.200.

Putting It All Together In a Simple Frazer Tree

Here is a simple tree:

A few comments:

  • There may be some refinements to this Frazer Ancestor Signature STR, but this is the main idea.
  • It seems odd that Jonathan would have no STR mutations between 1690 and when he was born. It is likely that he has had mutations – probably with one of the faster mutating STRs
  • A new Frazer descendant has ordered a 67 STR test. He is on the Archibald line, so that should clarify things there as far as where the mutations happened.

Keep an Eye on the Grants

By YDNA, the Grants seem related to Frazers. I am assuming the relation goes back in time in Scotland. I don’t know if this break happened before the adoption of surnames or after. Here is a Grant/Frazer Tree I had made some time ago:

  • The Frazers could be related to other Scots Lines. However, this one seemed to stand out.
  • I took the STR signature concept I brought up in this blog and applied it further back in time and have a Grant/Frazer Ancestor signature at the top.
  • In this scenario, the only genetic difference between a common Grant/Frazer ancestor and a Frazer ancestor is the 447 STR.

Things to Come

  • Pat has ordered a 67 STR test for her male cousin and a Family Finder test for his sister
  • Joanna and I have ordered BigY tests for Jonathan and Paul.
  • With all this YDNA testing we are coming from the distant past into the less distant path. The goal is to confirm our Frazer Lines and connect with some as yet unknown Frazer Lines.
  • The three pronged attack is: genealogy, autosomal DNA testing for the last 250 years, and the Big Y to cover from perhaps 2,000 years ago to as recent as we can get. We will wait and see.
  • The advantage of having two Big Y tests is that we should discover new SNPs that are unique to our branch of Frazers.
  • I plan to use YFull to analyze Paul’s BigY results to get dates for the SNPs.

A New Frazer DNA Test on the Stinson Line

It has been a while since there has been a new Frazer test. With the results of Doug’s Aunt Rita in on the Stinson Line, the Frazer DNA Project has roared back into life. Here is the Stinson Line of the Frazers:

I tried to air brush out some of the last names for privacy. Doug and Aunt Rita are on the green line. They share 1,894.6 cM of DNA which is a bit higher than the average posted on the ISOGG Web page:

Note that in comparing those in the chart above, that they may match on the Frazer Line or the Stinson Line. However, in matching those outside this chart, they would be more likely to match on the Frazer Line.

The Numbers, Please

Now it’s time to run the numbers. I found a cool new tool at Gedmatch for doing this. First I added all the Frazers to a group.

Then I just had to choose that group for different analyses. Here is the Autosomal Matrix. This is like ordering the “everything” pizza. This Matrix has ALL the Frazers:

This is also known as the Frazer eye test. I have the Frazer/Stinson group in yellow. These Frazers are only in the Frazer/Stinson Line. Then, there is the green group. They are in the Stinson Line but also in at least one other Frazer Line. There are some good matches where green and yellow intersect, notably with Jane. These are more likely to be Frazer/Stinson Line matches. Where the green intersects with green, it will be difficult to tell if the DNA is from the Frazer/Stinson Line or from another line. The names in white are from my family. I recently had my sister Lori tested. Now there are 5 siblings tested in my family. Paul is a second cousin, once removed. Purple represents the James Line of the Frazers. There is a purple Jonathan and a white Jonathan. Scanning the yellow names from left to right, they match my family a bit more than the James Line Frazers in purple. There are a few exceptions where there are higher matches. This may be due to a match on a collateral line. Or this may be due to the effect that if a match is going to break through a distant relationship it can just as well break through as a somewhat larger match than as a smaller one.

Triangulation Groups

I like to use Triangulation Groups to sort out some of these families. A Triangulation Group points to a particular ancestor which should point to a particular Line of Frazers. The problem in this was alluded to above. That is, what if some Frazers are from more than one line? In order to somewhat get around this, I’ll make special note of the Frazers that are known to be only in the Frazer/Stinson Line. Namely, Rita, Cathy, Ros, Doug and Vivien.

Chromosome 1

In Chromosome 1, I see a Frazer/Stinson  Line Triangulation Group (TG). I previously had my brother Jon in that group, but that appears to have been a mistake:

Here is the what the TG likely looks like:

I say likely, as Jane and Michael also descend from the Richard Frazer Line. However, that would put the common ancestor as Archibald the father of this Archibald Frazer which would be a less likely match.

Chromosome 3

The next TG is also difficult to explain:

Here we have Michael and Rita, both in the Frazer/Stinson Line. They both match Prudence from the somewhat distant James Line of Frazers. I had to double check to find the match between Michael and Rita to finalize the TG. Here is a possible rendering of that TG:

I pulled Michael (pink box) off the Richard Line as he wasn’t put into the Frazer/Stinson Line on this chart to save room. This particular representation forces our attention to the parents of the James (on the right) and Archibald Lines (on the left above). However, a slightly later unknown common collateral line would also be possible. For example, Prudence has a Peyton ancestor. If Michael and Rita also had the father of Prudence’s Peyton ancestor as their ancestor, that would put the top circle one level down. The TG is sure. The interpretation of who the TG represents is not as sure due to holes in the genealogy near the top of the chart.

Chromosome 4

Here is a new TG with Jane, Cathy and Rita:

This TG is important because it is most certainly a Frazer/Stinson Line TG. I had to take down the Gedmatch levels to get the match between Jane and Cathy. If I were to map out the Frazer side grandparents for Rita, Cathy and Jane, they might look something like this:

As you compare Cathy and Jane’s green sections with each other, you can see that the Frazer overlap is relatively small.

Chromosome 5

In Chromosome 5, there is a similar situation with Pat, Cathy and Jane:

Again, I had from my Gedmatch download that Cathy matched Patricia and Cathy matched Jane. What was missing was the Cathy to Jane match. I lowered the Gedmatch thresholds and found a Cathy to Jane match right in the expected area between 73 and 76. Note that the Patricia to Cathy match ended at about 77M. The Jane and Cathy match started about 73.

73 is the crossover for Jane from McBride to Frazer. It is the number that Jane has in common with both her matches. Likewise, Patricia’s crossover from her Frazer grandparent to her Gray grandparent is at 77M. It is the number that she has in common with both her matches. So that tells me something is going on there (i.e. a crossover). The area between 73 and 77 is where Patricia and Jane match.

In reviewing my past work, I see that I had shown a TG with Gladys, Pat and Cathy in this area. To see that, I need to go further up my spreadsheet:

So let’s map out Gladys’ DNA from her grandparents. It looks like her match with Cathy and Patricia tell me that she has Frazer DNA from 54M to 134M. But where is her match with Jane? When I run a one to one match at Gedmatch between Gladys and Jane, I get this:

5 73,514,449 76,680,718 5.3 842

With this information, I’ll draw a revised Chromosome 5 Map:

It was a little tricky to draw this map. I think that what happened was that Patricia and Gladys share the common ancestors: George Frazer and Susannah Price. Notice that Patricia and Gladys have a large match. I think that match is picking up the older crossover in Patricia of George Frazer and Susannah Price at position 77M. Well, you can see I’m still working these things out!

Chromosome 9

Here is a new Frazer/Stinson TG at the end of Chromosome 9:

In it, we have Doug, Rita and Patricia. Interestingly, Ros, Vivien, Gladys and Bill don’t appear to be in this TG. They seem to be busy being related to each other on their non-Frazer sides.

Anything Else, Summary, Conclusions?

  • I found it interesting that Rita matched Prudence. Rita’s match with Prudence was a little larger than any found so far and Rita and Prudence are on the two most distant Frazer Lines of Archibald and James.
  • It is interesting to look at the autosomal matrix for the Frazers as the higher number indicate family groupings. Overlaps in the families where Frazer cousins married cause even higher cMs in the matches.
  • A focus on the Frazer/Stinson TGs helped shore up that line of the Frazers. In cases where a TG could be from one line or the other, the addition of a Frazer/Stinson only Line tester gave more evidence that those TGs were more clearly in the Frazer/Stinson Line.
  • I did some Chromosome mapping based on the TGs. The TGs gave clear indications of crossovers. However, it was not always clear as to which generation we were mapping to as far as specific ancestors.
  • Here is an update of the Frazer TG Matrix:

More Frazer/McPartland DNA and the Mush Move

Since my last post on the Frazer/McPartland connection, one of the McPartland descendants, Charlene, has uploaded her DNA to Gedmatch. Basically, the McPartlands have in their genealogy that they had a Frazer ancestor. This Frazer ancestor is thought to be related to the Frazers that lived in North Roscommon, Ireland. This relationship has been made more sure by the fact that the McPartlands lived near the Frazers and that McPartlands and Frazers have matching DNA.

Here are some of the McPartlands:

I am focusing on the green part as those are the ones that have had their DNA tested and uploaded the results to Gedmatch. The McPartland/Frazer connection is seen at the top where Owen McPartland married Ann Frazer. From this chart, we can also see that Charlene is a 3rd cousin to Karen and Chris.

Charlene’s X Chromosome

When I look at Charlene’s X matches at Gedmatch, I see something very interesting. Her top match is to my sister Heidi:

And here is how Charlene matches her 3rd cousin, Karen:

Notice how close these two matches are. Just to close the loop, here is the huge X match between Heidi and Karen:

The above comparison shows an X triangulation. This, to me, is proof that the three are related.

Here is a possible Frazer McPartland tree which could explain the above X matches:

For this to work well, the Frazer at the top would most likely have two wives. Margaret would have been born from the first wife and from the second wife. The other solution would be to have another generation between Ann and the top Frazer. However, that also introduces problems as the X Chromosome does not travel from father to son. That scenario would require Ann Frazer’s mother to be a Frazer which would mean Ann’s father would also be a Frazer.

Here is a late breaking update on Ann Frazer from a McPartland researcher:

Hi Joel,
Ann was born between 1818 and 1823 (1901 census age 78, and her death registration, also 1901, age 85).
The 1823 date seems likelier, since her last child was born in 1866, and she might well have personally given her age to the census taker, while with the death registration, we’re depending on her son John, with whom she lived, to give the correct date.
All the best,
Sandy
This is good news as it would now not require the Frazer at the top of the tree to have had two wives. If the top Frazer’s wife was born in 1780, she could have had Margaret around 1800 when she was 20 and Ann in 1823 when she was 43. I could narrow that down even a bit further. She could have been born in 1783, had Margaret in 1803 when she was 20 and Ann in 1823 when she was 40.

Who Is the Unknown Frazer? By James Line Genealogy

One way to look at this is through the existing Frazer genealogy. There is the Archibald Line and the James Line. My past assumption has been that this unknown Frazer is in the James Line. But what James Line Frazer would fit the bill? If our genealogy is right, then the sons of James were born to soon to fit the bill of someone born around 1780
JAMES1 FRAZER was born circa 1717 at Aghrafinigan, Ardcarne, Roscommon. He married Katherine Fitzgerald in 1745.
He was a farmer.
Children of James1 Frazer and Katherine Fitzgerald were as follows:

  •       i.   (–?–)2 was born circa 1746.
  •       ii.   ELIZABETH was born circa 1748. She married William Knott.
  •     2.  iii.   ARCHIBALD was born circa 1751. He married Catherine Peyton, daughter of John Peyton and Hannah Wynne, in 1780. He was buried on 13 Aug 1835 at Ardcarne.
  •       iv.   PATRICK was born circa 1755 at Aghrafinigan, Ardcarne, Roscommon. He died in 1831 at Aghnasurn.
  •     3.  v.   MICHAEL was born circa 1764. He married Margaret (–?–). He died on 17 Mar 1837 at Ardcarne.

The children of the above were born too late. The only one who could have fit the bill is John Peyton, son of Archiald But he doesn’t have known Frazer descendants:

JOHN PEYTON3 FRAZER (Archibald2, James1) was born circa 1781. He married Frances Carlton. He died on 22 Nov 1865; aged 84.
Children of John Peyton3 Frazer and Frances Carlton both born at Ardcarne Parish Church, Roscommon, were as follows:

  •       i.   FRANCIS CARLTON4 was baptized on 10 Jun 1824.
  •       ii.   KATHERINE PEYTON was baptized on 20 Dec 1829. She married David Burns, son of Stephen Burns, on 8 Oct 1849.

The Unknown Frazer By Archibald Line Genealogy

By genealogy, it appears that the Archibald Line has more potential for our mysterious link between the Frazers and McPartlands.

Our genealogy has these four Archibald Line brothers born around 1780. That could put any of them as potential candidate to be Ann and/or Margaret’s father.

A Little McPartland Genealogy

Here is the 27 October 1860 Baptismal record that Joanna (a Frazer researcher) found in the Aghanah Catholic Parish record:

This is a record of the birth of Cath. Janam (Jane) [Mc]Partland daughter of Eugene and Ann Frazer. It appears that a Patrick Partland and a Healy were there and that the family lived in Annagh. Annagh is a very popular place name in Ireland. However, the closest Annagh to Dereenagan appears to be here on the shores of Lough Key:

Annagh is in the lower left of the map above. This is a bit confusing as one branch of the Frazer family had an Annagh House (or Lodge) in the Townland of Aughnacloy in County Sligo. To further confuse things, an Ireland Townlands website has Annagh further to the East and North:

It looks like my first choice may have been the better one. Here is a Roman Catholic Parish map of Ballinafad which historically was Aghanagh. This map was taken from the Leitrim-Roscommon Genealogy web page.

Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was another explanation! It gets confusing with overlapping parishes. I think that the Civil Parishes are equivalent to the Church of Ireland Parishes. The NLI website has Aughanagh Parish in County Sligo.

Back to the DNA

Above, I established that Heidi, Charlene and Karen all matched on the X Chromosome. It looks like my sister Sharon also matches. Here is how Charlene matches Heidi, Karen, and Sharon on the X Chromosome:

Back to Autosomal dna

Charlene matches Karen autosomally. They are known 3rd cousins. Charlene and Heidi don’t match autosomally. Charlene and my sister Sharon do match on Chromosome 9 from position 22-36M:

Here is Sharon’s Chromosome 9 map showing why she matches Charlene and Heidi and I don’t:

Lighter red is Frazer DNA. Sharon got a full load of that on her Chromosome 9. Heidi and I got nearly all Hartley DNA (darker red) on this Chromosome.

triangulation groups

With the McPartland/Frazer matches, I would like to focus on triangulation groups as they have a good chance of indicating a common ancestor.

Here are Charlene’s matches with my cousin Paul and my sister Sharon on Chromosome 9:

According to my last Blog, Karen and Chris also had matches in the same area. This indicates a common ancestor:

I have the Frazer at the top with a question mark as we are not sure which Frazer this is. It is quite likely to be a correct scenario. I base that on the combination of X Pattern matches and the triangulation. Although the match shows with Heidi, the actual match in this case was with my sister Sharon. Also note that Paul had no X match as he has two male Frazers above him and X does not travel from male to male.

The prudence triangulation group (TG)

Here Charlene matches Prudence, Chris and Karen:

#4 is Betty who is a cousin of Joanna’s family. From my last Blog, Prudence also matched Karen and Chris to complete the triangle. Here is Prudence’s tree.

How can we fit the McPartlands in here? Prudence is on the James line. Earlier in the Blog, I had mentioned John Peyton Frazer as a not likely person of interest. I’ll re-consider him here:

What if John had two other daughters: Margaret and Ann? They would fit in. The problem with this is that I have a baptism of and Ann and a Hannah already in 1823 that may fit the bill. They were born to an Archibald and a James Frazer respectively. There are many possibilities. One would be that the match is through the Peyton side.

The Anne above had a White mother. Perhaps Catherine Peyton had a sister than married a White and had Anne? What if the James above was an unknown James Line descendant? He would fit the bill also.

Here is the simple portrayal of my first scenario:

Here I just mushed the two trees together where this could be seen. In this scenario, The Frazer on the McPartland part would be John Peyton Frazer (or perhaps the James that I know little about). That would make Prudence, Charlene, Karen and Chris 4th cousins, once removed. Under this scenario, Paul and my family fall out from DNA matching as we are a generation or two below the McPartlands.

Joanna’s TG – Chromosome 15

This figure shows Charlene’s matches with Joanna and her sister Janet. After that is Joanna’s cousin Betty. Finally is my cousin Paul. The green section is not a TG as Janet and her sister only count as one in a TG. The yellow section is a TG. Paul does not appear to be in the TG. Is this showing us that Paul’s match with Charlene is on a different line than Joanna’s TG?

Time for my two family mush move (again for illustration purposes only):

This would be a scenario similar to the Prudence TG above (except I forgot to add the ?????). In this scenario the relationship would be 3rd cousin twice removed. This is slightly closer than the 4th cousin once removed Prudence TG scenario.

Summary and Conclusions

  • The addition of Charlene’s McPartland/Frazer DNA to gedmatch has resulted in some interesting comparisons
  • The X match between the McPartlands and my family gives a strong indication of a match along the Frazer line.
  • This X match has also been backed up by a four way Triangulation group between two McPartland families and two Frazer families (my family and my cousin Paul)
  • I used a new (to me) technique called the mush move. This is where in a TG I mush the two trees together.
  • Even thought the connection was not proven, it gives an indication of where the connection likely is.
  • In the comparison between the Prudence TG and the Joanna TG, it shows that Joanna’s higher level of DNA matches are the result of a likely closer relationship with the McPartlands.
  • The mush move technique is helpful in seeing possible links between families as well as possible problems of links between families.
  • In the beginning of the Blog, I was favoring an Archibald link between the McPartlands and the Frazers. At the end of the Blog, I was favoring the James Line. It seems like the existing paper genealogy favors Archibald Line and that the DNA seems to favor a James Line connection. One possible way to reconcile the two would be to have James (wife of Margaret) be the missing James Line Frazer. In that scenario James’ eldest daughter Margaret (my ancestor) would have been named after her mother which would have been traditional.
  • Perhaps more research will bring something to light concerning James Frazer who married Margaret and had Hannah in 1823.

The Frazer/McPartland Connection: Genealogy and DNA

It all started around 1850 in Ireland when Owen McPartland married Ann Frazer. Owen (or Eugene in the Latin) was Roman Catholic. Ann was from a traditionally Church of Ireland Frazer family. Perhaps this caused waves. Perhaps Owen and Ann had to go out of the area to marry. At any rate, this couple produced offspring and we have the DNA and genealogy to prove it today.

Frazer/McPartland Genealogy

I’ll start in 1901.

This enumeration is for the small Townland of Derreenagan in the North of Roscommon. By this time Owen McPartland has died and left his wife Annie with her son John and their young family. Annie is said to be 78 at the time, so we suppose that she was born in 1823.

Who were the parents of Annie Frazer?

This is a common question that genealogists are always asking. I have two candidates:

This is from a compilation of vital records from Michael of the Frazer study group. These two Frazer girls were born very close in time to each other. I don’t know much about James and Margaret. Richard Frazer born around 1777 was believed to have a son – probably the eldest – named James. Then the Archibald I have above was probably the son of John Frazer born around 1775. Both these families were from the Archibald Line of the Frazers.

Derreenagan

Here is a map of Derreenagan -where the  McPartlands lived:

Derreenagan was in the historical Frazer area. Frazers lived in the surrounding Townlands of Derrycahel, Derreentunny, Shanvoley, Cleragh and Aghrafinigan.

Griffith’s valuation

This Valuation published about 1858 for Derreenagan is important due to the lack of an Irish Census for that time period.

Here we see Edward Frazer as the major occupant. Next to him is Patrick Partland who I take to be a McPartland. William Frazer was the only lease holder for this Townland. He and Edward Frazer were likely brothers from the James line of the Frazer family.

Here is the Griffith’s Valuation Map showing Derreenagan:

Alexander Frazer lived in Shanvoley. Edward Frazer should have the largest house in Derreenagan based on his assessment. I’m not sure where Patrick Partland lived.

McPartland genealogy: Shuffle off to buffalo

One of our Frazer researchers, Joanna, writes:

I have found a couple of baptismal records in Aghanagh Parish (Catholic records) Ballinafad Co Sligo – for Catherine Jane bap 27 Oct 1860 parents Eugene McPartland and Anna Frazer.  Eugene is apparently Latin for Owen.  Also a John McPartland – same church bap 23 Feb 1866 parents Eugene McPartland and Elizabeth Frazer – either she was Anna Elizabeth or there was another marriage to another Frazer in the meantime. 

A review of Ancestry Trees shows:

  • Mary Ann a daughter of Eugene and Ann may have died in Buffalo, New York
  • John McPartland (above b. 1866) had sons James and Patrick who died in the Buffalo. [I have mentioned a Patrick and a James above. Could these be hints for the parents of Owen and Ann?]
  • John had another son Eugene who died in San Francisco
  • Catherine Jane (Jennie) McPartland is the daughter of Owen. Her great granddaughter matches Joanna of the Frazer DNA Study group. Jennie also lived in Buffalo.

Here is a McPartland partial family tree:

The two on the bottom left have taken DNA tests. I didn’t follow the tree down on the right as I don’t believe that this line has tested for DNA. The bottom two McPartland/Frazer descendants are 3rd cousins to each other.

Now, the Frazer/McPartland DNA

I have previously blogged about the X match my two sisters have with Karen. Karen descends from the Maryann McPartland Branch of the family. Karen matches my two sisters by more X Chromosome DNA than her own brother. However, there is a reason for that. Karen’s brother Chris gets no X Chromosome from his dad Walter – only a Y. The match that Frazer descendants have with Karen is through Walter. Karen’s X Chromosome that she got from her father is the entire X Chromosome that he got from his mother Agnes. That helps to explain the large X Chromosome match between Karen and my sisters.

Above are Karen’s X-DNA matches with her mother, my sisters Heidi and Sharon and her brother Chris.

Here is the route of Karen’s X-DNA:

The red arrow indicates that Karen’s DNA from Walter is the same he received from Agnes.

Here is a possible way Heidi and Sharon got their X-DNA from the Frazer side:

Note that the route is a bit longer. Also it goes from Frazer to McMaster and back to Frazer again. Imagine that Margaret Frazer (circled in the bottom right of the image above) had a brother who had Ann Frazer. This could account for the X-DNA match between Frazer and McPartland. Another interesting thing is that Sharon got one X Chromosome from her dad which is the same that he got from his mother. Let’s take it one step further. My grandmother also got an X DNA from her dad which is the same X-DNA that he got from his mother. That should mean that my sister Sharon has a chance to get a large chunk of X-DNA from her 2nd great grandmother Margaret McMaster – which is apparently what happened.

Non-X, Autosomal DNA matches

Here are some of the other matches between the McPartlands and the Frazers:

Jonathan is Joanna’s brother. He is in a small Triangulation Group with Chris and his 2nd cousin Betty – a Frazer descendant. A Triangulation Group (TG) is a sure way of knowing that those in the group have a shared ancestor. However figuring out who that common ancestor is can be difficult.

In the blue area above, there are small matches between Karen and Chris on the McPartland side and Jane, Melissa, Charlotte and Judith in the Frazer DNA Study Group. Charlotte also has an X match along with Sharon, Heidi and Karen, tying the four of them together. It should be noted that some of these common matches may not be Frazers, but spouses of Frazers.

In the green is a larger TG between Karen, Paul and Sharon. Paul is Sharon’s second cousin once removed. That means that Sharon’s second great grandparents are the same as Paul’s 1st great grandparents: George Frazer and Margaret McMaster.

Finally, we see some good matches between Karen, Chris, and Prudence. Prudence descends from Edward Frazer who is believed to have lived in Derreenagan. OK, what was going on in Derreenagan in the 1800’s?

Here is part of the James Line working tree for the Frazer DNA Project:

This is quite a busy chart. Charlotte and Madeline both have X matches to Karen. Edward Frazer who lived in Derreenagan is circled above Prudence. Most of these circles go up to Archibald Frazer b. 1751. I’m not sure how Judith fits in. Probably through James Frazer at the top or a Frazer spouse’s Line.

I don’t have Jane on this Chart as she is on the Archibald Line – a different chart. I’m not sure how Melissa fits in. I had a note that she may be related to Margaret Frazer.

So, Where Are We?

The above genealogy and DNA have given a lot of food for thought:

  • My genealogy summary left me looking at two sets of parents for Ann Frazer that appear to be on the Archibald Line of the Frazers
  • The DNA matches seem to favor the James Line of the Frazers (Jonathan, Joanna, Betty, Charlotte, Madeline, Judith and Prudence)
  • If the match is through a collateral Frazer spouse, then that could account for both lines. Unfortunately, many of the Frazer spouses names are missing
  • The largish match between Prudence and McPartand descendants Karen and Chris looks suspicious given that Prudence’s ancestor probably lived next to the McPartlands.
  • Further, there was a Patrick Partland in Derreenagan. He could be the father of Owen/Eugene McPartland.

 

Solving Joanna’s Mystery DNA Match with Visual Mapping

Recently I had a question from Joanna, who is part of a Frazer DNA Project that I’m working on. She has a large mystery match and would like to know which side of the family the match is on. Joanna is also interested in having her chromosomes mapped using Visual Phasing. Visual Phasing is a method that Kathy Johnston has pioneered using the DNA results of at least 3 siblings. Blaine Bettinger has also written a 5 part series on this subject.  Perhaps the mapping could help her find out what side of her family this mystery match is on.

Joanna’s Mystery DNA Connection with Mystery Vickey

Joanna’s siblings are Janet and Jonathan. I will check Gedmatch.com to see how the three siblings match up with Vickey.

vickeytojoanna

On Vickey’s One to Many list, I saw Joanna and Janet, but not Jonathan. You can see why Joanna is interested as her match with Vickey is 55 cM. I didn’t want to leave out Jonathan, so I ran a One to One between him and Vickey at Gedmatch;

vickeyjonathan

Jonathan does match Vickey, but he just fell off the bottom of Vickey’s One to Many List. The start of Jonathan’s match is at the start of Joanna’s orange bar above. His match with Vickey ends before his sister Janet’s match with Vickey starts. Now, in Joanna’s family we have a small, medium and large match with Mystery Vickey.

Visual Mapping of Joanna, Janet and Jonathan

As all the above matches are on Chromosome 13, it would make sense to start there. The first step is to compare the 3 siblings in the Gedmatch Chromosome Browser:

chromosomebrowserjjj

I then added crossover lines and attempted to assign the right sibling or siblings to the right crossover. This Chromosome was not simple. It looks like there are or could be close crossovers in three different places – around position 29, 33 and 98. In addition, something strange seems to be going on at the 72/73/74 location. That leaves only 2 crossovers which appear to be less than complicated. Those are: the first crossover which I have given to Jonathan and; the crossover at 62 which I gave to Janet.

Mapping the JJJ siblings

From 33 to about 73, Joanna and Jonathan have a Fully Identical Region (FIR). That means in that area, Joanna and Jonathan got their DNA from two of the same grandparents. One of those grandparents was on their Paternal side and one on the Maternal side.

chr13jjjfir

Above I’ve portrayed Joanna and Jonathan’s shared grandparents as blue and red. The next step is extending the blue and red bars. I’ll keep Jonathan’s two grandparents where they are as he has crossovers on either side. However, I’ll extend Joanna’s DNA from her 2 grandparents to the right. Should I extend them to 98 or to the end?

A single or double crossover at 98?

The simplest scenario at Position 98 would be a crossover assigned to Joanna. Joanna is the common factor in the first two comparisons, so that would make sense. In that scenario, neither Janet nor Jonathan would have crossovers at 98. However, that does not appear to go along with what we know. Recall above that I looked at Vickey’s match with Joanna and Janet:

vickeytojoanna

Why isn’t Janet matching Vickey for 55 cM as Joanna is? Something happened around Position 97. That something has to be a crossover for Janet. That sets a few things in motion. Now that we know Janet has a crossover, that means that Jonathan also has a crossover there. Our two options at 98 were either a single crossover for Joanna or a double crossover including Janet and Jonathan. My conclusion:

  • Janet has a crossover at 98
  • Jonathan also has a crossover at 98
  • Joanna does not have a crossover at 98

The immediate result is that I can send Joanna’s DNA over to the right side of the page:

joannamap

In the next step, I want to take advantage of the Joanna to Janet FIR and the places where siblings don’t match at all. This is where there is red in the Browser and no blue bar below. In these areas I will use two different colors.

firhir

The Irony of Vickey’s match

Next, I’d like to use Vickey’s match with Joanna and Janet set the crossover at position 98. We will now pick a ‘side’ to the colors. We will say that Vickey is a red match. In the area between 62 and 98 Joanna and Janet are in a Half Identical Region (HIR). That means that they have one grandparent in common our their four. The irony is that we are mapping this Chromosome to find out where Vickey fits in. Yet we are first using Vickey’s match to map the Chromosome.

vickeyonmap

Here I have added in Vickey’s matches with Joanna, Janet and Jonathan. Note that Janet’s match with Vickey starts right near her crossover. Before that, Janet matched another of her four grandparents (shown in yellow). Also Jonathan’s match with Vickey ends right by his crossover where he received his DNA from another grandparent (the same yellow). Now we have Joanna and her two siblings’ Chromosome 13 roughly mapped out. We have relative positions for their four grandparents. Can we now find out which of Joanna’s grandparents the Mystery Vickey is related to?

Finding Which of Joanna’s Grandparents Matches Vickey

In January, 2016, I wrote a blog about Joanna and her Chromosome 15. Here are the results I came up with (after I went back and corrected a mistake I found):

chr15frazermaprev

I show this to indicate the possible grandparents that Vickey could be related to. Chromosome 15 was also a much easier Chromosome to analyze. There were only three crossovers for Joanna and her siblings on Chromosome 15. The 90-97 area was where Joanna matched a Williams relative. From 67-92, Joanna and Janet matched Frazer relatives.

For Chromosome 13, however, the [maternal] Williams relative did not match with Joanna, Janet and Jonathan. So it will not be possible to make determinations on Joanna’s maternal side. There were, however matches on the Frazer side. Betty has not uploaded her results to Gedmatch, but she is on FTDNA which has a browser and gives Chromosome match locations.  Betty is our last chance to at least identify the paternal part of Joanna and her siblings’ Chromosome 13.  Fortunately, Betty matches Joanna twice and Jonathan once:

bettychr13

Now all I have to do is see where Betty’s DNA would fit on our Chromosome 13 Map.

chr13mapbetty

It looks like Betty has shown that Vickey is related somewhere along the line of Frazer – or more specifically Edward Frazer born in 1867. Here are a few notes on what I did:

  • I extended Jonathan’s Seymour DNA to the right as he had no Frazer match there where his two sisters did. They both matched Vickey. Then I added a blue segment above Jonathan’s yellow segment as Jonathan has a HIR with his two sisters at the end of Chromosome 13.
  • Question: Why didn’t I match Betty to the blue maternal side of the Chromosome? There is room for her DNA there also.
  • Answer: Imagine that I moved all the Betty matches up to the blue segments. That would leave a problem for Janet. In that scenario Joanna would have a blue match and Janet would also have to have the same blue match, but Janet didn’t match Betty from 75-96. Janet also did not match Vickey from 63-107. So that alternative scenario does not work out.
  • For more distant relationships, one would not want to make deductions based on lack of matches. However, with siblings there has to be an explanation as to why one sibling would have a match and the other would not based on the visual mapping.

Edward Frazer is wearing a top hat at the bottom right. In our Chromosome 13 Map, his DNA is shown as red and his Seymour wife as yellow.

frazer1867

The fact that Vickey matches on this Frazer line doesn’t mean that Vickey has to have Frazer ancestors. It just means that she and Edward Frazer must have a common ancestor. That common ancestor may be along the Palmer line, for example (Edward Frazer’s mother’s Line).

Betty to the rescue again

Let’s use Betty’s results to fill in the rest of Joanna’s family’s Chromosome 13:

chr13joannafinished

  • Note that Betty matches Joanna from 29-43 and Jonathan from 33-43. That tells me that Jonathan has a paternal crossover at 33. Because Joanna doesn’t have a paternal crossover at 33, that means she has a maternal crossover there. The rest I fill in using the FIR and HIR regions.
  • The smaller segments at the beginning of the Chromosome correspond with all the crossovers at the beginning of the Chromosome. There are 5 crossovers up to position 33. In Chromosome 15 that I mention earlier in the blog, there were 3 crossovers for the whole Chromosome. After position 33 on Chromosome 13, there are fewer, more spaced out crossovers which account for the larger segments of inherited grandparent DNA.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Visual Mapping can be fun and helpful in finding out where mystery matches come from
  • Without the help of Joanna’s 2nd cousin Betty, we would not have a complete map. We would also not be able to know which grandparent Vickey was related to.
  • If Betty’s results were only at AncestryDNA, we would not be able to do this analysis as AncestryDNA does not give detailed information on DNA matches. The fact that she tested at FTDNA helped us come to these conclusions, even though her results were not uploaded to Gedmatch.com
  • Joanna may know of more test results with known relatives that could help fill out the maternal side of Chromosome 13 or we may find out more in the future.