Category: DNA General

My brother Jim was the last of six siblings to have his DNA tested. As a result, I am behind on phasing his DNA. The Visual Phasing process puts your DNA into four categories. Those four categories correspond to the DNA that you got from your four grandparents.

First I used the Steven Fox Visual Phasing Spreadsheet. I downloaded information from gedmatch using that spreadsheet. The program timed out, but it looks like I have enough to get started. Usually, Visual Phasing is just done with three siblings at a time, but I thought I’d try it with all six.

Starting with the X Chromosome

Some people like to start with the X Chromosome. Part of the reason is that it is already phased between maternal and paternal. Females get two X Chromosomes, but males get one. The one that males get is from the maternal side. I had already looked into Jim’s X Chromosome. I compared it without the Fox Spreadsheet and got this:

Here is the complicated six sibling comparison:

In this comparison, Jim is V, Jon is F, and Joel is D. V&F, V&D and F&D correspond to my three brother comparison above. My three sisters have two X Chromosomes, so they have a maternal and paternal side. The paternal side is the same for all three sisters, so they are at least half identical in all places. Yellow is the half identical areas. Red is no match and green means that my sisters match on both the maternal and paternal sides.

I have set the crossover points here:

Next I need to figure out who owns each crossover. It looks like the first one belongs to Heidi:

Every time there is a change in one of the comparisons, Heidi is involved. In three sibling visual phasing, Heidi would be involved in match changes with two other siblings. In six sibling visual phasing, she shows the changes with each of her five siblings. This gives more certainty to setting crossover lines.

Second Try at Building the Chromosomes

I tried to build the chromosomes a second time without all the added cousins as that was slowing the process down. The spreadsheet allows you to add them later. Here is the assuring message I got:

I can add the cousins in later.

An Apparent Jim Crossover That Is Not

Note that at about position 23, it appears that Jim should have a crossover, but it actually goes to his two brothers:

This is a little easier to see in the six sibling comparison:

Jon (F) is in purple and Joel (D) is in orange. These two crossovers are not in the same place but are very close to each other. Joel’s is first at about 23M and Jon is next at about 23.3M.

Another Close Set of Crossovers: Jim and Lori

Here Jim’s crossover is at 87.5M and Lori’s is at 87.7M. That means I need to add another Line for Lori. Now I have 13 crossovers for six siblings:

Adding Cousins

I would like to add cousins to the spreadsheet, as I took them out earlier to make the spreadsheet build run smoothly. Now I will add them back in. I went through Steve Fox’s instruction manual. I added back in cousins and hit the ‘add’ button. I had added my father’s cousin Jim and the program didn’t like that as my brother is also Jim, so I changed my father’s cousin’s name to James and the program was happy. I added 17 cousins, so it could take the spreadsheet a while to add in 17 cousins for 6 siblings. Based on the progress, this process should take about an hour if nothing times out. Actually, it did time out or Excel hung up and I wasn’t happy with the results. So I deleted the cousins and added them in in two batches after closing unneeded programs and Excel spreadsheets.

Here is another assuring announcement:

After this, I ran the other 9 cousins and I successfully completed the build. This build process took a while but should be well worth it.

Back to Visual Phasing of the X

Heidi, Sharon, and Lori will all have their X DNA from their paternal grandmother – Frazer.

I put Frazer on the bottom. That means the maternal side will go on top. For that, I just need to see a few cousin matches. When I choose ‘all cousins’, I see that Anita and her sister have the best X Chromosome matches with my family:

Anita matches Jim, Sharon, Heidi, and Lori on the right. Anita has smaller matches near the middle of the Chromosome with Sharon and Lori . By comparing the chromosomes on the right, it looks like I can see a crossover for Sharon (at 68M) and Lori. For some reason, the position numbers for the matching comparisons are not all showing at the left.

Remember, I said that Lori had a crossover on the right hand side? It shows as my crossover (D or Joel). That means I probably missed a crossover for Lori.

Here is a comparison between Lori and Jim that shows where Lori’s crossover is:

Every carat mark is one million, so Lori’s crossover is at 142M.

Anita above represents Rathfelder, so I just need to put in Rathfelder everwhere that Anita matches my family.

The spreadsheet has a function called Extend, but it didn’t work for the Rathfelder entries for some reason. I’ll just extend Rathfelder manually to the crossovers:

A Problem for Sharon

I extended Jim, but ran into a problem with Sharon:

If I extend Sharon to the right, it goes through a crossover line. A crossover line is where there should be a change from Rathfelder to Lentz. That means that something is wrong. I’ll just visually phase the brothers:

Then I will go segment by segment from Jim to his sisters to see where the change is needed.

It turns out that I was doing it right, but the two small matches with Anita and Inese were wrong. The common wisdom is to ignore X Chromosome matches under 15 or 20 cM. In my opinion, this is especially true between two females. I find this a bit confusing as three cousins match on those two segments of Sharon and Lori.

So that was supposed to be the ‘easy’ Chromosome!

Here is another way of looking at the X Chromosome and cousin match:

Jim (V) matches Lori and Sharon at segment S-F as shown by the blue bars above. Sharon and Lori match cousins Anita, Inese and Catherine at the same segment. However, James does not match cousins Anita, Inese or Catherine at the same segment. That is further confirmation that the X Chromosome match Anita has with Lori and Sharon is not good for use in Visual Phasing.

Checking the Segment Map

The Fox Spreadsheet also has a Segment Map. This is a check to see if your final results match up with the original Gedmatch comparison. It is not a proof that the visual phasing is right. However, if it does not match, it is pretty good proof that something went wrong.

For the X Chromosome, it only works for the three sisters.

The top part is the Gedmatch comparisons with my three sisters. The bottom spreadsheet part should mimic the topgedmatch comparisons if the Visual Phasing is done correctly. Also in Chromosomes other that the X, there will be red sections where there is no matching. When three sister always match on the paternal grandmother, there is no place on the X Chromosome where there is no match.

Summary and Conclusions

• I had never visually phased my brother Jim except for the X Chromosome. I decided to start the process by working with the Steven Fox Visual Phasing Spreadsheet.
• I had never clearly understood why a crossover that looked like it should belong to one sibling could belong to the other two. Using six siblings, it was visually clear how that could happen. The other two siblings have crossovers that are close to each other. In this example, Joel and Jon had crossovers near each other. As a result, they both matched Jim in those close crossovers. This made it look like Jim had one crossover when the three sisters were not considered.
•  A match that three of my sisters had with three cousins made the visual phasing confusing. By re-checking the crossovers and the match between my brother Jim and my three sisters, it became clear that the X Chromosome matches with my sisters that was around 10 cM was either not valid or too ancient to be helpful. In order for these 10 cM cousin matches to be valid there would have had to have been a match with these cousins and my brother Jim also.
• Visual Phasing of the X Chromosome is simple in that there are only three grandparents to consider and one grandparent is always the sisters’ paternal grandmother’s DNA unrecombined. However, there are other issues that can make the visual phasing of the X Chromosome complicated.
• I used the segment map to check my work.
• The Steven Fox Visual Phasing Spreadsheet is a great tool for Visual Phasing. It is time-saving and a great way to organize your work. For six siblings, it shows the results for those siblings all in one location.
• I’m ready to Visually Phase Jim and the other 5 siblings for Chromosomes 1-22.

 

I recently wrote a Blog about Brenda’s Newfoundland DNA and her DNA matches with my wife’s family. I had a response to that Blog requestingt that I check out the DNA of William. William is about #20 on Esther’s Gedmatch List. Aunt Esther is my mother-in-law’s 1/2 Aunt.

By Gedmatch, Joan and William could be about 2nd cousins once removed or similar. However, with Newfoundland genealogy, there can be many lines of family connections.

William at Ancestry

I see from William’s Gedmatch number that William has tested at Ancestry. I can now go down Esther’s match list and see how closely people match by DNA:

This William looks to be the same as the one at Gedmatch. Here is William’s tree at Ancestry:

There are some holes in the genealogy, but the common surname at William’s great grandparent level is Dicks. There are also some ancestors marked as ‘private’ at the lower right of William’s tree. This happens when the ancestor is not noted as deceased. I found out by an e email from Norma that this is the right William. Ancestry thinks that Joan and William are third cousins. If so, the common ancestor would be on the level that has three of Williams 2nd great-grandparents identified out of 16. This would also be at the same level as the parents of Esther Dicks.

A Quick and Dirty Tree for William

As some ancestors are missing on William’s tree, I’ll whip up what is called a quick and dirty tree.

Ancestry has suggested ancestors, so I just used their suggestions. Now we have 12 out of 16 potential 2nd great-grandparents for William. It appears that William favors the Collins. Senior, and Butler surnames. If I understand it correctly, my wife’s Great Aunt Esther should have the Butler name on her maternal side, but I have gotten around to fitting it into her genealogy.

Esther Dicks Born 1854

Norma tells me that William’s Esther Dicks may have come from Harbour Buffet where both sides of Esther’s family were from. The clue I got from Ancestry thought that Esther Dicks was from Flat Island where a lot of William’s ancestors were from. However, I don’t have a lot of evidence showing where Esther Dicks was born.

William’s DNA

It would be nice if we could figure out more about William’s ancestry by looking at his DNA and his matches. One problem with William’s match with Esther is that she has Dicks on her mother’s and father’s side:

 

My mother-in-law Joan only matches Esther on her paternal side, so matches that Esther, Joan and William share force the match to Esther’s paternal side. This is also true forJoan’s sister Elaine. Here is how Joan and William match at Gedmatch:

Joan and William match by only 31 cM which leaves an extra 150 cM for William to match Esther where she doesn’t match Joan. Part or all of this 150 cM could represent the [lower] maternal side of Esther’s tree. Well, it can’t be all of 150 cM, as this is how William matches Joan’s sister Elaine:

Comparing William to Other Dicks Descendants

The next logical step is to compare William to other Dicks descendants. These would be descendants of Christopher Dicks who was born about 1784 and Married Margaret. One problem with this is that I have not added Joseph Dicks to this Line. I probably should, but I’m only partially convinced that his is a son of Christopher Dicks.

This could explain why Esther has so many matches to other Dicks descendants.

Here is the Dicks Matrix I get for William:

William is at the top, but I don’t see that he clearly matches any of the groups more than the groups match themselves. As Norma pointed out to me, William matches Esther the best followed by Anne and Brenda. I do notice that William also matches DIddie pretty well. Based on my last Blog on Brenda, a common ancestor could be Dicks and Crann. I also wonder about the Collins name as the common Crann Ancestor from England had a wife named Collens.

Here is the tree I’m pulling the results from. This is just a tree of Dicks descendants who have had their DNA tested (noted by the green boxes):

Esther and Anne are one generation up on most others except for Nelson in the Adams Line. Given that fact, and that William has good matches with Diddie and Brenda, I would tend to put William’s DNA match in with the Crann Line on the right. For William to have such a good match with Brenda who is two generations down from Esther and Anne seems significant to me.  Looking at Triangulation Groups may clarify things.

Getting More Specific With Triangulation Groups (TGs)

Triangulation Groups are when three or more people all match each other in three ways on the same segment of DNA. When this happens, those three people are supposed to have a unique common ancestor. In practice, it is difficult to narrow this down to one common ancestor, but often a common ancestral couple can be found.

This is not my favorite step as it involves comparing 31 people’s DNA with each other. Also I have to change all the names for privacy.

First, the Crann Test

In my previous Blog, I looked at four additional people. Three had Crann ancestry, but no specific Newfoundland ancestry. One person had Crann ancestry and Newfoundland ancestry, but no known Dicks ancestry.

Equally Confused and Illuminated

This is the Matrix I should have produced in my previous Blog:

In the bottom right of the matrix, I have a box around the Crann’s from New Zealand. They show to be matching clearly with the Christopher Dicks group. I had thought that it would be more clear that they would be matching with the Crann Group. However, they have a small match with Judy from the Joyce group. Then they match with Molly and Howie who are in both the Joyce and Crann Group. Finally, Heather has a respectable match with Brenda who is only in the Crann Group. Other than that there is an ambiguous match with Kirsten from the Burton group and no matches above 7 cM in the Adams Line descendants.

Richard from Newfoundland with Crann Ancestry But Not Dicks

Richard has Crann Ancestry, but not Dicks. That means his match with Cheryl is likely on a non-Crann non-Dicks Line. Richard matches William and others by a greater amount than he matches the New Zealand Crann descendants. That tells me he is matching these people on multiple lines. William matches the three New Zealand Crann descendants at levels right around the threshold of 7 cM. William matches Richard at 132 cM so must have other matches with Richard outside of the Crann and Dicks Lines. Hmm….

Triangulating Between the Dicks, Cranns, and Richard

Hey, why not? Let’s find out what happens.

TG01 With Richard

Richard is in the mix for quality control and for his Crann ancestry:

Normally, if I saw Anne, Randy and Forrest in a TG, I would assume that this would be a Dicks TG. However, I am told that Richard has no Dicks ancestry.  Here is Richard’s paternal Newfoundland side:

It seems like there could be room for some DIcks, but there are no Dicks in Richard’s known genealogy.

TG01 with William

Based on known genealogies, this TG probably represents a Dicks common ancestor going back to Christopher Dicks who was born 1784 or his wife Margaret.

TG03 with William

The DNA is telling me that William, Diddie, Sandi and Wallace have a common ancestor. However, I’m a little confused as to who that may be. It may be a Dicks as all these people have Dicks ancestors. However, it seems like there could be other possibilities.

Summary of William’s TGs

Rather than boringly going through each of William’s TGs, I will summarize them. There are quite a few:

• Even though the TGs may not be based on Dicks ancestry, I have set up the headings for the different Dicks branches.
• TGs that have Richard in them probably don’t include Dicks ancestry – though we are not totally certain of that. They are in salmon color
• TGs with Elaine or Joan have to be on Esther’s paternal side.
• William was in one TG with New Zealand Cranns.
• I added up the people in William’s TGs at the bottom. The numbers seem to favor William coming from the Christopher Group that has Esther and Anne in it.

Is Esther Dicks from the Christopher Dicks Line?

I have Esther Dicks being born 1854. That would seem to fit the tree I have, but it would fit in other branches also:

I would go with Esther being in this branch of the Dicks, and wait to see if more information comes in to prove this or disprove it.

A Double TG for Esther – Chromosome 11

I wanted to mention an interesting double TG for Esther:

The question is, “How can Esther be in two overlapping TGs at the same time?” The answer is that one TG has to be on her maternal side and one has to be on the paternal side. Esther, like everyone else, has a full set of paternal and maternal chromosomes. The first TG is with Joan and Edward. I have mentioned that Joan only matches Esther on her paternal side. The next TG is with William, Anne and Richard. My assumption is that Richard has no Dicks ancestors. That means that William, Richard and Anne must share a non-Dicks ancestor on Esther’s maternal side. Here is Esther’s maternal side:

The matches are not large, so my guess is that the common ancestor goes back to the 1700’s. That would likely be in the last row of people. There are 4 people out of 16 possible in that row. There are only three surnames: Emberley, Tibbo and Dicks. We have ruled out Dicks for now. However, we could bring up Shave (or Sheave) and Kirby to that row. Also Griffith.

Summary and Conclusions

• As requested, I looked at how William matched my wife’s relatives and some other people (mostly Dicks descendants) who I had been looking at.
• I got a bit side-tracked by issues that I was already considering.
• It helped that I included Cranns from New Zealand and Richard who had no known Dicks ancestry as a control.
• Knowing that my mother-in-law and her sister only match their Aunt Esther on the paternal side aslo narrows down some DNA matching options.
• William probably matches a lot of people with Newfoundland heritage, which makes DNA analysis difficult.
• Based on my Dicks DNA project, William appears to match people from the Christopher Dicks Line more than others. This is after accounting for the fact that two of the people in that group are one generation closer to a common ancestor than most in the Project. This also accounts for the fact that there are some non-Dicks TGs included in that group.
• I looked at a special case for my mother-in-law’s Aunt Esther where she was in two TGs at the same place on a Chromosome and explained how this could happen.

 

I need to come up with catchier titles on these Blogs. I have already written two Blogs about Richard. They are here Part 1 and here Part 2. Richard tells me that Martha has little interest in DNA which is fine. She is glad to let Richard handle her DNA. That reminds me of when I drove my mom to Philadelphia to visit her sister. While there, I did some genealogical research on my mom’s side of the family. My Aunt Muriel was surprised that I was interested in dead people. Putting it that way, I do sound like a nut.

Martha’s Genealogy

I have this tree for Richard and Barry:

This reminds me that I had also written a Blog about Barry. This tree is put together with a combination of traditional genealogy, guesses, DNA matches, naming patterns, and research done by a Frazer relative about 70 years ago. Irish genealogical records tend to disappear for the most part before the early 1800’s. Note also that Richard and Barry’s green line is long and narrow. This is not always the best for DNA matching. The fact that two brothers tested is a help to this problem. Also adding a third cousin helps. Here is what I get from Richard’s e-mail:

 

As I have us all in a Philip branch, I like to see another Philip Frazer (albeit under the Johnston name).

Purpose of the Blog

I would like to see if the DNA supports the tree I have. This tree goes up to the Philip Line. The green line of Ann Frazer born 1832 who married Robert Johnston appears to be a good one. As far as we know, they have no other Frazer Lines to confuse things. [However, note later in the Blog we will find out differently.] The yellow line above is in two other Frazer Lines. The blue line is  also at least in one other Frazer line. Comparing the DNA of these three lines should tell us if these groups belong together or not. It will not tell us for sure if these three groups descend from the Philip born in the latter part of the 1700’s.

Looking at the DNA: Martha Matching Richard and Barry

When I look at Martha’s ‘One to Many’ match list at Gedmatch, I see that Richard and Barry are not her closest Frazer matches based on DNA. Here is how Martha matches her two third cousins, Richard and Barry:

They have a match of 17 cM on Chromosome 17. This is on the low side of reported matches for third cousins:

Martha and Barry also have an X Chromosome match:

The X Chromosome match is interesting as the X Chromosome is never inherited from father to son. That means that this match must be from Ann Frazer born 1832 and not her husband Robert Johnston. Ann Frazer could have gotten her DNA from her Frazer father or Taylor mother. It would be interesting to know which it was. If it was from Philip Frazer, then Philip Frazer would have had to have gotten this X Chromosome from his mother. This is the mother we know nothing of. I won’t follow up specifically on the X Chromosome, but it is an area of possible future research and something to keep in mind while looking at other matches.

Martha and the Archibald Frazer Line

When I plug Martha into the Archibald Line of Frazer, this is what I get for DNA matches:

These comparisons get a bit small. Martha is highlighted in blue. I see that she has a good match with Jamie on the Stinson line, but this may be due to a Johnston connection. It would be a good idea for me to look at some Johnston genealogy at some point to see how some of these people are connected to that family. The above chart is simplified in that many of these people match on different Frazer Lines. That would explain why Michael and Jane have large matches. Jane and Michael do not descend from the Phillip Line but they and my family both descend from the Richard Line of Frazers which explains the good matches that Michael and Jane have.

Martha’s top three matches are with Gladys, Jane and Michael. Assuming that Martha and Gladys both descend from Philip Frazer, that would explain that match. But how do I explain Martha’s match with Michael and Jane? [More on this later in the Blog.]

Some Background on Richard’s Johnston/Frazer Family History

Richard tells me his line is well-documented back to Ann Frazer who married Robert Johnston. I don’t know much about this line, so I’ll see what I can find. Here is the 1916 Census for Manitoba:

According to this Census, Richard’s grandmother, Gertrude was a young teacher in Souris.

Souris is about 150 miles West of Winnipeg.

Richard’s Great-Grandfather, William Archibald Johnston Born in Ontario

Here are the first two trees I found at Ancestry for Gertrude’s father:

Ancestry wanted to give me a hint that Mariette was William Archibald Johnston’s father. The second tree agrees with what I have from Richard. I ended up accepting the second tree for the tree I am working on. Once I did that, I got this hint from Ancestry:

 

 

This tells me that Philip F Johnston got married in 1888 at the age of 33. He was a widower at the time. So Philip would be Martha’s great-grandfather. Here is Philip’s first marriage in 1880:

Here, Philip’s birthplace is given as Blenheim:

 

Here is the 1871 Census for Blenheim, Ontario that pulls things together:

The enumerator got Johnston as Johnstone. Robert was 33. Ann was 22 and Rebecca was 24. Here Robert was listed as a cooper. Rebecca is an added bonus. She looks like she could be Ann’s sister. Based on this Census Ann would have been born 1849 and Rebecca 1847.

Ireland to Ontario

I note in my Frazer Web Page that there was a Philip Frazer family living in Plympton, Ontario in 1871.

From what I understand, Ireland was not a very good place to live during and around the Potato Famine. This Philip had a son born in Ontario around 1858, so that would put Philip Frazer and Jane in Ontario at least at that time. My guess is that the elder Philip above who was born about 1826 is the same as this Philip from my web page who I have born 14 January 1825:

That would mean that Philip’s [#10 above] second wife was probably Mary Taylor.

Putting the Philip Frazer Family Back Together Again

When I reassemble the Philip Frazer family, I get this:

I even have an explanation as to why Ann Frazer was not included in my web page. Here is a compilation of Frazer vital records that Michael from the Frazer DNA project put together:

There are no Frazer Vital Records at Kilmactranny between 1831 and 1841. For some reason, the records are missing at Kilmactranny for that period. A local genealogist, Arthur coined this period, the Maxwell Discontinuity. Maxwell was the parish priest for Kilmactranny. One could say that this period constituted the peak years for Ireland before people left due to the Potato Famine.

I’ll back this Frazer Line out another generation:

[Edit: Note I did not consider that the Philip who married Jane may have been the first son of James and Violet Frazer. This may be a more likely scenario.]

All we need to do next is to see if there are descendants of Philip W, Alfred, Mary, Emily and George and see if they would take a DNA test.

This appears to be Philip W and his mother Jane Frazer in the 1861 Census for East Oxford, Oxford County, Ontario:

I have not located the father Philip in this Census. Jane could have been living with her parents in 1861.

Here is a map of Oxford County:

I mentioned above that Philip Johnston was born in Blenheim.

More on the Johnston Family and the Archibald Frazer/Stinson Line

I found this marriage for Robert Johnston:

I assume that Ann Frazer died between the Census in 1871 and 1876. Here Robert marries Jane M Lindsay. This gets us back a generation on the Johnston line as it gives Robert’s parents as William and Mary Jane Johnston. I have a theory here based on my web page on the Frazers:

Here are Mary’s siblings:

This puts Mary in the Stinson line. If this is right, then Richard, Barry and Martha would be in the Philip Frazer and Archibald Frazer/Stinson Lines. This could also explain the DNA matches from Frazers in the Stinson Line. Here is a simple tree:

 

The Mary Jane Frazer above is from the Frazer/Stinson Line. Ann Frazer who married Robert is from the Philip Line based on my reckoning. I like this so much, I’ll add this to the big Archibald Frazer/Stinson Line:

Here Martha, Barry and Richard have joined John and Jamie in light blue on the Mary Frazer/William Johnston Line. John and Jamie are third cousins once removed to Martha, Richard and Barry by this tree. Jane is in the duller green and Michael is at the end of the salmon colored line. By this tree, Archibald Frazer and Ann Stinson had five children who had ancestors that had their DNA tested.

Here is my current thinking of who is in the major Frazer Lines:

I had previously thought that Martha, Richard and Barry would be just in the Philip Line. Now I see that they are in the Philip and Archibald Lines. The names in red are in all three lines. Note that I have no one that is just from the Philip or Richard Lines. I do have several that are just from the Archibald Frazer who married Ann Stinson Line.

This represents a shift in my thinking concerning Martha, Richard and Barry. I was so concerned about the effect of Johnston DNA between their line and the Frazer/Stinson Line and I missed the fact that they were related to the Frazer/Stinson Line on the Frazer side.

Some More Genealogy

Here is Robert Johnston’s death record:

Based on this record, he would have been born around 1828.

Checking the Philip Line and Archibald/Stinson Lines by DNA Matches

First, the Archibald/Stinson DNA

But before that, I will look at the common ancestors of Mary Frazer and William Johnston:

Here Martha matches John and Jamie a little better than Richard and Barry.

There is something interesting about this tree – assuming that is correct, of course.

• If John or Jamie match Martha, Richard or Barry by DNA, the match will be from either one of the two common ancestors: Mary Frazer or William Johnston.
• The next part has a twist to it. If Martha matches Richard or Barry by DNA, that match will represent either Robert Johnston or Ann Frazer. However, the part that matches Robert Johnston may also have Frazer DNA from Robert mother’s Mary Frazer.

The Archibald Frazer/Stinson Matrix

In this Matrix, I have separated DNA tested descendants into the five children of Archibald Frazer and Ann Stinson. Looking at the Mary Line, they will match the Ann Frazer Line either on that Line or in the Philip Line (not shown). This is because the Ann Frazer Line also descends from Philip. As far as I know, the Mary Line will match the John, Archibald and Alexander Lines on only those lines. If there is triangulation between the Mary Line and two of the other Lines, then that should represent DNA from either Archibald Frazer or Ann Stinson.

Looking for Frazer Triangulation Groups (TGs)

In looking for this TGs, I find it is best to spread the net widely. For example, if I limit the group I am looking at to just the Archibald Frazer/Stinson Line, I will miss those that are not in that group. The downside to this is that it is more work. I need to compare everyone in the Arcibald Frazer Line DNA project to everyone else.

TG Chromosome 1

Here is Martha in part of a large TG at Chromosome 1:

These matches are from position 233M to 237M on Chromosome 1. I had already shown a TG in this area:

I had assumed that this TG was in the Richard Frazer Branch. Assuming Martha’s TG is on the Frazer Line, then this would go back to Richard’s father Archibald. This is one way of portraying Martha’s TG:

Here I don’t show it, but Martha, Jane, and Michael are also in the Archibald Frazer/Ann Stinson Line on the right. In the Richard Frazer TG, we also had Emily, Gladys and Bill. Those matches dropped out about 231M. So it would be more accurate to say that TG01D in the table above should go from 203 to 231. This represents Richard Frazer DNA. Then TG01E should be from 233 to 237M and represent DNA from Archiabald Frazer born 1747 or his wife Mary Lilley.

I haven’t been maintaining this chart, but here is one update:

The reason I have TG01E going all the way up to Achibald who was born around 1747 is because:

• I don’t have Michael and Jane in the Philip Line
• I don’t have Heidi, Jon, Lori and Paul in the Frazer/Stinson Line
• I don’t have Martha in the Richard Line which is where I had TG01D
• That means the common ancestor must be Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilley

Martha’s TG Chromosome 9

This one appears a bit simpler:

In this TG, Doug and Rita match each other as nephew and Aunt. Also Martha matches Doug and Rita. This is the basic definition of a Triangulation Group.

This identifies this portion of DNA on Chromosome 9 for Martha, Rita and Doug as being from either Archibald Frazer or Ann Stinson.

TG Chromosome 12

I probably have found this before. I bring it up because it is similar to the TG above at Chromosome 1 in that appears to go back to Archibald of 1747:

I’m not sure what other connection there could be. It would be interesting if Philip Frazer born 1758 married a Johnston. I’m not sure how long the Johnstons have been in County Roscommon. It would be interesting to check out that possibility. Note that the birth dates are different on this chart. I’m not sure which version is right. I sort of favor this earlier version for the three brothers near the top of the chart. Even if Philip did marry a Johnston (and I don’t have any genealogical evidence to support that), the connection would be at the same level at the top. It would just mean a double connection for those involved.

A Frazer/Stinson TG on Chromosome 13

All TGs are good, but this is an especially good one due to the relational distance between Martha, Jamie and Caz. Think of it as a triangle with a large stable base. This also brings in the one of the Australian Frazers in the plum color. This, of course, assumes that we have the genealogy right. There is a chicken and the egg aspect as the DNA supports the genealogy, but is also dependent on it.

Unravelling Chromosome 17

I had mentioned near the start of the Blog that Martha matched Richard and Barry on Chromosome 17:

Martha also matches Jamie, Michael, Lori and me on Chromosome 17. This is a rolling TG. People are dropping out and adding in. Jamie drops out at 61M. Joel and Lori are added in at 66M. That means that if I lowered thresholds at Gedmatch.com, I would see a match between Jamie and Joel and Lori.

Here I compared myself to Jamie, lowering the threshold to 5 cM and 300 SNPs and got only one match:

As I predicted this match had to exist, I would say this is a valid match. For example, I share 3587 cM with my mom. The chance of this match being a coincidence woud be less than 0.2%. Here is one interpretation of this TG:

Again, it seems to be a pattern of my family or Paul’s with two with Johnston ancestry and Michael. It seems like there could be another explanation to these TGs, but I can’t think of one. We don’t know the wives for Philip or Richard above, so if they both married Johnstons, that would make things interesting for the DNA matches.

Martha’s TG 18: Philip or Archibald/Stinson Line?

Here Martha matches Bill, Gladys, Ken, Susan and Doreen. Bill, Gladys, Ken, Susan and Doreen are in both the Archibald and Philip Lines. However, my guess is this is the Philip Line as Martha goes on to match Emily and Mel

Emily is from the Philip and Richard Lines and not the Archibald/Stinson Line. It is likely that the match Martha has with Emily is from the same route as her match with those in yellow above.

Another Difficult to Explain TG on Chromosome 18

I had mentioned this TG in my last Blog about Barry:

Here is that familiar combination. Perhaps Emily has some Johnston ancestry?

TG20: Running Out of Chromosomes

Here Martha, Gladys, Jamie and Bill are in a TG. Bill and Gladys match each other by a large amount that isn’t shown in the spreadsheet. It is important to notice people that are not in the TG. Those are Emily, Joel, Jonathan and Mel. These four likely match on the McMaster side.

We had a chance to match on the Frazer or McMaster side. If we had matched on the Frazer side, we would be in the TG. Because we did not, that shows that our Chromosome 20 DNA was likely from the Frazer side.

Here is the TG:

This is my best guess. These people are all from the Archibald Frazer/Stinson Tree. That means that the matches with me, Lori, Jonathan, Heidi, Mel and Emily could also be from the Philip Line. The better guess would be the McMaster Line as shown above. Usually it is one or the other line, but in this case, there are multiple Frazer Lines.

That concludes the TGs. There are many more single matches, but the TGs are more significant.

Summary and Conclusions

• After writing Blogs about Richard and Barry, I wrote one about Richard’s third cousin, Martha. I assumed that Richard and Barry were only in the Philip Frazer Line. After looking at Martha’s DNA results and genealogy, I realized that Richard, Barry, and Martha were also in the Archibald Frazer/Stinson Line.
• I looked at TGs which fell into two categories. In one, the TGs went to either the Philip or Archibald/Stinson Line. Some went back to an earlier Archibald Line.
• For the TGs that went back to the earlier Archibald Line, I couldn’t tell for sure if they were matching on another surname, or that they were actually going back to Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilley from the early 1700’s.
• I made a guess that there may have been earlier marriages between the Frazer and Johnston families. However, I didn’t check the records to see how long the Johnston’s had been in the County Roscommon, Ireland area.
• I also noted an X Chromosome match between Martha and Barry which would be worth following up on.
• I was able to get Barry, Richard and Martha’s family history further back on their Frazer and Johnston Lines.

I’ve been on the Newfoundland Gedmatch Facebook Page for a while. I have posted some of my Blogs there. But I have never used Matchmaker there. Matchmaker is a program written by Devon at the Newfoundland Gedmatch Facebook Page. I would like to figure out how to use it.

Matchmaker

Even though I have done a lot of complicated DNA analysis, I feel intimidated by Matchmaker. Like many things, I’m sure it is easy once you do it. I have read instructions in the past, but will need to find them again. Here is the Newfoundland Gedmatch Facebook Page:

On the left of the photo I see a menu. That seems to be a good place to look. Under Announcements, I see this post by Devon:

Now I am no longer floundering in the sea of the internet. I’m not a new member, but I will want to read about the Matchmaker.

Step 2 leads me to this form:

I administer many kits that would apply. However, at least three of those kits are for people who are not on Facebook. That means I’ll use my Facebook name. My Facebook name is my first name followed by my last. That is not difficult. The first kit I want to add is my wife’s 1/2 Great Aunt Esther. She has a boatload of matches as both her parents were from Newfoundland.

That was very easy. Once I did that, I got this response:

I will just add my mother-in-law, and her sister next. I won’t add my wife as she got all her DNA from her mom.

I Submitted My Forms, Now What?

Now there are three kits in the system. What is next?

I followed this Step 3 and got these instructions:

PLEASE NOTE: This tool will NOT work on Ipad, tablet, cellphone, Microsoft Edge or Internet Explorer. Therefore you need to use Chrome, Safari, Firefox etc.
After submitting your kit(s), you will need to navigate to this link:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11FSvtyRLpcfUz0FC7mo4RVrbiVUD5NZvlxxc1uoV2Dg/copy

Select “Make a copy” when the page loads.

This will open the matchmaker tool.

Instructions will be listed on the “Gedmatch Results” Page (the first tab at the bottom of the sheet).

They are as follows:
– Start by running “One-to-many Matches” on your kit within your gedmatch.com account.
– When the results load, click Ctrl A on your keyboard, then the whole page will select (turn blue). Then click Ctrl C. This copies it.
– Go back to the matchmaker tool, and click Ctrl V. That will paste it. Sometimes it will take a few minutes to load as they are large files.
– Go to the “Matches” Sheet on the bottom tab, and then your matches from the group should show.

This is like one of those games where you get one instruction and it leads you to one place. Then at the next place, you get more instructions. I followed the above link and the new instructions are to “Make a copy”. As that is the only possible option, that is not too difficult. My computer thought about this for a while.

Aah, more instructions after the Make a Copy step:

First there is a warning. OK. I suppose I should try this with Aunt Esther first. I ran the ‘One to many’ at Gedmatch and got 2,000 matches for Aunt Esther. I hope I don’t break the system. Ctrl A is choose all and Ctrl C is copy, so I did that.

Copying to Matchmaker 3

I copied my results as instructed.  This put all Esther’s matches into the spreadsheet but in red letters.

This is the tab at the bottom of the sheet. The next instructions want me to click on the Matches tab.

The Matches Tab – The Meat of the Matchmaker

Here is where the fun begins. Click the Matches Tab and it narrows Esther’s matches from 2,000 to the others that have posted at Matchmaker. Esther’s matches go down to Line 84 but they start on Line 4. That must be 81 matches. I wonder how many are in Matchmaker? I know there are three more than a few minutes ago. I’ll blur out the personal stuff, which is most everything on Esther’s list of matches:

My mother-in-law Joan and her sister Elaine are already in the system at the top of the list even though I haven’t run the program for them yet. Many of these Kit names and Facebook names are familiar to me, but it will be fun to follow up on the unfamiliar ones.

Next Steps to Matchmaker Success

The instructions say post a screen shot in Facebook. The shot I posted made it down to line 32. That means that I will need to post three screen shots. I do see a lot of people doing that at the Newfoundland Gedmatch Facebook Page. I did that in three screen shots. I looked at the last two tabs which included some suggestions for updating the results. Another suggestion said to bookmark your results. Instead of that I copied the page address for Aunt Esther and copied them on a contact spreadsheet I have. A further suggestion was to tag people on Facebook. That is a good idea for getting in touch with people that I haven’t been in touch with before. That would help if they have any family history information.

Adding Joan

Joan and Elaine are important as they narrow down Esther’s matches. Joan and Elaine match their half Aunt Esther only on her father’s Upshall side. Now that I know how to do this, it should be easy.

My first step was that Make a Copy step. I think I’ll close out Esther’s spreadsheet so I don’t get confused. I copied and pasted Joan’s ‘One to Many’ matches into the Matchmaker spreadsheet. Then I checked the match tab. Joan has 36 lines of matches or 33 matches. That makes sense. Joan is one generation more recent than Esther and matches her only on Esther’s paternal side. That narrows down Joan’s matches to Esther’s paternal – mostly. I say mostly because Esther’s parents were related to each other in some way. I know there were Dicks on either side of the equation for example.

Lastly, Elaine

Now that I am on my third Matchmaker entry, I am a pro. Elaine has 31 Newfoundland Gedmatch Matchmaker matches.

Summary and Conclusions

• Matchmaker is a great tool. I wish there were more groups like Newfoundland Gedmatch using tools like Matchmaker.
• With Matchmaker I could compare Esther’s matches with Joan and Elaine and somewhat phase her maternal and paternal sides.
• Matchmaker is an easy tool to use. It requires a little maintenance to catch new arrivals at Gedmatch, but this should be quickly done.
• Matchmaker is a good way to summarize people that are already in the system – those that likely see the importance of comparing DNA to family trees to find connections.

 

DNAPainter is a good tool for assigning ancestors to segments of your chromosomes. I’ll use DNAPainter to see how many ancestors I can find for my mother-in-law Joan’s chromosomes.

Here, I start with a blank slate for Joan. The blue is where her paternal ancestors will go and the pink is where her maternal ancestors will go. Joan has two X Chromosomes like all women.

Joan’s 1/2 Aunt Esther

Joan has a 1/2 Aunt. They share the common ancestor of Fred Upshall who was born in Harbour Buffet, Newfoundland in 1879:

The DNA that Joan and Esther share is DNA that they got from Fred Upshall:

So with one DNA match, Joan has painted 15% of her chromosomes.

A Paternal Match for Joan at Gedmatch

Gedmatch.com is a good place to find matches. Gedmatch has specific information on your matches that can be mapped or painted. Joan’s second match at Gedmatch is with Ken. However, the exact common ancestor is difficult to determine due to poor records in the area of Newfoundland where the Upshalls lived. Also there was some intermarrying between families. So I’ll look for one of Joan’s paternal matches so I can paint in on the blue side of Joan’s chromosomes.

Ronda is Joan’s 2nd cousin once removed. Ronda and Joan are also 3rd cousins once removed along the Ellis Line, but I’ll use this relationship. It looks like Joan and Ronda have one common ancestor, but like most people, they have two. James Ellis married Clarinda Gorrill. Ronda has her as Clarinda Gorrill Ellis. This confused AncestryDNA, so they didn’t show Clarinda as a common ancestor. I will, however, on DNAPainter:

Here is how Melissa and Joan match:

I’m not sure why Ronda and Joan had two Shared Ancestor Hints and Melissa and Joan only had one.

Melissa doesn’t bring a new color to the map, but does get Joan up to 19% painted.

A Third Color – On the Maternal Side

Joan has a lot of Dicks descendant relatives. The Dicks were also from Newfoundland along Joan’s Upshall grandfather’s line:

I mapped Barry because it was clear who Barry and Joan’s common ancestors were. However, we are not positive what Elizabeth’s last name was. I forgot to say that Barry was a maternal match and this is what DNAPainter does when that happens:

The match goes across the maternal and paternal side. Here I have fixed that problem:

In some places, Barry has supplied new DNA matches. In other places, they are in parts of areas already matched. Here is an expanded view of Chromosome 15:

Karen and Wallace – Upshall Relatives

I painted some of these on my wife’s Chromosomes. 

Jessie Kate was put in as a daughter of Henry Upshall and Catherine Dicks. I think that Wallace’s Line was better supported by a paper trail.

This brings Joan up to 21% painted, but is mostly on her maternal side.

Going Back in Time on the Ellis Line

Sarah adds some history to the Ellis Line:

Sarah’s match is easier to see by just showing the Joan’s paternal side:

This gets Joan’s paternal side up to 10% mapped.

More Ellis/Gorrill DNA: A Match with Mariann

Joan and Mariann are second cousins:

It helps drawing these out as I realize that Mariann’s father is Melissa’s grandfather. Mariann tested at FTDNA and Ancestry. I can show her FTDNA match with Joan:

One interesting thing is that Mariann and Joan have an X Chromosome match. This cannot be an Ellis match as the X Chromosome does not pass down from father to son. Some people ignore X Chromosome matches of less than 15 cM – especially between two women. This match is around 8 cM.

Now Joan is up to 24% painted. I also organized the key of ancestors into paternal and maternal.

Robert’s Ellis Ancestry

Robert and Joan also match on the Ellis side. Here is part of Robert’s tree from Gedmatch:

Robert descends from William Ellis and Hannah Totton in three ways. I think I’ll skip drawing that out. I note also that Robert also has Rayner ancestry.

Joan is a 4th cousin once removed on the Rayner Line. I said I wasn’t going to make an Ellis tree, but now I have to draw one of the three lines:

Oh my. Robert is a 4th cousin once removed on the Ellis Line. That means that Robert and Joan’s DNA matches have a 50/50 chance of being Ellis or Rayner. Isn’t that confusing.

My guess is that the Chromosome 4 match is Ellis and that the Chromosome 9 match is Rayner. It looks like Mariann and Robert should triangulate, that should mean that the Chromosome 4 match is Ellis. It would take more research to figure out the Chromosome 9 match.

Jane – A 1/2 Third Cousin

As I mentioned about Aunt Esther above, 1/2 relatives can come in handy when doing genetic genealogy. I went back and looked over information about Jane in a previous Blog I wrote about Ellis DNA and Genealogy. Here is how Jane and Joan look like at AncestryDNA:

However, both Joan and Jane descend from James Ellis. Here is the tree I drew:

Here Jane is actually a half 3rd cousin once removed to Joan. Jane descends from the Ramsay side and Joan descends from the MacArthur side. That means that any DNA that they share is from James Ellis born 1801.

Looking for Rayners and Daleys

So far, I have only found DNA on two out of four of Joan’s grandparents’ lines. I would like to find some Rayner and Daley ancestors. The Rayners were, like the Ellis’, from Prince Edward Island. The Daley’s were from Nova Scotia.

Jo-Ann and Joan: Many Common Ancestors

Jo-Ann is listed at AncestryDNA and MyHeritage. Her tree is better filled out at MyHeritage. Here is Jo-Ann’s paternal side starting with her four paternal great-grandparents:

I have circled the ancestors that are in common with Joan. I see that Jo-Ann also has an Agnes Ellis in her tree. She is probably the daughter of William Ellis and Hannah Tawton going back one more generation. That means that Joan and Jo-Ann share three sets of common ancestors in three different generations.

Here is a tree showing that Joan and Jo-Ann are third cousins:

Jo-Ann and Joan appear to also be 4th and 5th cousins. When I paint in Jo-Ann’s matches, this is the confusing picture I get:

It is confusing because on Chromosomes 2 and 4 Jo-Ann’s DNA overlaps with Sarah and Jane’s Ellis DNA. On Chromosome 6, Jo-Ann has a small overlap with Sarah. I take this to mean that on Chromosomes 2 and 4, this is Ellis DNA – even though the common ancestors are two generations away from the Hopgood match. There are segments on Chromosomes 2 and 16 that don’t match others. This could be Hopgood or Gorrill DNA. I’m not sure about Chromosome 6. I would have to compare this to other matches first.

Jo-Ann brings Joan’s chromosomes up to 25% painted.

One Last Match: Glenda

There are many avenues to follow for painting. However, some are easier than others. Glenda has her DNA at Family Tree DNA (FTDNA). I also wrote about her in my previous Blog on Joan’s DNA. Here are Glenda’s four maternal great-grandparents:

The two lines to watch are Ellis and Rayner. Here is the Ellis connection:

Like Jane, Glenda and Joan have one common ancestor: James Ellis.

Here is the Rayner connection:

Here Joan and Glenda are full third cousins once removed. They share both Commmon ancestors of John Rayner and Sarah Simmons. That means that theoretically, Joan and Glenda should share twice as much DNA on the Rayner Line compared to the Ellis Line. Here is what Glenda looks like mapped onto Joan’s map:

 

Here Glenda’s DNA which I have as Rayner/Simmons DNA is in red. I have only showed Joan’s paternal side for clarity. Here there is no overlap with Green or tan Ellis DNA. That means that it is not positive that this DNA is Ellis DNA. Perhaps this is mostly Rayner/Simmons DNA as I guessed.

Here are Joan’s 26% painted chromosomes:

• The yellow James Ellis of 1801 doesn’t show as it is behind other Ellis colors.
• I could have painted more Dicks DNA as I have a lot of information on that family.
• This represents only 3/4 of Joan’s matches as there are no Daley side matches. There are Daley side matches at AncestryDNA, but AncestryDNA does not supply enough information for mapping DNA.
• Joan has something mapped on every chromosome exept for #22. This is not unusual, as #22 is the shortest chromosome.

Summary and Conclusions

• This exercise turned out to be more difficult than I expected. Three out of four of Joan’s grandparents were from Islands: PEI or Newfoundland. A lot of intermarrying went on between families within those islands.
• I hope to find some Daley DNA eventually. One method is to ask a match from AncestryDNA to upload to gedmatch, FTDNA or MyHeritage.
• The theoretical information I gave on DNA is on average of everyone. Individual DNA hardly ever complies with the averages – especially as the relationships go beyond second cousins.
• Although I did find likely Rayner DNA, that has not been proven without a doubt
• DNA matches that could be from one set of ancestors or another have to wait for other matches that are only from one set of ancestors to see if they match up on the chromosomal segments.

I’ve had a few messages from Jack. He shows as a potential 2nd cousin match to my wife’s aunt Virginia. Here is Jack’s tree at Ancestry:

 

Here is Virginia’s tree:

Due to the dates, it could be that Jack’s great-grandfather George E Kerivan was the son of Virginia’s John Kerivan. If I expand Virginia’s tree, I get this:

That means that Jack and Virginia have the common ancestors of John Kerivan and Alice Rooney. That would make Virginia and Jack 2nd cousins, once removed. Here is a top down drawing of how Virginia and Jack are related:

When I run shared matches at AncestryDNA between Jack and Virginia, John and Gaby also show up.

More of Jack’s Relatives at AncestryDNA

I also see Donna and Dott at AncestryDNA. Here is Donna’s tree:

That would make Donna Jack’s mother or aunt.

Here is Dott’s tree:

 

How Does Sandra Fit In?

Sandra is a 2nd cousin once removed to my wife’s Aunt Lorraine (and her Aunt Virginia and her dad).

It turns out that Thomas was an older brother to George and Lillie. Thomas married Catherine Collins:

I had a message from Ancestry from Jack saying his mom is Donna. That means that the tree would look like this:

More Specific Information at Gedmatch.com

My wife’s family and Gaby have uploaded their DNA results to Gedmatch.com. John and Gaby have also. If Sandra, Jack, Dott and Donna uploaded their DNA to Gedmatch also, we would be able to see exactly where the Kerivan and Rooney DNA is coming from. We would be able to see on which chromosome they match.

Summary and Conclusions

• My wife’s family has great matches with Jack, Dott, Donna, and Sandra on the Kerivan/Rooney side.
• These matches are on the order of 2nd cousin. Second cousin is an important relationship as it defines a grandparent side.
• If Sandra, Dott, Donna and Jack were to upload their DNA results to gedmatch.com, we would be able to see exactly where the Kerivan and Rooney DNA is coming from. It is possible that there would be more Kerivan matches found also at Gedmatch.