![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.jmhartley.com\/HBlog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/2021-01-07-08_29_36-Window.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nR-Y151390 and R-Y85652<\/h2>\n
I was only expecting one new Haplogroup for the Archibald Frazer Branch (shown as “Your branch” above. Previously, I was disapointed that Rodney’s previous test did not form a new branch for the James Frazer Line. Apparently Rick’s BigY test also gave FTDNA the confidence to create a James Frazer Branch shown in the bottom left portion of the Block Tree above.<\/p>\n
The James Line and the Archibald Lines were previoiusly under R-YP6489 which is now an umbrella group over the two new Frazer subgroups.<\/p>\n
R-Y85652<\/h3>\n
This Archibald Frazer Branch came out as predicted by the R1a – L664 FTDNA Project Administrator Martin. The Archibald Frazer Branch is the one below near the date 1804:<\/p>\n
I added the dates in black above from my previous Blog<\/a>. Apparently the manual review has not completed (or started?) yet. My understanding is that there is a mechanical\/automated review first before the manual review. Note that the Private Variants do not line up. Martin has Rick with 10 Private SNPs. The Block tree shows an average number of three private variants between Paul and Rick. Rick’s Private Variant List at FTDNA has gone down to nine pressently:<\/p>\n It’s a puzzle trying to find the difference between Martin’s list and FTDNA’s. Martin has the additional Private Variant numer of 11683336. If Rick had 13 private variants and three went to the new Archibald Frazer Line, then he should have 10 left.<\/p>\n Here is 11683336 at YBrowse:<\/p>\n This must be a new Private Variant as it has no name yeat at YBrowse. This Private Variant may have gone up to the umbrella group of YP6489. Here is Rick’s previous Block Tree:<\/p>\n The old YP6489 had five SNPs. The new group has six:<\/p>\n FT421618 is the new SNP in that group. That means that Rick’s BigY results ended up changing the umbrella Frazer group of YP6489 as well as creating two new groups (for Archibald and James Frazer) under that group.<\/p>\n The FT series is FTDNA’s newer SNPs. As seen by the fact that YBrowse is not yet aware of this SNP, this must be a brand new SNP. In order for this position to be a true Private Variant for Rick, it has to show as negative in Rodney, Jonathan and Paul. FTDNA probably looked at their results and saw that Rodney, Jonathan\u00a0 and Paul tested for this posisiton and it wasn’t clear that they didn’t test positive for this position.<\/p>\n Here is Rick’s results:<\/p>\n What this shows is that Rick is very positive for this SNP. 10 good reads is usually OK. He has many more than 10 good reads.<\/p>\n Here are Paul’s results:<\/p>\n There is a little arrow where the results should be, but there is nothing there. That is probably what is called a no-call.<\/p>\n Here are Jonathan’s results:<\/p>\n Jonathan has four good reads. Remember that for Rick to have this position as a Private Variant, the others have to be negative for this position. Jonathan didn’t have enough reads to give him this SNP on his own, but because Rick tested really well for it, then Rick and Jonathan must both have this SNP. That is how it got added to the Frazer Umbrella Haplogroup.<\/p>\n Finally, we look at Rodney:<\/p>\n Rodney has only one good read for this SNP, so Rick confirms this single read.<\/p>\n This is the new James Frazer Line Haplogroup that FTDNA is showing on their Block Tree, I am having trouble finding this SNP perhaps because it has not been on a tree before. When I search on YBrowse:<\/p>\n When I search for Y151390 at FTDN, BY151390 shows up which is a different SNP. Without knowing what position Y151390 is, I cannot do further analysis on it. I have one more place to look. Here is Jonathan’s non-Block Tree at FTDNA:<\/p>\n When I hover over the SNPs under R-Y151390:<\/p>\n The first is Positive and the second is presumed negative. However, I still don’t know what position that Y151390 is at. That means that I can’t figure out how FTDNA arrived at their decision.<\/p>\n A Google search for this SNP revealed that I had mentioned Y151390 in at least one of my old Blogs:<\/p>\n The answer appears to be at YFull. After clicking around a while at YFull, this appears to be the position of Y151390:<\/p>\n For some reason, this named SNP was perhaps never uploaded to YBrowse:<\/p>\n So it appears that FTDNA got the name of its SNP for the James Frazer Branch from YFull. I believe that the Y prefix is from YFull. Further it is unclear how my cousin Paul was listed under Y151390 at YFull and is now not in that group at FTDNA.<\/p>\n This is the other SNP in the new YDNA Tree for the James Frazer Line. I can’t find it right now listed as being tested for either Jonathan or Rick. That means that it must be still listed under the position number. As I don’t know what the position number was, I can’t find the test results for the position. An FT prefix refers to a new SNP by FTDNA. Here are the search results for Jonathan:<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n11683336<\/h4>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nMore on FT421618<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nWhere Does R-Y151390 Come From?<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nFT421607<\/h3>\n