![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.jmhartley.com\/HBlog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/2022-01-05-17_46_21-STR-Tree2-Excel.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nThat would make them 7th cousins if the genealogy is right. Hopefully, the BigY test will support the genealogy. So far, it the STR results between Lawrence and Michael make the genealogy seem off. However, when there is a discrepancy between SNPs from the BigY test and STRs, the SNPs are far more reliable.<\/p>\n
The New BigY700 Results<\/h2>\n
Michael did the BigY500 test, so the comparisons may not be exact, but let’s take a look. This morning, it was clear that FTDNA decided that Lawrence was now A11134. However, that could change. Here is Lawrence’s Block Tree as of today:<\/p>\n
Here Lawrence is just added in under A11134. This tree will likely change in some way – especially and at least in the area of Private Variants.<\/p>\n Lawrence has 6 Private Variants:<\/p>\n These are important as they can show either places where Lawrence may match with other BigY tester’s Private Variants and they can show how long Lawrence’s tree is from his closest tested common ancestor.<\/p>\n Lawrence’s Private Variants do not match up with Michael’s two Private Variants:<\/p>\n That means that Michael and Lawrence will not form an obvious new branch based on these Private Variants.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, Michael was not tested for 11503251:<\/p>\n Michael is missing 12197124:<\/p>\n Michael is missing 13636160:<\/p>\n Michael is missing 19708663:<\/p>\n Michael is missing 26634402:<\/p>\n Michael is missing 5742283:<\/p>\n That means that Michael was not tested for any of Lawrence’s Private Variants. That also means that we don’t know if Michael and Lawrence would form a new Hartley Branch based on any of Lawrence’s Private Variants.<\/p>\n Lawrence tested for 12695002 but was not positive for this Variant:<\/p>\n Lawrence tested for 20317042 but was not positive for this Variant either:<\/p>\n That means that, as far as the BigY testing goes for Private Variants, it seems as Michael and Lawrence are like ships passing in the night.<\/p>\n The following implications are based on the fact, further along in the Blog, that Lawrence and Michael are positive for A16717. The further implication from this is that Lawrence and Michael are related as shown in the genealogy chart near the beginning of this Blog:<\/p>\n In a previous Blog, I had compared Variants:<\/p>\n These Variants are Steve’s Private Variants, Michael’s Private Variants and my brother and my SNPs shared. I\u00a0 should have added John to the list. Part of my reasoning for having Lawrence test the BigY was to fill in the yellow areas of Michael’s test. I may do further filling in of this chart in a subsequent Blog.<\/p>\n It appears that Michael and Lawrence may share A16717. Let’s take a look. I noticed that in the list of non-matching variants, A16717 showed up with Lawrence’s matches except for with Michael. That means that Lawrence and Michael must share that SNP:<\/p>\n I checked and both Michael and Lawrence are positive for this SNP. This SNP was named by William Hartley in 2017 – probably when Michael first tested:<\/p>\n Today, FTDNA does not name these until there is a match, but back then they were named sometimes.<\/p>\n Here is my initial idea of how the new Hartley Branch should look:<\/p>\n A day after the Lawrence’s BigY results started coming out and the average number of Private Variants went up for the A11134 Hartley group from 2 to 3:<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nLawrence’s Private Variants<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nChecking Deeper Into Michael’s Private Variants<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nChecking Michael’s Two Private Variants on Lawrence’s Results<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nImplications of Lawrence’s Private Variants Vs Michael’s<\/h4>\n
\n
More Variants Compared<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nA16717<\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\nDay 2 of Lawrence’s BigY Results<\/h3>\n