Category: Frazer

Posted on

Barry’s Irish Frazer DNA

I had a message from Richard that he had his brother Barry’s DNA tested. The last Blog I wrote on Richard was here.

A Summary of Richard’s Frazer Line and DNA

In summary, it seems clear from my earlier Blog, that Richard was related to the same Frazers that I was related to from the areas of South County Sligo and Northern County Roscommon. Based on guesses, family given names and DNA, I came up with this likely tree for Richard in green:

Here is a summary of Richard’s matches:

The Mystery of Michael

A second look at this list shows that Richard had a large match also with Michael who I don’t have as descending from the Philip Line. However, he could match on other lines. For example, we don’t know who the wives were of Philip and Richard Frazer born in the 1700’s. Just looking at Richard’s matches of Paul, Gladys and Michael, it would appear that Richard would come from the Richard Frazer Line (born about 1777). However, Richard did not have a known son named Philip.

Barry’s DNA Compared to His Brother Richard

Barry’s DNA results should even out his brother’s results. What that means is that Richard or Barry could have DNA matches that are on the high or low side. However, when taken together, their results should be indicative of the DNA that their Frazer side mother has. At Gedmatch, I have compared Richard’s and Barry’s matches using their ‘One to Many’ lists:

The purple results are from the line of George Frazer who was born about 1838. The yellow line is from George’s older brother Richard Frazer who was born in 1830. When I last wrote about Richard, I didn’t mention Emily. She is a new match. I have written about Gary, Brian and Karen in other Blogs. The McPartland connection is one that comes up a lot. This family has a Frazer ancestor. The main point in presenting the above chart was to show the differences in matches between Richard and Gary. For example, my sister Sharon does not show up as a match to Richard above the 7.0 cM threshold. However, Sharon matches Barry at 54.7 cM in his One to Many list.

Comparing Barry to Others in the Frazer DNA Project

I added in the McPartlands above. Richard matches that family but his brother doesn’t. That means that my purple and blue table above is wrong that shows Barry matching McPartlands.

A Surprise Off-Topic Discovery

Based on the chart above, I found something surprising. Marilee and Bob match. I wrote a Blog about Marilee here. She appears to descend from the John Line of Frazers. I have her as the only known descendant in the John Line. I actually did look at the match Marilee had with Bob in my previous Blog.

Here is Marilee’s line in pink. Assuming that I have the tree right, that could mean that the McPartlands descend from the John Frazer Line. Perhaps the Ann Frazer who married a McPartland was the daughter of Archibald Frazer and Jane White:

It is a theory based on the match between Marilee and Bob. Here is Bob’s tree with my previous guess that pulled three families together using triangulation.

 

Well, it looks like I had thought of this before. If this is right, then it means that I descend from the John Line as well as the Philip and Richard Lines of Frazers. One cannot have enough Frazers in their ancestry!

Back to Barry’s DNA

Sorry for the tangent. Here is Barry’s DNA grouped a little differently:

I had trouble grouping Michael and Jane. I should have put them in the Stinson Section. They also descend from Violet Frazer who was the husband of James Frazer and daughter of Richard Frazer. However the Chart above emphasizes James Frazer who was the son of Philip Frazer (if I have it right).

In general if I were to draw a box around all the people believed to be descended from Philip born about 1776, it seems like the matches would hold together.

It is a little difficult to see the distinction as Michael and Jane also have connections to the Richard Frazer Line as a mentioned above. Notice that the matches drop off for Jane when she gets to Richard and Barry, but they don’t drop off for Michael. That could mean that there is some ancestral connection that Michael has to Richard and Barry that Jane does not.

Barry and Jamie – A Johnston Connection?

I see that Barry and Jamie have a large match. I have that Jamie is in the Stinson Section. However, Jamie and John have no matches with the other Stinsons and a pretty good match with Richard and Barry. However, this match may be due to a Johnston connection. Both Barry and Jamie have Johnstons in their ancestry. Other connections are possible. Richard, Barry, Jamie and her brother John all have Johnston grandparents. Their Frazer ancestors go much further back.

Barry and DNA Triangulation Groups

If Barry has a match with two people by DNA and those two people also have a DNA match with each other, that is called a triangulation group. This is a strong DNA match that indicates a  common ancestor. I leave the triangulation step until the end as it takes a little bit of work. To triangulate, I need to compare the 28 people that are in the Archibald Frazer descendant group and compare them to each other.

Triangulation Group (TG) Chromosome 12

From my spreadsheet of matches, I see this group on Chromosome 12:

Here Barry matches Jamie and Paul. Paul also matches Jamie. That makes a TG. This means that this DNA on Chromosome 12 came down to these three people from one specific ancestor. Here are two possibilities for common ancestors:

Here at the top of the tree is Archibald Frazer born about 1720 and Mary Lilley.  If it wasn’t for the match with Paul, we might guess that Jamie and Barry were matching on a Johnston ancestor as they both have Johnston ancestors. Paul, however, has no known Johnston ancestors. That leaves the above possibility for the TG on Chromosome 12.

TG at Chromosome 17

I already described this TG in my Blog on Richard. However, now Barry has joined the TG. Also Jamie from the Stinson Line. I think that I found out about Jamie after I wrote the Blog on Richard.

These people could be represented with the same common ancestors as in TG 12 above.

This gets confusing, because Lori and I also descend from the Richard Frazer Line. In addition, Michael also descends from the Stinson Line. Also, note that Paul and Marilee have a small match. Perhaps these two would be in the TG if I lowered the DNA match thresholds.

Again, if this was just a match between Barrie and Jamie, I would suspect that it could be from a common Johnston ancestor. However, as Lori, Joel and Michael have no known Johnston ancestors, it appears more likely that this is a Frazer TG.

A New TG on Chromosome 18

Here is a new TG between Barry, Richard, Jamie and Emily.

Again, there seems to be something special about Jamie’s DNA or ancestry, that she has shown up in all three TGs.

I should note that Jamie has the same line as her brother John. That makes me think that Jamie got the Frazer DNA. I wrote a Blog about John here. I would like to write a Blog about his sister Jamie to look into some of the questions that were raised in this Blog.

Here is the match between Jamie and Barry:

Barry has no DNA match with Jamie’s brother John. Barry’s brother Richard has this match with Jamie:

 

Summary and Conclusions

  • I showed how two brothers could have different DNA matches.
  • I have put Barry and Richard in the Philip Line. This seems to be supported by the DNA, common first names, and the genealogy that we know of.
  • I looked at threeTriangulation Groups (TGs). All of these included Jamie from the Stinson Line. It may help to look more closely into Jamie’s family tree. Perhaps she has other connections to Frazers or to their collateral lines. Or perhaps Jamie has inherited more than the usual amount of Frazer DNA.
  • Given that we are not totally sure of the genealogy of many of these lines and that there was intermarriage of Frazers and perhaps other lines, the analysis of the DNA and genealogy is very complicated.
  • There is need for more analysis of the DNA matches (and the genealogy). I should look more closely into Jamie’s DNA.
Posted on

Uncle Mike’s Jame’s Line Frazer DNA

The results of Kathy’s Uncle Mike’s DNA came in. This resulted in some interest from those Frazers from the James Line Branch. Here is where Mike is on the James Line DNA testing chart:

I stuck Mike in with his sister Madeline to save space.

Uncle Mike and Visual Phasing

It appears that there are three siblings that have tested. This means that it would be possible to do visual phasing on these three. This is a way to tell what portions of their grandparents’ DNA has been passed down to Madeline, Mike and Charlotte. For example, about one-quarter of Minnie Frazer’s DNA has been passed down to these three siblings in different ways. Put another way, about half of Mike’s maternal DNA would be from Minnie born in 1865. I give an example of Visual Phasing later in this Blog.

Uncle Mike and the Line of Archibald Frazer born 1792

Here is a closer up view of Mike in the left branch of the James Line:

Here, Mike is a third cousin to Rodney, Betty, Janet, Joanna, and Jonathan. He is third cousin, once removed to most others in red above. This shows three DNA-tested branches: William, Edward and Thomas. Ancestry shows these branches as Circles:

I got the above figure from Joanna’s AncestryDNA results. The Walter group includes Joanna and family. They descend from Thomas. Uncle Mike is in the Frazer Emmet Group from Edward. The C.W Family is on the left descending from William. However, Ancestry does not have all the tested descendants.

The William, Edward and Thomas Frazer Branches at Gedmatch

Here is what the three Frazer Branches look like when the DNA of the tested descendants is compared at Gedmatch:

Mike matches everyone except for Penny. He also matches Joanna, but below the normal cutoff of 7 cM. Note that Penny doesn’t match anyone in the Edward Wynn Line, but her sister Toni does. This points out the importance of sibling testing.

Further Out in the James Line

If we have the genealogy right, Mike is a 4th cousin to Prudence and a 5th cousin to those in the Michael Frazer (born 1764) Branch.

Mike’s Interesting X DNA Match

This is how Mike matches Clyde at #3 and others of his close family on the X Chromosome. The interesting part is that this would have to be the DNA from the wife of Archibald born in 1792:

 

We can know this because the X Chromosome never travels from father to son. Going up from Clyde, we see females up to William. Going up from Mike, we see females up to Edward. William and Edward got no X Chromosome from their father, so that means that this match is from the their mother. This means that they had the same mother who would have been the wife of Archibald. There is a small chance that this X Match could be along another common line between Clyde and Mike. But I don’t think that is likely.

More on Visual Phasing

This Blog was sort of short, so why not try a little visual phasing? Here are some of Mike’s DNA matches (other than with his siblings or nieces):

It looks like a lot is going on at Chromosome 5. Mike matches Bonnie at 31.3 cM. By my chart above, Mike and Bonnie should be 5th cousins. Unless they match on another line, this would be DNA going all the way back to James Frazer born about 1720.

Visual Phasing of Chromosome 5 for Mike and His Two Siblings

Stephen Fox has an excellent spreadsheet that does a lot of the hard work in the visual phasing. I found his spreadsheet at The Visual Phasing Working Group on Facebook. It took a while to download the different matches but it is better than doing it by hand.

Here is Chromosome 5:

The first bar is Mike and Madeline Compared. The second is Mike and Charlotte. The third bar is Madeline compared to Charlotte. Next, I try to line up the crossovers:

Unfortunately, they are not lining up easily. Perhaps the X Chromosome would be easier

Chromosome 23

Here, I still have some problems. I only had crossovers for Mike and Charlotte. I didn’t see any obvious crossovers for Madeline. The first two bars are comparisons between Mike and Madeline and Mike and Charlotte. There are no solid blue sections because Mike gets no X Chromosome from his dad. Madeline and Charlotte in the last comparison have a solid green section as they both got an X from their dad. The green means that they have the same DNA from two grandparents – a maternal and paternal grandparent.

When I map out the Madeline and Charlotte’s green areas, I get this:

 

The green area is a Fully Identical Region or FIR. That means that the yellow and green grandparents sent down their DNA to the same places on Charlotte’s and Madeline’s X Chromosome. My simple view of the crossovers was that Madeline had no crossovers, so that means that she would be missing the DNA from one of her grandparents. The missing grandparent would have to be on her mother’s mother’s side. That is because she is already missing her paternal grandfather on the X. That is because he sent no DNA to Madeline’s father (or to Charlotte’s father). We know that Madeline and Charlotte match Clyde. That would be a Frazer match. The Frazer match maps to Madeline’s mother’s mother who was Minnie Frazer.

This is the view of the right side of Mike, Madeline and Charlotte’s X Chromosome. The bottom three blue bars represent where Clyde matches Mike, Madeline and Charlotte. Note that Charlotte has a shorter match with Clyde. That means that Charlotte’s crossover at the right side of the match is where her DNA goes from Frazer to Emmet. At this point we need to make a decision as to whether we want Frazer to be G1 or G4.

Here, by putting a G3 on Charlotte’s bottom part of her X Chromosome, I made that the maternal side. That means that G4 is Frazer and Emmet is G3. That also means that the bottom part of the X is set as the maternal side of the Chromosome. That then means that G1 is paternal.

The blue is the paternal grandmother who is Cronin. I must have made a mistake, because Mike should only have one side of his maternal Chromosome. Here is a probable map:

Mike only has a maternal side to his X Chromosome. That means that wherever he has a crossover, that means that the DNA he got goes either from Emmet to Frazer or Frazer to Emmet. This map assumes that I have the right crossovers. More matches with cousins could confirm or alter the map. I have some areas on the right and left of Charlotte’s map not filled in.

Note that Mike does not match Madeline, but does match Charlotte in the first section. As I have Mike with Emmet there, that means that Madeline has Frazer in that segment and Charlotte must have Emmet. Here is a filled-in map:

To do this right, I should have put numbers in for the locations of the crossovers.

Any Problems?

Yes, there are problems. Here is an X match with 5th cousin Bonnie:

Note that Bonnie matches Madeline on the middle bar but not Mike or Charlotte. It makes sense that she doesn’t match Mike as Mike has Emmet (purple) in that segment. This could be a false positive match for Madeline, or Charlotte could have a match there that did not show.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Mike’s testing brings interesting mapping possibilities with his two sisters. The mapping of these four grandparents goes back to about the 1860’s.
  • Mike’s DNA testing adds an important piece to the Archibald Frazer (born 1792) Line.
  • Mike also has interesting matches with James Line relatives that are further out.
  • Mike has an interesting X Chromosome match with Clyde that appears to represent DNA from the wife of Archibald Frazer born 1792. It is possible that other X Chromosome matches in common with Clyde and Mike could reveal other common ancestors that would lead to confirmation or clues to the identity of the wife of Archibald Frazer.

 

 

Posted on

Elizabeth’s DNA from the Australian Line of Frazers

I recently had an email from my Austrian cousin Ros. Her 2nd cousin Elizabeth had taken a DNA test. Here is how Elizabeth fits in with the Australian group of Frazers:

I wrote a Blog about Don here. While looking at Elizabeth’s DNA matches, I noticed that Jean had a sister Kathy that had tested, so I added her to the tree. This brings us back to 1827. Here is one generation earlier:

That brings us back to 1802 and adds in Cathy and Jane. John Parker Frazer and Honora White were the ancestors of the Australian Frazer Line in purple above. Elizabeth is related to Vivien as a 1st cousin once removed. She is a 2nd cousin to Ros, Jean and Kathy and a 3rd cousin to Don. Elizabeth is a 3rd cousin once removed to her non-Australian cousins Cathy and Jane.

The Archibald/Stinson Line

Going back one more generation gets us the Archibald/Stinson Line:

Unfortunately, even at this level, I am not on the tree. My Frazers descended from two of the siblings of the Archibald that married a Stinson at the top of the tree. I suppose that would make me a double 6th cousin to Elizabeth.

Elizabeth’s Australian DNA

To simplify things, I’ll compare Elizabeth to Don, Vivien and Ros. I’ll skip Jean and Kathy because Vivien’s children got all their maternal DNA from Vivien. So Vivien’s children could not match Elizabeth any more than Vivien does.

When I compare Elizabeth to Vivien and Ros, there will roughly half a chance that some of the DNA will be from the Boots family. However, when Don matches Elizabeth, that DNA would have to be from either John Parker Frazer or Honora White.

Here is an example from Chromosome 1:

Here Elizabeth matches Don and Vivien in green in the same area. This represents DNA from John Frazer or Honora White. This match stops at about position 4M. Then Elizabeth matches Ros. One likely possibility is that the yellow match between Ros and Elizabeth above is from the Boots side.

Here is a summary of Elizabeth’s Australian Frazer DNA matches:

Here are some DNA match ranges for Elizabeth compared to Vivien, Ros and Don:

Elizabeth and Vivien share 455.9 cM which is about average for a 1st cousin once removed. Ros and Elizabeth are also about average for 2nd cousins. However, Elizabeth and Don are below average for third cousins. As, I mentioned above,  the DNA ranges start to vary more the further out the relationship is.

Elizabeth’s DNA One Step Beyond Australia

 

Here I added Cathy and Jane who don’t have Australian ancestors. I wrote a Blog about Cathy nearly three years ago, back in the early days of Frazer DNA Blogs. From what I can tell, Cathy is from North Carolina and Jane is from Colorado.

In the darker box, I have the Elizabeth’s Australian cousins. Elizabeth is a 3rd cousin once removed to Jane and Cathy. An average or typical amount of DNA shared for a 3rd cousin once removed is about 48 cM. As can be seen for the amounts of DNA shared with Elizabeth’s cousins, the amounts go down from right to left on the top row in the above chart. Any DNA that Elizabeth shares with Cathy and Jane would likely be from Archibald Frazer born in 1802 or his wife Catherine Parker.

Pushing Back Elizabeth’s DNA to the 1700’s

The next logical step is to look at the generation before Archibald Frazer and Catherine Parker.

This adds 11 people to the 6 we have already looked at. We are not sure when this Archibald was born, but a guess was put at 1778. This is sometimes referred to as the Stinson Line as Archibald married Ann Stinson. The light blue line on the left was put in by DNA as a likely guess. Elizabeth should be a 4th cousin once removed or 5th cousin to most of these new people.

Here is how Elizabeth matches by DNA to her more distant cousins:

Unfortunately, I didn’t list these cousins in the best order. Out of the 11 more distant cousins, Elizabeth has a DNA match with three: Michael, Ken and Susan. The chances that Elizabeth will match a 4th or 5th cousin get smaller.

Elizabeth and More Distant Frazer Cousin

The next step up for Jane goes to Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilly

This couple had four sons that had descendants with tested DNA. I am in the blue line descended from Philip and Marilee is in the pink line descended from John. The descendants of Richard are also in the Archibald/Stinson line, so they are accounted for. Here Elizabeth would be 5th cousin once removed or 6th cousins to her more distant Frazer cousins. Based on the Chances of Finding a Match Chart above, her chances of having a DNA match with these people are very small.

Here is the Philip Line:

Those in yellow are already in the Archibald/Stinson LIne. Richard in green was added due to a DNA match as a likely Philip descendant.

Here is how Elizabeth matches her more distant cousins:

Elizabeth only matches Emily and Paul. And she matches them at below the normal cutoff of 7 cM.

Elizabeth and the James Line: The Final Frontier

Here the James Line is shown in white boxes:

Elizabeth would be typically a 6th cousin once removed to a 7th cousin to these people. From the list above, Elizabeth matches two people: Mary and Janet in the 5 cM range.

Summary and Conclusions

Elizabeth’s DNA behaves in an expected manner. I traced her matches from her closest Australian cousins down to her most distant James Line Frazer cousins. At each step further out, those DNA match levels go down. Elizabeth’s DNA testing confirms the genealogy we have. It also reminded me of others that had tested that I had forgotten about.

A review of the testing of Frazer DNA over the past three years, shows how the project has grown and come together.

 

Posted on

A Third Frazer Big Y 500: Part 2

Last month, I took a first look at Rodney’s Big Y 500 results. At that time, I was looking for unnamed SNPs that Rodney and Jonathan shared on the James Line. I was unable to find any. It looks like FTDNA and YFull were unable to find any also. When I wrote my first Blog, Rodney’s results were not at YFull yet. YFull is a popular service for interpreting Big Y results. I’ll take a look at Rodney’s YFull Results in this Blog. Before I do that, here is where Rodney fits into the Frazer YDNA testing tree:

Paul, Rodney and Jonathan have taken the Big Y test and Rick has taken the YDNA STR test.

Rodney at YFull

Before Rodney’s results were in, this was the YTree:

Jonathan and Paul were the last two id’s. Here is the present YTree:

YTree Changes

I see two major changes to the YTree. One is that there is a new non-Frazer Branch. The second is that the Frazer branch common ancestor is refined from 475 ybp to 375 ybp. From what we can tell, at the tree above, Archibald was born around 1690. That is roughly 325 years ago. So 375 years ago by YDNA is pretty close. I was expecting a new SNP for the James Line of the Frazers. These SNPs form about every 144 years. Note that at 375 years ago, that should represent 2 or three new SNPs. From my work on the STR side of the YDNA testing, it has seemed like the STR differences have been primarily on the Archibald Branch of the Frazer tree and not on the James side. It seems like this must be true for the SNPs also. This would have to be verified by Big Y testing of someone else in the Archibald Line. The only other possibility is that there is indeed another SNP for the James Line, but the testing results were not clear enough to determine that.

A New Parallel SNP Line to the Frazers

Here is the new line of R-BY26344:

While I’m thinking of it, there is another interesting point. The YTree shows that YP6488 was formed 1100 years ago. [The date that the SNP was formed is earlier than the common ancestor dates listed above. For the formed dates, see the YTree above.] The two branches below YP6488 were formed 700 years ago. However, the Frazer branch of YP6489 consists of six total SNPs listed here:

From 1100 to 700 years ago is 400 years. SNPs are formed on average every 144 years but in 400 years somehow the Frazer seemed to get 6 SNPs. On the other hand, BY26344 has is only represented by two SNPs over 400 years. That could mean that the Frazer line had all it’s SNP mutations between 1100 and 700 years ago, so now they are just coasting, so to speak.

Who Does BY26344 Represent?

YFull uses ID’s, so it can be difficult to tell who these people are. In the past, I have been tracking the Grants as their YDNA STRs have had similarities to the Frazers. That appears to be the case. However, there is also a Stuart as well as a grant in the YP6488 Group.

Here Grant and Stuart are still listed as YP6488, so that means that FTDNA may be a bit behind YFull for Grant and Stuart.

This is interesting as it shows us that Grant and Frazer had a common ancestor about 1300 A.D. To me, this would be before the time that surnames were in common use. However, by 225-375 years ago, surnames should have been in common use. This should mean that the two SNPs at the bottom of the tree should represent Grant and Frazer respectively. This also has interesting parallels to my wife’s line. A surname that was related to hers was also found to be a common ancestor about 700 years ago.

As a reminder, here is a map showing how close the Frasers and Grants lived in 1587:

My assumption is that this is where the common ancestors of the Grants, Stuarts and Frazers lived around the year 1300. This is to the Southwest and West of Inverness. The Frazers had the Grants surrounded. Also the Grants and Frazers surrounded Loch Ness.

I also note that one of the YDNA Grants testers mentions Carron. If I have the right Carron, it is to the Northeast of Glasgow. The Frazers were believed to be from the area of Ayr. I have also added dates to the various areas that the Grants and Frazers may have lived these areas.

Note where I have Grant above, I should have also included Stuart.

Further Questions on the Grant/Stuart Line

Assuming that the two IDs at YFull on the YTree are indeed Stuart and Grant, that poses additional questions for those two lines:

  • A common ancestor of 225 years ago is within the surname era. That means that there was some mixing of the two surnames due to adoption or other event.
  • Stuart appears to have been in Virginia before 225 years ago and Grant in Carron before that time. If this is correct, then the 225 years for a common ancestors may not be right.

I point this out partly, because it shows some common issues that could arise in a surname project. Fortunately, the testing of the Frazers so far has not resutled in similar issues.

Big Y 500 STRs

YFull looks at STRs deduced from the Big Y test. Here is how Rodney matches Jonathan and Paul:

This shows that, by STRs, Rodney is much more closely related to Jonathan than Paul. I think that there is a way to convert the distance to years, but I can’t find it right now. However, it appears to show that Rodney is more than twice as closely related to Jonathan as Paul is. This makes sense based on the genealogical tree at the top of the Blog.

Rodney is Running Out of SNPs

Here are Rodney’s novel SNPs at YFull:

Note that Rodney has no best or acceptable quality Novel SNPs. Novel SNPs are the ones that don’t match others. That means that all of Rodney’s good SNPs are already matched up with Paul and Jonathan as they should be. This makes sense as the time between the birth of Rodney, Jonathan and their common ancestor of Thomas Henry Frazer is likely less than 144 years.

For comparison, here are Paul’s Novel SNPs:

Paul has 10 Best or Acceptable Quality novel or private SNPs. It is likely that one or more of these SNPs could become an Archibald Line SNP if another Archibald Line Frazer descendant tests for the Big Y.

Perhaps a better comparison would be with Jonathan’s novel SNPs:

Jonathan is really out of Novel SNPs. He has no novel SNPs of any kind of quality.

Summary and Conclusions

 

  • Rodney’s Big Y 500 test has refined the YTree and dates of common ancestors
  • Many new SNPs prior to about the year 1300 may account for no identified SNPs after that date for the James Line
  • Another Big Y tester on the Archibald Line may create a new SNP for that branch
  • Assuming that the new Branch of BY26344 was for Stuart and Grant, that raises questions about the origin of those lines and about the date of the common ancestor for those two surnames.
  • The common ancestors for the Frazer distant relatives of Stuart and Grant has been moved up from 800 years ago to 700 years ago.
  • The common ancestor for the three Frazer testers has also been moved up 100 years: from 475 to 375 years ago.
  • The STR testing confirms the relative DNA closeness of Rodney and Jonathan who are in the James Line. This is also confirmed by autosomal DNA test results.
Posted on

More on Emily’s Frazer DNA

In March, I wrote my first Blog about Emily. She is a 2nd cousin, once removed who tested her DNA at MyHeritage. Emily and her daughter Mel who are related to me on my Frazer Line have also uploaded their DNA results to Gedmatch. MyHeritage does not show X Chromosome results but Gedmatch does.

The X Chromosome

The X Chromosome is interesting as it is not inherited from father to son. As a result, when there is an X Chromosome match with someone, it is possible to narrow down where that DNA came from.

Here is how my sisters and I are related to Emily:

Note that cousin Paul got no X Chromosome on his father’s Frazer side. Also Joel, Jon and Jim got no Frazer X Chromosome. That Leaves Emily, Melanie, Heidi, Sharon and Lori.

McMaster DNA from the X Chromosome

A further interesting point is that if Heidi, Sharon, or Lori match Emily by the X Chromosome, then it would have to be from Margaret McMaster, born 1846. How do I know that? Emily got her X from Susan Fairbanks. Susan got hers from Violet Frazer. Violet Frazer got an X from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster. However, my sisters got their Frazer X from their dad. He got his only from his mother. Marion Frazer got her Frazer X DNA from her dad. James Frazer got his X DNA only from his mom Margaret McMaster. Therefore if Emily matches Heidi, Sharon, or Lori by X Chromosome, it has to be from Margaret McMaster.

Emily’s X Chromosome Matches with My Sisters

I will just be considering Emily as Melanie got half her DNA from her mother. Here is how Emily matches Lori, Sharon and Heidi on the X:

That means that Lori, Sharon and Heidi each have about 38 cM of DNA from their 2nd great grandmother.

Painting Lori

It is possible to paint or map Lori’s match using a great utility called DNAPainter:

While I’m at it, I’ll map Lori and Emily’s other non-X matches:

The blue side represents Lori’s paternal side and red is her maternal side. The greenis segments represent either George Frazer or Margaret McMaster. We can’t tell which right now. The blue indicates that we know that particular DNA is from Margaret McMaster.

Emily and My Brother Jim

I mentioned Emily and my brother JIm in my previous Blog. Even though Jim was the sixth of six siblings tested in my family, his DNA test showed he had some Frazer DNA that the other five siblings did not have. Jim’s unique Frazer segment is on Chromosome 5 as shown with his match with Emily below:

As shown in the lower left key, Jim’s matches with Emily represent DNA they both have from George Frazer and Margaret McMaster.

Going Back a Generation

Jim also matches Gladys. She is a third cousin once removed. Jim and Gladys’ common ancestors are James Frazer and Violet Frazer. From what I can figure out, these were first cousins that married each other.

This couple in yellow were the parents of George Frazer. What is interesting to note is that the match with Gladys and Jim overlaps the match with Emily and Jim on Chromosome 5. That would be considered triangulation. This indicates that this match is actually from older Frazer DNA. This also tells me that the blue DNA that Jim matched with Emily is actually Frazer and not McMaster DNA.

In theory, the DNA segments that are older should be smaller and more broken up and the DNA segments representing more recent ancestors should be larger. However, the DNA didn’t read that section on DNA theory. In practice, larger segments sometimes get passed down from many generations ago.

Next up: more painting or mapping of Lori and Jimmy’s DNA.

Posted on

A First Look at Rodney’s BigY500 Results – a Third Frazer BigY

I had some good news recently. Rodney’s BigY500 results were in ahead of schedule.

Rodney’s Genealogy

Here is Rodney with other Frazer that have had YDNA testing. Paul, Rodney and Jonathan have taken the BigY test and Rick has taken the STR test.

Frazer SNPs

Currently, the SNP that defines this whole Frazer line is R-YP6489. This is part of the R1a group. With the addition of Rodney to BigY testing, we should be able to get a new SNP that defines the James Line Branch and more specifically, the Thomas Henry Frazer Branch. This testing is bringing us into relatively modern times.

Paul Compared to Rodney and Jonathan

When I compare my cousin Paul to Rodney and Jonathan I see this:

Paul has these Non-Matching Variants compared to Rodney and Jonathan:

  • 7947875
  • 8162400
  • 16784516
  • 20957961
  • 21457649

These are likely Variants on Paul’s side (the Archibald Line) which are not on the James Line side of the Frazer tree. The problem with these Variants is that they will not be named as SNPs unless someone else tests positive for them. There are two ways that this could happen. One would be that Rick (from the Archibald Line) takes a BigY test. Or, tests could be requested for each of the variants above and Rick (or another Archibald direct line male descendant) could test for the individual SNPs once there is a test protocol.

Looking for the James Line Variant

Where is the Variant or Variants that will define the James Line? Here is what Rodney’s niece Kim sent me. This is how Rodney compares to Jonathan and Paul. The comparison is by non-matching variants which is a bit confusing. The non-match could be on Rodney’s side, Joanathan’s or Paul’s sides:

 

What I am looking for is where Rodney does not match Paul. I want these to not include the Variants that I have listed above representing the Archibald Line. That leaves:

  • ZS3186
  • 20102008

These would be potential candidates for the James Line

Here are Jonathan’s matches:

These appear to be unique to Jonathan:

  • BY26998
  • BY28746
  • BY28749
  • BY28761
  • F4038
  • ZS3186
  • 11718822
  • 11720223

I was hoping that these lists would match up better. Rodney’s results have been uploaded to YFull for analysis, but the analysis is not yet done. It could be that there is an issue on how these variants were reported. The only Variant in common is ZS3186. However, this is a named variant which would probably not be used for a new branch.

Further, Jonathan has this list of Unnamed Variants:

Here it seems we are dealing with a lot of double negatives. Jonathan’s results report Variant 11103209. As this is not on Jonathan’s list of Non-matching Variants, should I assume that Jonathan has this variant in common with Rodney and Paul? I’m confused.

Here is Paul’s list of unnamed variants:

This matches pretty well with my original list for Paul, but it does not include 20957961.

ZS3186

ZS3186 was shared by Rodney and Jonathan but not Paul. However, this is already named. The YBrowse website has this information:

This was found in 2014 but never added to a YTree. It is in the J1 Haplogroup. For this reason, this SNP may be not considered good. Or, it may be determined that the original sample was in error(?) Again, we need some help from FTDNA or YFull in figuring this one out.

Variant 20102008

I had listed this Variant above. Is this the defining James Line Variant? This is not on Paul’s list of unnamed variants. This is good as Paul is from the Archibald LIne. 20102008 is shown as a non-matching variant between Paul and Rodney, so that leads me to believe that Rodney has this variant. However, 20102008 is not a non-matching variant between Paul and Jonathan. This would lead me to believe that Jonathan does not have this variant.

Frazer Variant Summary

This left me a bit confused, so I found out Rodney’s Unnamed Variants. Here is a summary of the three tested Frazers:

Hopefully, I can explain the inconsistencies in blue. The first row is YP6489. All the Frazers have this SNP and it currently defines the project.

Variant 1103209

The second row shows that Jonathan has Variant 11103209. This is actually a double discrepancy. Rodney and Paul do not show this Variant listed on their results but neither do they show this as an non-matching variant with Jonathan. Here is what I believe happened. The results for Rodney and Paul were inconclusive. As a result, the first go at looking at this variant was not enough to list this variant for Rodney and Paul. However, due to the uncertainty, it could not be clearly said that this was a non-matching variant between Jonathan and Rodney and Jonathan and Paul. By looking at the raw test data, it may be better to come up with a better analysis. Right now, this does not look like a defining Variant for the James line if there is some question as to whether Paul has this Variant.

Variants 11718822 and 11720223

These Variants appear to be Jonathan’s private SNPs. Jonathan is positive for them, but Paul and Rodney are not. That means that these likely formed in Jonathan, his father or grandfather after the time of Rodney and Jonathan’s common ancestor Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836. Once YFull has done their analysis, they will give an estimated date of SNP formation and an estimated date of common ancestor. The SNP formation is always the older date. In this case, we know the date of the common ancestor: 1836.

More on Dating

While I’m on the subject of dating. Here is the present Frazer tree going back over 3,000 years:

Jonathan and Paul are at the bottom of this YFull YTree. Based on their BigY testing alone, it was estimated that the SNP YP6489 was formed 800 years ago and that Paul and Jonathan had a common ancestor 475 years ago. This is to illustrate that the SNP formation is before the common ancestor. Going up one step is YP6488. This was formed 1050 years ago. There was a common ancestor there 800 years ago. I assume that this date fits into the formation date of YP6489 800 years ago.

Paul’s Private Variants – The Archibald Line

Paul has four private variants. These formed in the Archibald line between the time of Archibald Frazer born around 1690. The Archibald Line needs another person to test to have some of these Variants named as defining SNPs for the Archibald Line.

Rodney’s Variants

Rodney’s first Variant 2012008 has a question mark under Jonathan. That means that there is some question on Jonathan’s read. However, the fact that Paul was negative for this Variant makes it looks like this could be the new defining Variant that gets named as the SNP for the James Line. Rodney’s second Variant is common to only him at this time. Like Jonathan, this variant formed in either Rodney, his father or grandfather.

This appears to be Rodney’s only Private Variant:

What’s Next?

Kim has uploaded Rodney’s BigY500 to YFull for further analysis. YFull will get this information onto their tree. They will give age estimations and produce 500 STRs from the results. FTDNA will also be doing further analysis on the results. In addition, the R1a administrators will take a look at the results. However, they will like be interested in seeing what FTDNA and YFull have to say.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Rodney’s results show that there are some clear SNPs that could be added to define the Archibald Line. However, as Paul is the only Archibald LIne BigY500 tested person right now, these SNPs will not be named.
  • The James Line results are not as clear. Interpretaion of the results are needed. It is likely that Variant 2012008 will be a new defining SNP for the James Line for the Frazer DNA Project. It appears that this SNP occured between James Frazer born about 1720 and Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836.
  • We need to wait and see if FTDNA and YFull come up with further analysis.
Posted on

Another Frazer Joins YDNA Testing

Joanna, who has had her brother tested for the BigY. informed me of a new YDNA match for the Frazer family. This is big news when a new Frazer match appears. The new match is Richard.

Some of Richard’s YDNA Matches

Here Richard shows up as the fifth match to my cousin Paul:

The new tester, Richard, has tested for 37 STRs. The first three on the list are known to be related to each other by genealogy. Those three and Paul all have ancestors from Northern County Roscommon by the early 1700’s.  Here is how they are related as best we can figure:

How Richard Shows Up on Jonathan’s List

Richard shows up as a Genetic Distance (GD) of 2 on Jonathan’s list. On Paul’s list, Richard has a GD of 4.

More YDNA Comparisons – YDNA TIP Report

On Jonathan’s match list, I ran the ‘TIP’ report. This is an estimation of how far away Richard and Jonathan’s common ancestor is:

This report makes it look like Jonathan and Richard are related in the not too distant past. The likelihood that Jonathan and Richard have a common ancestor in the last 5 generations is close to 90%. A 67 STR test would give better results as it is possible that Jonathan and Richard have more STR differences in the second tier of STRs. If these results are born out, there would be a good chance that Richard’s ancestors were from North County Roscommon Ireland.

TIP Report for Richard and Paul

If Richard is from the James Line of the Frazer Tree, then I would expect that Paul would be 6 generations to the common ancestor of James.

Looking at Richard’s STRs

One thing that jumped out at me was STR 447:

Those in green have a Frazer or Frasher ancestor. They also have a 447 STR of 24. All those above are Grant, Chisum, Hayes or Whittaker and have a STR value of 25 or higher. That could mean that among families that are closely related to the Frazers, the Frazers alone have a STR of 24 at this location. This gives me some confidence that Richard is related to our line of Frazers. The question then becomes whether his ancestors were in North County Roscommon or whether our common ancestor goes further back to Scotland.

STR 391

Another interesting STR is 391. Rick and Paul are both on the Archibald Line and have a STR value of 11:

Jonathan and Rodney are known to be on the James Line and have a STR value of 10.

This shows that the first Frazer known to be in North County Roscommon had a STR value of 10 at location 391. Somewhere on the Archibald Line on the left between the first Archibald and James born around 1804, the value of that STR changed from 10 to 11. This doesn’t prove that Richard is from the James Line as Grants, Chisum, Whittaker and Hayes also have a 391 value of 10,

Frasher and Frizelle

Jonathan also matches a Frizelle at 37 STRs at a GD of 1. Putting Jonathan and Frizelle into the TIP report also shows a probable close relationship. The Frizelle that Jonathan matches by YDNA has an ancestor of William Frizelle. I wonder if there is a connection between this William Frizelle and Richard’s William Frasher.

Further Options for Richard

Richard may want to upgrade to the 67 STR test. An autosomal DNA test would also be interesting to see if he matches anyone in the Frazer DNA Project. The autosomal test would be the less expensive option. If Richard is from the James Line, it is likely that the autosomal test would reveal that. If no matches with the Frazer DNA Project show up in the autosomal DNA test, then further YDNA testing may be of further use.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Richard’s recent YDNA test appears to show a pretty close relationship to Frazers from North Roscommon County, Ireland
  • Autosomal DNA testing, if taken, could reveal more matches to those already in the Frazer DNA Project for descendants of those Frazers from North Roscommon
  • Richard shares a STR that has been found to be unique to the Frazers up to this point
  • There is also a Frizelle who has found to be fairly closely related by YDNA to the North Roscommon Frazers, however his results have not been posted to my knowledge
  • It will be interesting to see what additional genealogy or DNA testing will reveal
Posted on

The John Line of the Frazers and Marilee’s DNA

This is a follow-up on a previous Blog I wrote on the John Line. At that time, I found Marilee as a Frazer match at MyHeritage. Marilee has kindly agreed to upload her DNA to Gedmatch where I can compare her results to others in the Frazer DNA Project.

The John Frazer Line

If I have my genealogy right, John was the eldest known son of Archibald Frazer. I have John born around 1755 or 1757. Some researchers have him born as late as 1775. However, that would cause a problem with John’s son who Marilee has as being born in 1779.

 

Marilee’s Line is on the left. She is the lone known DNA tested person in the line. I have that John had four children. One of them was Archibald who Marilee has as her second great grandfather. Archibald had another John who emigrated. This John would be a pivotal person in the research of the John Frazer Line. The previous research that I have done did not go down from John.

More on John Frazer, Immigrant

Here is what Marilee has to say:

I know my Frazer ancestor emigrated from Ireland in 1850 and settled first in Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada, and then Lockport, New York, which is in Niagara County, New York. 

As I don’t have information on this line, I created a Frazer Tree at Ancestry. Here is Marilee’s grandfather and great-grandfather in the 1870 Census living in Lockport, NY:

Here the name is listed as Fraser.

In 1860, John was a Hotel Keeper:

It looks like John managed a staff of six. It appears from the birth of the children, that the family moved to New York about 1850.

I also found this monument at Ancestry:

The 1855 New York Census shows that the family had been in Lockport for four years:

That means that they would not be in the 1850 US Census and may not be in the Canadian 1851 Census. If Marilee is right and this family emigrated to Ireland in 1850, they wouldn’t have had much time in Canada. However, If John and Sarah had John in 1849 in Canada, they could have emmigrated in 1848 or 1849. Then there is the question of where did John and Sarah marry? I did find one tree that had the couple marrying in Ireland which probably makes sense.

Marilee’s DNA

One of the hopes of DNA testing is that it might shore up our genealogical research or point us in new directions for research. Let’s look at Marilee’s DNA.

Mystery Match With Bob

One of the first things I noticed on Marilee’s match list was a match with Bob. He looked familiar. Here is the match they have:

By DNA, it would look like Bob and Marilee are 2nd cousins once removed. Bob’s great-grandmother was Jane or Jennie McPartland. I have written many blogs on the McPartlands. I’m not sure if they have included Bob. Here is a portion of Bob’s tree at Ancestry:

Here is how Bob is related to other McPartlands:

It is no mystery that Bob is a 2nd cousin to Charlene and 3rd cousin to Karen and Chris. The mystery is why he shows as a pretty close DNA match to Marilee. Perhaps Bob and Marilee are related on a non-Frazer Line? Perhaps the Ann above is a daughter of Marilee’s 2nd great-grandfather Archibald Frazer?

Marilee also matches with Karen here:

For Bob, Karen and Marilee to triangulate, Bon would have to match Karen on Chromosome 7 in th same area. He does:

The closest place that Karen and Bob match are at Owen McPartland and Ann Frazer. As far as I know, Marilee has no McPartland ancestors, so that would point to the Frazer side.

In addition Brian, who I believe is Chris’ brother matches Marilee on Chromosome 7:

Marilee and Bonnie

The next person I notice going down Marilee’s match list is Bonnie. Bonnie is in the James Line of the Frazer DNA Project.

On the Frazer Chart, Bonny and Marilee would be 6th cousins. Here is their DNA match:

This is another mystery. By DNA this connection could indicate a 3rd cousin or 3rd cousin once removed.

A More Rational DNA Approach

So far, I have checked a few random matches for Marilee. These seem to indicate that she matches a McPartland that marred a Frazer and someone on the James Line of the Frazers even though Marilee’s genealogy shows she is on the Archibald Line of the Frazers.

Here is how Marilee matches others on the Archibald Line of the Frazers:

Marilee is on the top row. She matches me and some of my siblings over 15 cM. This could be a Frazer match or possibly a McMaster match. Marilee matches Michael at over 15 cM. She also matches Jamie who has a Frazer/Johnston background.

Here is how Marilee matches Frazer descendants from the James Frazer Line:

As noted above, Marilee has a good match with Bonnie. I notice that there appears to be a Stewart on the Michael Line. Marilee mentioned the Stewart name. Marilee has a pretty good match with Beverly also but a bit more with Charlotte. I note that both Charlotte and Marilee have a Jane White in their ancestry. Apparently two different Jane Whites. Charlotte’s great-grandmother is Ismena Jane White. Marilee has her third great-grandmother as Jane White.

Marilee and Triangulation

If Marilee triangulates with two people that are in the Frazer DNA Project. That means that those three people should have a common ancestor.  Above, I showed that Marilee triangulates with at least two people in the McPartland Group. That means that they have a common ancestor. I checked to see if the two Triangulation Groups (TGs) that Marilee is in has already beenidentified by my previous research. It appears that these are new TGs.

Next, I’ll look at Marilee compared to all the Archibald Line DNA-tested descendants. As I looked through the results, I found one TG:

The TG involves Marilee, Bob, me and my two younger sisters. That means that we have a common ancestor. It would take some fancy guesswork to figure out who that common ancestor is.

I checked also on the James Line for TGs, but didn’t see any.

One Guess on the Marilee, McPartland, Frazer Connection

In a previous Blog, I had supposed that my connection to the McPartland Family could look like this:

Under this scenario, Bob would have been connected to my family – above represented by my sister Heidi. This seems a bit convoluted. However, my second great-grandmother was Margaret McMaster. Her mother was also a McMaster named Fanny. Her mom was Margaret Frazer. I had supposed that Margaret could have been the sister of the Ann Frazer that married Owen McPartland. I further supposed that this Frazer could have been born around 1780. I notice that Marilee’s second great-grandfather was Archibald Frazer born 1779 and married to Jane White.

 

Above is a possible scenario that could fit the DNA. The clrcles and the lines represent the TG with a possible set of common ancestors. What if my Margaret Frazer was the daughter of Marilee’s Archibald and the sister of the Ann Frazer who married Owen McPartland? That would be one way to tie the families together. That would make Marilee and Bob third cousins, once removed and me and Marilee third cousins three times removed.

Let’s see if that is even possible. Bob and Marilee shared almost 111 cM. Here is part of a chart of ranges of DNA for fourth cousins:

127 is the highest expected match for a fourth cousin. That means that Bob and Marilee would be near the top of that range. My two younger sisters and I matched Marilee at 16 or 17 cM. That is a little below average for a fourth cousin, two times removed. I would be a fourth cousin twice removed to Bob under that above scenario. My two sisters match Bob at about 8 or 9.5 cM.

Perhaps someone will come forward with a more obvious explanation.

Occupants of Derrycastle 1834

Here is the Tithe Applotment for 1834 in Derrycastle:

My guess is that Archy is Marilee’s ancestor. John could have been his brother. William could have been his other brother. George, Philip and James could have been the sons of Philip. I believe that James was my ancestor.

Here is a map of the area:

 

The Tithe Applotment mentions Archy of Shan which would be Shanvoley. Dereenargan is where the McPartlands lived later. There were also at least one Frazer and McMaster living in Dereenargan at the time of Griffith’s Valuation. I discussed this previously here.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Marilee had a surprising DNA match with Bob – a McPartland/Frazer descendant.
  • Given what we knew of the genealogy, the size of the DNA match did not make a lot of sense
  • Bob, Marilee, and three in my family triangulated which means that we have a common ancestor.
  • I looked at some of my past DNA analysis of the McPartland/Frazer connection and came up with a possible scenario to explain the triangulation. This explanation would have Bob, Marilee and me descending from Marilee’s 2nd great grandfather, Archibald Frazer, born 1779 who married Jane White.
  • This explanation is further supported by the proximity the families. However, the genealogical evidence appears to be lacking.
  • This theory may have other DNA evidence added to it in the future or more genealogical evidence may come to light to disprove my guess or to add weight to it.
  • If I am right in my guess, I would have found my third Frazer line which was missing and the McPartland Frazer Line which was missing.
Posted on

A New DNA Match in Marilee and a New Frazer Line

I was searching for Frazer matches at MyHeritage recently and came across Marilee. I thought it unlikely that she would be matching on the same Frazer line that I have going back to County Roscommon, Ireland. However, when I looked at her tree, I saw this:

Marilee shows that she descends from John Frazer of Roscommon. Not only does Marilee show that she is related to me, she shows that she is on a Frazer Line that has not been found to be DNA tested yet. That is great news.

Marilee and Frazer Genealogy

The John Frazer Line is shown here in some Frazer research that was done before I was born:

John is shown as the eldest son of Archibald at the top left of the image above. The Frazer DNA Project has people from the Philip, Richard and Archibald Lines, but Marilee is the first from the John Line. This is like finding a lost tribe.

Dating the Archibald Line of the Frazers

The above hand-written tree was done for a coat of arms for a Frazer that was issued in 1952. The birth dates were given for the four brothers as 1757, 1758, 1759 and 1760.  Originally I had followed this early research which had the first known Archibald, born in about 1690 having two sons. The first son was  Archibald who married Mary Lillie and the younger son was James . It was the Archibald who married Mary Lillie that was shown as having the four sons above. Other researchers felt that there needed to be another Archibald in the line for the dates to work out. I added that extra Archibald but never felt all that comfortable doing that. That change also required having later birth dates for the four sons. As a result, perhaps, Marilee’s tree shows John’s first son born when he was two years old!

The Elphin Census of 1749

The first good record I have of North Roscommon Frazers is in the Elphin Census. This is what it shows:

Let’s assume that this represents the situation for the Frazer family in Aghrafinegan, North Roscommon Ireland in 1749. We believe that Archibald had four sons. That means that he had at least four children. The Census shows that Archibald had three children under 14 and none over 14. That makes me believe that these children were on the young side of 14 and that there were children yet to be born .

The Added Archibald

That must be what lead to the researcher’s interpretation that there needed to be another Archibald:

Under this scenario, the Archibald that married Mary Lillie (or Lilly) was not the son of Archibald born around 1690, but his grandson. He was not only the eldest son, but th eldest child.

The One Archibald Scenario – My Preference

There could be many explanations for the Elphin Census. It is possible that none of the children in the Census were the four brothers. That would have to be case if the birth dates of 1757-1760 were right in the early research. Let’s assume under the one Archibald scenario, that Mary Lilly was the mother of all the children. Let’s also say that she may have had children over a time span of 20 years or so. I’ll guess she got married at the age 20 and had children until about the age of 40. I’ll give her 5 years to get married and have three children. That would put their marriage at 1744. I’ll say Archibald was born in 1720 and his brother was born around 1722. If Mary was 20 at the time of her marriage in 1744, then she could have had children until about 1764 or so. If Marilee’s tree is right, then John had a son in 1777. Let’s say John was 22 at the birth of Stuart. That would mean that John would have been born 1755. That is a lot of supposin’, but I would start the four sons’ birth dating at 1755. The other three sons’ births could be spread out between 1755 and 1764 or so.

Further Supposin’

Let’s look at Archibald and James’ parents. Let’s say that Mary was 22 when Archibald was born. I had Archibald born in 1720. That would put her birth at 1698. Then she would have been a 51 year old widow in 1749. Perhaps her husband was two years older than her and was born in 1696. I’ll say he died about 1745 at the age of 49.

John Line Added to the Frazer DNA Tree

This is my tree of the Archibald Branch of Frazers that have had their DNA tested:

Marilee’s eldest John Line is added on the left in pink.  I cut off some of the Archinbald/Stinson Line of the right. I also updated the birth dates for the top two rows. The addition of the John Line to the Frazer DNA Tree is a big deal as the John Line represents 25% of the DNA of these four brothers.

From this tree, Marilee is my 5th cousin once removed. From the configuration of the three, it looks like Marilee’s closest Frazer relative should be a 5th cousin.

I didn’t check Marilee’s genealogy. It wouldn’t hurt for someone to check to see if they come up with the same results she did.

I’m glad I got a new, larger screen on my computer. This is the overall Frazer Project:

This is actually a simplified view as the yellow and blue lines are much bigger. Also the yellow line should be in there three times and the blue line two times. The James line is in white on the right.

Marilee’s DNA

Marilee’s DNA test results are at MyHeritage, so I will only be able to compare her results with those results that I have uploaded to MyHeritage. Let’s see how Marilee compares. I’ll start:

I have a match with Marilee on Chromosome 7 and a small match on Chromosome 20. I can add those to DNA Painter, however, I will have to lower the threshold for the Chromosome 20 match as it is only 6.7 cM.

Here is the view on my DNA Painter Map. I circled the new segments from Marilee that represent Archibald Frazer and Mary Lilly.  Green represents my Hartley side. So on Chromsome 7 and 20, these matches are at important places. They represent where my DNA crossed over from my Frazer Grandmother to my Hartley grandfather.

On Chromosome 20, the brown represents my 2nd great grandparents George Frazer and Margaret McMaster.

Where my DNA goes from brown to mustard could be where my DNA crossover went from McMaster to Frazer. There are other possibilities.

Marilee’s DNA Compared to My Siblings

I didn’t see that Marilee had a match with my sister Heidi. Sharon has a match. Sharon’s match was similar to the match I have with Marilee, except it is a little smaller on Chromosome 7 and I didn’t see a match on Chromosome 20. I didn’t see a match between my brother Jonathan and Marilee. My sister Lori’s match with Marilee appears to be identical with mine.

While I was at it, I checked if my cousin Paul and my more distant cousin Gladys matched Marilee, but they did not. So that is it for the DNA comparison for now. The genealogy part was more interesting than the DNA in this case.

Summary and Conclusions

  • It was great to come upon Marilee through her DNA match. Finding a DNA match with someone from the John Line is like finding a lost tribe or city. I have been looking at the DNA for about three years and Marilee is the first DNA-tested John Frazer Lline descendant that I have found.
  • While looking at the John Line, I also streamlined the Archibald Line by taking out an extra Archibald that was added previously.
  • I see why the extra Archibald was added based on an interpretation of the Elphin Census of 1749. However, I see how that extra Archibald is not needed by another interpretation of the Elphin Census.
  • Marilee matches three out of five in my family. By the tree, we would be 5th cousins, once removed. That is pretty far out for a DNA  match.
  • I am hoping that Marilee will be able to get her DNA uploaded to Gedmatch.com. Then, I can take a look to see how she matches all the people in the Frazer DNA project.
Posted on

A New Frazer Tested for YDNA

People say that YDNA is complicated. It is not too complicated. YDNA gets passed on from father to son unchanged. Except it does change on average about once every 144 years or so. That reminds me of how to have a good lawn. Plant grass seed. Wait 100 years and you will have a good lawn.

Rodney Added to the Frazer YDNA Tree

 

There is some confusion on the Archibald line (left side)  as to whether there should be two Archibalds or one under the top Archibald. Some researchers added one to make the dates look better, but I am thinking of taking one back out. For example, an alternate tree has one Archibald but has Philip born 1758 instead of 1776.

Here is the alternate tree:

 

If nothing else, the symmetry is better on this one.

Rodney’s STRs

Rodney tested for 111 STRs. That is a good amount. Jonathan also tested for 111 STRs. Rick and Paul tested 67. STRs are Short Random Repeats. These are repeats of certain markers on the YDNA. They may increase or decrease every so many 100’s or 1,000’s of years. Some markers change faster than others. Over a large amount of time these markers could go up or down and we wouldn’t know it as we weren’t around 1,000 years ago to test them. However, this tree only goes back to about 1690 or so, so we shouldn’t have to worry about that.

Rodney’s Vs Jonathan on the Thomas Henry Line

Jonathan’s sister asked me about Rodney and Jonathan’s STR comparisons. Rodney and Jonathan had a perfect match at 67 STRs but a one difference at 111 STRs. That was because their only difference was between STR 68 and 111. The actual marker for this difference is at DYS552. Rodney has a value of 24 and Jonathan has a value of 25. That means that Jonathan has one more Short Random Repeat compared to Rodney. Out of all the STRs, that is the one that distinguishes Rodney’s Line from Jonathan’s line.

Which Line Changed: William or Edward Fitzgerald?

And does it matter? It would be nice to know who changed, because that would mean either 24 or 25 would be ancestral, meaning that Thomas Henry either had 24 or 25 for that marker and one of the lines changed. I did not have the 111 STR test done for my cousin Paul, but he has taken the BigY. When he had that test done, I uploaded his results to YFull and they extracted some of the STRs from the BigY test. Unfortunately, the extraction from the BigY test does not get good reads for all the STRs. Fortunately, Paul did get a result for DYS552. He had a result of 25.

That means that 25 is likely the ancestral value. 25 would also likely be the value for Archibald Frazer born around 1690.

This is the way I’ve heard STRs explained. Pretend at every conception along the male line through the ages, the YDNA is going through a copying machine. All the different STRs are being copied. Every three generations or so, one of the 111 STRs has a copying error and one more copy or one less copy is made. In Rodney’s case, one less copy must have been made of DYS552 in either Rodney, Rodney’s dad or his grandfather, William Frazer.

There is one implication concerning the mutation in Rodney’s line. When Paul is compared to Rodney and Jonathan, it looks like he is more distantly related to Rodney than Jonathan. These differences are called GDs or Genetic Distances. However, based on the tree, Paul is related no more closely or further away from either Rodney or Jonathan.

It’s Simple

That is why I said at the top that YDNA is easy. Rodney and Jonathan have a common ancestor of Thomas Henry Frazer born 1836. Jonathan and Rodney have a GD of 1. That means that change happened after Thomas Henry Frazer as he had only one value for each of his 111 STRs. Because we know Paul’s result for DYS552, we know Thomas Henry Frazer’s value at location DYS552. There is only one catch. It is possible for STRs to go up and down. What if DYS552 changed more than once since 1690? This would be highly unlikely. If DYS552 was a fast-moving STR or if there were several thousands of years to the common ancestor, this would be more likely, but that is not the case here.

The Bigger Picture

Using the same principles, I should be able to get some ancestral values for our common ancestor, Archibald Frazer. However, let’s start with a smaller part of the Archibald tree, like we did on the James Line.

Here is Rick and Paul on the Archibald Line of the Frazer YDNA tree. Where Rodney and Jonathan had 3 generations to have YDNA changes from their common ancestor, Paul has 4 generations and Rick has 5 generations from their common ancestor of James Frazer born about 1804.

Rick has taken the 67 STR test but not the BigY test. Paul has taken the 67 STR test and the BigY test. As a result, he has some results from the 111 STR test, but is missing many of the STR markers between 68 and 111. Here are the differences between Paul and Rick:

Getting the Ancestral STR Values

Now I want to know what values James had for his STRs for 444 and 576. These are the values that Rodney and Jonathan have going up to the orignal Frazer ancestor born around 1690.

That means that Rick’s STR of 444 went down one repeat from 14 to 13 and Paul’s  STR of 576 went up from 18 to 19.

Putting it Together

Now we know that Archibald , born about 1690 had 444 = 14, 576 = 18 (oops, typo above) and 552 = 25. However, there are two other differences from the Archibald Line and the James Line.  It will be easier to show this on a tree:

Now there is a tie, so how do we tell which values are ancestral? (That should be CDY above.) In order to figure out the ancestral values, we have to go outside the Frazer project and bring in some more distant relatives: Grant, Hayes, and Stewart. Fortunately, I have already done this in a previous Frazer YDNA Blog:

This shows the ancestral value to be 391 = 10 and CDY = 35-38. Now we have our five ancestral values for Archibald.

Here is the final Frazer STR Tree:

 

Observations:

  • If I drew this right, Jonathan has no mutations going back to Archibald, born about 1690.
  • Paul and Rick both have three mutations going back from the same Archibald.
  • There are more mutations on the Archibald Line than the James Line, but they average out.
  • Paul and Rick have a GD of 2. That represents differences in marker 444 and 576.
  • Paul has a GD of three compared to Rodney and Jonathan. This is based on markers 391, CDY and 444. 552 was not counted as Paul did not test at FTDNA for 552.
  • This tree contains some 67 STR results and some 111 STR resuilts.
  • Other direct male Frazer descendants that have YDNA STR tests should be able to tell what branch of the Frazer tree they are in based on this tree.
  • This gives an idea of how the mutations occur. There were two mutations that happened rather quickly between about 1690 and 1804 on the Archibald Line. So that was one every 57 years.  Rodney had one mutation. I’m not sure when he was born, but let’s say one mutation in 260 years. Let’s say Paul and Rick had a mutation about once per 87 years. An average between Paul or Rick and Rodney would be about one mutation in 173 years. This is comparing a bit of apples and oranges as some tested at 67 STRs and some tested at 111. I don’t know how to average Jonathan in as he has no known mutations.

 

Dating Using the McDonald TMRCA Calculator

Rodney and Jonathan

That should say generations at the bottom. Jonathan and Rodney have a common ancestor at three generations.  This calculator’s first choice for a GD of one at 111 markers is 2 generations away. Three generations would be the third choice.

Paul and Rick

This graph tops out at 5 generations. Paul and Rick are 4.5 generations away from a common ancestor, so that is close enough.

Paul Compared to Rodney (and Jonathan)

Paul and Rodney are 7 generations to a common ancestor. At least they are on the tree without the extra Archibald. This shows 8 as the first choice, but almost the same chance as being 7 generations away. Rick and Rodney should be at the same genetic distance (GD) and they show as 7.5 generations away from a common ancestor. These would also apply to the matches between Rick, Paul and Jonathan.

Summary and Conclusions

  • Rodney’s YDNA test has added some symmetry to the Frazer YDNA Tree
  • The YDNA test does not appear to be precise enough to tell us if the Archibald tree is correct or not. Either configuration would be reasonable based on the YDNA.
  • The Frazer STR tree sets down some results that places the four tested Frazer descendants in their different branches.
  • A Frazer that is unsure of his branch would be able to test his STRs and find out which branch he is in.