GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266510217


From: Robert Tarín <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] King Tutankhamun's Y-DNA - Eureka!
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:23:37 -0600
References: <8CC7ECA92E89A62-3798-7262@webmail-d008.sysops.aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <8CC7ECA92E89A62-3798-7262@webmail-d008.sysops.aol.com>


The 393=9 results are explained in the published study as being nonrelated
to Tutankhamun. While I agree that the narration in the video did not always
match the results being displayed, I got the impression that the screens
displayed were indeed valid and not just Yfiler sample images. Here is what
the study relates about the Y-DNA:
*
Markers DYS393 and YGATA-
H4 showed identical allele constellations
(repeat motif located in the microsatellite allele reiterated 13 and 11
times, respectively) in Amenhotep III,
KV55, and Tutankhamun but different
allelotypes in the nonrelated CCG61065
sample from TT320 (9 and 9, respectively).
Syngeneic Y-chromosomalDNA
in the 3 former mummies indicates that
they share the same paternal lineage.*

Additionally, if you look at the CODIS markers for Tutankhamun which they
provide in the published study and run them in OmniPop, it indicates
similarity with Europeans.

Robert


On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:00 AM, <> wrote:

> > I'm going to have to wait for the TV show with captions to see how
> the segment is presented.
>
> ----------
> I would not trust the film editor to show accurate readings. This film
> clip shows an STR of 9 for DYS393 while talking about King Tut, when it
> in fact it was from a different mummy,
>
> "...they manage to isolate the first small piece of King Tut's DNA..."
>
>
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/news/tutankhamun-now-we-know-who-the-mummys-mummy-was-1901730.html
>
> Kathy J.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>


This thread: