GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266518908


From: Thomas Krahn <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some more Tut DNA STR values from the video
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:56:50 -0600
References: <14735.6683cc3c.38ac6578@aol.com>, ,<SNT115-W45463D0E57A424FC088542CC480@phx.gbl>,<SNT115-W400377CF1A910C32AFA705CC480@phx.gbl><SNT115-W209B414EEFCD31E04B9B32CC470@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <SNT115-W209B414EEFCD31E04B9B32CC470@phx.gbl>


Astrid and I have also spent an hour on interpreting the
electropherograms from the video yesterday.
Unfortunately it's not as easy as counting the gray bars (bins) from the
Genemapper software because the lab technicians have added additional
bins by themselves for some alleles that don't show up in the ladder.

Also there are actually (at least) two different scenes which show peaks
from entirely different persons.
At 1 minute and 18 seconds they show apparently a full set of (blue,
green, black, red) traces which is most likely a control sample from
haplogroup R. My best guess for the haplotype would be
DYS456 15
DYS389I 13? (additional bin)
DYS390 23? (additional bins)
DYS389II 30? (additional bins)
DYS458 16
DYS19 14
DYS385 11-14
DYS439 10
DYS438 12
DYS437 13 or 14 (additional bins)
Y-GATA-H4 11 (NIST nomenclature)
DYS393 13
DYS391 11
No warranty for any of the values!
This could possibly be the 007 control DNA that comes with the ABI
Yfiler kit. At least it looks similar.

The more interesting scene starts at 1:22 where a couple of black traces
are compared with each other. This could possibly be the real traces
from the mummies.
Due to a bug in the Genemapper software the bins are not displayed
correctly. Note that some of the peaks are far off from the bins. So the
only way to investigate this is to use the actual fragment sizes on the
bp scale. We have measured and calculated the peak positions with a
ruler on the monitor screen and then assigned the alleles based on
experimental data from runs on our own instruments. Of course the
instrument results vary and there is again no warranty that my guesswork
is correct. My call of the NED labeled markers may be something like:
DYS393 9
DYS439 11
DYS391 12
DYS635 23
DYS392 13 or 14 (resolution not good enough for a trinucleotide repeat)

In an earlier scene at 1:12 in the blue trace we can definitely read
allele 16 for the marker DYS458 and as discussed in the article itself
we know about Y-GATA-H4 being 11 in NIST nomenclature.
Yet another scene at 1:30 shows DYS389I in the blue trace which is most
likely allele 13
I'll leave it to the experts to predict a haplogroup for this profile.
Without the rare DYS393 allele 9 it matches multiple haplogroups. With
the DYS393 = 9 allele I have no matches in the FTDNA database.

Again this could still be a wrong sample and I could still have made
errors with my analysis. In any case I hope this helps.

Thomas


Steven Bird wrote:
> Several people at the E-M35 Project have spent a few hours poring over the video that was uploaded to the web from the Discovery Channel and we have an estimate of some of the other STR markers and their values. It would be very helpful if anyone on list who is used to working with YFiler could confirm our identifications:
>
>
>
>
>
> 389i=13
> 390=24 (the number is barely visible, but the peak agrees with the number) I have high confidence in this number.
> 389b= 16 or 17
> 393=13 (given in the paper)
> 439=11
> 392=11?
> H4=10 (using FtDNA nomenclature - given in paper)
> 458=16 (this one seems definite)
> DYS19=13 or 14 (more likely 13)
>
>
> Most of the peaks are actually quite clear and I imagine that anyone who looks at a lot of Yfiler outputs would be able to identify the actual peaks easily. The only questions appear because I don't always know exactly where the Yfiler bars start and stop for each locus.
>
>
>
> Thomas Krahn, are you out there?? :-)
>
>
>
> Here is the link to the video:
>
>
>
> http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/king-tut-unwrapped-king-tuts-paternal-line.html
>
>



This thread: