GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266522358


From: Thomas Krahn <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some more Tut DNA STR values from the video
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:54:17 -0600
References: <14735.6683cc3c.38ac6578@aol.com> <SNT115-W45463D0E57A424FC088542CC480@phx.gbl> <SNT115-W400377CF1A910C32AFA705CC480@phx.gbl> <SNT115-W209B414EEFCD31E04B9B32CC470@phx.gbl> <4B7D8D72.5060401@familytreedna.com><e2f96c1b1002181117k3e9b76aeg48071405c4209b5a@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e2f96c1b1002181117k3e9b76aeg48071405c4209b5a@mail.gmail.com>


Well if Tut hasn't DYS393 = 9 then this may not be his trace.
As I understand it they were also talking about two different mummies in
the video clip that are just somehow related to Tut.
In the video the sample has definitely DYS393 = 9 which is even
confirmed with the ladder. If so, we can't rely on Y-GATA-H4 either.

There is definitely much speculation in this. Not enough reliable data.

Thomas

Robert Tarín wrote:
> Thomas and Astrid,
>
> Thank you for your time and efforts in analyzing this. What I must point out
> is that in the published study it has 393=13 for the Tutankhamun lineage.
> The value of 9 is stated to be from a nonrelated sample
>
> Robert.
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Thomas Krahn <>wrote:
>
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
> -------------------------------
> 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: