Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

King Tut's DNA

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    King Tut = Druze

    The ysearch entry says King Tut is one away from matching a Druze.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rainbow View Post
      The ysearch entry says King Tut is one away from matching a Druze.
      The study in question is: The Druze: A Population Genetic Refugium of the Near East, Liran I. Shlush et al, 2008. In this study, the Y-STR markers that have been sampled are: DYS19, DYS388, DYS389i, DYS389ii, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393, DYS426, DYS438, DYS439, and DYS457. Only nine of these are common to Tut's STR study, with a supposed GD of one, with respect to this Druze. Compared to this, ySearch offers a comparison of 10 markers with Tut and we have at least four individuals who have a GD of zero, which is of course much closer.

      The Druze case, however offers tantalising clues as to the possible origin of Tut's ancestors. The region encompassing present day Golan, Lebanon and Syria and the West Bank could be a good candidate.

      Comment


      • #18
        I looked at the wikipedia entry for Druze. I had thought it was an ethnic group native to Israel. Wikipedia says that they are a religious community of various origins. It says that they have feuding families and that one family was kicked out in 1711. Maybe the "unknown origin" matches are descended from that family?

        I was wondering.....the four people he matches perfectly....are they also old Egyptian mummies....or living people?

        It's amazing that R1b existed in far away Egypt thousands of years ago. And in a pharoah. And that the paternal line was probably from the ancient Lebanon-Syria-Palestine area. I had thought that the R1b that is there was from Crusaders or the French or other modern Western Europeans.

        The Druze in modern-day Syria and Lebanon speak French, and Hebrew in Israel, according to wikipedia.

        Comment


        • #19
          rainbow: The four matches on ySearch are all Europeans. A match on 10 markers is close but the ultimate would be a 67 marker test, which is of course out, as Tut has been tested for 16 markers only. So the present study gives a fair idea of the paternal lineage, which happens to match with R1b1b people. Now, besides West Europe, these are also found at around 10% in West Asia (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan) and could belong to any community: present day Druze, Muslims, Maronite Christians anyone, really. So reading too much into the Druze match could lead to silly conclusions (Pharaohs were Druze ). One needs a much more extensive study, which, I am sure, would follow soon. It is actually too early to base conclusions on this amateur sleuthing we folks are doing. As of now, it would be safe to say that it seems that the 18th Dynasty was of West Asian origin. The meagre detected presence of R1b1b in North Africa (< 0.7%) almost rules out the odds for an indigenous Tut....so far.

          One thing is sure. Pharaonic-Egyptian history is sure to unravel in surprising ways in this genetic age, a start of which we have seen in recent days.

          Comment


          • #20
            "The meagre detected presence of R1b1b in North Africa (< 0.7%) almost rules out the odds for an indigenous Tut....so far."

            Well, except for the "genetic drift" effect.

            Haplogroup statistics change randomly from one generation to another.
            Over a period of time, it can change to anything and this effect will kick out haplogroups until, one day, a population has only one haplogroup left.
            The number of generations, that are needed to turn a population into a single haplogroup, depends on the size of the population (so fewer individuals are in the population, so faster the process that eliminates all haplogroups but one)

            IN other words, Egypt COULD have had 50% R1b 3000 years ago and it vannished by "Genetic Drift".

            There are examples of how a population of 100 people, with 2 haplogroups (both 50% of the population) turns into a population were 1 haplogroup has 100% in only 5 generations.

            "Genetical drift" is an evil evil thing that turns all our ideas into crap. Because it makes it totaly impossible to estaminate how haplogroups have been for real in the past. Thats why each time a mummy is DNA tested, all existing theories become absolete.

            The extreme R1b presence on the british isles is explained with "Genetical drift". Means, the Isles had NOT been settled by a people of predominantly R1b, but genetical drift exterminated all other haplogroups.

            Same goes for mtDNA H in Europe.

            All voodoo crap, exept for real DNA testings of old populations.
            The only way to tell what haplogroups the old people really had.

            Comment


            • #21
              Well, maybe the data that was said to be aired on the screen wasn't actually of King Tut's dna, but of someone else, just for demo/prop purposes.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Kaiser View Post
                The latest Discovery Channel video grab shows the STR values of two samples labelled KV55 (Akhenaten, Tut's father) and AmIII (Amenhotep III, Tut's grandfather) as can be clearly seen on the screen (Time - 1':53")
                rainbow: Please note this above quote in one of my previous posts. The video of the DNA charts clearly shows the labels KV55 and AmIII.

                Daniel72: You brought up a very interesting point. I concede that todays' virtual non-existence of R1b1b2 in Egypt does not necessarily mean that the frequency distribution was the same 3,000 years ago. Perhaps DNA studies of the 600-odd mummies discovered to date might give us better clues.

                Comment


                • #23
                  KV55 &amp; AmIII

                  KV55 & AmIII

                  Noted

                  Sorry, I hadn't noticed that before. I must be not as sharp as I used to be.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I hasten to give credit for this amazing sleuthing to Robert Tarin, who cleverly picked up clues from the Discovery Channel video clip to determine the results of the 16-marker STR test.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      For me, the jury is still out on his haplogroup. I'm waiting for the official verdict.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I don't know why they just don't go ahead and tell us what his haplogroups were.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by twang View Post
                          I don't know why they just don't go ahead and tell us what his haplogroups were.
                          twang: Dr Hawass has been saying in the past that the 'Pharaohs are Egyptian'. Now if the R1b1b2 leak is true, it would imply a West Asian lineage (which is also majorly dispersed in Western Europe) of the 18th Dynasty and its most famous Pharaoh, Tut. This is sure to turn everything on its head. Hawass is perhaps buying time to be able to pull off a PR job based on fudging .... "actually, you know...." stuff. The truth has its way of unravelling, so its just a matter of time.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I watched the video for the mother's DNA on the discovery website. It was far easier to pause that video and collect information. I tried it with the one on his father, but the pauses were too blurry.

                            This is what I got for his mother.

                            d21511 d7s820 d2s1338 d21s11 d16s539 d18s51

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Tut's lineage would seem impossible to "cover up." No one could hold that secret for long and we know the results were confirmed by two different labs. Even if his Y-dna haplogroup is R1b, I don't know that that is earth shattering news anyway. People tend to project the issues, politics and biases of today back through history and incorrectly assume relevance that just didn't exist.

                              All of this is extremely interesting but I'd prefer an official legitimate announcement on the haplogroup before any of this is taken seriously. The paused screen shot analysis is fun speculation but it is still speculation.
                              Last edited by CWF; 23 February 2010, 12:28 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Hello All,

                                I recently got got my ancestry by DNA results and am awaiting the results from a second test from 23andMe, which I was led to believe is more accurate.

                                This thread caught my attention because of its title, and then I was really hooked when I realized the 16 Amenhotep/Akhenaton y-STR markers posted here are the same 16 on my test results. Here they are, side-by-side:

                                Hello All,

                                I recently got got my ancestry by DNA results and am awaiting the results from a second test from 23andMe, which I was led to believe is more accurate.

                                This thread caught my attention because of its title, and then I was really hooked when I realized the 16 Amenhotep/Akhenaton y-STR markers posted here are the same 16 on my test results. Here they are, side-by-side:

                                ……….....……TUT'S --------MINE
                                DYS 19 ----- 14 -------- 15
                                DYS 385a - 11 ---------- 14
                                DYS 385b - 14 ---------- 15
                                DYS 389i - 13 ---------- 12
                                DYS 389ii- 30 ---------- 29
                                DYS 390 -- 24 ---------- 23
                                DYS 391 -- 11 ---------- 10
                                DYS 392 -- 13 ---------- 11
                                DYS 393 -- 13 ---------- 13
                                DYS 437 -- 14 ---------- 17
                                DYS 438 -- 12 ---------- 10
                                DYS 439 -- 10 ---------- 12
                                DYS 448 -- 19 ---------- 19,20
                                DYS 456 -- 15 ---------- 14
                                DYS 458 -- 16 ---------- 14
                                DYS 635 -- 23 ---------- 21
                                YGATAH4 -- 11 ----------11

                                According to this my paternal haplogroup is I1 -- also European like Tut's R1b paternal lineage. There is just one big problem:

                                I am undeniably black.

                                Paternal DNA, alone, is not enough to determine ethnicity. The Akhenaton/Amenhotep samples, like mine, may show a European-concentrated paternal lineage but what is glaringly absent is the other half of our genetic makeup: Our mother's and paternal grandmother's (or paternal aunts') dna. Add those to the mix and the "what race/ethnicity are they?" question would be settled for good.

                                Curiously, mtDNA is omitted when it comes to Egyptian mummies, i.e. as shown here on wikipedia:
                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...es#mtDNA_tests

                                Because I know my lineage is mostly East African my Y-STR markers do not surprise me since "European" qualities have often been ascribed to the appearance of our group. But from our perspective, being from the older group, we don't have European features; Europeans have ours.
                                Last edited by EricSilver; 6 April 2010, 03:53 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X