Why Everyone from the Mormons to the Muslim Brotherhood is Desperate for a Piece of Tutankhamun
by Majestic on March 8, 2014 in News
THIRTY FEET BENEATH THE DESERT of southern Egypt, Yehia Gad stands in a cramped, stone tomb. On the wall, brightly-colored paintings tell the story of an ancient king’s journey into the afterlife. The precise strokes show a mummy embalmed with great care, a perilous battle for his soul, and an eternity spent riding high with the Sun.
Gad moves slowly, encased in a protective mask and gown, and a hat that hides his neat, grey hair. In front of him, on a wooden table, is the body that was buried here more than 3,000 years ago.
The stick-thin figure is little more than a silhouette, black as coal, with empty eye sockets and skin that’s cracked like parched earth. This is Tutankhamun, Egypt’s most famous pharaoh, a man whose people believed was a god on earth.
Gad puts on a pair of white gloves and picks up a biopsy needle.
It is February 2008. President Mubarak reigns over Egypt these days, and the nation’s antiquities service is led by a forceful, charismatic archaeologist called Zahi Hawass.
Gad isn’t the first to attempt to test Tutankhamun’s DNA, but he is the first to get this far. Previous efforts by foreigners were cancelled at the last minute. After decades of outside interference, Egypt’s politicians were reluctant to hand over the keys to the pharaohs’ origins—especially when the results, if dropped into the crucible of the Middle East, might prove explosive.
Now American television, with its lavish budgets, has bought its way to the king. The Discovery Channel has paid millions of dollars to film a pioneering study of Tutankhamun’s genetic heritage, this time carried out by the Egyptians themselves. If successful, the project could fill state coffers, achieve a scientific coup and reclaim dented national pride. Yet the goal is so ambitious that many of the world’s top researchers insist it isn’t even possible.
posted
The autosomal genetic profile of the Ancient Egyptians mummies (top) are more prevalent in the modern genetic geographical regions at the bottom
posted
LOL! This isn't the first DNA test done on Tut or Egyptian mummies. So I guess this time they believe they will get the results they want? Just like they kept doing reconstructions of his face until they got the one they liked, because apparently his face mask wasn't good enough. Which should tell you that only a moron thinks these folks would publish anything showing the native dynasties had primarily African DNA from the South of Egypt.
quote: In 2010, researchers analyzed DNA from the ancient Egyptian boy-king Tutankhamen and 10 of his relatives (JAMA, 303:638-47). It was a blockbuster study. Revealing family relationships among the 3,300-year-old royals and identifying the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum in several of the corpses, the research grabbed headlines and was even the subject of a 3-part documentary aired by the Discovery Channel, which partly funded the project.
But the work drew criticism from some ancient-DNA experts, who claimed that the results could be explained by contamination from modern humans. The ensuing row deepened a long-standing rift among researchers who aim to coax genetic secrets from the mummified denizens of bygone civilizations. "For sure it is a highly debated field," says Carsten Pusch of the University of Tübingen in Germany, who was part of the team that analyzed King Tut’s DNA. "The tone of the arguments is sometimes a little bit strong."
On one side are "believers," who claim to have analyzed DNA from dozens of Egyptian mummies. On the other side, skeptics view such claims as highly problematic. DNA breaks down more quickly in hot conditions, causing many to doubt whether fragments long enough to enable reliable analysis can survive for thousands of years baking in the Egyptian desert.
What's more, many of the studies have relied on the classical Sanger sequencing method in which the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is used before sequencing to amplify specific fragments of DNA. Such methods are particularly susceptible to contamination, says Tom Gilbert of the Center for GeoGenetics in Copenhagen, Denmark. "If you have a well-handled sample from a mummy, you might have a tiny bit of mummy mitochondrial DNA and tiny bits of modern mitochondrial DNA," he says. "If you do PCR, you amplify both up and get both appearing at very high frequency" compared to other genetic material in the sample. Additionally, the skeptics say many mummy sequencing studies were done without proper controls.
The application of next-generation sequencing (NGS) has the potential to resolve these debates. It could also bring about a new era of "molecular Egyptology" in which mysteries concerning the ancestral origins of ancient Egyptians, and how they lived and died, can finally be solved.
NGS enables a metagenomic approach, meaning that, prior to sequencing, researchers amplify all DNA fragments in a sample, including small bits of ancient DNA that were missed by traditional methods. This provides a broad snapshot of the sample's genetic material and offers a more accurate reading of the true ratio of ancient DNA to modern DNA. "Contaminants are still a tiny fraction, because you're looking at the whole pool," says Gilbert. The speed of next-gen platforms also means researchers can sequence a sample over and over again, which makes it easier to check for patterns of damage that distinguish ancient DNA from modern DNA.
Naturally, then, both camps were intrigued when, earlier this year, Pusch and his colleagues published preliminary results from the next-gen sequencing of mitochondrial DNA from 5 mummified Egyptian human heads held at the University of Tubingen.
From the limited sequence data they retrieved, Pusch’s team deduced that one of the mummies belongs to an ancestral group thought to have originated in Western Asia. The researchers also identified DNA sequences from the pathogens that cause malaria and toxoplasmosis, and from several plants that may have been used in the mummification process. "It’s a sparkling universe of different DNAs that can be characterized," says Pusch. "And it’s crazy how much information can be drawn from that."
Zink, who led the whole-genome sequencing of Otzi the Iceman, a 5,300-year-old frozen mummy discovered in the European Alps, agrees. "This is the first time next-gen sequencing has been done on Egyptian mummies, and it is important that they showed DNA was preserved," he says. Both Zink and Pusch think the mummification process protects DNA by rapidly desiccating tissue, removing the water required for hydrolytic depurination and deamination, two of the primary mechanisms by which DNA is broken down.
The new NGS findings have not gone unchallenged, however. Some researchers have questioned Pusch's suggestion that the proportion of human DNA in samples from the Egyptian heads is comparable to that from permafrost-preserved specimens—such as a 4,000-year-old Greenlandic mummy known as the Saqqaq man—subjected to NGS.
"I was pleased to see this paper, and I believe they have DNA, but they’ve done an incomplete job of analyzing it," says Gilbert, who was part of the Saqqaq genome project. The comparison to the ice-preserved specimens is misleading, he says, because the vast majority of the sequences obtained from the Egyptian samples were unidentifiable. For instance, in one of the Egyptian samples put forward as comparable, the researchers could not identify 97.5 percent of the sequences, so they used the 2.5 percent they could, of which 96 percent was human. "That’s a very different thing to total DNA content," says Gilbert. For comparison, 75 percent of the sequences for Saqqaq man could be identified, 99.7 percent of which were human.
Pusch insists that "the relative comparison we did is absolutely sound," though he concedes that it would be better to compare entire genomes.
Even so, the latest study is "a first step in the right direction," says Zink, who agrees with Pusch that whole-genome sequencing of ancient Egyptian mummies will likely become commonplace in the near future—that is, so long as sufficient funds are available and researchers can get their hands on specimens.
quote:Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: The autosomal genetic profile of the Ancient Egyptians mummies (top) are more prevalent in the modern genetic geographical regions at the bottom
LOL! This isn't the first DNA test done on Tut or Egyptian mummies. So I guess this time they believe they will get the results they want? Just like they kept doing reconstructions of his face until they got the one they liked, because apparently his face mask wasn't good enough. Which should tell you that only a moron thinks these folks would publish anything showing the native dynasties had primarily African DNA from the South of Egypt.
Naturally, then, both camps were intrigued when, earlier this year, Pusch and his colleagues published preliminary results from the next-gen sequencing of mitochondrial DNA from 5 mummified Egyptian human heads held at the University of Tubingen.
From the limited sequence data they retrieved, Pusch’s team deduced that one of the mummies belongs to an ancestral group thought to have originated in Western Asia.
Nothing to worry about the samples went into the Greco Roman period in Egypt >>>
First insights into the metagenome of Egyptian mummies using next-generation sequencing
Rabab Khairat, Markus Ball, Chun-Chi Hsieh Chang, Raffaella Bianucci, Andreas G. Nerlich, Martin Trautmann, Somaia Ismail, Gamila M. L. Shanab, Amr M. Karim, Yehia Z. Gad, …
Abstract We applied, for the first time, next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology on Egyptian mummies. Seven NGS datasets obtained from five randomly selected Third Intermediate to Graeco-Roman Egyptian mummies (806 BC–124AD) and two unearthed pre-contact Bolivian lowland skeletons were generated and characterised. The datasets were contrasted to three recently published NGS datasets obtained from cold-climate regions, i.e. the Saqqaq, the Denisova hominid and the Alpine Iceman. Analysis was done using one million reads of each newly generated or published dataset. Blastn and megablast results were analysed using MEGAN software. Distinct NGS results were replicated by specific and sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocols in ancient DNA dedicated laboratories. Here, we provide unambiguous identification of authentic DNA in Egyptian mummies. The NGS datasets showed variable contents of endogenous DNA harboured in tissues. Three of five mummies displayed a human DNA proportion comparable to the human read count of the Saqqaq permafrost-preserved specimen. Furthermore, a metagenomic signature unique to mummies was displayed. By applying a “bacterial fingerprint”, discrimination among mummies and other remains from warm areas outside Egypt was possible. Due to the absence of an adequate environment monitoring, a bacterial bloom was identified when analysing different biopsies from the same mummies taken after a lapse of time of 1.5 years. Plant kingdom representation in all mummy datasets was unique and could be partially associated with their use in embalming materials. Finally, NGS data showed the presence of Plasmodium falciparum and Toxoplasma gondii DNA sequences, indicating malaria and toxoplasmosis in these mummies. We demonstrate that endogenous ancient DNA can be extracted from mummies and serve as a proper template for the NGS technique, thus, opening new pathways of investigation for future genome sequencing of ancient Egyptian individuals.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Amun Ra what's the point in putting up a private DNA testing company 's results up ?
I didn't do such thing.
The ancient DNA results I posted are from the JAMA study on the Ancient Egyptian mummies. DNA Tribes only input the values in their database to determine in which world genetic regions were those "genes" more prevalent. Which happens to be African regions among African populations.
People can note how the familial relationships are logically maintained by the DNA extracted (as children obtain one allele from the father and one allele from the mother). On the graph above they use nice colors to demonstrate the familial relationship and how alleles were inherited from fathers to sons.
This is also in agreement with the Ramses III genetic results where Ramses III was determined to be E1b1a, an haplogroup prevalent among Africans, by the BMJ study itself.
Of course, there was also foreign migrants into AE, I would guess (knowing human nature) even at the early phase of the AE state but the results thus far make it clear they were an African civilizations in a similar way as Ancient Greece, the Roman empire/republic, is an European civilization with some minimal input from foreign migrants like Africans (there was indeed an African presence in those European empire). Populations from modern Egypt and the Levant are usually closer genetically to African people than most world populations geographically further away due to admixture.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a misconception about the DNA Tribes analysis of King Tut and family on the internet.Most people do not realize that it is based on the JAMA article of 2010 and it is on autosomal DNA.
Posts: 121 | From: Guyana | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ponsford: There is a misconception about the DNA Tribes analysis of King Tut and family on the internet.Most people do not realize that it is based on the JAMA article of 2010 and it is on autosomal DNA.
not a misconception at Egyptsearch
JAMA was linked and mentioned several times from the very first page of the 2011 ES thread on it I linked it myself somewhere in that thread or one of the other long DNA Tribes Amarna threads, lost track
the methodology that DNA Tribes used was not disclosed it's "propietary" The article published on their website has not been peer reviewed.
And It's old news. The is 2014, this thread is about new more advanced precise testing which is now available
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ponsford: There is a misconception about the DNA Tribes analysis of King Tut and family on the internet.Most people do not realize that it is based on the JAMA article of 2010 and it is on autosomal DNA.
not a misconception at Egyptsearch
JAMA was linked and mentioned several times from the very first page of the 2011 ES thread on it I linked it myself somewhere in that thread or one of the other long DNA Tribes Amarna threads, lost track
the methodology that DNA Tribes used was not disclosed it's "propietary" The article published on their website has not been peer reviewed.
And It's old news. The is 2014, this thread is about new more advanced precise testing which is now available
After they have established the genetic world regions using proprietary techniques (probably similar in objective than the admixture software). The methodology of DNA Tribes is very simple. It's a simple ratio.
For Tutankhamun and Great Lakes for example. On the numerator you got the frequencies of Tutankhamun's alleles in the Great Lakes genetic regions, while at the denominator, you have the frequencies Tutankhamun's alleles in other world genetic regions as a whole.
MLI= % of King Tut alleles in the Great Lakes/% of King Tut alleles in the whole world
/ means divided-by (of course)
As explained in the document, a MLI scores of 1328.01 for Tutankhamun, means Tutankhamun's alleles are 1328.01 more prevalent in the Great Lakes region than the world as a whole.
Obviously this is done for each world genetic regions so we can see which regions has the highest MLI scores (aka similar DNA than the Ancient Egyptians) and put them in order. It's very doubtful that their database is wrong or something like that, while the rest is simple calculations of ratios. How they create their genetic regions is interesting but of little concern as all the regions matching AE most are composed of African populations.
New genetic studies are most welcome, I guess by re-reading the article my only worry is the way the journalist is talking. According to the journalist, the Egyptian authorities won't publish the results if it turns out AE matches people they don't want to match like Jewish people. Jo Marchant is talking like the Egyptians want to control the information. What will they do if the mummies have Jewish DNA or non-modern Egyptians DNA? Keep it mum? At least, that's the vibe I get from the person who wrote the article.
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ponsford: There is a misconception about the DNA Tribes analysis of King Tut and family on the internet.Most people do not realize that it is based on the JAMA article of 2010 and it is on autosomal DNA.
This is true. It's the DNA profiles of the 18th Dynasty Royal mummies which matches African populations. I highly doubt the DNA Tribes database of world populations is wrong because the rest is simple math(ratio).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually just sent Jo Marchant an inquiry about the DNA Tribes results, which I notice she doesn't mention in that Matter article. I wonder if she's even heard about them.
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: I actually just sent Jo Marchant an inquiry about the DNA Tribes results, which I notice she doesn't mention in that Matter article. I wonder if she's even heard about them.
I wouldn't think so, why else talking about a genetic company who took a miscellaneous screenshot off the TV screen, which is like a joke; instead of mentioning a genetic company who took the real results published in the JAMA (The journal of the American Medical Association) study? In fact, the journalist don't mention the JAMA study also determined the autosomal STR alleles of the mummies, they can easily be used to determine the origin or kinship of those mummies (the subject of her article). She doesn't mention the BMJ study either which determined Ramses III to be E1b1a which can also be used to determined the relationship of Ramses III with modern population (the subject of her article).
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: I actually just sent Jo Marchant an inquiry about the DNA Tribes results, which I notice she doesn't mention in that Matter article. I wonder if she's even heard about them.
Did she replied to you?
Posts: 2981 | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic