LONDON (Reuters) - Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.
Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.
"It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe -- there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to," said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.
Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.
"We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago," Scholz told Reuters.
It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.
However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun's paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.
The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of "King Tut."
"The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest," Scholz told Reuters.
posted
It would be interesting to know what the maternal side was. I know that his mother and father were brother and sister, but how does that affect his maternal side?
Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
More evidence the egyptians were Caucasoids.
I'm guessing though the afrocentrics will come up with some crackpot theory to discredit the genetic results.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
They were thinking about publishing his dna results sometime this year. It's probably already inside knowledge among geneticists what the results were.
Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Simple Girl: It would be interesting to know what the maternal side was. I know that his mother and father were brother and sister, but how does that affect his maternal side?
I thought these DNA test are based off of the maternal line, using mitochondrial dna (which can only be passed down via the mother). If that is the case these results could simply mean they (ancient egyptians) started taking european slaves/concubines around that time or earlier and Tut is the result of such a union.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: More evidence the egyptians were Caucasoids.
I'm guessing though the afrocentrics will come up with some crackpot theory to discredit the genetic results.
No crackpot theories would be necessary.
Eurocentrics (Caucasian-centrics) have lost enough credibility with their crackpot perverted claims on associating Pharaohs with Europeans.
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Simple Girl: It would be interesting to know what the maternal side was. I know that his mother and father were brother and sister, but how does that affect his maternal side?
I thought these DNA test are based off of the maternal line, using mitochondrial dna (which can only be passed down via the mother). If that is the case these results could simply mean they (ancient egyptians) started taking european slaves/concubines around that time or earlier and Tut is the result of such a union.
Well king Tut only had one grandmother. It's doubtful from looking at her mummy that she was black. It would still be interesting to know the maternal line of DNA. Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Simple Girl: It would be interesting to know what the maternal side was. I know that his mother and father were brother and sister, but how does that affect his maternal side?
I thought these DNA test are based off of the maternal line, using mitochondrial dna (which can only be passed down via the mother). If that is the case these results could simply mean they (ancient egyptians) started taking european slaves/concubines around that time or earlier and Tut is the result of such a union.
Well king Tut only had one grandmother. It's doubtful from looking at her mummy that she was black. It would still be interesting to know the maternal line of DNA.
You lost me, I don't think I fully understand your meaning. You do understand how these DNA test work right? It is done through the maternal line so you already know what his maternal line is via the finding posted in the original post in this thread. To be clear, these dna test are based on mitochondrial dna and that is in each and every human via what your mother placed in you when you were born.
p.s. unless he wasn't human he has TWO grand mothers, one via his father's side and one through his mother's side
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
R1-M269 does not indicate that King Tut was caucasoid. It is further confirmation of the African origin of King Tut given the greatest diversity of R1-M173 in Africa.
Y-chromosome V88 (R1b1a) has its highest frequency among Chadic speakers, while the carriers of V88 among Niger-Congo speakers (predominately Bantu people) range between 2-66% ( Cruciani et al, 2010; Bernielle-Lee et al, 2009). Haplogroup V88 includes the mutations M18, V35 and V7. Cruciani et al (2010) revealed that R-V88 is also carried by Eurasians including the distinctive mutations M18, V35 and V7.
R1b1-P25 is found in Western Eurasia. Haplogroup R1b1* is found in Africa at various frequencies. Berniell-Lee et al (2009) found in their study that 5.2% carried Rb1*. The frequency of R1b1* among the Bantu ranged from 2-20. The bearers of R1b1* among the Pygmy populations ranged from 1-25% (Berniell-Lee et al, 2009). The frequency of R1b1 among Guinea-Bissau populations was 12% (Carvalho et al,2010).
Y-Chromosome R1-M173 was probably spread in Western Europe first by African Roman soldiers, and later by African Muslims when they conquered Western Europe as Moors. This would explain why 60-70% French and Spanish males carry this y-haplogroup.
Around 0.1 of Sub Saharan Africans carry R1b1b2. Wood et al (2009) found that Khoisan (2.2%) and Niger-Congo (0.4%) speakers carried the R-M269 y-chromosome. The Niger-Congo speakers formed a significant population in the nomes of Upper Egypt, where the founders of the 18th dynasty originated.
Haplogroup R1b1b2 was probably taken to Europe by African Roman soldiers. Africans were first recorded in the Western Europe 1800 years ago, as Roman soldiers defending Hadrian's Wall. There was a skeleton African Roman soilder recently found in Britain.
Other Africans were found in Britain including the Rich African women called the bangled lady.
These skeletons show how heavily integrated Africans were in western Europe. This would explain the widespread nature of y-chromosome R1-M173 in Europe.
In addition to R1-M173 in western Europe, the African y-chromosome haplogroup A1 was also recently found in Britain.
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss: You lost me, I don't think I fully understand your meaning. You do understand how these DNA test work right? It is done through the maternal line so you already know what his maternal line is via the finding posted in the original post in this thread. To be clear, these dna test are based on mitochondrial dna and that is in each and every human via what your mother placed in you when you were born.
p.s. unless he wasn't human he has TWO grand mothers, one via his father's side and one through his mother's side [/QB]
I'm not sure how the tests are done that's why I asked about his maternal side.
Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss: p.s. unless he wasn't human he has TWO grand mothers, one via his father's side and one through his mother's side [/QB]
Well since his mother and father were brother and sister, I'm assuming that he only had one grandmother.
Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Comprehension skill remain low on this site. Sad how little any of you retain information..
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III,based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
This is based off the Discovery Channel leak, This was already addressed, the so called "Leak" that was popular last year was NOT King Tut's DNA but the DNA of an American control sample.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Comprehension skill remain low on this site. Sad how little any of you retain information..
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III,based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
This is based off the Discovery Channel leak, This was already addressed, the so called "Leak" that was popular last year was NOT King Tut's DNA but the DNA of an American control sample.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: This is based off the Discovery Channel leak, This was already addressed, the so called "Leak" that was popular last year was NOT King Tut's DNA but the DNA of an American control sample.
I dunno, this new Reuters article seems to have the geneticists confirming that King Tut himself had R1b according to their research. That being said, I'm suspecting contamination in this case. Anyone remember this article?
quote:However, researchers rarely attempt this approach with ancient samples because the original DNA is likely to be degraded, and dwarfed by modern contamination. It's more common to sequence mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) – cells contain around a thousand times more copies of mtDNA than of genomic DNA, improving chances of finding large intact samples.
Zink and Pusch defend their choice, saying that they took extensive precautions to guard against contamination. For instance, they extracted samples from deep inside the mummies' bones, and genotyped lab staff to rule out contamination.
But others doubt the precautions were sufficiently rigorous. Robert Connolly of the University of Liverpool, UK, who carried out blood typing of Tutankhamun's mummy in the 1960s, argues that it would be difficult to reach deep enough inside Tutankhamun's thin, fragile bones – or those of the two fetuses – to reach uncontaminated material.
Lorenzen adds that many people – not just the Hawass team – have handled the mummies since they were first unwrapped. The authors should have tested non-human samples from the tombs as negative controls, she says.
To judge the quality of the team's results, Lorenzen and others are asking for access to raw data not included in the Journal of the American Medical Association paper – but Zink is reluctant to oblige, fearing the data would spark "a lot of arguing" over technicalities.
However, Zink, Pusch and colleagues insist that they will soon be able to put any doubts to rest. They say they have also extracted the mtDNA that Lorenzen and others consider necessary for rigorous genetic analysis and are still working on the data. They hope to publish the results this year.
But the critics are still advising caution. "When working with samples that are so well-known, it is important to convince readers that you have the right data," says Lorenzen. "I am not convinced."
Posts: 7083 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I find even more funny is that despite your knowledge that the Egyptians stem from Saharans and other Tropical Africans, despite how Queen Tiye and Amunhotep III was portrayed some of you still believe King Tut is related to Europeans over Africans. LMAO...
Simple Comprehension of the very first paragraph would have kept this Garbage article from being posted here. Let me know when we should take serious reconstructing DNA profiles off of a Television Documentary snap shot rather than direct evidence studied by a team of Geneticists..
Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to what research?? Show me in that article where research is ever mentioned??...My Minor is in English Comprehension...so please show me where the article details any research...
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
Is reconstructing a DNA profile off of a Discovery Channel Documentary snap shot "Research".
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: This is based off the Discovery Channel leak, This was already addressed, the so called "Leak" that was popular last year was NOT King Tut's DNA but the DNA of an American control sample.
I dunno, this new Reuters article seems to have the geneticists confirming that King Tut himself had R1b according to their research. That being said, I'm suspecting contamination in this case. Anyone remember this article?
quote:However, researchers rarely attempt this approach with ancient samples because the original DNA is likely to be degraded, and dwarfed by modern contamination. It's more common to sequence mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) – cells contain around a thousand times more copies of mtDNA than of genomic DNA, improving chances of finding large intact samples.
Zink and Pusch defend their choice, saying that they took extensive precautions to guard against contamination. For instance, they extracted samples from deep inside the mummies' bones, and genotyped lab staff to rule out contamination.
But others doubt the precautions were sufficiently rigorous. Robert Connolly of the University of Liverpool, UK, who carried out blood typing of Tutankhamun's mummy in the 1960s, argues that it would be difficult to reach deep enough inside Tutankhamun's thin, fragile bones – or those of the two fetuses – to reach uncontaminated material.
Lorenzen adds that many people – not just the Hawass team – have handled the mummies since they were first unwrapped. The authors should have tested non-human samples from the tombs as negative controls, she says.
To judge the quality of the team's results, Lorenzen and others are asking for access to raw data not included in the Journal of the American Medical Association paper – but Zink is reluctant to oblige, fearing the data would spark "a lot of arguing" over technicalities.
However, Zink, Pusch and colleagues insist that they will soon be able to put any doubts to rest. They say they have also extracted the mtDNA that Lorenzen and others consider necessary for rigorous genetic analysis and are still working on the data. They hope to publish the results this year.
But the critics are still advising caution. "When working with samples that are so well-known, it is important to convince readers that you have the right data," says Lorenzen. "I am not convinced."
Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:The fourth expansional wave of the probably indoeuropean Kurgan Culture between 2.500 and 2.200 BC is also a good candidate. This culture spread since 4.400 BC to Europe which explains the correlation with haplogroup R1b1a2. This haplogroup was also widespread in the indoeuropean Hittite empire in Anatolia. From the time of Akhenatens or Tuankhamuns reign a letter of an egyptian queen is known from the Hittite archives. In this letter she asks the Hittites King for one of his sons as a new Pharao because her husband died and she herself got no son.
The identity of the queen is unknown, perhaps the 18th dynasty was related to the Hittites, the origin of the R1b1a2-lineage could point to this.
The detailed context can only be clearified by further research. By the publication of the test result we want to contribute to the scientific discussion and bring it forward.
They seem to be implying that King Tut had ancestry from Hittites who intermarried with Egyptian royalty. If so, these results would say nothing about the larger Egyptian population.
EDIT: Wait, I see what Jari means. They actually used a recording from a Discovery Channel documentary instead of directly testing the mummy himself? Fucking morons!
Posts: 7083 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
How irresponsible to base "results" on screenshots rather than on actual DNA samples taken from the very individual under subject supposed "study."
This was refuted a year and a half ago. Do we have to go through this yet again?
Who are the unnamed iGENEA "scientists" hiding behind the Reuters article and where is their standard peer reviewed scientific report and its replies/responses from the geneticist community?
Another thread on a subject already adressed on E.S. and already debunked, but the unlearned and illiterate will never learn.
Yet, you idiots search in vain for a Published study when they very article you site says they based their findings off a leaked snap shot from a discovery channel Documentary..SMH
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: What? Whale meat again?
How irresponsible to base "results" on screenshots rather than on actual DNA samples taken from the very individual under subject supposed "study."
This was refuted a year and a half ago. Do we have to go through this yet again?
Where is the standard peer reviewed scientific report and its replies/responses from the geneticist community?
The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2,
^^^^ Thank God Almighty another person gets it, this is just another Eurocentric ploy...
Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
Another thread on a subject already adressed on E.S. and already debunked, but the unlearned and illiterate will never learn.
Yet, you idiots search in vain for a Published study when they very article you site says they based their findings off a leaked snap shot from a discovery channel Documentary..SMH
Sorry for my miscomprehension. I should have looked at the text more closely.
Posts: 7083 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tell me 'bout it Jari, even Dienekes (link) ain't down with this ****.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
Another thread on a subject already adressed on E.S. and already debunked, but the unlearned and illiterate will never learn.
Yet, you idiots search in vain for a Published study when they very article you site says they based their findings off a leaked snap shot from a discovery channel Documentary..SMH
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: What? Whale meat again?
How irresponsible to base "results" on screenshots rather than on actual DNA samples taken from the very individual under subject supposed "study."
This was refuted a year and a half ago. Do we have to go through this yet again?
Who are the unnamed iGENEA "scientists" hiding behind the Reuters article and where is their standard peer reviewed scientific report and its replies/responses from the geneticist community?
The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, [<<R-M269>>]
^^^^ Thank God Almighty another person gets it, this is just another Eurocentric ploy... [/qb][/QUOTE]
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unless they have inside confirmation that the screenshot was king Tut's dna, then it's all just speculation.
quote:iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel.
posted
^^^^ I can understand why you and Cassiterides give credit to this and why you can't comprehend simple English. I mean you need any little evidence you can get to link yourself to Egypt.
Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't need to link myself to Egypt little whiney boy, but it seems you need to 24/7.
Posts: 527 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by typeZeiss: p.s. unless he wasn't human he has TWO grand mothers, one via his father's side and one through his mother's side
Well since his mother and father were brother and sister, I'm assuming that he only had one grandmother. [/QB]
To be honest im starting to doubt that these people actually married brother and sister because of the language and how they would refer to someone of close relation as "sister" even though there was no blood relation. I could be wrong though, this is just a theory i have right now that I have not fully explored as of yet. But as ausaur pointed out in another thread, maybe i need to try and learn ancient egyptian and the complicates of translating these works.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
iGENEA is not a science research lab. iGENEA is a for profit corporation. iGENEA is hustling DNA analysis sales.
iGENEA's alleles for TUT are exactly the same ones worked out by RealDealT lacking only the "data" for DYS635. See here.
Running this haplotype against YHRD's extensive database yielded no matches. Reducing the haplotype to 13 STRs gave 3 matches, one Afro-Caribbean and one mestizo (both of whom hail from Isla de San Andrés, Colombia), and one citizen from the USA of European extraction. See here.
But a credentialed geneticist, Thomas Krahn, challenges the amateur analysis of RealDealT which iGENEA uses without crediting him at all nor heeding the caveat of the professional. See here and here.
Also, STR haplotype is not a haplogroup. While haplotype is a fairly indicative of haplogroup, only a test of UEPs can accurately determine haplogroup as any legitimate DNA testing company will tell its customers but iGENEA fails to do so. See here and here.
iGENEA is suckering people into buying a Match King Tut's DNA kit with refund for any European matches. See here.
iGENEA knows there will be no such matches or, at very best, only a pitiful handfull.
iGENEA stands to make a windfall profit off of suckers due to King Tut enthusiasm and hype thanks to Reuter's shoddy (in this case) sensationalist journalism.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Another thread on a subject already adressed on E.S. and already debunked, but the unlearned and illiterate will never learn.
Yet, you idiots search in vain for a Published study when they very article you site says they based their findings off a leaked snap shot from a discovery channel Documentary..SMH
I was just about to say that, when I noticed several people already beat me to it. A lot people who come to this site don't appear to be very bright.
And Clyde only helps in propagating the myth, by accepting it and trying to build explanations around it.
So goes the saying: If you repeat a lie enough times, it becomes the "truth".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sahel (Siptah): Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said..{....}...It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.
I remember something not to long ago about an article noting that R was brought into Europe during the spread of agriculture, of course we know this spread also involved other hg's, I wonder why they're now attributing this marker as being amongst the neolithic farmers.
Which would of course make this marker not European in reality and the research in the past that showed Europe was not considerably populated during the Neolithic, contradicts this.
Some 6 percent of Europeans are descended from the continent's first founders, who entered Europe from the Near East in the Upper Paleolithic era 45,000 years ago, Dr. Richards calculates. The descendants of these earliest arrivals are still more numerous in certain regions of Europe that may have provided them with refuge from subsequent waves of immigration. One is the mountainous Basque country, where people still speak a language completely different from all other European languages. Another is in the European extreme of Scandinavia. Another 80 percent arrived 30,000 to 20,000 years ago, before the peak of the last glaciation, and 10 percent came in the Neolithic 10,000 years ago, when the ice age ended and agriculture was first introduced to Europe from the Near East.
It used to be thought that the most important human dispersals occurred in the Neolithic, prompted by the population increases made possible by the invention of agriculture. But it now seems that the world filled up early and the first inhabitants were quite resistant to displacement by later arrivals.
Seems that what they thought before, and which was contradicted in the above article, i.e. the most important human dispersal's occurring during the Neolithic is trying to come out of the woodworks.
Doesn't really make sense as most research that comes beforehand contradicts it.
Note also below;
quote:
The First Europeans
About 80 percent of Europeans arose from primitive hunters who arrived about 40,000 years ago, endured the long ice age and then expanded rapidly to dominate the continent, a new study shows.
Researchers analyzing the Y chromosome taken from 1,007 men from 25 different locations in Europe found a pattern that suggests four out of five of the men shared a common male ancestor about 40,000 years ago.
Peter A. Underhill, a senior researcher at the Stanford Genome Technology Center in Palo Alto, Calif., and co-author of the study, said the research supports conclusions from archaeological, linguistic and other DNA evidence about the settlement of Europe by ancient peoples.
When we can get different lines of evidence that tell the same story, then we feel we are telling the true history of the species. The researchers used the Y chromosome in the study because its rare changes establish a pattern that can be traced back hundreds of generations, thus helping to plot the movement of ancient humans.
The Y chromosome is inherited only by sons from their fathers. When sperm carrying the Y chromosome fertilizes an egg it directs the resulting baby to be a male. An X chromosome from the father allows a fertilized egg to be female.
"The Y chromosome has about 60 million DNA base pairs. Changes in those base pairs happen infrequently, but they occur often enough to establish patterns that can be used to trace the ancestry of people. Researchers looking at the 1,007 chromosome samples from Europe identified 22 specific markers that formed a specific pattern of change. Underhill said the researchers found that about 80 percent of all European males shared a single pattern, suggesting they had a common ancestor thousands of generations ago.
"The basic pattern had some changes that apparently developed among people who once shared a common ancestor and then were isolated for many generations. This scenario supports other studies about the Paleolithic European groups. Those studies suggest that a primitive, stone-age human came to Europe, probably from Central Asia and the Middle East, in two waves of migration beginning about 40,000 years ago. Their numbers were small and they lived byhunting animals and gathering plant food. They used crudely sharpened stones and fire.
"About 24,000 years ago, the last ice age began, with mountain-sized glaciers moving across most of Europe. The Paleolithic Europeans retreated before the ice, finding refuge for hundreds of generations in three areas: what is now Spain, the Balkans and the Ukraine.
"When the glaciers melted, about 16,000 years ago, the Paleolithic tribes resettled the rest of Europe. Y chromosome mutations occurred among people in each of the ice age refuges, said Underhill. He said the research shows a pattern that developed in Spain is now most common in northwest Europe, while the Ukraine pattern is mostly in Eastern Europe and the Balkan pattern is most common in Central Europe.
"About 8,000 years ago a more advanced people, the Neolithic, migrated to Europe from the Middle East, bringing with them a new Y chromosome pattern and a new way of life - agriculture. About 20 percent of Europeans now have the Y chromosome pattern from this migration.
"Archaeological digs in European caves clearly show that before 8,000 years ago, most humans lived by gathering and hunting. After that, there are traces of grains and other agricultural products. Earlier studies had traced European migration patterns using the DNA contained in the mitochondria, a key part of each cell. This type is DNA is passed down from mother to daughter."
Antonio Torroni, a researcher at the University of Urbino, Italy, who first proposed that early humans retreated to Spain during the ice age, said in a separate Science report that the Y chromosome study fits completely' with the mitochondria studies.
"The Y chromosome studies are also consistent with genetic studies showing a broader picture of human migration. In general, studies show that modern humans first arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago and thousands of years later began a long series of migrations, he said. Some groups migrated eastward and humans are known to have existed in Australia about 60,000 years ago. Other groups crossed the land bridge into the Middle East. Humans appeared in Central Asia about 50,000 years ago. From there, the theory goes, some migrated west, arriving in Europe about 40,000 years ago. Later, some migrated east, across the Bering Straits, to the Americas."
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Balaresque et al., 2010. last reported on the role of R1b markers in the spread of the Neolithic in Europe from an Anatolian origin, but that marker was hg R1b1b2, rather than hg R1b1a2. Before that, Cinnioglu et al. 2004 were first to note a pattern in the spread of R1b1b2 markers from the Anatolian region and then into western Europe, in addition to a spread from an Iberian refugium, but they did not specifically tie the hg R markers in with the Neolithic as Balaresque et al. had done.
The hg R marker that Siptah's article notes is not even found in Europe. Only one incidence of the type has been reported, and it is in Africa, found in a Tali individual (Cruciani et al. 2010).
But we mustn't lose sight of the fact that Tut's Y-DNA profile has actually not been released, and that the marker guessed from a documentary video is not the DNA report for the young king.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Balaresque et al., 2010. last reported on the role of R1b markers in the spread of the Neolithic in Europe from an Anatolian origin, but that marker was hg R1b1b2, rather than hg R1b1a2. Before that, Cinnioglu et al. 2004 were first to note a pattern in the spread of R1b1b2 markers from the Anatolian region and then into western Europe, in addition to a spread from an Iberian refugium, but they did not specifically tie the hg R markers in with the Neolithic as Balaresque et al. had done.
Which would of course make the claim of the author of said article fabricated by claiming R1b1a2 as correlating with the agricultural spread but evident to the fact that they're pretty much grasping at straws for anything European without knowing the background, foolish, along with Reuters publishing it. SMH
Basically trying to tie together two different color strings which don't match.
Why would Reuters even publish this nonsense without credence?
No credibility.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: The hg R marker that Siptah's article notes is not even found in Europe. Only one incidence of the type has reported, and it is in Africa, found in a Tali individual (Cruciani et al. 2010).
Indeed, hence my highlighting of this haplogroup being first introduced into Europe 9kya by the author.
Which would pretty much not only make this haplogroup non-European but also contradict completely with earlier research which has shown that 80% of Europeans on the Y chromosome ascend from humans who entered Europe milennia beforehand wherein this article claiming "Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men... descend from R1b1a2 migrating into Europe 9kya makes no sense.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: But we mustn't lose sight of the fact that Tut's Y-DNA profile has actually not been released, and that the marker guessed from a documentary video is not the DNA report for the young king.
Indeed, I remember the whole scramble a year ago or so that went along with the supposed analysis of screen shots instead of actual DNA results. LOl
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
[i] About 80 percent of Europeans arose from primitive hunters who arrived about 40,000 years ago, endured the long ice age and then expanded rapidly to dominate the continent, a new study shows...
It's funny though, that the earliest remains of modern humans in Europe is 28 ky ago (Cro-Magnon, the "Old man"). The Oase 2 Cro-magnon may be older than the "Old man", being that it looks to be an archaic human leaning towards modern humans, but it too yielded a carbon age of 28.8 ky ago. However, researchers treated this as a minimum age for the Oase 2 specimen, and inferred that it could be as old as ~40 ky ago, based on nothing else other than that it sports some dental affinities with the older dated Oase 1 mandible.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
[i] About 80 percent of Europeans arose from primitive hunters who arrived about 40,000 years ago, endured the long ice age and then expanded rapidly to dominate the continent, a new study shows...
It's funny though, that the earliest remains of modern humans in Europe is 28 ky ago (Cro-Magnon, the "Old man"). The Oase 2 Cro-magnon may be older that the "Old man", being that it looks to be an archaic human leaning towards modern humans, but it too yielded a carbon age of 28.8 ky ago. However, researchers treated this as a minimum age for the Oase 2 specimen, and inferred that it could be as old as ~40 ky ago, based on nothing else that it sports some dental affinities with the older dated Oase 1 mandible.
I see what you're saying.
Hence, why it's always great to rehash older data that we may forget about, and see how it's fitting in with the new (or as it progresses) data.
Basically to see how it all makes sense, and if it actually makes sense.
This is a lesson "king" could learn from.
Why we're able to falsify this nonsense in the article.
P.S.
Also considering the fact that there's no ancestral marker to R in Africa found outside of Africa, and this R haplogroup appears in Europe with an ancestral line.
As you note this marker R1b1a2 not even being found at high frequencies outside of Africa, nor even being the same haplogroup noted by actual geneticists is something to note, note it because it's them trying to find ancestral R outside of Africa to disconnect from a likely scenario of humans migrating from Africa into Europe.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
@ Explorer do you recall the samples from this study?
quote:The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective
ABSTRACT
A genetic perspective of human history in Europe was derived from 22 binary markers of the nonrecombining Y chromosome (NRY). Ten lineages account for >95% of the 1007 European Y chromosomes studied. Geographic distribution and age estimates of alleles are compatible with two Paleolithic and one Neolithic migratory episode that have contributed to the modern European gene pool. A significant correlation between the NRY haplotype data and principal components based on 95 protein markers was observed, indicating the effectiveness of NRY binary polymorphisms in the characterization of human population composition and history.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember last year when the 'results' were released. IIRC someone was being interviewed while in the background the results of King Tut's dna were being released via fax. G-A-S-P! European dna. The whole episode was high school sensationalism that would embarrass any amateur geneticist. At no time were peer reviewed studies announced or any scientific protocols followed. Only the simple minded still believe that circus.
Posts: 55 | From: nairobi | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
@ Explorer do you recall the samples from this study?
quote:The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective
ABSTRACT
A genetic perspective of human history in Europe was derived from 22 binary markers of the nonrecombining Y chromosome (NRY). Ten lineages account for >95% of the 1007 European Y chromosomes studied. Geographic distribution and age estimates of alleles are compatible with two Paleolithic and one Neolithic migratory episode that have contributed to the modern European gene pool. A significant correlation between the NRY haplotype data and principal components based on 95 protein markers was observed, indicating the effectiveness of NRY binary polymorphisms in the characterization of human population composition and history.
Oh, this old study. The samples were mostly southern European, with a few more northerly European, east European and "Near Eastern" samples put in. But the study should be freely circulated on the net.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Citing African ancestry in the Greeks found in this study, in the form M35 chromosomes, irked a troll going by the name of Evil Euro. We had fun ruffling his feathers with these sort of reports.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
As you note this marker R1b1a2 not even being found at high frequencies outside of Africa, nor even being the same haplogroup noted by actual geneticists is something to note, note it because it's them trying to find ancestral R outside of Africa to disconnect from a likely scenario of humans migrating from Africa into Europe.
Hg R1b1a2 was not found at all outside of Africa. It might possibly change in the future, but as of right now, Africa is the only place where it has been found.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I revisited the ISOGG website, and as it turns out, hg R1b1b2, you know the aforementioned Neolithic expanding R markers, has just been renamed hg R1b1a2 as of 21 March 2011. These things can change fast, so its best to keep checking as frequently as possible. So, what was the African R1b1a2 (V8) has now been renamed R1b1c2. So, I stand corrected. Siptah's article got it right, since the article was very recently posted. Had the article been posted before this year, then that would have been an entirely different story.
Still doesn't change the status quo that:
We mustn't lose sight of the fact that Tut's Y-DNA profile has actually not been released, and that the marker guessed from a documentary video is not the DNA report for the young king.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
The Tutankhamun DNA Project Are you a direct male descendant of the Pharaos? iGENEA exclusively publishes the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun and starts the search for his last living relatives. In the year 2009 extended DNA-tests had been carried out with the mummy of Tutankamun and other members for his family. These have only partially been published in February 2010. Despite several demands, the results of the Y-DNA tests have been shut away. iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel. The astonishing result: Tutankhamun belongs to the haplogroup R1b1a2, which more than 50% of all men in Western Europe belong to.
iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel.
They didn't actually sequence Tut's DNA themselves, unless I'm missing something here.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: lioness, you were not paying attention:
iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel.
They didn't actually sequence Tut's DNA themselves, unless I'm missing something here.
I didn't miss a thing. For reference I'm just reproducing the short statement they made on their website rather than the Reuters article, without comment
Posts: 42938 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: Comprehension skill remain low on this site. Sad how little any of you retain information..
Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III,based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.
This is based off the Discovery Channel leak, This was already addressed, the so called "Leak" that was popular last year was NOT King Tut's DNA but the DNA of an American control sample.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: It is neither Tut, his father, nor an admixture. It is some unknown recent citizen in the West.
Thomas Krahn, an industry professional, says the data most likely is just a calibrating sample that comes with the kit. When I ran the haplotype through a very extensive database there were 3 hits all of them in the Americas none of them in the Old World.
Two of the three hits were from a Columbian island off the coast of Nicaragua (one Afro-Caribbean and one mestizo) and the other hit was from the USA.
From: Thomas Krahn<thomas@familytreedna.com> Subject: Re: [DNA] Some more Tut DNA STR values from the video 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.
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
Thomas Krahn is only one of several people discussing this topic. Here's a link to the entire forum conversation:
Another thread on a subject already adressed on E.S. and already debunked, but the unlearned and illiterate will never learn.
Yet, you idiots search in vain for a Published study when they very article you site says they based their findings off a leaked snap shot from a discovery channel Documentary..SMH
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: What? Whale meat again?
How irresponsible to base "results" on screenshots rather than on actual DNA samples taken from the very individual under subject supposed "study."
This was refuted a year and a half ago. Do we have to go through this yet again?
Where is the standard peer reviewed scientific report and its replies/responses from the geneticist community?
The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2,
^^^^ Thank God Almighty another person gets it, this is just another Eurocentric ploy...
I saw that part about the film but didn't really comprehend what they were saying. Makes you doubt western science when you see stuff like this being done.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
The folk at iGENEA are of course restrained by political correctness, and do not wish to be accused of arguing that Egypt was “white,” so they have inserted one line into their story saying it is “not clear at this point of time, how this lineage came from its region of origin to Egypt.”
This, of course, completely negates the point of the DNA result and their discussion on the expansion of the Indo Europeans and the European presence in Ancient Egypt.
iGENEA also discusses the “fourth expansional [sic] wave of the probably Indo European Kurgan Culture between 2.500 and 2.200 BC” which they claim is “also a good candidate” to explain Tutankhamun’s European DNA.
“This culture spread since 4.400 BC to Europe which explains the correlation with haplogroup R1b1a2,” the iGENEA statement goes on to tell us.
“This haplogroup was also widespread in the Indo European Hittite empire in Anatolia. From the time of Akhenaten’s or Tuankhamun’s reign, a letter of an Egyptian queen is known from the Hittite archives. In this letter she asks the Hittites King for one of his sons as a new Pharaoh because her husband died and she herself got no son.”[sic] (I point out the sic just to make sure that people realise I am quoting directly from iGENEA. Don’t laugh at iGENEA’s English, it is a lot better than most English-speakers’ German, French or Italian).
Finally, iGENEA points out that “among modern-day Egyptians, this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent,” a figure which was confirmed by earlier DNA research already published.
This low figure is, of course, the product of many thousands of years of racial mixing and invasions, first by Arabs, then by Nubians from the south, and finally by the mixed-race Muslim armies following the establishment of the religion of Islam.
Tutankhamun’s DNA finally lays to rest the debate on the origin of Ancient Egypt.
It was an European-founded society which was then overrun by non-European immigrants.
The lessons for modern Europe are striking, obvious and clear: halt and reverse Third World immigration, or end up looking like the Third World.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic