Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Yuya related to Amenhotep?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 1:53 pm    Post subject: Yuya related to Amenhotep? Reply with quote

I was just looking at the DNA for Yuya and Amenhotep III.
They share 6 allels at 5 different markers.
That's quite a bit!

Would that suggest that Aldred's theories about Queen Mutemwia could be correct? I.e. that Yuya was a brother of Queen Mutemwia?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Possible, I guess, but highly unlikely.
There is no known reltionship between Yuya and Amonhotep III. The only connection seems to be as a Royal Chariot figure, and his wife as mother of the queen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
christphe
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 17 Mar 2009
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i wonder why this is unlikely. Anen second amon prophet is the brother of queen tiyi and we know this from one inscription only. Ancient egyptian didn't think the way we do. I have little doubt that Tiyi, Nefertiti, Ay, even Horemheb or Maya are close to the royal House.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Osiris II wrote:
Possible, I guess, but highly unlikely.
There is no known reltionship between Yuya and Amonhotep III. The only connection seems to be as a Royal Chariot figure, and his wife as mother of the queen.


There an older theory (from Aldred) that Yuya was a brother to Queen Mutemwia. If that were the case then some sharing of DNA traits would make sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
freeTinker
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 Jan 2009
Posts: 397
Location: USA - Northeast

PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Given the significance of this 'new' area of research (as applied) to Egyptology, and given that the results are (probably) the most profoundly significant development since Howard Carter and Co. saw 'wonderful things' - I think we can look forward to the same technology being applied to every mummy (ever discovered), every bit of bone and even burial residue... I don't think that these particular results are the end of the tale - I think we are witnessing Egyptology moving into hyperspace and answers to questions like the Yuya/AIII relationship and many, many more will be answered relatively quickly (THAT should be Hawass's legacy). That spread-sheet they were using in the Discovery clip will soon be turning into a massive database (instantly looking up and comparing past results on multiple levels and throwing up bells, whistles and flashing lights when something of interest is found). It would be real nice if (rather than restricting access and publishing findings for vanity) it were to be made open and available online to ALL AND SUNDRY (imo it is that important). Perhaps 'egyptology' as a discipline will move more towards the audit of findings- this is a job for the mathematically inclined and there are millions out there in the cyberworld. Just keep on refining and improving the software

I love it!
_________________
Est modus in rebus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
BobManske
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 350

PostPosted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

freeTinker wrote:
It would be real nice if (rather than restricting access and publishing findings for vanity) it were to be made open and available online to ALL AND SUNDRY (imo it is that important). Perhaps 'egyptology' as a discipline will move more towards the audit of findings- this is a job for the mathematically inclined and there are millions out there in the cyberworld. Just keep on refining and improving the software


I hope you're not suggesting that the people who actually funded the research and the principal investigators who actually who did the work should immediately turn over all their data so people who contributed nothing to the projects could tear into the data like swarming piranhas. There is no possibility of progress in such a undisciplined approach.

I also hope you're not suggesting that subsequent publications by the PI's is done for vanity's sake. Decency requires that an interval of time must be given to these people to present their findings and their interpretations to peer review and then publish their works so the proper recognition and attribution can be given. The PI's are responsible for assembling teams of contributing experts such as "the mathematically inclined" to assist in the interpretation and publication of the results. This is true in all areas of research, not just Egyptology. That's how actual progress is made. That is what is important.

The research teams, the people who have contributed the funds and/or labor have a rightful claim to their research and the protection of their findings.

Please tell me you're not trying to piggy back for free on someone else's work. Please tell me I misunderstood you.

Bob
_________________
In the beginning the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
- Douglas Adams

Good bye, Doug, thanks a lot, and you're welcome for all the fish. Stop by our way again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And can we please get back to the topic now? Smile

It still seems to me that there is enough overlap in DNA to suggest some connection between Amenhotep III and Yuya. Would that possibly be through the mother of Amenhotep III?

The other possibility is that Yuya is somehow a member of a collateral branch of the royal family.

Both scenarios seem to require a bit of a leap of faith without further information. But having the DNA of Tutmosis IV and Amenhotep II sequences might help answering those questions.

I'm not sure, but I think that this much overlap in DNA markers due to coincidence is a bit much?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
freeTinker
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 Jan 2009
Posts: 397
Location: USA - Northeast

PostPosted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

anneke wrote:
And can we please get back to the topic now? Smile
Yes, of course... but please first allow me a respectful response to Bob who makes a good point or three

BobManske wrote:
Please tell me I misunderstood you
Yes you do, but not entirely- and that is ok, I know my words can irratate sometimes (especially when I use words like 'vanity'), as you will (hopefully) realize- I mean no disrespect- allow me to explain...

BobManske wrote:
Please tell me you're not trying to piggy back for free on someone else's work
I'm not in the business, so no more than you or I wanting to attend the latest production of Dido and Aeneas - I just don't like waiting in line for 10-years to allow every tom, dick and harry critic to see it first and then tell me what I am to think about it - I wanna make my own mind up. But your reference to 'piggy-backing' is VERY important...

As I see it, piggy-backing has been the standard in egyptology since day one. Each and (almost) every academic quoting one or ten that went before, each wishing to build their own case (not all) for fame and fortune (ok, I'm cynical). The problem with this approach has been, as a certain book says... we are constructing on sand. One mistake in the foundations and the whole edifice is going to come tumbling down... I genuinely think we are on the verge of seeing more solid foundations (now) with the embedding of DNA &c. into the discipline

I realize that Hawass irks many here (there and everywhere), but I kinda like his approach. I am no fan, but the discipline of egyptology seems to have been in desperate need of STANDARDS for a long time. His 'godfather-like' approach must be highly frustrating to those who work in the field, I really do understand this, but the way I see it- he is creating a conduit (himself/antiquities auth.) through which all must pass in order to do... (anything?) in other words, he is creating (good or bad) a standard

DNA evidence seems (to me) far more objective than many of the subjective results and professional opinions that have been thrown out over the years. This is my reference to vanity, I could have used the word irresponsibility. It is irresponsible for professionals in their field (egyptology) to go throwing out their pet theories as fact, or forcing them onto the (ignorant) public and their peers without or with little evidence. They do this for vanity, they do it to be published (meaning a hard cover with a glossy jacket and a price tag of $28.50) and all that other negative stuff I have mentioned

We need consistency and we need standards to develop, evolve and progress the discipline. Now you may ask, what do you know? you are a 'tinkering' outsider in this world of egyptology. Yes I am, but my business is (in part) international quality standards, some of these standards I have implemented in academia. I know about standards- and egyptology needs them! - would it be fair to say that just like wall street, self-regulation (standards) in egyptology have been found wanting?

I see a wonderful opportunity for the discipline the advance massively (with the intro of DNA &c.) This open practice (with the latest DNA findings) is wonderful- you, like I must be learning a massive amount (even) here on these boards with all the good stuff some are discussing. This would not be happening without open data, the talk would still be about theory this and theory that, and so and so says this, so it must be true coz he has a degree in this or that... open standards is step-one

And so on... hopefully we agree more than we disagree

---

anneke wrote:
It still seems to me that there is enough overlap in DNA to suggest some connection between Amenhotep III and Yuya. Would that possibly be through the mother of Amenhotep III?
Yes, I think it could be if I understood our NZ doctor's response in the other (big tut family) thread

anneke wrote:
I'm not sure, but I think that this much overlap in DNA markers due to coincidence is a bit much?
I see the same as you are seeing, I don't know... this is why I am hoping this research is extended to EVERY mummy and bone and becomes standard practice for every new (and old) find. Imagine the information that could be accumulated throughout egypt. Now widen the scope to include ancient cultures throughout the entire near east!!! - and then... I think this is very important to our understanding of Life and the Universe, not just egyptology

I was looking to see if a comparison lower down the listing was relevant (to see if a similar "similarity' of codes existed), but unless I am missing something, none can be applied... hopefully someone else knows
_________________
Est modus in rebus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i think if yuya and mutemwia had the same mother, you could test amenhotep III's mitochondrial dna and find a link or not. we dont have mutemwia at all, and know nothing of her. for a while she was equated with a mitannian princess. i think if they begin dna sequencing thutmose II to thutmose IV not only will they be able to genetically build the pharaohs line, but all the anonymous mummies might be tagged and placed as well, especially half the female mummies, which are likely to be sisters or wives of these pharoahs.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sobek
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Maine, USA

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I was just looking at the DNA for Yuya and Amenhotep III.
They share 6 allels at 5 different markers.


Good eye, anneke. May you live for ever (and ever).

I have been checking the microsatellite marker chart from the JAMA article for founder effects. Three of the individuals sampled may account for almost 98% (145 of 148 alleles) of the variation observed, and one additional unsampled individual could account for the remaining 2%. The three "founders" are the KV46 female (Thuya), the KV46 male (Yuya), and the KV35 male (Amenhotep?).

One way of measuring diversity in a population is to calculate the average difference between individuals not known to be related. Two of the "founder" pairs (Thuya/Yuya and Thuya/Amenhotep) share one of sixteen alleles for an average difference of 94% (Yes, the sample is ridiculously small. It's all I have to work with.). As anneke has pointed out, the other "founder" pair (Yuya/Amenhotep) shares six of sixteen alleles for a difference of 63%.
Quote:
Would that suggest that Aldred's theories about Queen Mutemwia could be correct? I.e. that Yuya was a brother of Queen Mutemwia?


I would say yes. I think the greater degree of allele sharing is probably significant. If it's what's expected for an uncle/nephew relationship, I don't know. Does anyone know a good geneticist they can ask?

I have read Aldred's theory in his 1988 book, but that doesn't give any details. Can someone cite some references which give more information about the possible relationship of Yuya and Mutemwia?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From what I have seen the connection between Yuya and Mutemwia was completely speculative.

A shabti of a man named Yey was found. He held the titles Master of the Horse and God's Father, which match those of Yuya. I think (but am not sure) that this may have led to the suggestion that Yey was the father of Yuya (who held the same titles) and the God's Father title was taken to mean "father in law to the king" which then led to the assumption that the daughter married to the king was Mutemwia.

Hayes mentions the alabaster shabti of Yey in The Scepter of Egypt II (p 229). This means the shabti is in the Metropolitan Museum. The theory that Yey, Yuya and Aye are father, son and grandson is mentioned by Hayes on page 260. The only reasons he gives are the similar titles the three hold and the similarity in the names (athough apparently there are slight variations in spelling between the 3?) He mentions that 2 of the 3 have connections to Akhmim. I'm fairly certain he means Yuya and Aye.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Diorite
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 210
Location: Land of Make-Believe

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobManske wrote:

I hope you're not suggesting that the people who actually funded the research and the principal investigators who actually who did the work should immediately turn over all their data so people who contributed nothing to the projects could tear into the data like swarming piranhas. There is no possibility of progress in such a undisciplined approach.



Should every piece of DNA evidence they've collected on any mummy whatsoever be released immediately? No. But all of the data used in a published article should be released as soon as the article is published. Part of science is putting your conclusions AND your data out there so people can evaluate your work. Does your data support your conclusions? Are there alternative explanations? Are you full of it? Only by releasing all of the data you collected and used in that published study can others evaluate it.

Diorite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sobek
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Maine, USA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does anyone know enough mathematics to say with confidence that an 8th order Pascal distribution is useful to assess allele sharing at 8 positions?

An 8th order Pascal distribution (to 2 digit precision)
0% 3% 11% 22% 28% 22% 11% 3% 0%

I am trying to understand the degree of possible allele sharing between full siblings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sobek wrote:
Does anyone know enough mathematics to say with confidence that an 8th order Pascal distribution is useful to assess allele sharing at 8 positions?

An 8th order Pascal distribution (to 2 digit precision)
0% 3% 11% 22% 28% 22% 11% 3% 0%

I am trying to understand the degree of possible allele sharing between full siblings.


That's what I come up with.
This would be for 4 different pairs (giving 8 alleles)

I did a quick check on 4 alleles and you do indeed get the 1-4-6-4-1 distribution (sharing 0-1-2-3-4 alleles resp.), so for 8 alleles you should get 1-8-28-56-70-56-28-8-1

This gives the percentages you gave.
So 28 % of siblings will share 4 alleles, 22% will share 3 alleles, another 22% shares 5 alleles and sharing only 2 or as many as 6 alleles only happens in 11% of the cases.
Sharing 0, 1, 7 or 8 alleles is fairly rare.

But this is assuming the parents are not related.

Given this the match between KV55 and KV35YL is rather remarkable. They share 11 out of 16 alleles.

I should note that the way I read it is that there are 8 markers (in the article) and every individual has 2 alleles at each marker. So in looking at probabilities that siblings share alleles we are actually looking at 16 alleles for an individual. (8 from the father, 8 from the mother)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sobek
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Maine, USA

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

EUREKA! (yes, I know it's Greek, not ancient Egyptian) with some prodding (and inspiration) from anneke. Thanks.

A 16th order Pascal distribution assigns 65,536 elements (the possible allele profiles of a child) to 17 groups (the number of alleles the child shares with another child of the same parents). I was confusing the number of positions with the number of alleles. Will someone please check me on this?
Quote:
I should note that the way I read it is that there are 8 markers (in the article) and every individual has 2 alleles at each marker. So in looking at probabilities that siblings share alleles we are actually looking at 16 alleles for an individual. (8 from the father, 8 from the mother)


Exactly so. More later...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group