Are You related to King Tut ?

[CraigS]

King Tut and half of European men share DNA (http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-08-king-tut-european-men-dna.html)

Seems that 50 percent of European men possess the same DNA profile group as King Tut!

They think it may have originated 9,500 years ago and spread to Europe in 7000BC.

Amazing stuff !

Cheers

[renormalised]

That's nothing.....there is an area in NW Wales (I think) where a body was found and dated to 9500BCE (7500BC). They found a good deal of usable marrow and stuff in the bones they could get a DNA analysis from, and so they did. They then tested the local school children and their parents in the study, to see if there was any connection. Turns out 90% of the population in the area are direct descendants of this buried person. He's their 385th great grandfather!!!!. How they found out was they found the person's Y chromosomes (it was a male) and they managed to extract enough DNA to map out the gene markers on the Y chromosomes that are specific through generations. They also found the mitochondria as well, so it was a bit of a bonanza and lucky he had tissue that was in good preservation.

But as far as being related to King Tut, that wouldn't surprise me in the least. You wouldn't be directly related to him, as he had no children, but you'd certainly be related more distantly if you both share the R1b Haplogroup. He'd be your cousin, umpteen times removed.

[xelasnave]

Very interesting Craig.
Genghis Khan dna can be found in 8% of the population in a large region such that it is about 0.5% world wide...
Wonder what my family did way back, who they were etc.
alex

[TrevorW]

I'm not sure who my Mummy was

[renormalised]

Genghis Khan (1155-1227)

I'm lucky, I do know:)

I'll have to check my family tree to see where I fit in as I have Rurikid blood and I know that some of them married into Genghis's family. However, I have plenty of others scattered all over the place:)

His descendants are most likely cousins.

[sally1jack]

[QUOTE=renormalised;750870]
You wouldn't be directly related to him, as he had no children,

Aahhhh , none that you know of they reakon he was a bit of a player that Tut fellow;)

[renormalised]

I know.....I knew him and his sister, Tootuntessie, when they had the gig at the RaRa Casino....down in Thebes:):P

[xelasnave]

Well if one thinks it thru we all came from that first primative cell so we are all related at some point... even to everything that is alive on this planet today...animals and plants as well.
alex

[multiweb]

Was it King Tut or Toot! That would explain the way I drive. Can't fight the genes... :driving:

[sjastro]

There was a lot of inbreeding in the royal family of the Pharaohs.

Does that mean Tut married his sister and had kids?

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/09/tut-dna/tut-family-tree
According to the tree Tut's parents were brother and sister.

Does it also mean that 50% of European men are related to each other in ways they don't care not to admit?:whistle::whistle::whistle:

Regards
Steven

[Gem]

Ancestry can be quite interesting. We had a family rumour that we were descended from Joseph Banks (who had no kids!). Turned out we were descended from a whaling Captain Banks who moved out to Oz in the late 1820s. However, he was descended from Sir Joseph's father's second marriage or something. So the rumour was kinda true in a very indirect way...