A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[Chris]

There seems to be a reveling in the media fame.

But at the moment it seems more like "Infamy, infamy - they've all got it in for me!"

[Caligo Umbrator]

Yes, certainly the book says it was a mtDNA haplogroup. And in that case it would share no more than its name with the Y-DNA haplogroup T1a1.

I must admit it didn't occur to me to try to identify the sequence, but as we know from the book it was submitted in or around May, is T1a1 and had ethnicity "Russian", it may indeed be feasible!

Hi Chris,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...report=genbank

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...9?report=graph

This was submitted 24th April 2014.

It also states - "ethnicity:Russian; origin_locality:Russia", which would tie in with the claims in the book.
As I stated before, its not really my field so I'm not sure if its of any use.

Yours, Caligo

[mickreed]

Am I the only one who finds the tone of those tweets bizarre, considering the circumstances?

They seem very bizarre.

[Caligo Umbrator]

But at the moment it seems more like "Infamy, infamy - they've all got it in for me!"

[ATTACH]16374[/ATTACH]

Hi Chris,

It does all seem rather like a 'Carry On' film, doesn't it?

If only I could find them on DVD here in the USA.

Yours, Caligo

[Chris]

Hi Chris,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...report=genbank

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...9?report=graph

This was submitted 24th April 2014.

It also states - "ethnicity:Russian; origin_locality:Russia", which would tie in with the claims in the book.
As I stated before, its not really my field so I'm not sure if its of any use.

It certainly seems to fit the bill. Very interesting.

[Purkis]

Hi Chris.

Maybe the cheese tweet is very telling - Dilemma - " Aged for 7 years - molds in your fridge after a week"



Yours, Caligo

I thought that myself. Very pertinent, whether intended or not.

[Caligo Umbrator]

Hi, Chris.

If you thought that was interesting look at this -


" LOCUS KJ748572 16572 bp DNA circular PRI 07-MAY-2014
DEFINITION Homo sapiens haplogroup T1a1 mitochondrion, complete genome.
ACCESSION KJ748572
/organelle="mitochondrion"
/mol_type="genomic DNA"
/isolate="FTDNA 295554"
/db_xref="taxon:9606"
/haplogroup="T1a1
/note="ethnicity:Russian; origin_locality:Russia"

As described on "
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...report=genbank "


I believe this is the same entry percolated down to a more readable form.
It certainly contains the same pertinent (KJ748572(Russian)) information, halpogroup info and shows the same entry date.

KJ748572(Russian) FTDNA Haplogroup T1a1 07-MAY-2014
A73G T152C A263G 309.1C 315.1C 523.1C 523.2A G709A A750G A1438G
G1888A A2706G T4216C G4596A A4769G G4820A A4917G C7028T G8697A A8860G
T9899C T10463C A11251G G11719A C12633A G13368A C14766T G14905A A15326G
C15452A
A15607G G15928A T16126C A16163G C16186T C16188- 16193.1C C16294T T16519C

As described on " http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1400053213 "

Do you see a 315.1C in there anywhere?

Yours, Caligo

[Caligo Umbrator]

Hi Chris, Mickreed et al,

So if the reported 314.1C that is claimed to relate to the identification of CE, is now, as we believe, more correctly named 315.1C and the 315.1C information also appears in the 'Kosminski' correlation, as described by JL and RE (P. 292) then is it, do you think important or significant?

The sequence that I highlighted in my last previous post is, I believe, the same as used by JL to identify the T1a1 as being of Russian origin. JL calls it a reference sequence and says that it has exactly the same long sequence as obtained from the shawl.Hi Chris, Mickreed et al,

So if the reported 314.1C that is claimed to relate to the identification of CE, is now, as we believe, more correctly named 315.1C and the 315.1C information also appears in the 'Kosminski' correlation, as described by JL and RE (P. 292) then is it, do you think important or significant?
I have to say that it seems so to me.
As much of the ' Eddowes ' mDNA was said to be fragmented, does anyone think that perhaps an elemental error has been performed in its reconstruction and that, perhaps, what DNA and mDNA there was upon the shawl, after multiple handling untold numbers of individuals, may have undermined or contaminated the findings of the investigation?
Or has there been an even more major error?

Yours, Caligo

[mickreed]

Hi Chris, Mickreed et al,

So if the reported 314.1C that is claimed to relate to the identification of CE, is now, as we believe, more correctly named 315.1C and the 315.1C information also appears in the 'Kosminski' correlation, as described by JL and RE (P. 292) then is it, do you think important or significant?

The sequence that I highlighted in my last previous post is, I believe, the same as used by JL to identify the T1a1 as being of Russian origin. JL calls it a reference sequence and says that it has exactly the same long sequence as obtained from the shawl.

This is going to take a bit of work all round, Caligo. A job for this evening:

However a quick look at Family Tree DNA here

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/T_FGS/default.aspx?section=mtresults

suggests that T1a1 is pretty common in many places. A quick count has 129 people in haplogroup T1 and of these, 51 are T1a1 so - nearly 40%. Even more are sub-clades of T1a1.

More later.

[Caligo Umbrator]

Hi, Mickreed

I don't know if you caught my earlier post - I believe I have found the exact Kosminski T1a1 match within the NCBI database that JL claimed he had used to exactly identify the Kosminski long sequence as obtained from the shawl, as noted in the book (P. 292).
That is to say, the absolute and exact same sequence that JL matched within the book, and which is claimed as proof of Kosminski's involvement. It has the inclusion within that sequence of the important 315.1C component.
What I am suggesting is, that if the identifying component of CE's mDNA is 314.1C, and we know that 314.1C is in reality 315.1C and 315.1C is apparent in the 'suspcts DNA' as well as the mDNA from CE, then is there a cross-contamination?

Within the book 314.1C is THE cited proof of any Eddowes link. So if 314.1c is indeed 315.1C and 315.1C is ALSO in 'Kosminskis' sequence, then how is it unique to Eddowes?

I have looked at the link you provided, it is interesting but does not seem to be entirely relevant. I am still going double checking through what you sent but I was suggesting that more significant and specific information was available on the links I posted earlier.


Your, Caligo.

[mickreed]

Within the book 314.1C is THE cited proof of any Eddowes link. So if 314.1c is indeed 315.1C and 315.1C is ALSO in 'Kosminskis' sequence, then how is it unique to Eddowes?

I have looked at the link you provided, it is interesting but does not seem to be entirely relevant. I am still going double checking through what you sent but I was suggesting that more significant and specific information was available on the links I posted earlier.

Hey Caligo.

I'm at work at the moment so can't do anything until this evening, The existence of 315.1C in the Kosminski sequence, if that's what it is, is to be expected. Most Europeans carry it.

So 315.1C is NOT unique to Eddowes, not even close. It was merely the fact that they called it, incorrectly, 314.1C that got them into trouble and led them astray.

Cheers

Mick

[Tom_Wescott]

Jeff,

In light of the knowledge that the DNA on the shawl is not Eddowes or Kosminskis, I'm sure you'll agree that there's no way Kosminski could have been the Ripper and can once and for all be struck from the suspect list.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[drstrange169]

"Jeff,
In light of the knowledge that the DNA on the shawl is not Eddowes or Kosminskis, I'm sure you'll agree that there's no way Kosminski could have been the Ripper and can once and for all be struck from the suspect list.
Yours truly, Tom Wescott"

Hello Tom,

Even though I have no scientific qualifications, I'm deducing you meant to post this on the "DNA error" thread.

[GUT]

I note that Mr Edwards' site [store and tour] has been very quiet.

Just looked at the news section nothing since Sept 8.

Funny that.

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks, Dusty. I just posted it there. I'm having a bit of fun with Jeff. I don't actually mean a word of it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott