DNA of Semyon

[tenne]

The more I read about the results of the 2nd DNA test, the more I wonder if it's like the official report (perhaps worded for political reason vs truthful reasons) or it's a translation issue

"A study of chromosomal (nuclear) DNA allows you to establish kinship only at a very close genetic distance: parents and children, siblings."

https://dyatlovpass.com/zolotaryov-exhumation-3?lid=1

Ancestry, 23andme etc are all based on nuclear DNA tests and have accurately identified niece, various 1st, 2nd and 3rd cousins, and aunts and uncles of mine who were known and correctly called them what they were by the various DNA companies. example, "1st cousin 966 cM | 14% shared DNA"  (correct) "2nd – 3rd Cousin 151 cM | 2% shared DNA" ( 3rd cousin)  "4th – 6th Cousin 34 cM | < 1% shared DNA1" (turned out to be 5th cousin)

So why he said this isn't clear to me..... Semyon could have been identified far more accurately by nuclear DNA, so it could be cost reasons why they didn't but it's not because it isn't accurate at that level of kinship

[Ziljoe]

I think that Semyon was also identified through his skull and teeth.

[tenne]

sorry, I should have been more specific. The grave was exhumed and the 1st DNA test ruled out a match between the body in the grave and Semyon's great great niece (I think that is the amount of greats) a 2nd test was at  Russian Forensic Medical Examination Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (RC SME) and it found a mitochondrial DNA match.

Mitochondrial DNA is the DNA passed by the women of the line, it never changes and can be traced back many generations. So there are many many many conceivable matches to that DNA within the extended family. Its not a very accurate way of defining kinship as all it can prove is there was a common woman ancestor sometime in history. The other DNA is very exact and needs an extremely tiny amount to test.

[Ziljoe]

Yes, but it is Semyon . I think the family are content ?

[WinterLeia]

The impression I get from the crime shows I watch is that nuclear DNA degrades a lot faster than mitochondrial. So if the remains are old, they might not be able to get uncontaminated nuclear DNA. And mitochondrial DNA can serve just as well in many situations. For instance, it was mitochondrial DNA that they used to identify Empress of Russia Alexandra Feodorovna Romanova after they found the grave where the Bolsheviks had dumped them. She was the granddaughter of Queen Victoria of Britain and so was Prince Philip, Elizabeth II’s husband, through his maternal line. So they obtained mitochondrial DNA from him (he was still alive at the time) and compared it to the remains. It was a match. Since the remains were old, but clearly did not predate Queen Victoria, the Empress was the only person it could be, because how many other descendants of Queen Victoria of England do you think anyone would find in an unmarked grave in the Russian wilderness? Plus, none of Queen Victoria’s other descendants were missing.

Regarding Semyon’s DNA, it does not exclude the possibility it could be his brother, because if they had the same mother, and I believe they did, they would have the same mitochondrial DNA. It’s not a theory I support, but I thought I should mention it.

[WinterLeia]

To clear up a syntax error, I made in my post, Prince Philip is a descendant of Queen Victoria through the maternal line, not her granddaughter 😀.

[tenne]

the maternal DNA would prove he was a part of the same family that descended from the same woman. So it could be anyone in the extended family very easily. I was very surprised that anyone who is supposed to be an expert in DNA like him would make such a false statement. doesn't bode well for truth in results IMO

[WinterLeia]

the maternal DNA would prove he was a part of the same family that descended from the same woman. So it could be anyone in the extended family very easily. I was very surprised that anyone who is supposed to be an expert in DNA like him would make such a false statement. doesn't bode well for truth in results IMO

I think the problem is that you are comparing a large database of DNA results to a case where the scientist has two samples from people who are related, but are not part of the same nuclear family. If that is all 23DNA had for you, it wouldn’t be able to tell you all that information either. That’s because it can’t match the largest part of your DNA to a particular person. You inherit one half of your DNA from each of your parents, but only one fourth from each of your grandparents. And even though siblings inherit their DNA from the same two people you did, it’s not the same sequence. Otherwise, siblings would be identical. This further complicates things when it comes to identifying cousins and all that.

Now, if you have DNA from all those people, well, yes, it would be accurate because you can clearly see all the relationships. You can see the big picture, the entire family tree. They even say on the site that the more people in your family that they have DNA for, the more accurate the results. The geneticist doesn’t have a database of Semyon’s relatives. Even worse he doesn’t have it from any member of Semyon’s nuclear family (parents, siblings, child). Of course, I’m not saying that they don’t know who Semyon’s nuclear family is. But without DNA from them, they can’t tell what part of his genetic code comes from his father and what part comes from his mother. So for the work that the geneticist is doing, mitochondrial DNA is the only accurate way to prove a distant relationships with Semyon. And if they had DNA from his child, the geneticist said they would still need to get nuclear DNA from him, which may be impossible considering the state of the remains.

[tenne]

"A study of chromosomal (nuclear) DNA allows you to establish kinship only at a very close genetic distance: parents and children, siblings.

This is an inaccurate statement from an expert. kinship can be determined down to 6th cousins by the amount of shared DNA. While the nuclear DNA would not say great great niece, it would give the amount of shared DNA and that would be used to determine how close he was to the other person. The fact that he stated it wouldn't, and he is an expert, makes me very suspicious of his test results


.

[tenne]

The chart I posted is what is used by search angels to help people who are adopted find family, when there is usually no information other than DNA. Normally the search starts with more distant family and narrows down but no names are needed to tell the relationship, within parameters, between the people. Unless of course the searcher is very lucky and gets a close match right off the bat

[WinterLeia]

The chart I posted is what is used by search angels to help people who are adopted find family, when there is usually no information other than DNA. Normally the search starts with more distant family and narrows down but no names are needed to tell the relationship, within parameters, between the people. Unless of course the searcher is very lucky and gets a close match right off the bat

That is only a chart that helps you to read the data that the site puts out and to give you a little bit of general information about DNA. It doesn’t prove or is making the claim that just because you have two samples from people who are sixth cousins or less that they can verify that. In fact, quite to the contrary. The International Society of Genetic Genealogy explained that sites like 23andme rely on two methods to establish relationships with relatives beyond the nuclear family, and both of them rely on them being able to establish which part of your genetic code is from your father and which part is from your mother. They don’t establish a relationship between anybody else except your parents and siblings and child. What they do instead is establish those relationships for you, and then take your mother’s DNA and establish her nuclear family, and your father’s DNA and establish his nuclear family, and that gives your aunts, uncles, first cousins, and grandparents. And then they just work outwards and backwards. Obviously, if there is a link in the chain missing, they’ve reached a dead end. So what the geneticist says is true. He is just being very precise, which you would expect from a scientist.

Hence, because there is no way to establish which part of Semyon’s genetic code comes from his father and which comes from his mother, assuming they even had nuclear DNA from him, they have to use mitochondrial DNA, because at least that narrows it down to his mother’s genetic code and excludes his father’s, even though it’s not specific to an individual.

[tenne]

You are wrong but I'm not going to clutter up the forum with how many ways you posted false information. I posted the chart to show what I meant, not to clutter it up with information on how to use DNA.

[WinterLeia]

And I will just go on record to say that I did not post false information. But you’re right. We’re just going to have to agree to disagree. Because what I don’t want the thread to devolve into is personal attacks.

[Ziljoe]

Semyon, or whoever the character in the photos is the same skull and teeth. I am sure his family recognised the photos.

The request I believe was to exhume the body to make sure. Although the DNA wasn't conclusive , the skull and teeth give evidence. There is nothing to suggest it was not Semyon.

Semyon's body was requested to be looked by the family, not by us or the authorities..

There is nothing to be gained by this thread.

Winterleia did not post false information.

[tenne]

The body that was found had tattoos and everyone who knew him said he didn’t have tattoos so who is in the grave is a question.

For the rest take a DNA course like I have and you will see what I mean

[tenne]

"On the reverse of the right hand near the base of the thumb there is the tattoo ‘Gena’ (‘Гена’)."

This is the tattoo that I can not understand why no one saw it and how he would be employed as a teacher around young women when he had a visible tattoo. 

Tattoos  were extremely frowned upon, only criminals had them (other than some soldier ones) and there would be no way to hide a hand tattoo. From my research on the attitudes to tattoos in soviet russia, only the lowest of the low had them and no one would allow young women around instructors like that

so how did no one who knew him know he had tattoos? I can see the other ones maybe being hidden, although he went on ski tours, according to the russian forum, where privacy between males wasn't a priority and they would have been seen, but not the hand one

[Manti]

I think it is possible that someone else (an escaped prisoner or a gangster on the run) was living under Semyon's identity because those are not just any tattoos... it's a whole different rabbithole but look into Russian prison tattoos.

[tenne]

I have and it’s a fascinating language of its own.

Even how he was identified is confusing and the fake hollow crown on his teeth is unusual

[Ziljoe]

Did the fAmily refute the images of Semyon in the photos?

[tenne]

From what I have seen, yes and no so I I’m not sure. They unequivocally said he didn’t have tattoos though

[RMK]

"A study of chromosomal (nuclear) DNA allows you to establish kinship only at a very close genetic distance: parents and children, siblings.

This is an inaccurate statement from an expert. kinship can be determined down to 6th cousins by the amount of shared DNA. While the nuclear DNA would not say great great niece, it would give the amount of shared DNA and that would be used to determine how close he was to the other person. The fact that he stated it wouldn't, and he is an expert, makes me very suspicious of his test results


.

tenne, you are correct that DNA can be used to determine how closely two people are related, even if they are distant relatives.  Stated precisely, DNA can tell you what proportion of segregating alleles two people have in common, identical-by-state (IBS). I expect some of the meaning in the scientist's words was lost in translation.  Specifically, I suspect what was translated as "kinship" refers to the exact form of the familial relationship between two people; it seems that WinterLeia understood it that way, too.  When you read the scientist's quote with that interpretation, what he says is true, per the chart you posted yourself.  If two people share 33% or more of their segregating alleles IBS, then they pretty much have to be a parent-offspring pair, or full sibs (or, monozygotic twins!).  Further, a parent-offspring pair will always share exactly 50% of segregating alleles IBS (except for rare scenarios, like uniparental disomy).  Since parent-offspring and full-sibling relationships are the least ambiguous to infer from IBS proportions, they are the most useful in constructing a pedigree (a "family tree", if you like) from DNA, which I believe is the point WinterLeia was trying to convey.  More distant familial relationships are much harder to nail down if all you have is the two individuals' DNA samples, which is evident from that chart.  For example, if two people share 18% of their segregating alleles IBS, it is within the realm of possibility that they could be any of the Group B or Group C types of relatives.