Jan
01-03-2008, 09:55 AM
This was on Monster Quest on the History Channel last night and will air again on Saturday night. Igor has given me permission to share these with everyone here. We wish to thank Igor for sharing this information with us and with you all as well. Thank you Igor.
Note: Curt Nelson did not run the test on the female teeth that he took from Igor or he did so and never returned the results of the analysis to Igor, and did not give them out on the show. We are still checking into this matter with hopes that we will be told the results in the very near future.
It may also be included that Dr. Todd Distotel of New York University never gave Igor the analysis report on Khwit and the Female thought to be possibly Zana either. We are still battling to get these result analysis also at this time.
Names have remained in the following text but e-mail and addresses have been removed for privacies sake. Also we do not tell everything we know before we know what we have to offer everyone.
Thank you,
Jan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Curt Nelson"
To: "Burtsev"
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 2:40 AM
Subject: Khwit tooth analysis
Dear Dr. Burtsev,
Here is a description of the work I did on the teeth you sent to Doug
Hajicek for DNA analysis.
I cleaned the exterior of the Khwit tooth to remove contaminating DNA
from its surface. The tooth was vigorously brushed with fresh tooth
paste, rinsed several times with distilled DNA-free water, and then
soaked in 0.5% bleach solution over night followed by several distilled
water rinses.
The tooth was broken open aseptically and tooth powder was generated
from interior portions of the tooth by 1) crushing, and 2) drilling
with a Dremel tool outfitted with a diamond bit.
Twenty-five milligrams of tooth powder - from crushing and drill dust -
was DNA extracted using the Qiagen tissue DNA extraction kit as
follows: 180 ul of DNA extraction buffer and 20 ul proteinase K
solution was added to each tooth powder sample.
(A "spiked positive control" sample included was 25 mg of crushed tooth
powder with 100 human cells added (from a human cell line culture), and
handled in parallel with the samples. This "spiked control" should
produce a human DNA result. Failure to do so would indicate something
is wrong with the procedure.)
The samples were incubated at 56 degrees C for 18 hours, and then the
liquid portion of the samples (which should contain any DNA dissolved
from the tooth material) was column purified to extract the DNA from
the solution. The "DNA samples" were then amplified by polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) using primers designed to amplify either human or
chimpanzee mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA).
DNA (human) was successfully amplified from the positive control (human
cell spiked) tooth samples using three different primer pairs, however
no DNA was amplified from the natural tooth samples. This means that
the procedure was successful - human DNA was amplified from the
positive control samples - but that no "natural" DNA compatible with
three primer pairs suitable for human and chimpanzee, was found. Either
the natural DNA in the tooth was too degraded (possible) , or I was
unsuccessful in extracting the natural DNA (possible), or the natural
DNA was not compatible with the primers used (very improbable).
I hope that you are able to view the photos I attached, which show the
DNA amplification results, and that you can understand my descriptions.
Please feel free to ask for any clarifications you would like me to
make.
Sincerely,
Curt Nelson
University of Minnesota, USA
On Mar 28, 2007, at 5:32 PM, Burtsev wrote:
Thanks Kurt!
Igor Burtsev
----- Original Message ----- From: "Curt Nelson"
To: "Beth Pacunas"
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:26 AM
Subject: Re: Teeth
To All:
I have received the teeth -- two from a woman and one from a man, according to the notes with the teeth. I plan to do a DNA analysis on the teeth in April -- I will extract DNA from the teeth (if possible), attempt to amplify any mitochondrial DNA using three sets of primers, and sequence any DNA fragments produced. The primers are designed to amplify segments of the mitochondrial genome in which human and chimpanzee sequences are significantly different.
I will certainly write a description of my efforts and the results.
Sincerely,
Curt Nelson
On Mar 28, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Beth Pacunas wrote:
Hi,
FYI, all...
The two emails below are from Burstev, owner of the teeth. He would like, Curt, DNA results in written form that includes the information in the first email. (Much of what is provided is also part of my story.) The second email, if I am not mistaken, suggests that the 2 women's teeth may be Zana's.
Please respond.
Thank you,
Beth
ONE:
I would like to sign now an agreement with your people about the results of further activities re analysis and publication of them. I would like you to send me after the official paper with results documented. And it should be written in that papers that the samples had been received from me, Igor Bourtsev, Russian hominologist.
They both have been excavated in 1975 in Tkhina village of Abkhazia, 80 km away of the city of Sukhum, the Abkhazian capital. The male skull belonged to Khwit, son of a local human and Zana - a wild woman, captured in the 19th century by the local people in a forest and kept in the fence near the Tkhina village. Her son Khwit died in 1953 in ages of 67. As to another skull - female one - it was a skull from a neighborings to Khwit's grave, very old one (the grave of the end of 19th century), and the woman was buried in the not ordinary position - she lied on her side with legs bent. The skull has very protruding jaws (lip/teeth prognatism). It was restored by me in the laboratory headed by anthropologist Dr Lebedinskaya under her supervision. (It is also the answer to your questions)
TWO:
I have written the previous letter because till now I haven't received the results of DNA analysis from Dr Distotel of NYUniv. Though they made that analysis in July, 2006, and asked them several times to send me their conclusion written. Also I want to add that it's very important to learn if the sKulls are of close relatives. If so - the female sKull is Zana's one. If no - that is not Zana's...
Igor
Note: Curt Nelson did not run the test on the female teeth that he took from Igor or he did so and never returned the results of the analysis to Igor, and did not give them out on the show. We are still checking into this matter with hopes that we will be told the results in the very near future.
It may also be included that Dr. Todd Distotel of New York University never gave Igor the analysis report on Khwit and the Female thought to be possibly Zana either. We are still battling to get these result analysis also at this time.
Names have remained in the following text but e-mail and addresses have been removed for privacies sake. Also we do not tell everything we know before we know what we have to offer everyone.
Thank you,
Jan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Curt Nelson"
To: "Burtsev"
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 2:40 AM
Subject: Khwit tooth analysis
Dear Dr. Burtsev,
Here is a description of the work I did on the teeth you sent to Doug
Hajicek for DNA analysis.
I cleaned the exterior of the Khwit tooth to remove contaminating DNA
from its surface. The tooth was vigorously brushed with fresh tooth
paste, rinsed several times with distilled DNA-free water, and then
soaked in 0.5% bleach solution over night followed by several distilled
water rinses.
The tooth was broken open aseptically and tooth powder was generated
from interior portions of the tooth by 1) crushing, and 2) drilling
with a Dremel tool outfitted with a diamond bit.
Twenty-five milligrams of tooth powder - from crushing and drill dust -
was DNA extracted using the Qiagen tissue DNA extraction kit as
follows: 180 ul of DNA extraction buffer and 20 ul proteinase K
solution was added to each tooth powder sample.
(A "spiked positive control" sample included was 25 mg of crushed tooth
powder with 100 human cells added (from a human cell line culture), and
handled in parallel with the samples. This "spiked control" should
produce a human DNA result. Failure to do so would indicate something
is wrong with the procedure.)
The samples were incubated at 56 degrees C for 18 hours, and then the
liquid portion of the samples (which should contain any DNA dissolved
from the tooth material) was column purified to extract the DNA from
the solution. The "DNA samples" were then amplified by polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) using primers designed to amplify either human or
chimpanzee mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA).
DNA (human) was successfully amplified from the positive control (human
cell spiked) tooth samples using three different primer pairs, however
no DNA was amplified from the natural tooth samples. This means that
the procedure was successful - human DNA was amplified from the
positive control samples - but that no "natural" DNA compatible with
three primer pairs suitable for human and chimpanzee, was found. Either
the natural DNA in the tooth was too degraded (possible) , or I was
unsuccessful in extracting the natural DNA (possible), or the natural
DNA was not compatible with the primers used (very improbable).
I hope that you are able to view the photos I attached, which show the
DNA amplification results, and that you can understand my descriptions.
Please feel free to ask for any clarifications you would like me to
make.
Sincerely,
Curt Nelson
University of Minnesota, USA
On Mar 28, 2007, at 5:32 PM, Burtsev wrote:
Thanks Kurt!
Igor Burtsev
----- Original Message ----- From: "Curt Nelson"
To: "Beth Pacunas"
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:26 AM
Subject: Re: Teeth
To All:
I have received the teeth -- two from a woman and one from a man, according to the notes with the teeth. I plan to do a DNA analysis on the teeth in April -- I will extract DNA from the teeth (if possible), attempt to amplify any mitochondrial DNA using three sets of primers, and sequence any DNA fragments produced. The primers are designed to amplify segments of the mitochondrial genome in which human and chimpanzee sequences are significantly different.
I will certainly write a description of my efforts and the results.
Sincerely,
Curt Nelson
On Mar 28, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Beth Pacunas wrote:
Hi,
FYI, all...
The two emails below are from Burstev, owner of the teeth. He would like, Curt, DNA results in written form that includes the information in the first email. (Much of what is provided is also part of my story.) The second email, if I am not mistaken, suggests that the 2 women's teeth may be Zana's.
Please respond.
Thank you,
Beth
ONE:
I would like to sign now an agreement with your people about the results of further activities re analysis and publication of them. I would like you to send me after the official paper with results documented. And it should be written in that papers that the samples had been received from me, Igor Bourtsev, Russian hominologist.
They both have been excavated in 1975 in Tkhina village of Abkhazia, 80 km away of the city of Sukhum, the Abkhazian capital. The male skull belonged to Khwit, son of a local human and Zana - a wild woman, captured in the 19th century by the local people in a forest and kept in the fence near the Tkhina village. Her son Khwit died in 1953 in ages of 67. As to another skull - female one - it was a skull from a neighborings to Khwit's grave, very old one (the grave of the end of 19th century), and the woman was buried in the not ordinary position - she lied on her side with legs bent. The skull has very protruding jaws (lip/teeth prognatism). It was restored by me in the laboratory headed by anthropologist Dr Lebedinskaya under her supervision. (It is also the answer to your questions)
TWO:
I have written the previous letter because till now I haven't received the results of DNA analysis from Dr Distotel of NYUniv. Though they made that analysis in July, 2006, and asked them several times to send me their conclusion written. Also I want to add that it's very important to learn if the sKulls are of close relatives. If so - the female sKull is Zana's one. If no - that is not Zana's...
Igor