(23-12-2021, 02:53 PM)RenegadeHealer Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm not sure much could be proven definitively by the isolation of human DNA from unknown and un-sequenced people on the manuscript, or any ancient artifact for that matter. In fact, I could see this opening up the field to all sorts of new red herrings. For example, say a bit of human DNA was scraped off a folio of the VMs, which was definitively identified as belonging to Y-DNA haplotype Q. Soon you've got a crank with a whole blog dedicated to resurrecting Janick and Tucker's New World origin theory, on the basis that most Native American males are haplotype Q.
One would expect that there are many different samples of human DNA somewhere on the manuscript given the number of different people who have come into contact with the manuscript. So how could one isolate the author(s)' ? There are two possibilities that occur to me as a non-specialist in this area:
1) Looking for a place or places in the manuscript where only the author(s)' DNA would be found. This is why I suggested looking for DNA sealed under the ink as this would be separated from later DNA.
2) Another option that I have no idea as to whether it is viable is to look for the most degraded DNA. I don't know if DNA becomes more degraded over time and therefore the older DNA would be the most degraded. I would think that even if DNA is degraded then a large enough sample would allow the reconstruction of the original DNA.
This may all be science fiction, though science fiction often one day becomes science reality.
If one manages to isolate and sequence the author(s)' DNA then there are a world of possibilities for isolating the author(s)' by geography and possibly even by name. There is an ever growing database of human DNA by region and from different eras. One can even identify distant familial relationships on the basis of DNA.(I was fascinated by how the Golden State Killer was identified.) In the future, if we are not already able to, we will be able to identify all sorts of characteristics from the author(s)' DNA gender(obviously), eye colour and well as all sorts of physical and mental characteristics.
In short, without having any expertise in this area, I would expect that there are huge possibilities. The key is really how long it will take before such scientific techniques are realised. 30 years is a long time in terms of the current rate of advance of science, so I would think that in less than 30 years this will be possible. However 30 years is also a long time in terms of our lifespans, so we may not want to wait. Of course this could conceivably be possible in much less than 30 years.
(23-12-2021, 03:05 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.That's what I was thinking as well. Even if a determination were conclusive (e.g. a DNA strain from a specific region in Europe), this still wouldn't allow us to eliminate much. It wouldn't even eliminate New World theories.
My thinking would be much more ambitious, though I don't think unrealistic. I quite enjoy some of these finding your ancestry TV shows. I remember one where they were looking at the ancestry of Larry David, an American comedian, and Bernie Sanders, an American politician. They discovered that they both had a common stretch of DNA that demonstrated that they both had a common ancestor in recent history that neither were aware of(few generations ago).
The recent identification of the Golden State killer was done in the following way: they had a DNA sample of the killer's DNA, the killer's DNA was not in the national DNA database, a slightly sneaky detective sent the killer's DNA to one of those ancestry testing companies which will highlight known relatives, the detective then essentially triangulated from the known relatives to the actual killer. I would think this kind of approach could be used to triangulate on the Voynich author(s)'
@ Mark
I think it is not possible to search DNA under the ink.
The ink is a dissolved liquid and is absorbed by the parchment.
The human DNA would be somewhere in the ink.
I can understand your idea, but it is not a varnish where I can just peel off.
(23-12-2021, 07:08 PM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.@ Mark
I think it is not possible to search DNA under the ink.
The ink is a dissolved liquid and is absorbed by the parchment.
The human DNA would be somewhere in the ink.
I can understand your idea, but it is not a varnish where I can just peel off.
What you have said makes perfect sense. So maybe rather than looking for DNA "under" the ink it would be better to look for DNA "in" the ink. One would not expect later DNA such as that of Wilfred Voynich to be found in the ink as the ink has dried. If the ink has not destroyed the DNA then it should still be there in the ink.
I repeat that I am no expert it this area and would welcome the opinions of those with expertise in this area.
Likewise other may also have ideas where else in the manuscript the author(s)' DNA might be found separate from the other DNA.
A note on ink.
Glair (eggwhite) was used for clear or the color white. It was used in the headdress of bather on folio 78r ( clear, not white ) and a face on folio 70v (see McCrone Institute report, table). The protein could be used to determine the origin of the embryo (DNA). There is hope that the protein is much less contaminated than the parchment, since it was only mixed with calcium carbonate but not otherwise processed. So one would determine the origin of the ink instead of the origin of the parchment. However, it also only works with a comparative database.
Gene databases already exist for poultry ( You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. ). However, I don't know how extensive these databases are.
Quote:The DNA sequences used to generate the poultry-specific PCR systems for turkey, pheasant, quail, and guinea fowl were obtained from gene databases.
edit: For example, there is also an extensive genome database for chickens ( You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. ).
The manuscript is six hundred years old. Even if only two different humans handled it each year, that's more than 1,200 different opportunities for epithelial or other cells to be left behind (including mine!), and that doesn't include the multiple humans who helped to create it: slaughter and skin the calves, prepare the parchment, mix the ink, grind the pigment, write the text, paint the illustrations, organize the sheets and quires, sew the quires and attach them to the binding, etc.
And remember as well that it was common in the Middle Ages for scribes to take dictation from an "author" or content-creator. It's quite likely that if there was a single brain responsible for the content of the manuscript that s/he might never had touched it in a way that would be distinguishable from the scribes and artist(s).
The best places to look for cellular debris in any manuscript would be along the edges (where hands turn pages) and in the gutters (where there isn't much airflow).
(23-12-2021, 08:22 PM)LisaFaginDavis Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The manuscript is six hundred years old. Even if only two different humans handled it each year, that's more than 1,200 different opportunities for epithelial or other cells to be left behind (including mine!), and that doesn't include the multiple humans who helped to create it: slaughter and skin the calves, prepare the parchment, mix the ink, grind the pigment, write the text, paint the illustrations, organize the sheets and quires, sew the quires and attach them to the binding, etc.
The best places to look for cellular debris in any manuscript would be along the edges (where hands turn pages) and in the gutters (where there isn't much airflow).
Maybe I have taken too much interest in true crime. I do get the impression that specialists are able to isolate specific DNA from absolutely minuscule samples and in unexpected and ingenious ways.
It also seems to me that DNA science has come a very long way in the last 20 years and where it will be in the next 20 years, who knows?
I should have been more specific to have said scribe(s)' rather than author(s)'. As you point out the idea of an author is a more nebulous concept. So I would be talking about a scribe's DNA or the DNA of more than one scribe. The association between scribes and authors as distinct or the same is a separate determination. Here I include illustrator(s) amongst scribes. Basically I mean people who were physically involved with writing/drawing the original text/illustrations on the manuscript.
You are absolutely correct that one would expect a very large number of samples of all sorts of peoples' DNA on the manuscript that is why I wonder what ways there might be to distinguish the scribe(s)' DNA from the rest of the DNA. I would imagine that the scribe(s)' DNA is more likely to be found in certain places where other DNA might not be found that is why I suggested looking for DNA in the ink, where other DNA is much less likely to be found.
Maybe I have too much faith in what science might be capable of and what clever ways there might be to isolate the DNA of individuals that we are interested without getting bogged down in all the DNA of individuals that we are not interested in.
The cost and simplicity of DNA sequencing has improved leaps and bounds in recent decades, so it may be that extracting the DNA of the 1000+ different people to have interacted with a given page of the manuscript over the years could be done with no harm to the manuscript. Potentially then all those 1000ish people could be identified and eliminated from interest. 1000ish people seems like a lot of people to eliminate, but there may be ways of eliminating many of them relatively quickly.
I wonder if there are ways of guessing what era some DNA may date from. From my understanding harmless mutations accumulate over time and often can be used as specific flags for specific changes(Kohamin markers). Can
epigenetics be relevant here? I saw an article looking at using the recombination clock to date DNA, but I don't know of that will work over the Voynich timescale. If it is possible to date DNA then lots of DNA samples can be eliminated on the basis that they are not old enough.
I am sure there are plenty of other strategies for isolating scribe DNA that haven't even occurred to me.
It will be interesting to see if this becomes possible in the future.
[quote="Mark Knowles" pid='48420' dateline='1640204061
Why would we be interested in finding Wilfred Voynich's DNA? Nobody seems to doubt that he had contact with the manuscript. And why do you think Wilfred Voynich's DNA will be necessarily easier to isolate than that of the author(s)'?
[/quote]
In order to validate the putative procedure - because it would be fresher and we know the VM was in his hands for many years. Plus reference samples from living relatives could be available.
Just to be clear, I doubt there is ANY realistic chance of separating and identifying any single human DNA strand from a mixture containing, at least, scores of contaminants, human and non-human, probably all extensively degraded.
(24-12-2021, 06:31 AM)DONJCH Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.because it would be fresher
What do you mean by "fresher"?
I think Mark means Wilfred's DNA is more recently applied than the vms makers, and he is known to have owned it for some time so there is perhaps a possible sample in there somewhere. There are "fresher" samples to look for that are also known. Maybe it is time to make lists of known contact and make genealogies thereof if not living, to be ready to compare with the testing that could be done in future.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
So currently neither goes back very far but i just found more on Ethel so i will update some info, already attached some sources to what i found. The farther back you go, the more forward you can go to find more living relatives that could provide samples. Ethel already has a list of living relatives that could be tested for autosomal matches, one shows publicly and works at the University of Toronto. Wilfred so far has no relatives listed to test.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
These both have living relatives...