Early DNA Testing

In late 1999 we were funded to have DNA testing done on the two skulls (the Starchild and the Adult Female skull found with it) for the fist time. BOLD, a forensic DNA lab in Vancouver, B.C., specializing in recovering DNA less than 50 years old, agreed to perform the tests. They carried out testing as described in the two links below. They were able to recover both types of DNA from the Adult Female skull found with the Starchild, but the Starchild proved very difficult to type. Finally, over the course of four attempts, they recovered a small amount of what they felt was a sample of the Starchild's Y chromosome, which if accurate and not the result of contamination meant it was a male with entirely human DNA. Although this result would seem to end al speculation about the Starchild not being entirely human, there was legitimate reason to be skeptical about the result.

Both types of DNA were easily recovered from the Adult Female skull of the same age, found in the same place, which suggested that if the Starchild was indeed a deformed but otherwise normal human its DNA should have been equally easy to recover. However, the first two attempts to recover Starchild DNA produced contaminated samples--possibly due to the number of people who handled the skull prior to testing, possibly due to the inability, despite its best efforts, of the BOLD lab to maintain the strictly non-contaminated environment required for extraction of ancient DNA. Even a precious tooth was sacrificed to the testing process, to no avail. On the third try a very small sample of genetic material was recovered: just 200 picograms, as opposed to the 1,000 picograms needed for useful amplification. Multiple amplifications and test were performed on this small sample, and the resulting  Y chromosome, the smallest human chromosome, which arguably should have been one of the most difficult for a primer to recover. Then a fourth test was carried out to be sure, with the same result--a male human.

Text of the First Forensic DNA report (1999)

Analysis of the First Forensic DNA report (1999)

Lloyd Pye and other proponents of the project remained skeptical that these results could be 100% reliable, however, they are presented here in full for your evaluation. The previous contaminations and the fact that the BOLD lab was not designed to recover ancient DNA (the Starchild bone is 900 years old), cast doubt on the validity of the result. Luckily, we were able to secure funding for a second round of testing at Trace Genetics, a lab specializing in the recovery of ancient DNA, which produced considerably different--and we have to assume more accurate--results. Click to view the Trace Genetics report.