Starchild DNA Results Evaluated with Mixed Results

We diverge from bigfoot a bit to consider another hot cryptozoological project. The Starchild Project  has produced some DNA results worth taking a good look at. They are quite astonishing. The website (http://starchildproject.com/ )gives good background information on the unusual skull found in Mexico alongside a normal looking skull in the 1930s. Also to be found there are two sequences:  a 167 bp mtDNA sequence, and a 211 bp purported FOXP2 gene sequence.  The Starchild project has involved many different kinds of analysis over 13 years. Of course, the central question is what is the genetic origin of the skull? Is it human, nonhuman, alien, or some combination. DNA sequencing is just the technique to answer these questions, but extraction from ancient material 900 years old can be difficult. Elimination of possible modern human contamination can be even more difficult for a specimen handled casually many times since its discovery. That being said, we took the DNA sequences at face value to verify the interpretations of their anonymous geneticist. The mtDNA conclusions are believable; the FOXP2 gene results are not.

Mitochondrial DNA

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited from the mother. It has up to 10,000 times more copies in a cell than the single copy of nDNA and hence is easier to extract and sequence. A short 167 bp sequence was obtained (the complete human mitochondrial genome is 15,569 bp) and put to the test of a BLAST™ search, finding that it matched human mtDNA but with way more mutations(17) than are found among the human population for this sequence (0-1). Table 1. shows our results for aligning this sequence against the NCBI reference genomic sequences database.

Table 1.  Starchild mtDNA Comparisons

Homo sapiens	LEN(bp)	%ID	SCORE	NCBI Accession
modern human	170	89.41	181	NC_012920.1	mtDNA
Neanderthal	170	88.82	176	NC_011137.1	mtDNA
Altai (Denisovan)	170	88.24	172	NC_013993.1	mtDNA
Other Chordates
Heidelberg Man	170	88.24	172	NC_023100.1	mtDNA
pygmy chimpanzee	170	86.47	158	NW_003870568.1	nuclear
chimpanzee	170	85.88	154	NC_001643.1	mtDNA
orangutan	170	84.12	140	NW_002981604.1	nuclear
red-cheeked gibbon	171	80.7	120	NC_018753.1	mtDNA
gorilla	84	89.29	96.9	NW_004001282.1	nuclear
SP Website
human	167	89.82			mtDNA

FOXP2 Gene: nDNA

In contrast to the above mitochondrial sequence, which shows a relationship to primates, the nuclear sequence matches everything under the sun about equally. It’s pure junk sequence, intergene spacer. Foerster’s geneticist claimed a match to the nuclear gene FOXP2. “Not even close,” says Garry Nolan on the website. I concur. Table 2 shows our search results.

 Table 2.  “FOXP2” Nuclear DNA Comparisons

vs. Bacteria	Length	%ID	SCORE	NCBI Accession
Xanthomonas campestris pv. raphani 756C,	201	90.05	269	NC_017271.1
Advenella kashmirensis W13003	200	89.00	262	NZ_KI650980.1
Cellulophaga geojensis KL-A	199	88.94	260	NZ_ARZX01000003.1
Pseudoxanthomonas spadix BD-a59	193	89.64	255	NC_016147.2
Vibrio parahaemolyticus 863	195	88.72	250	NZ_AOOY01000020.1
Paenibacillus sp. A9	191	88.48	244	NZ_AOIG01000002.1
Vibrio halioticoli NBRC 102217	192	88.54	246	NZ_BAUJ01000029.1
Pseudomonas sp. CFII68	191	88.48	244	NZ_ATLN01000099.1
Vibrio alginolyticus E0666	192	88.54	246	NZ_AMPD01000075.1
Photobacterium damselae subsp. damselae CIP	191	88.48	244	NZ_ADBS01000002.1
vs. Other nonchordata
mulberry	198	92.42	289	NW_010362274.1
sugar beet	189	93.65	288	NC_025816.1
black-legged tick	198	91.98	286	NW_002562430.1
tobacco	196	92.35	286	NW_008904058.1
vs. Chordata
collared flycatcher	198	93.43	298	NC_021700.1
Norway rat	196	91.84	280	AC_000070.1
Bactrian camel	199	90.45	273	NW_006213244.1
large yellow croaker	199	90.45	273	NW_011323673.1
Starchild "FOXP2"
Starchild vs. SP FOXP2	211	73.5		Starchild website
Starchild vs. SP FOXP2	173	80.3	159	From BLAST™
Starchild vs human FOXP2	122	86.1	143	NC_018918.2
Starchild vs. best human (from BLAST)	193	82.9	197	NC_018921.2

SP = Starchild Project Website

From Table 2 it is clearly seen that the purported Starchild FOXP2 sequence is a poor match to human FOXP2 or any other human sequence. It matches better a wide variety of plants and animals. Because of these widely diverse species matches, the sequence cannot be coding, and must be called intergene junk sequence, probably from an unknown/unsequenced species. As before, none of these matches would identify a species, genus, or family. The best human match by score is even on a different chromosome (10) than the FOXP2 gene (chr. 11). Alternatively the Starchild sequence could contain multiple sequencing errors due to small amount of DNA and/or contamination. Much more DNA must be collected and analyzed before a definite statement of its origin can be made.

With a whole skull, researchers should be able to collect enough DNA to do repeatable sequencing. After all, the whole nuclear genomes of the Neanderthal and Denisovan were sequenced from small bone fragments. But this takes experience with ancient DNA, and I do not see that in the present investigators. I do believe that the overall project is worthy of support. 

Anonymity in Science

As with Melba Ketchum’s genetics consultants in the Sasquatch Genome Project, the Starchild Project geneticist has chosen to remain anonymous, ostensibly for “security reasons.” Security of his/her reputation, no doubt. Anonymity has no place in science, which is self-correcting by crosschecking and debating results. Anonymous researchers hope to claim fame if their work is accepted, but protect themselves from criticism by remaining anonymous. This is not acceptable. It allows those they work for to say that they’re the experts and their word should not be challenged, especially by other scientists from different fields. The result is propagation of false conclusions, as seen here and in the Sasquatch Genome Project.