DNA Testing to Identify Unknown Soldiers

[General Casey]

With the enormous amount of Unknowns in Civil War cemeteries, do you think it would be possible to use DNA databases (Ancestry, 23&Me) to help identify those Unknowns?

 

[Robtweb1]

Good question. Seems like you would have to get a DNA sample from the soldier's remains.

 

[MattL]

With the enormous amount of Unknowns in Civil War cemeteries, do you think it would be possible to use DNA databases (Ancestry, 23&Me) to help identify those Unknowns?

An interesting idea. From a practicality perspective it would be pretty hard currently. Testing remains is a lot different, harder, and more expensive than testing a living person (basically spit in a vile and send it in). With that said as the technology evolves, becomes more widespead, easier, and cheaper this might be more feasible. DNA in ancient remains is becoming far more common (and adding immensely to our understanding of history and the people that it contains).

Though to answer your specific question, yes you could likely identify the unknowns. For example my 4x great grandfather served in the 11th Georgia Infantry in the Confederacy. He died in the Battle of Cold Harbor on Jun 1st 1864. He very well might be in some unnamed grave somewhere in Virginia. If his DNA were submitted I would very likely match, I have DNA matched various cousins who descend from him, most of them would match too. Further analysis can triangulate the actual DNA segments shared by said person and the matches to basically confidently identify them. Further a Y DNA test would match them to other paternally related people. So yes you would very likely be able to identify them, or at least provide enough info to identify them with enough research (or hitting on someone like me who would expect them to come up in a scenario like that).

 

[2/241]

You'ld need a realy rich sponsor

 

[jgoodguy]

Autosomal and Y-STR Analysis of Degraded DNA from the 120-Year

Upon exhumation, it was discovered that Ezekiel had been buried in a wooden casket with an apparent inner glass vault/casing, both of which had deteriorated and collapsed under the weight of the soil. Bones with adequate structural integrity were retrieved from the burial site and the following were sent to our lab for analysis: left tibia, right tibia, right femur, mandible, and four teeth (2 canines, 1 lateral incisor, 1 premolar). Bone samples were extracted separately in small batches in a low-copy number (LCN) area of the laboratory. Given the age and condition of the remains, three different extraction methods were used to maximize the probability of DNA recovery. Considering the genetic recombination that occurs in autosomal DNA over the generations within a family, Y-STR analysis was determined to be the most appropriate and informative approach for determining potential kinship (although autosomal DNA analysis was performed as well to assess the efficacy of the different extraction methods used).​

Skeletal remains often contain limited quantities of DNA that can be substantially degraded and copurify with environmental inhibitors. Given the age and condition of Ezekiel's remains, the same contamination controls recommended for archaeological and ancient DNA specimens were used throughout this study. Furthermore, the skeletal remains were stored separately from other samples in the LCN area of the laboratory. A chain-of-custody was maintained, and only one person handled and worked on the bones for the entirety of the project. To prevent cross-contamination from modern sources, the bones were processed and typed prior to collecting reference samples for comparison; hence, the reference samples could not be the source of the profile obtained from the skeletal remains. Additionally, reference samples were processed in a designated high-copy area of the laboratory (separate from the bones, which were extracted and analyzed in the LCN area). All individuals involved in the exhumation and all laboratory personnel were excluded as possible sources of both the autosomal and Y-STR profiles that were obtained from Ezekiel's remains.​

How Accurate Are Online DNA Tests?

There are two potential issues arising from the question of their results' accuracy. The first is somewhat trivial: Has the sequencing been done well? In critiquing this business, it seems fair to assume the data generated is accurate. But there have been some bizarre cases of failure, such as the company that failed to identify the sample DNA as coming not from a human, but from a dog. One recent analysis found 40 percent of variants associated with specific diseases from "direct to consumer" (DTC) genetic tests were shown to be false positives when the raw data was reanalyzed.​

​

Assuming the tests are done accurately, some discrepancies can still arise from differences in the companies' DNA databases. Almost every DTC genetic test does not sequence your entire genome, but instead looks at positions in your DNA that are known to be of interest. When I was tested by 23andMe, they proclaimed I do not carry a version of a gene that is associated strongly with red hair. Another ancestry company said I did. This merely reflects the fact one company was looking at different variants of the gene that code for ginger hair.​

​

When it comes to ancestry, DNA is very good at determining close family relations such as siblings or parents, and dozens of stories are emerging that reunite or identify lost close family members (or indeed criminals). For deeper family roots, these tests do not really tell you where your ancestors came from. They say where DNA like yours can be found on Earth today. By inference, we are to assume that significant proportions of our deep family came from those places. But to say that you are 20 percent Irish, 4 percent Native American or 12 percent Scandinavian is fun, trivial and has very little scientific meaning. We all have thousands of ancestors, and our family trees become matted webs as we go back in time, which means that before long, our ancestors become everyone's ancestors. Humankind is fascinatingly closely related, and DNA will tell you little about your culture, history and identity.​

 

[2/241]

There are only a few dna sequence which are realy definitiv.
Mostly recessive and therefore inbredmarkers (=accumulation in a closed group of inbreds).

 

[jgoodguy]

You'ld need a realy rich sponsor

That is my impression, accuracy needs a lot of resources.

 

[Don Dixon]

The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPMA) has been unwilling to dig up the graves of "unknown" burials from World War II in the National Cemeteries, even when families and researchers believe that they have good evidence that identifiable remains are contained in the graves, and even when DPMA has been sued in efforts to force exhumation. DPMA has essentially taken the position that once remains have been recovered and are in the ground in a National Cemetery that is the end of it. There is a good deal of information on these cases on-line. And, they are much more recent than the subject of this thread.

While the technology may now exist to identify unknowns from Korea and earlier wars buried in National Cemeteries, the will - and the funding to do so - does not appear to currently exist at the national government level. And, legal opposition from the Department of Defense and Veterans Administration, which control the National Cemeteries would almost certainly preclude any such effort on anything more than a limited case-by-case basis following legal action.

The only time one would likely have much success in initiating testing would be in the discovery of new remains, such as the recent discovery of the two Federal soldiers found buried in a surgeon's bone pit on the 2nd Bull Run battlefield.

Regards,
Don Dixon

 

[2/241]

The only time one would likely have much success in initiating testing would be in the discovery of new remains, such as the recent discovery of the two Federal soldiers found buried in a surgeon's bone pit on the 2nd Bull Run battlefield.

Doesn't make sense, without a database of living relatives' DNA You never find out who. Well You can find out: This is not *insertname* if You have DNA from insertname's relatives.

But without a database of the relatives of the missing graves it is a waste of money. And I also doubt that inside the known graves is always the right man.

While I think about it, had there been dog tags in the ACW?

Edith: "Germany started 1870, but the Roman Legions had something similar"

 

[Northern Light]

While I think about it, hadthere been dog tags in the ACW?

Not official ones, but they could be purchased individually from private sources.

 

[Northern Light]

It seems to me that this would be a waste of money. Most of these bodies would have been moved at least once already, so why disturb them again just to satisfy our curiosity. If it matters a lot to you for that person to have a grave with a name, put a stone in your local cemetery with the name and likely place of death.
We use the term "Rest in Peace" when someone dies; let them do so.

 

[John Hartwell]

I see absolutely no reason for doing this, beyond idle curiosity. I'm with DPMA, let the remains rest undisturbed. It's the names and the memories of the dead we need to remember, not their "dust."

 

[Rusk County Avengers]

Its an intriguing idea, but there are so many factors, including ones mentioned that'd prevent it. For example its possible that there are more than a few CW soldiers who simply don't have any descendants, so there for no point of reference to find out who they were. Another factor is where they were buried, more than a few areas of the South have soil that very acidic, leaving no remains in left in the graves today.

With the latter I've seen it a couple of times, where a CW grave was exhumed for moving from a long forgotten wooded over spot to a cemetery and there was literally no remains left to move. The only recourse was really take the soil from the 6-foot level and place it in a box for moving.

 

[MattL]

You'ld need a realy rich sponsor

Currently that pretty much sums it up. It could be done now with enough money, also permission as others have mentioned would be the additional issue.

 

[MattL]

It seems to me that this would be a waste of money. Most of these bodies would have been moved at least once already, so why disturb them again just to satisfy our curiosity. If it matters a lot to you for that person to have a grave with a name, put a stone in your local cemetery with the name and likely place of death.
We use the term "Rest in Peace" when someone dies; let them do so.

I see absolutely no reason for doing this, beyond idle curiosity. I'm with DPMA, let the remains rest undisturbed. It's the names and the memories of the dead we need to remember, not their "dust."

I can respect such views, though respectfully disagree. If we think the remains and where they reside are important enough to let "rest" then why not important enough for some people to want them identified?

Personally I would love to have my own ancestors remains confirmed. I agree it's all "dust" and likewise they are not resting their (even when I wasn't an atheist I didn't care about their remains, their dead husk), so it's all symbolism and to me what more powerful symbolism than going through the effort of identifying people and connecting them with their family. Additionally manner of death can be attempted to be identified and it might help understand where and how someones ancestors died. Basically giving them a coroner report which many people seem to find some closure from.

 

[John Hartwell]

I can respect such views, though respectfully disagree. If we think the remains and where they reside are important enough to let "rest" then why not important enough for some people to want them identified?

Personally I would love to have my own ancestors remains confirmed. I agree it's all "dust" and likewise they are not resting their (even when I wasn't an atheist I didn't care about their remains, their dead husk), so it's all symbolism and to me what more powerful symbolism than going through the effort of identifying people and connecting them with their family. Additionally manner of death can be attempted to be identified and it might help understand where and how someones ancestors died. Basically giving them a coroner report which many people seem to find some closure from.

I respect that view, too. And, if it's meaningful to you, I certainly have no objections. I'm sure the deceased doesn't either.

But, for me personally, once I'm dead, I'm gone from the husk that used to contain me. I really don't care what is done with my corpse (though it would be nice if it could be put to some practical, beneficial use) -- it's not me any more. I'm not big on visiting cemeteries, either. A grave stone is a memorial, nothing more. The deceased is no more present there than anywhere else he or she is remembered.

 

[Arioch]

I believe it would require a court order to exhume them....and that would have to originate from the family who believes that their relative is 'buried right here'....I can't imagine any court issuing an order to 'dig 'em all up and let the DNA tests sort 'em out'...There HAS to be a reasonable, credible suspicion of being correct that your relative is buried here.

I remember a number of years back when they exhumed Zachary Taylor, to find out if he had, indeed, eaten cyanide laced cherries....one of the conspiracy theories surrounding his death....They still needed his descendants permission to do so, even though a "crime" was now suspected. (the family agreed to it....and If I remember correctly, it came up negative, thus debunking the conspiracy).

 

[John Winn]

I respect that view, too. And, if it's meaningful to you, I certainly have no objections. I'm sure the deceased doesn't either.

But, for me personally, once I'm dead, I'm gone from the husk that used to contain me. I really don't care what is done with my corpse (though it would be nice if it could be put to some practical, beneficial use) -- it's not me any more. I'm not big on visiting cemeteries, either. A grave stone is a memorial, nothing more. The deceased is no more present there than anywhere else he or she is remembered.

I'm with you on being gone and often think of the Robert Johnson line "I don't care what you do with my body when I'm dead and gone." I will say, though, that for many cemeteries are places to get in touch with their ancestors and to record a bit of the story of people's lives so it's not just a collection of memorials; it's history.

I believe it would require a court order to exhume them....and that would have to originate from the family who believes that their relative is 'buried right here'....I can't imagine any court issuing an order to 'dig 'em all up and let the DNA tests sort 'em out'...There HAS to be a reasonable, credible suspicion of being correct that your relative is buried here.

I remember a number of years back when they exhumed Zachary Taylor, to find out if he had, indeed, eaten cyanide laced cherries....one of the conspiracy theories surrounding his death....They still needed his descendants permission to do so, even though a "crime" was now suspected. (the family agreed to it....and If I remember correctly, it came up negative, thus debunking the conspiracy).

Yep; court order and depending on soil conditions and moisture I'd say a very high percentage of unidentified men don't have enough remains to identify even if they were dug up and there was a DNA database to compare them with. And I remember when the Taylor remains were removed and tested (I grew up in Louisville) and there was no finding of arsenic poisoning. He, though, was sealed in a lead casket. I'm not sure something like that would be allowed these days.

 

[Arioch]

...there was no finding of arsenic poisoning...

Arsenic...Thank you...that was it...

As far as the original question goes....sure, we have the technology now, to probably get a lot of that done....

But in reality, it would be a mountain of legal hurdles to make it impossible.

I think the big kibosh came down after they were able to ID the Vietnam War's unknown soldier (Captain Blaisey?)