Neolithic mitochondrial haplogroup H genomes and the genetic origins of Europeans
It has long been the case that ancient DNA studies have focused attention on mtDNA and then gone on to make sweeping claims about the rest of the DNA. Since mtDNA is among the least correlated with consanguinity of human DNA and Y-Chromosome the most, this is, at best, a highly suspect way of determining national* origins. When confronting these sweeping imputations, the (15 years or so) old excuse for this has been that mitochondria are numerous in comparison to nuclear DNA, and that therefore ignorance of the Y-Chromosome data is “understandable”. The problem is this merely excuses ignorance—it does not excuse sweeping imputation based on the ignorance. However, even the excuse for ignorance is no longer valid given the fact that entire genomes are being reconstructed from samples far older than neolithic. What excuse can Brotherton et al, or their apologists offer for this ignorance? *Nation: People related by consanguinity and congeniality—contrasted with Nation State Comments:Post a comment:
Next entry: Griffin, Moslem Grooming and a “misinterpreted” article
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsLinksMR Central & NewsComments |
Posted by Donald on Fri, 24 May 2013 23:31 | #
Razib Khan tells us to ignore mtDNA data and Y-Chromosome data:
“Please ignore mtDNA and Y chromosomal haplogroups”
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/please-ignore-mtdna-and-y-chromosomal-haplogroups/