GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-09 > 1220376984
Subject: Re: [DNA] Age of R1b
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:36:24 +0000
Dear David (Faux),
I understand your sentiments regarding importance of peer-review papers. Furthermore, I share them, albeit partly. Having published several hundred of P-R papers myself, along with a dozen of books, I believe I acquired some kind of authority to be realistic re. P-R articles. Of course, in a blind fashion I would prefer P-R paper vs. NP-R one, however, this is not a principal, or even not too important criterion for me. I look at content, numbers, reasoning, conclusions, novelty. I have my own load of P-R papers which I would not have published now.
Regarding my not-so-PC words on infamous Zhivotovsky coefficient, I mean it. I have done my load of research on this coefficient. It might be good in population biology, dealing with rabbits and squirrels, where not so many of them do care about their genealogy, and do not mind if their common ancestor is a couple of million years off one way or another. However, when this coefficient is applied in human DNA genealogy, it is, unfortunately, based on too vague principles. True, Z. has warned that his coefficient should NOT be applied in genealogical studies, only in populational, without giving any definitions and/or guidelines. Naturally, some people grab it (peer-review paper!! names!!) and apply, surely, precisely in genealogical studies, including Z. himself. It did a serious damage, and you, David, is one of the victims, with all my respect to you. In fact, the Z. coefficient can be rightly applied in our haplotype-related studies ONLY when a common ancestor !
2,500 years BP. No more, no less. Only then, due to reverse mutations, the apparent mutation rate constant is reduced to 0.00069 mutations/marker/generation, and only being applied to 12-marker haplotypes. For 6-, 8-, 9-, 10-, 25, etc. marker haplotypes numbers would be fifferent.
As a result, we have plenty of fantasy peer-review articles, such as about 30,000 year old R1b in Europe, 16,000 year old R1a1 in India (including the stuff published in PNAS what? A peer-review edition? Wow! Names? Wow!), and so on and so forth.
(to be continued)