GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-11 > 1321048141


From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Correct TMRCA analysis
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 21:49:01 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.232.1321047012.30868.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com>


>From: Dienekes Pontikos
>If anyone is still in doubt that Anatole Klyosov's method and his
self-assurance in his narrow confidence intervals are without any
merit...

>The recent publication of 7,000 year old E-V13 from Neolithic Spain...
>...indicates that Klyosov's age estimate for E-V13 is off by a factor of 2.5
>Huge confidence intervals indeed!

 

 

My response:

 

Funny. I thought that everyone here understands that by measuring TMRCA we identify the timespan to a SURVIVED common ancestor, who might very likely pass a population bottleneck and his DNA was carried on to the present time. By studying excavated bones we measure a timespan to an actual person who might likely died well before that population bottleneck.

 

Should I really remind this very simple thing on this Forum?

 

As a bonus: h ere are some data on CURRENT population of V13, two different datasets. 

 

In one study of 205 of 67 marker haplotypes it was 3725+/-380 ybp (from the Discussion I have referred to today); in another study 261 of 11 marker haplotypes were listed (Cruciani et al, 2007), and the calculations gave 2675+/-270 ybp (the linear method) and 2450+/-250 ybp (the logarithmic method). 

 





In other words, we compare here apples and oranges with the excavated bones.  This is the classical dilemma when one compares direct anthropological data with TMRCAs. 

 

Regards,

 

Anatole Klyosov 

 



 


This thread: