Talk:Human mitochondrial DNA haplogroup

message: I wrote Mr. Macaulay some time ago and asked him whether I may use their graphics for Wikepedia. He said it is OK as long as he and Mr. Richards are cited.
I uploaded the graphics and used it for the German article on "Mitochondrial Eve". I think it will fit well here.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:MacaulayRichardsmtDNAtree.jpg
I also made a draft tree depicting the overall structure of the tree. The image of Richards and Macaulay looks very confunsing at first.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:MtDNAtreeHuman.svg
Molgen 04:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphics 

message: Perhaps we should state more clearly that L1 and L3 are no real (=monophyletic) haplogroups. Haplogroup L1a is not closer related to L1f as it is to V.
Molgen 04:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of L1 and L3 

message: What was the reason behind the classification to omit the sequence O, P & S from being the names of mtHaplogroups? Also, why is the earliest group designated 'L'? The Y-chromosome Haplogroups are much more intuitive in sequence, starting at 'A' and going from there. The classifying letters in the mt-Haplogroups seem to jump around more from a evolutionary/mutation-rate to label perspective. Whatever the reasoning is, it might be beneficial to have some explaination of it in the article Nagelfar 11:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I added the Haplogroup P link since there was already a page for it, but it still doesn't appear on the table of mt Haplogroups. Nagelfar 18:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, found the template page (finally figured out how to edit those), added P, it's here; Template:MtDNA. Someone who knows needs to find the placement of O & S, and maybe help by starting those pages too. Nagelfar 02:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Finally added them, though I really know nothing about the O group. Nagelfar 19:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Admitedly it seems there is a haplogroup S (I didn't know). But still why you created the page for non-existent haplogroup O, knowing that it might not exist after all? I have nominated it for speedy deletion. --Sugaar (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So there's A-Z sans O? There's just little reference for it, but if there's a citation for there being no mtDNA "O" write that into the mtDNA haplogroup article to substantiate that, I am simply laying the groundwork for the whole strata of human haplogroups and in the process of doing so there will need to be work that should be filled in by others, getting upset about it or making ad hominem accusations (i.e. "know nothing") won't bring any progress, a rule to wikipedia is be bold. Nagelfar (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no O, P or S groups? 

message: Please see Phylotree V14. (http://www.phylotree.org) For that matter, haplogroup S existed way back in 2007 well before the deletions of 2008. See: http://www.pnas.org/content/104/21/8726.full Now, could we please kindly have the respective articles reinstated? --RebekahThorn (talk) 01:35, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: mtDNA Haplogroups O, P, and S Now Exist!

message: I have put up a suggestion at :Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals to create a new WikiProject, WikiProject: Genetic History.
To quote from what I've written there:
:; Description: A wikiproject for articles on DNA research into genetic genealogy and genealogical DNA tests; the history and spread of human populations as revealed by eg human Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups; and similar.  Many such articles can be found in :Category:Genetic genealogy and its subcategories, notably the subcategories on human haplogroups.
:; Rationale
:* My direct motivation for seeking this Wikiproject was a recent run-in at Y-chromosomal Aaron, where I desperately missed the lack of a relevant WikiProject talk page to go to, to attract the input, advice and views of knowledgeable editors in this area.  
::There's a lot of general public interest in the proposed subject area -- eg the Y-chromosomal Aaron page is apparently getting well over 100 hits a day, and over the last 18 months or so there's been a lot of material added, by a fair number of different editors, mostly editing different pages which are particularly relevant to them.  IMO, a central wikiproject would be useful, and also a good place to be able to bring WP:OR, WP:V, and WP:general cluelessness issues for wider informed input. 
:::Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology and :Wikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biology do already exist, but their focus is much much broader.  With regard to those project's charters, I believe the subject would be seen as a rather specialist niche topic area, rather out of the mainstream of those project's normal focus.  On the other hand, I believe that there are a number of wikipedia editors (and readers) who are specifically interested in the subject, who would find advantage if there were a specific wikiproject for it. Jheald (talk) 12:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to create a new WikiProject: Genetic History 

message: As per A. González et al., 2006 (The mitochondrial lineage U8a reveals a Paleolithic settlement in the Basque country), and probably other papers I am not aware of, K is a subclade of U8 (closer to U8b than U8a). See Figure 1 of that paper.
I strongly suggest to reposition it in this article as in the mtDNA template. The convention nowadays is that there is no "haplogroup UK" anymore but just haplogroup U of which K is a second or third level subclade, even if a quite common one. --Sugaar (talk) 16:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of K. It's a subclade of U8. 

message: I forget what kind of projection the first map is done with, but it should be labeled as such - it took me some ponderance to figure out what it was, and I've seen it before. Dextrose (talk) 03:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: I would certainly like to see examples of each mtdna haplogroup. 
I just took a DNA ancestry test. And I got a very unexpected out haplogroup.
Which might explain why I look so different from everyone in my town. 
- signed Purple Thunder  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.54.81.188 (talk) 18:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Except in rare cases such as bushmen (LO), papuans (Q), some siberians (G & Y) or malayans (E), it's not a good idea to try to identify haplogroups by means of photographs because most of the human being groups have come out of the mixture of many different haplogroups. This is why no picture would be accurate. --Maulucioni (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Will someone please include photos of people from each mtdna haplogroup? 

message: For instance, the lineage perspective shows L2 as a subclade of L1, but the diagram shows L2 and L1 as being co-subclades of Mt-Eve. --Michael C. Price talk 06:39, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagramatic and lineage perspectives do not agree

message: The text says she is the matrilineal mrca. Most lay readers (methinks) would interpret this as meaning she is the most recent female ancestor; eg the most recent woman who was ancestor (in whatever line) to all living humans. Would it be okay to add a sentence to clarify her status; or alternatively delete "matrilineal" and add "ancestor of the mitochondria of all living humans" near the end of the sentence?    
84.59.254.134 (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading definition of mtEVE

message: The article could be improved by listing the characteristic mutations, ie, what distinguishes N from M, etc.  This information could then be used in other articles.  This information is present for the Y-dna haplogroups. Skates61 (talk) 09:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Please list the characteristic mutations that define each haplogroup

message: The european genetics is only a small subgroup of the World's genetics. The new section Chronological development of haplogroups about European haplogroups should not be here, but in the Genetic history of European populations article. It must be move it. --Maulucioni (talk) 00:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section 

message: Are the migration location established science or the speculations of a single book author? 84.227.246.65 (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Established science?

message: http://nadge.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/mtDNA-Y-Migration-Map-Spencer_Wells2-1024x524.jpg
I eventually cancelled the sentence " Furthermore, attributing a specific geographic origin to any haplogroup, such as those proposed in the table below, is highly speculative and considered by most population geneticists to be 'story telling' and outside the domain of science.", because it would even render the "Out of Africa"-hypothesis outside science!217.93.140.13 (talk) 15:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  image 

message: It is unclear why the topic of "Mitochondrial DNA haplogroup" redirects to "Human mitochondrial DNA haplogroup" because these are found in other species. William Harris •  talk •   07:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitochondrial DNA haplogroup 

message: Why does the description say "The hypothetical woman at the root of all these groups "... in what way is she "hypothetical". there has to be such a person. no hypothetical about it. Unless there's a rationale for this word I plan to strike it. Skates61 (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hypothetical Woman?