Talk:Haplogroup R1a/Archive 1

message: Paper on Y-DNA :Different regional populations from Poland were studied in order to assess the genetic heterogeneity within Poland, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12107446&dopt=Abstract —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasz (talk • contribs) 11:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: populations from Poland

message: At the end of the intro, the link to http://www.ajhg.org/AJHG/journal/issues/v78n2/42812/42812.html on The American Journal of Human Genetics website is subscription-only. (after the text:  suggesting that it is not necessarily always a signature of exclusive Indo-European origin.) apers0n 11:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken link

message: Including a reference .
Vikings were part of that milennia-long IE expansion but Celts and Anglo-Saxons were too. Probably a good deal of R1a in Britain was brought by Celts (this is my opinion), together with also a good deal of haplogroup I (and continental branches of R1b).
The new writing is much more clear and less just imaginative. --Sugaar 21:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Changed "Vikings" for Indo-Europeans

message: Changed some things in this paragraph:
:The first carriers of the R1a1 haplotype are believed to have been nomadic pastoralists in Eurasian steppes about 10,000 years ago. Current theories point to them being the first speakers of the proto-Indo-European languages (the Kurgan culture) and the first ones to domesticate the horse.
It's obvious that 10,000 years ago, there was no Neolithic and therefore these people were no pastoralists yet. Rewrote that as "nomads of the Eurasian steppes".
Also it's not fully clear that they were the first ones to domesticate the horse, something that actually seems to have happened in nearby Ukraine inside a culture (Dniepr-Don culture) that wasn't yet IE/Kurgan. So I deleted that last comment. 
And in this one:
:R1a1 is spread across whole of Europe, with the highest concentrations found in Eastern Europe, with the highest percentage concentrations found in modern day Ukraine [1]
The link is broken and I have no reason to think Ukraine is highest in R1a1 than Poland or Russia. In fact Poland seems highest  (but by little margin). So I cut it after Eastern Europe - less pretentious but more informative.  --Sugaar 21:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More corrections

message: Swid has changed the graphic format diff and now it seems more confuse. It looks like R1a is higher in the tree than R1b. I think it would be better to revert to the previous format. Please discuss. --Sugaar 22:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Change in graphic

message: I think short quotes do not violate (c)
Giuseppe Passarino &a q1 "emerged in Ukraine, probably in a Palaeolithic population. Thereafter, the spread of this lineage toward Europe, Asia, and India occurred at different waves over a few thousands years. At present this seems to indicate the influence of the Ukraine Palaeolithic groups in the gene pool of modern populations"
It is + for autochthonous school. Right / why ? Nasz 04:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We can always add something like "However, according to one school (citation here), Ukraine was the actual birthplace of this lineage" or something similar. In an encyclopedia we have to report all respectable views but be careful not to mislead the reader into thinking this is an established fact. --Friendly Neighbour 06:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of R1a1

message: P4. Comparing Y chromosome haplogroup frequencies
and surnames of Norse and Irish origins in men in
Northern Ireland
*EK Conant, DP Berrar, AJ Bjourson, CS Downes.
*University of Ulster, Coleraine, Northern Ireland.
*http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/jil/ums/umj076/076(1)051.pdf
Q: "Ten Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs)
were tested in 244 men from Northern Ireland. Additionally,
a subset of 157 of these individuals were typed for 17 Short
Tandem Repeats (STRs)."''
Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration
*Michael E. Weale,*1 Deborah A. Weiss,†1 Rolf F. Jager,*‡ Neil Bradman,* and
Mark G. Thomas*
*The Centre for Genetic Anthropology, Departments of Biology and Anthropology, University College London,
University of London; †Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis; and ‡Faculteit Biologie,
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/19/7/1008.pdf
Table 2 Hg1=r1a1
*Ashbourne (n 54) 
Southwell (n 70)
Bourne (n 12) 
EAST ANGLIA Fakenham (n 53) 
N. Walsham (n 26) 
FRIESLAND (n 94) 
NORWAY (n  83) = 26.5
*Total 392 samples
Average ~7% 
Obscure formating - manual data extraction required. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nasz (talk • contribs) 08:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: related papers

message: The consolidated listing that Nasz has made for us here is very useful and valuable thing.  
But I can't help finding that such a large block of undigested data isn't good for the shape of the article as a whole, and makes the article harder for readers to take in.  Perhaps it's a pity in a way that nobody is keeping up an external page, like this one for Hg J2a-M410. , that we can't just link to.
One solution might be to move the data tables off this page to a separate new page, Haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) population frequencies.   Do people think this would be a good idea ?  -- Jheald 14:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its ok to move the data o separate page after making graphical summary. The best summary will be a map showing the % data and microsatelite diversity data, with place of origin and movement. Not all data are clear, some have substantial differences, and also not all available papers are jet collected. So far some sentences in this article contradict the tables so is essential to keep it together. Nasz 00:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move population frequency tables to a subpage?

message: 67.171.213.134 (Talk)  (→Origins - The highest haplotype diversity only indicates that the M17 mutation probably occurred among the population that was ancestral to modern populations of East/Central Europe.)
*'probably occurred among the population' not probably but certainly. The string of codons is certain. We can with very high probability map what was the sequence before and after microsatelite mutation. If single mutation has probability P then Multiple mutations are calculated by P^n or P1*P2*... (Pn) thus occurrence of probability of multiple mutations decreases exponentially. 
*What could be deducted from microsatelite diversity in different geographical locations? 
If there is Location where tree originated from mutation M is located then and another location where diversity tree of M2 is located is unlikely that group of people will segregate itself after bunch of mixed people will settle in given region. Especially the hypothetical rapid increase of population from small group can be rejected. There is sometime given theory that Slovian rapidly accelerated his population colonizing 'empty territory' *1 and time of this spread, in this allochtonic theory is given for about 5th century ad. Genetic data from microsatelite diversity in Y chromosome reject this theory. 
*Although it may be considered scenario that Slovian tribes separated itself in very ancient time and all living together on small area somehow maintained the ancestral division. But this hypothetical conception eventually supporting allochtonical origin of Slovians has mathematical difficulties. What is most certain is that geographical separation support microsatelite diversity. 
* For example diversity in India r1a1 is less than diversity in Europe. I think mathematical model may be constructed to test accept or reject what for me is the most probable that the diversity is linked to separated locations where it originated.
Add 1(quite unique dogmate of empty land is in this 'theory' is postulated) Where else in world empty, ready to take, land existed before?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.244.169 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 6 February 2007 its me Nasz 06:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: genetic diversity and place of origination

message: Shouldn't there be a mention of the fact the it is found in high percentages in Turkic people? Why do we keep advertizing the Indo-European aspect of it more than anything else? Is it because what the current scientific majority agrees on? It seems a bit biased to me. --Kupirijo 05:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: care to point us to a study on that? Nobody is objecting, as you can see, but someone has to do it. dab (𒁳) 12:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do not have time to go through pubmed for other than my research. I am writing my dissertation right now. Sorry. I am a biologist by training and an amateur linguist. I will keep in touch. I remember you from your edits on proto-Greek and related articles (XMK, etc). I am kind of saddened that nobody on wikipedia discussions noticed my comments on the Greek-Cypriot dialect which shows the breadth of Greek "dialects". Especially the voicing of the now-fricatives (φ, χ, θ) like in XMK (especially in liquid environments). It seems the training and knowledge of the Greek language in the Classics departments in the West is very limited, narrow-minded and Athenocentric nevertheless. Are you a classicist by training? Cheers. --Kupirijo 19:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: linguist and physicist, not classicist as such. Yes, obviously everyone is "Athenocentric", not just in the "West", Attic Greek is, after all, the main source of medieval and modern Greek. But you are welcome to add your material to  Arcadocypriot so it isn't lost in discussion archives. dab (𒁳) 10:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know. I find it annoying when Modern Greeks themselves do not appreciate the breadth of their own culture. Of course you cannot deny that the "West" also contributed to the "Renaissance" of "Athenocentricism" (see "Renaissance", "Enlightment", "Romanticism" etc.) --Kupirijo 03:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: R1a and turkic people?

message: For the first time I read that finnish Hungary has 60% of R1a1? Where is this data come from? Ukraine - 60%? Again. I was participating in Genographic Project, got my results, absolutely different data. Poland - 40%, Russia - about the same, West Iran - 35%. I really don't like to think that someone tries to adjust the data just for the good old "blue eyes, brown eyes" fun. Please if you enter the data, make a reference. The source of the data, method, sample size, CI, unbiasness.
Even according to the sources listed 95%-CI for Hungary is 14.0 – 28.7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.230.126.71 (talk • contribs) 21:56-22:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Saami in the Asia Table!!! High frequencies of many other Finno-Ugric people are missing. Have a look Tambets et al. 2004, American Journal of Human Genetics 74: 661-682. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.192.197.251 (talk • contribs) 12:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then please do us a favor and insert the proper numbers. Yes, the popular view on R1a1 is biased and nationalists are definitely at work: nothing indicates the original carriers of the gene being anything more but a substratum to later migrations. This substratum originates from the Ukrainian LGM refuge‎ and is strongly confined to ancient genetic barriers, that probably predated the IE "blue eyes" advance a few thousand years. If you are looking for blue eyes you should check on other genes. I would choose Hg I1c, but  according to scholarly wisdom about this gene "geographic and linguistic correlations across the continent were insignificant". I wonder if this might be true to any gene (and especially R1a1), or whether we just have to wait for some proper analyses by a new generation of scholars being raised with genetics. Rokus01 14:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Everythig written in this article is a bull shit and totally wrong. R1a1 originated in region any where from northwest india , pakistan , afghanistan and souther central asia. It has reached in europe from these lands and not the other way around. The highest rate and greatest diversity in r1a1 lineages is also found in this area according to new research papers.This is a pitty that some stupid idiot has changed the original R1a1 page from wikipedia which has solid proof of what I wrote. And now this R1a1 page looks like a fantasy page with self claims.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.58.115.244 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Where are these numbers come from?

message: Relatively high frequencies are also found in Northern Europe, Iran 25% (mainly Persians), and the largest being 23% in Iceland, and it is believed to have been spread across Europe by the Indo-Europeans, and later by the Germanic migration, which accounts for the existence of it in, among other places, the British Isles
How the Germanic migration can spread the R1a1 gen not spreding it to Germans ? Łook in tables how many % of R1a1 have Germans < this looks like pure nonsens, but if somebody twisting sources he may later realy belive in that twisted knowledge. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.13.244.169 (talk) 18:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: sheesh, if you check the edit history, you will find that this replaces "Vikings", Nasz. Germanic migration didn't originate in Germany, it originated in Scandinavia, and spread to Britain and Germany. How about using your account again, btw? dab (𒁳) 18:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: sentence of Dbachmon

message: Any One Know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Catintheoven (talk • contribs) 21:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ideally it doesn't do anything, or else the dispersion of the gene would be influenced by environmental factors. At best I could imagine a protection against some kind of extinct disease, anyway most genes don't show clear activity. Interesting question. Rokus01 00:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What Does The Gene Do?