Misplaced Pages

User talk:Pdeitiker: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:46, 10 November 2009 editChazchaz101 (talk | contribs)391 edits Minor Edits: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 07:23, 11 November 2009 edit undoAndrew Lancaster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers40,268 edits R1a phylogenyNext edit →
Line 287: Line 287:


:I think for now R1a1a1 etc should all just be redirect pages to R1a? By the way I guess you realize that the Karafet article in 2008 did try to develop a method with SNPs. See the refs for E1b1b1. Maybe Underhill and Kivisild's review article a few years back also made steps in this direction?--] (]) 15:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC) :I think for now R1a1a1 etc should all just be redirect pages to R1a? By the way I guess you realize that the Karafet article in 2008 did try to develop a method with SNPs. See the refs for E1b1b1. Maybe Underhill and Kivisild's review article a few years back also made steps in this direction?--] (]) 15:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

::Yes I believe Underhill et al. typed for at least as many variants as Sharma et al, though the phylogenetic name might be different. Look at the mutation names when in doubt.--] (]) 07:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


== Minor Edits == == Minor Edits ==

Revision as of 07:23, 11 November 2009

Archiving icon
Archives

The painful birth of the GEWEX page


Call for opinion on a neutrality accusation in a human genetics related article

As a fellow member of the WikiProject HGH may I ask for opinions on this accusation?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind that I've just raised a bit of discussion about the reference formats. I just want to get it straight in my mind what we are heading towards, and I think other potential editors will need this also. Look at other Y haplogroup articles and you know why I am cautious.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Genetics articles

Thanks for your work on the E1b1b article. I keep editing on what you do, but this does not mean I don't appreciate the leads you are giving. We have tended to accrete too much justification of every word and sentence due to the history of editing. Once you start cleaning up, I can sometimes see ways to go further. Anyway, we got off-topic concerning the sub Saharan issue and I wanted to mention that I think the article I mentioned is headed to deletion unless someone can make something encyclopedic out of it, and I tend to think that the scientific literature is just not clear enough to provide a foundation. My reason for writing now is to suggest that you look at an article which has more promise but suffers from some of the same problems: Genetic history of Europe.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

E1b1b1a as a separate article is just a matter of time I think. Just needs time. Have already done one of course on the haplowiki: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=E-M78. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I kind of agree. It depends a lot upon the edit war factor! Look how much work it is sometimes to change a couple of words on this article. Of course the edit would not need to concern sub Saharan Africa and races, so maybe there is hope! But there could be disagreements about what should stay in E-M35 and what should move on. Would we leave everything in E-M35 in the first stages? I'd suggest we make the new article before starting to delete any big chunks. People might start reverting out of surprise.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you know? I started splitting and now we have a problem with reverts on the original page with several of the reduction of detail edits being reverted. This can get confusing!--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Wondering if you'd be interested in commenting on any of the specific discussions on Sub-Saharan DNA admixture in Europe and Genetic history of Europe. The latter is the "keeper" but some of the debates on the former are likely to rage on to other articles.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:10, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and I think that your agreement to my deletion proposal says all that needs to be said on the biggest problems of this page. What I was more interested in was getting your input on some of the specific discussion going on on that talkpage. Presuming the article gets deleted, these arguments will probably migrate to Genetic History of Europe. BTW I think Tishkoff came up with a homeland of human genetic diversity, so to speak, near Angola. Quite interesting.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

FYI, some discussion of Europe-Sub Saharan DNA links has continued on Genetic history of Europe. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 05:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, in response to your messages, yes I can imagine further improvements on E1b1b. I had already reduced the size of E1b1b1a in the most obvious ways. I don't have a lot of time right now and I don't remember anything needing urgent fixing, but by all means keep looking at it. You seem to see things I don't notice, which is good.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 23:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I would very much like you to write a draft here, rather than leaving it as a ping pong match: --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I get your point but if you would write one paragraph on the talk page of the article, and if I can follow it, then I can use it to try to develop a compromise. I fear any draft by Small Victory or Wapondaponda is doomed, and my own draft is not going to please because it misses a lot. It is not an area I have looked at closely yet.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe relevant to some comments you made recently: http://www.miller-mccune.com/science_environment/the-ancestor-hunter-1372 --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Have had a reasonably serious effort today on the African admixture in Europe article. Yesterday I also deleted the edit war ground sections in the Genetic History of Europe article. Comments welcome.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

re: your message

Hi PB666, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 01:49, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Process

Hello, Pdeitiker. I've noticed that you have taken a step in the Dispute Resolution Process by posting in one of the dispute resolution forums. Please note that it is recommended that you advise the other party of your complaint filing so that they are aware of it, and so that they have a chance to respond.

If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page.

In addition, you would be well-served to read the submission instructions on WQA, and remove excessive formatting and quoting, using diffs as directed. Right now, it's not likely to get a response (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:36, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

The maps issue

Good to see another person looking at what we can do about frequency maps. I love the look of contour maps and I know they make things easy to understand, but they are also potentially misleading given the importance of assumptions in them. This means using them is always a balance between a copyright problem and OR. Perhaps the least controversial approach would be to use pie charts. I know of a person who collects such data and posts maps on internet forums. Maybe I can convince him to post his latest stuff on Misplaced Pages.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

The E1b1b article has a pretty good bibliography.
  • Cruciani et al. (2004) is a "must use" and has good data for many of these areas.
  • Hassan et al. 2008 is important because it fills the Sudan gap.
  • Rosa et al. has Guinea Bissau.
  • Robino et al. adds some detail for the Maghreb, as does Arredi et al. and Luis et al.
  • There was a recent paper by Kujanova et al with some interesting data for Egypt.
More generally try the Haplowiki I have set up for the E-M35 project: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=Kujanova_et_al._%282009%29. If you search for a country, you should find papers covering that country.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Here is a new one for a very important region: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/08/coastal-inland-differences-in-y.html--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Cruciani et al 2007, too
  • I agree that contour maps are intuitive. I have been trying to find software that can generate contours, but no luck yet. The frequency maps can work, but it must take a lot of work to make them. Wapondaponda (talk) 18:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

The software packages are named in the papers? The method is the Kriging method. But to cut a long story short this method is just a formalization of guessing what is in the gaps. I think crude maps like PD is proposing are a good idea for avoiding the OR problem and the copyright problem.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I just got in from work (12:30AM), its going to be a while before I can update those maps. The Dienekes link appears to be a deadlink, not sure why.PB666  05:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Cruciani 2004 and 2007 is basically the same data set. I have tried to reconcile a bit here: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=Cruciani_data . Let me know if you really can not get to the new article about Syria and Lebanon etc. Another one that might be useful is this new one.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I should point out that the haplowiki has several data tables already made: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=Category:Data . See for example the collection for M123: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=E-M123_data --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The basic strategy is to create a Template map that has countries (grey bordered by black or blue) and samples (shades of grey) within countries. The big problem is getting the 2nd. An example of the problem is Kenya has 6 regions which speak bantu and 3 regions that speak bantu and other indigeonous languages. When someone states Kenya Bantu one has to make assumptions that these equally represents all bantu speaking areas of Kenya, but not areas were mixed Bantu is spoken. If not the authors need to state explicitily which region they sampled.

I can give you a list of the samples that are going to take time to process through for the map:

  • Northern Russians (Is he referring to ethnic russians and what is the dividing line)
  • Southern Russians
  • Greeks from Aegean Peloponnese was continental,Euboea as part of Lamia
  • Asni Berbers A tiny village just west of Marrakesh
  • Bouhria Berbers (I assume these are northern most Morrocan Berbers)
  • Moyen Atlas Berbers(What country what berber population)
  • Moroccan Jews, Libyan Jews
  • Mozabite Berbers (Algerian, there are 9 regions with berbers in Algeria)
  • Delta Egyptians (What defines the delta)
  • Northern Egyptians (What deliniates N. Egyptians?)
  • Egyptian Berbers (Where from?)Siwa Oasis
  • Egyptians from Baharia (Where?)Baharyia Oasis <-Assume
  • Egyptians from Guma Oasis(Where?)
  • Southern Egyptians Southern Half of Egypt<-Assume
  • Mixed Ethiopians
  • Borana/Oromo (Kenya/Ethiopia)
  • Wolayta (who?) mispelled found but no map yet.
  • Western Africa (which country(s))
  • Mandenka Senegalese (nikoloko?)
  • Pygmies (YIKES! threre are fifteen+ pygmy tribes scattered bout Africa)
  • Southern Africa (what countries, what people)
  • Southwestern Turkish,Northeastern Turkish,Southeastern Turkish, Erzurum Turkish, Central Anatolian (What divides these groups?)
  • Bedouin (from where? W. Arabia?)
  • Adygei (who)
  • Portugal Southern (there is a northern portugal map, southern Portugal may be the southern most province or southern most 4 provinces)

Each one of these requires a search, and after they're respective territories are found, (Hopefully as a Map), the map needs to be drafted and repainted, eliminating all accessory color information leaving a simple polychromatin representations. That then needs to be shrunk, streched, skewed such that it overlays exactly with the wikitemplate map. Then it needs to be recolored, rebordered. At this point one needs to decide if the study represents part or all of a color region. So that I need help finding what is a good representative map of a given sampling, or some indicator, for example coordinates X +/- 1degree or 5 minutes (A minute is approximately a nautical mile at the equator). Once I get through these peoples then I will move onto other studies.PB666  14:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I do not see a PMID for the new El-Sibai paper with new Syrian data, and this may be because it is an early pre-publication? Anyway the doi does exist: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.2009.00538.x . As a URL maybe this is better: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122553140/abstract TI: Geographical Structure of the Y-chromosomal Genetic Landscape of the Levant: A coastal-inland contrast Annals of Human Genetics 2009 DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.2009.00538.x US: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2009.00538.x --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the El-Sibai data gives problems because of the unclear mixture of data sets. They clearly did not do the same tests on all samples, and if we just remove the ones which are most obviously useless this will bias the data. For the haplowiki I only dared to say what % of a/b/c tested E1b1b was a, b and c, because working out what % of the whole population would involve quite a few steps of analysis beyond what we get out of the paper. The paper did however remind me of the older Zalloua papers and I added E-M123 data for Cyprus and Palestinians to the E1b1b article on Misplaced Pages, and to http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=E-M123 http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=E-M123_data --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 05:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

This might be a practical limitation but perhaps it should be mentioned that your base maps are a little Euro-centric, missing some interesting areas like Somalia and Kenya and most of the Middle East. I don't know if there is any alternative?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, because originally there were only a couple of points in Africa and Asia (mostlyu no occurrence points) not west Asia, the new map has been expanded in both directions so that now it includes Iran and also includes Kenya. Should there be a multitude of data on the E haplotypes south of Kenya then it can be enlarged. I like to keep the PNG sizes as small as possible for bandwidth regions, plus in Misplaced Pages they prefer images of thumbnail size which is standard 200px or so across, and at that size visual orientation on the maps is will decrease as the coordinate dimensions increase.

Expanding a map downward is not such a problem as expanding the map sideways when thumbs are created.PB666  13:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

If it is the Cruciani data which you are stuck on, don't forget that this data is discussed in several articles, so details missing in one might be present in the other.

--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I am going to process what I can and leave the map blank for those I have not struck on my list.PB666  13:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I do not know why but the E-M78 level for Serbia looks too low in your map.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 20:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Have you seen this: http://gunn.co.nz/map/ --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, where is the table you refer to? Concerning how to improve these maps, more data is an obvious request, and mentioning all sourced used is another. In the end I can imagine these will still get some complaints because of the way it makes large countries look homogenous. Not sure how to fix that, but I am also looking around.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 05:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Looking around, I've also been talking to a fellow "genetic genealogist" whose maps I like. For example http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k178/argiedude/IberianM817201samples.gif One problem with many of his maps is that he tends to use predicted haplogroups in order to get value from article which only tested STR data, but perhaps it gives some ideas. I am trying to get him interested in loading maps to Misplaced Pages, suitable for Misplaced Pages! You can immediately see something with this M81 map which no published article has yet pointed to so clearly.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 05:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I am asking the maker of this map what he might have that would not be so open to OR accusations. Concerning your question, good M78 data for the Balkans in several papers: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=E-V13#Journal_articles_which_have_typed_for_V13 --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, most E-M35* at least in East and South Africa will be E-M293 as discovered in Henn et al. (2008).--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 05:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I see you pasted in a M35* map anyway. I am not sure it is meaningful. You are correct that the Cruciani data on the haplo wiki should say M123 is always part of M35 not M78. Concerning M123, as it is a haplogroup that has only been discussed in bits and pieces in the literature I have made some effort to collect ALL data here: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=E-M123_data --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 05:55, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks! I have corrected the Semino data and the Oman figure from Luis et al. Anything else?
  • Please feel free to register and use the haplowiki. We can store data there with a lower level of concern for OR, because as a specialised wiki I believe that what is "obvious" is going to be different than on Misplaced Pages itself. For example we have allowed analysis based on STR modal haplotypes using the www.yhrd.org database and we have also allowed use of Whit Athey's haplogroup predictor in order to convert from STRs to SNPs.
  • Sorry, I have never collected M33 data.
  • Concerning the haplowiki a good way to find what you want might be to check the Category pages. For example for the Middle East.
  • I think you have better access to articles than me. For R1a I could not look at the data for what might be an interesting article: Wang et al. (2003), "The origins and genetic structure of three co-resident Chinese Muslim populations: the Salar, Bo'an and Dongxiang", Human Genetics. Any chance you could show me a copy?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Sanchez-Mazas

I included information from Sanchez-Mazas in the article African admixture in Europe. I am not familiar with the nomenclature, so I was wondering whether the information is already covered by the other articles. I also found this article . I don't have access to the full article, but the abstract describes Sub-Saharan gene flow into Arabia. I am not sure whether this is associated with the Arab slave trade or prehistoric migrations. Wapondaponda (talk) 22:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

X-linked fixation times

What you write is interesting, and difficult to follow. Most importantly, or at least for what we are working on, what does it mean in terms of what we should put in a Misplaced Pages?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I think there needs to be something explaining what "record longer genetic histories" means.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

So it comes down to meaning that they give older common ancestor estimates?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for your explanation!--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Mitochondrial Eve

Although you did the right thing by explaining your removal of s poorly worded section, you can't just delete what you don't like. Please update the text instead, with references. Note that Dawkins can be referenced (it did say it was a popular source). And please sign your talk past contributions. It's that not hard. --Michael C. Price 04:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Please stop instantly reverting. I'm trying to imptove the section. We don't even have time to read your talk page inserts before you started deleting the entire section again.--Michael C. Price 04:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Remember for future reference: do not delete unreferenced material material. Instead add a tag. If the material is sourced but you feel incorrect, and you don't want to correct it yourself, then add a tag or something else. It saves a lot of wasted time. --Michael C. Price 10:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, stopped reading when I got to "However, since you refuse to read the guidelines let me make this clear." since I do and have read the guidelines.--Michael C. Price 18:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Eurasian Adam

Not sure if you were watching this: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Eurasian_Adam --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:14, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Y-DNA haplogroups by ethnic groups

Does this article Y-DNA haplogroups by ethnic groups, have a realistic chance of accurately displaying the correct information. Wapondaponda (talk) 04:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC) See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Human_Genetic_History#Data_articles_.28tables_collecting_raw_data.29_for_Y_haplogroups --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

You continue to ignore advice to cease posting with excess verbosity

Your response on my talk page, is again excessively verbose and most of it is not relevant to the issue I raised (about your posting erroneous information). Thus, I have limited my response, to your additional comments, to the actual issue of your posting erroneous information. If you choose to respond further, PLEASE limit your comments to that issue, without adding reams of comments that are not germane or relevant. EditorASC (talk) 09:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Since I have not left anything on your page in a week I think the best answer here is that I would be best to ignore troll bait. PB666  13:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
You are excessively verbose. See WP:TLDR.--Michael C. Price 20:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Chinese paper

Thanks for that data table. Any chance you could e-mail me some more? Those for NRY STR markers are not saying much.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The there is a mixture of text and tabled information, its real poor quality presentation. They don't even describe what the base is for the STRs, how do these kinds of things get accepted for publication?PB666  14:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

OOA v MRH

Any opinions on this? http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Anatomically_modern_humans#Out_of_Africa_versus_Multiregionalism --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

This is Pdeitiker's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Latest E1b1b data

I think I put it in so hopefully correct. Also see http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=Kujanova_et_al._%282009%29 . One thing I have not yet included anywhere is also this one: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/09/y-chromosomes-of-saudi-arabia.html . Once again remember that I try to keep tabs on all data broken down by region in the Haplowiki, so if you search by a country, you'll find articles about those places. I also have a Category called Data which includes all articles that have raw data: http://www.haplozone.net/index.php?title=Category:Data --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Mungo Man

Hi Pdeitiker,

I noticed that you have been working quite a bit on the LM remains. Some time ago I translated Mungo Man to German for de-WP; currently I extend the article (already doubled). Don't you want to accelerate your work on the English article, so I can get inspiration? :-) I am neither an expert in genetics nor in anthropolgy or archeology; just a dilligently writing author... but I can see you are an expert at least in genetics... txs, :-) schomynv 07:40, 9 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schomynv (talkcontribs)

Talk:Prehistoric Ireland

Hiya Pdeitiker, I see you did alot of work on the above and, seeing that you know your onions re DNA, if you have any input re my talk comment, it would be gratefully received. --Þjóðólfr (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Hiya Pdeitiker, thanks for you input, I am guessing that I will be slow to respond to your input simply because there so much more to the subject than I anticipated! Hopefully you will not mind if I link some or you comments to help my understanding. --Þjóðólfr (talk) 14:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

R1a

Sorry if my comments about R1a came off the wrong way. I know the article needed compression. My background is in language, and not genetics. I just meant that the piece will need some editing at some point. You're doing good work. Thanks. MarmadukePercy (talk) 01:11, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Broken reference

In this edit from you added a reference <ref name="Takahata1999"/> to Mitochondrial Eve. Could you please go back and fill in the details, or tell me where you found this reference? Thank you, Debresser (talk) 12:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Debresser (talk) 15:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation

The WikiProject Tropical Cyclones recruitment drive!

The WikiProject Tropical Cyclones (WPTC) needs your help. Since 2008, our number of members have decreased. We need your help making sure all of are Featured articles are updated and some project processes need to be accomplished. We can do some processes with many active members, so we Wikipedians like you to help us get this done. In WPTC we

If you have any questions just ask Hurricanehink (talk · contribs), Cyclonebiskit (talk · contribs), Jason Rees (talk · contribs), Juliancolton (talk · contribs), Mitchazenia (talk · contribs), Yellow Evan (talk · contribs), Hylian Auree (talk · contribs) or Thegreatdr (talk · contribs). Click here to join!

Darren23 00:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

R1a phylogeny

Maybe you did not notice but the shape of the tree is the same in the new Underhill paper and according to ISOGG. So this gives us something to work with. OTOH, the mutations they are naming are indeed different: L series (as per the ISOGG tree) are discovered by Family Tree DNA which is a lab that works with genealogists (and we make up ISOGG). M series mutations are names given by the Stanford (i.e. Underhill) people. So they may be the same mutations discovered by different labs or different ones that are phylogenetically equivalent. I have written to ISOGG to see if they can work it out.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I think for now R1a1a1 etc should all just be redirect pages to R1a? By the way I guess you realize that the Karafet article in 2008 did try to develop a method with SNPs. See the refs for E1b1b1. Maybe Underhill and Kivisild's review article a few years back also made steps in this direction?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes I believe Underhill et al. typed for at least as many variants as Sharma et al, though the phylogenetic name might be different. Look at the mutation names when in doubt.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Minor Edits

Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. Chazchaz101 (talk) 22:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)