Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Totals don't add up in big 2005 Capelli y-dna study of Mediterranean

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Totals don't add up in big 2005 Capelli y-dna study of Mediterranean

    http://www.ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/Ca...ed_Basin_Y.pdf

    I've looked at this much cited paper, and 2 of the totals don't add up.

    The NWS column (northwest Sicily) adds up to 65, but is listed as 70.
    The TUN column (Tunisia) adds up to 40, but is listed as 39.

    The paper talks about 656 total samples, but there are 652.

    This is how I feel about the whole deal: ^ 3.

    Has anyone pointed out to Capelli his crucial mistake, yet? Maybe the missing samples are those that he put aside because they needed further testing due to their rare haplogroup and he forgot about it, and now the world is ill informed about the true nature of the northwest Sicilians and Tunisian people! Now I feel like this: + x 2 - / pi = .

    But seriously, has anyone noticed this, yet? I remember that Dienekes caught a mistake in one paper and sent them an email and only then did they notice it and correct it.

  • #2
    I just counted NWS with a sum of 68 vs. Capelli's 70 and your 65.
    And yes Tunisia added up to be 40 vs. Capelli's 39.
    It's good to have a triple checker on the double checker followed by a quad checker!
    Who's next?
    I also have two matches in this study........ one in ESC and one in CYP!
    Last edited by iberiandave; 9 July 2007, 06:35 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      You're right, it's 68. Thanks.

      Comment


      • #4
        My sum gives the required total of 70 and 39 for both samples, don't know why the difference. It is true that NWS has one dubious C and one dubious P... though to be fair, the Italy project does have one R2 and one Q.

        What bothers me more of the table is that they didn't specifically test for G, which is has significant percentages in the area, nor for K2, nor for my own haplogroup L (!!! big flaw!). And I am also concerned about the high number of PxR1 that they find all over. Given the importance of PxR1 for all the discussions about the origin for R, these numbers beg for an explanation.

        cacio

        Comment


        • #5
          Here's the pic with the evidence.

          http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k1...llicantadd.gif

          With the corrected corrections, it seems the NWS column is 68 (instead of 70), and the TUN column is 40 (instead of 39), which gives a new total of 655 (instead of 656). The mystery, of course, is what was in that missing sample? Was it a missing link? Are Sicilians Neanderthals??? Is Capelli trying to hide this fact??? What about the Mafia, or Roswell??? This is bigger than Watergate!!! Of course, I could be jumping to conclusions...
          Last edited by argiedude; 9 July 2007, 08:05 PM. Reason: wanted to add one of those big green smiley dudes, can't get enough of those guys

          Comment


          • #6
            argiedude:

            I did not look at that table, I looked at the summary table 3. By cross-checking the totals in table A1 by haplogroups with the totals reported in table 3, it will be possible to see where the missing/extra sequences are. But I'd have to print out table A1, I cannot really look on the screen...

            cacio

            Comment

            Working...
            X