Newsletter #12
BREAKTHROUGH OF THE YEAR:
Human Genetic Variation
Elizabeth Pennisi
Science 318/5858 (21 December 2007) 1842-43.
Equipped with faster, cheaper technologies for sequencing DNA and assessing variation in genomes on scales ranging from one to millions of bases, researchers are finding out how truly different we are from one another. Read article .
Genetics News Highlight of 2007
According to the Editors of Nature
First whole human genome decoded
James Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, and genomics pioneer Craig Venter announced that their full genomes had been sequenced. The achievements were the first in an anticipated wave of personal-genome sequencing and crucial steps towards personalized medicines tailored to an individual's genetic makeup. Watson's genome, announced in June, was analysed by Connecticut company 454 Life Sciences' new rapid-sequencing technique. Venter's, published in September, was the first fully sequenced diploid genome — detailing DNA inherited from both parents — and revealed that human genetic variation is greater than previously thought.
In November, Google-backed Californian biotech firm 23andMe launched a $1,000 personal genome service; the same month that Icelandic deCODE genetics offered DNA testing for disease-linked genes for the same price. And 2007 saw a splurge of research papers from genome-wide disease-association studies, including diabetes and cancer.
DNA does NOT Support Bering Land Bridge Sole Source
Here we go again. A small number of Siberians crossed the Bering Strait when it was dry land 12,000 years ago and populated the entire New World.
I refer to the article in PLoS (Public Library of Science) Genetics, titled "Genetic Variation and Population Structure in Native Americans," by S. Wang et al. So far from vindicating a decrepit theory that had nearly drawn its last breath in anthropology circles in the late 1990s, the "new evidence" does nothing but perpetuate geneticists' circular reductionist logic again. Set up a survey the right way and you will get the results you want.
First, the 678 markers the scientists investigated are those they have determined are associated with Native Americans in the first place. Surprise! They were found in high frequencies in the 29 Native American populations of the study -- the very populations that have been studied to death since the 1980s. One much-cited study of alleged Siberian origins of Native Americans used only 9 North American Indians, all from the tiny Papago tribe in Arizona. Most of the Indians were from South America. No study will touch an Indian with admixture, although it is likely all Indians have some degree of admixture, at least in North America, even the reservation-born and bred Navajos, considered the "purest" (as much as 20% by one measure).
In every other population of the world except those in the New World, greater diversity equals source. Thus, geneticists established the "out of Africa" theory because Africa has the most genetic diversity.
But does it? Actually, the Americas have more. Rather than pointing to the source of migrations, the gradual increase in frequency of the 678 markers as we get closer to the Bering Strait could reflect a decrease in diversity as a result of genetic drift the farther removed populations became from a center situated, say, in Central America. The same phenomenon occurs on the fringes of the Atlantic, where one particular genetic type, the male lineage known as the Atlantic Modal Haplotype, reaches frequencies of over 80% in Connaught, Ireland. It did not originate in Ireland, though, but rather in Basque lands, which have a high amount of diversity, like Africa.
Geneticists set great store by a concept known as time to coalescence. This is a backtracking calculation of the age of a population according to how many mutations it has accumulated, usually in its mitochondrial DNA. Wind back the mitochondrial clock and you get to zero hour. Nothing is wrong with this approach, but the geneticists go further and set the time together with theoretical migrations to arrive at a source -- say Lake Baikhal in central Siberia. So they use theoretical migrations to prove theoretical migrations. For Native Americans, supposing even that they had one central origin, it could just as well have been in Panama. But for geneticists, it must be in Siberia or Mongolia because that is the only place it is allowed to be.
The search for one single source is illusory and reductionist anyway. Who would suggest that all Europeans came, say, from Tajikistan, 40,000 years ago.
Rather than keep attempting to reiterate Native Americans' lack of diversity, a colonial attitude with blinkers to begin with, geneticists should study how and why Native American diversity far exceeds that of the Europeans, Africans, Asians and all other world populations.
--Donald N. Yates
Principal Investigator
DNA Consulting
New genetic evidence supports isolation and drift in the Ladin communities of the South Tyrolean Alps but not an ancient origin in the Middle East
European Journal of Human Genetics (2008) 16, 124–134
By Mark G Thomas et al.
The Alps are one of the most significant geographical barriers in Europe and several isolated Swiss and Italian valleys retain the distinctive Ladin and Romansch languages, alongside the modern majority of Italian and German languages. Linguistically, Ladin belongs to the Romance languages, but some studies on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation have suggested a major Middle Eastern component to their genealogical origin. Furthermore, an observed high degree of within-population diversity has been interpreted as reflecting long-standing differentiation from other European populations and the absence of a major bottleneck in Ladin population history. To explore these issues further, we examined Y chromosome and mtDNA variation in two samples of Ladin speakers, two samples of German speakers and one sample of metropolitan Italian speakers. Our results (1) indicate reduced diversity in the Ladin-speaking and isolated German-speaking populations when compared to a sample of metropolitan Italian speakers, (2) fail to identify haplotypes that are rare in other European populations that other researchers have identified, and (3) indicate different Middle Eastern components to Ladin ancestry in different localities. These new results, in combination with Bayesian estimation of demographic parameters of interest (population size, population growth rate, and Palaeolithic/Neolithic admixture proportions) and phylogeographic analysis, suggest that the Ladin groups under study are small genetically isolated populations (subject to strong genetic drift), having a predominantly European ancestry, and in one locality, may have a greater Palaeolithic component to that ancestry than their neighbours.
The impact of genetics and genomics on public health
By Angela Brand et al.
European Journal of Human Genetics (2008) 16, 5–13
Public health practice has to date concerned itself with environmental or social determinants of health and disease and has paid scant attention to genomic variations within the population. The advances brought about by genomics are changing these perceptions. In the long run, this knowledge will enable health promotion messages and disease prevention programmes to be specifically directed at susceptible individuals and families, or at subgroups of the population, based on their genomic risk profile. As the controversial discourse in science and health politics shows, the integration of genomics into public health research, policy and practice is one of the major challenges that our health-care system is currently facing.
Hominid Harems: Big Males, Small Females and Bodybuilding
By Ann Gibbons
From Science magazine
A study on page 1443 of the November 30 (2007) issue of Science finds that the males of an extinct species of hominid in South Africa took longer to grow up than females and got much larger, suggesting that top males of this australopithecine species invested energy in bodybuilding in order to possess a harem of females, much like silverback gorillas do today.
Genetic Determinants of Hair, Eye and Skin Pigmentation in Europeans
Patrick Sulem et al.
Nature Genetics 39:1443-1452
Published 21 Oct. 2007
From a review by OBBeC
Scientists at deCODE genetics and colleagues in Iceland and Holland have reported the discovery of variations in the human genome that influence pigmentation of hair, eyes and skin. By studying more than 300,000 SNPs (single-letter variants in the human genome) across the whole genome in close to seven thousand individuals of European origin, the deCODE team discovered several novel SNPs influencing hair, eye, and skin pigmentation, at the same time refining earlier findings influencing these traits.
The findings help in the understanding of the molecular basis for and evolution of these most visible of characteristics, and may be useful for teasing out the biology of skin and eye disease as well as for forensic DNA analysis....
It is known that pigmentation characteristics such as freckles and hair and eye colour run in families. However, only few genes have been strongly linked to normal variation of these characteristics. Skin pigmentation in human populations tends to be darkest near the equator and to lighten with increasing latitude. This variation has a generally accepted dual biological function: heavier pigmentation affords protection against ultraviolet radiation in sunlight, protecting against sunburn and skin cancer but also reduces the body’s capacity to synthesize vitamin D. By contrast, there is no clear functional role for hair and eye color. The vast majority of variations in these two traits is confined to populations of European origin, with most populations around the globe with only dark hair and brown eyes....
The multitude of genes affecting pigmentation and their varied effects are reflected in the great degree of diversity of pigmentation seen in Europeans.
DNA Tests Find Branches but Few Roots
New York Times
By RON NIXON
Published: November 25, 2007
HENRY LOUIS GATES JR., whose PBS special “African American Lives” explores the ancestry of famous African-Americans using DNA testing, has done more than anyone to help popularize such tests and companies that offer them. But recently this Harvard professor has become one of the industry’s critics.
Mr. Gates says his concerns date back to 2000, when a company told him his maternal ancestry could most likely be traced back to Egypt, probably to the Nubian ethnic group. Five years later, however, a test by a second company startled him. It concluded that his maternal ancestors were not Nubian or even African, but most likely European.
Why the completely different results? Mr. Gates said the first company never told him he had multiple genetic matches, most of them in Europe. “They told me what they thought I wanted to hear,” Mr. Gates said.
An estimated 460,000 people have taken genetic tests to determine their ancestry or to expand their known family trees, according to Science magazine. Census records, birth and death certificates, ship manifests, slave narratives and other documents have become easier to find through the Internet, making the hunt for family history less daunting than in years past.
Yet for many, the paper or digital trail eventually ends. And for those who have reached that point, genetic DNA tests may help to provide the final piece of the puzzle.
The expectations and reasons for taking the test vary. For some, the test allows them to reconnect with African ancestors after centuries of slavery wiped out links between African-Americans and their forebears. Others want to see if they have links to historical figures like Genghis Khan or Marie Antoinette. For still others, it’s an attempt to fill gaps in family histories and find distant cousins they might not otherwise have known.
The demand has spawned an industry. Almost two dozen companies now offer such services, up from just two or three only six years ago. The field is so hot that private equity investors have moved in: Spectrum Equity Investors recently bought Ancestry.com, an online genealogy site, for about $300 million shortly after the site added genetic testing as a service.
But as the number of test takers and companies has grown, so has the number of scientists or scholars like Mr. Gates who have questioned assertions that companies make about their tests. One of the most controversial issues is the ability of the tests to determine the country or the ethnic group of origin for African-Americans or Native Americans.
Mr. Gates, director of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard, said his experience and similar stories from others have prompted him to enter the field.
Mr. Gates recently teamed up with Family Tree DNA, a DNA testing and genealogy firm in Houston, to provide genetic testing and genealogy work for African-Americans. The new venture is called AfricanDNA.
“What we hope to do is combine this with genealogical and other records to try to help people discover their roots,” he said. “The limitations of current genetic DNA tests mean you can’t rely on this alone to tell you anything. We hope to bring a little order to the field.”
In an editorial in Science magazine in October, a number of scientists and scholars said companies might not be fully explaining the limitations of genetic testing, or what results actually mean.
The authors said that limited information in the databases used to compare DNA results might lead people to draw the wrong conclusions or to misinterpret results. The tests trace only a few of a customer’s ancestors and cannot tell exactly where ancestors might have lived, or the specific ethnic group to which they might have belonged. And the databases of many companies are not only small — they’re also proprietary, making it hard to verify results.
Anthropologists lobby to retain Native Indian skeletons for study
By Rex Dalton
Nature 450/469 ( November 22, 2007)
Alarm is growing among anthropologists in the United States over a plan that could empty institutions of about 120,000 human skeletons currently stored for research purposes.
Under a new proposal, the bones at museums, universities and federal facilities across the nation could be given to Native American tribes now living in the area from which the remains were excavated, even if the skeletons are not culturally identifiable to the tribes. In October, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) programme, the agency that oversees the handling of American Indian remains, opened a 90-day comment period on the proposal.
It would affect ancient skeletons similar to the Kennewick Man specimen from Washington state. Scientists won a long court battle to keep that 9,000-year-old skeleton for study after attempts to give it to tribes for likely disposal.
Under current guidelines, bones that can be matched with a living tribe by using cultural evidence may be returned to them, but what to do with remains that are so old that they can't be associated with today's surviving tribes has been hotly debated for a decade.
“The proposal would allow the return of almost any skeleton, even those used in medical schools.”
Setting up a system to dispose of these 'culturally unidentifiable' specimens is a natural progression from NAGPRA, which became federal law in 1990 after extensive negotiations between scientists and tribes, says Sherry Hutt who manages the NAGPRA programme. “This is a proposal for disposition [in situations] such as when a new highway runs through an old graveyard,” says Hutt, an attorney and economist from Arizona.
But major scientific organizations strongly dispute this view, calling the move “illegal” because it goes beyond the Congressional law, and a “divisive” manoeuvre that may shatter decades of working relationships between scientists and tribes. “The rules would be disastrous,” says Phillip Walker, an anthroplogist at the University of California, Santa Barbara. A former member of NAGPRA's seven-person review committee, Walker helped prepare the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (AAPA) comments.
The AAPA says that the proposal would allow the return of almost any skeleton, even those used in medical schools, would greatly hinder anatomical teaching, and would eliminate comparative material for studies. Many of the specimens are among the oldest, offering data on the continent's first humans.
The comment period closes on 14 January, when the NAGPRA review committee will comment on the draft regulations. Then US Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne will issue a final decision.
Donald Yates comments:
Even if the Federal Government decides to extend ownership of ancient remains and relics to locally visible American Indian groups for disposal as they see fit, authorities will have to take American Indian spokespersons' word on who they are, how old they are, where they came from and how long they have been where they are -- in other words, the very questions science seeks to answer by study of those remains and relics. It's like giving students the chance to set course policies and grade themselves. I say this as a university professor and American Indian.
American Indian cultural continuity and collective identification is quite recent. The oldest Indian writing, the Walam Olum, says the last-but-one phase of Lenape history comprised thirty-six reigns of their chiefs from their settlement along the Ohio to a figure known as Lekhihiten the Author down to about 800 C.E. Before about the year 1 C.E., all these nations were still in Asia around the area of Lake Bakhal. The Cherokee, Iroquois and Lenape lived together in the former territory of the Moundbuilder Indians (likely a mixture of Mexican Indians and peoples from the Old World) for an estimated 500 years. Another thirty-six generations passed until the Lenape arrived in their last dwelling place along the Delaware River, where they were encountered by the Dutch and English. A special black wampum belt was made to commemorate this event. When the beads were counted in historical times, the belt showed that the Lenape arrived in their easternmost homeland in 1396.
So much for ancient roots on the land, and the Algonquian Indians are regarded as the grandfathers by other Indian nations. There are more Indian nations of Algonquian speech today in North America than any other. Yet they, like all others, appear to be relative newcomers, historically, genetically and culturally.
Scholars such as Isabel Stewart have suggested that the Athabaskan Navajo and Apache Indians, today's largest and most favored tribes in the eyes of the Federal Government, did not arrive in the American Southwest until shortly before the Spaniards.
It's time to stop throwing political sops and go on with the the science of objective study of peoples, whether that involves historical accounts, genetics or whatever means. The truth is far more empowering than anything else.
DNA Pioneer Rebuked
For Racist Remarks
BBC News, October 20, 2007
DNA helix co-discoverer James Watson was suspended from the board of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory after making disparaging remarks in the Independent, a British newspaper, about the intelligence of Africans.
Watson said he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really.” He added that “…people who have to deal with black employes find it is not true” that everyone is equal.
Later, Watson, qualified his remarks. “The overwhelming desire of society today is to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity,” he said. “It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science. To question this is not to give in to racism.”
With Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins in 1962, Watson received the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for their discovery of the double-helix structure and nature of DNA, often called "the code of life."
Personalized genomes go mainstream
Companies prepare to offer a very personal service
By Erika Check Hayden
Nature 450/7166:11
When scientists released a draft of the human genome sequence six years ago, they said the data belonged to all of us — but until now, they have been the only ones able to play with the data therein.
That's now starting to change. In the next few months, two Silicon Valley start-ups will start giving customers a peek at their genomes for a few thousand dollars a pop. A firm in Massachusetts is also offering people the opportunity to buy the whole sequence of their genome for an unspecified amount. And close behind these firms are corporations, such as Google, that are developing ways to store, analyse and profit from health information — including genetic data.
The first start-up, 23andMe of Mountain View, California, plans to launch before the end of this year, and the second, Navigenics of Redwood Shores, hopes to do so by spring 2008. Both companies say that they will genotype millions of regions in customers' genomes, called single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNPs, which have been linked to a handful of diseases and nonmedical traits, such as earwax consistency. They then sell that information back to the customer.
Navigenics will focus on medical conditions, says its chief scientific officer, Dietrich Stephan, a human geneticist at the Translational Genomics Research Institute in Phoenix, Arizona. It will use information from scientific studies to estimate composite risk factors for diseases based on each customer's SNPs, he says. It also plans to provide genetic counselling to help customers interpret these risk factors. The firm says that it will conduct long-term studies on how well those predictors work.
By contrast, 23andMe will analyse not just medical information, but also traits not necessarily linked to disease. The firm will introduce a social networking component to genomics by allowing customers to link their data with others', such as family members, say advisers. It is also considering providing researchers with access to the data, they say.
Advisers familiar with the firms say that there is a distinct difference between them. "Navigenics might be the white coat and stethoscopes approach, and 23andMe might be about family and ancestry and who you inherited something from," says genome scientist George Church from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. Church is an adviser for 23andMe, has had discussions with Navigenics and is also advising Knome, the Cambridge-based personal genome company that offers to sequence the whole genome. "It's like the difference between IBM in the 1960s, which was about black ties and white shirts and shiny black shoes, and Google in the present time, which is a little more playful," he says.
From Human Genome to Your Personal Genome
Innovations in DNA sequencing and genotyping are opening doors for personal genomics. Science writer Nathan Blow in Nature explores these technological advances and their implications.
Related articles review the state of the science of personal genomics, including economic feasibility and emerging technology that suggest it may soon be possible to sequence your own entire genome. Such an event could be the precursor to hundreds of gene screening tests within the reach of consumers, inaugurating a whole new era in DNA testing for ordinary people.
According to Harvard biology professor Richard Lewontin, because the Human Genome Project was completed by twenty or more research institutes and much of it was "fill-in-the-blanks" computer guesswork, the Human Genome we now have is an artificial one corresponding to no living individual. Only by sequencing real human subjects and describing the vast variety of human genetics will medical science be able to achieve its aim of discovering the genetic basis of disease. This has been heralded as Phase II of the Human Genome Project, although it has attracted little funding (unlike Phase I).
By Nathan Blow
Nature 449/7162:627
Exoneration Using DNA Brings Change in Legal System
By SOLOMON MOORE
Published: October 1, 2007, New York Times
State lawmakers across the country are adopting broad changes to criminal justice procedures as a response to the exoneration of more than 200 convicts through the use of DNA evidence.
PICTURE: Dwayne Allen Dail, right, leaving a North Carolina court after DNA evidence led to the overturning of his child-rape conviction.
All but eight states now give inmates varying degrees of access to DNA evidence that might not have been available at the time of their convictions. Many states are also overhauling the way witnesses identify suspects, crime labs handle evidence and informants are used.
At least six states have created commissions to expedite cases of those wrongfully convicted or to consider changes to criminal justice procedures. One of them, the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, will hold a hearing this month on remedies for people who have been wrongfully convicted.
Laws in several states, including Illinois, New Jersey and North Carolina, have bipartisan backing, with many Democrats supportive on civil rights grounds and Republicans generally hoping that tighter procedures will lead to fewer challenges of convictions.
“Technology has made a big difference,” said Margaret Berger, a DNA legal expert who is on a National Academy of Sciences panel that is looking into the changing needs of forensic scientists. “We see that there are new techniques for ascertaining the truth.”
Maryland, North Carolina, Vermont and West Virginia passed legislation this year to create tougher standards for the identification of suspects by witnesses, one of the most trouble-ridden procedures.
Nationwide, misidentification by witnesses led to wrongful convictions in 75 percent of the 207 instances in which prisoners have been exonerated over the last decade, according to the Innocence Project, a group in New York that investigates wrongful convictions.
Legislatures considered 25 witness identification bills in 17 states this year, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers reported. Five states approved bills, while five states defeated them. Bills are pending in seven states.
“It’s become clear that eyewitnesses are fallible,” said Lt. Kenneth A. Patenaude, a police commander in Northampton, Mass., who is an expert on witness identification techniques.
Two states, Vermont and Maryland, passed laws this year to improve crime lab oversight to eliminate errors and omissions. Maryland recently passed a law that will hold its crime labs to the same standards as clinical labs, a much more rigorous requirement. Other legislative changes to crime lab oversight are pending in 21 states, including New York.
More than 500 local and state jurisdictions, including Alaska, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia have adopted polices that require the recording of interrogations to help prevent false confessions, according to the Innocence Project.
The California Legislature also passed a bill this year that requires informant testimony to be corroborated before it can be heard by a jury. Critics say such testimony can be unreliable, especially when it is offered by convicts or suspects in return for leniency. The bill awaits approval by the governor.
Advocates of efforts to use DNA to exonerate those wrongfully convicted say the changes in the state laws are welcome and long overdue.
“The legislative reform movement as a result of these DNA exonerations is probably the single greatest criminal justice reform effort in the last 40 years,” said Peter J. Neufeld, co-director of the Innocence Project.
But some law enforcement officials oppose some of the changes, saying they create legal minefields for the police and prosecutors. Any deviation from the new standards, no matter how minor, could be taken up by defense lawyers in an appeal, the critics say.
The California State Sheriffs’ Association is fighting two bills there that would mandate electronic recording of interrogations and corroboration of informant testimony. The bills have been passed by the Legislature and are awaiting final approval by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican.
“Simply put, these two bills create loopholes for defendants to get an edge in court on technicalities,” according to a letter from the sheriffs’ organization to the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice. The association also opposed a state bill that would create guidelines for suspect lineups.
Even some proponents of the new standards balk at making them state law, insisting they are better dealt with by local law enforcement agencies.
“I’m not fond of legislation,” said Lieutenant Patenaude, the Massachusetts police commander. “I’ve been asked to review bills in several states, and I haven’t seen one that mirrors the best practices that we’ve put out here. I’d like to see police agencies mold the procedures instead of legislatures or courts.”
DNA CONSULTING LAUNCHES
ANCESTRY DISCUSSION BOARDS
DNAcommunities.com Has Support Forums
for 300 Populations from around the World
SANTA FE, N.M. – (September 15, 2007) – DNA Consulting has introduced a website designed to help genetic genealogists understand their ethnic mix as determined by home DNA tests.
DNA Ancestor Communities is a support forum for users inputting their DNA profile into OmniPop, a world population database. OmniPop takes the unique set of markers contained in the DNA of each of us and estimates which countries and ethnic groups contributed to our overall ancestry.
“The use of population genetics for genealogy is a totally new, somewhat daunting technology, one that has just recently come into the reach of the consuming public,” said Donald N. Yates, principal investigator for DNA Consulting. “OmniPop is out there and available, but it’s tricky to use. We wanted to give people a special community in which to interpret and update their results. This way, they can grow, learn from and teach others as the science unfolds.”
OmniPop is the driving force behind a product DNA Consulting introduced only last year. Called the DNA Fingerprint Test, this home test looks at random markers spread across your entire genome, not just at your father’s Y chromosome or mother’s maternally inherited DNA type as do older tests. Accordingly, the DNA Fingerprint Test can paint a picture of your entire ancestry, not just selective lines.
DNA Fingerprint Test gives you your top 20 matches to populations around the world, plus a separate list for European countries. These are interpreted in a custom report that summarizes the likely major countries of your principal ancestry, as well as the presence of any admixture from minor ancestral lines (for instance, Native American). The test can reveal hidden or small degrees of ancestry that may not be shown in traditional DNA tests.
Not just customers, but anyone can participate in DNA Ancestor Communities. The last public version of OmniPop is available there free.
DNA Consulting supports the development of OmniPop and uses the most up-to-date version in its DNA Fingerprint Test, with data from more than 300 world populations – and counting. At the new website, customers can discuss how well their DNA Fingerprint results match the family’s oral traditions and known genealogy. They can also upload pictures and share links to special information about different countries of origin and family trees.
In addition to world OmniPop populations, every DNA Fingerprint Test includes the top-ranking matches according to the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes database. Because they use different standards, OmniPop and ENFSI cannot be combined into a single database, and two searches are necessary. The company is the only test provider to provide this service. The Europe forum within DNA Ancestor Communities has expert help on using ENFSI and understanding human migrations in post-Ice Age Europe.
The DNA Fingerprint Test sells for $250.00 and is available for immediate ordering online at www.dnaconsultants.com or by calling toll-free 1-877-473-5155.
The website for DNA Ancestor Communities is www.dnacommunities.com.