User talk:Mreneecapp

Hello, From the source you provided for the definition of archaeogenetics: "Applying molecular genetics to questions of early human population history, and hence to major issues in prehistoric archaeology, is becoming so fruitful an enterprise that a new discipline—archaeogenetics—has recently come into being." To me, it seems this definition does not limit archaeogenetics to ancient DNA. The use of extant DNA has been used many times to make archaeological discoveries; this seems to also fit the definition in the source. :) FR-85 (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

clarification followup
Renfrew described archaeogenetics as "the study of the human past using the techniques of molecular genetics." (from Cambridge World HIstory, Volume 2). Notably, molecular genetics is not restricted to ancient DNA even when studying the past-- ancient DNA is not required for archaeogenetics, though it is sometimes used. The source you cited concurs with this as well; both "ancient DNA" and "aDNA" are not mentioned in the article. Does that clear things up? Let me know :) FR-85 (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit: DNA is taken from existing populations. For example, people hypothesize indigenous Americans came from Asia by comparing the DNA of existing Natives with existing Asians. So this would be an example of an archaeological conclusion about from existing DNA-- applying molecular genetic techniques to understanding the past. In fact, although this is not a cited statement, from what I have seen, most findings of this nature come from DNA from existing populations. Existing DNA is available so readily that it really has been a useful tool in archaeology (See the applications section).

However, in cases where aDNA can be recovered, it is useful. As I wrote in the applications section, aDNA was used to support hypotheses about people consuming milk before lactose tolerance became prevalent in Europe. This is also an example of archaeogenetics in action.

For an introductory treatment on the definition of archaeogenetics and what sorts of studies go into it, I recommend Cambridge World History Vol 2. Chapter 2 is titled "Archaeogenetics," and it explains uses of both existing DNA as well as aDNA. I suppose the most important thing to understand is that "archaeo" does mean old, but the DNA we study doesn't have to be old to make hypotheses about the past.

I hope that makes sense :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FR-85 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 9 August 2017 (UTC)