Authentic Viking DNA From 1,000-Year-Old Skeletons
FiReaNGeL writes "Scientists were able to extract authentic DNA from ancient Viking skeletons, avoiding many of the problems of contamination faced by past researchers. Analysis of DNA from the remains of ancient humans provides valuable insights into such important questions as the origin of genetic diseases, migration patterns of our forefathers and tribal and family patterns. Using freshly sampled material from ten Viking skeletons from around AD 1,000, from a non-Christian burial site on the Danish island of Funen, Dissing and colleagues showed that it is indeed possible to retrieve authentic DNA from ancient humans."
Sure, contamination is a big problem, but it isn't like this hasn't been done before.
The problem is that you're trying to take very small traces of human DNA and greatly amplify it. Even a very small amount of contamination from the researchers or lab environment can introduce as much or more modern DNA than the ancient DNA being studied - so you end up sequencing the lab's janitor instead of the viking.
For example, here is a list of ancient humans who have had mitochondrial DNA sequences taken. (There are also Neandertal sequences not listed here.)
So I'd say this is a good job, and good science, but not at all a first.
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
A christian themed burial site would indicate a greater likelihood of intermingling with non-viking cultures from Southern Europe. This could be an indicator of genetic intermingling as well.
A non-christian burial site would not preclude intermingling, but probably be an indicator of lower likelihood.
Besides, TFA said they already did a christian site from around the same time, so this would give them a separate set of data points.
I know its hard to believe the concept of people who profess different religious affiliations being less likely to associate and intermarry. That kind of thing is so middle ages, all the major religions live in such peace and harmony in the enlightened 21st Century!
He's talking about a method of tracing ancestry through the female line. Current person whether male or female, their mother, their mother's mother etc. This doesn't correspond to genes with any visible phenotypes (two people in haplogroup T2 aren't necessarily going to share any traits), but it can tell you something about which populations mixed in the past and how recently. Also since 20% of the samples contain mutations not found in current populations, we can conclude that a number of the maternal lines for the vikings died out. (I don't know much population genetics, so I don't know if 20% loss over 1000 years is high or low, or what you'd expect).