Slashdot Mirror
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."
Next step is to clone them and open a theme park, right?
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
Just imagine how awesome the theme parks could be if they were populated by real, genetically correct vikings. Oh wait...
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Now we can reincarnate the vikings. Good job.
-- (this is a sig) My Computer Programming Forumhttp://www.programers.co.nr/
This should be interesting. I wonder if we'll find out one of the Native American Tribes was heavily interbred with some vikings.
In any case, the really interesting thing is that this will really show us how each race of humans developed and spread, and who came from who.
Of course, we'll find that it all started 6,000 years ago, in a garden in the Middle East...
Not more spam!
I have some of the viking in my mish-mash genetic make up - they were very good, after all, at getting their genes spread widely.
perhaps this research will confirm my suspicion that the Viking lineage is where I acquired my most powerful gene
Read my Very Short "Stories"
How drastically would their DNA differ from that of current Norweigians, Swedes, and Danes? I dare not mention the Finns, lest some the Scandinavians go viking-shit on me.
But seriously, though; has the modern gene pool been dramatically changed due to southern neighbors migrating north?
My favorite place to hang out in the summer, is a scandinavian bar. If you go up on the roof, you'll find authentic viking DNA all over the place...
I don't mind dating a girl that has been with everybody, as long as she had a good shower afterwards.
For the lazy, the samples found were:
All of those are found in Europe to varying degrees; the only item of note is that the K and one of the H samples had no exact matches when compared to a database containing over 15,000 mtDNA sequences.
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.
Authentic vikings still walk the earth today.
This is the only creature Chuck Norris is afraid of.
So why would it matter if the burial site is Christian or no-Christian? Last time I checked one dead body is as dead as another, wouldn't just saying "from a burial site on the Danish island of Funen" be more textualy efficent ;)
a Beowulf cluster of these.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
As a Scandinavian, I am compelled to invoke the Slashdot meme:
I am a genetically correct viking, you insensitive clod!
I lost my sig.
At the Battle of Stamford Bridge, allegedly one single Berserker held the bridge and blocked Harold Godwinson's advance long enough for Harald Sigurdsson's army to assemble. Essentially denied Godwinson the element of surprise.
One guy. Vs the whole freaking Saxon army. What was _left_ of that Saxon army after the battle, was still enough to put up a battle at Hastings, so the original size must have been even more impressive.
I dunno, I'd vote that this is one of those cases where one should resist trying to improve what's perfectly good as it is. I'm not sure if the velociraptor genes wouldn't actually make it worse. And not in a good way.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
"A Viking-Velociraptor with a battleaxe and the speed of a cheetah...*drool*"
Uhh.. Bravestarr?
å møøse ønce bit my sister
I'm a rabbit startled by the headlights of life
If they get the first sentence completely wrong, I'm not going to bother with the rest of the article.
(Viking literally means a person who comes from a bay or similar.)
"And I'll pump you all the viking DNA you'll ever want!"
How will you get the Vikings to accept your offer?
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
My mtDNA is T2 so I guess that means mom was descended from Vikings... The Vikings were raiding Ireland before AD 1000 and carrying out the most winsome lasses so I'd guess that's where some of the mtDNA came from. Ancient Celtic Warriors: Vikings and Irish at War Viking Settlemnent in Ireland
You're kidding, right? Let's look at the world of 1008 AD, and you tell me if it sounds ancient:
The English language didn't exist.
There were no ocean-going trade routes between Europe and East Asia.
Iceland had just had their first allthing, but other than that there were no democracies or republics in existence.
Spain was a Muslim province. Oh, and the Spanish language didn't exist, either.
The wild notion that the earth orbited the sun, and not the other way around, would not have scientific and mathematical constructs to support it for another 531 years.
The Roman Empire still existed (at least its Eastern Half).
The only religion in most of Europe was Roman Catholicism (the Vikings converted in the previous century).
The average person never traveled more than seven miles from the place of his or her birth, and could not conceive of communicating with people more than shouting distance away. They couldn't even write, only priests could (Charlemagne was notable as one of the only medieval rulers who could sign his own name).
About 33 generations have passed since 1008. If you don't think that's a long time, when was the last time you spoke with your great-great-grandfather in person? He was only four generations removed, and he was probably dead before you were born. 1000 years is a freakishly long time in terms of human life, culture, and advancement.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
I'm guessing you come from the New World somewhere. Yes, 1000 years is fairly recent. But you're partially right, it wasn't quite "modern" either, which is why I said "not far from" modern.
I'm not quite sure why you're bringing up Spain and East Asia; I'm perfectly happy to agree that Western Europe was a barbaric wasteland at the time, but for some reason I thought we were talking about Scandinavia. The eastern Roman empire continued to exist into the Modern period, by the way; when Constantinople fell the Renaissance had been well under way for some time in various European countries. But the Byzantine Empire was neither ancient, mediaeval, nor modern, but somewhere in between and all three at once.
Unlike the rest of your points, that one is actually kind of (tangentially) related to the basic rationale for my earlier statement, as cultural and political links between Constantinople and Scandinavia were unusually strong, as European states of the time went. Scandinavians had already discovered and were attempting to colonise three separate New Worlds (Iceland, Greenland, and Labrador), something that Italians like Columbus didn't even think of for nearly another half millennium; and it was only going to be a couple more centuries before a sort of Renaissance started in Scandinavia, long before it got going anywhere else in Europe. So, I stand by my statement: "not far from modern". In the same way that the Italy of Boccaccio's time could be considered "not far from modern".
I'm assuming that the majority of Slashdotters are proscience and not pro-Creationism. In the interest of maintaining scientific temper on this forum, may I request Slashdotters to employ the more secular 'CE' -- Common Era -- rather than the forthrightly Christian 'AD' -- Anno Domini, meaning, 'In the Year of Our Lord'. I think most here, including myself, have utmost respect for Jesus and his followers even we don't necessarily consider him to be 'Our Lord'. The usual response is, 'Who cares? Nobody knows exactly what AD means, anyway. And it's become established so why change it.' I would there are many perfectly rational individuals who might object to the above response. The corresponding term for 'BC' is 'BCE' -- Before Common Era. Thanks. No flames please!
I bet they find they could not win a super bowl back then either.