Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18385274›Full record

ArticleGenome research2008

New binary polymorphisms reshape and increase resolution of the human Y chromosomal haplogroup tree.

Tatiana M Karafet, Fernando L Mendez, Monica B Meilerman, Peter A Underhill, Stephen L Zegura, Michael F Hammer

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 308 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
308citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

308 citing papers in PubMed, 874 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Genetic ancestry of families of putative Inka descent.Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2018
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Y-chromosome lineages and surnames, two blurry trails.International journal of legal medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

248 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tatiana M KarafetARL Division of Biotechnology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA.
Fernando L Mendez
Monica B Meilerman
Peter A Underhill
Stephen L Zegura
Michael F Hammer
University of Arizona · USStanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Markers on the non-recombining portion of the human Y chromosome continue to have applications in many fields including evolutionary biology, forensics, medical genetics, and genealogical reconstruction. In 2002, the Y Chromosome Consortium published a single parsimony tree showing the relationships among 153 haplogroups based on 243 binary markers and devised a standardized nomenclature system to name lineages nested within this tree. Here we present an extensively revised Y chromosome tree containing 311 distinct haplogroups, including two new major haplogroups (S and T), and incorporating approximately 600 binary markers. We describe major changes in the topology of the parsimony tree and provide names for new and rearranged lineages within the tree following the rules presented by the Y Chromosome Consortium in 2002. Several changes in the tree topology have important implications for studies of human ancestry. We also present demography-independent age estimates for 11 of the major clades in the new Y chromosome tree.

Indexed as

PhylogenyChromosomes, Human, YGenetic MarkersHaplotypesHumansMutationPolymorphism, GeneticGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID18385274
PMCPMC2336805
OpenAlexW2113104073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.