Journal Article

XTEND

Can someone help me interpret this article? Summarize it PLZ.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v.../5201726a.html

MATLABdude

Hello XTEND,

PhysicsForums is populated by a large number of people who are inquisitive, and often knowledgeable in various areas of science, the arts, and various esoteric topics.

I don't mean to be overly harsh, as you're relatively new here, BUT:

• We don't do your work for you (e.g. summarizing an article--that's your job / homework)
• We don't share / make publicly available copyrighted materials (e.g. a Nature article). If the original authors have this online somewhere, please link to THEIR website.

Additionally, the Abstract (a summary of the paper) is on the first page!

EDIT: Additionally, please refrain from txtspk--people spend time writing out proper responses, you should ask proper questions.

Ophiolite

The full article is available online for all at the Nature website.

Xtend, what is it you wish help understanding? The conclusions or the methodology?
The conclusions are simple: genetic evidence lends support to the claim by Pathans that they are descended from Greek soldiers under Alexander the Great. The genetic fingerprint is faint, but significant.

If you wish to understand the methodology you are going to have to range far and wide beyond this single paper.

XTEND

I basically need to be able to present the paper in terms people would better understand than a complicated journal article. BUT I'm having troubles understanding it as well.

A basic summary of these would help...
-methods or approach
-what questions the author addresses or has
-conclusions

Ophiolite

XTEND, let me make a couple of background remarks. I basically agree with Matlabdude's statement that members here won't do your work for you. But you seem to be having genuine difficulty with this, so I'm willing to help out.

However, I am having great trouble in understanding what you don't understand. You ask "what questions the author addresses or has, (what are his) conclusions".

That has been answered. It was answered by : "genetic evidence lends support to the claim by Pathans that they are descended from Greek soldiers under Alexander the Great. The genetic fingerprint is faint, but significant."

It has been answered by matlabdude, who pointed you to the abstract of the paper. "Three Pakistani populations residing in northern Pakistan, the Burusho, Kalash and Pathan claim descent from Greek soldiers associated with Alexander's invasion of southwest Asia. ................Although based on only a few unrelated descendants, this provides strong evidence for a European origin for a small proportion of the Pathan Y chromosomes."

So, I am at a loss to see what it is you don't understand about this. Can you say what remains unclear?

As to the methodology, unless you are talking to someone well versed in genetics there is not a lot you can say.

MATLABdude

I'm at home and accessing this (without accessing through my University's institutional access proxy). Didn't know Nature had switched over to an open-access model.

For the OP, what is this for? Are you a high school student who's been given a scientific paper to parse / understand, or is this for a university-level genetics course? It would help us understand where you're coming from, and what you might or might not understand.

Ophiolite

They haven't. It applies to only a very limited subset of their publications. I haven't yet figured out what defines the subset.