Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeDo the results really support the autochtonous theory?
Posted by grzegorj on 02 Nov 2014 at 11:02 GMT
We can read that "the authors suggest a genetic continuity of some Slavic mitochondrial lineages from at least the Bronze Age". It is true, however it should also be emphasized that the Multidimensional Scaling plot (figure 4) clearly shows that the genetical characteristic of the investigated Roman Iron Age populations was most similar to the one of modern Germany, not to the one of the modern Poland. The authors pay attension that "The RoIA samples differed significantly when compared to Neolithic individuals (LBK, Germany), Ukrainians, Belarusians, Latvians and Finns" - whereas the RoIA samples differed almost as significantly when compared to Ukrainians as to Poles (once again, Figure 4). An oversight? A deliberate omission? Anyway, the authors do not try to explain this result.
Summarizing it up, their results seem to give more support to the allochthonous theory than to the autochthonous one.
RE: Do the results really support the autochtonous theory?
ajuras replied to grzegorj on 21 Nov 2014 at 12:29 GMT
Dear Reader
We are pleased that the Researcher has commented on our paper published in the recent issue of PLoS ONE (DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110839). In this study our aim was to demonstrate only the "hard" statistical data, thus with regard to Figure 4 we discussed only significant results. Therefore, please see Table S5, where we presented statistical significance of this analysis.
Thank you for your comment.
Authors