Relation of caste-religion-language-place-tribe with genetics of Indian population

Scientific study based on gene marker technique in haplo group chromosome, Mitochondrial and Y chromosome shows that in Indian population; there is no specific differences among them based on their difference in language, caste, religion, place, tribe or other.

Religion is no way related to gene. 

It is for sure that all Indians are maternally cousin-brothers; 
the difference if any lies, then that is with their generation only.

Indian population is growing consistently ever since the arrival of the first human (Homo sapiens) on this land, some 74,000 years ago.

This could well be understood with the example of British, who came to India, stayed here for 200 years but their role in Indian gene pool is negligible. English language is spoken here just double in numbers as compared to Britain. In India, English language became a media of transaction for latest technique, technology and science.

Since last 10,000 years Indian gene pool is the same. If we take the help of a Time Machine to go back in past 10,000 years, then North India was much the same as South India genetically.

That means the Central Asian comers (this study also denies the theory of possibility of Aryan influx in great numbers or if there were any, then10,000 to 15,000 years earlier) were least influencing genetically, while we accepted their culture and language; marriages were given least importance to.

Study concludes that the South East Asian groups are descendents of basically two groups: Indian and people residing in central or south China.

India always remained in contact with rest of the world. Outsiders came to India with their language and culture and submerged in this vast ocean. Since last 10,000 years none any influencing group have come to India, leaving no genetic evidence behind.
Indians are basically Indians.

#idea thankfully shared from the article of Dr.Gyanendra Mishra/Science Reporter/February 2014 issue.
#original papers consulted, cited therein.

#a related blog post
http://sciencedoing.blogspot.in/2014/04/caste-system-in-india-is-not-archaic-as.html

#abstracts of some references in original:

Genetics of Indo-European populations:  
the past, the future                                                              
by: Balanovsky, Oleg; Utevska, Olga; 
Balanovska, Elena                                                                                                                                      

Journal of Language Relationship, № 9, 2013 - p.23-3

We describe our experience of comparing genetic and linguistic data in relation to the Indo-European problem. Our recent comparison of the genetic variation with lexicostatistical data on North Caucasian populations identified the parallel evolution of genes and languages; one can say that history of the populations was reflected in the linguistic and the genetic mirrors. For other linguistic families one can also expect this similarity, though it could be blurred by elite dominance and other events affecting gene and lexical pools differently. Indeed, for Indo-European populations of Europe, in contrast with the Caucasus case, the partial correlation indicates a more important role of geography (r = 0.32) rather than language (r = 0.21) in structuring the gene pool; though high pair correlation (r = 0.67) between genetics and linguistics distances allows using the lexicostatistical data as good predictors of genetic similarity between populations. The similarity between genetics and linguistics was identified for both Y­chromosomal data (populations are clustered according to their language) and mitochondrial DNA (populations are clustered according to their language group). In general, we believe that there is no single genetic marker definitively linked with the expansion of Indo-European populations. Instead, we are starting a new research project aiming to identify a set of markers partially linked with separate Indo-European groups, thus allowing partial reconstructions of the multi-layer mosaic of Indo-European movements.(http://www.jolr.ru/)

The place of Armenian in the Indo-European language family: 
the relationship with Greek and Indo-Iranian                                                                                                                         
Martirosyan, Hrach                                                                                                                                          

Journal of Language Relationship, № 10, 2013 - p.85-138

The main purpose of this paper is to present lexical correspondences that unite Armenian with Greek and/or Indo-Iranian. They include shared innovations on the one hand, and isolated lexemes on the other. These two lexical corpora — lexical innovations on an inherited basis and isolated words — can be placed within the same temporal and spatial framework. After the Indo-European dispersal Proto-Armenian would have continued to come into contact with genetically related Indo-European dialects. Simultaneously, it would certainly also have been in contact with neighbouring non-Indo-European languages. A word can be of a substrate origin if it is characterized by: (1) limited geographical distribution; (2) unusual phonology and word formation; (3) characteristic semantics. The material presented here, albeit not exhaustive, allows to preliminarily conclude that Armenian, Greek, (Phrygian) and Indo-Iranian were dialectally close to each other. Within this hypothetical dialect group, Proto-Armenian was situated between Proto-Greek (to the west) and Proto-Indo-Iranian (to the east). The Indo-Iranians then moved eastwards, while the Proto-Armenians and Proto-Greeks remained in a common geographical region for a long period and developed numerous shared innovations. At a later stage, together or independently, they borrowed a large number of words from the Mediterranean / Pontic substrate language(s), mostly cultural and agricultural words, as well as animal and plant designations. On the other hand, Armenian shows a considerable number of lexical correspondences with European branches of the Indo-European language family, a large portion of which too should be explained in terms of substrate rather than Indo-European heritage.(http://www.jolr.ru/)