A new study is available with plenty of data on the haploid genetics of Siberian populations with focus on Tungusic peoples.
Anna T. Duggan et al., Investigating the Prehistory of Tungusic Peoples of Siberia and the Amur-Ussuri Region with Complete mtDNA Genome Sequences and Y-chromosomal Markers. PLoS ONE 2013. Open access → LINK [doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081605]
Maybe the most informative graphic is fig. 1, which shows the scatter of mitochondrial DNA:
| Figure 1. Map of Siberia showing approximate locations of sampled populations and their basic haplogroup composition. |
For the meaning of abbreviations, check table 1.
Typical NE Asian haplogroups like C and D are quite widely distributed, up to the point of becoming difficult to say much about them. Instead A is more concentrated (Nyukhza, Iengra, both of them Evenks, and Koryaks particularly), while Z does appear to show a similar pattern (but with presence among Kamchatka instead of Koryaks and a relevant distributon in NE Siberia (Berezovka and some Yakuts).
Haplogroup B is rare instead, only showing up in Southern Yakuts. It must be mentioned in any case because of its relevance in the original peopling of America.
G is not too common, with the partial exception of G1, which shows an Eastern Siberian concentration.
Y is concentrated among Nivkhs (no surprises here), while F seems most important in Yakutia (like B, it is not a typical Northern lineage but its bulk distribution lays further South).
West Eurasian lineages, marked in Brown are concentrated in the Evens of Nyukhza, as well as among some Yakuts. Their presence among Yakuts is easy to understand considering their partial Turkic ancestry but the Nyukhza even larger apportion seems to me derived of some other kind of contact with Altai and the steppe, although the authors seem to favor Yakut admixture instead.
Premonitory FAQ:
Which is the difference between "M_N" and "Other"?
No idea: ask the authors. But I'm quite positive that "Other" cannot mean L(xM,N) but rather "other M and N". Speculatively, it could indicate the difference between some M and N sublineages they have tested for and others which they did not. It's sloppy nomenclature in any case.
Y-DNA
[Important post-script note: excepted the basal SNP markers for C and N, which were tested for, all the haplogroups are defined based on STR markers, what may be wrong].
Table 4 lists the Y-DNA haplogroups for Evenks, Evens, Yakuts and Yukaghirs only. C3c1 is very dominant in the Tungusic populations: 87/127 among Evenks, 43/89 among Evens, but all the opposite among Yakuts (1/184) and rather weak also among Yukaghirs (2/13).
Yakuts are dominated by N1c (173/184), lineage that has also some presence among the other sampled populations: Evenks: 18/127 (Nyukhza and Iengra groups), Evens: 30/89 (particularly Sakkyryyr and Sebjan groups), Yukaghir: 4/13.
Q1 is found mostly among Yukaghirs (4/13) with a single Yakut other case.
N1b is also of some importance among Tungusic peoples: 18/127 among Evenks (Taimyr and Stony Tunguska) and 13/89 among Evens (essentially in Tompo).
C3* is found mostly among Nyukhza Evens (13/78), who also harbor most of the Western lineage I detected in the area (4/78).
The other meaningful Western lineage spotted is, of course, R1a, which is found in two variants: R1a(xR1a1) is concentrated among Taimyr Evenks (3/18) with only another sample among Stony Tunguska Evenks (1/40). R1a1 instead is concentrated among Yakuts (4/184).
There are also erratics (isolated single-individual samples) of C*, J2, O and F*.
There is also other interesting material in the study but I can only extend myself so much. I strongly recommend reading it for everyone with interest in Siberian and related populations, be these Uralics, Native Americans or generally East and Central Asians.
The R1a look like errors. It's unlikely that they can be R1a with DYS392=11. They're probably R1a1a-Z645, and either Z280+ and/or M458+. Both of these are commonly found in Slavic populations, like Russian and Polish.
ReplyDeleteYour highly subjective opinion is not evidence, David. That's what the study says and I see absolutely no reason to question their professionalism. The Taimyr R1a(xR1a1), obviously tested for the corresponding SNP markers, may have a different origin than the Slavic R1a1. Even it's possible that the Yakut R1a1 has a different origin as well, older than Slavs and distinct from the Western IE markers typical of Western and Eastern (but not Southern) Slavs. They may well come from the time of Scythians (or older) in the case of Yakuts and from other Central Asian sources in the case of Taimyr Evenks.
DeleteCan you tell me which SNP markers they tested?
DeleteNo.
DeleteCan you be more straightforward in the future? I guess not. So I'll have to speak for you, what is work, so you owe me 50 bucks. Donation button is right top.
Ok, excepted C and N basal markers it's all STR junk (who uses that these days anymore?!) However their STR haplotypes were compared to previous Siberian data (all PPV) in the following papers:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20590
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00439-006-0213-2
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21290
Up to you to browse the literature and check if correct or not. You don't pay me enough to afford the cost of those papers, which is higher than zero.
These results are definitely fishy, because there's no detailed evidence of the presence of R1a (xR1a1) in Siberia. Also, see here...
Deletehttp://eng.molgen.org/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=1391
I sent an e-mail to the authors telling them they made a mistake. Let's see if they reply.
Vale. Notice taken.
DeleteWhen you say that western mtDNA lines are concentrated in the Evens of Nyukhza and Central and Vilyuy Yakuts, I notice that Nyukhza have also a more diverse yDNA pool and Central and Vilyuy Yakuts (98.2%) have the highest yDNA N1c frequency:
ReplyDeleteNyukhza: 13/78 C3, 42/78 C3c1, 1/78 F*, I* 4/78, 1/78 J2*, 16/78 N1c, 1/78 R1a*
Vilyuy Yakuts: 1/56 J*, 55/56 N1c
Central akayushie: 1/49 C3, 46/49 N1c, 1/49 N1b, 1/49 R1a1
Central okayushie: 1/47 C3, 44/47 N1c, 2/47 R1a1
Western mtDNA lines in Vilyuy Yakuts and Central Yakuts are: U4a1, U4d2, HV1a1a, H49, J1c5, T2g1 and W3a1+199 and 1 South Asian R3; and in Nyukhza H8b, J2a2b.
U4a1 seems to be (western) Siberian and U4d2 is more Eastern European/Russian. W3 is found in Tajiks, and W3a1 seems to be found, for example, in Uzbeks and Uygurs. J1c5 and HV1a1a seem to be South Siberian (exact matches in Buryats). H49 is found in Europeans, including Finns, Danes, Spanish. R3 is found in Turkmens, Russians, India, and according to Ian Logan site in Finns and Armenians. T2g1 is found in the Near East (Egypt, Iraq). H8b is found at least in Shors and Russians. According to Ian Logan site, J2a2b is found in Tunisia and UK.
On the basis of this study it is possible to try to determine the haplogroups that N1c (and R1a1), on the one hand, and N1b, on the other hand, brought to Northeast Siberia. Apart from western lines such as W3, T2, H49 and HV1, I would suggest that the mtDNA lines which N1c (and R1a) brought from Baikal area are among the following: D5a2a2, D4i2, D4c2b, D4l2 (frequent in Mansi), C4a1d, C5b1, G2a1, F2b, F1b1, M7c1d (M7c is also found in Hami, Xinjiang). N1b in Evenks has spread from the West and is most diverse in Stony Tunguska. I would connect N1b with mtDNA lines C4b and D4e4 (frequent in Khanty but not in Mansi).
C4a1c seems to be old in the area as there are also the subtypes C4a1c1 and C4a1c1a. The age estimate of C4a1 in South Siberia is c. 15 ky, and the sister branch of C4a, C4c, is found in America (even in South America). C4a1c is found in Altaian Kizhi, Buryats, Dolgans, Evens, Evenks, Kazakhs, Kyrghiz, Uighurs, Nanays, Selkups, Tuvinians, Tuva Kizal, Khanty/Mansi, Nenets, Nganasan, Yakuts. It is so wide spread in Northeast Siberia that I would say that it was around already before N1c arrived.
Also C4a2 is old in South Siberia (Derenko c. 17 ky) and found in Altaians, Shors, Tuvinians, Khamnigans, Bashkirs, Turkmens, Buryats, Mongols, Tajiks, Kazakhs, Kets, Selkups, Khakas, Kyrgiz, Nganasan and Tundra Nenets, but it is not found in Uralic groups, such as Volga Uralics and Khanty/Mansi. I would say again that C4a2 was around already before N1c arrived
On the basis of Table S1, it is possible to determine the mtDNA lines of the populations without (or with only little of) yDNA N.
Berezovka Evens: C4b3, Z1a
Kamchatka Evens: C4b1, D4o2, G1b, Z1a, Z1a2
Koryaks: A2b1, A8, C5a2
Nivkhs: D4m2, Y1a
Udegey: M7a2a, M8a1, M9a1a1a, N9b
All you say in both commentaries looks very interesting, although I am admittedly a bit overwhelmed by the abundance of details. I just ended preparing my discussion of the Altai Neanderthal paper and my mind is admittedly not willing to contrast all those many details, so I'll have trust your criterion by default.
Delete"I notice that Nyukhza have also a more diverse yDNA pool"...
Yes but much of that extra diversity seems caused by numerically small Western influence. In the yDNA pool: 6/78 individuals but 3/7 described haplogroups (assuming F* is not Western). Once we exclude this small but diverse Western influx, they are similarly diverse as other Evenks, particularly the Iengra, in spite of their much greater sample figures (a distorting element).
So a bit of caution here: with n=9 (Iengra) you can have a max. number of haplogroups of 9 and the Iengra have 4, while the Nyukhza sample is n=78 and, excluding Western lineages, most of them erratics, they have 4 haplogroups as well. If we exclude the NYUK single individual erratics (regardless of origin) they also retain 4 haplogroups with more than one sample. A sample of the same size as that of the IEN, would probably have only spotted 3-4 haplogroups, considering their actual frequencies.
Separately, I also caution of not conflating N1c with R1a, because even if both are present among Yakuts, their frequencies are completely unrelated, as are almost certainly their origins as well. Also, unlike R1a1, which is only found in Yakuts, N1c is found in many Siberian populations at significant frequencies, particularly in Evens (30/89, with clear dominance in 2/5 subpopulations) and Yukaghirs (4/13), being only less common in Evenks (partly excepted the SE ones).
So N1c seems very strong in Yakutia and South of it, what may have some relation with the finding of N1c in a population of Bronze Age Manchuria.
If C3c and Q were the first settlers of the area, it is interesting to try to determine their mtDNA lines on the basis of this paper. I would suggest the following:
ReplyDeleteWith C3c: C4a1c, C4a2, C4b1, C4b3, C5a2, C5d, D4o2, G1b, Z1a
With Q (R1a?): A2, A8a (found in Kets and Selkups), C4b3 (?), C4b7, C5a2 (?), Z1a (?)
Remains of yDNA C3b (???): B4b1a3a
Ydna C3(xC3c) (found mainly in Nyukhza) might have moved with some yDNA N or not, but I would link yDNA C3 with mtDNAs A4, B4a, B5b, D4j4, M13a1b (found in Mongols).
MtDNA D3 (under D4b) seems to be quite young mtDNA line (Derenko 2.4 kya). It is not found in Khanty/Mansi or Nenets, but instead in Buryats, Chukchi, Dolgan, Even, Evenks, Barghuts, Tuvinians, Tuva-Kizal, Selkups, Kazakhs (?), Nganasans. I would link it with yDNA C3. One interesting possibility is to link D4b with C3 and divide it as follows: mtDNA D4b1 (Derenko 30 ky) with yDNA C3d (c. 19 ky in Dörwöd Kalmyks) and C3c (c 30 ky in Kalmyks) and mtDNA D3 arising with yDNA C3c in Yakutia.
The Highest frequencies of C3d:
Buryats 54%
Sojots 53.6%
Khamnigans 53%
Mongols 15.2%
Kalmyks 12.1%
D4b1a2a1a is found in Kalmyks, Koryaks, Siberian Eskimos, Chukchi, Bashkirs, Karakalpaks, Greenland Eskimos, Canadian Eskimos, Chuvantsi, Altaians, Shors, Khakassians, Uighurs, Tubalars and Kirghiz. D4b1a2a1b is found in Khamnigans, Buryats, Mongolians, Barghuts, Uighurs, Russians, Tatars, Udmurts, Bashkirs, Belorussians, Maris, Poles, Udmurts.
It is exciting that a sister branch of D4e4, D4e1, migrated to America and is found even in Mexico. D4e1 is found in Korea.
According to that Yakut paper, Yakuts moved to Yakutia from Olkhon area and the region of Lake Baikal only during the Middle Ages. When you look at Fig. 2 here http://www.hamagmongol.narod.ru/library/keyser_2009_e.pdf you see that there is a concentration of R1a1 in the area west and south of Baikal. I think that it is only normal that the ancestors of Yakuts assimilated a few R1a1 men.
ReplyDeleteI suppose that you refer to this:
Dashanqian, Upper Xiajiadian Culture, 3000 YBP, 1 C, 3 N1c, 1 N, 2 O3-M117, 2 O3-M324.
In the earlier sites only N was found. In Northeast China, N1c is concentrated in Inner Mongolia (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1456369/):
Outer Mongolian 4/65
Daur N1c 3/39
Hezhe N1c 0/45
Manchu N1c 0/35
Inner Mongolian 6/45
Oroquen N1c 0/31
Korean N1c 0/68
The time estimation for N1c in China is 11, in Turkey 12 and in Outer Mongolia only 3.6 ky.
There are probably several waves of N1c to Northeast Asia, as they say that ”the proposition of recent male expansion from Yakutia to Chukotka and Kamchatka is not supported by phylogenetic analysis of STR lineages: Yakut N1c haplotypes do not match those of Chukchi, Eskimos, Koryaks and Evens, but form a distinct branch in the hg N1c network, differing from other populations, except Evenks … Recent Y-chromosomes flowing from Chukotka and Kamchatka to Yakutia could be valid for northeastern populations of Yukaghirs and Evens, the immediate neighbours Chukchi and Koryaks.”
On the basis of the ancient North Chinese yDNA paper, there has been a flow of N1c to Inner Mongolia 2000-1000 BC, but I am not sure if it is the same flow that went up to Chukotka and Kamchatka. However, mtDNA pool in ancient Inner Mongolia is different from mtDNA lines in Chukotka and Kamchatka.
Ancient Inner Mongolian and Northeast Chinese mtDNA:
N9a, D4, D5, G1a, G2a, A4, B, C, F1b, N, M7c, M9a, M10, Z, R11
Personally I don't have too clear if the modern Yakuts can be identified with the Medieval Yakuts or rather they are a complex mixture of these and pre-existing peoples of that region.
Delete"N1c is concentrated in Inner Mongolia"...
It seems so. The Daur people of Westernmost Inner Mongolia look like a good candidate to be related to Dashanqian people. However we do not know if they spoke Mongol back in the day (remember that Mongols expanded a lot in historical times by assimilating nearby peoples of similar lifestyle, often Altaic but I guess that not necessarily so).
"The time estimation"...
... is meaningless.
"There are probably several waves of N1c to Northeast Asia"...
I don't have clear at all that there was any single wave. I rather suspect that they are remnants of the origin of the lineage. After all N1 in general must have migrated from that area first of all. Of course some of them may have moved somewhat at times but all those NE Asian branches look NE Asian rooted and that, the same that we find lots of N(xN1c) there was also some N1c all the time over there, just not in the sampled sites (but maybe just a few hundred Km north of them or whatever). Dashanqian is incidentally the northernmost of all ancient yDNA sites of China, the distances among sites in that NE area are not really big but maybe it has some meaning.
I think it should be said that they mentionned 5 Y-DNA I* among the Evenks.
ReplyDeletehttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tL_TyaybxHo/Uriq1wfEA6I/AAAAAAAAJcM/PLgoBazCqbk/s1600/tungus.png
Indeed. 4 of them in Nyukhza Evenks and and the other one in the Stony Tunguska population. I just found the later erratic not relevant enough to be worth mentioning.
DeleteNotice also that the I* nomenclature does not necessarily mean that it is I(xI1,I2), if that's what provoked your comment. That would be interesting indeed but, as Davidski mentioned above, it seems that it just means that the authors were unable to classify it in any subclade based on the STR data they used for genotyping (no SNP used in those cases it seems).
I checked if there is any overlap between Yakut mtDNA pool and ancient Krasnoyarsk inhabitants. Apart from U4, western mtDNA lines seem to be quite different. In Krasnoyarsk, there are U4, T1, T3, T4, U2e, H6, H CRS, H5, K2b, U5a1, I4. The only possible common haplotypes are HV and H (093 209).
ReplyDeleteThe eastern Mtdna in Krasnoyarsk are: Z1, G2a, C, F1b, N9a. G2a and F1b are found in Yakuts. Probably C also.
Some Yakut western mtDNA lines are typical of Volga-Uralic people: U4a1 and U4d2 (Yakut haplotype is found in Mansi). J1c is common in Khanty and Mansi, and J1c and J1c5 seem to be found in Finland. Also T2 is typical of Uralic people, but I do not know if T2g is found in them. R is very frequent in Udmurts (6.9%), but I do not know if it is R3, but R3 is found in Finland. HV1a1a and H49 seem to be found in the Near East. W is very frequent in Finland but not that much in other Uralic groups.
That's an interesting bit I had not looked at, thanks.
DeleteThe Nyukhza Evenk Western lineages are H8 (typical Central Asian) and J2 (another "Silk Road" lineage). Specifically H8b and J2a2b.
The Yakut ones are different instead: H15a1a, H49, HV1a1a, J1c5, T2g1, R3, U4a1 and U4a2.
R3 has also been found in Jordan, FYI. U4 clades should be of NE European origin but most of the rest looks rather Central Asian or West Asian to me (on first inspection). H15 for example is another of the "Central Asian" small group of H subclades if I recall correctly. J1, T2, HV1 and R3 I would first of all associate with West Asia and only secondarily with Europe (although R3 is poorly understood, being very rare).
Without enough reference data (admittedly), my preliminary assessment is that the Western lineages found in this study look mostly "West/Central Asian" rather than "European", the main exception being U4 (there could be others, I guess, but not obvious).
Concentration of N1c in Inner Mongolia is probably linked with this Dashanqian, Upper Xiajiadian Culture, but when you go to see the study (http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/13/216), they say that it is later than what I said before, ie 1000-600 BC.
ReplyDeleteThere are three older sites: Niuheliang 4.5-3 ky, Miaozigou 4-3 ky, Halahaigou 3-2.3 ky, and in all these sites only N1 is found. In Dashanqian, almost all haplotypes are new (excluding O3a3): N1c, C3e, O3a3c. The highest frequencies of O3a3c-M117 are in Tibet (40%) and West China. When you take into account this and the frequencies of C3e below, it is possible that O3a3c-M117 came from West China and is linked with lower Xiajiadian Culture and C3e and N1c from Inner Mongolia/Xinjiang steppe areas.
C3e: Gansu Han 0.45%, Tibetan Xizang 0.63%, Ewenki Inner Mongolia 1.75%, Mongolian Inner Mongolia 4.35%, Uygur 0.53%, Hui 1.64%, Xibe Xinjiang 9.84%
They say in this West Liao River Valley paper that ”one instance of C3e-P53.1 was found in the Dashanqian site, while all 12 individuals of the Jinggouzi site belonged to this subtype. The Jinggouzi people originated in the North China steppe, and our findings support the view that C3e originated in the north.”
Wikipedia tells us about Upper Xiajiadian culture that it is derived from the Eurasian steppe bronze tradition.
According to Wikipedia, ”the Upper Xiajiadian culture (1000-600 BC) was a Bronze Age archaeological culture in Northeast China derived from the Eurasian steppe bronze tradition. The culture was found mainly in southeastern Inner Mongolia, northern Hebei and western Liaoning, China; its range was slightly larger than that of the Lower Xiajiadian culture, reaching areas north of the Xilamulun River. … The culture still relied heavily on agriculture, but also moved toward a more pastoral, nomadic lifestyle. The social structure changed from being an acephalous or tribal society to a more chiefdom-oriented society. The type site is represented by the upper layer at Xiajiadian, Chifeng, Inner Mongolia.
The Upper Xiajiadian culture produced inferior ceramic artefacts compared to that of the Lower Xiajiadian culture, although this was compensated by superior bronze, bone and stone artefacts. The culture is well known for its bronze objects, producing bronze daggers, axes, chisels, arrowheads, knives and helmets. Upper Xiajiadian bronzes were decorated with animal and natural motifs. These motifs indicate possible Scythian affinities, suggesting continuing cultural contact and exchange across the Eurasian steppes. The locally produced bronze vessels were much smaller than comparable bronzes from Zhou states. In the later periods, Zhou-style dagger-axes and bronze vessels were found at Upper Xiajiadian sites. In one case, bronze vessels belonging to the ruling family of the state of Xu (許) were discovered in an Upper Xiajiadian grave at Xiaoheishigou, evidenced by the inscriptions on one of the vessels.
The culture showed evidence of a drastic shift in lifestyle compared to that of the Lower Xiajiadian culture. The Upper Xiajiadian culture placed less emphasis on permanent structures, preferring to reoccupy Lower Xiajiadian structures or reuse Lower Xiajiadian stones for building Upper Xiajiadian structures. The horse became important to the culture, as evidenced by the remains of horses and horse paraphernalia found at Upper Xiajiadian sites. The culture also moved away from a centralized social organization, as no evidence for large public works was discovered at Upper Xiajiadian sites. The culture shifted from relying on pigs to relying on sheep and goats for its primary source of domesticated protein. The culture built more extravagant graves for its elites than the Lower Xiajiadian, with more numerous and elaborate burial offerings. Upper Xiajiadian burials were marked by cairns and tumulus.
There was an error in my comment! I meant that to say that O3a3c-M117 came from West China and is linked with Yangshao culture.
ReplyDeleteAs for your comment on similarities between Daur and Dashanqian people, you find below Daur and Oroquen mtDNA frequencies:
Daur: D4 15.5%, D5 8.9%, C1 2.2%, C(xC1, 5) 4.4% (Derenko)
Daur: A 1/45, B4 7/45, CZ 7/45, D(xD5) 7/45, D5 4/45, G(xG2) 2/45, G2 2/45, J 1/45, M7 4/45, M7b 5/45, N9a 1/45, R 2/45, T 1/45, Y 1/45
Oroquen: D4 67.2%, D5 1.6%, C1a 7%/11.5% (Derenko)
Oroquen: A 2/44, B4 1/44, CZ 14/44, D(xD5) 7/45, D5 5/44, F1 2/44, G(xG2) 5/44, N 1/44
There are clear similarities between Daur and ancient Inner Mongolian and Northeast Chinese mtDNA, so there is probably a continuity on the mtDNA side.
However, on yDNA side, continuity is not so clear.
Ancient Dashanqian yDNA: N1 1/9, N1c 3/9, C3e 1/9, O3a3 2/9, O3a3c 2/9.
Modern Daur yDNA: C3c 1/39, C3d (?)(xC3e, C3c) 11/39, NO 1/39, N1c 3/39, O* 1/39, O1* (xO1a, O1b) 2/39, O2 8/39, O3(xO3a3c) 7/39, O3a3c 3/39
Modern Oroquen yDNA: C3c 13/31, C3d (?)(xC3e, C3c) 6/31, K* 1/31, N1b 2/31, O* 1/31, O2 2/31, O3(xO3a3c) 5/31, O3a3c 1/31
Excluding C lines, there are similarities. It would be an exciting finding if it is the arrival of C3d (or whatever clade of C3 it is excluding C3e and C3c) that has formed the modern Daur identity. It seems that Oroquens have arrived from the North as C3c is typical of extreme Northeast Asia.
I have updated the Chinese ancient yDNA entry to include mention of the Cui 2013 study. Thanks for the reference.
Delete"According to Wikipedia, ”the Upper Xiajiadian culture (1000-600 BC) was a Bronze Age archaeological culture in Northeast China derived from the Eurasian steppe bronze tradition"...
What means what? Altaic?
What you say about their lifestyle, it seems to have been quite pastoralist and tribal, right?
"Excluding C lines, there are similarities."
We should not expect a perfect fit after so many millennia (or even between any two random samples), much less in a semi-nomadic population, so I guess that good enough. Your mention of the Oroqen is quite interesting too because it may point to a Tungusic rather than Mongolic identity.
I notice that the area where the Oroqen modernly live (Hailar) is said to "act as gateway between China and Russia" (i.e. non-coastal Eastern Siberia). Maybe it acted that way also in the distant past?
However the Oroqen lack N1c (at least in the sample you mention).
From Altai and/or Northwest China.
ReplyDeleteYes, they were pastoralists and tribal, and their culture was different from earlier Hongshan culture.
According to that recent Chinese N paper, the diversity of N1c is higher in Altai (Northwestern China) than in Siberians or Han Chinese.
Y-STRs diversity:
Altai (Northwestern China): 0.286
Han Chinese (mainland China): 0.277
Tibeto-Burmans: 0.519
Hmong-Meins, Daic and Austro Asiatics: 0.143
Siberians: 0.283
Europeans: 0.352
The difference between Siberia and Altai (NWC) is so minimal that you should ignore it, even the Han one is not much lower. Interestingly it seems very diverse among Tibeto-Burmans.
DeleteWhich is that paper? Can you post link or doi?
It is not pay per view! It is this paper you already know: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0066102
ReplyDeleteAh, alright. I just did not know which study you meant by "the Chinese N paper".
DeleteIn that study, the real pity is that they did not study more STR markers because the haplotype networks (notably N1* and N1c) are a total mess as result of too few such markers (those 7 are obviously not enough to provide a half-decent resolution). With more markers (and/or more convenient ones) it's likely that a decent network would have been produced leading to better answers.
Diversity alone does not seem enough to inform us of the origins because diversity can be caused by various independent migrations ("dripping") converging on one area or by formation of derived diversity. We need some hierarchy to understand the nuances.