(Photo of the Hokkien Marilyn Monroe)

 

Fujian

 

 

Taiwanese People

 

 

Southern "Han"

 

Minnan

Excerpts from Wikipedia.org

Hoklo (河洛人; Minnan, 閩南民系) commonly refers to those Chaozhou people, Hainanese people and Taiwanese people who claim Han Chinese ancestry from the southern part of Fujian province of China. Large populations of similar background can also be found in Malaysia, Guangdong, Hong Kong, Philippines, Singapore, Burma, Thailand, and Indonesia where they are usually referred to as Hokkien, meaning Fujian in Min Nan language. In Hong Kong's New Territories, "Fukienese" often refers to all Min Nan speakers relocating from Fujian

In Taiwan, the Hoklos are the largest ethnic group (see Demographics of Taiwan). Most Hoklos trace their paternal ancestry to male settlers who migrated to Taiwan from Fujian in the 17th and 18th centuries.

Because about 70% of the population in Taiwan are Hoklo, Taiwanese is often used interchangeably with Hoklo. People who are aware of the multi-ethnic nature of Taiwan recognize the two are not identical, although most people will know by context when this word refers to people from Taiwan and when this word refers specifically to Hoklos.

The Southern Min languages, or Min Nan ("Southern Fujian" language) is a family of Chinese languages which are spoken in southern Fujian and neighboring areas, and by descendants of emigrants from these areas in diaspora. In common parlance, Southern Min usually refers to Hokkien, in particular the Amoy and Taiwanese.

 

河洛人，通常稱 Hō-lóh 人（漢字常寫作福佬人、河洛人、鶴佬人、學佬人、學老人）。

狹義

• 福建南部的居民：包含北京統治的泉州、漳州、廈門，及福建龍岩市新羅區與漳平市與臺北治理的金門縣）等地。

• 台灣閩南人：大多祖籍閩南（泉州府、漳州府），在台灣日治時期前即居台灣，使用閩南語台灣話，台灣四大族群之一。一般而言，臺灣閩南人也包含被閩南化的客家人與臺灣原住民平埔族。

• 世界各地的閩南華人、華僑或是閩南語閩台片使用者：在日本、北美、南洋最多，新加坡甚至有半數以上的華人使用閩南語。

廣義

• 閩中莆、仙的居民：該地莆仙話本屬閩南語系，只因地近福州，受到福州話較多影響，莆仙話與其他地方的鶴佬話仍有許多相通的詞彙，而且莆田是許多鶴佬移民的原鄉，莆田湄洲島也是閩、台著名海神媽祖的故鄉。

• 浙南溫州平、蒼等地的一些居民：不少當地居民是在明清時由閩南遷入浙江，使用的語言是帶著吳語溫州話色彩的浙南閩語。

• 狹義潮汕人：使用潮汕話，多居廣東潮州、汕頭、揭陽3地級市，少許分佈在梅州地級市。

• 廣義潮汕人：廣東汕尾地級市的汕尾鶴佬人、海陸豐鶴佬人，現在的惠州地級市有少許分佈。

• 隆都人：以廣東中山市隆都為居住中心，或者使用隆都話的居民

• 雷州人、文昌人：廣東雷州講雷州話，與海南島講文昌話者。

 

 

 

台灣河洛人

台灣河洛人，是指母語為河洛語的人，也涵蓋被河洛人漢化的平埔族群、漢化的越族、河洛化的客家族群，為由中國東南沿海赴臺之移民與當地平埔族或其他漢族所融合的後代。昔時移民來源為中國福建漳州人和泉州人兩大支，次為廣東潮汕移民之後，皆為漢族與越族後胤。

河洛人在移民台灣初期，泉州、漳州之間時傳分類械鬥，今皆自稱為「本省人」、「河洛人」、或「台灣人」，不再區分泉漳。

以語言來說，各地的河洛人都使用台灣河洛語，雖有口音之別，但都可以溝通；現有「台灣四大族群」住民中，自我族群認同為河洛人者，據七成以上。

以血液研究來說，台北馬偕醫院教授林媽利分析，發現台灣河洛人與客家人的基因；指出48%的台灣人來自福建，其他的52%來自山地原住民、東南亞島嶼族群，及其他亞洲地區。此外，85%的台灣人帶有原住民及或東南亞島嶼族群基因，同時有90%以上的人帶有越族基因，據此提出「台灣是個族群的大鎔爐」。

前國立中興大學企管系副教授－沈建德、許銘洲質疑台灣河洛人族譜的真實性，認為河洛人實多為被漢化的平埔族，而非中國來台漢人。

河洛人基因研究與越族關係: 台北馬偕醫院教授林媽利2001年分析發現台灣「河洛人」人與「客家人」的基因幾乎完全相同；2006年，發現他們的母系有26%源自山地族群（不是平埔族群）；2007年，發現母系47%源自台灣原住民及東南亞島嶼族群、48%源自亞洲大陸族群，而父系有59%源自亞洲大陸的漢化越族。林媽利指出，48%的台灣人來自福建，其他的52%來自山地原住民、東南亞島嶼族群，及其他亞洲地區。此外85%的台灣人帶有原住民及或東南亞島嶼族群的基因，同時有90%以上的人帶有越族的基因，林媽利據此提出「台灣是個族群的大鎔爐」。

林媽利提出「台灣人的基因大概一半來自台灣原住民及東南亞島嶼族群，另一半來自福建、廣東及亞洲大陸。」深入分析發現，台灣人有59％亞洲大陸的父系血緣，母系血緣則只有33%來自亞洲大陸，67%混合了台灣原住民、東南亞島嶼族群及亞洲大陸的血緣，印證了台灣俗諺「有唐山公無唐山嬤」的說法。綜合分析，85％的台灣人帶有台灣原住民的血緣，「平埔公、平埔嬤、唐山公、唐山嬤，還有高山公、高山嬤及少數荷蘭、美國基因一起建構了非原住民台灣人的基因。」

根據血液基因研究表示，台灣河洛人的基因大多數（平均高達九成）來自平埔族群，指出台灣河洛人主要為台灣原住民族的後裔。1991年由《中國遺傳學報》所做的中國人種基因比對，發現中國閩南人（廈門、汕頭）、客家人（梅縣）的血型主體都是南方的越族（佔75％至90％以上的基因），與東南亞人最接近；廣州人的北方血統比梅縣人更低。

河洛人與漢族關係: 根據河洛人為漢族之原生民族系說法，臺灣河洛人主源自福建泉州、漳州，次由廣東潮州、浙江台州等地，而泉漳河洛人又自中原移民而至。遠從西晉末年五胡亂華世族衣冠南渡；唐朝中期陳元光開漳；五代初期固始王潮、王審知入閩；後於明末經鄭成功在台灣建立反清基地，大批河洛人亦移民至台，陳永華主持內政與教育，方有今日臺灣河洛文化之初。故有『古代漢語今日只見於漳泉臺灣，其因在此。也因此，欲求漢學，必學漢語，欲學漢語，必傳今日臺灣之河洛漢音。』之說。

有一些學者認為中華民國建立後，已與中華民國建立前就脫離清國殖民的台灣漢族成為不同的民族。檀香山復健專科醫師周明峰認為，國民政府進駐台灣，對台民所施政策用心惡毒，與對待中國各省人民待遇天差地遠，顯然中國人也從不把台民當「同胞」看待過。

國立中興大學企管系前副教授沈建德懷疑當代台灣的人擁有漢人移民血統；因祖先共妻，很難確定誰是祖宗；認為，「羅漢腳，是來台「閩客」的代名詞，無田宅、無妻子，當然也無後代，流竄於全台各地。此事，道光13年（1833）北路理番同知陳盛韶的「問俗錄」已有談及。大市數百，小市村數十人，白天為丐、晚上為盜，史不絕書。在屏東一地就有3塊碑文，見證來台閩客乃棍徒流匪乞丐，可是屏東人和其他縣市的人一樣，認他們為祖先，真是認賊作父

* 非原住民台灣人的基因結構 by 林媽利

* Most Hoklo, Hakka Have Aboriginal Genes, Study Finds by Hu Ching-hui

* 台灣人和印支半島族群的關係 by 鄭昭任

* True History of Taiwan by Sim Kiantek

* 血統獨立 by Sim Kiantek

台灣血統: 揭開台灣人身世之謎！ by Sim Kiantek

 

 

 

移民臺灣：臺灣移民歷史的考察 by 戴寶村

 

 

 

 

 

日治時期台灣閩粵原住民分佈概圖

福建人 : 漳州人, 三邑人, 同安人, 安溪人

 

漳州:

漳州系歷史文化名城，早於一萬年前就有先民在這片沃土上繁衍生息。秦始皇二十五年（前222年），列入秦中央版圖，屬閩中郡。漢代，以梁山（今地名）為界，分屬南越、閩越，延至隋開皇十二年（592年）歸於一統。唐垂拱二年（686年）建州，迄今已有一千三百餘年歷史。

 

泉州:

同安區別稱「銀城」、「銀同」，原屬於福建泉州府，現改劃為福建省廈門市的一個行政區，也是該市最大的行政區，地處閩省東南沿海、「閩南金三角」的心臟地帶。

同安建縣於西晉太康三年（公元282年）。五代後唐長興四年（933年）復置。 直至民國三年（1914年），同安縣轄域包括現在的廈門市、金門縣及龍海市東北部。

安溪縣位於福建省東南沿海，廈、漳、泉閩南金三角西北部，隸屬泉州市。有漢族、畲族等多個民族，以茶業聞名全中國，號稱中國茶都。

安溪是著名的僑鄉，許多安溪先民遠渡重洋到台灣，甚至南洋拓展新天地。在台灣，有兩百餘萬人口祖籍安溪，約佔台灣人口的十分之一。清朝時，因安溪本地的大學士李光地家族反對台灣的明鄭政權之故，安溪移民是泉州諸縣邑之中，最晚來台的。而台灣，也有許多名人祖籍安溪縣，如大企業家：台塑集團創辦者王永慶、王永在兄弟，大同公司創辦者林尚志、林挺生父子，台灣五大家族的基隆顏家，瑞芳礦業名人李建興、李建和兄弟。政治方面，則有：民主進步黨創黨元老黃信介，台灣總統府資政前台北市長高玉樹，曾任台北市代理市長的周百鍊等。在印尼、馬來西亞、新加坡，各約有20萬人口祖籍安溪。在東南亞，也有許多名人祖籍安溪縣，如大企業家：馬來西亞雲頂集團的創辦人林梧桐等。政治方面，則有：新加坡國會議員王世豐等。

三邑，也就是福建泉州府的晉江、南安、惠安三縣。一般台灣所稱之三邑，即指泉州三邑。

在台灣清領時期，大量遷移至台灣的該三縣居民，在泉州移民中居大多數，在台灣，如清朝即相當程度開發的台北、彰化、嘉義、台南等地，也比例甚高，甚至與漳州府移民人數不相上下。

在台北，三邑移民以艋舺龍山寺為中心，頗得商業利益。也為了利益，參與、引發了許多歷史重要事件，如驅逐勢力範圍內的泉州同安人之頂下郊拚等。

通常來說，泉州三邑的建築，宗教，以及生活習慣影響台灣甚鉅，比方廟宇建築，台灣喪葬習俗，語言腔調等，如台北的艋舺青山王廟、艋舺龍山寺，都是泉州三邑人的信仰中心。

 

 

艋舺，又稱文甲，是臺灣最早的原住民聚集地平埔族凱達格蘭語「Moungar / Mankah」，台北歷史上，三市街之一，今名萬華，為台北市發源地，亦為當時原住民商聚之地，其最古老市街在「紗帽廚社」的故址「大溪口」，即今之貴陽街與環河南路口。日治時，因「艋舺」以台語發音，與日語「萬華」（Manka）相似，「艋舺」因此被當時日本人政府易字為「萬華」，今日台語猶稱其「艋舺」。

清世宗雍正元年（1723年），閩南泉州三邑之晉江、南安、惠安人士渡海來此地。後搭建茅屋數棟，販賣蕃薯為生，而漸成小村落，人稱「蕃薯市」，當時台灣原住民平埔族則多以獨木舟自淡水河上游載運農、獵產品等物與漢人交易；平埔族人稱「獨木舟」為「Moungar / Mankah」，故附近漢人以閩南語譯音，稱此地為「艋舺」（Bangkah）。

清治時期移民於艋舺的有幾大閩南人族群，一是泉州三邑人，二則泉州安溪移民，三為泉州同安移民，三邑人建立了艋舺龍山寺以凝聚團結；安溪人則建立清水祖師廟為信仰核心，同安移民則在八甲庄祭祀民宅中的霞海城隍神像。清文宗咸豐三年（1853年），三邑人以艋舺龍山寺為基地，發動「頂下郊拼」攻擊，協議燒毀而穿越了安溪人信仰中心艋舺祖師廟，突襲同安移民，並將奉祀著霞海城隍的同安移民殘部，逼到了大稻埕，艋舺因港商之利，曾經盛極一時，於清治時期，與台南府城、彰化鹿港並列為三大重要城市，有「一府二鹿三艋舺」之稱。

以後，艋舺港口卻因淤積，逐漸被同安人群聚的大稻埕取代。

依據台灣堡圖，艋舺的範圍北至忠孝西路，東至中華路一段（台北城西城牆），西至淡水河，南至三水街。現代一般人將三水街以南至縱貫鐵路之間也當作艋舺的一部份，但是三水街以南至大排水溝的地段是下崁庄。反而忠孝西路以南至貴陽街的地段本屬艋舺，現代一般人卻視為「西門町」。

 

《艋舺》（MONGA）是由鈕承澤導演、李烈監製的一部台灣電影，大致描述1980年代臺北市「艋舺」地區黑幫兄弟與慘綠少年們的愛恨情仇 . 《艋舺》主要在艋舺祖師廟拍攝，由於艋舺龍山寺香火鼎盛之故，許多人誤會《艋舺》本片的主要地點是在龍山寺，其實不然，除了一場械鬥畫面以外，主角們居住與結義之背景地點皆在艋舺祖師廟，大多數場景也幾乎都在祖師廟內，甚至有不少是在清水祖師神像前拍攝，而《艋舺》本片的各主角頸上都掛有祖師香火，宗教味道濃厚，尤其是和尚身上的復古紅色香火，更掀起了一陣懷舊風潮。

電影前導宣傳片則是在艋舺青山宮拍攝。(video; official website).

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

* Y-Chromosome Evidence Suggests a Common Paternal Heritage of Austro-Asiatic Populations by Vikrant Kumar, et al.

The Isofrequency Map Portraying Spatial Distribution of Haplogroups in Asia and Oceania for O-M122

 

Haplogroup O3 (Y-DNA)

Haplogroup O3 (M122) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup.

Origins: Haplogroup O3 is a descendant haplogroup of haplogroup O. Some researchers believe that it first appeared in China approximately 10,000 years ago. The prehistoric peopling of East Asia by modern humans remains controversial with respect to early population migrations. In a systematic sampling and genetic screening of an East Asian–specific Y-chromosome haplogroup (O3-M122) in 2,332 individuals from diverse East Asian populations, results indicate that the O3-M122 lineage is dominant in East Asian populations, with an average frequency of 44.3%.

Distribution: Although Haplogroup O3 appears to be primarily associated with Chinese populations, it also forms a significant component of the Y-chromosome diversity of most modern populations of the East Asian region. Haplogroup O3 is found in over 50% of all modern Chinese males (with frequency ranging from 30/101 = 29.7% among Pinghua-speaking Hans in Guangxi to 110/148 = 74.3% among Hans in Changting, Fujian), about 40% of Manchurian, Korean, and Vietnamese males, about 33.3% to 62% of Filipino males, about 10.5% to 55.6% of Malaysian males, about 10% (4/39 Guide County, Qinghai) to 45% (22/49 Zhongdian County, Yunnan) of Tibetan males, about 20% (10/50 Shuangbai, northern Yunnan) to 44% (8/18 Xishuangbanna, southern Yunnan) of Yi males, about 25% of Zhuang and Indonesian males, and about 16% to 20% of Japanese males. The distribution of Haplogroup O3 stretches far into Central Asia (approx. 40% of Dungans, 30% of Salars, 28% of Bonan, 24% of Dongxiang, 18% to 22.8% of Mongolians, 12% of Uyghurs, 9% of Kazakhs, 6.2% of Altayans, and 4.1% of Uzbeks) and Oceania (approx. 25% to 32.5% of Polynesians, 18% to 27.4% of Micronesians, and 5% of Melanesians), albeit with reduced frequencies of most subclades. It should be noted that Haplogroup O3* Y-chromosomes, which are not defined by any identified downstream markers, are actually more common among certain non-Han Chinese populations than among Han Chinese ones, and the presence of these O3* Y-chromosomes among various populations of Central Asia, East Asia, and Oceania is more likely to reflect a very ancient shared ancestry of these populations rather than the result of any historical events. It remains to be seen whether Haplogroup O3* Y-chromosomes can be parsed into distinct subclades that display significant geographical or ethnic correlations.

Haplogroup O3 is also found very frequently among populations of Northeast India (Garo 42/71 = 59.2%, Khasi 112/353 = 31.7%) and Nepal (Tamang 39/45 = 86.7%, Newar 14/66 = 21.2%, general population of Kathmandu 16/77 = 20.8%).

Among all the populations of East and Southeast Asia, Haplogroup O3 is most closely associated with those that speak a Sinitic, Tibeto-Burman, or Hmong-Mien language. Haplogroup O3 comprises about 50% or more of the total Y-chromosome variation among the populations of each of these language families. The Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman language families are generally believed to be derived from a common Sino-Tibetan protolanguage, and most linguists place the homeland of the Sino-Tibetan language family somewhere in northern China. The Hmong-Mien languages and cultures, for various archaeological and ethnohistorical reasons, are also generally believed to have derived from a source somewhere north of their current distribution, perhaps in northern or central China. The Tibetans, however, despite the fact that they speak a language of the Tibeto-Burman language family, have high percentages of the otherwise rare haplogroups D1 and D3, which are also found at much lower frequencies among the members of some other ethnic groups in East Asia and Central Asia.

Haplogroup O3 has been implicated as a diagnostic genetic marker of the Austronesian expansion when it is found in populations of Oceania. Its distribution in Oceania is mostly limited to the traditionally Austronesian culture zones, including moderately high frequencies in the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Polynesia, with generally lower frequencies found in coastal and island Melanesia, Micronesia, and Taiwanese aboriginal tribes.

The subgroup O3a5-M134 is particularly closely associated with Sino-Tibetan populations, and it is generally not found outside of areas where a Sino-Tibetan language is currently spoken or that are historically supposed to have undergone Chinese colonization or immigration, such as Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Indonesia. However, its presence among non-Sino-Tibetan populations is always very limited and never amounts to more than 10% of the total Y-chromosome diversity. There are also reports that Y-chromosomes belonging to Haplogroup O3a5 have been sampled from populations of such far-flung places as Western Samoa. Surprisingly, Haplogroup O3a5-M134 Y-chromosomes have also been found in about 1% to 3% of indigenous Australian men in the northwest of that continent, which might indicate that a certain degree of contact has occurred between the Austronesian expansion from Asia and some indigenous Australian populations. The fact that Haplogroup O3a5 is so strongly associated with Chinese populations, however, and the fact that no Y-chromosome haplogroups characteristic of Austronesian populations have been found among these indigenous Australian populations may be taken to suggest the possibility of some direct Chinese-Australian contact in the precolonial era. Within Japan, the subgroup O3a5-M134 forms the majority of the haplogroup O3 Y-chromosomes detected.

Haplogroup O3's brother clade, Haplogroup O1, displays a similar geographical distribution, being found among nearly all the populations of East and Southeast Asia, but generally at a frequency much lower than that of Haplogroup O3. Another brother clade, Haplogroup O2, has an impressive extent of dispersal, as it is found among the males of populations as widely separated as the Kolarians of India and the Japanese of Japan; however, Haplogroup O2's distribution is much more patchy, and the Haplogroup O2 Y-chromosomes found among the Mundas and the Japanese belong to distinct subclades.

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Haplogroup O1 (Y-DNA)

Haplogroup O1 (MSY2.2) is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup. Haplogroup O1 is a descendent branch of the greater Haplogroup O.
The great majority of Y-chromosomes within Haplogroup O1 belong to its subgroup O1a (M119).

Origins: The Haplogroup O1 branch is believed to have evolved during the Late Pleistocene (Upper Paleolithic) in Southeast Asia. The genetic marker, Haplogroup O1a-M119 is found frequently among Austronesian peoples, Kradai peoples, and Ethnic minorities in China. This lineage is presumed to be a marker of the prehistoric Austronesian expansion, with possible origins encompassing the regions along the southeastern coast of China and neighboring Taiwan, and is found among modern populations of Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania.

A 2009 study by Karafet et al. at the University of Arizona suggests haplogroup O1 was part of a four-phase colonization model in which Paleolithic migrations of hunter-gatherers shaped the primary structure of current Y chromosome diversity of Maritime Southeast Asia. Neolithic incursions made only a minor impact on the paternal gene pool, despite the large cultural impact of the Austronesian expansion. Approximately 5000 BC, Haplogroup O1 coalesced at Sundaland and migrated northwards to as far as Taiwan, where O1a2 constitutes some 90% of the Aboriginal Y-DNA, being the main haplogroup that can be directly linked to the Austronesian expansion in phase 3.

Li et al. at the Yale University Department of Genetics, School of Medicine, concluded that in contrast to the Taiwan homeland hypothesis, Island Southeast Asians do not have a Taiwan origin based on their paternal lineages. According to their results, lineages within Maritime Southeast Asia did not originate from Taiwanese aborigines as linguistic studies suggest. Taiwan aborigines and Indonesians were likely to have been derived from the Daic populations based on their paternal lineages, and therefore evolved independently of each other.

The strongest positive correlation between Haplogroup O1 and ethnolinguistic affiliation is that which is observed between this haplogroup and the Austronesians. The peak frequency of Haplogroup O1 is found among the aborigines of Taiwan, precisely the region from which linguists have hypothesized that the Austronesian language family originated. A slightly weaker correlation is observed between Haplogroup O1 and the Han Chinese populations of southern China, as well as between this haplogroup and the Kradai-speaking populations of southern China and Southeast Asia. The distribution of Daic languages in Thailand and other parts of Southeast Asia outside of China has long been believed, for reasons of traditional linguistic geography, to reflect a recent invasion of Southeast Asia by Daic-speaking populations originating from southeastern China, and the somewhat elevated frequency of Haplogroup O1 among the Daic populations, coupled with a high frequency of Haplogroup O2a, which is a genetic characteristic of the Austro-Asiatic peoples of Southeast Asia, suggests that the genetic signature of the Daic peoples' affinity with populations of southeastern China has been weakened due to extensive assimilation of the earlier Austro-Asiatic residents of the lands which the Daic peoples invaded. Also, it has been noted that Haplogroup O1 lineages among populations of continental Southeast Asia outside of China display a reduced level of diversity when compared with populations of South China and insular Southeast Asia, which may be evidence of a bottleneck associated with the westward migration and settlement of ancestral Daic-speaking populations in Indochina.

Distribution: Haplogroup O1 lineages are found primarily in Southeast Asian populations of Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, southern China and Taiwan.

Haplogroup O1a-M119 Y-chromosomes also have been found to occur at low frequency among various populations of Siberia, such as the Nivkhs (one of 17 sampled Y-chromosomes), Ulchi/Nanai (2/53), Yenisey Evenks (1/31), and especially the Buryats living in the Sayan-Baikal uplands of Irkutsk Oblast (6/13).

Frequencies: A 2008 study by Li et al. at Yale University Department of Genetics, School of Medicine, demonstrated that the admixture analyses of Daic populations showed a significant genetic influence over a large proportion of Indonesians. Most of the population samples contained a high frequency of haplogroup O1a-M119.

The frequencies of Haplogroup O1 among various East Asian and Austronesian populations suggest a complex genetic history of the modern Han populations of southern China. Although Haplogroup O1 occurs only at an average frequency of approximately 4% among Han populations of northern China and peoples of southwestern China and Southeast Asia who speak Tibeto-Burman languages, the frequency of this haplogroup among the Han populations of southern China nearly quadruples to about 15%. The frequency of Haplogroup O1 among the Southern Han has been found to be slightly greater than the arithmetic mean of the frequencies of Haplogroup O1 among the Northern Han and a pooled sample of Austronesian populations. This suggests that modern Southern Han populations may possess a non-trivial number of male ancestors who were originally affiliated with some Austronesian-related culture, or who at least shared a genetic affinity with many of the ancestors of modern Austronesian peoples.

Subgroups

The subclades of Haplogroup O1 with their defining mutation(s), according to the 2010 ISOGG tree:

• O1 (MSY2.2)
  • O1*
  • O1a (M119) Found frequently in Austronesians, southern Han Chinese, and Tai-Kadai peoples
    • O1a*
    • O1a1 (M307.2/P203.2)
      • O1a1*
      • O1a1a (M101) Observed in one individual from China and another from Kota Kinabalu
    • O1a2 (M50, M103, M110) Occurs among Austronesian peoples of Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Melanesia, Micronesia, and Madagascar as well as among some populations of continental Southeast Asia

 

 

* Partial Duplication at AZFc on the Y Chromosome Is a Risk Factor for Impaired Spermatogenesis in Han Chinese in Taiwan by Yi-Wen Lin, et al.

The Y Chromosome Haplogroups of Han Taiwanese

 

 

我們流著不同的血液: 以血型、基因的科學證據揭開台灣各族群身世之謎
by 林媽利

 

 

 

Excerpt

從基因看人類的遷移: 台灣人的構成
…我們認為閩南人、客家人是屬於中國南方的族群, 這個跟過去的觀念不一樣, 而且也會牽扯到政治, 所以當然會有人來「消毒」, 有2007年中國的報導《分子人類學所見歷史上閩越族群的消失》,因為父系血緣的O1*血緣, 被認為是中國越族的特徵血緣, 這報告中福建各處195人的男性檢體, 只有6%(13/195) 屬於O1*血緣,195人中的59人採樣自閩南及潮州地區, 這些地區正是台灣閩南人、客家人的來處, 結果這59人中並沒有發現O1*血緣, 所以結論是這些地方的越族早已被漢武帝移走或者是殺掉, 現在閩南、潮州地區的人應該是來自中國北方漢人移民的後代。是這樣嗎?因為我們也有福建的檢體啊! 所以, 我們在55個福建男性中找到12人是O1*型(22%), 22%跟6%在統計上是有意義的不同,表示這二個資料有不同的結果,我們認為福建還有22%越族的O1*血緣,百越族並沒消失。我們對我們的結果有信心, 且這結果和台灣人O1*血緣的頻率接近。…

我們在2006年為100個台灣人做尋根的服務…上述100人當中有彭明敏教授, 徵得他的同意, 他的祖先來源是母系血緣從亞洲北方來的, 他的父系血緣是屬於O1*血緣, 在台灣O1*血緣可能來自越族或者來自台灣原住民, 後來我們做了Y-STR分析, 發現他的父系血緣是屬於原住民, 他的組織抗原有只見於西拉雅的特徵血緣, 還有一個組織抗原是閩越族的特徵血緣。所以可以看到他的基因來源是多方來源。我們發現台灣人差不多都是這個樣子, 每個人都可能有多元來源的
祖先群。…

永恆的平埔族: 西拉雅族、巴宰族及凱達格蘭族遺傳基因的研究
…台灣高山族主要屬於M119及M95群, 閩南人主要屬於M122群。M119群父系血緣在台灣有O1a*, O1a1*及O1a2的3個血緣,M95群有O2*,O2a*及O2a1a的3個血緣。M122血緣在台灣高山族有O3*,O3a*,O3a3*及O3a3c1*,在平埔族除此外多出O3a3a,O3a3b*,O3a3c*(漢藏語系為主), O3a3c1a及O3a4*血緣。O1*(O1a*及O1a1*)血緣在中國被認為是越族的血緣, O1*血緣在福建人出現22%,在台灣高山族有很高的頻率, 如在泰雅族高達98%,以致中國不少學者認為台灣高山族與古代泰越族為同一來源, 在這報告中, 我們試著探討福建人的O1*及台灣高山族O1*是否完全相同。在這報告中, 我們也探討在西拉雅族、巴宰族及凱達格蘭族三族平埔族出現的O1*是來自福建的移民, 或是源自台灣高山族(及平埔族群原本) 的血緣。…

西拉雅族共有14%(25/221) 的父系血緣屬於O1a2血緣, 巴宰族有13%(5/40) 也屬於這個血緣, 凱達格蘭族24男性中則有一人為這血緣。西拉雅族屬O1*(O1a*+O1a1*)血緣有71人, 因O1*血緣可來自高山族及平埔族(泰雅族有98%屬這血緣), 也可來自福建移民(福建人有22%屬這血緣), 所以利用西拉雅族32人、巴宰族18人及凱達格蘭族8人的O1*的Y-STR結果與台灣高山族238人及福建人23人的Y-STR資料做neighbor network分析, 以探究西拉雅族人或巴宰族人O1* 的父系血緣是來自福建移民, 或者是源白原來的台灣高山族或平埔族。一起分析的O1*STR資料包括: 阿美族l6人、泰雅族49人、排灣族15人、卑南族14人、魯凱族22人、賽夏族21人、太魯閣族19人、邵族19人、鄒族38人及雅美族25人、共238人高山族、及菲律賓巴丹人10人、台灣人5人及福建人23人。分析的結果顯示在圖2的O1*父系血緣網狀關係split tree圖上，中心的網狀處是顯示基因的相關性，這關係圖很明顯的把福建人與台灣高山族區分開來，灰色區為平埔族及高山族區，圈起來的區域(在時鐘9點的位置)為福建人區，可看到被分析的32人西拉雅族中8人落在福建人區，表示這8人或25% (8/32=25%) O1*西拉雅族父系血緣來自福建的移民(8人為SL233, SL320, SL314, SL316, SL014, SL019, SL030, SL321)，其他24人(75%)的O1*血緣落在高山原住民區(灰色區)，顯示這75%西拉雅族的O1*父系血緣來自平埔族或高山族。在巴宰族的情形是40個男性族人中,父系血緣屬O1*系血緣有21人, 其中18人參與父系血緣屬的neighbor network分析, 結果有5人或28%(5/18=28%)的O1*父系血緣來自福建(5人為PZ031,PZ019,PZ098,PZ058,PZ080在時鐘9點圈起來的地區),其他72%來自平埔族或高山族(灰色區)。凱達格蘭族23個男性族人中, 有1人屬台灣高山族特有的O1a2,8人屬於O1*,經Y-STR資料分析, 其中5人(63%)O1*父系血緣來自平埔族或高山族, 在圖2可見西拉雅族、巴宰族及凱達格蘭族屬非福建人的O1*父系血緣常在同一區出現, 顯示這三族平埔族的父系血緣在遺傳上接近及相關。…

 

 

* 永恆的西拉雅族－遺傳基因的研究 by 林媽利, et al.

圖2 O1*父系血緣Y-STR的Neighbor Network 分析

線 圈起來的區域為福建人區, 灰色區為高山族區含平埔族血緣

(circled area - Fujian, shaded areas - Taiwanese aborigines)

 

 

* Y Chromosomes of Prehistoric People Along the Yangtze River by Hui Li, et al.

Abstract: The ability to extract mitochondrial and nuclear DNA from ancient remains has enabled the study of ancient DNA, a legitimate field for over 20 years now. Recently, Y chromosome genotyping has begun to be applied to ancient DNA. The Y chromosome haplogroup in East Asia has since caught the attention of molecular anthropologists, as it is one of the most ethnic-related genetic markers of the region. In this paper, the Y chromosome haplogroup of DNA from ancient East Asians was examined, in order to genetically link them to modern populations. Fifty-six human remains were sampled from five archaeological sites, primarily along the Yangtze River. Strict criteria were followed to eliminate potential contamination. Five SNPs from the Y chromosome were successfully amplified from most of the samples, with at least 62.5% of the samples belonging to the O haplogroup, similar to the frequency for modern East Asian populations. A high frequency of O1 was found in Liangzhu Culture sites

 

Locations of the Archaeological Sites, Cultures and the Distributions of Y SNP Haplogroups

 

Case Counts of Y SNP Haplogroups of the Archaeological Sites

 

 

Liangzhu Culture

Photo of Jade cong with taotie motif, Liangzhu Culture, National Gallery of Art, Washington DC

The Liangzhu culture (良渚文化) (3400-2250 BC) was the last Neolithic jade culture in the Yangtze River Delta of China. Its area of influence extended from around Lake Tai north to Nanjing and the Chang Jiang, east to Shanghai and the sea, and south to Hangzhou. The culture was highly stratified, as jade, silk, ivory and lacquer artifacts were found exclusively in elite burials, while pottery was more commonly found in the burial plots of poorer individuals. The type site at Liangzhu was discovered in Yuhang County, Zhejiang and initially excavated by Shi Xingeng in 1936.

The culture possessed advanced agriculture, included irrigation, paddy rice cultivation and aquaculture. Houses were often constructed with stilts on rivers or shorelines.

The jade from this culture is characterized by finely worked large ritual jades, commonly incised with the taotie motif. The most exemplary artefacts from the culture were its cong (cylinders). The largest cong discovered weighed 3.5 kg. Bi (discs) and Yue axes (ceremonial axes) were also found. Jade pendants were also found, designed with engraved representations of small birds, turtles and fish. Many Liangzhu jade artefacts had a white milky bone-like aspect due to its tremolite rock origin and influence of water-based fluids at the burial sites, although jade made from actinolite and serpentine were also commonly found.

A neolithic altar from the Liangzhu culture, excavated at Yaoshan in Zhejiang, demonstrates that religious structures were elaborate and made of carefully positioned piles of stones and rock walls: this indicates that religion was of considerable importance. The altar has three levels, the highest being a platform of rammed earth. Three additional platforms were paved with cobblestones. There are the remains of a stone wall. On the altar are twelve graves in two rows. A new discovery of ancient city wall base relics was announced by the Zhejiang provincial government on November 29, 2007. All the relics previously identified were parts of city construction. It was concluded the site was the ancient capital of the Liangzhu Kingdom, whose influence spread as far as modern-day Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Shandong Provinces. A new Liangzhu Culture Museum was completed in 2008 and opened late in the year. It is 17.5 kilometers north-west of the north-east corner of West Lake in Hangzhou.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Genetic Studies

 

* The Distribution and Most Recent Common Ancestor of the 17q21 Inversion in Humans by Michael P. Donnelly, et al.

Abstract: The polymorphic inversion on 17q21, sometimes called the microtubular associated protein tau (MAPT) inversion, is an approximately 900 kb inversion found primarily in Europeans and Southwest Asians. We have identified 21 SNPs that act as markers of the inverted, i.e., H2, haplotype. The inversion is found at the highest frequencies in Southwest Asia and Southern Europe (frequencies of approximately 30%); elsewhere in Europe, frequencies vary from < 5%, in Finns, to 28%, in Orcadians. The H2 inversion haplotype also occurs at low frequencies in Africa, Central Asia, East Asia, and the Americas, though the East Asian and Amerindian alleles may be due to recent gene flow from Europe. Molecular evolution analyses indicate that the H2 haplotype originally arose in Africa or Southwest Asia. Though the H2 inversion has many fixed differences across the approximately 900 kb, short tandem repeat polymorphism data indicate a very recent date for the most recent common ancestor, with dates ranging from 13,600 to 108,400 years, depending on assumptions and estimation methods. This estimate range is much more recent than the 3 million year age estimated by Stefansson et al. in 2005.

 

MAPT Inversion Frequencies in East Asia

(MLY-Malaysians, LAO-Laos, CBD-Cambodian, CHS-Chinese San Francisco, CHT-Chinese Taiwan, HAK-Hakka, MNG-Mongol, MNC-Manchu, LOL-Lolo, HMG-Hmong, KOR-Korean, JPN-Japanese, AMI-Ami, ATL-Atayal)

 

 

* Genetic Origin of Kadai-speaking Gelong People on Hainan Island Viewed from Y Chromosomes by Dongna Li, et al.

Principal Component Plots of the Populations Concerned

 

Dendrogram of the Populations Based on the Y-SNP Haplogroup Frequencies

 

 

* Genetic Distances Between Chinese Populations Ccalculated on Gene Frequencies of 38 Loci by DU Ruofu, et al.

Phylogenic Tree of Han Subpopulations in 30 Provinces, Cities and Autonomous Regions

(Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Hainan, Taiwan)

 

 

* A New Haplogroup Pattern Displayed in Fujian Han in China by M. Yu, et al.

Excerpt: In comparison with the southern Han and the northern Han, the Fujian Han displayed a relatively lower frequency of H6/7/8, but much higher frequencies of H5 and H1. The characteristics of the Y-chromosome loci are not compatible with those of either the southern han or the northern Han, although Fujian Province is located in southeast China. In conclusion, the genetic evidence of Y-chromosome haplogroup distributions present an interesting picture regarding the origin of the Fujian Han. The distinctive frequencies of haplogroups H6/7/8, H1, and H5 in the Fujian Han imply that the haplogroup pattern is a relatively ancestral and interim type. If the ancestors of the Sino-Tibetan population in China were originally from southern East Asia (Su et al. 1999), they might have reached the Fujian region first, with a part of them continuing to reside there, and the others making their way northward.

 

* Sequence Polymorphism of mtDNA HVR Iand HVR II of Oroqen Ethnic Group in Inner Mongolia by CX Yan, et al.

Abstract: Venous blood samples from 50 unrelated Oroqen individuals living in Inner Mongolia were collected and their mtDNA HVR I and HVR II sequences were detected by using ABI PRISM377 sequencers. The number of polymorphic loci, haplotype, haplotype frequence, average nucleotide variability and other polymorphic parameters were calculated. Based on Oroqen mtDNA sequence data obtained in our experiments and published data, genetic distance between Oroqen ethnic group and other populations were computered by Nei's measure. Phylogenetic tree was constructed by Neighbor Joining method. Comparing with Anderson sequence, 52 polymorphic loci in HVR I and 24 loci in HVR II were found in Oroqen mtDNA sequence, 38 and 27 haplotypes were defined herewith. Haplotype diversity and average nucleotide variability were 0.964+/-0.018 and 7.379 in HVR I, 0.929+/-0.019 and 2.408 in HVR II respectively. Fst and dA genetic distance between 12 populations were calculated based on HVR I sequence, and their relative coefficients were 0.993(P < 0.01). A phylogenetic tree was constructed based on genetic distances and included Oroqen, Taiwan and South Han population in a clade, which indicated near genetic relation between them, and far relation with northern Han, Mongolian and other foreign populations. The genetic polymorphism of mtDNA HVR I and HVR II in Oroqen ethnic group has some specificities compared with that of other populations. These data provide a useful tool in forensic identification, population genetic study and other research fields.

 

Photo from Joshua Project

The Oroqen people (鄂倫春族) are an ethnic group in northern China. They form one of the 56 ethnic groups officially recognized by the People's Republic of China. According to the 2000 Census, 44.54% live in Inner Mongolia and 51.52% along the Heilongjiang River (Amur) in the province of Heilongjiang. The Oroqin Autonomous Banner is also located in Inner Mongolia.

The Oroqens are mainly hunters and it is customary of them to use animal fur and skins for clothing.

The Oroqen language is a Northern Tungusic language. Their language is very similar to the Evenki language and it is believed that speakers of these two languages can understand 70% of the other language.

The Oroqen ethnic group is one of the oldest ethnic groups in northeast China. Their name Oroqen, means "people using reindeer" (in Mongolian, it means "Guruchin"), it is a name they gave themselves. The ancestor of the Oroqens originally lived in the vast area south of the Outer Xing'an Mountains and north of Heilongjiang. They once formed part of the ancient people known as the Shiwei. In the 17th century, following the invasions by Russia, some Oroqens moved to the area near the Greater and Lesser Xing'an Mountains.

 

* Use of Autosomal Loci for Clustering Individuals and Populations of East Asian Origin by Jong-Jin Kim, et. al.

Least-squares Tree for Nine East Asian Populations and 43 Independent Diallelic Markers, Based on a Tau Genetic Distance Matrix

 

 

* Heterogeneity of Taiwan’s Indigenous Population: Possible relation to prehistoric Mongoloid dispersals by m. Lin, et al.

Neighbor-joining Tree of Taiwan’s Indigenous peoples, Asians, North American Indians and Oceanians

Taiwan’s indigenous groups were found clustering together and adjacent to Maori and PNG Highlanders. Pazeh showed affinity with ‘Taiwanese’ (Minnan, Hakka)

 

 

* Polymorphism of 17 Y-STR Loci in Shanxi Han Population and Genetic Relationship with 13 Populations by MS Shi, et al.

Abstract: To investigate the genetic polymorphisms of 17 Y-chromosomal short tandem repeats (Y-STR) loci in Shanxi Han population and to explore their forensic application values and genetic relationship with neighboring populations, 17 Y-STR in 222 unrelated healthy Shanxi Han individuals were amplified with Y-filerTM System, and the PCR products were detected with 3130 Genetic Aanalyzer. The allele frequencies and haplotype diversity were calculated. Y-STR data of another 13 populations were collected from publications. Cluster analysis and phylogenic trees were applied to show the genetic distance among the populations. As a result, a total of 219 haplotypes were identified, and the observed haplotypes diversity value was 0.9999. The gene diversity values (GD) for each locus ranged from 0.3894 (DYS391) to 0.9755 (DYS385a/b). Comparing with 13 populations, the genetic distance between Shanxi and Jihei Han populations was the smallest (0.0001), while the genetic distance between Shanxi and Taiwan population was the largest (0.0152). The phylogenetic tree was similar to the results of clustering analysis. Multiplex detection of the 17 Y-STR loci revealed a highly polymorphic genetic distribution, which would be very powerful for establishing a Y-STR database, for population genetics and forensic practice.

 

14 个群体NJ 系统发生树

 

14 个群体聚类分析图

 

 

* Genetic Link Between Chaoshan and Other Chinese Han Populations: Evidence from HLA-A and HLA-B allele frequency distribution by Sheng-Ping Hu, et al.

Neighbor-Joining Tree

Neighbor-joining tree constructed by Nei’s genetic distance based on the HLA-A and -B allele frequencies of Chaoshan and the other nine Chinese Han populations. Chaoshan clusters closely with the Mainland Minnan and the Mainland Hakka. All southern China-related groups in general cluster together and are separated from the China North group with the China Middle standing in between.

 

 

* The Emerging Limbs and Twigs of the East Asian mtDNA Tree by Toomas Kivisild, et al.

Phylogenetic Reconstruction and Geographic Distribution of Haplogroup M7

 

Phylogeography of Haplogroup A

 

 

* Analysis of East Asia Genetic Substructure Using Genome-Wide SNP Arrays by Chao Tian, et al.

Principal Component Analyses of Substructure in a Diverse Set of Subjects of East Asian Descent

 

 

* Y-chromosomal STRs Haplotypes in the Taiwanese Paiwan Population by Fang-Chin Wu, et al.

MDS Plot Based on Pairwise Φst Values Calculated for the Paiwan (filled circle) and Ten Reference Populations (open circles)

(Minnan, Taiwan, Melanau, Iban)

 

 

* Genetic Affinities Between the Yami Tribe People of Orchid Island and the Philippine Islanders of the Batanes Archipelago by Jun-Hun Loo, et al.

Phylogenetic Tree of Populations of Taiwan, ISEA and MSEA Using mtDNA Haplogroup Frequencies (Fst distances)

 

 

* HLA Class III and Non-HLA Blood Genetic Markers in Chinese by S.W. Serjeantson, et al.

Phylogenetic Relationships Between Eight Chinese Populations, Based on Seven Polymorphic Systems

 

 

* Paternal Population History of East Asia: Sources, Patterns, and Microevolutionary Processes by Tatiana Karafet, et al.

Northern Han (Nha), Hui (Hui), Tibetans (Tib), Manchu (Man), Chinese Evenks (Cev), Oroqen (Oro), Uygurs (Uyg), Mongolians (Mon), Siberian Evenks (Sev), Buryats (Bur), Koreans (Kor), Yizu (Yiz), Tujians (Tuj), Southern Han (Sha), Taiwanese Han (Tha), Zhuang (Zhu), She (She), Miao (Mia), Yao (Yao), Vietnamese (Vie), Malaysian (Mal), Kazakhs (Kaz), Altai (Alt), Uzbeks (Uzb), Kirghiz (Kir)

 

 

* Genetic Admixture History of Eastern Indonesia as Revealed by Y-chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA Analysis by S. Mona, et al.

Two-dimensional MDS Plot Based on a Fst Distance Matrix Computed from NRY Haplogroup Frequencies

(TCH - Taiwan Han Chinese, VIN - Vietnamese, CHI - Chinese, KOR - Korean, SMT - Sumatra, MAL - Malay, SBO- South Borneo, JAV - Java)

Open white circles: AN-speaking groups; full black circles: NAN (Papuan)-speaking groups; full gray circles: all other populations (irrespective of languages). Groups with more than five samples were not considered. Abbreviations are as following: ADR: Adonara (eastern Indonesia, EI), ALR_p: NAN Alor (EI), ETR_a: AN eastern Timor (EI), FLO: Flores (EI), LMB: Lembata (EI), PNT_p: NAN Pantar (EI), PNT_a: AN Pantar (EI), SLR: Solor (EI). Additional data are from Kayser et al. (2001, 2003, 2006) and additionally from Mona et al. (2007) for NRY data, and from Tommaseo-Ponzetta et al. (2002) for mtDNA data: MOL: Moluccas (pooled from Hiri and Ternate, EI), TEN: Nusa Tenggara (pooled Alor, Flores, Roti, Timur; EI), KAR: Karon (Northwest New Guinea, NWNG), BAH: Baham (NWNG), BIK: Biak (NWNG), EKA: Ekari (NWNG), HAT: Hatam (NWNG), MAB: Maibrat (NWNG), MAN: Mantion (NWNG), MOI: Moi (NWNG), MSK: Moskona (NWNG), WAN: Wandamen (NWNG), IRA: Irarutu (NWNG), ONI: Onin (NWNG), THE: Tehit (NWNG), ASM: Asmat (Southwest New Guinea, SWNG), AWY: Awyu (SWNG), CIT: Citak (SWNG), DAN: Dani/Lani (SWNG), KET: Ketengban (SWNG), KRW: Korowai (SWNG), MAP: Mappi (SWNG), MY: Muyu (SWNG), UNA: Una (SWNG), YAL: Yali (SWNG), KMB: Kombai (SWNG), TRO: Trobriand (Papua New Guinea, PNG), BRN: Bereina (PNG), KAP: Kapuna (PNG), TOL: Tolai New Britain (PNG), PCO: PNG coast, PHL: PNG highlands, FIJ: Fiji, AS1: Australian Aborigines Arnhem Land, AS2: Australian Aborigines Great Sandy Desert, CHI: Han Chinese (East Asia, EA), TAB: Taiwan Aborigines (EA), TCH: Taiwan Han Chinese (EA), VTN: Vietnam (EA), KOR: Korea (EA), MAL: Malay (Southeast Asia, SEA), PHI: Philippines (SEA), SBO: South Borneo (SEA), SMT: Sumatra (SEA), JAV: Java (SEA), COK: Cook Islands (Polynesia, POL), FUT: Futuna (POL), NIE: Niue (POL), TOK: Tokelau (POL), TON: Tonga (POL), TUV: Tuvalu (POL), WES: West Samoa (POL).

 

Two-dimensional MDS Plot Based on a Fst Distance Matrix Computed from mtDNA Sequences

(TCH - Taiwan Han Chinese, SBO- South Borneo, SMT - Sumatra, JAV - Java, SLR - Solor)

 

 

* Genetic Relationship of Chinese Ethnic Populations Revealed by mtDNA Sequence Diversity by Yong-Gang Yao, et al.

Unrooted NJ Tree

 

 

* The GM Genetic Polymorphism in Taiwan Aborigines: New data revealing remarkable differentiation patterns
by Alicia Sanchez-Mazas, et al.

Excerpt: The MDS (characterized by a very good stress value of 0.041) segregates four Northern and Central Han populations at the top, the Minnan from Taiwan in a central position, and the Southern Han from Guangzhou, the eight Austronesian populations from Taiwan and the extra-Formosan Yami at the bottom. The four Northern and Central Han populations are genetically linked to each other according to a pattern recalling their relative geographic position. The Minnan are genetically intermediate between the Northern and the Southern Han but are very distant from both groups and significantly differentiated from all populations. Within the last group, we observe three clusters of genetically related populations: the Atayal, Taroko and Tsou; the Pazeh, Siraya, Bunun and Puyuma; and the Ami and Yami. In addition, we find that the Southern Han from Guangzhou are genetically very close to the Taroko, Atayal and Tsou, from whom they are not differentiated significantly according to the permutation statistical test (dotted lines). Genetic relationships are also suggested between the Taroko and both the Siraya and Bunun, and between the Puyuma and the Ami according both to the permutation test and to their relative position in the MDS....

Multidimensional Scaling Analysis among 15 Populations from Taiwan and
China Based on the Frequencies of GM ± 23 Sub-haplotypes

Solid lines link populations that are undifferentiated at the 5% level according to an exact test of population differentiation. Dotted lines link populations that are undifferentiated at the 5% level according to a permutation test on pairwise Fst’s, but not to the exact test. Final stress = 0.041 (excellent). White circles: Sino-Tibetans; triangles: Austronesians from Taiwan; black circle: Extra-Formosan Austronesians.

 

 

* Genetic Origins of the Ainu Inferred from Combined DNA Analyses of Maternal and Paternal Lineages by Atsushi Tajima, et al.

Asian Population Tree

 

 

* STR Polymorphisms of the Henan Population and Investigation of the Central Plains Han Origin of Chaoshanese by Li-Na Xu, et al.

Neighbor-joining tree constructed from Nei’s genetic distance based on the allelic frequencies of CODIS STR loci in 25 Chinese Han populations

 

 

* Three Major Lineages of Asian Y Chromosomes: Implications for the peopling of east and southeast Asia by Tajima A, et al.

Neighbor-joining (NJ) tree for a total of 20 Asian and Australo-Melanesian populations on the basis of DA distances, calculated from the frequencies of seven Y-haplotypes with six polymorphic sites (DYS257108, DYS287, SRY4064, SRY10831, RPS4Y711, and M9)

Abstract: DNA variation on the non-recombining portion of the Y chromosome was examined in 610 male samples from 14 global populations in north, east, and southeast Asia, and other regions of the world. Eight haplotypes were observed by analyses of seven biallelic polymorphic markers ( DYS257(108), DYS287, SRY(4064), SRY(10831), RPS4Y(711), M9, and M15) and were unevenly distributed among the populations. Maximum parsimony tree for the eight haplotypes showed that these haplotypes could be classified into four distinct lineages characterized by three key mutations: an insertion of the Y Alu polymorphic (YAP) element at DYS287, a C-to-G transversion at M9, and a C-to-T transition at RPS4Y(711). Of the four lineages, three major lineages (defined by the allele of YAP(+), M9-G, and RPS4Y-T, respectively) accounted for 98.6% of the Asian populations studied, indicating that these three paternal lineages have contributed to the formation of modern Asian populations. Moreover, phylogenetic analysis revealed three monophyletic Asian clusters, which consisted of north Asian, Japanese, and Han Chinese/southeast Asian populations, respectively. Coalescence analysis in the haplotype tree showed that the estimated ages for three key mutations ranged from 53,000 to 95,000 years, suggesting that the three lineages were separated from one another during early stages of human evolutionary history. The distribution patterns of the Y-haplotypes and mutational ages for the key markers suggest that three major groups with different paternal ancestries separately migrated to prehistoric east and southeast Asia.

 

 

* Genetic Polymorphisms of 17 Y-chromosomal Short Tandem Repeat Loci in Atayal Population of Taiwan by Fang-Chin Wu, et al.

Neighbor-joining Tree

(Atayal, Korean, Taiwanese, Japanese, Minnan Han Chinese, Northeast Han Chinese)

The present data on Y-chromosome haplotypes in the Atayal and the data on minHt of Y-STR loci of Chinese population in Taiwan (monomorphic [TCTG]3 at DYS389I and DYS389II including a repeat +3 compared with the available data) (6), Minnan Han Chinese (7), northeast Han Chinese (8), Korean (9), and Japanese (10) were analyzed using the Arlequin software package to determine the molecular variance between these populations. RST values were 0.318, 0.478, 0.448, 0.265, and 0.362, respectively, all of which were significant (P < 0.001). Neighbor-joining tree of the 6 populations (22,23) is shown as Figure 2.

 

 

* Taiwan Aboriginals and Peoples of the Pacific-Asia Region: Multivariate craniometric comparisons by M. Pietrusewsky, et al.

Plot of 55 Male Groups Means on the First Two Canonical Variates Using 29 Cranial Measurements

 

Diagram of Relationship Based on a Cluster Analysis (UPGMA) of Mahalanobis' Generalized Distances Using 29 Cranial Measurements Recorded in 55 Male Groups

 

* A Genetic Analysis of the Sakishima Islanders Reveals No Relationship With Taiwan Aborigines but Shared Ancestry With Ainu and Main-Island Japanese by Hirotaka Matsukusa, et al.

The Neighbor Joining (NJ) Tree for 15 East and Southeast Asian Populations Constructed Based on mtDNA HVI Nucleotide Sequences

 

The Neighbor Joining (NJ) Tree for 15 East and Southeast Asian Populations Constructed Based on Seven Y-STR Loci

 

The Neighbor Joining (NJ) Tree for 10 East and Southeast Asian Populations Constructed Based on Nine A-STR Loci

 

 

* The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity by R. Spencer Wells, et al.

Neighbor-joining tree of 61 Eurasian populations, based on Y-chromosome biallelic haplotype frequencies

(Cluster IV: Kazak, Mongolian, Cambodian, Dungan, Taiwanese, Chinese, Korean, Japanese)

Nei genetic distances were used in a neighbor-joining analysis. Internal numbers are bootstrap values (1000 replicates); values less than 200 are not shown. Roman numerals denote population clusters described in the text.

 

 

* Genetic Landscape of Eurasia Viewed from Large Allele Frequency Differences by Hui Li, et al.

Genetic Structure of Eurasian Populations

 

 

* Partial Duplication at AZFc on the Y Chromosome Is a Risk Factor for Impaired Spermatogenesis in Han Chinese in Taiwan by Yi-Wen Lin, et al.

The Y Chromosome Haplogroups of Han Taiwanese

Haplogroups (Y DNA): C, D, N, O, O1, O2, O3, Q, R

 

 

* Genetic Polymorphism Analysis of 15 STR Loci in Chinese Hui Ethnic Group Residing in Qinghai Province of China by YJ Deng, et al.

Abstract: In the present study, we investigated the diversity distributions of allelic frequencies of 15 short tandem repeats (STRs) loci in a sample of Chinese Hui ethnic group in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. The allelic frequencies of the 15 STR loci (D8S1179, D21S11, D7S820, CSF1PO, D3S1358, TH01, D13S317, D16S539, D2S1338, D19S433, vWA, TPOX, D18S51, D5S818 and FGA) were obtained from 2975 unrelated healthy Hui individuals. The STR genotyping data of all the samples were generated by DNA extraction, multiple amplification, GeneScan and genotype analysis. The genetic distances among different populations were calculated by using Nei's method and a phylogenetic tree was constructed based on the allelic frequencies of the same 15 STR loci using the neighbor-joining method. A total of 185 alleles were observed in the Hui population, with the corresponding allelic frequencies ranging from 0.0002 to 0.5322. Chi-Square tests showed that all STR loci were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The forensic statistical parameters of all the loci showed high values. The population data in this study were compared with the previously published population data from other ethnics or areas. The Hui population showed significant differences from the Minnan Han, Uigur, Ewenki, Yi, Tibetan, Maonan and Malay ethnic minority groups in some loci, and from the South Morocco population and the Moroccan population in all the loci. Our results are valuable for human individual identification and paternity testing in the Chinese Hui population and are expected to enrich the genetic information resources of Chinese populations.

 

 

* Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroup Distribution in Chaoshanese with and without Myopia by Qin Wang, et al.

Principal Component Map of Mmitochondrial DNA Variation

 

 

* Ethnic Related Selection for an ADH Class I Variant within East Asia by Hui Li, et al.

Haplotype Frequencies of the ADH1B Gene Region Including the Regulatory Region

(AMI: Amis, ATL: Atayal, CHT: Minnan, HKA: Hakka, CHS: Canton, WUU: Wu Chinese)

 

 

* Ethnic-specific Prevalence of Hepatitis B/C Virus Infection in Pin-Jen, Taiwan by HW Lai, et al.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to estimate prevalence rate of hepatitis B/C virus infection by three ethnic groups including Hakka, Minnan, and Mainlander in Taiwan where there was a high incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS: We enrolled a total of 5007 people aged 30 years or older who participated in Li-Shin Out-Reaching Neighboring Screening (LIONS) project in 2004-2005 in Pin-Jen township of Taoyuan county. The ethnic group was classified in the current study by using the criteria on the basis of the ethnicity of mother of participants. We collected the character of participants, hepatitis B/C virus infection, and life-style factors for the comparison across three ethnic groups.

RESULTS: The highest positive rate of hepatitis B virus infection was seen in Minnan descendants (15.1%), followed by Hakka descendants (11.4%), and Mainlander descendants (6.6%). The difference by three groups was statistically significant (P<.001). Positive hepatitis B virus infection declined with age whereas positive hepatitis C virus infection increased with age regardless of ethnic group. By using ecological analysis, the higher proportion of Minnan was positively correlated to the elevated incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (correlation coefficient=.46, P=.03).

CONCLUSIONS: Our population-based study shows prevalence rate of hepatitis B and C virus infection varies with ethnic group, with higher rate in Minnan. This finding was consistent with the ecological result, the higher the composition of Minnan the higher the incidence of HCC.

 

 

* Phylogenetic Relationship of the Populations Within and Around Japan Using 105 Short Tandem Repeat Polymorphic Loci by Shi-Lin Li, et al.

A Neighbor-joining (NJ) Tree Showing the Relationships of Ten Human Populations Examined in the Present Study on the Basis of DA Distances Calculated from the Allele Frequencies at 105 Tetranucleotide STR Loci

 

Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) Plot of Ten Human Populations Analyzed in the Present Study, Based on DA Genetic Distances Calculated from 105 Autosomal Tetranucleotide STR Loci

 

 

* Ethnic Variation in Hypertension Prevalence of Women in Taiwan by TC Su, et al.

Abstract: The prevalence and risk factors of hypertension vary in ethnic groups. This study aimed to estimate the hypertension prevalence and to compare risk factors associated with hypertension in women of four ethnic groups in Taiwan. The study subjects were participants in the Taiwanese Survey on Hypertension, Hyperglycemia and Hyperlipidemia (TwSHHH) enrolled in 2002. In this analysis, only 2810 women who were at age of 20-80 years old and whose father and mother had same ethnic background (Minnan, Hakka, Aborigines or Mainland Chinese) were included. Results showed that there were significant ethnic differences in the prevalence of hypertension, obesity indices, fasting glucose, dyslipidaemia, hyperuricaemia, history of alcohol drinking and tobacco smoking and socioeconomic status. Aborigines had the highest prevalence of hypertension (28.6%) and diabetes mellitus (8.9%), whereas the Minnan group had the second highest prevalence of hypertension (19.2%) and diabetes mellitus (7.9%). Both age and central obesity were associated with an increased prevalence of hypertension except central obesity in Mainland Chinese in all four ethnic groups. Compared with the Mainland Chinese as the referent, the multivariate-adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) was 1.19 (0.63-2.26), 1.92 (1.15-3.21) and 2.03 (1.00-4.12) for Hakka, Minnan and Aborigines, respectively. Elevated body mass index (>or=27.0 vs <24.0 kg m(-2)) and central obesity were significantly associated with hypertension showing multivariate-adjusted OR (95% CI) of 1.68 (1.18-2.38) and 1.95 (1.48-2.57), respectively. In addition, dyslipidaemia, hyperuricaemia and diabetes associated with higher OR for hypertension in Minnan women. In conclusion, there were ethnic variations in hypertension prevalence and determinants in Taiwanese women.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

* HLA Antigens in Three Normal Southern Chinese Dialect Groups -- Cantonese, Hokkiens and Teochew by S.H. Chan, et al.

Synopsis: The HLA profiles of the Cantonese, Hokkien and Teochew dialect groups in the Chinese population were compared. The profiles of the three groups were remarkably similar. HLA-A2 and HLA-Bw46 were strongly and significantly associated in all three dialect groups. Other significantly associated antigen pairs were Aw19, B17 and A29, B7 in the Cantonese and Blank, B40 in the Teochews.

 

HLA-B46

Dark Red = 7% or greater,
Red = 3 to 7%
Orange = 1 to 3%
Green = O to 1%
Black = regions not typed

HLA-B46 (B46) is an HLA-B serotype. The serotype identifies the gene products of HLA-B*4601 allele. B*4601 resulted from a rare, interlocus, gene conversion between B62, probably B*1501, and a HLA-C allele. B*4601 is the most common HLA-B allele that does not have an origin within Africa, and estimated 400 million people in Eastern Asia carry a B46 allele. When found B*4601 segregates with only 2 HLA-Cw alleles, A limited number of HLA-A and HLA-DRB1 alleles suggesting that the allele recently expanded from a limited sized group within SE Asia. Extremely low frequencies outside of Eastern Asia are indicators of a recent expansion of B46 from a recently small population. The frequency distribution suggests the ancestral B46 population was in SE China, or, potentially Burma (Myanmar or Laos, untested). B46 in Asia correlates with wet-rice farming. The exceptions are notable, it has been found in the Nivkhi on north-eastern Sakalin Island, the Ainu, and the Nivkhi-related (genetically) Tlinglet population of Alaska at trace levels. This B46 contribution appears to have been recent.

A2-B46 is one of the most frequent, if not the most frequent A-B haplotype in the world, even though it is absent from the indigenous populations of most peoples in the world.

The most common haplotype, and probably the ancestral haplotype given its distribution from the Ninhivet to Indonesia is:

A*0207 : C*0102 : B*4601 : DRB1*0901 : DQA1*0302 : DQB1*0303

A different haplotype that is more common in Korea and Japan is

A*0207 : C*0102 : B*4601 : DRB1*0803 : DQA1*0103 : DQB1*0601

B46, or a closely linked allele may have been under positive selection in rice farmers of Asia.

 

Wet Rice Farming

A paddy field is a flooded parcel of arable land used for growing rice and other semiaquatic crops. Rice can also be grown in dry-fields, but from the twentieth century paddy field agriculture became the dominant form of growing rice. Paddy fields are a typical feature of rice-growing countries of east, south and southeast Asia, including Cambodia, Bangladesh, China, Taiwan, India, Indonesia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam, and Laos.

Paddy fields can be built adjacent to otherwise natural areas such as rivers or marshes. They can be constructed, often on steep hillsides with much labor and materials. The fields require large quantities of water for irrigation. Flooding provides water essential to the growth of the crop. Water also provides a favorable environment for the rice strains being grown as well as discouraging the growth of many species of weeds. The water buffalo is one of the most important working animals adapted for life in wetlands so they are extensively used in paddy fields.

Archaeologists generally accept that wet-field cultivation originated in China. At Caoxieshan, a site of the Neolithic Majiabang culture, archaeologists excavated paddy fields. Some archaeologists claim that Caoxieshan may date to 4000-3000 B.C., but as of now the oldest excavated rice paddy field dated by absolute scientific dating techniques are from Korea. There is archaeological evidence that unhusked rice was stored for the military and for burial with the deceased from the Neolithic period to the Han Dynasty in China.

 

The Majiabang culture (馬家浜文化) was a Neolithic culture that existed at the mouth of the Yangtze River, primarily around the Taihu area and north of Hangzhou Bay in China. The culture was spread throughout southern Jiangsu and northern Zhejiang from around 5000 BC to 3000 BC. Initially, archaeologists had considered the Majiabang sites and sites in northern Jiangsu to be part of the same culture, naming it the Qingliangang culture. Archaeologists later realized that the northern Jiangsu sites were of the Dawenkou culture and renamed the southern Jiangsu sites as the Majiabang culture. The Majiabang culture coexisted with the Hemudu culture for over a thousand years as two separate and distinct cultures, with cultural transmissions between the two cultures.

Majiabang people cultivated rice. At Caoxieshan, a site of the Majiabang culture, archaeologists excavated paddy fields. However, faunal remains excavated from Majiabang archaeological sites indicated that people had domesticated pigs. In addition, the remain of sika and roe deer have been found, showing that people were not totally reliant on agricultural production. Archaeological sites also bear evidence that Majiabang people produced jade ornaments.

 

 

* The ADH1B Arg47His Polymorphism in East Asian Populations and Expansion of Rice Domestication in History by Yi Peng, et al.

The Distribution of the ADH1B*47His Allele and the Sites of Early Rice Relics

 

The Distribution of the ADH1B*47His Allele in the 38 East Asian Populations

 

 

She People

Photo from Cultural China

The She (畲) people are a Chinese ethnic group. They form one of the 56 ethnic groups officially recognized by the People's Republic of China.

They are the largest minority in Fujian province. They are also present in the provinces of Zhejiang, Anhui, Jiangxi and Guangdong.

The She language is a Hmong-Mien language. Most of the She today speak Chinese dialects, like Hakka. Those who retain their own language - approximately 1,200 individuals in Guangdong province - call themselves Ho Ne "mountain people" (活聂).

 

 

* Rice Responsible for Asians' Alcohol Flush Reaction, Research Finds by Science Daily

Excerpt: The mutation responsible for the alcohol flush reaction, an unpleasant response to alcohol that is relatively common in people of Asian descent, may have occurred following the domestication of rice.

Researchers writing in the open access journal BMC Evolutionary Biology traced the history of the version of the gene responsible, finding that the ADH1B*47His allele appeared around the same time that rice was first cultivated in southern China....

Rice was fermented to gain the benefits of ethanol's combined analgesic, disinfectant and profound mind-altering effects. In addition, fermentation can help to preserve and enhance the nutritional value of food and drink.

Su and his colleagues believe that the flushing response may be an adaptation to counter the negative effects of alcohol consumption. They write, "Individuals carrying ADH1B*47His have a lower risk for alcoholism, as the unpleasant reaction they experience can influence drinking behavior and so protect them from overconsumption. The allele can also protect their organs from the damage caused by alcohol consumption."

 

 

Alcohol flush reaction (colloquially referred to as Asian Flush, Asian Red or Asian Glow) is a condition in which the face and/or body experiences flushes or blotches, due to an accumulation of acetaldehyde. The acetaldehyde accumulation can be caused by a missense polymorphism that encodes the enzyme, acetaldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH2), normally responsible for breaking down acetaldehyde, a product of the metabolism of alcohol. The acetaldehyde accumulation can also be caused by a polymorphism in the gene encoding the ADH1B enzyme, increasing production of acetaldehyde by more rapid metabolism of alcohol. Flushing, or blushing, is associated with the erythema (reddening caused by dilation of capillaries) of the face, neck, shoulder, and in some cases, the entire body after consumption of alcohol.

Research has shown that a history of facial flushing when drinking is indicative of ALDH2 deficiency, and that an ALDH2-deficient drinker who drinks 2 beers per day has 6 to 10 times the risk of developing esophageal cancer as a drinker not deficient in the enzyme.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Taiwanese Aboriginal Ancestry Among the Taiwanese "Han" Population

 

* The Real Story of the Settlement of Taiwan's Peoples by Taiwan Identity

Excerpts: Many people have been taught the often repeated myth that goes like this: The Austronesian aboriginal tribes used to live in the plains of Taiwan. But then the Hakka came across the Taiwan Strait from China and pushed them back to the foothills. Then the Fujianese (Hoklo) came and pushed the Hakka to the foothills and the Austronesians to the mountains where they began to be called the "mountain tribes." This simplistic myth was probably pushed by the KMT dictatorship era to safeguard the prestige and claimed ethnic superiority of Han Chinese, to somehow say that the Chinese-derived language speakers of Taiwan have always been "Chinese," "blood is thicker than water," and all those claims to somehow say that Taiwan belongs to China....

There was some dislocation of Austronesian tribes, but on the whole the Austronesian plains tribes did not move to the mountains; they assimilated and became what is now the Hoklo and Hakka speaking populations of the majority of the people of Taiwan, now called "Taiwanese". Examples include the Siraya, Pazeh, Ketagalan, Kavalan, etc. to name a few.

 

 

* A Comparative Study of Sakizaya and Amis in Hualien by Mitochondrial DNA Sequences Analysis by Li-huang Tsai

Excerpt: Compare with the mitochondrial DNA data infromation of ten populations in Taiwan, I obtain phylogeny trees about the Amis, Atayal, Bunun, Paiwan, Puyuma, Rukai, Saisayat, Tsou, Yami, Taiwan Han, Sakizaya, the North Amis and the Middle Amis. It appears that, Sakizaya, Kuwazon and Fataan is clustered together first, then clustered to Taiwan, then is Amis. Furthermore, the haplogroups figure of all these thierteen populations shows that, the Tajima’s C2 and C4 haplogroups, which are suggested as ancient mtDNA clusters of Taiwan aborigines, is absent in Sakizaya, Kuwazon and Fataan; but the distribution of SKF3-like haplogroup is only discovered within the samples of Taiwan Han, Sakizaya, the North Amis and the Middle Amis. As my opinion, the intermarriage between Sakizaya, North Amis, Middle Amis and Taiwan Han, has influenced the genetics structures of all these populations.

 

 

* Biological Relationships of Ethnic Groups in Taiwan by Jen-yih (Albert ) Chu

Based on family pedigree records, two main ethnic groups in Taiwanese Han, Hoklo (Minnan) and Hakka, are traditionally considered descendants of migrants of Han from the " Central Plain " and " Areas of Yellow and Luo Rivers " of northern China. Recent biological data including immunoglobulin, human lymphocyte antigen, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase mutants, thalassemia mutants, microsatellite, mitochondria DNA and other biological studies indicate that Han Chinese have two origins, one in the south and the other in the north. These biological studies also indicate, that the Hoklo and Hakka originated mainly from the southern groups of China. Immunoglobulin studies show that Hakka and Hoklo populations in China are closely related to the southern minorities of China. Based on the gene frequency of immunoglobulin haplotypes, it is estimated that 20-25% of the genes of current Hakka or Hoklo populations in China originated from northern Han and 75-80% from southern groups of China. The HLA typing pattern of Taiwanese aborigines is very different from that of Chinese Han. Analysis of HLA suggests 13% Taiwanese aboriginal genes are in the current Taiwanese Hoklo and Hakka gene pool. A similar percentage of aboriginal ancestry can be estimated by comparing mutant patterns of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase in Taiwanese Han, Taiwanese aborigines, southern Chinese and Southeast Asians. Additional data from linguistics, social surveys and archeology also suggest that Hakka and Hoklo populations originated primarily in southern China. Recent publications indicate that the method of using family pedigree books to trace the origin of Hakka and Hoklo to northern China are questionable. Biologically, Taiwanese Han groups are most close to the southern Han group in China. In short, it is highly unlikely that Hakka and Hoklo populations in Taiwan and China are descendants of migrants of northern Chinese. Probably, there are no more than 15-20% of Taiwanese Hakka and Hoklo whose ancestors originated from the northern Han of China. The majority of ancestors (65-70%) might from the southern groups, originally living in southern China, and the other 15% are descended from Taiwanese aborigines.

 

 

* More Genetic Sharing Among the Population of Taiwan than Expected: A plain tribes (Pinpu) perspective by
Marie Lin, et al.

 

Mitochondrial DNA (Neighbor Joining Phylogram)

 

 

* A Study of the Genetic Relationships Among Aboriginal Populations in Taiwan ：Comparison of Pseudogene Sequences on Autosomal Chormorsome by 張佩琪

UPGMA Tree

(P-Puyuma, Ta-Atayal, S-Saisiat, T-Tsou, R-Rukai, Pai-Paiwan, H-Taiwan Han, A-Amis, B-Bunun)

 

NJ Tree

 

Minimum Evolution (ME)

 

 

* Genetic Profile of Non-aboriginal Taiwanese by M. Lin, et al.

 

 

* Spoligotypes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from Different Provinces of China by H. Dong, et al.

Abstract: A total of 2,346 Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates from 13 provinces in China were genotyped by spoligotyping. Two hundred seventy-eight spoligotypes were identified: 2,153 isolates were grouped into 85 clusters, and the remaining 193 isolates were orphans. Comparison with the SpolDB4.0 database revealed that 118 spoligotypes had shared international type numbers in the database and the other 160 were novel. These 160 novel spoligotypes were assigned to families and subfamilies using the SpotClust program. The most prevalent family was the Beijing family (74.08%), followed by the T family (14.11%). CAS family strains were found only in the Xinjiang and Tibet regions, while EAI family strains were found only in Fujian Province. In conclusion, the present study of the M. tuberculosis population in China demonstrated that Beijing family isolates are the most prevalent strains in China and that they exhibit geographical variation. Furthermore, many new spoligotypes were found in this study.

 

 

* Characterization of Predominant Mycobacterium tuberculosis Strains from Different Subpopulations of India by Jyoti Arora, et al.

Abstract: The predominant strains from India belong to Central-Asian (CAS) and the East-African-Indian (EAI) clade of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The two clades have also been shown to be geographically partitioned. The study of such strains may help to understand the characteristics that make M. tuberculosis an effective pathogen and its overrepresentation in certain populations. M. tuberculosis isolates characterized by spoligotyping under a population based tuberculosis study covering different regions from the North and South India were further analyzed by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and by deletion analysis of M. tuberculosis specific deletion region 1 (TbD1). The genetic relationship of the two clades inferred using different genetic markers showed good correlation. In the North where the CAS clade predominates the isolates are characterized by presence of high IS6110 copy number and absence of TbD1 region whereas in the South where the EAI clade predominates the isolates are characterized by low copy number of IS6110 and presence of TbD1 region. The ancestral EAI strains were found to be less often associated with drug resistance or young age as compared to the CAS clade. The study highlights that the EAI lineage is well established in India and that CAS may be emerging or more recently introduced to India. The results depict a distinction in the lineage of strains from the North versus South India indicating a need to study if the pathogen has adapted to specific human populations.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

* The Origin of Minnan & Hakka, the So-Called "Taiwanese" Inferred by HLA Study by M. Lin

Abstract: The Minnan and Hakka people groups, the so-called "Taiwanese", are the descendants of early settlers from the southeast coast of China during the last few centuries. Genetically they showed affinities to southern Asian populations as determined by phylogenetic trees and correspondence analysis calculated from HLA allele frequencies. This corresponds historically with the fact that they are the descendants of the southeast coastal indigenous population (Yueh) of China and should therefore not be considered as descendants of "pure" northern Han Chinese. A33-B58-DRB1*03 (A33-Cw10-B58-DRB1*03-DQB1*02), the most common HLA haplotype among "Taiwanese", with a haplotype frequency of 6.3%, has also been found to be the most common haplotype among Thai-Chinese and Singapore Chinese, two other populations also originating from the southeast coast of China. These observations suggest that this haplotype is the most well conserved ancient haplotype of the Yueh (從組織抗原推論閩南人及客家人，所謂「台灣人」的來源 by 林媽利).

 

 

 

Thai Chinese

The Thai Chinese (泰國華人) are an overseas Chinese community who live in Thailand. Official statistics show that six million people in 1987, or about 14% of Thailand's population claim to be of Chinese ethnicity. Extensive intermarriages with the Thais, especially in the past has resulted in many people who claim Chinese ethnicity with Thai ancestry, or mixed. People of Chinese descent are concentrated in the coastal areas of Thailand, principally Bangkok. They are well-represented in all levels of Thai society and play a leading role in business and politics.

Slightly more than half of the ethnic Chinese population in Thailand trace their ancestry to the Chaozhou prefecture in northern Guangdong. This is evidenced by the prevalence of the Minnan Chaozhou dialect among the Chinese in Thailand. A minority trace their ancestry to Hakka and Hainanese immigrants.

History: The history of Chinese immigration to Thailand dates back many centuries. Chinese traders in Thailand, mostly from Fujian and Guangdong, began arriving in Ayutthaya by at least the thirteenth century. According to the Chronicles of Ayutthaya, it was mentioned that King Ekathotsarot (r. 1605-1610) had been "concerned solely with ways of enriching his treasury," and was "greatly inclined toward strangers and foreign nations," especially Portugal, Spain, the Philippines, China, and Japan.

Ayutthaya was under almost constant Burmese threat from the 16th century onwards, and Qianlong, the Emperor of Qing was alarmed by the Burmese military might. From 1766-1769, Qianlong sent his armies four times to subdue the Burmese, but all four invasions failed. Ayutthaya thus fell to the Burmese in 1767. The Chinese efforts diverted the attention of Burma's Siam army, General Taksin, who was the son of a Chinese immigrant, took advantage of the situation by organizing his force and attacking them. Taksin actively encouraged Chinese immigration and trade. Settlers principally from Chaozhou prefecture came in large numbers.

The Chinese population in Thailand jumped from 230,000 in 1825 to 792,000 by 1910. By 1932, approximately 12.2% of the population of Thailand was Chinese.

However, early Chinese immigration consisted almost entirely of Chinese men who married Thai women. Children of such intermarriages were aptly called Sino-Thai or known as Luk-jin (ลูกจีน) in Thai. This tradition of Chinese-Thai intermarriage declined when large numbers of Chinese women began to emigrate into Thailand in the early 20th century.

The corruption of the Qing Dynasty and the massive population increase in China, along with very high taxes, caused many men to leave China for Thailand in search of work. If successful, they sent money back to their families in China. Many Chinese prospered under the "tax farming" system, whereby private individuals were sold the right to collect taxes at a price below the value of the tax revenues.

Dialect Groups: The vast majority of the Thai Chinese belong to various southern Chinese dialect groups. Of these, 56% are Teochew (also commonly spelled as Teochiu), 16% Hakka and 11% Hainanese. The Cantonese and Hokkien each constitute 7% of the Chinese population, and 3% belong to other Chinese dialect groups.

The Teochews mainly settled around Chao Phraya River in Bangkok. Many of them worked in government sectors, while others were involved in trade. During the reign of King Taksin, some influential Teochew traders were granted enjoyed certain privileges. These traders were called "Royal Chinese" (Jin-luang in Thai).

The Hokkiens constitute the largest dialect group among the Chinese in Songkhla and Phuket, while the Hakkas are mainly concentrated in Chiang Mai, Phuket and Central Western provinces. The Hakka own many private banks in Thailand, notably Kasikorn Bank.

A large number of Thai Chinese are the descendants intermarriages of Chinese immigrants and Thais, while there are others who are of predomiantly or solely of Chinese descent. People who are of mainly Chinese descent are descendants of immigrants who relocated to Thailand as well as other parts of Nanyang (the Chinese term used at the time for calling Southeast Asia) in the early to mid 20th century due to famine and civil war in the southern Chinese provinces of Guangdong (Teochew, Cantonese, Hainan, Hakka groups) and Fujian (Hokkien, Hakka). Among the ethnic Chinese, assimilation and adoption of Thai culture tend to take place among the Chinese who have a significant amount of Thai ancestry.

In the southern Thai provinces, notably the Chinese community in Phuket Province, the assimilated group is known as Peranakans. These people share a similar culture and identity with the Peranakan Chinese in neighboring Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia. Ethnic Chinese in the Malay-dominated provinces in the south used Malay, rather than Thai as their lingua franca, and occasionally intermarry with the local Malays.

Alternate Identities: The Chinese in Contemporary Thailand by Chee Kiong Tong (Editor), Chan Kwok Bun (Editor), Tong Chee Kiong (Editor), Kwok B. Chan (Editor)

 

 

 

The Chinese Émigrés of Thailand in the Twentieth Century by Disaphol Chansiri

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Singaporean

Chinese Singaporeans (新加坡華人) constitute 78% of Singapore's population, or approximately three out of four Singaporeans. Outside Greater China, Singapore is the only country in which overseas Chinese forms the majority of the population.

Chinese in Singapore today commonly recognize themselves first as Singaporeans (新加坡人), and then Chinese (Huaren 华人). The term Chinese Singaporean or Singaporean Chinese are used interchangeably with no differences in meaning. Peranakans are ethnic Chinese who had married ethnic Malays somewhere in their ancestral line and thus developed a culture of their own comprising a mixture of Chinese and Malay culture.

The Hokkiens constitute around 41% of the Chinese Singaporean population. Most originated from the southern parts of the Fujian province, primarily Xiamen, Zhangzhou and Quanzhou (泉州). They speak the Amoy dialect of Hokkien, a Min-nan language, which is 50.4% comprehensible with Teochew (潮州话), and less so with Hainanese(海南话).

The Hokkien language was a lingua franca amongst the various Chinese language groups and was also used by other ethnic groups such as the Malays and Indians to communicate with Chinese before Mandarin came into dominance during 1980s and 1990s.

Early Hokkien migrants settled around Amoy Street and Telok Ayer Street, forming enclaves around the Thian Hock Kheng Temple. They subsequently set up clan headquarters (Hokkien Huey Kuan) there and later expanded to Hokkien St and the vicinity of China Street. The Hokkiens were the most active in early trading that centered along the Singapore River.

As early settlers came from the southern coast of China, they were active in sea trade and worshiped one of the patron-deities of Taoist pantheon, the Heavenly Mother or "Ma Zhu" who supposedly looked out for seafarers. Thian Hock Kheng Temple houses Goddess "Ma Zhu" (妈祖) and is thus also known as Ma Zhor Kheng. Another popular patron group of deities are the Nine Emperor Gods, a commemoration of the Emperors who were said in Taoist folklore to have brought peace and prosperity to the people. Among some Chinese Singaporeans, the supreme Taoist God, the Jade Emperor, is revered and his birthday on the 9th day of Chinese New Year is accorded utmost prominence by them.

An official Taoist practice by a Taoist spiritual medium known as "Tangki 乩童" (a Hokkien term derived from Taiwan) is also popular amongst some Taoist Chinese. In this ceremony, the spiritual medium goes into a trance and is thought to establish a channel of communication between the mortal petitioner and the chosen Deity. It is said that the Taoist Deity transmogrifies the spiritual medium and provides a wide range of help to devotees ranging from religious rituals to health, business, domestic queries and requests like a talisman to protect their loved ones.

The Teochew in Singapore constitute about 21% of the Chinese population in Singapore. Teochews originated from the Chaoshan region in Guangdong Province of China, namely Jieyang, Shantou, Chaozhou, Chaoyang, Puning, Chao'an, Raoping, Huilai, Chenghai and Nan'ao.

The Teochew people speak Teochew, another Min-Nan language, which is 50.4% mutually intelligible with Hokkien. The Teochews, like the Hainanese, trace their ancestry to southern Fujian (闽南). Their migration from southern Fujian to their new homes in the Chaoshan region and Hainan Island respectively were mainly due to overpopulation and famine in the southern Fujian region. Despite linguistic and cultural similarities, the Teochews and Hokkiens considered themselves distinct and did not get along well during their early settlement in Singapore, especially during the British colonial era.

The Teochews were the dominant Chinese Language group for a period of time during the 19th century. Mass immigration of Chinese from Fujian later caused the Hokkiens to outnumber the Teochews, especially in the south. The majority of the Chinese living along the banks of the Straits of Johor were largely Teochew until the HDB initiated mass redevelopment from the 1980s onwards.

The majority of the Teochew settled along the banks of the Singapore River in Chinatown during the 19th and early 20th century. Teochews who settled in Chinatown worked in many commercial sectors as well as fishery. Traditional commercial sectors of Chinatown once dominated by Teochews include Circular Road and South Bridge Road.

Others Teochew businessmen set up gambier and pepper plantations in the dense forests of Singapore, parts of northern Singapore as well as Johor Bahru. The Chinese first started their plantations with the approval of the Sultan of Johor from the nineteenth century onwards. This attracted more Teochews to start their plantations in those areas over the years. As such, the "Kangchu" system eventually started to form. The Chinese word "Kang" (江) means river, while "Chu" (厝) means house. However, in this context, "Chu" is the clan's name of the first headman in charge of the plantations in the area. The "Kangchus" gave rise to modern place names such as Choa Chu Kang, Lim Chu Kang and Yio Chu Kang, all of which were largely plantation areas prior to urban redevelopment.

Early Chinese immigrants clustered themselves to form clan and Language associations. These clan associations or Kongsi served as unions for the mostly illiterate Chinese laborers and represented them when dealing with their colonial rulers or employers. One of the more prominent clan assosciations for the Teochew was the Ngee Ann Kongsi, a Teochew-oriented association formed in 1845 that is still in existence.

The Straits Times highlighted that Hougang has a relatively high concentration of Teochew residents.

The Cantonese make up 15% of the Chinese Singaporean population. Unlike the Hokkien, Teochew and the Hainanese, the Cantonese speak a language belonging to the Yue family. The Cantonese community is also further sub-divided into several dialect groups. Yue Hai is considered to be the purest form of Cantonese because of its close proximity with Guangzhou. Other variants include Luoguang, Seiyap and Gouyeung. The Gwainaam variant is largely based in Guangxi and shares close affinity with Pinghua.

The Cantonese mainly worked as goldsmiths, tailors and restaurateurs during the early and mid 20th century, and their businesses predominated the shophouses along Temple Street, Pagoda Street, and Mosque Street.

Cantonese women from the Samsui district (三水区), worked in construction sites, and contributed greatly towards the development of Singapore. These Samsui women left their families behind in China and came to Singapore to work in construction sites for a living during the early 20th century. They were noted for their distinctive navy blue outfits and bright red headgear, which were meant for protecting their hair as they worked. The headgear was first worn by Wang Chao Yun (王朝云 字子霞), a concubine of Su Dongpo, in the Hakka Fui Chiu district of Guangdong province and it eventually became the traditional headgear of Hakkas. Cantonese women who worked alongside female Hakka labourers adopted the use of the headgear.

Cantonese women from the Seiyap (四邑) district in Jiangmen prefecture wore black headgear similar to the Samsui women. Seiyap women who wore black headgear mainly worked in shipyards at the old harbour along Singapore river as well as at Keppel Harbour.

Today Chinatown is known among Singaporeans for having a large number of Cantonese people.

 

Ethnic Chinese in Singapore and Malaysia: A Dialogue Between Tradition and Modernity by Leo Suryadinata (Editor)

 

 

 

Chinese Street Opera in Singapore by Tong Soon Lee

 

 

 

Sojourners and Settlers: Histories of Southeast China and the Chinese by Anthony Reid (Editor), Kristine Alilunas-Rodgers (Editor)

 

 

 

 

 

Yue Peoples

Yue (越 or 鉞; also seen as Yueh or Yuet) refers to ancient semi-Sinicized or non-Sinicized peoples of southern China, originally those along the eastern coastline of present-day Zhejiang province. In archaic Chinese, a number of characters (越, 粵, 鉞) were often used interchangeably to represent the same meaning.

Origins and Ancient Usage: In ancient times, the northern Han Chinese referred to the peoples to their south collectively as the Yue. Historian Luo Xianglin has suggested that these peoples shared a common ancestry with the Xia Dynasty. There is little evidence, however, that the Yue peoples held any common identity. Historical texts often refer to the Hundred Yue tribes (百越. There is little evidence, however, that the Yue peoples held any common identity. The "Treatise of Geography" in Han Shu notes: "In the seven or eight thousand li from Jiaozhi to Kuaiji (modern southern Jiangsu or northern Zhejiang) the Hundred Yue are everywhere, each with their own clans." Just as the term Celt was used by the Greeks to describe what they perceived to be a broad cultural group, so the term Yue was a culturally relative term for the ancient Chinese. Also like "Celt", Yue is now used in a number of different ways.

Ethnolinguists have suggested that the pronunciaton of Yue may be related to a type of hemp produced in what is now Zhejiang. The character itself is related to the character for "ceremonial axe" (鉞), usually considered a symbol of royal or imperial authority. A number of stone axes have been found in the area of Hangzhou, and there is evidence that the ceremonial axe was a southern invention.

Sinification and Displacement: From the Ninth century BC, two northern Yue peoples, the Gou-Wu and Yu-Yue, were increasingly influenced by their Chinese neighbours to their north. These two states were based in the areas of what is now southern Jiangsu and northern Zhejiang respectively. Their aristocratic elite learned the written Chinese language and adopted Chinese political institutions and military technology. Traditional accounts attribute the cultural change to the Grand Earl of Wu (吳太伯), a Zhou prince who had fled to the south. The marshy lands of the south gave Gou-Wu and Yu-Yue unique characteristics. They did not engage in extensive agrarian agriculture, relying instead more heavily on aquaculture. Water transport was paramount in the south, so the two states became advanced in shipbuilding and developed riverine warfare technology. They were also known for their fine swords.

In the Spring and Autumn Period, the two states, now called Wu and Yue, were becoming increasingly involved in Chinese politics. In 512 BC, Wu launched a large expedition against the large state of Chu, based in the Middle Yangtze River. A similar campaign in 506 succeeded in sacking the Chu capital Ying. Also in that year, war broke out between Wu and Yue and continued with breaks for the next three decades. In 473 BC, the Yue king Goujian finally conquered Wu and was acknowledged by the northern states of Qi and Jin. In 333 BC, Yue was in turn conquered by Chu. The Kings of the state of Yue, and therefore its succesor state Minyue also claimed to be descended from Yu the Great of the chinese Xia dynasty. According to Sima Qian, Wu was founded by Wu Taibo, a brother of zhou wu wang, the King of the chinese Zhou dynasty.

After the unification of China by Qin Shi Huang, it became incorporated into the Chinese empire. The Qin armies also advanced south along the Xiang River to modern Guangdong and set up commanderies along the main communication routes. Throughout the Han Dynasty period two groups of Yue were identified, that of the Nan-Yue in the far south, who lived mainly in the area of what is now Guangdong, Guangxi, and Vietnam; and that of the Min-Yue who lay to the southeast, centred on the Min River in modern Fujian. The Kings of Minyue claimed to be descended from Yu the Great of the chinese Xia dynasty.

Sinification of these peoples was brought about by a combination of imperial military power, regular settlement and Chinese refugees. The difficulty of logistics and the malarial climate in the south made the displacement and eventual sinification of the Yue peoples a slow process. When the Chinese came into contact with local Yue peoples, they often wrested control of territory from them or subjugated them by force. When a serious rebellion broke out in 40 AD by the Trung Sisters in what is now modern Vietnam, a force of some 10,000 imperial troops was dispatched under General Ma Yuan. Between 100 and 184 no less than seven outbreaks of violence took place, often calling for strong defensive action by the Chinese.

As Chinese migrants gradually increased, the Yue were gradually forced into poorer land on the hills and in the mountains. Unlike the nomadic peoples of Central Asia, such as the Xiongnu or the Xianbei, however, the Yue peoples never posed any serious threat to Chinese expansion or control. Sometimes they staged small scale raids or attacks on Chinese settlements - termed "rebellions" by traditional historians. The Chinese for their part regarded them as being highly uncivilised and prone to fight one another.

While most Yue peoples were eventually sinicized, the Kam-Tai (Daic): Zhuang, Buyi, Dai, Sui (Shui), Kam (Dong), Hlai (Li), Mulam, Maonan, Ong-Be (Lingao), Thai, Lao, Shan, and Vietnamese peoples retained their ethnic identities. Some of these peoples also have their own nation-states today. In particular, the Vietnamese people broke free from Chinese rule in the 10th century and have their own state to this day.

Legacy of the Yue Peoples: The fall of the Han Dynasty and the succeeding period of division sped up the process of sinification. Periods of instability and war in northern China, such as the Northern and Southern Dynasties and during the Song Dynasty led to mass migrations of Chinese. Intermarriage and cross-cultural dialogue has led to a mixture of Chinese and non-Chinese peoples in the south. By the Tang Dynasty, the term "Yue" had largely become a regional designation rather than a cultural one A state in modern Zhejiang province during the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Period, for example, called itself "Wu-Yue". Likewise, the "Viet" in "Vietnam" (literally, "Viet South") is a cognate of the "Yue".

The impact of Yue culture on Chinese culture has not been determined authoritatively but it is clear that it is significant. The languages of the ancient states of Wu and Yue form the basis the modern Wu language and to some extent the Min languages of Fujian. Linguistic anthropologists have also determined that a number of Chinese words can be traced to ancient Yue words. An example is the word "jiang" (江), meaning river. To some extent, some remnants of the Yue peoples and their culture can also be seen in some minority groups of China and the Vietnamese people retain the identity.

Modern Usage: In modern Chinese, the characters of "越" and "粵" (both yuè) are differentiated. The former is used to refer to the original territory of the Yue Kingdom, the area of what is now northern Zhejiang, southern Jiangsu, and Shanghai, especially the areas around Shaoxing and Ningbo. The opera of Zhejiang, for example, is called "Yue Opera" (yueju, 越劇). The first character "越" is also associated with Vietnam. The second character "粵" (yuè) is associated with the southern province of Guangdong. Popularly called "Cantonese", both the standard form and regional dialects of the Cantonese language(Yue language) are spoken in Guangdong, Guangxi, Hong Kong, Macau and in many Cantonese communities around the world.

 

 

Minyue

Map of Asia, 200 BC

Minyue (閩越) was an ancient kingdom located in today Fujian, Southern China, during Han Dynasty. There lived a mix of multi tribes, namely Baiyue. The state survived roughly from 334 BC to 110 BC. According to Shiji, the founders were of the Yue royal family who fled after the state was defeated by Chu and Qi states in 334 BC.

Minyue was partially conquered by Han dynasty by the end of the 2nd Century BC. However its position (being closed off by mountains) made it almost impossible for the Han people to establish a strong grip over this area. An ancient stone city located in inner mountains of Fujian is said to be the Minyue capital. The nearby tombs show the same funerary tradition as the state of Yue. Hence, it is concluded that the city was a Minyue center.

 

 

閩越國

閩越或稱閩越國，亦有稱為無諸國，其國土大致位於今中國福建省，是中國歷史上戰國時期被楚國所滅的越人、在逃到該地時與當地的百越族原住民所共同建立的一個國家，主體民族為閩越族，存活的時間大致上在西元前333年至西元前110年之間。尤其是西元前202年之後的六、七十年之間，國力達到鼎盛，是當時中國東南一帶勢力最強的國家，閩越王無諸在城村（今福建省武夷山市南邊的興田鎮）所建的王城，也是當時東南一帶規模最大的城市。

背景 : 中國歷史上的戰國(西元前475年-西元前221年)中期，那個由越王勾踐所恢復起來、位於今浙江省紹興一帶的越國，再一次遭到滅國之災。西元前334年，越王勾踐七世孫無彊與楚威王作戰，失敗被殺，越國遂被楚國所滅。越國王族於是航海入閩，越國國民則徙居越遷山(今福建省長樂市)。越族人的體質特徵和生活習慣與中原的華夏族有很大的差別。越人身軀中等、短面、鬚髮少、鼻形廣、眼睛圓而大，習慣傍水而居、好水鬥、善於駕舟行筏、還有「斷髮紋身」的習俗。

失去家園的越人在福建北部定居下來後，與當地原住民逐漸融合成閩越人，建立了閩越國。閩後來也就演變成福建省的簡稱。

古城遺跡的發現: 1958年，閩越古城遺跡正式被發現，並進行了試掘，出土了大量的文物。古城平面似長方形，南北長約860公尺，寬約550公尺，總面積48萬平方公尺。在已發掘的高湖坪，出土了一個大型的宮殿建築群，布局嚴謹，結構完整，底下還舖設了流暢的排水系統。在城內外還發現了多處居住遺址和冶鐵遺址，出土了大量的鐵器、陶器、建築材料和銅器。其中的陶器，無論是形制或紋制，皆與中原的「漢式」陶器截然不同，具有濃厚的地方風格(唐風宋韻網頁 2004b)。

2000年，在閩越王城遺址東南3公里處，又發現了一處古墓。2002年10月，研究人員開始了探索性的挖掘，經考察後，發現這是一處閩越王時期的貴族古墓(唐風宋韻網頁 2004b)。

閩越國君主列表

閩越國君主

稱號	姓名	在位時間	備注
閩越王	無諸	前202年－？	越王勾踐後裔
閩越王	（不詳）	？－？	無諸之子
閩越王	郢	？－前135年	與先代王關係不詳。為余善所殺
繇王	丑	前135年－？	無諸的後裔
東越王 （東越武帝）	余善	前135年－前110年	郢之弟。為居股所殺
繇王	居股	？－前110年	降漢，舉國遷江淮，國除

 

 

閩越人

閩越人是公元前110年以前生活在今天中國福建一帶的居民，是福建的早期原住民，屬於百越的一支。

史學界有觀點認為閩越人是福建最早的的原住民，也有觀點認為閩越人是由越國滅亡後南下入閩的越人和當地七閩居民（或稱古閩族人）融合而成的。

七閩是西周至春秋戰國時期中國南方的古代民族，可能包括了七個部落，最早見於《周禮》的記載，屬於「蠻之別種」。該古民族活動範圍可能是今天的福建，也有人認為還包括了廣東潮州和梅州、浙江溫州和台州，甚至有人認為包括了整個東南中國。七閩文化處於青銅器時代，與當時的中原文明有一定的交流，曾向周朝進貢，但歷史典籍上對他們的記載極其有限。他們可能就是生活於古代福建的原住民古閩族，是閩越人的前身。

公元前306年越國被楚國滅亡後，一部分越國貴族南逃至閩地，與當地居民融合，並臣服於楚國。公元前222年，秦朝統一天下，在閩設閩中郡，當時的閩越王無諸被降為君長。然而閩越之地的實際控制權仍在無諸手中。

陳勝、吳廣起義後，無諸率領閩越人與東甌的搖一起跟從鄱陽令吳芮幫助諸侯消滅秦朝。後來，無諸又率閩越輔佐漢劉邦打敗項羽。漢五年（前202年），劉邦重新立無諸為閩越王，管轄原有區域，建立閩越國，都城設在東冶。後又封搖為東海王，領東甌地。也有人認為搖與東甌也是屬於閩越族的。此後閩越社會經濟文化迅速發展，閩越進入了最強盛的時期。無諸死後，閩越人頻頻挑起對周邊越人國家的戰爭，公元前138年閩越王郢北征東甌，導致東甌民眾棄地徙於江淮間，閩越隨後吞併東甌的地盤，公元前135年又南伐南越未果，導致內亂，漢武帝同時封繇君丑為越繇王，封余善為東越王，閩越形成二王並處。公元前111年余善反漢，漢武帝隨後在公元前110年滅亡閩越，遷徙閩越人到江淮一帶，閩越族於是消亡。也有人認為，仍有相當數量的閩越人殘留在福建，直到後來被入閩的漢人漢化。

 

 

古閩族

約3200年前古閩族使用的陶器，福州閩侯縣黃土侖遺址出土

古閩族是在約從夏商時代到戰國中期這段時期內，即約公元前1000年—前2000年至公元前4世紀時，生活於今天中國福建及鄰近地區的一個原住民族，是福建最早的土著民族，可能就是《周禮》中的七閩，後與越國南下的於越族人融合成閩越族。

分佈與早期情況: 古閩族大約在距今3000年前的夏商時代已經進入青銅器時代，分佈於今日的中國東南沿海以福建為中心的區域，除了福建外，其分布區尚包括廣東東部的潮州、梅州一帶，浙江南部的溫州、處州、台州一帶。部份學者認為古閩族亦分佈在臺灣，甚至認為台灣原住民是其後裔，唯此說未在學界形成主流觀點。

閩的名稱最早見於《周禮》，《周禮·職方氏》中的七閩可能就是指代古閩族。新石器時代，古閩族人在福建沿海和閩江流域發展出了曇石山文化和黃土侖文化等。大約在公元前1200年左右（中原的商代），古閩族人進入青銅器時代，並從事漁獵、原始農業，還擁有一定的陶瓷、紡織和造船技術，蛇則是他們崇拜的圖騰。

文化習俗: 閩族是「蠻」的一種，其服飾有別於越人，可能為「頂髻徒跣」，但沿海的閩族人可能也像越人一樣「斷髮文身」。他們崇拜的圖騰為蛇，這種崇拜被記錄在從上古流傳下來的神話傳說中，甚至在今天福建的一些地方還有殘留。在山區的古閩族人還有崖葬、懸棺葬（即船棺葬）的喪葬習俗。古閩族有著比較發達的鋤耕農業，但並沒有發展到犁耕農業，畜牧業也不發達，社會發展較為緩慢。船隻是他們重要的交通工具。而他們的居住場所經歷了由半地穴式建築到干欄式建築的不同階段特點。

與其他民族的關係: 和古閩族人聯繫比較緊密的民族是於越人，由於地理上的鄰近關係，在越國的越侯允常在位的時代就有於越族人到閩族人的居住地定居。傳說春秋末年的越國歐冶子也到屬於古閩族地域的湛盧山（在今福建松溪縣）和冶山（今福州市鼓樓區）鑄造寶劍，福州現在仍有歐冶池的遺迹。古閩族還曾向中原的周朝進貢，進貢路線往往選擇江海行船運輸，其貢品既包括特產的水果，也包括沿海的水產品，但由於相距太遠，周朝對閩越族並無管轄或控制的能力。到了戰國時期，隨著楚國勢力的擴張，古閩族和楚人也有一定的交流，曾有楚國人進入古閩越族的地界生活，在閩侯庄邊山還出土了戰國時期的楚墓。唐代賈公彥甚至認為楚人和古閩族還有源流關係。

與越人融合為閩越族: 古閩越族和於越族有著長期的交流乃至一定的融合，到了公元前334年（周顯王三十五年、楚威王六年），無彊統治的越國被楚國所滅，越國王室貴族南逃，其中的一支進入古閩族所生活的閩地，並佔據了該地，極大加速了於越族和古閩族的融合，二者最終融合為閩越族，而入閩的越國王室第七代的無諸也於戰國末年自立為閩越王。

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

* Distribution of HLA Gene and Haplotype Frequencies in Taiwan: A comparative study among Min-nan, Hakka, Aborigines and Mainland Chinese by C.K. Shaw, et al.

Abstract: A total of 8,497 blood samples were typed for HLA-A, B, DR and DQ. Of these, 7,137 Min-nan, 714 Hakka, 535 Mainland Chinese (152 from North China, 211 from Middle China, and 172 from South China) and 111 Aborigines were randomly selected from Tzu Chi Taiwan Marrow Donor Registry (TCTMDR). Differences in HLA gene and antigen frequencies have been observed between various ethnic groups of the Chinese population in Taiwan. The phylogenic tree shows Taiwan Aborigines and Javanese cluster together; Min-nan shares a common cluster with Hakka, Southern Hans and Thai; and Northern Hans shares a cluster with Middle Hans. The separation between Northern/Middle and Southern Chinese Hans support the idea that Northern and Southern Chinese have different genetic background. Aborigines appeared to be quite distinct in the distribution of a majority of the class I and class II antigens. High frequency of HLA-A24 (60.4%) and relatively restricted HLA polymorphisms are noted in Aborigines. The HLA haplotypes with high frequency in Aborigines included A24-B60-DRB1*04, A24-B60-DRB1*14, A24-B48-DRB1*04, and A24-B48-DRB1*14, which are different from the other ethnic groups. Although the phylogenic tree separates Aborigines and Han Chinese populations, 4 out of 20 most common HLA-A, -B, and -DR haplotypes presented in both Aborigines and Han Chinese may reflect an ancient common origin or intermixture between early settlers of Han Chinese and Taiwan Aborigines. The results in this study are essentially a summary of the observed gene/haplotype frequencies and differences among various ethnic groups in Taiwan.

 

 

* A Homeland or Hostland? The power and challenges of genetic studies on Austronesian’s expansion by Mutsu Hsu and Shu-Juo Chen

Neighbor-joining (NJ) Tree for the Nine Taiwan AN Populations and Other Asian and African Populations (from Tajima et al. 2003)

(Taiwan Han, Thai)

 

Neighbor-joining Tree of Taiwan AN Populations, East Asians, Southeast Asians and Other Populations Worldwide (from Chu et al. 2001)

(Taiwanese, Buyi, Thai Dai Lue, Thai Dai Dam)

 

 

Thai People

The Thai (or Tai) are the main ethnic group of Thailand and are part of the larger Tai ethnolinguistic peoples found in Thailand and adjacent countries in Southeast Asia as well as southern China. Their language is the Thai language, which is classified as part of the Tai-Kadai family of languages. The term Thai people may also refer to the population of Thailand in general, and not only to ethnic Thais.

The earliest mention of the Thai, as a nation in south China called NAN-JOA (Nanzhao or Nanman), comes from Chinese records dating back to the sixth century BC. These early Thai emanated out of the Yunnan region and dispersed into the general area of what is today Thailand. These Thai peoples arrived in various waves and displaced the earlier native Mon and Khmer populations as they settled the region with a large group settling in Thailand during the Sung period of China roughly around 960 AD. The related Lao people split off from the early Tai-Kadai peoples and moved into Southeast Asia, mainly Laos, while another kindred people, the Shan, made their way into Myanmar.

The founding of the Sukhothai kingdom culminated in the emergence of the first Thai nation-state founded in 1238. Various conflicts in the Chinese-dominated region of Nanchao facilitated increased migration of the Thai, especially mercenaries fleeing from the Mongol conquest of China, and helped establish the Thai as a regional power. Successful wars with the Mon helped to establish the kingdom of Lan Na as the Thai increased their hold in Southeast Asia.

 

 

* The Peopling of the Pacific from a Bacterial Perspective by Yoshan Moodley, et al.

The Distribution of H. pylori Populations in Asia and the Pacific

(16. Thailand: hpAsia2, other)

1. Japan-Hokkaido, 2. Japan-Honshu, 3. Japan-Okinawa, 4. Korea, 5. China-Hong Kong, 13. Vietnam, 14. Singapore, 15. Malaysia, 16. Thailand, 17. Philippines, 18. India - Ladakh, 19. New Caledonia - Melanesians, 20. New Caledonia - Polynesians from Wallis and Futuna, 21. New Zealand, 22. Samoa/Tonga, 23. Australia-Alice Springs, 24. Australia-Jigalong, 25. Australia-Perth, 26. Australia - Torres Strait

 

Global Phylogeny of H. pylori

 

 

Origin and Migrations of Kradai-speaking Peoples

The Tai-Kadai languages, also known as Daic, Kadai, Kradai, or Kra-Dai, are a language family of highly tonal languages found in southern China and Southeast Asia. They include Thai and Lao, the national languages of Thailand and Laos.

The diversity of the Tai-Kadai languages in southeastern China, especially on Hainan, suggests that this is close to their homeland. The Tai branch moved south into Southeast Asia only in historic times, founding the nations that later became Thailand and Laos in what had been Austroasiatic territory.

The study of over 100 East Asian populations including 30 Kadai-speaking peoples had reached the following conclusions.

1. The Tai-Kadai-speaking populations show a great deal of genetic similarity although admixture with local populations did occur after its expansion.
2. A significant proportion of southern Chinese populations carry a signature of Tai-Kadai-speaking populations.
3. Taiwanese Aborigines are more similar to Tai-Kadai-speaking populations than they are to the other Austronesian populations, that is, the Malayo-Polynesians.
4. The clustering of subfamilies of Tai-Kadai-speaking populations correlates well with that based on their genetic similarity indicating limited gene flow between them after their separation.

Tai-Kadai-speaking populations originated in the southern part of East Asia and then migrated northwards and eastwards with Kam-Sui probably being the oldest.

External Relationships: The Tai-Kadai languages were formerly considered to be part of the Sino-Tibetan family, but outside of China they are now classified as an independent family. They contain large numbers of words that are similar in Sino-Tibetan languages. However, these are seldom found in all branches of the family, and do not include basic vocabulary, indicating that they are old loan words (Ostapirat 2005).

Several Western scholars have presented suggestive evidence that Tai-Kadai is related to or a branch of the Austronesian language family. There are a number of possible cognates in the core vocabulary. Among proponents, there is yet no agreement as to whether they are a sister group to Austronesian in a family called Austro-Tai, a backmigration from Taiwan to the mainland, or a later migration from the Philippines to Hainan during the Austronesian expansion.

 

 

Peopling of Thailand

Aside from ethnic groups representing recent expatriate migrations, and the earliest Negrito arrivals, the ethnic groups of Thailand are all believed to be descended from ethnicities associated with clades of Y-DNA Haplogroup O, suggesting an ancient homogeneous ethnicity in China some 35,000 years ago which, over time, spread out and independently evolved into diverse sub-ethnicities, branches of which found their way to Thailand at different points in history, employing different migration routes and modes of transportation, only after being infused with elements of other cultures along the way, via both exposure and inter-breeding. The result is an extremely diverse population of distantly related tribes with a common Asian heritage steeped in ancient tradition.

Negrito: The Mani are an indigenous tribe of southern Thailand, who make their home on the Malay Peninsula. While they speak a Mon-Khmer language, they are not Mon-Khmer people, but rather remnants of an earlier migration into the region. The Mani are the only Negrito people of Thailand.

Being among the least-known of all living human groups, the origins of the Negrito people is a much debated topic. The Malay term for them is orang asli, or original people. They are likely descendants of the indigenous populations of the Sunda landmass and New Guinea, predating the Mongoloid and Australoid peoples who later entered Southeast Asia. Alternatively, some scientists claim they are merely a group of Australo-Melanesians who have undergone island dwarfing over thousands of years, reducing their food intake in order to cope with limited resources and adapt to a tropical rainforest environment. Regardless of the theory of origin, geographically speaking, they probably came to Thailand via the lower portion of the Malay Peninsula, through present-day Malaysia.

Coastal Migration of the Indigenous Mon-Khmer Populations: The Mon-Khmer ethnicities were among the earliest aboriginal populations in Southeast Asia. The arrival of these ethnic groups likely represents the first waves of settlement in Thailand, although considerable inter-Southeast-Asian migration has taken place since their arrival, especially during the prevalence of the Khmer Empire in Thailand. Archaeologists suspect that the Mon-Khmer may have spread through Thailand throughout the metal ages, bringing rice agriculture, metalworking, domestic animals, and the Mon-Khmer languages to the region. They are believed to have spread through Southeast Asia from west to east along the coast, and then subsequently migrated inland along the rivers to the central plains of Thailand, long before the arrival of the now dominant Tai ethnic groups.

Comparative linguistics reveals that the Mon-Khmer are of Austro-Asiatic descent. Genetic research suggests that Y-DNA Haplogroup O2a is the primary marker associated with the Austro-Asiatic ethnicities, suggesting that some 35,000 years ago, the Austro-Asiatic people were homogeneous with the Sino-Tibetan, Austronesian, and Hmong-Mien peoples (prior to the evolution of Y-DNA Haplogroup O into its present clades), sharing a common homeland in central China. The coastal immigration theory suggests that the Mon-Khmer probably first entered Thailand from the northwest, via present-day Burma, where a large population of Mon still exists.

Arrival of Malayic Peoples by Sea: The Malay were historically a sea-faring people, as is evident by their prominence on the islands of Southeast Asia, and they likely settled throughout the region via a mixture of sea and land routes. The Malayic migrations to Thailand took place over a vast expanse of time. The Mon-Khmer probably inhabited the Malay Peninsula prior to or contemporaneous with the Malay people, but long before the Tai came into the region.

It is believed that the ancient Malayic speakers were once part of a greater Malayo-Polynesian people who originated in Philippines and then expanded outwards into Sumatra and later into the Malay Peninsula, establishing substantial settlements in present-day Malaysia. They were part of an earlier Austronesian ethnicity originating on the Island of Formosa (Taiwan). It is believed that the Y-DNA haplogroup O1 is associated with the Austronesian people, thus suggesting that prior to their arrival in Taiwan, they were part of an earlier ethnicity in China which encompassed the Sino-Tibetan and Austro-Asiatic people as well. Archaeological evidence supports this theory, and suggests that the Austronesians may have come to Southeast Asia via boat, south from mainland China through Formosa island after settling for a period of time in mainland China.

Gradual Inland Migration of Tai Peoples from China: The Tai migration from the northern mountains into Thailand and Laos was a slow process, with the Tai generally remaining near to the mountainous regions within the region, where they were able to use their specialized agricultural knowledge relating to the use of mountain water resources for rice production. The earliest Tai settlements in Thailand were along the river valleys in along the northern border of the country. Eventually, the Tai settled the central plains of Thailand (which were covered with dense rainforest) and displaced and inter-bred with the pre-existing Austro-Asiatic population. The languages and culture of the Tai eventually came to dominate the regions of both modern-day Laos and Thailand. In more recent times, many of the Tai tribes of Laos also migrated west across the border establishing communities in Thailand. The Laotian Tai ethnic groups, often referred to as the Lao), are largely clustered in the Isan region of Thailand.

Comparative linguistic research seems to indicate that the Tai people were a proto Tai-Kadai speaking culture of southern China, and that they, like the Malay-Polynesians, may have originally been of Austronesian descent. Prior to inhabiting mainland China, the Tai are suspected to have migrated from a homeland on the island of Taiwan where they spoke a dialect of Proto-Austronesian or one of its descendant languages. After the arrival of Sino-Tibetan speaking ethnic groups from mainland China to the island of Taiwan, the Tai would have then migrated into mainland China, perhaps along the Pearl River, where their language greatly changed in character from the other Austonesian languages under influence of Sino-Tibetan and Hmong-Mien language infusion. The coming of the Han Chinese to this region of southern China may have prompted the Tai to migrate in mass once again, this time southward over the mountains of southern China into Southeast Asia via the mountains of Burma and Laos to the north of Thailand. It is believed that the Tai ethnic groups began migrating southward from China and into Southeast Asia during the first millennium A.D. While this theory of the origin of the Tai is currently the leading theory, there is insufficient archaeological evidence to prove or disprove the proposition at this time, and the linguistic evidence alone is not conclusive. However, in further support of the theory, it is believed that the O1 Y-DNA haplogroup is associated with both the Austronesian people and the Tai.

Over the years, the Tai intermarried and absorbed many of the other populations who co-inhabited and/or politically occupied the region, particularly populations of Mon-Khmer, Burmese, and Chinese descent. This fusion of ethnicity has led to considerable genetic diversity in the modern Thai people, and has resulted in a Tai population significantly different in culture, language and physical appearance from the Tai ethnic groups who remained in China.

 

 

* The Prehistory of the Daic (Taikadai) Speaking Peoples and the Hypothesis of an Austronesian Connection by Roger Blench

Map Showing Hypothetical Expansion of Daic Speakers

 

 

Tai Peoples

The Tai (泰) ethnicity refers collectively to the ethnic groups of southern China and Southeast Asia, stretching from Hainan to eastern India and from southern Sichuan to Laos, Thailand, and parts of Vietnam, which speak languages in the Tai family and share similar traditions and festivals, including Songkran. Despite never having a unified nation-state of their own, the peoples also have historically shared a vague idea of a "Siam" nation, corrupted to Shan or Assam in some places, and most self-identify as "Tai".

Origin of the Tai: Linguist Laurent Sagart recently hypothesized that the proto-Kradai language originated as an Austronesian language migrants carried from Taiwan to mainland China which then was heavily influenced by local languages from the Sino-Tibetan, Hmong-Mien, or other families, borrowing much vocabulary and converging typologically. Much closer to the present, some peoples speaking Tai languages migrated southward over the mountains into Southeast Asia, perhaps prompted by the coming of the Han Chinese to south China.

Linguistic heritage is not synonymous with genetic heritage, because of language shift where populations learn new languages. However, it is believed that the O1 Y-DNA haplogroup is associated with both the Austronesian people and the Tai. The prevalence of Y-DNA Haplogroup O1 among Austronesian and Tai peoples also suggests a common ancestry with the Sino-Tibetan, Austro-Asiatic, and Hmong-Mien peoples some 35,000 years ago in China. Y-DNA Haplogroup O2a is also found at high frequency among most Tai peoples, which is a trait that they share with the neighboring Austroasiatic peoples. Y-DNA Haplogroups O1 and O2a are subclades of O Y-DNA haplogroup, which itself is a subclade of Y-DNA Haplogroup K, a genetic mutation that is believed to have originated 40,000 yeas ago, somewhere between Iran and Central China.

Geographic Distribution: The Tai have historically resided in China, India and continental Southeast Asia since the early Tai expansion period. Their primary geographic distribution in those countries is roughly in the shape of an arc extending from northeastern India through southern China and down to Southeast Asia.

History in China: In China, Kadai languages are mainly distributed in a radial area from the western edge of Yunnan Province to Guangdong and HGuizhou Plateau since ancient times, were called Luoyue, Pu, ainan Provinces. Most speakers live in compact communities. Some of them are scattered among the Han Chinese or other ethnic minorities. The Yue people, who covered a large area in South China in ancient times, were their common ancestors.

Population in China

In southern China, people speaking Kam–Tai (Zhuang-Dong) languages are mainly found in Guangxi, Guizhou, Yunnan, Hunan, Guangdong, and Hainan. According to statistics from the fourth census taken in China in 1990, the total population of these groups amounted to 23,262,000. Their distribution is as follows:

Zhuang is the largest of these languages and also the largest ethnic minority in China, with a population of 15,489,630. The Zhuang live mainly in the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and Wenshan Zhuang and Miao Autonomous Prefecture in Yunnan Province. In addition, there are some Zhuang scattered throughout Lianshan Zhuang-Yao Autonomous County in Guangdong Province, Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture in Guizhou Province and Jianghua Yao Autonomous County in Hunan Province (Zhao Jia 1994).

The Buyi people are mostly found in the south and southwest of Guizhou Province, where there are two autonomous prefectures and three autonomous counties designated for the Buyi and the Miao. There are also Buyi living in the suburban areas of Guiyang (the capital of Guizhou Province), Liupanshui District, Luoping and Maguan counties of Yunnan Province and Ningnan County of Sichuan Province. According to statistics collected in 1990, the total number of Buyi is 2,545,059 (Zhou Guomao et al. 1994). Although the Chinese regard them as a group separate from the Zhuang, a commonly held belief among the Buyi is that they are, indeed, Zhuang.

The Kam (Dong) have a population of 2,514,014, found mainly in counties such as Liping, Rongjiang, Congjiang, Jingping, Sanshui, Tianzhu, Jianhe, Zhenyuan, Chengong of Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture, Yuping, Jiangkou of Tongren Prefecture in Guizhou Province, Xinhuang, Tongdao, Chengbu, Zhijiang, Jingxian, Huitong and Shining etc. in Hunan Province; Sanjiang, Longsheng, Rongshui in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and Enshi Xuan'en, Xianfeng in Hubei Province (Yang Quan et al. 1994).

Hlai (Li), with a population of 1,110,900, is found mainly in the following counties and districts in Hainan Province: Ledong, Dongfang, Baisha, Lingshui, Changjiang, Baoting, Qiongzhong, Sanya, and Tongzha. A few are also scattered throughout Wanning, Tunchang, Chengmai and Ding'an (Wen Mingying 1994).

Dai have a population of 1,025,128, mainly inhabiting Yunnan Province. Most them live in Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture, Dehong Dai and Jingpo Autonomous Prefecture and such autonomous counties as Gengma, Menglian, Yuanjiang, and Xinping. The rest are scattered throughout many districts of Yunnan province (Zhang Gongjin 1994).

Sui (Shui) have a population of 345,993 and live mainly in Sandu Shui Autonomous County of Qiannan Buyei and Miao Autonomous Prefecture in Guizhou Province in some other areas in the counties and districts nearby, such as Libo, Dushan, Rongjiang and Congjiang etc., as well as in Ringshui County in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (Liu Rirong 1994).

Mulam (Mulao) have a population of 159,328, 80% of which lives in Luocheng Mulam Autonomous County in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. The rest are scattered throughout Xincheng, Yishan, Liucheng, Du'an huanjiang, Hechi, Rongshui and Rong'an etc. in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (Qin Xiaohang 1994)

Maonan have a population of 71,968, mainly living in Huanjiang Maonan Autonomous County in Guangxi Autonomous Region, while the rest are scattered throughout Hechi Nandan, Yishan and Du'an etc. in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (Che Rushan 1994). In the early 1990s, about thirty thousand T'en (Yanghuang) people in Pingtang, Huishui, Dushan in Guizhou Province identified themselves as ethnic Maonan (Zhang Min 1991).

Lin'gao, according to statistics from the early 1980s, there are about 500,000 speakers of the Lin'gao language. They live in Lin'gao, Qiongshan, Chengmai, Danxian counties, and the suburban districts of Haikou city in Hainan Province, but at this stage have not been recognized as an individual ethnic group (Ni Dabai 1990).

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is the most common cancer originating in the nasopharynx, the uppermost region of the pharynx or "throat", where the nasal passages and auditory tubes join the remainder of the upper respiratory tract. NPC differs significantly from other cancers of the head and neck in its occurrence, causes, clinical behavior, and treatment. It is vastly more common in certain regions of East Asia and Africa than elsewhere, with viral, dietary and genetic factors implicated in its causation. It is most common in males.

NPC is uncommon in the United States and most other nations, but is extremely common in southern regions of China, particularly in Guangdong accounting for 18% of all cancers in China. It is sometimes referred to as Cantonese cancer because it occurs in about 25 cases per 100,000 people in this region, 25 times higher than the rest of the world. It is also quite common in Taiwan. This could be due to the South East Asian diet which typically includes consumption of salted vegetables, fish and meat. While NPC is seen primarily in middle-aged persons in Asia, a high proportion of African cases appear in children. The cause of increased risk for NPC in these endemic regions is not entirely clear.

 

 

* Is Nasopharyngeal Cancer Really a "Cantonese Cancer"? by JT Wee, et al.

Abstract: Nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is endemic in Southern China, with Guangdong province and Hong Kong reporting some of the highest incidences in the world. The journal Science has called it a "Cantonese cancer". We propose that in fact NPC is a cancer that originated in the Bai Yue ("proto Tai Kadai" or "proto Austronesian" or "proto Zhuang") peoples and was transmitted to the Han Chinese in southern China through intermarriage. However, the work by John Ho raised the profile of NPC, and because of the high incidence of NPC in Hong Kong and Guangzhou, NPC became known as a Cantonese cancer. We searched historical articles, articles cited in PubMed, Google, monographs, books and Internet articles relating to genetics of the peoples with high populations of NPC. The migration history of these various peoples was extensively researched, and where possible, their genetic fingerprint identified to corroborate with historical accounts. Genetic and anthropological evidence suggest there are a lot of similarities between the Bai Yue and the aboriginal peoples of Borneo and Northeast India; between Inuit of Greenland, Austronesian Mayalo Polynesians of Southeast Asia and Polynesians of Oceania, suggesting some common ancestry. Genetic studies also suggest the present Cantonese, Minnans and Hakkas are probably an admixture of northern Han and southern Bai Yue. All these populations have a high incidence of NPC. Very early contact between southern Chinese and peoples of East Africa and Arabia can also account for the intermediate incidence of NPC in these regions.

Excerpt: Before the last ice age, continental Asia extended to Japan and Taiwan through two coastal landmasses known as Tunghailand and Nanhailand (from the Gulf of Tonkin to Japan) and to Borneo and Java through Sundaland (now the Gulf of Siam and Java Sea); now all are under the sea after the rise in sea levels (Figure 3). The original southern China aborigines (protoBaiyue) probably wandered freely along this coastal region, but after the ice age and the following rising sea levels, they became isolated on the islands of Taiwan, Hainan, Borneo, and islandic Southeast Asia. Some of these people were also believed to have migrated north and across the Bering Strait into Alaska, Greenland, and the Americas.

Origins of the Polynesians

 

 

* Cancer Mortality Analysis Among Aborigines in Taiwan by YC Ko, et al.

Abstract: Mortality among Aborigines tribes in Taiwan from malignant neoplasms in the 1971-80 and 1981-90 decades were analyzed. Sex and tribe specific standardized mortality ratios were calculated from death certificate data and compared with the number of expected deaths derived from the cancer mortality of the entire population of Taiwan. Mortality due to oral cancer was statistically significantly higher than expected among Paiwan men in the 1971-80 decade and among Paiwan women from 1971-80 and 1981-90; as was mortality from nasopharyngeal cancer among Bunun, Paiwan and Rukai men from 1981-90 and among Bunun and Paiwan women from 1971-80 and 1981-90; mortality due to stomach cancer among the Atayal, Bunun and Paiwan people from 1971-80 and 1981-90, among Rukai men from 1971-80 and among the Tsou and mixed group women from 1981-90; mortality from liver cancer among Atayal and Bunun men in 1971-80, among Bunun women from 1971-80 and 1981-90 and among Paiwan women in 1981-90; mortality due to nasal cavity, middle ear and paranasal sinuses cancer among Rukai men from 1981-90; and mortality due to bone cancer among Tsou men and Atayal women from 1981-90. Mortality due to colorectal cancer was statistically significantly lower than expected among mixed group men from 1971-80 and in Atayal women from 1981-90; as was mortality from lung cancer among Atayal men and Paiwan women from 1971-80 and among Paiwan and mixed group men in the 1981-90 decade. Overall, the standardized mortality ratio of all cancers in aborigines was a little higher than in the general population of Taiwan. However, differences for ratio or site existed in different tribes.

 

Bunun

 

Paiwan

 

Rukai

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Stevens–Johnson Syndrome

Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are two forms of a life-threatening condition affecting the skin in which cell death causes the epidermis to separate from the dermis. The syndrome is thought to be a hypersensitivity complex affecting the skin and the mucous membranes. Although the majority of cases are idiopathic, the main class of known causes is medications, followed by infections and (rarely) cancers.

Signs and Symptoms: SJS usually begins with fever, sore throat, and fatigue, which is misdiagnosed and usually treated with antibiotics. Ulcers and other lesions begin to appear in the mucous membranes, almost always in the mouth and lips but also in the genital and anal regions. Those in the mouth are usually extremely painful and reduce the patient's ability to eat or drink. Conjunctivitis of the eyes occurs in about 30% of children who develop SJS. A rash of round lesions about an inch across arises on the face, trunk, arms and legs, and soles of the feet, but usually not the scalp.

Medication/Drugs: It can be caused by adverse effects of drugs (allopurinol, Aloprim, Zyloprim, Dilantin, Depakote, Levaquin, diclofenac, etravirine, Isotretinoin, aka Accutane, fluconazole, valdecoxib, sitagliptin, oseltamivir, penicillins, barbiturates, sulfonamides, phenytoin, azithromycin, oxcarbazepine, zonisamide, modafinil, lamotrigine, nevirapine, pyrimethamine, ibuprofen, ethosuximide, carbamazepine, nystatin, and gout medications).

Although Stevens–Johnson Syndrome can be caused by viral infections, malignancies or severe allergic reactions to medication, the leading cause appears to be the use of antibiotics and sulfa drugs.

Medications that have traditionally been known to lead to SJS, erythema multiforme and toxic epidermal necrolysis include sulfonamides (antibiotics), penicillins (antibiotics), barbiturates (sedatives), lamotrigine and phenytoin (e.g. Dilantin) (anticonvulsants). Combining lamotrigine with sodium valproate increases the risk of SJS.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are a rare cause of SJS in adults; the risk is higher for older patients, women and those initiating treatment. Typically, the symptoms of drug-induced SJS arise within a week of starting the medication. People with systemic lupus erythematosus or HIV infections are more susceptible to drug-induced SJS.

SJS has also been consistently reported as an uncommon side effect of herbal supplements containing ginseng. SJS may also be caused by cocaine usage.

Prognosis: SJS proper (with less than 10% of body surface area involved) has a mortality rate of around 5%. The risk for death can be estimated using the SCORTEN scale, which takes a number of prognostic indicators into account. Other outcomes include organ damage/failure, cornea scratching and blindness.

 

 

* Association Between HLA-B*1502 Allele and Carbamazepine-Induced Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions in Han people of Southern China Mainland by Q. Wang, et al.

Abstract: Previous studies have found a strong association between HLA-B*1502 and carbamazepine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome in Asian areas including Taiwan, Hongkong and Thailand. This study explores the association between HLA-B*1502 allele and carbamazepine-induced cutaneous adverse reactions in Han Chinese of southern China mainland, and find the genetic marker that can predict carbamazepine-induced cutaneous adverse reactions. HLA-B*1502 allele genotyping was performed by a polymerase chain reaction-sequence specific primers (PCR-SSP) method in 48 Han Chinese subjects who had carbamazepine-induced cutaneous adverse reactions, including 9 severe cutaneous adverse reaction patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) or toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) and 39 cutaneous adverse reaction patients with maculopapular eruption (MPE). Meanwhile 80 carbamazepine-tolerant controls and 62 healthy individuals were also tested. The frequency of HLA-B*1502 allele among SJS/TEN patients (100%) is significantly higher than carbamazepine-tolerant controls (13.75%, P<0.001) and healthy individuals (17.74%, P<0.001). But the frequency between MPE patients and carbamazepine-tolerant controls (25.64% vs.13.75%, P=0.110) did not have any significant difference. The data showed that HLA-B*1502 allele is strongly associated with carbamazepine-induced SJS/TEN but not MPE in Han Chinese of southern China mainland.

 

HLA-B75

HLA-B75 (B75) is an HLA-B serotype. The serotype identifies certain B*15 gene-allele protein products of HLA-B.

B75 is one of many split antigens of the broad antigen, B15. B75 (B*1502) is associated with a severe drug-induced skin condition in ethnic East Asians.

HLA-B*1502 is associated with Carbamazepine and phenytoin induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome in Chinese and Thai. One study showed a 100% association between B*1502 and the drug induced skin disorder in Chinese. In Europe the B*1502 positive patients are only found in this syndrome of persons of East Asian descent, however B58 confers susceptibility to both groups but to a lesser degree and is sensitive to allopurinol.

 

HLA B*1502 Frequencies

Population	(%)
Philippines Ivatan	22.0
Taiwan Puyuma	18.0
China Guangxi Maonan	14.8
China Yunnan Lisu	12.3
Taiwan Tao	12.0
Singapore Chinese Han	11.6
China Guangzhou	11.0
Hong Kong Chinese	10.2
China Yunnan Nu	9.0
Singapore Riau Malay	8.4
Singapore Javanese Indonesians	8.2
Thailand (3)	8.2
China South Han	7.1
Singapore Thai	6.1
India Khandesh Pawra	6.0
Taiwan Minnan pop 1	5.9
Singapore Chinese	5.7
India West Bhils	4.0
Taiwan Pazeh	3.6
China Guangdong Meizhou Han	3.5
South Africa Natal Tamil	3.1
China Qinghai Hui	2.7
Taiwan Hakka	2.7
Shijiazhuang Tianjian Han	2.4
China North Han	1.9
India Mumbai Marathas	1.9
India North Delhi	1.6
China Beijing	1.5
China Inner Mongolia	1.5
American Samoa	1.0
India North Hindus	1.0
Taiwan Siraya	1.0
Taiwan Tsou	1.0
Ingig. Australian Groote Eylandt	0.7
United Arab Emirates	0.6

 

 

Map of Hong Kong, Taiwan, and the Philippines

 

 

Ivatan People, Philippines (Photo by Anne Jimenez)

 

Puyuma People, Taiwan

 

Tao People, Taiwan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Southern Mongoloid

Map of the Yangtze River (Chang Jiang)

Southern Mongoloid populations are a subgroup of Mongoloid populations, distinguished by older criteria like appearance and craniology, or dental patterns. Genetically Northern Mongoloids are very unrelated to Southern Mongoloids.

In Cavalli-Sforza's genetic clustering work (1988) South Chinese join Southeast Asians in genetic clustering while the North Chinese associate with Koreans, Japanese, Ainu, Bhutanese and Tibetans in genetic clustering. Other Southeast Asians include Malaysian, Viet Muong, Thai, Western Indonesian and Philippine.

Xiao and Cavalli-Sforza (2000) find the boundary between Northern and Southern Mongoloids to approximate the Yangtze River, and suggest that their ancestors arrived from Africa via separate routes. Principal component analysis of gene frequencies of Chinese populations

Other scientists have suggested that the finding of sharp genetic differences between North and South China is an artifact of using an insufficient number of samples. However, Xiao and Cavalli-Sforza (2000) has a larger number of samples than previous studies.

Modern biological evidence from the anthropological textbook Human Species (2003) contradicts earlier theories of which groups were more genetically related to other groups. The Human Species(2003) and Physical Anthropology used the genetic clustering of Cavalli-Sforza (2000) in their publication. Humans are all related. Humanity divided itself into the African and the Eurasian/Oceanic branch. The Eurasian and Oceanic branches are the products of this common origin. The Eurasian branch split into the Amerindian and major East Asian branch. The major East Asian branch divided itself into eastern Russian and the East Asian. The Oceanic branch divided itself into the Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders. According to the Human Species (2003), East Asians generally are more genetically similar to the South Asians than to Southeast Asians, because the Far East and the Indian Subcontinent are members of the Eurasian branch while Southeast Asians (including south Chinese) are members of the Oceanic branch. More interestingly, Asians have very local genetic clusters inside these regions, implying different Asian ethnic groups have not historically intermarried with each other. Examples of localized genetic clusters include Japan, Korea, Mongolia and China which form separate genetic clusters from each other.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

* The Origin of Minnan & Hakka, the So-Called "Taiwanese" Inferred by HLA Study by M. Lin

Abstract: The Minnan and Hakka people groups, the so-called "Taiwanese", are the descendants of early settlers from the southeast coast of China during the last few centuries. Genetically they showed affinities to southern Asian populations as determined by phylogenetic trees and correspondence analysis calculated from HLA allele frequencies. This corresponds historically with the fact that they are the descendants of the southeast coastal indigenous population (Yueh) of China and should therefore not be considered as descendants of "pure" northern Han Chinese. A33-B58-DRB1*03 (A33-Cw10-B58-DRB1*03-DQB1*02), the most common HLA haplotype among "Taiwanese", with a haplotype frequency of 6.3%, has also been found to be the most common haplotype among Thai-Chinese and Singapore Chinese, two other populations also originating from the southeast coast of China. These observations suggest that this haplotype is the most well conserved ancient haplotype of the Yueh (從組織抗原推論閩南人及客家人，所謂「台灣人」的來源 by 林媽利).

 

 

HLA-A33

A33 shows two different distributions that can be discriminated by subtyping capability of SSP-PCR: A*3301 and A*3303.

A*3301 Distribution: The first distribution appears to have a Western distribution that introgresses into Europe as a result of the Post-neolithic periods. It is commonly found in linkage disequilibration within the A*3301-Cw*0802-B*1402 haplotype which can be extended to DRB1 and DQB1 in certain instances. The source of its general expansion appears to be the Middle East or the Levant, as it is found in the Palestinian population. B14 splits into B64 (B*1401) and B65 (B*1402) but the only Arabian people which show both antigens are the United Arab Emirates.

A*3303 Distribution: Certain alleles confound population histories. At the top of that list is A*3303. This allele appears to jump, literally, out of West Africa into South Asia. The point of origin is Africa, most likely central or western Africa given the low levels in East Africa (although much of East Africa is undersampled). In certain tested populations of the Middle East the level of A*3303 is either very low, or non-existent. Within East Africa Sudan appears to be the highest at around 2%. The frequency of A*3303 begins to rise in eastern Arabia (Oman, UAE) and then markedly rise in the Brahui and Balochi of Pakistan.

 

HLA A*3303 Frequencies

Population	(%)
India West Bhils	18.0
Pakistan Burusho	17.9
South Korea (3)	16.3
India West Parsis	14.0
Singapore Thai	13.3
India Mumbai Marathas	13.0
Japan	12.8
Pakistan Baloch	12.7
China South Han	11.5
Singapore Riau Malay	10.9
Singapore Chinese	10.1
Hong Kong Chinese	10.0
Chaoshan	9.8
China Inner Mongolia	9.3
Singapore Javan	9.0
India North Hindus	8.7
Taiwan Minnan	8.3
Taiwan Hakka	8.2

 

 

HLA-B58 (B58)

HLA-B*5801 is involved in allopurinol sensitive drug induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome. Allopurinol is a frequent cause of severe cutaneous adverse reactions, including drug-hypersensitivity syndrome, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN). The association with allopurinol sensitivity in JSJ/TEN was extremely strong in Asia, and somewhat less associated in Europeans.

In East Asians the carbamazepine and phenytoin induced syndrome is strongly associated with (B*1502 allele of HLA-B). A study in Europe suggested that the gene-marker is only relevant for East Asians. Based on the Asian findings similar studies in Europe were performed, sixty-one percent of allopurinol-induced SJS/TEN carried the HLA-B58 (B*5801 allele - Phenotype frequency in Europeans is typically 3%), indicating that while the risk alleles differ between ethnicities, the HLA-B locus is strongly associated or closely linked to a strongly associated gene.

 

HLA B*5801 Frequencies

Population	freq (%)
India Khandesh Pawra	15.0
Taiwan Hakka	10.9
India West Bhils	9.0
China South Han	8.9
China Inner Mongolia	8.8
India North Delhi	8.8
Thailand Northeast	8.4
Thailand	7.7
India Mumbai Marathas	7.4
India Andhra Pradesh Golla	7.2
India New Delhi	6.8
Oman	6.8
Russia Tuva (2)	6.7
South Korea (3)	6.5
Taiwan Siraya	5.9
India North Hindus	5.8
Singapore Riau Malay	5.0
Saudi Arabia Guraiat and Hail	4.6
Iran Baloch	4.0
Taiwan Pazeh	3.6
India West Coast Parsis	3.0
China North Han	2.9

 

 

HLA A*33-B58 Frequencies

Population	freq (%)
Chinese (Thailand)	12.6
Baloch (Pakistan)	11.1
Chaoshan (China)	8.1
Chinese (Singapore)	5.5
Burusho (Pakistan)	4.6
Hui	4.0
Mongolian	3.7
Kalash (Pakistan)	3.6
Korea	3.5
Yaku	3.2
Panthan (Pakistan)	3.0
Tribals (India)	3.0
Baloch (SE Iran)	2.9
Brahui (Pakistan)	2.9
Southern Han	2.8
Thais	2.5
Vietnamese	2.3

 

Baloch

 

Burusho

 

Brahui

 

Kalash

 

HLA-DQ2

HLA-DQ2 (DQ2) is a serotype group within HLA-DQ (DQ) serotyping system. HLA-DQ2 and HLA-DQB1*02 are almost synonymous in meaning. DQ2 β-chains combine with α-chains, encoded by genetically linked HLA-DQA1 alleles, to form the cis-haplotype isoforms. These isoforms, nicknamed DQ2.2 and DQ2.5, are also encoded by the DQA1*0201 and DQA1*0501 genes, respectively.

DQ2 is most common in Western Europe, North and West Africa. Highest frequencies are observed in parts of Spain and Ireland, this distribution correlates with the frequency of two of the most prevalent autoimmune diseases. There is also a increase in DQB1*0201 in Central Asia, peaking in Kazakhstan and declining slowly east to west into China and finally Southeast Asia. DQA1*0501 : DQB1*0201. DQ2.5 is one of the most predisposing factors for autoimmune disease.

 

DQA1-B1 Haplotypes

	Subtype	DQA1	DQB1
DQ2	2.5	0501	0201
	2.2	0201	0202
	2.3	0302	0202

DQ2.5: DQ2.5 and the linked DR3 are associated with probably the greatest frequency of autoimmune occurrence relative to any other haplotypes. The haplotype is positively associated with coeliac disease, dermatitis herpetiformis, juvenile diabetes, Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS), Sjögren's syndrome, and autoimmune hepatitis (although significant proportion of the risk is secondary to coeliac disease). DR3 and/or DQ2.5 are linked to the following diseases: Moreen's ulceration, "bout onset" multiple sclerosis, Grave's disease and systemic lupus erythematosus.

DQ2.2: the haplotype is linked to DR7. A small percentage of coeliac disease are associated with this haplotype, and some disease causing gliadins are presented by DQ2.2. The haplotype is found at high frequencies in the Mediterranean and West Africa. The Eurasian geographic distribution of DQ2.2 is slightly greater than DQ2.5. Compared to DQ2.5, the freqeuncy in Sardinia is low, but in Iberia it is high reaching a maximum frequency of ~30% in Northern Iberia, and half that in the British Ilses. It extends along the Mediterranean and Africa at relatively high frequency and is found in high frequencies in some Central Asian, Mongolians, and Han Chinese. It does not appear to have an indigenous presence in the West Pacific Rim or the New World and DQ2.2 presence in Southeast Asia and Indonesia is likely the result of gene flow from India and China in post-neolithic times. The haplotype shows considerable diversity in Africa and this has translated to Iberia with 2 addition haplotypes, DQA1*0303:DQB1*0202 and DR7:DQA1*0201:DQB1*0303. The expansion of DQ2.2 into Europe appears to have been slightly later or biased by some constriction between Iberia and the rest of the continent.

DQ2.3: It is genetically linked to DR7. By serology DR7-DQ2 cannot discriminate DQ2.2 from DQ2.3 haplotypes, and therefore DQA1 typing is required.

 

HLA DR3-DQ2

HLA DR3-DQ2 is not spread evenly in the among humans. It is has a substantially higher frequency in the western world, except indigenous Native American. It is virtually absent in some Asian populations. Its current world distribution suggest that it spread from Africa with a wave that spread late in human evolution which reached Central Asia more recently, a possibility is that it spread with agrarian cultures that migrated from Africa.

DR3-DQ2 probably originated from Central or West Africa. DQ2.5cis haplotype is the second highest frequency haplotype in the Aka (N. Congo) and several other surrounding groups it is virtually absent in the !Kung. DQ2.5 primarily spread to the northwest and appears to have spread late in global spread of anatomically modern humans. The !Kung and Austronesians are reasonable marker populations earliest (eatward) spread out of Africa and those that spread rapidly, since the ancestors of the !Kung appear to have come from East Africa and share many Cw_B types in common with Austronesians and Northern Eurasians. DQ2.5 is at low frequencies in both of these populations, and it did not spread to Japan or the New World in pre-Columbian times. There is the possibility it spread to Arabia, but through stepwise expansion of small groups was lost from the DQ genetic repertoire.

DQ2.5 appears to be derived from DQ2.2 by gene recombination. One haplotype DQA1*0501:DQB1*0202 can be found in Africa suggesting DQB1*0201 evolved from DQB1*0202. The regions of Africa where DQ2.5 is at its highest frequencies indicate potential sources for western European haplotypes (e.g. Bedoin) but also indicate recent dispersion making precise evolution difficult to interpret. Other evidence for a west African origin/expansion is seen with the probable origin of DQA1*0501 from DQA1*0505, which is at relatively high frequencies in west-central Africa.

HLA DR3-DQ2 Frequencies in Asia: Based on frequencies in Central and East Asia, DR3-DQ2 appears to have spread eastward recently. Of particular interest to the West African/Central Asian comparison, not only is DQ3-DQ2.5 elevated in both places, but a linked HLA A-B haplotype, A33-B58, is found in West Africans and both the A33 and B58 alleles show more allelic and haplotype diversity in West Africa. This similarity would be remarkable if this haplotype came with migrations 50,000 to 130,000 years ago, since considerable equilibration and long range migrations are expected over this time frame. Ironically, there is no convincing route of travel between West Africa and Central Asia suggested by gene frequencies in the peoples between the two. This recent migation hypothesis is supported by HLA-A36 which shows a similar African/Central Asian bimodal distribution. One population that might have been related to this migration are non-caucasians of northern Africa.

DR3-DQ2 is notably higher in W. Mongolia, Kazakhstan and W. China. One eastern haplotype is "A33-B58" and has some punctuated distribution in Western Europe at relatively low levels, and is also in extreme disequilibrium where it is found, elsewhere. In Thailand it is elevated, particularly in the Thai Chinese, but in the south and most parts of Indonesia its frequency is zero. Elevated DR3-DQ2 levels in the Muong suggest a similar North to South spread.

DR3-DQ2 presence in the Koreans and lack thereof in the Japanese suggest a recent spread into Western Pacific Rim of Asia. By HLA, Y chromosome, or mitochondrial DNA the Japanese are about 60-85% of post-Jōmon period Korean origin, and the level of DR3-DQ2 in Japanese is about 1/10th that of Koreans suggesting that DR3-DQ2 did not spread in the Yayoi and that it spread recently with Mongol spread in Eastern Asia, it is rare both east and south of China (except in regions with strong historic migrations of Chinese), rare in Indigenous Austronesians, and isolated Indigeonous American groups.

The Importance of the Estimates: Currently, in assessing diseases like coeliac disease a definite diagnosis is often not possible and statistical considerations are relied upon. The knowledge of frequencies in populations, particularly among ancestors of immigrants can aid patient and physician as to the potential risks. An example, one publication states that the western regions of Ireland have the highest coeliac disease rate in the world. Plotting the frequency of DQ2.5 from any part of Western Europe to the Irish one sees the frequency gradient progressing toward the north and west of Ireland; therefore, a high rate of coeliac disease is not unexpected in Western Ireland. People with many common ancestors from Ireland share similar risks of disease.

In the case of juvenile diabetes a clear distinction of DR3-DQ2 from DR7-DQ2 is necessary because both DR3 and DQ2 confer risk of disease. And DR3-DQ2/DR4-DQ8 individuals who have type 1 diabetes (late onset) are often mistaken for type-2 diabetes.

 

DR3 and DQ2.5 Levels in Asians (%)

Reference	DR17	DRB1	Haplo.	Estimated
Population	(DR3)	0301	DR3DQ2	DQ2.5
Kazakh	13.1			13.1
Uygar (China)	14.0		12.6	12.6
Tsaatan (Mongolia)	12.5			12.5
Khalka (Mongolia)	9.0		11.5	11.5
Australo (N.S.Wales)			11.4	11.4
Iranian	10.0		10.0	10.0
Muong (Viet Nam)	12.7		9.8	9.8
Oold (Mongolia)			8.7	8.7
Jing (China)			8.1	8.1
N.W. Han (China)	7.6		7.6	7.6
Mansi (Russia)		7.4	7.4	7.4
N.India	7.4		7.4	7.4
Iran (Yadz)	5.4		5.4	5.4
Hanoi (Viet Nam)	4.4		4.0	4.0
Buryat (Siberia)		4.0	4.0	4.0
Shangdong (China)			3.6	3.6
Korean		2.9	2.9	2.9

 

Kazakh

 

Uygar

 

Khalka

 

Iranian

 

Frequencies in Europe: In identifying DR3-DQ2 studies of DR3 and DQ8 frequencies, when DQ2.5 frequencies are not clear, are helpful. DQ8 is helpful because of the strong linkage disequilibrium (LD) of the "super B8" haplotype (HLA A1-B8-DR3-DQ2).

European DR3-DQ2 is ancestrally derived from Africa, probably from Southwestern Europe or the Levant (in which DQ2.5 may have undergone negative, coeliac disease, selection during the holocene). Since the last glacial maximum there appears to be two sources of DR3-DQ2. The first, propagating "super b8" is from Iberia into much of western and central Europe. The second, propagating A30-B18-DR3-DQ2, is from Africa into Sardinia, Iberia, France and Italy.

Anti-node in Western Europe. DR3-DQ2 was probably the predominant HLA haplotype in the early holocene Western and Central Europe, archaeological studies of France, particularly of the Paris Basin region indicate a cultural shift that occurs as a result of the neolithic revolution. In this region of France DR3-DQ2 specifically associated with super-B8 forms an anti-node of frequencies, whereas HLA types more common in Italy, Greece and the middle east are more common within this region of France. Other haplotypes indicate this introgression was significant over and the primary wheat farming regions of Europe.

Multiple Nodes. Because of the central location of the anti-node, the center of expansion of DR3-DQ2 with the recolonization of western Europe after the last glacial maximum has been obscured. However, the frequency is still high within the Basque of NE Spain, including some Super-B8 haplotype. The highest frequency of this node is in Western Ireland. Despite its high frequency Ireland is not likely the source of the haplotype in European, but a region that has been least disturbed by the negative selection of wheat culture and migrations. Much of Ireland was covered in glacial ice in the late paleolithic and few exploitable resources. Colonization started about 10500 years ago, whereas neolithization started about 6500 years ago and was dominated by cattle culture with some wheat and minor barley cultivation. The paleontology of Europe during the last glacial maximum suggests that the most likely places of origin are NE Iberia, Southern France and new ice-core evidence suggests that final spread northward probably occurred after Younger Dryas.

 

HLA A33-B58-DR3-DQ2

A33-B58-DR3-DQ2: One haplotype stands out, the A33-B58-DR3-DQ2 haplotype which is found in West Africa, in Sudan, and Pakistan, scattered along West Indias coast, the Turkic republics and appears to have recently introgressed into Korea (post-Yayoi period of Japan) and China. So recent arrival into Asia that the level of HLA DR3-DQ2 in Korea is 2.9%. Korea is the major recent source of Japanese genes, by the Yayoi period that lasted from 3000 to 1600 years ago approximately 3/4ths of Japanese genetic makeup is attributed to this migration. And yet there is trace DR3-DQ2 in the Japanese, none in the Ainu nor many other indigeonous Siberian groups.

 

 

HLA Gene Frenquencies from the Origin of Minnan and Hakka, the So-Called "Taiwanese", Inferred by HLA Study by M. Lin, et al.

	HLA	Minnan	Hakka
DR3-DQ2	DRB1*03	7.4	8.6
	DQB1*02	8.8	10.6

 

 

* The Origin of Minnan & Hakka, the So-Called "Taiwanese" Inferred by HLA Study by M. Lin

Discussion: Because of the high degree of the polymorphism of HLA system, it is a useful genetic marker for the characterization of human populations and analysis of their relationships for anthropological purposes. Differences in the distribution of HLA alleles among various human populations are more marked when compared to other genetic markers. This becomes even more obvious if HLA haplotypes (particular combinations of alleles) are used as an index. It is interesting that many haplotypes were found to have a unique organization of HLA genes that have been well-conserved through thousands of years and also each characteristic haplotype shows a limited regional distribution. Therefore the HLA haplotype is a powerful marker and is useful for surveys among closely related ethnic groups (8). Family studies have been found to be the best method for studying multilocus HLA haplotype distribution in Taiwan, this studies is the first report based on family study in “Taiwanese” (Minnan and Hakka).

A33-B58-DRB1*03 was found to be the most common and also the best conserved A-B-DR three-locus haplotype among “Taiwanese” (6.3%), was exclusively related to the most common five locus haplotype, A33-Cw10-B58-DRB1*03-DQB1*02 (6.3%). Similar to our results, the haplotype A33-B58-DR17 (DRB1*03) was also proven to be the most common haplotype in Taiwan among Minnan (n = 7137, 5.59%) and Hakka (n = 714, 5.10%) by the Tzu Chi Taiwan Marrow Donor Registry as estimated by the maximum likelihood method (7). The three-locus haplotype A33-B58-DRB1*03 has also been found among southeast Asians (Thai-Chinese 7.1%; Singapore Chinese 4.4%) (5) and northern Asians (Han in Urumchi, China 3.5%; Khalha in Mongolia 3.4%; Uygur in Urumchi, China 1.8%; Kazakhs in Urumchi, China 1.8%; Korean 1.2%) (9, 10). The five-locus haplotype has also been found in Thais (Present-day Thais 2.2%; Black Thai 2.8%) (11). It is interesting to note that the HLA-A, B two-locus haplotype A33-B58 among southern Han (n = 138, samples collected in Human and Fuchien) was reported to be only 2.4%, with no significant A-B-DR three-locus haplotype frequency at the 11 IHW (5), while in an earlier report the A33-B17 haplotype frequency among southern Han (n = 844) was 1.53%, and for southern minorities (n = 621) was 1.29% (12). In another report, the haplotype A33-Cw10-B58 was found among northern Han (n = 196, 3.1%), however, the most frequently associated DR gene with this haplotype in northeast Asians is more likely DR13 than DR3 (13), and the distribution of haplotype B58-DR3 was found clearly focused in southeast Asian population (8). Therefore, although three- to five-locus haplotype of A33-Cw10-B58-DRB1*03-DQB1*02 has been found to be distributed among all east and southeast Asians, however, the highest frequencies have been found in “Taiwanese”, Singapore Chinese and Thai-Chinese, and these three populations are presumed to be the descendants on early settlers from the southeast coast of China. Therefore, this haplotype is probably the most well-conserved haplotype among these three populations....

 

Ürümqi or Ürümchi (乌鲁木齐), formerly Dihua (迪化), is the capital of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China, in the northwest of the country.

With an urban population of over 2.5 million people, Ürümqi, whose name means "beautiful pasture" in the Mongolian language of the Dzungar people, is the largest city in China's western interior.

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Celiac Disease

Coeliac disease (spelled celiac disease in North America) is an autoimmune disorder of the small intestine that occurs in genetically predisposed people of all ages from middle infancy onward. Symptoms include chronic diarrhoea, failure to thrive (in children), and fatigue, but these may be absent, and symptoms in other organ systems have been described. A growing portion of diagnoses are being made in asymptomatic persons as a result of increased screening. Coeliac disease is caused by a reaction to gliadin, a prolamin (gluten protein) found in wheat, and similar proteins found in the crops of the tribe Triticeae (which includes other cultivars such as barley and rye). Upon exposure to gliadin, and certain other prolamins, the enzyme tissue transglutaminase modifies the protein, and the immune system cross-reacts with the small-bowel tissue, causing an inflammatory reaction. That leads to a truncating of the villi lining the small intestine (called villous atrophy). This interferes with the absorption of nutrients, because the intestinal villi are responsible for absorption. The only known effective treatment is a lifelong gluten-free diet. While the disease is caused by a reaction to wheat proteins, it is not the same as wheat allergy.

Epidemiology: The prevalence of clinically diagnosed disease (symptoms prompting diagnostic testing) is 0.05–0.27% in various studies. However, population studies from parts of Europe, India, South America, Australasia and the USA (using serology and biopsy) indicate that the prevalence may be between 0.33 and 1.06% in children (5.66% in one study of Sahrawi children) and 0.18–1.2% in adults. People of African, Japanese and Chinese descent are rarely diagnosed; this reflects a much lower prevalence of the genetic risk factors. Population studies also indicate that a large proportion of coeliacs remain undiagnosed; this is due to many clinicians being unfamiliar with the condition.

Populations at increased risk for coeliac disease, with prevalence rates ranging from 5% to 10%, include individuals with type 1 diabetes, and autoimmune thyroid disease, including both hyperthyroidism (overactive thyroid) and hypothyroidism (underactive thyroid).

Genetics: The vast majority of coeliac patients have one of two types of HLA-DQ. This gene is part of the MHC class II antigen-presenting receptor (also called the human leukocyte antigen) system and distinguishes cells between self and non-self for the purposes of the immune system. The gene is located on the short arm of the sixth chromosome and has been labeled CELIAC1.

Over 95% of coeliac patients have the isoform of DQ2 or DQ8, which is inherited in families. The reason these genes produce an increase in risk of coeliac disease is that the receptors formed by these genes bind to gliadin peptides more tightly than other forms of the antigen-presenting receptor. Therefore, these forms of the receptor are more likely to activate T lymphocytes and initiate the autoimmune process. Most coeliac patients bear a two-gene HLA-DQ2 haplotype referred to as DQ2.5 haplotype.

The frequency of these genes varies geographically. DQ2.5 has high frequency in peoples of North and Western Europe (Basque Country and Ireland with highest frequencies) and portions of Africa and is associated with disease in India, but is not found along portions of the West Pacific rim. DQ8, spread more globally than DQ2.5, is more prevalent from South and Central America (up to 90% phenotype frequency).

 

 

HLA-DQ8

HLA-DQ8 (DQ8) is a human leukocyte antigen serotype within the HLA-DQ (DQ) serotype group. DQ8 is determined by the antibody recognition of β8 and this generally detects the gene product of DQB1*0302.

DQ8 is commonly linked to autoimmune disease in the human population. DQ8 is the second most predominant isoform linked to coeliac disease and the DQ most linked to juvenile diabetes. DQ8 increases the risk for rheumatoid arthritis and is linked to the primary risk locus for RA, HLA-DR4. .

DQA1*0301:DQB1*0302 (DQ8.1) is the most common DQ8 subtype representing over 98% of the DQ8 bearing population. DQ8.1 is found almost ubiquitously in every human regional population, but because of its unique distribution it becomes an object of molecular anthropology. There are 3 places where haplotype frequency is elevated, Central and South America, NE Pacific Rim, and Northern Europe.

Global Spread of DQ8: DQ8 along with a few other Haplotypes appears to be split NW/SE in Eurasia and with the evidence for DQ2.5 and other haplotypes suggest an ancient Central Asian population was displaced by a more recent African migration. There are many common markers found in France, Germans, Danes, Swedes, Tibetans, Amur River, Japanese and Koreans that are potential indicators of this bilateral spread. The DQ8 haplotypes is found at high frequencies in the !kung, albeit one expects more DQ8 in Austronesia it is ubiquitously spread if at some times low frequencies, other times higher frequencies (Thai). The path of DQ8 spread to the New World is enigmatic, certainly Japan and Amur River are potent sources, but other displaced populations cannot be ruled out. If the mode of travel was through the Beringia corridor as proposed by archaeologist, the very low frequency of DQ8 at present is a very unusual find with regard to evidence for complete displacement elsewhere in the World. Markers that are shared between Japanese, TW-aboriginals tend to decline in frequency as one approaches Siberia, mtDNA markers decline in the Kuril chain. During the Jōmon period of Japan it appears there would have been displacement by Ninhvet/Ainu ancestors and depression of DQ8 through out northern Japan, but the decline throughout the region is somewhat inexplicable outside of a catastrophic climate event between the settling of the New World and the current time. An alternative model is that there were multiple sources of DQ8 in the peopling of NE Asia, some sources were from central Asia and some from the indochinese region, some of the DQ8 found in NW eurasia could be from an admixture of West pacific Rim and Central Asian sources, and were displaced from the more central regions but not from the more Eastern regions.

High Levels of DQ8 in Northern Europe: DQ8 is also abundant also in Northern Europe and is found at high frequencies in the German-Scandinavian-Uralic population north of Switzerland. HLA A-B haplotypes suggest that a migration from people east of the Urals is responsible for DQ8, possibly from as far east as the West Pacific Rim. The high level of DQ8 and DQ2.5 is something of great interest for DQ mediated diseases of Scandinavia and Northern Europe. DQ8 is also found in Iberia and places were east to west gene flow by other genetic markers cannot be substantiated, and the levels within the African or Middle Eastern population are possible sources, Iberia has considerable A1/B1 equilibration suggesting independent sources from Africa.

DQ8 and Selection: Like DQ2.5, DQ8 might have been under selection for maritime, coastal foraging peoples and in particular for peoples adapted to the climate/habitat situation on the northern end of the habitable west pacific rim at the Last Glacial Maximum. Triticeae (wheat, barley, and rye) cultivation may apply negative selection on DQ8. While there were numerous members of Triticeae species similar to Mid Eastern wild Triticeae in the Americas, and a great number of domesticated plants in the new world, no single species of Triticeae appears to have been domesticated in the New World, and no clear examples in closely related tribes of grasses. Among new world grass species in post Columbian times, one species of Elymus has been domesticated for human consumption and another as a pastoral cultivar. This could be interpreted in 2 ways. First, that levels of DQ8, negatively, inhibited the domestication of Triticeae strains. Second, that the absence of such cultivars more suitable than already developed cultivars allowed DQ8 to rise or remain high, while DQ2.5 levels in NW under much longer term selection have fallen, or a little of both. Most of American cultivars were domesticated south of the Rio Grande river (exceptions are Caddo rice and Texas varigated squash, etc.). Wheat, particularly Barley and Rye are preferential cultivars in cooler climate, whereas Zea (maize) is more adaptive in tropical climates and some cultivars are relatively drought tolerant, Zea however lacks certain amino acids that must be supplimented by other foods to prevent malnutrition. The proximity of neolithization to the Equator in the New World may have much to do with the unapparent negative selection of DQ8 relative to the neolithization of Western Eurasia.

Abundance in Asia - Hiatus of DQ8 in the NE Siberian Arctic, Elevated Levels in Amur Region and Eastern Turks: The levels of DQ8 in SW to West Pacific Rim are at variable haplotype frequencies, from 2 to 30%, and level off around 10% for Ryūkyūan, Japanese, Koreans, Amur (黑龍江) Regions and in the NW Pacific Rim drop to less than 1% in the Nivkhi. There is a modern hiatus of DQ8 in the Alaska-Eastern Siberian region and it is unclear whether this is due to replacement, selection, or the mode in which first Americans arrived (i.e strictly maritime route). The DR types associated with DQ8 are DRB1*0403, *0404, *0406, *0407, *0408, and *0401 is split between many DQA1:B1 haplotypes. The Cook Island DQ8 had only one associated DR haplotype suggesting diversity limiting introduction into the region, either via the TW-(Japan/Korea/China) route or through the west, for example the Bunun have high DRB1*0403. The majority of DRB1*04 appear to have redistributed from eastern Asia from an unknown source, possibly in Central Asia or India. The distribution can be compared with Native Groups such as South Americans. Three groups with high levels, the Kogui, Sikuni, and Yucpa, have about 75% DQ8, the dominant DRB1* allele in 2 of 3 is the *0411 (N. China = 0), but *0407 (Ryūkyū, Japanese, Mansi-Eastern Ural, Naxi Chinese) and *0403 (Nganasan, Buryat, Negidal, Tunisians, Ryūkyū, Korea, Ainu) are also found. In North America DRB1*0404 and *0407 are more common than *0403 and, in the Lakota Souix, B1*0411 is rare. The DRB1*0404-DQ8 haplotype is more common in North Western Asia, and Northern Europe.

 

DQB1 *0302 levels in the Asia
(given as frequency in %)

Reference Population	DQB1 *0302
Cook Isl. (Pacific)	25.0
Negidal (Siberia)	18.6
Kazahk	11.4
Uyghur, Urumqi (China)	11.4
Nganasan (Siberia)	11.4
Japanese	10.8
South Korea	10.3
Ket, Yenisey (Siberia)	8.4
Thais	7.4
Khalkha (Mongolia)	6.1
China Beijing and Xian	6.1
Shandong Han (China)	3.1
Ainu (Japan)	3.0
Naxi (Lijiang, China)	2.7
Yao (China)	2.6
Madang (Papua New Guinea)	1.5
Khoton (Mongolia)	1.2
Zorastra, Yadz (Iran)	0.8

 

 

HLA Gene Frenquencies from the Origin of Minnan and Hakka, the So-Called "Taiwanese", Inferred by HLA Study by M. Lin, et al.

	HLA	Minnan	Hakka
DQ8	DQB1*0302c	19.4	7.6
	DQB1*0302d	7.4	7.6

*0301c:0311-012/04/09/10, *0302d:0302/05/07-08

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Min Language

Chinese Language Tree from glossika.com

Mǐn or Miin (閩語) is the name of a broad group of Chinese dialects spoken by 45 million people in the southeastern Chinese province of Fujian as well as by migrants from this province in Guangdong (around Chaozhou-Swatou, or Chaoshan area, and the Leizhou peninsula), Hainan, three counties in southern Zhejiang, and Zhoushan archipelago off Ningbo, and Taiwan. There are many Min speakers also among overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia. The most widely spoken variety of Min is Hokkien, which includes Taiwanese and Amoy, amongst other dialects. The Min dialects preserve many of the archaic pronunciations of Old Chinese and Middle Chinese.

Varieties of Min Dialect: Min has greater dialectal diversity than any other division of Chinese. It is typically divided, on the basis of mutual intelligibility, into five to nine languages, such as Min Dong (Eastern Min) and Min Nan (Southern Min). Min Dong is centered around the city of Fuzhou (Fuzhou dialect is the standard dialect of Min Dong), capital of Fujian province, while Min Nan is dominant in the south of Fujian and into Guangdong. Qiongwen, spoken in Hainan, is sometimes classed as a separate language, but often seen as a dialect of Min Nan.

Min Nan is also called by the name of its regional variants in the places it is spoken, especially Taiwanese. The Amoy dialect of Xiamen is the prestige dialect of Min Nan in mainland China, with Teochew also being an important variety. Teochew has low intelligibility with Hokkien Minnan, having fewer words in common with them than German has with English.

The Southern Min language in Guangdong is known as Hoklo, in Hainan as Qiong Wen or Qiongzhou hua (though some class Qiong Wen as a separate sub-group). Min Nan is the dominant Chinese dialect spoken by the Chinese minority in the Philippines, where it is known as Lan-nang. In Taiwan, Minnan is known as Hō-ló-oē and is spoken by the majority of the population as their native language. In Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and other areas in Southeast Asia, Minnan is known as Hokkien, in addition to the Teochew variant, originating in the Chaoshan region, which is the ancestral home of many ethnic Chinese in Singapore.

 

 

* 分子人類學所見歷史上閩越族群的消失 by 李輝

現代福建的人群主要是漢藏語系漢語族齊語支的漢族群體，因為齊語支現在主要分佈在福建，所以也叫閩語支。齊語支是漢語三大語支之一，形成於河南東部到山東一帶，可能是漢語在東夷語的影響下形成的。福建的齊語支起源較早。因為發現閩語中有許\多特徵保留著漢代的漢語音韻樣式，所以可能是漢代來到福建的。如果是這樣的話，就和閩越族被強制移民的時間相吻合了。

 

Zhou Dynasty -- Qin Dynasty -- Guan Dong Yu -- Zhong Yuan Yu --Min -- Min -- Min (Fujian)
Zhou Dynasty -- Qi State (齊國) -- Qi -- Qi -- Min -- Min -- Min (Fujian)

 

 

Qi State

Qi State: Qi (齊國) was a powerful state during the Spring and Autumn Period and Period of the Warring States. Its capital was Linzi, which is part of the present city of Zibo in Shandong Province.

Qi was founded around 1046 B.C. as one of the many states of the Zhou Dynasty. The first ruler appointed for Qi is Jiang Shang, the most powerful official during that time. The Jiang family (姜) ruled Qi for several centuries before it was replaced by the Tian family (田) in 384 BC (田氏代齊). In 221 BC, Qi was the last state of pre-Imperial China to be conquered by the State of Qin, the final obstacle which allowed the Qin Dynasty to consolidate the first centralized and imperial empire over China.

Lord Huan of Qi (齊桓公, died 643 BC) was the best-known ruler of the state of Qi in the Spring and Autumn Period. His personal name was Jiāng Xiǎobái (姜小白) . Lord Huan of Qi appointed Guan Zhong (管仲, given name Yíwú, 夷吾), the famous thinker and economist, as his prime minister, and adopted Guan's thoughts and policies to administer his country, reform the economic system and develop relations with other states, After scores of years, Qi became the strongest state for its economic and military strength, and was named as the "state with one thousand chariots" and the "head of the five strongest states". The culture and education undertakings were rather developed in Qi. Both poetry and music were of high level. Linzi District remained its capital for as long as 638 years, and was the biggest city in the orient.

The Silk Road, prosperous through the Han (漢朝; 206 BC–220 AD) and Tang Dynasties (唐朝; 618 AD–907 AD) is the famous passageway in China's history for economic and cultural exchange between East and West. As a result of textual research, Shandong area, with Zibo as its center, was the major place of silk supply at that time, and was one of the origins of the "Silk Road".

Shandong is the second most populous province of China, after Henan, with a population of almost 92 million. Over 99% of Shandong's population is Han Chinese. Minority groups include the Hui and the Manchus. Shandong is also known as having highest average height of any Chinese province.

臨淄，古稱營丘，秦漢時作臨菑。相傳上古時期的伏羲、顓頊曾在這裡活動。此後為爽鳩氏、蒲姑氏等部族的聚居地。公元前約1046年，周朝建立後，周武王把首席功臣姜尚（姜太公）分封於此，建立了侯國齊國，定都營丘。六世齊胡公遷薄姑。七世齊獻公遷回營丘，因其地臨淄水，遂改名為臨淄，此後臨淄之名一直延用至今。

齊國是有周一代東方第一大國，春秋戰國時為「五霸」之首、「七雄」之一，因此臨淄作為其都城，歷史上極為繁榮。目前臨淄齊國故城的城址尚存，分民眾生活的大城和國君居住的小城，兩城相連，周長21公里，面積15平方公里，共有十三座城門。城內幹道縱橫交錯，排成「井」字形，並有完善的供水、排水系統。城外還有埋葬齊國六位君主的田齊王陵等多處先秦墓葬。

東周時的臨淄人物阜盛，齊相國管仲著《管子》。孔子曾來此聞韶樂，孟子也曾為齊王擔任客卿。莊子曾被齊湣王聘為相。戰國時臨淄設稷下學宮，以招徠諸子百家來此講學辯論、著書立說，荀子即為稷下的祭酒之一。遊學於此的還有騶衍、宋鈃、尹文、彭蒙、田駢、慎到等，號為稷下學派。當時的臨淄鄰近渤海，因而兼具魚鹽之利，經濟繁榮、貿易發達，各種冶鐵、煉銅、鑄錢、制陶、紡織的作坊遍布城市內外。

臨淄作為齊國的都城，共延續了八百餘年歷史，直到被秦國所滅。秦置臨淄縣，屬齊郡。兩漢時，臨淄為五都之一。漢高祖劉邦封韓信為齊王，都臨淄。韓信死後，高祖將長子劉肥封於臨淄，建齊國，轄七十餘城。文帝時將齊國一分為七。據史載，當時的臨淄約有十萬戶人家，依然是東部地區最大的城市。及至晉代，臨淄多遭兵禍，政權更迭頻繁，其中南燕曾短暫地建都於此。此後臨淄在青州的地位被益都所取代。南北朝後的歷代，臨淄先後屬齊郡、青州、益都府、益都路、青州府等管轄。元末原城址被廢棄，而在東南部另築新城，即今臨淄城區。

戰國時，齊國臨淄即為東方工商業中心之一。在漢代，齊郡號為“冠帶衣履天下”。臨淄與陳留襄邑（今河南睢縣一帶）為全國兩大官辦紡織業中心。西漢時，少府在臨淄設立了三服官，以生産刺繡、紈素（魏晉以後謂之絹）、縑、綾為主。刺繡在漢代是非常昂貴的織品，價格在錦之上，大約是一般繒帛的二十餘倍。“齊細繡文，上價匹二萬，中萬，下五千也”。時人稱：“齊郡世刺繡，恆女無不能；襄邑俗織錦，鈍女無不巧。”齊郡出產的紈素亦知名于世，其上品為冰紈，極爲潔白細密，《文選》所收古詩《怨歌行》有“新裂齊紈素，皎潔如霜雪”之句。東漢章帝時，曾下令齊國服官“省冰紈方空彀吹綸絮”。新疆曾出土漢代齊郡出產的絹疋，標明了產地、規格，作為商品銷往西域或外國。漢元帝時，諫大夫貢禹上書說：“故時齊三服官輸物不過十笥，方今齊三服官作工各數千人，一歲費數巨萬”，足見其規模之大。

漢代齊郡制陶業也有所發展。窩托村西漢齊王陵出土的陶器主要為禮器和日用陶器。金嶺東漢齊王墓則出土了不少陶製明器，有陶樓、陶屋、陶井、圈竈等，器形高大，工藝較為複雜。

臨淄故城遺址內有多處冶鐵和鑄銅作坊遺址。漢代鐵官即設于大城東南一帶，有“齊鐵官丞”、“齊採鐵印”等封泥出土。大城東北的鑄錢遺址曾出土半兩、五銖及新莽大泉五十的錢範。

* Videos: 臨淄中國古車博物館, 山東淄博「東周殉馬坑」

 

 

* The Ancestor of Zhou Dynasty's Royal Family, 后稷 by China History Forum

Excerpt: 姜 Jiang was a great clan in pre-Qin China. They helped the forming of Zhou dynasty and were given several states to rule. The famous state in the Spring and Autumn period and the Warring State period, 齊 (Qi State), was one of the 姜 (Jiang) states. They were also famous for their tall and fair women. A few famous Zhou dynasty beauties came from this clan, and not a few poems were written about them in the Book of Poems. The Zhou’s royal families of 姬 Ji and the families of 姜 Jiang frequently married each other. This custom was based on the ancient marriage traditions that two clans would establish the marriage relationship and married each other throughout the generations. Later on, the so-called “親上加親”(closeness added on closeness) in Chinese culture of marrying cousins at the mother’s side of family was the extension of this old custom. This custom was practiced till modern era.

Many scholars believed that 姜 (Jiang) belonged to the ethnic group of 羌 (Qiang) and probably was originally a nomadic tribe. Zhou people also claimed that they were originally descendents of 夏 Xia people and they lived (mixed) among the 戎 (rong – ancient tribes at the west of China) and 狄 (di – ancient tribes at the north of China) and had close relationships with 羌 (qiang) people.

 

* 中 華 百 家 姓 一 覽 by greatchinese.com

「姓氏」在現代漢語中是一個詞，但在秦漢以前，姓和氏有明顯的區別。姓源於母系社會，同一個姓表示同一個母系的血緣關係。中國最早的姓，大都從「女」旁，如：姜，姚，姒，媯，嬴等，表示這是一些不同的老祖母傳下的氏族人群。而氏的產生則在姓之後，是按父系來標識血緣關係的結果，這只能在父權家長制確立時才有可能。因此，當我們讀到「黃帝軒轅氏，姬姓」以及「炎帝列山氏，薑姓」時，可以明白，中華民族共同始祖炎黃二帝原分屬兩個按母系血緣關係組織起來的部落或部落聯盟，一姓薑，一姓姬，而他們又分別擁有表示自己父權家長制首領的氏稱;列山，軒轅。姓和氏有嚴格區別又同時使用的的局面表明，母權制已讓位於父權制，但母系社會的影響還存在，這種影響一直到春秋戰國以後才逐漸消亡。

 

 

Ancient DNA from Linzi (Yixi), Shandong Peninsula

* Molecular Genetic Analysis of Remains of a 2,000-year-old Human Population in China-and Its Relevance for the Origin of the Modern Japanese Population by H. Oota, et al. (1999)

Abstract: We extracted DNA from the human remains excavated from the Yixi site (approximately 2,000 years before the present) in the Shandong peninsula of China and, through PCR amplification, determined nucleotide sequences of their mitochondrial D-loop regions. Nucleotide diversity of the ancient Yixi people was similar to those of modern populations. Modern humans in Asia and the circum-Pacific region are divided into six radiation groups, on the basis of the phylogenetic network constructed by means of 414 mtDNA types from 1, 298 individuals. We compared the ancient Yixi people with the modern Asian and the circum-Pacific populations, using two indices: frequency distribution of the radiation groups and genetic distances among populations. Both revealed that the closest genetic relatedness is between the ancient Yixi people and the modern Taiwan Han Chinese. The Yixi people show closer genetic affinity with Mongolians, mainland Japanese, and Koreans than with Ainu and Ryukyu Japanese and less genetic resemblance with Jomon people and Yayoi people, their predecessors and contemporaries, respectively, in ancient Japan."

 

* Genetic Structure of a 2,500-Year-Old Human Population in China and Its Spatiotemporal Changes by Li Wang, et al.

A Neighbor-joining Tree for 19 Human Populations

Abstract: To examine temporal changes in population genetic structure, we compared the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences of three populations that lived in the same location, Linzi, China, in different periods: 2,500 years ago (the Spring–Autumn era), 2,000 years ago (the Han era), and the present day. Two indices were used to compare the genetic differences: the frequency distributions of the radiating haplotype groups and the genetic distances among the populations. The results indicate that the genetic backgrounds of the three populations are distinct from each other. Inconsistent with the geographical distribution, the 2,500-year-old Linzi population showed greater genetic similarity to present-day European populations than to present-day east Asian populations. The 2,000-year-old Linzi population had features that were intermediate between the present-day European/2,500-year-old Linzi populations and the present-day east Asian populations.

Result: The smallest genetic distance for the present-day Linzi population was that from the Mongols, followed by those from mainland Japanese and Koreans. Surprisingly, the three smallest genetic distances for the 2,000-year-old Linzi population were from the present-day central Asian populations: the Kirghiz (Sary-Tash), followed by the Kazakh and the Uighurs. Even more surprisingly, the three smallest genetic distances for the 2,500-year-old Linzi population were from the Turkish, Icelander, and Finnish, rather than from the east Asian populations.

 

* Reconstructing the Evolutionary History of China: A Caveat About Inferences Drawn from Ancient DNA by Yong-Gang Yao, et al. (2003)

Abstract: The decipherment of the meager information provided by short fragments of ancient mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is notoriously difficult but is regarded as a most promising way toward reconstructing the past from the genetic perspective. By haplogroup-specific hypervariable segment (HVS) motif search and matching or near-matching with available modern data sets, most of the ancient mtDNAs can be tentatively assigned to haplogroups, which are often subcontinent specific. Further typing for mtDNA haplogroup-diagnostic coding region polymorphisms, however, is indispensable for establishing the geographic/genetic affinities of ancient samples with less ambiguity. In the present study, we sequenced a fragment (982 bp) of the mtDNA control region in 76 Han individuals from Taian, Shandong, China, and we combined these data with previously reported samples from Zibo and Qingdao, Shandong. The reanalysis of two previously published ancient mtDNA population data sets from Linzi (same province) then indicates that the ancient populations had features in common with the modern populations from south China rather than any specific affinity to the European mtDNA pool. Our results highlight that ancient mtDNA data obtained under different sampling schemes and subject to potential contamination can easily create the impression of drastic spatiotemporal changes in the genetic structure of a regional population during the past few thousand years if inappropriate methods of data analysis are employed.

 

* Reanalysis of Eurasian Population History: Ancient DNA Evidence of Population Affinities by C.C. Bennett, F.A. Kaestle (2006)

Abstract: Mitochondrial hypervariable region I genetic data from ancient populations at two sites in Asia-Linzi in Shandong (northern China) and Egyin Gol in Mongolia-were reanalyzed to detect population affinities. Data from 51 modern populations were used to generate distance measures (F^sub ST^'s) to the two ancient populations. The tests first analyzed relationships at the regional level and then compiled the top regional matches for an overall comparison to the two probe populations. The reanalysis showed that the Egyin Gol and Linzi populations have clear distinctions in genetic affinity. The Egyin Gol population as a whole appears to bear close affinities with modern populations of northern East Asia. The Linzi population seems to have some genetic affinities with the West, as suggested by the original analysis, although the original attribution of "European-like" seems to be misleading. We suggest that the Linzi individuals are potentially related to early Iranians, who are thought to have been widespread in parts of Central Eurasia and the steppe regions in the first millennium B.C., although some significant admixture between a number of populations of varying origin cannot be ruled out. We also examine the effect of sequence length on this type of genetic data analysis and discuss the results of previous studies on the Linzi sample.

Results:

Table 4 contains the comparisons of the Linzi and Egyin Gol samples to East and Central Asia .... The top half of the Linzi list is dominated by Southeast Asians, southern Chinese, and Central Asians. The lower half is dominated by northern Asians (save for the lowland Kirghiz and Akha). It is not clear how and why both Southeast Asians (and southern Chinese) and Central Asians are similar to the Linzi population, although this is only a relative comparison within the region. However, there is some debate over the nature of ancient East Asian genetic history, so possibly there are issues here that have yet to be illuminated ....

Table 5 is the total comparison of modern populations to Linzi and Egyin Gol from a composite of the top matches from each region, .... As for the Linzi individuals, they seem to be most highly related to Near Easterners (Turks, Iranians, and Iraqis), Armenians, and Eastern Europeans (Slavs, Hungarians), although others, such as Catalans and Iraqis, are mixed in. The Icelanders are twelfth on this list. The high placement of the Vietnamese may be an anomaly, error, or some element of ancient genetic history that is not clear ....

 

* Mitochondrial DNA Analysis of Yayoi Period Human Skeletal Remains from the Doigahama Site by Kazunari Igawa, et al.

Excerpt: The 2500-year-old Linzi population (group I: 15%, group II: 6%, group III: 3%, group IV: 65%, group V: 3%, group VI: 9%) resembled the 2000–2300-year-old Doigahama Yayoi population with respect to the high frequency for group IV. It was suggested that there were phylogenetically similar populations in China and Japan during the ancient period, from 2500 to 2000 years ago.

On the other hand, the low frequencies of group IV in the modern East-Asian populations were reported by Wang et al. In addition, their study indicated that the 2500-year-old Linzi populations showed less genetic resemblance to modern East-Asian populations. These findings suggest that more than one ancient population, which had different phylogenetic characteristics from modern East-Asian populations, existed in the past in East Asia. This is informative for estimating the phylogenetic relationships among ancient East-Asian populations. The resemblance between the ancient populations in China and Japan might support the notion that ancient China is the place from which the Doigahama Yayoi population immigrated. The amount of genetic data is still not sufficient enough to discuss the phylogenetic relationships among the ancient East-Asian populations. Further genetic studies are required to shed light on the phylogenetic relationships among the ancient East-Asian populations.

 

Geographicl Distribution of HVI Sequence Types Observed in Doigahama Yayoi Specimens

Individual Number	Sharing Populations (number of individuals)
1, 124, 1601	Vietnam (1)
1301, 1405, 1406, 1903, 88A	Thai (15), China Nei Mongol (11), China Xinjiang (11), China Hainan (10), China Yunnan (8), Vietnam (7), China Guizhou (6), Russia Buryat (6), Japan Okinawa (4), China Shandong (3), China Shanghai (2), Indonesia (1), China Bouyei (1), China Dai (1), Taiwan Yami (1) and other China (2)
914, 1604	China Guangxi (4), China Nei Mongol (4), China Guizhou (2), China Xinjiang (2), Taiwan Chinese (1), China Hubei (1), and other China (1)
1904	China Xinjiang (1)
1305	China Yunnan (7), China Shandong (4), Japan mainland (3), China Hainan (3), Thai (3), China Liaoning (2), China Guangxi (2), Russia Nivhi (2), South Korea (1), Taiwan Chinese (1), Indonesia (1) and other China (4)
913	Not found in East-Asian Population

 

 

Ancient Iranian peoples who settled Greater Iran in the 2nd millennium BC first appear in Assyrian records in the 9th century BC. They remain dominant throughout Classical Antiquity in Scythia and Persia.

The Iranian languages form a sub-branch of the Indo-Iranian sub-family, which is a branch of the family of Indo-European languages. Having descended from the Proto-Indo-Iranians, the Proto-Iranians separated from the Indo-Aryans around in the early 2nd millennium BC. The Proto-Iranians are traced to the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, a Bronze Age culture of Central Asia. The area between northern Afghanistan and the Aral Sea is hypothesized to have been the region where the Proto-Iranians first emerged, following the separation of Indo-Iranian tribes.

By the 1st millennium BC, Medes, Persians, Bactrians and Parthians populated the Iranian plateau, while others such as the Scythians, Sarmatians, Cimmerians and Alans populated the steppes north of the Black Sea. The Saka and Scythian tribes remained mainly in the south and spread as far west as the Balkans and as far east as Xinjiang.

 

Map of the Balkans

 

Map of Xinjiang

新疆自古就有人類活動的跡象，為中亞諸多民族活動的場所。新疆最早的居民是屬塞種，後受漢人，突厥人，回鶻人壓力,只分布於中亞,代表性民族是斯基泰人。他們發展出發達的游牧文化。公元前一世紀新疆大部被漢朝第一次納入中國的版圖。六世紀後，人種和語言才逐漸回鶻化。11世紀後開始出現穆斯林民族； 而11世紀後新疆開始穆斯林化後，經歷過一些列大大小小國家政權統治，現在屬於中華人民共和國新疆維吾爾自治區。

上古文明

• 考古發現新疆的上古文明可能由塞種人創造，也是媒體中經常提及的西域印歐人。如《史記 大宛列傳》和《漢書 西域傳》中記載的樓蘭古國，早在前2世紀以前，樓蘭就是西域一個著名的「城廓之國」。它東通敦煌，西北到焉耆、尉犁，西南到若羌、且末。古代「絲綢之路」的南、北兩道從樓蘭分道。《漢書·張騫傳》：「月氏已為匈奴所破，西擊塞王。塞王南走遠徙，月氏居其地。」斯基泰即古伊朗碑銘及希臘古文獻中所載Sacae（Sakas）。公元1世紀， 月氏迫使斯基泰向西南遷徙，跨過錫爾河，到達河中地區的粟特地方。
• 龜茲，前272年印度阿育王勢力擴展到龜茲（今新疆阿克蘇地區和巴音郭楞蒙古自治州部分地區），阿育王賜龜茲為太子法益封地。
• 康居,古代生活在中亞地區(包括新疆西部)的游牧民族，活動範圍主要在今哈薩克南部及錫爾河中下游。公元前2世紀，控弦者八九萬人；前1世紀末年，人口達六十萬，擁有軍隊十二萬，以卑闐城為中心（今塔什干或奇姆肯特）。和所有游牧民族一樣，康居人隨季節的變化而遷徙。冬季他們南下於錫爾河一帶，夏季北上至「蕃內」，兩地相距數千里之遙。他們是伊朗人種。康居本身是突厥與斯基泰人的一聯盟，現在愈來愈多人認為他們與蒙古時期的康里人有關，他們也成為哈薩克汗國大玉茲的主體。他們與烏孫構成聯盟，是哈薩克人的重要族源
• 月氏,公元前3世紀至公元1世紀 住在北亞，並經常與匈奴發生衝突，其後西遷至中亞。

 

 

* Phylogeographic Differentiation of Mitochondrial DNA in Han Chinese by Yong-Gang Yao, et al.

PC Map of the mtDNA Data (with respect to the basal haplogroup profiles) of 13 Regional Han Samples

(Taiwan-2 clusters with Xinjiang, Shanghai)

 

 

Scythians

The Scythians (斯基泰人) or Scyths were an Iranian speaking people of horse-riding nomadic pastoralists who dominated the Pontic steppe throughout Classical Antiquity. By Late Antiquity the closely-related Sarmatians came to dominate the Scyths in this area. Much of the surviving information about the Scyths comes from the Greek historian Herodotus (c. 440 BC) in his Histories, and archaeologically from the exquisite goldwork found in Scythian burial mounds in Ukraine and Southern Russia

The name "Scythian" has also been used to refer to various peoples seen as similar to the Scythians, or who lived anywhere in a vast area covering present-day Ukraine, Russia and Central Asia — known until medieval times as Scythia. The name was also used among early scholars studying the Proto Indo-Europeans, and within the framework of the Kurgan hypothesis the Scythians are considered a reasonable analogue for their Proto Indo-European ancestors.

Scholars generally classify the Scythian language as a member of the Eastern Iranian languages, and the Scythians as a branch of the ancient Iranian peoples expanding into the steppe regions north of Greater Iran from around 1000 BC.

Asians, especially Persians, knew the Scythians in Asia as Sakas. The Indo-Scythians had the name "Shaka" in South Asia, an extension on the name "Saka".

Ruled by small numbers of closely-allied élites, Scythians had a reputation for their archers, and many gained employment as mercenaries. Scythian élites had kurgan tombs.

In Late Antiquity the notion of a Scythian ethnicity grew more vague, and outsiders might dub any people inhabiting the Pontic-Caspian steppe as "Scythians", regardless of their language. Thus, Priscus, a Byzantine emissary to Attila, repeatedly referred to the latter's followers as "Scythians". In Attila's regime Edekon was the king of Scythians.

The Goths had displaced the Sarmatians in the 2nd century from most areas near the Roman frontier, and by early medieval times, the Turkic migration marginalized East Iranian dialects, and assimilated the Saka linguistically.

Archaeological remains of the Scythians include kurgan tombs (ranging from simple exemplars to elaborate "Royal kurgans" containing the "Scythian triad" of weapons, horse-harness, and Scythian-style wild-animal art, gold, silk, and animal sacrifices, in places also with suspected human sacrifices. Mummification techniques and permafrost have aided in the relative preservation of some remains. Scythian archaeology also examines the remains of North Pontic Scythian cities and fortifications.

Carbon-14 dating of kurgans has allowed archaeologists to trace their emergence in the Sayan-Altay area from about 3,000 BC, and their westward spread starting about 900 BC

Some of the first Bronze Age Scythian burials documented by modern archaeologists include the kurgans at Pazyryk in the Ulagan district of the Altay Republic, south of Novosibirsk in the Altay Mountains of southern Siberia. Archaeologists have extrapolated the Pazyryk culture from these finds: five large burial mounds and several smaller ones between 1925 and 1949, one opened in 1947 by Russian archaeologist Sergei Rudenko. Pazyryk culture flourished between the 7th and 3rd centuries BC in the area associated with the Sacae (Saka).

Genetic research in modern populations reveals that the same paternal Y-chromosome haplogroup (R1a1) represents a genetic lineage currently found in central, western and south Asia, and in Slavic populations of Europe. The distribution of this haplogroup has been posited to represent the spread of peoples from the Ukrainian steppelands which served as an ice-age refuge during the LGM, in the eneolithic succeeded by the Pit Grave ("Kurgan") culture. This latter culture is associated with the spread of Indo-European languages in the "Kurgan hypothesis". The R1a allele thus far predates the Scythians, and its distribution consequently cannot be used simplistically to trace Scythian migrations in particular.

The distribution of Y-chromosome haplogroup (G2) from Pakistan and northwest India and out to Spain rather closely mirrors the spread of the Scythians, Sarmatians, and their offshoot, the Alans. Haplogroup G2 reaches its highest worldwide concentration in the Caucasian Russian Republic of North Ossetia-Alania, and the present-day Ossetians, who speak a Scythian Northeast Iranic language are the last remnant of the ancient Alans. Although this may be indirect evidence of Scythian "genetic legacy", it is likewise of Neolithic origin and cannot be used as a one-to-one identification of Scythian ancestry.

Mitochondrial DNA extracted from skeletal remains obtained from excavated Scythian kurgans have produced a myriad of results and conclusions. Analysis of the HV1 sequence obtained from a male Scytho-Siberian's remains at the Kizil site in the Altai Republic revealed the individual possessed the N1a maternal lineage. The study also noted that haplogroup mtDNA N1a was found at a relatively high frequency in the southern fringes of the Eurasian steppe, Iran (8.3%), and within the Indian Havik group (8.3%), an upper Brahman caste. From this, a possible link to ancient populations presumed to have come from Europe that lived in the neighboring Central Asian parts of India and Iran was suggested.

Additionally, mitochondrial DNA has been extracted from two Scytho-Siberian skeletons found in the Altai Republic (Russia) dating back 2,500 years. Both remains were determined to be of males from a population who had characteristics "of mixed Euro- Mongoloid origin." One of the individuals was found to carry the F2a maternal lineage, and the other the D lineage, both of which are characteristic of East Eurasian populations.

Maternal genetic analysis of Saka period male and female skeletal remains from a double inhumation kurgan located at the Beral site in Kazakhstan determined that the two were most likely not closely related and were possibly husband and wife. The HV1 mitochondrial sequence of the male was similar to the Anderson sequence which is most frequent in European populations. Contrary, the HV1 sequence of the female suggested a greater likelihood of Asian origins. The study's findings were in line with the hypothesis that mixings between Scythians and other populations occurred. This was buttressed by the discovery of several objects with a Chinese inspiration in the grave. No conclusive associations with haplogroups were made though it was suggested that the female may have derived from either mtDNA X or D.

* Video: Schythians or Huns?, TURAN: Epic of Identity

 

 

Zhou Dynasty

The Zhou Dynasty (周朝; 1045 BC to 256 BC) was preceded by the Shang Dynasty and followed by the Qin Dynasty in China. The Zhou dynasty lasted longer than any other dynasty in Chinese history—though the actual political and military control of China by the dynasty only lasted during the Western Zhou. During the Zhou, the use of iron was introduced to China, while this period of Chinese history produced what many consider the zenith of Chinese bronze-ware making. The dynasty also spans the period in which the written script evolved from the ancient stage as seen in early Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, to the beginnings of the modern stage, in the form of the archaic clerical script of the late [Warring States period].

During the Zhou Dynasty, the origins of native Chinese philosophy developed, its initial stages beginning in the 6th century BC. The greatest Chinese philosophers, those who made the greatest impact on later generations of Chinese, were Kong Fuzi (Latin: Confucius), founder of Confucianism, and Laozi, founder of Daoism. Other philosophers, theorists, and schools of thought in this era were Mozi (Latin: Micius), founder of Mohism, Mengzi (Latin: Mencius), a famous Confucian who expanded upon Kong Fuzi's legacy, Shang Yang and Han Feizi, responsible for the development of ancient Chinese Legalism (the core philosophy of the Qin Dynasty), and Xunzi, who was arguably the center of ancient Chinese intellectual life during his time, even more so than iconic intellectual figures such as Mencius.

The Yongzheng emperor (fourth emperor of the Manchu Qing Dynasty) proclaimed that the Chinese were not superior to the barbarians. To justify his statements, he declears that the Zhou dynasty, which much of Chinese civilization is descended from was a "barbarian state" because he alleged it had been part of the Xirong (西戎), who were barbarians.

 

 

Xīróng

Xīróng (西戎), literally "Western Chariots", was the name of an ancient ethnic group who inhabited the Western part of China from the Zhou Dynasty (1046 – 221 BC) onwards. Xīróng was also the name of a state during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Periods of Chinese history.

From the perspective of Sinocentrism, the Xīróng together with the Dōng Yí (東夷), Běidí (北狄) and Nánmán (南蛮) were collectively called the “Four Barbarian Tribes”. Spade-foot three-legged pottery vessels as well as one and two handled pots were primary cultural characteristics of the Xīróng.

Amongst the written records of the Xīróng many deal with their activities and wars, for example "the bigamy of Shēn Luò (申駱) and subjugation of the Xīróng"；“do not abandon the idea that the Marquess of Shen’s woman is the best for Luò and the Xīróng" and so on.

They are first mentioned as making a diplomatic visit to Zhou in 721BC.

Pullyblank thinks that they spoke a Tibeto-Burman language and connects them to the Qiang Fang (古羌人) and the ruling house or base population of the Zhou dynasty.

Di Cosmo says that 'Rong' was a vague term for warlike foreigner. He then seems to contradict himself by giving them a definite location. He places them from the upper Wei River valley and along the Fen River to the Taiyuan basin as far as the Taihang Mountains. This would be the northwestern edge of what was then China and also the transition zone between agricultural and steppe ways of life.

 

 

Beidi

Beidi or Northern Di (北狄) were groups of people who lived to the north of what was then China during the Zhou Dynasty. By the end of the dynasty they were mostly conquered or absorbed by the Chinese.

The ancient Chinese classed their neighbors by compass direction, calling them the Northern Di Southern Man, Eastern Yi and Western Rong. Bei Di may simply mean 'northern foreigners' or it may have been a definite people whose nature was explained by its location. We have too little information to assign them to any ethnic or linguistic group. The four names, or combinations of them like 'Yi-Di' are often used vaguely to mean un-Chinese.

The Di seem to have lived in a horizontal band from the upper Ordos Loop and across northern Shanxi to the state of Yan north of Beijing. This area was a transition zone between the emerging Chinese civilization and the steppe peoples to the north. They seem to have practiced a mixed pastoral, agricultural and hunting economy. Other groups of Di seem to have lived interspersed between the Chinese states. To their north was the emerging steppe society whom the Chinese later called Hu. To the southwest the Rong lived along the northwest frontier of China. The Di and Rong are often associated and both were considered more warlike and less civilized than the Yi and Man.

The Di had walled towns and fought on foot. They were often enemies and sometimes allies of the various Chinese states. We hear of trade, treaties, marriage alliances and Chinese politicians fleeing to exile among the Di.

The Bai (White) Di lived in the west and the more warlike Chi (Red) Di to the east. The state of Zhongshan near Beijing was founded by the Bai Di. It adopted Chinese material culture but was never considered properly Huaxia (Chinese). Other Di groups were the Chang Di and Xianyu. The state of Fei and the Xianyu were part of the White Di confederation.

The scattered references to the Di do not add up to a coherent history. According to legend the ancestors of Zhou dynasty lived among the Rong and Di until Gu Gong Danfu led then away to the mid-Wei River valley where they built their capital near Mount Qi (before 1107BC). In 676-651 Duke Xian of Jin conquered a number of Rong and Di groups. In 662 the Di drove the Rong out of Taiyuan. In 662-659 the state of Xing was nearly destroyed by the Chi Di until it was rescued by Qi. In 660BC the Chi Di took the capital of Wey and killed its king, but were driven out by Qi. From 660 to 507 Jin fought many wars with the Di, destroying Chi Di state of Lu in 594, 'subjugating' them in 541 and being severely defeated by the Xianyu Di in 507. In 640 the Di were allied with Qi and Xing against Wey and in 636 the Di helped the Zhou king against the state of Cheng. In 531 Jin attacked the Xianyu and Fei. By about 400bc most of the Di and Rong had been eliminated as independent polities. Zhongshan was conquered by Wei in 406, regained its independence in 377 and was conquered by Zhou in 295. Circa 283-265 Tian Dan fought some Di who seem to have lived within the area of the Chinese states.

 

 

Qiang People

'Qiang' was one of the many vague terms used by the ancient Chinese to describe their non-Huaxia neighbors. During the Oracle Bone period the Qiang-fang were one of the most constant enemies of the Shang (-fang is a suffix meaning country or people). They seem to have lived in a diagonal band from northern Shaanxi to northern Henan somewhat to the south of the later Beidi. They were skilled in making oracle bones and had a close relation to Zhou. One of their groups was called the 'Many-Horse-Qiang'. Pullyblank connects them with the later Rong people. Not until the rise of the state of Qin under Duke Mu was the Qiang expansion effectively checked. A Qiang leader, Yao Chang founded the Later Qin kingdom (384-417) during the Sixteen Kingdoms period of Chinese history.

But Qiang was not a distinct ethnic identity until 20–30 years ago. The term "Qiang" (the Chinese character for which suggests a shepherd) was used in old Chinese inscriptions to refer generically to the various nomadic peoples living to the west and has no direct relationship to today's Qiang. It has only been in recent decades that these people identified themselves as Qiang

The structure of the graph 羌 also reflects this view. It was composed of two elements: 人 (man) and 羊 (sheep), suggesting a sheep-herding people. During the Eastern Han Dynasty (25-220 AD) and Wei-Jin periods (221-419), Qiang were widely distributed along the mountainous fringes of the northern and eastern Tibetan Plateau, from the Kunlun Mountains (崑崙山) in Xinjiang province, and eastern Qinghai area, to southern Gansu, western Sichuan, and northern Yunnan. It was during this era that Qiang revolts along China's frontier borders led to a full scale invasion of China's interior by Qiang people. This was a significant factor in the eventual disintegration of the Eastern Han Dynasty.

Later imperial Chinese government restricted the term Qiang min 羌民 (Qiang people registered with the Chinese government) to refer to sinicized non-Han people living in the Min River valley in Sichuan and used the term Fan Qiang 番羌 (raw Qiang) to refer to less sinicized non-Han tribes living in the vicinity.

 

 

滷肉飯

滷肉飯，常被誤寫為魯肉飯，早年台灣農業社會所傳承下來的台灣小吃之一。

滷肉飯在台灣南北有不同的意義。在台灣北部，滷肉飯為一種淋上含有煮熟碎豬肉（豬絞肉）及醬油滷汁的白飯的料理，有時醬汁裡亦會有香菇丁等的成份在內，與焢肉飯不同，而此種作法在台灣南部稱作「肉燥飯」；「滷肉飯」在台灣南部是指有著滷豬三層肉的焢肉飯。

如同許多的台灣小吃一樣，在全臺各地都有店家販售滷肉飯。

 

 

* 魯肉飯出自山東 朱振藩：99.8%沒錯 by 蘇湘雲

Excerpt: 台灣廣為人知的知名小吃魯（滷）肉飯在米其林綠色指南台灣版中，被解釋為起源於山東的著名小吃，讓許多美食愛好者為之愕然。美食家則認為從歷史考證來看，滷肉起源於山東是沒有錯，但是米飯是南方料理的特色，如果醬油不同，味道當然與台灣滷肉飯不同。

知名美食家朱振藩說，他推測魯肉飯百分之九十九點八出自山東應該沒錯。以四書《孟子》出現的「膾炙」一句來說明，「膾」是生肉片，切成條狀，用「炙」的方式處理，然而，兩個字相合為「膾炙」的解釋多元，現代人習慣解釋為「烤肉」，但其實也蘊含「滷」的意義。

其中，語言學家楊柏駿解釋為「炒肉末」，但持續追蹤，根據近代考證，料理動作「炒」最明確的出現時間是北宋，而古文字學家郭沫若引《楚辭》「露雞蠵」認為，雞用來滷的，像綠蠵龜般的大烏龜一樣，擷取濃厚的汁來喝。

朱振藩認為，郭沫若的考證，將「膾炙」判斷為「滷肉燥」，是最可信的說法。早在戰國時期，滷肉燥已經是山東美食，至於，傳至何處才開始澆淋或拌入米飯，則尚未查證，但「滷肉是源自山東，是沒有錯的。」至於目前是否仍存有山東的滷肉飯？朱振藩則表示自己沒吃過。

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Taihang Mountains

Map from East Asia in Geographic Perspective

The Taihang Mountains (太行山) are a Chinese mountain range running down the eastern edge of the Loess Plateau (黃土高原) in Henan, Shanxi and Hebei provinces. The range extends over 400 km from north to south and has an average elevation of 1,500 to 2,000 meters. The principal peak is Xiao Wutaishan (2,882 metres). Cangyan Shan in Hebei forms the eastern tip of the Taihang range.

The name of Shanxi Province (山西), meaning "west of the mountains", derives from its location west of the Taihang Mountains, as does the name of Shandong Province ( 山東; east of the mountains).

太行山又名五行山、王母山、女媧山。中國東部地區的重要山脈和地理分界線。聳於北京、河北、山西、河南4省、市間。北起北京西山，南達豫北黃河北崖，西接山西高原，東臨華北平原，綿延400餘公里，為山西東部、東南部與河北、河南兩省的天然界山。這裡是華北平原進入山西高原的要道。

歷史與軍事作用: 太行山形勢險峻，歷來被視為兵要之地。從春秋戰國直到明、清，兩千多年間烽火不息。公元前650年，齊伐晉，入孟門、登太行。齊桓公曾懸車束馬窬太行。公元前263年，秦伐韓，在太行山「決羊腸之險」，一舉奪韓滎陽。公元前204年，劉邦被困於滎陽、成皋之間，他採納酈食其的建議，北扼飛狐之口，南守白馬（今河南滑縣東北）之津，終於轉危為安。東漢元初元年（公元114年），漢安帝為防外敵侵犯洛陽，下詔在太行南端36處要衝屯兵。曹操圍臨漳，袁尚輕易率軍東出太行，結果大敗於曹軍。晉太元十九年（公元394年），後燕慕容垂進伐西燕，屯軍於臨漳西南。西燕慕容永令全部人馬前去堵塞太行山口，慕容垂引兵自滏口進入，滅了西燕。隋末，李世民與竇建德相爭，李世民進據虎牢，使竇不能越過太行，李乘機佔領上黨，盡收河東之地。元至元十八年（公元1281年），劉福通率起義軍越過太行，火燒上黨。元將察罕粘木兒塞井陘、杜太行，遏止起義軍向北發展。

 

 

* mtDNA Evidence: Genetic background associated with related populations at high risk for esophageal cancer between Chaoshan and Taihang Mountain areas in China by Xiao-Yun Li, et al.

Abstract: There are three major geographic regions in China known for their high incidences of esophageal cancer (EC): the Taihang Mountain range of north-central China, the Minnan area of Fujian province, and the Chaoshan plain of Guangdong province. Historically, waves of great population migrations from north-central China through coastal Fujian to the Chaoshan plain were recorded. To study the genetic relationship among the related EC high-risk populations, we analyzed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroups based on 30 EC patients from Chaoshan and used control samples from the high-risk populations, including 48, 73, and 89 subjects from the Taihang, Fujian, and Chaoshan areas, respectively. The principal component of all haplogroups, correlation analysis of haplogroup frequency distributions between populations, and haplogroup D network analysis showed that compared with other Chinese populations, populations in the three studied areas are genetically related. The highest haplogroup frequency shared by all studied populations was haplogroup D, with much higher frequency in the Chaoshan area EC patients. The majority of haplogroup D individuals among the Chaoshan area EC patients belonged to subhaplogroups D4a and D5a, with the total frequency of these two haplogroups significantly higher than that in the high-risk population in the same area (χ2 = 9.017, p < 0.01). In conclusion, EC high-risk populations in these three areas share a similar matrilineal genetic background, and D4a and D5a might be candidate genetic markers for screening populations susceptible to EC in the Chaoshan area. Ours is the first report to show the association between mtDNA haplogroups (D4a and D5a) and esophageal cancer.

 

 

* STR Polymorphisms of the Henan Population and Investigation of the Central Plains Han Origin of Chaoshanese by LN Xu, et al.

Abstract: Allele frequencies for 15 short tandem repeat (STR) loci were obtained from a Chinese Han population in Henan province of middle China. No deviation from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium was observed for the STR loci except for D3S1358. The 15 STR loci are potentially useful for paternity testing and forensic casework in the Henan population. A phylogenetic tree based on CODIS STR allele frequencies of 25 Han populations revealed noticeable but far less clear distinctions between southern and northern Chinese populations; the Henan Han population was located at an intermediate position between south and north Chinese Han populations, relatively closer to Chaoshan and Minnan Han. Moreover, admixture analysis showed a large proportion of Central Plains Han origin in Chaoshanese and Minnanese. Admixture and phylogenetic analysis also reflected the genetic similarity shared by these two groups.

 

 

* Y-chromosome Evidence for Common Ancestry of Three Chinese Populations with a High Risk of Esophageal Cancer by H Huang, et al.

Abstract: High rates of esophageal cancer (EC) are found in people of the Henan Taihang Mountain, Fujian Minnan, and Chaoshan regions of China. Historical records describe great waves of populations migrating from north-central China (the Henan and Shanxi Hans) through coastal Fujian Province to the Chaoshan plain. Although these regions are geographically distant, we hypothesized that EC high-risk populations in these three areas could share a common ancestry. Accordingly, we used 16 East Asian-specific Y-chromosome biallelic markers (single nucleotide polymorphisms; Y-SNPs) and six Y-chromosome short tandem repeat (Y-STR) loci to infer the origin of the EC high-risk Chaoshan population (CSP) and the genetic relationship between the CSP and the EC high-risk Henan Taihang Mountain population (HTMP) and Fujian population (FJP). The predominant haplogroups in these three populations are O3*, O3e*, and O3e1, with no significant difference between the populations in the frequency of these genotypes. Frequency distribution and principal component analysis revealed that the CSP is closely related to the HTMP and FJP, even though the former is geographically nearer to other populations (Guangfu and Hakka clans). The FJP is between the CSP and HTMP in the principal component plot. The CSP, FJP and HTMP are more closely related to Chinese Hans than to minorities, except Manchu Chinese, and are descendants of Sino-Tibetans, not Baiyues. Correlation analysis, hierarchical clustering analysis, and phylogenetic analysis (neighbor-joining tree) all support close genetic relatedness among the CSP, FJP and HTMP. The network for haplogroup O3 (including O3*, O3e* and O3e1) showed that the HTMP have highest STR haplotype diversity, suggesting that the HTMP may be a progenitor population for the CSP and FJP. These findings support the potentially important role of shared ancestry in understanding more about the genetic susceptibility in EC etiology in high-risk populations and have implications for determining the molecular basis of this disease.

The Two-dimensional Graphs of Y-STR Frequencies

The three EC high-risk populations and Manchu form 2 clusters; the three Northern Han (labeled 10–12) and five Southern Han populations (labeled 5–9) form another group. The remaining populations are scattered. 1, Chaoshan EC high-risk population; 2, Fujian EC high-risk population; 3, Henan Taihang Mountain EC high-risk population; 4, Fujian Han; 5, Anhui Han; 6, Yunnan Han; 7, Henan Han; 8, Zhejiang Han; 9, Guangzhou Han; 10, Dongbei Han; 11, Beijing Han; 12, Tianjing Han; 13, Tibetan; 14, Uygur; 15, Krigiz; 16, Manchu; 17, Shui; 18, Naxi; 19, Zhuang. 4–9 refer to Southern Hans, 10–12 to Northern Hans, 13–17 to Northern minority nationalities, 18–19 to Southern minority nationalities.

 

 

Northeast China

Northeast China is a geographical region of China, consisting of the three provinces of Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang. It is separated from Russia largely by the Amur, Argun, and Ussuri rivers, from North Korea by the Yalu River and Tumen River, and from the Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region by the Greater Khingan Range. The heartland of the region is the Northeast China Plain.

Northeast China includes the three northeastern provinces of Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning according to the government of the People's Republic of China, and thus the region is sometimes called the Three Northeast Provinces (東北三省; Dōngběi sānshěng).

In context with the Northeast China Revitalization strategy of the State Council, the five eastern prefectures of Inner Mongolia are also defined as part of the Northeast: Xilin Gol, Chifeng, Tongliao, Hinggan and Hulunbuir. The region is nearly congruent with historical region of Manchuria in some definitions, and is often referred to in English as such. It is also sometimes referred to as Inner Manchuria in contrast with Outer Manchuria, provinces lost to the Russian Empire, during the Qing Dynasty.

Another term for the area is Guandong (關東; Guāndōng) meaning "east of the gate," referring to the gate at Shanhaiguan. This name was also used by the Japanese to their leased territory of Dalian, as Kwantung Chou, and its Kwantung Army which was later mobilized to set up the puppet state of Manchukuo in Northeast China.

Demographics: Northeast China has a total population of about 107,400,000 people, accounting for 8% of China’s total population. The majority of the population in the Northeast is now Han Chinese, whose ancestors came only recently in the 19th and 20th centuries in a population movement called "Chuang Guandong" (Rush to Northeast China). Manchus form a significant minority, and have been almost completely assimilated into the Han Chinese; the Manchu language is almost extinct, and many Han Chinese in Northeast China, as well as the rest of China, can claim some Manchu ancestry. Other major ethnic groups include the Mongols, the Koreans, and the Huis.

 

 

Chuang Guandong

Chuang Guandong (闖關東, literally "Crashing into the east (of the fortress)" The "fortress" in this case being Shanhaiguan), means the rush to Northeast China of the Han Chinese, especially from Shandong Peninsula, during the second half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century.

Northeast China, also called Guandong (east of the Fortress) or Guanwai (outside of the Fortress), the Fortress in this case being at Shanhaiguan, used to be a land of sparse population, inhabited mainly by the Tungusic peoples and other minority peoples. In 1668 during the reign of Emperor Kangxi, the Qing government further decreed a prohibition of other people getting into this area of their origin.

In the second half of 19th century, as Czarist Russia advance through Siberia and reached the Sea of Okhotsk, the Qing officials like General Tepuxin made a proposal to open Guandong for farming, and the Qing government changed their policy, thus encouraging the poor farmers in near-by Zhilei (the present-day Hebei) and Shandong to move to and live in Northeast China.

Until 1931 when the Manchurian Incident occurred, a few million people are said to have moved to this area from outside. This movement of people, called "Chuang Guandong" (Rush to Northeast China) is comparable to the Westward movement in U.S.A., the advance to Siberia in Russia or, on a smaller scale, the move to Hokkaido in Japan.

Those who moved to Northeast China are the poor farmers mainly from Shandong who came over land through Shanhaiguan or over the sea, using the Yantai-Lushun ferry that had opened because of the Beiyang Fleet were stationed in Weihaiwei in Shandong Peninsula and Lushun in Liaodong Peninsula. One of the results of this people movement, for example, is that the majority of the older people in Dalian City are from Shandong and that the Dalian Dialect is part of the Jiao Liao Mandarin, the Chinese dialect group spreading from Qingdao to Dalian and Dandong.

 

 

Manchu

Portrait of Kangxi Emperor

The Manchu people (滿族) are a Tungusic people who originated in Manchuria (today's northeastern China). During their rise in the 17th century, with the help of the Ming dynasty rebels (such as general Wu Sangui), they came to power in China and founded the Qing Dynasty, which ruled China until the Xinhai Revolution of 1911, which established a republican government in its place.

The Manchu ethnicity has largely been assimilated with the Han Chinese. The Manchu language is almost extinct, now spoken only among a small number of elderly people in remote rural areas of northeastern China and a few scholars; there are around ten thousand speakers of Sibe (Xibo), a Manchu dialect spoken in the Ili region of Xinjiang. In recent years, however, there has been a resurgence of interest in Manchu culture among both ethnic Manchus and Han. The number of Chinese today with some Manchu ancestry is quite large - with 10.68 million members (in China), Manchu is the 3rd largest ethnic group in China after the Han and the Zhuang. The adoption of favorable policies towards ethnic minorities (such as preferential university admission, government employment opportunities and exemption from the one child policy) has encouraged some people with mixed Han and Manchu ancestry to re-identify themselves as Manchu.

 

 

Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer (or oesophageal cancer) is malignancy of the esophagus. There are various subtypes, primarily adenocarcinoma (approx. 50-80% of all Esophageal cancer) and squamous cell cancer. Squamous cell cancer arises from the cells that line the upper part of the esophagus. Adenocarcinoma arises from glandular cells that are present at the junction of the esophagus and stomach. Esophageal tumors usually lead to dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), pain and other symptoms, and are diagnosed with biopsy. Small and localized tumors are treated surgically with curative intent. Larger tumors tend not to be operable and hence are treated with palliative care; their growth can still be delayed with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or a combination of the two. In some cases chemo- and radiotherapy can render these larger tumors operable. Prognosis depends on the extent of the disease and other medical problems, but is fairly poor.

Esophageal cancer is a relatively rare form of cancer, but some world areas have a markedly higher incidence than others: China, Iran, Iceland, India and Japan, as well as the United Kingdom, appear to have a higher incidence, as well as the region around the Caspian Sea

There are a number of risk factors for esophageal cancer:

• Heredity. It is more likely in people who have close relatives with cancer.
• Tobacco smoking and heavy alcohol use increase the risk, and together appear to increase the risk more than either individually.
• Coeliac disease predisposes towards squamous cell carcinoma.
• Thermal injury as a result of drinking hot beverages
• Alcohol consumption in individuals predisposed to alcohol flush reaction

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Seima-Turbino Phenomenon

The Altai Mountains (阿爾泰山脈,) are a mountain range in central Asia, where Russia, China, Mongolia and Kazakhstan come together, and where the rivers Irtysh, Ob and Yenisei have their sources. The Altai Mountains are known as the Turkic peoples' birthplace. The proposed Altaic language family (include the Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Korean, and Japonic languages) takes its name from the mountain range.

The population during the Copper Age has been described as paleomongolid in the east of what is now Mongolia, and as Europid in the west.

The Altai Mountains in what is now southern Russia and central China have been identified as the point of origin of a cultural enigma termed the Seima-Turbino Phenomenon. It is conjectured that climatic problems in this region around the start of the second millennium BC created ecological, economic and political changes which triggered a rapid and massive migration of peoples westward into northeast Europe and eastward into southeast China, Vietnam and Thailand across a frontier of some 4,000 miles. This migration took place in just five to six generations and led to peoples from Finland in the west to Thailand in the east employing the same metal working technology and, in some areas, horse breeding and riding. It is further conjectured that this phenomenon may have been the medium through which the Uralic group of languages spread across Europe and Asia, ultimately producing 39 modern languages including Hungarian, Finnish, Estonian and Lappish.

* Videos: 22. Altai Mountains • Russia, Kara-Chad, Altai, v.1

 

 

* Extreme mtDNA Homogeneity in Continental Asian Populations by Hiroki Oota, et al.

Tw (Taiwan Han Chinese) Ca (Cantonese) - Finns - Kirghiz Lowlander - British - Kazakh - Turks - Basques - Sardinian

Tw (Taiwan Han Chinese) Ca (Cantonese) - Finns - Indian - Ainu - Aboriginal Australian - Anatolia Turks - Borneo

Tw (Taiwan Han Chinese) Ca (Cantonese) - Korean - Philippines - Uighurs - Changsha - Taiwanese (aborigines) - Vietnamese - Vanuata - Indonesian - PNG

Tw (Taiwan Han Chinese) Ca (Cantonese) - Xi'an - Tottori (Japanese) - Kirghiz Highlander - Mongolian - Ngoebe - Altai of Siberia - Amerind - Argentina - Siberians

 

 

* Three Case Studies for mtDNA Analysis of Iron Age People in Central Taiwan by Ling-Dai Yen

Abstract: This study is focused on Central area of Taiwan and based on three important Iron Age plains and coastal archaeological sites-Fan-Zai-Uan (番仔園), Lu-Liao (鹿寮) and Hui-Lai (惠來), dating between 2000 and 400 B.P. This period is so called “Iron Age”. Mitochondrial DNA extracted from human remains of these three sites will tell us the genetic relation between the Iron Age people and modern aboriginal populations of Taiwan. Combing other pertinent researches of this subject, we can delineate the possible migration route of Iron Age people. The results of ancient DNAs（aDNAs）indicate that Iron Age people in Central Taiwan have genetic affinities with some modern aboriginal populations. The haplogroups of aDNAs show that their maternal origin might be the mainland of Asia.

Based on haplotyes shared with modern aboriginal populations, Fan-Zai-Yuan sample is closely related to Atayal ethnic group. Atayal came from mountain area of central Taiwan. The haplotype of Fan-Zai-Yuan sample possibly has a connection with Da-Ma-Lin archaeological site, which is located in the central mountain area and affected by cultures from plains. Lu-Liao sample is close to Bunun ethnic group. Lu-Liao site is where Papora used to live. A linguistic study suggests that Papora might come from the Zhuo-Shui river, which is a possible homeland of Luan community of Bunun. The Hui-Lai sample shares no haplotyes with any modern aboriginal populations. The haplogourp is also hardly found in modern Austronesian, possibly because lots of populations lived here and had a large gene pool.

Recent genetic researches show that modern aboriginal populations are heterogenous because of geographic reasons. However, people who live in plains interacted frequently and belonged to the same culture system for a long time. Based on the results of aDNAs analysis, the Iron Age people arrived lowland central Taiwan as early as part of modern indigenous people who live in mountain area today. Moreover, people who live in plains were more likely to be affected by other cultures. Genetically speaking, their population structures tend to be more diverse.

 

Individual Samples with Assigned Haplogroups and Haplogroup Frequencies in East Asia

(Haplogroups: F, D, M9)

 

Excerpt

(Major distribution of haplogroup M9 (mtDNA): Shandong, Liaoning, Xinjiang, Qinghai)

 

 

* The Biological Evidence of the San-pau-chu People and Their Affinities by Hsiu-man Lin

Abstract: ... This research is the first study in Taiwan trying to combine both morphological and genetic evidence to explore the biological nature of one prehistoric population. Because the dental morphological study and ancient DNA analyses seem to suggest a Northern Asian origin for the SPC people, it is proposed here that approximately 2,500 BP, some prehistoric Taiwanese came from mainland East Asia. However, the WCTS people, contemporaries of SPC, show a closer relatedness with the Namu from the Hawai’i. Therefore, a multiple set of models must be considered. Studies with larger samples sizes and wider range of archaeological sites in the future will also help to gain insights.

 

Individual Samples with Assigned Haplogroup Markers by Restriction Analysis

(Haplogroups: M, C, H, A)

 

 

Haplogroup H (mtDNA)

Haplogroup H is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup that originated in Southwest Asia/Middle East 25,000-30,000 YBP.

Origin: Haplogroup H is a descendant of haplogroup HV. The Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS), the human mitochondrial sequence to which all other sequences are compared, belongs to haplogroup H. Several independent studies conclude that haplogroup H probably evolved in West Asia c. 30,000 years ago having arrived in Europe c. 20-25,000 years ago, spreading rapidly to the southwest of the continent. This would make its arrival roughly contemporary with Gravettian culture. They are also coincident in that the spread of subclades H1, H3 and the sister haplogroup V reflect a second intra-European expansion from the Franco-Cantabrian region after the last glacial maximum, c. 13,000 years ago.

Distribution: Haplogroup H is the most common mtDNA haplogroup in Europe. About one half of Europeans are of mtDNA haplogroup H. The haplogroup is also common in North Africa and the