PDA

View Full Version : Did Cambodians' ancestors come from southern China? Do genetics support this?



Sikeliot
08-29-2019, 12:57 AM
I have read that the Cambodian people are said to have descended from migrants from Yunnan province, China.

Is this true? Is it supported by genetics?

Kulin
08-29-2019, 02:16 AM
Austro-asiatic people(s) did indeed migrate from Southern China, so Cambodians are descended from these migrants who mixed with local Hunter gatherers that were genetically mostly like the Onge of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands (who look to be an isolated ancient SEA-like hunter-gatherer population).

Sikeliot
08-29-2019, 02:29 AM
Austro-asiatic people(s) did indeed migrate from Southern China, so Cambodians are descended from these migrants who mixed with local Hunter gatherers that were genetically mostly like the Onge of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands (who look to be an isolated ancient SEA-like hunter-gatherer population).

Are there ethnic groups in southern China today who are related to Austro-asiatic peoples, or do they no longer exist?

Kulin
08-29-2019, 02:34 AM
Are there ethnic groups in southern China today who are related to Austro-asiatic peoples, or do they no longer exist?

There's the Wa people in the border with Burma (among other very smaller communities). However, much of the Austro-asiatic people in the region have been assimilated/absorbed by Tai-Kadai and Sinitic Groups.

Ebizur
08-29-2019, 04:53 AM
Judging from what little published data I have seen regarding the Y-DNA and mtDNA of present-day Khmers, I would say that certain elements of their ancestry probably have been contributed by people who have migrated to Mainland Southeast Asia from some parts of what is now China, and not necessarily only Yunnan Province. In particular, most of their Y-DNA probably has been contributed by ancestors who have migrated from China, with O-M95 and O-M134 apparently being predominant among present-day Khmers. There is not much high-resolution data available regarding Khmer Y-DNA, but it is possible that their Y-DNA may be difficult to distinguish from that of neighboring Tai peoples.

However, the mtDNA of Khmers seems to be more unique to that ethnic group, and does not resemble that of any population in present-day China as far as I know. Much of their mtDNA seems to belong to various subclades of M (about 30% of the Khmer total) and N (about 10% of the Khmer total) that are not generally found in China or elsewhere in East Asia. The clades of mtDNA that they do share at a certain level with East Asians in general include B5a1 (about 19% of Khmers), F1a (about 12% of Khmers), M7b (about 6% of Khmers), N9a (about 5% of Khmers), B4c2 (about 4% of Khmers), C (about 2.5% of Khmers), and B5b1 (about 1% of Khmers), amounting to about 50% of the total Khmer mtDNA pool. Another 10% or so belong to R9 and R22, which are basal to haplogroup F, but, unlike that latter haplogroup, are not found widely among present-day East Asians. Like Filipinos, Khmers seem to be lacking in mtDNA that belongs to the D subclade of M, which is the predominant clade among present-day northern East Asians and especially people in Japan. However, their "generic East Asian" mtDNA clades are found in the north, too, although many of them exhibit frequency gradients with negative correlation to latitude. I guess their mtDNA profile may be summarized as a combination of roughly equal proportions of an M-heavy Paleolithic Mainland Southeast Asian element that is not shared with present-day East Asians plus an R-heavy Neolithic element that is shared with present-day East Asians (i.e. East Asian minus certain mtDNA M-heavy, probably Paleolithic bounce-back elements that have contributed greatly to modern East Asians, especially northerly ones).

Present-day Khmers also have a minor (probably less than 5% of their total genome) element of Western Eurasian origin that probably has been mediated mostly by historical Indian males.

shazou
09-01-2019, 01:58 AM
'Tribal' cambodians/thais are basically like half australoid/protomalayid + half mongoloid vaguely speaking i'm guessing..of the Onge type/pursuasian i presume.. maybe subjected to 'genetic drift'/evolution perhaps?

Tsakhur
09-02-2019, 09:16 AM
Judging from what little published data I have seen regarding the Y-DNA and mtDNA of present-day Khmers, I would say that certain elements of their ancestry probably have been contributed by people who have migrated to Mainland Southeast Asia from some parts of what is now China, and not necessarily only Yunnan Province. In particular, most of their Y-DNA probably has been contributed by ancestors who have migrated from China, with O-M95 and O-M134 apparently being predominant among present-day Khmers. There is not much high-resolution data available regarding Khmer Y-DNA, but it is possible that their Y-DNA may be difficult to distinguish from that of neighboring Tai peoples.

However, the mtDNA of Khmers seems to be more unique to that ethnic group, and does not resemble that of any population in present-day China as far as I know. Much of their mtDNA seems to belong to various subclades of M (about 30% of the Khmer total) and N (about 10% of the Khmer total) that are not generally found in China or elsewhere in East Asia. The clades of mtDNA that they do share at a certain level with East Asians in general include B5a1 (about 19% of Khmers), F1a (about 12% of Khmers), M7b (about 6% of Khmers), N9a (about 5% of Khmers), B4c2 (about 4% of Khmers), C (about 2.5% of Khmers), and B5b1 (about 1% of Khmers), amounting to about 50% of the total Khmer mtDNA pool. Another 10% or so belong to R9 and R22, which are basal to haplogroup F, but, unlike that latter haplogroup, are not found widely among present-day East Asians. Like Filipinos, Khmers seem to be lacking in mtDNA that belongs to the D subclade of M, which is the predominant clade among present-day northern East Asians and especially people in Japan. However, their "generic East Asian" mtDNA clades are found in the north, too, although many of them exhibit frequency gradients with negative correlation to latitude. I guess their mtDNA profile may be summarized as a combination of roughly equal proportions of an M-heavy Paleolithic Mainland Southeast Asian element that is not shared with present-day East Asians plus an R-heavy Neolithic element that is shared with present-day East Asians (i.e. East Asian minus certain mtDNA M-heavy, probably Paleolithic bounce-back elements that have contributed greatly to modern East Asians, especially northerly ones).

Present-day Khmers also have a minor (probably less than 5% of their total genome) element of Western Eurasian origin that probably has been mediated mostly by historical Indian males.

Yes here are Global 25 results of 2 Khmer samples (the 3rd sample seem to be half (around 55%) Han Chinese admixed according to Freeform nMonte Runner)

Using Global 25 nMonte Runner: The most Western-shifted Khmer sample aka Cambodian HGDP00713 seem to have from around 5-6% West Eurasian and 4% AASI ancestry. The second Khmer sample (Cambodian HGDP00711) seem to have slightly less Western ancestry.

"sample": "Custom:CambodianHGDP00713",
"fit": 2.3424,
"LAO_LN_BA": 60,
"Dai": 30,
"TJK_Sarazm_En": 5.83,
"Simulated_AASI": 4.17,

"sample": "Custom:CambodianHGDP00711",
"fit": 2.1888,
"LAO_LN_BA": 70.83,
"Dai": 20.83,
"Simulated_AASI": 5,
"TJK_Sarazm_En": 3.33,

Using FreeForm nMonte Runner:

"sample": "Test1:Cambodian_-_HGDP00713",
"fit": 2.3775,
"LAO_LN_BA": 60.83,
"Dai": 30,
"TJK_Sarazm_En": 5,
"Simulated_AASI_Averaged": 4.17,

"sample": "Test2:Cambodian_-_HGDP00711",
"fit": 2.1582,
"LAO_LN_BA": 70.83,
"Dai": 20.83,
"Simulated_AASI_Averaged": 4.17,
"TJK_Sarazm_En": 4.17,

Here is a comparison between the most West Eurasian shifted Khmer sample (Cambodian HGDP00713) and the most Eastern Eurasian shifted (Han Chinese admixed) Khmer sample (Cambodian HGDP00712) using FreeForm nMonte Runner.

"sample": "Test1:Cambodian_-_HGDP00713",
"fit": 2.2678,
"LAO_LN_BA": 64.17,
"Dai": 20.83,
"Han": 5.83,
"Simulated_AASI_Averaged": 3.33,
"Yamnaya_BGR": 3.33,
"TJK_Sarazm_En": 2.5,

"sample": "Test2:Cambodian_-_HGDP00712",
"fit": 1.3127,
"Han": 55.83,
"Dai": 28.33,
"LAO_LN_BA": 13.33,
"Simulated_AASI_Averaged": 1.67,
"Yamnaya_BGR": 0.83,
"TJK_Sarazm_En": 0,

Also looks like Cambodian HGDP00711 and Cambodian HGDP00713 (most Western-shifted sample) have around 8-10% South Asian ancestry using Velama as a source pop as their South Asian ancestry is mostly South Indian-related.

"sample": "Custom:CambodianHGDP00711",
"fit": 2.1733,
"LAO_LN_BA": 71.67,
"Dai": 20,
"Velamas": 8.33,

"sample": "Custom:CambodianHGDP00713",
"fit": 2.3414,
"LAO_LN_BA": 60,
"Dai": 30,
"Velamas": 10,

pmokeefe
09-02-2019, 02:52 PM
This paper was about ancient South-East Asia in general, not Cambodia in particular. But it found that Southeast Asians are mixture of local hunter-gathers and two waves from southern China.
The prehistoric peopling of Southeast Asia (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6397/88.abstract)
Abstract
The human occupation history of Southeast Asia (SEA) remains heavily debated. Current evidence suggests that SEA was occupied by Hòabìnhian hunter-gatherers until ~4000 years ago, when farming economies developed and expanded, restricting foraging groups to remote habitats. Some argue that agricultural development was indigenous; others favor the “two-layer” hypothesis that posits a southward expansion of farmers giving rise to present-day Southeast Asian genetic diversity. By sequencing 26 ancient human genomes (25 from SEA, 1 Japanese Jōmon), we show that neither interpretation fits the complexity of Southeast Asian history: Both Hòabìnhian hunter-gatherers and East Asian farmers contributed to current Southeast Asian diversity, with further migrations affecting island SEA and Vietnam. Our results help resolve one of the long-standing controversies in Southeast Asian prehistory.

okarinaofsteiner
09-04-2019, 06:23 AM
This paper was about ancient South-East Asia in general, not Cambodia in particular. But it found that Southeast Asians are mixture of local hunter-gathers and two waves from southern China.

The prehistoric peopling of Southeast Asia (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6397/88.abstract)
Abstract
The human occupation history of Southeast Asia (SEA) remains heavily debated. Current evidence suggests that SEA was occupied by Hòabìnhian hunter-gatherers until ~4000 years ago, when farming economies developed and expanded, restricting foraging groups to remote habitats. Some argue that agricultural development was indigenous; others favor the “two-layer” hypothesis that posits a southward expansion of farmers giving rise to present-day Southeast Asian genetic diversity. By sequencing 26 ancient human genomes (25 from SEA, 1 Japanese Jōmon), we show that neither interpretation fits the complexity of Southeast Asian history: Both Hòabìnhian hunter-gatherers and East Asian farmers contributed to current Southeast Asian diversity, with further migrations affecting island SEA and Vietnam. Our results help resolve one of the long-standing controversies in Southeast Asian prehistory.

The initial rice farmers who settled in Mainland SEA had Austroasiatic affinities, while the ones who settled in Island SEA were Austronesians. Vietnamese stand out compared to other Mainland SE Asians in that they have much less Hoabinhian ancestry, almost zero South Asian admixture, and a stronger affinity towards modern-day South Chinese. Modern-day lowland Filipinos have less Austroasiatic-like ancestry (and possibly more recent admixture from modern-day South Chinese) than Malaysians and West Indonesians.

Richardrli
09-04-2019, 09:58 AM
How do Laotians compare to Vietnamese in terms of affinity towards Southern Chinese?

Kulin
09-04-2019, 06:04 PM
How do Laotians compare to Vietnamese in terms of affinity towards Southern Chinese?

Laotians should be mostly like the Thai (esp some subgroups like the Isan in NE Thailand). The vietnamese are different in that, they weren't very 'indianized' in culture/admixture vs other SEAs. They may have some Indian-like ancestry most likely in southern areas of Vietnam, through absorption/assimilation of the Cham people, though its going to be very diluted.

Megalophias
09-04-2019, 07:03 PM
The only analysis I recall seeing with Laotians (who weren't isolated hill tribes) had them somewhat shifted toward Cambodians and Austroasiatic hill tribes (Mlabri, Htin) relative to Vietnamese and Dai, so further from Chinese.

The 1000 Genomes Vietnamese are from Saigon, but they are pretty close to Dai, don't seem especially southern shifted (but I haven't seen them compared with northern Vietnamese).

shazou
09-09-2019, 02:24 AM
The initial rice farmers who settled in Mainland SEA had Austroasiatic affinities, while the ones who settled in Island SEA were Austronesians. Vietnamese stand out compared to other Mainland SE Asians in that they have much less Hoabinhian ancestry, almost zero South Asian admixture, and a stronger affinity towards modern-day South Chinese. Modern-day lowland Filipinos have less Austroasiatic-like ancestry (and possibly more recent admixture from modern-day South Chinese) than Malaysians and West Indonesians.
Most regular Filipinos are also on average around 7-10% negrito admixed too i believe. Even Malaysians/Indonesians have some Semang negrito in them too but Semang is more linked closer genetically towards the Onge type of Australoid, whilst filipino negritos like the Aeta are closer genetically to the melanesian/papuan type I think.

shazou
09-09-2019, 02:34 AM
Most regular Filipinos are also on average around 7-10% negrito admixed too i believe. Even Malaysians/Indonesians have some Semang negrito in them too but Semang is more linked closer genetically towards the Onge type of Australoid, whilst filipino negritos like the Aeta are closer genetically to the melanesian/papuan type I think.
I guess such SE-asian groups like the Ma'anyan plot so distantly/distinctly from other SE-asians because of being subject to "genetic drift",,, while looking at the PCA chart below Filipinos are pulled closer towards East-Indonesians/Melanesians/etc correct me if I'm wrong

https://i.imgur.com/8Uv8uFM.jpg
...

one study: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep26066

Ebizur
11-01-2021, 12:31 PM
Judging from what little published data I have seen regarding the Y-DNA and mtDNA of present-day Khmers, I would say that certain elements of their ancestry probably have been contributed by people who have migrated to Mainland Southeast Asia from some parts of what is now China, and not necessarily only Yunnan Province. In particular, most of their Y-DNA probably has been contributed by ancestors who have migrated from China, with O-M95 and O-M134 apparently being predominant among present-day Khmers. There is not much high-resolution data available regarding Khmer Y-DNA, but it is possible that their Y-DNA may be difficult to distinguish from that of neighboring Tai peoples.

However, the mtDNA of Khmers seems to be more unique to that ethnic group, and does not resemble that of any population in present-day China as far as I know. Much of their mtDNA seems to belong to various subclades of M (about 30% of the Khmer total) and N (about 10% of the Khmer total) that are not generally found in China or elsewhere in East Asia. The clades of mtDNA that they do share at a certain level with East Asians in general include B5a1 (about 19% of Khmers), F1a (about 12% of Khmers), M7b (about 6% of Khmers), N9a (about 5% of Khmers), B4c2 (about 4% of Khmers), C (about 2.5% of Khmers), and B5b1 (about 1% of Khmers), amounting to about 50% of the total Khmer mtDNA pool. Another 10% or so belong to R9 and R22, which are basal to haplogroup F, but, unlike that latter haplogroup, are not found widely among present-day East Asians. Like Filipinos, Khmers seem to be lacking in mtDNA that belongs to the D subclade of M, which is the predominant clade among present-day northern East Asians and especially people in Japan. However, their "generic East Asian" mtDNA clades are found in the north, too, although many of them exhibit frequency gradients with negative correlation to latitude. I guess their mtDNA profile may be summarized as a combination of roughly equal proportions of an M-heavy Paleolithic Mainland Southeast Asian element that is not shared with present-day East Asians plus an R-heavy Neolithic element that is shared with present-day East Asians (i.e. East Asian minus certain mtDNA M-heavy, probably Paleolithic bounce-back elements that have contributed greatly to modern East Asians, especially northerly ones).

Present-day Khmers also have a minor (probably less than 5% of their total genome) element of Western Eurasian origin that probably has been mediated mostly by historical Indian males.cf. Anita Kloss-Brandstätter, Monika Summerer, David Horst, Basil Horst, Gertraud Streiter, Julia Raschenberger, Florian Kronenberg, Torpong Sanguansermsri, Jürgen Horst, and Hansi Weissensteiner, "An in-depth analysis of the mitochondrial phylogenetic landscape of Cambodia." Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 10816 (2021). Open Access. Published: 24 May 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90145-2


Results
The study included 299 DNA samples from Cambodian citizens, who lived in Northern Thailand at the time of
sample collection. Blood samples were originally collected from 300 individuals, but one sample (C228) showed
obvious signs of contamination and was therefore excluded from further analysis. Detailed descriptions of the
samples including sex, age, places of birth of the sampled individuals and of their mothers, the mtDNA haplogroup affiliations and the GenBank accession numbers are given in Table S1. Our strategy enabled a 2.8-fold
coverage of each mitochondrial profile with diverse electropherograms, generated with 55 forward primers and
41 reverse primers (see Supplemental Material Table S2, and Supplemental Fig. S1 for workflow). In comparison
to our previously published whole-mtDNA sequencing strategy26, six forward primers and 20 reverse primers
were new and replaced old sequencing primers. In addition, all liquid handling steps were performed by liquid
handling platforms, thereby reducing potential pitfalls such as contamination or sample mix-up. Finally, the
strategy was also economic in terms of DNA consumption, as less than 1 µg of DNA (for some samples only
400 ng, some had to be repeated) was needed for generating a high-quality mtDNA profile.

Out of the 299 Samples, the majority of individuals (79.3%) were born in four provinces of Cambodia
(Fig. 1, Table 1): Kampong Thom (central Cambodia, 27.4%), Siem Reap (northern Cambodia, 23.8%), Banteay
Meanchey (northwestern Cambodia, 14.4%) and Kampong Cham (eastern Cambodia, 13.7%). The remaining
20.7% of samples came from twelve different provinces. In 95.3% of individuals, the places of birth of the sampled
persons were identical to the maternal places of birth, thereby underscoring the stability of the geographic origin
of samples (see Table 1). Figure 1 represents the place of birth of the investigated samples, the sampling locations
in Zhang et al.2 and gives an overview of the geographic origin of samples analysed.

The largest part of participating refugees declared themselves as belonging to the ethnic group of Khmer
(76.9%, Table 1 and Supplemental Table S1). However, according to the official statistics, more than 90% of
Cambodians are of Khmer ethnicity1. The large proportion of Cham individuals sampled in this study (20.4%)
could therefore be explained by the fact that the samples were collected in refugee camps in Thailand, where
ethnic minorities, who were prosecuted or expelled by the Khmer rouge, found shelter.

We adapted HaploGrep 2 to automatically generate DOT graphs, which is represented in Fig. 2. The 299
samples fall into 224 unique haplotypes and into 90 different haplogroups. The samples can be grouped into
macrohaplogroups R (n=167, 55.9%), M (n=119, 39.8%), and N (n=13, 4.3%).

Figure 2 illustrates that macrohaplogroup M samples show only few larger clusters (with M17c1a1a being
the largest clade), while 76.6% of samples in macrohaplogroup R predominantly fall into haplogroups B5a1 (75
samples), F1a1 (38 samples) and R22 (15 samples), according to the latest PhyloTree version 1727. This indicates
a lack of phylogenetic resolution, especially in B5a1 and F1a1. Because some refugees were related to each
other within the Cambodian samples presented herein, we performed the subsequent analyses by only analysing one sample per family, which left us with 264 samples (see Table S3, samples with relations marked with
red-background and Table S4, where our samples are denoted by (Dataset=This)). Figures S5 and S6 represent
alternative phylogenetic trees, which were generated with maximum-likelihood (RaxML-NG) and Bayesian
(BEAST 2) methods respectively.

Table S1

Khmer from Siem Reap
2/71 B4c1b2c2
2/71 B4c2
19/71 = 26.8% B5a1a
5/71 B5a1d
2/71 F1a1a
4/71 F1a1a1
2/71 F1f
1/71 M12b1b
1/71 M17c1a1
10/71 M17c1a1a
1/71 M20 [Note: this individual's mother's place of birth has been recorded as Banteay Meanchey, so she is apparently an originally non-local woman who has given birth to the sampled individual in Siem Reap.]
5/71 M46 [Note: the place of birth of the mother of one of these five individuals has been recorded as Banteay Meanchey.]
1/71 M74b2
1/71 M76
1/71 M7c1c2
1/71 M7c1c3
1/71 N9a10+16311
6/71 R22
2/71 R23
1/71 R9b1b
3/71 Z3c

Khmer from Banteay Meanchey
1/43 B4c2
1/43 B5a
10/43 = 23.3% B5a1a [Note: the place of birth of the mother of one of these individuals has been recorded as Battambang, and the place of birth of the mother of another one of these individuals has been recorded as Unknown.]
1/43 B5a1c
1/43 B5a1d
4/43 F1a1a1 [Note: the place of birth of the mother of one of these individuals has been recorded as Unknown.]
1/43 F1a1d
3/43 F1f
1/43 M1'20'51
2/43 M12b1a2 [Note: the place of birth of the mother of one of these individuals has been recorded as Kampong Thom.]
2/43 M12b1b
1/43 M21b
1/43 M23
1/43 M46
1/43 M51a1a
1/43 M51a2
1/43 M72
1/43 M73
1/43 M73b
1/43 M7b1a1f
1/43 N
1/43 N8
1/43 N9a6
1/43 R9b
1/43 R9b1a1a [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Unknown.]
1/43 R9b2 [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Battambang.]
1/43 W3b [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Siem Reap.]

Khmer from Kampong Chhnang
1/2 M24a
1/2 M51a2

Khmer from Kampong Thom
1/82 B4c2
1/82 B4c2b
1/82 B4c2c
13/82 = 15.9% B5a1a
1/82 B5a1b1
2/82 B5a1d
4/82 B6a
1/82 D4
8/82 F1a1a1
1/82 F4a2
1/82 M13b1
1/82 M17a
3/82 M17c
2/82 M20
1/82 M21b
1/82 M21b+210
1/82 M21b2
3/82 M24a
1/82 M24b
1/82 M26
1/82 M51a1a
1/82 M51a1b
1/82 M51a2
1/82 M68a1
2/82 M68a2
2/82 M73
1/82 M73b
1/82 M74
1/82 M74a
3/82 M74b
1/82 M75
1/82 M76
4/82 M7b1a1e1
3/82 M7b1a1f
1/82 N
1/82 N21+195
1/82 N22
1/82 N9a10+16311
1/82 N9a6
3/82 R22
1/82 R23
1/82 R9b2
1/82 U2b1

Khmer from Kandal
3/5 F1a1a
1/5 M59
1/5 M7b1a1

Khmer from Koh Kong
1/1 F1a1a1

Khmer from Kratie
1/2 B4c2
1/2 B5a1a

Khmer from Phnom Penh
1/1 B5a1a

Khmer from Prey Veng
1/7 B5a1d
1/7 F1a1a
1/7 M21b2
1/7 M24a
1/7 M7c1c2
1/7 M9a4a2
1/7 R22

Khmer from Svay Rieng
1/3 M69a
2/3 R22

Khmer from Takeo
1/13 B4+16261
1/13 = 7.7% B5a1a
1/13 B5a1d
1/13 C7
1/13 F1a1
3/13 F1a1a1
2/13 M13c
1/13 M74b
1/13 M7c1b2b
1/13 R22 [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Unknown.]

Khmer total
1/230 = 0.43% B4+16261
2/230 = 0.87% B4c1b2c2
5/230 = 2.17% B4c2
1/230 = 0.43% B4c2b
1/230 = 0.43% B4c2c
1/230 = 0.43% B5a
45/230 = 19.57% B5a1a
1/230 = 0.43% B5a1b1
1/230 = 0.43% B5a1c
10/230 = 4.35% B5a1d
4/230 = 1.74% B6a
1/230 = 0.43% C7
1/230 = 0.43% D4
1/230 = 0.43% F1a1
6/230 = 2.61% F1a1a
20/230 = 8.70% F1a1a1
1/230 = 0.43% F1a1d
5/230 = 2.17% F1f
1/230 = 0.43% F4a2
1/230 = 0.43% M1'20'51
2/230 = 0.87% M12b1a2
3/230 = 1.30% M12b1b
1/230 = 0.43% M13b1
2/230 = 0.87% M13c
1/230 = 0.43% M17a
3/230 = 1.30% M17c
1/230 = 0.43% M17c1a1
10/230 = 4.35% M17c1a1a
3/230 = 1.30% M20
2/230 = 0.87% M21b
1/230 = 0.43% M21b+210
2/230 = 0.87% M21b2
1/230 = 0.43% M23
5/230 = 2.17% M24a
1/230 = 0.43% M24b
1/230 = 0.43% M26
6/230 = 2.61% M46
2/230 = 0.87% M51a1a
1/230 = 0.43% M51a1b
3/230 = 1.30% M51a2
1/230 = 0.43% M59
1/230 = 0.43% M68a1
2/230 = 0.87% M68a2
1/230 = 0.43% M69a
1/230 = 0.43% M72
3/230 = 1.30% M73
2/230 = 0.87% M73b
1/230 = 0.43% M74
1/230 = 0.43% M74a
4/230 = 1.74% M74b
1/230 = 0.43% M74b2
1/230 = 0.43% M75
2/230 = 0.87% M76
1/230 = 0.43% M7b1a1
4/230 = 1.74% M7b1a1e1
4/230 = 1.74% M7b1a1f
1/230 = 0.43% M7c1b2b
2/230 = 0.87% M7c1c2
1/230 = 0.43% M7c1c3
1/230 = 0.43% M9a4a2
2/230 = 0.87% N
1/230 = 0.43% N21+195
1/230 = 0.43% N22
1/230 = 0.43% N8
2/230 = 0.87% N9a10+16311
2/230 = 0.87% N9a6
13/230 = 5.65% R22
3/230 = 1.30% R23
1/230 = 0.43% R9b
1/230 = 0.43% R9b1a1a
1/230 = 0.43% R9b1b
2/230 = 0.87% R9b2
1/230 = 0.43% U2b1
1/230 = 0.43% W3b
3/230 = 1.30% Z3c

Khmer Loeu from Oddar Meanchey
1/8 B5a1a
1/8 F1a1a
2/8 F1a1a1
1/8 M23
1/8 M23'75
2/8 M74b2

Cham from Battambang
2/17 B4b1a2
1/17 B4c2
5/17 B5a1a [Note: the place of birth of the mother of one of these individuals has been recorded as Unknown.]
1/17 B5a1b1
1/17 F1a1a1 [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Unknown.]
1/17 F1f
1/17 F2
3/17 M17a
1/17 N8
1/17 N9a10+16311

Cham from Kampong Cham
1/41 B4h
7/41 B5a1a
1/41 B5a1b1
3/41 B5a1d
1/41 C7
2/41 F1+16189
5/41 F1a1a1
1/41 M12b1b
1/41 M17c
1/41 M21b2
1/41 M24b
1/41 M26
1/41 M51a
1/41 M51a1b
2/41 M68a1a
2/41 M74b
4/41 M76
1/41 M7b1a1
1/41 M7b1a1a2
1/41 M9a4a2
1/41 N7b
2/41 R22

Cham from Kampot
1/1 M73

Cham from Pursat
1/2 F1a1a [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Takeo.]
1/2 F3a [Note: the place of birth of the mother of this individual has been recorded as Svay Rieng.]

Cham total
2/61 B4b1a2
1/61 B4c2
1/61 B4h
12/61 = 19.7% B5a1a
2/61 B5a1b1
3/61 B5a1d
1/61 C7
2/61 F1+16189
1/61 F1a1a
6/61 = 9.8% F1a1a1
1/61 F1f
1/61 F2
1/61 F3a
1/61 M12b1b
3/61 M17a
1/61 M17c
1/61 M21b2
1/61 M24b
1/61 M26
1/61 M51a
1/61 M51a1b
2/61 M68a1a
1/61 M73
2/61 M74b
4/61 = 6.6% M76
1/61 M7b1a1
1/61 M7b1a1a2
1/61 M9a4a2
1/61 N7b
1/61 N8
1/61 N9a10+16311
2/61 R22

These results obtained from Cambodian citizens living as refugees in Northern Thailand do not differ too much from those of previous studies of Cambodians. However, I have noted the following:

(1) Haplogroup B5a1 (especially B5a1a and B5a1d) is even more common among these Khmer refugees in Thailand (approx. 25% total) than among Cambodians in previous studies (approx. 19% total). However, the results of the present study hint that B5a1a, the most frequently observed mtDNA haplogroup among present-day Khmers, may be distributed inhomogeneously. Haplogroup B5a1a has been found in 26.8% (19/71) of Khmers from Siem Reap and 23.3% (10/43) of Khmers from Banteay Meanchey, two provinces of northwestern Cambodia. (The internationally famous Angkor Wat is located in Siem Reap.) The territory of these two provinces has been part of Siam (Thailand) from 1795 to 1907. Haplogroup B5a1a has been found in 15.9% (13/82) of the present study's sample of Khmers from Kampong Thom, a province located immediately southeast of Siem Reap Province and likewise bordering the northeastern shore of Tonle Sap. However, the frequency of this haplogroup among Khmers in southern Cambodia (roughly, south of Tonle Sap and the Mekong River) may be quite low: it has been found in only 6.3% (2/32) of a pool of the present study's Khmers from Kampong Chhnang (0/2), Kandal (0/5), Koh Kong (0/1), Phnom Penh (1/1), Prey Veng (0/7), Svay Rieng (0/3), and Takéo (1/13). Haplogroup B5a1a also has been found in a great percentage of the present study's small sample of Chams (5/17 = 29.4%) from Battambang Province (extending from Tonle Sap to the present-day border with Thailand) in northwestern Cambodia and with moderate frequency (7/41 = 17.1%) in the present study's sample of Chams born in Kampong Cham Province in eastern Cambodia. I would like to see additional data regarding the mtDNA of people from southern Cambodia.

(2) The Khmer and Chams of Cambodia share many mtDNA haplogroups, including the two most frequently observed clades (B5a1a and F1a1a1). They also share many subclades of haplogroup M (M12b1b, M17a, M17c, M21b2, M24b, M26, M51a1b, M73, M74b, M76, M7b1a1, M9a4a2), many of which are deep rooted and rare, as well as N8, N9a10+16311, and R22.

(3) The frequencies of some East Asian-related mtDNA haplogroups, including M7b (9/230 = 3.9% Khmer, 2/61 = 3.3% Cham), N9a (4/230 = 1.7% Khmer, 1/61 = 1.6% Cham), and C7 (1/61 = 1.6% Cham, 1/230 = 0.43% Khmer), are lower than in previous studies of Cambodians.

NascentStar
11-16-2021, 05:26 AM
I am khmer. To the poster above me,, my family is from southern cambodia, Takeo province to be exact. My 23andme results:

I posted results on reddit:
https://i.redd.it/uaewot7ocnz71.jpg

77.2% Indonesian/Thai/Khmer/Myanmar
16.4% Vietnamese
3.5% Chinese Dai
0.7% Broadly Chinese/Southeast Asian
1.1% Northeast Indian/Bengali
0.4% Northern Indian/Pakistani
0.4% Broadly Central Asian/Northern Indian
0.2% Southern European/Italian(trace ancestry)
0.1% Unassigned

Maternal haplogroup M, paternal haplogroup O-B418

NascentStar
11-17-2021, 01:47 AM
I have 3 other relatives who took 23andme. One thing that was actually consistent in all our results were the percentage of vietnamese. I have 16.4%, my 3 relatives had 13.8%, 15.3%, 20.1% respectively. Not all of us inherited the Indian genes from our ancestors, and not all of us had the chinese dai or Han chinese genes either. However, vietnamese was consistent and the percentages weren't too different. I wonder if this is ancient austroasiatic dna? None of us recall anyone in the family being pure or part vietnamese. Supposedly, we had a great, great grandparent who was pure vietnamese living in the late 1800s to early 1900s according to 23andme ancestors timeline.

okarinaofsteiner
11-17-2021, 07:04 PM
The Indonesian/Thai/Khmer/Myanmar category sounds like a catch-all for all SEA ancestry that isn’t Vietnamese, Filipino, or Chinese Dai so it makes sense that it might assign some part of Khmer ancestry as Vietnamese due to lack of specificity.

NascentStar
11-18-2021, 01:15 AM
The Indonesian/Thai/Khmer/Myanmar category sounds like a catch-all for all SEA ancestry that isn’t Vietnamese, Filipino, or Chinese Dai so it makes sense that it might assign some part of Khmer ancestry as Vietnamese due to lack of specificity.

I can sort of see why they're all lumped together. A lot of thais are assimilated austroasiatic speaking people. The indonesians are part AA and the Burmese have the mon ethnic minority who once were widespread and predated the arrival of the ethnic Burmese. But, I dont understand how vietnamese could have their own category when their genetics overlap with chinese ethnic minority in southern China. Viets themselves are hybrids with a good amount of Han chinese, dai and AA. Also, one of my relatives had matches in vietnam such as in Hanoi. Me and another relative had 0 match in vietnam. We did score high matches in cambodia of course.

okarinaofsteiner
11-19-2021, 03:23 AM
I can sort of see why they're all lumped together. A lot of thais are assimilated austroasiatic speaking people. The indonesians are part AA and the Burmese have the mon ethnic minority who once were widespread and predated the arrival of the ethnic Burmese. But, I dont understand how vietnamese could have their own category when their genetics overlap with chinese ethnic minority in southern China. Viets themselves are hybrids with a good amount of Han chinese, dai and AA. Also, one of my relatives had matches in vietnam such as in Hanoi. Me and another relative had 0 match in vietnam. We did score high matches in cambodia of course.

My theory is that Vietnamese and Filipinos have their own categories since their database is based on their mostly American customers. Most Southeast Asians in the US are Vietnamese or Filipino, so 23andMe has more Filipino/Viet samples, which allows them to better detect those ancestries. 23andMe probably doesn’t have enough Khmer samples (for example) to be able to accurately distinguish it from Thai or Lao ancestry the way they can with Kinh Vietnamese or native Filipino.

NascentStar
11-20-2021, 06:37 AM
My theory is that Vietnamese and Filipinos have their own categories since their database is based on their mostly American customers. Most Southeast Asians in the US are Vietnamese or Filipino, so 23andMe has more Filipino/Viet samples, which allows them to better detect those ancestries. 23andMe probably doesn’t have enough Khmer samples (for example) to be able to accurately distinguish it from Thai or Lao ancestry the way they can with Kinh Vietnamese or native Filipino.

Yes, that's most likely the case. But, why do these results vary so much even between siblings? How is it possible to get a matching dna from certain regions and countries for one sibling, while being undetected and not specific enough for a match with another sibling?

NascentStar
11-22-2021, 05:18 AM
(3) The frequencies of some East Asian-related mtDNA haplogroups, including M7b (9/230 = 3.9% Khmer, 2/61 = 3.3% Cham), N9a (4/230 = 1.7% Khmer, 1/61 = 1.6% Cham), and C7 (1/61 = 1.6% Cham, 1/230 = 0.43% Khmer), are lower than in previous studies of Cambodians.
One of my many 3rd cousins on 23andme has the mtdna haplogroup N9a2'4'5 which I assume is a subclade. Interestingly, she is 99.2% I/T/K/M. 0% chinese or northern asian such as Japanese or Korean. She is however very fair skinned for a khmer person who is almost 100%. I'm guessing this particular haplogroup she belongs to has something to do with it. I have another 3rd cousin on 23andme who is 99.7% I/T/K/M but with mtdna haplogroup M7b, one of the subclades of M. Her skin is more tanned like mine.

ph2ter
02-18-2022, 11:54 PM
Some similarity maps of ancient Asian samples:

https://i.imgur.com/oj4UDvY.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:21 AM
https://i.imgur.com/YcX0YM4.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:30 AM
https://i.imgur.com/zXJpQCQ.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:31 AM
https://i.imgur.com/LEoZ4m6.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:42 AM
https://i.imgur.com/kP3vfex.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:46 AM
https://i.imgur.com/h8QhAMw.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:52 AM
https://i.imgur.com/HA7DDFE.png

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 12:58 AM
https://i.imgur.com/HGpHYSJ.png

pmokeefe
02-19-2022, 01:19 AM
Indian genetic heritage in Southeast Asian populations (https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1010036)

"Another group genotyped in this study, Khmer from Thailand, is a Northern Khmer-speaking population which is closely related to Cambodian Khmer (Cambodians), the majority population in Cambodia [1]. Present-day Khmer are likely to be descendants of people from ancient Khmer states in the region"

...

Cambodian Khmer, Cham, Ede, Giarai, and Malay (data for four former populations were generated in this study) demonstrated a “light pink” ancestry component (accounting for more than 5% of their ancestry, on average) that is enriched in South Asian populations such as Irula and Mala from Southern India

Khmer from Cambodia and Thailand ... harbor South Asian ancestry (9.4 ± 2.2%, ...), as inferred by qpAdm

...

In this study, we generated new data for Austroasiatic-speaking Khmer from Thailand. Khmer is the official language of Cambodia, and Cambodian Khmer (Cambodians) is the majority ethnic group in Cambodia [1]. Our admixture graph modeling showed that Khmer from Thailand and Cambodia harbor two ancestry sources in common: a Mlabri-related source and South Asian ancestry (Figs 6C and S4E and S3 Table). Low frequencies of West Eurasian-associated Y-haplogroups R1a1a1b2a2a (R-Z2123) and R1a1 were reported in Khmer from Thailand (3.4%) [9] and Cambodia (7.2%) [7], respectively. The best-fitting admixture graph model for Khmer from Cambodia includes additional ancestry from an Atayal-related (i.e., Austronesian) source (S4E Fig and S3 Table). Khmer from Cambodia plausibly received this ancestry via Cham due to a long-lasting interaction between the ancient Cambodian and Champa Kingdoms [6]. Cham is also the largest ethnic minority in Cambodia today [1]. Haplotype-based analysis SOURCEFIND also confirms South Asian admixture in Khmer from Thailand and Cambodia (Fig 7). The date of the South Asian admixture event is older in Khmer from Thailand (1218–1291 YBP) than in Khmer from Cambodia (771–808 YBP) (Fig 8), but both dates lie within the Angkorian period (9th - 15th century CE) [2].

Data Availability: All genotype data of 119 individuals in this study is publicly available at the Reich lab website (https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/datasets).

Huck Finn
02-19-2022, 05:33 AM
https://i.imgur.com/h8QhAMw.png

Many thanks for a nice pic. What, according to your understanding, differentiates groups like Hanty, Mansi, Nganassan and Nenets but also groups like Ket and Siberian Tatars from CHN_WLR? Western ANE, other East Asiatic sources, some other sources?

ph2ter
02-19-2022, 11:03 AM
Many thanks for a nice pic. What, according to your understanding, differentiates groups like Hanty, Mansi, Nganassan and Nenets but also groups like Ket and Siberian Tatars from CHN_WLR? Western ANE, other East Asiatic sources, some other sources?
I think that you can conclude what differentiates them from the next few maps:

https://i.imgur.com/4EdenOh.png
https://i.imgur.com/ZighCwR.png
https://i.imgur.com/6C0tqE2.png
https://i.imgur.com/VvSSn8K.png
https://i.imgur.com/7k8x0a7.png
https://i.imgur.com/aDQS0v2.png
https://i.imgur.com/m3GBWaI.png
https://i.imgur.com/m62K4tf.png
https://i.imgur.com/RMwrSvS.png

Q-M242-is-Papuan-related
02-19-2022, 02:02 PM
It appeared that some Europeans (for example, the Estonians) do share significantly more alleles with some East Asian populations relative to the ancient population from Europe (Baltic_BA).

https://i.ibb.co/fC2dXdY/1.png

Supplementary Information Table S8. Significantly positive results for D(Modern eastern Baltic population, Baltic_BA;X, Mbuti). We tested all modern populations for X. This test shows if Test shares significantly more alleles with X than
A does with X when Z>3. The 40 most significant tests are shown for each.

okarinaofsteiner
02-20-2022, 01:47 AM
https://i.imgur.com/HGpHYSJ.png

Interesting to see what the map looks like for Jomon. Fascinating that "Siamese" Thai and Burmese are Jomon "enriched" while Khmer and Lao are not.

I also find it interesting that Lao scores lower than all the other non-Mlabri/Htin/Khmer_Thailand Mainland SEA populations on many of the "East Eurasian" Siberian reference group maps.

ph2ter
02-20-2022, 11:24 AM
Interesting to see what the map looks like for Jomon. Fascinating that "Siamese" Thai and Burmese are Jomon "enriched" while Khmer and Lao are not.

I also find it interesting that Lao scores lower than all the other non-Mlabri/Htin/Khmer_Thailand Mainland SEA populations on many of the "East Eurasian" Siberian reference group maps.
By looking the maps the Lao people appear the most autochthonous to the area of central Indochina.

Max_H
02-20-2022, 07:31 PM
https://i.imgur.com/kP3vfex.png

I am curious, why is there no sharing with Papuan groups?

Max_H
02-20-2022, 07:32 PM
Interesting to see what the map looks like for Jomon. Fascinating that "Siamese" Thai and Burmese are Jomon "enriched" while Khmer and Lao are not.

I also find it interesting that Lao scores lower than all the other non-Mlabri/Htin/Khmer_Thailand Mainland SEA populations on many of the "East Eurasian" Siberian reference group maps.

Possibly due to higher drifted Hoabinhian-related or/and higher inland southern East Asian ancestry?

Q-M242-is-Papuan-related
02-20-2022, 11:13 PM
A technological perspective on the lithic industry of the Bailiandong Cave (36–7 ka) in Guangxi: An effort to redefine the cobble-tool industry in South China

Yuduan Zhou, Yuanjin Jiang, Ge Liang, Yinghua Li , Hubert Forestier, Huan Li, Peng Chen, Liwei Wang, Tingting Liang, Chengpo He
Published: 31 October 2019

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631068319301551

Abstract
In South China and mainland Southeast Asia, the lithic industry called the “cobble-tool industry” dominated throughout the Pleistocene and persisted until the middle Holocene. Although this term has long been used to characterize the lithic industry and to compare the Paleolithic cultures interregionally, it is really just a description of the raw material used by the lithic industry, lacking any indication of essential technological information about lithic production. As a result, the term loses utility when we compare the lithic industries of different sites in South China and mainland Southeast Asia, because both regions' lithic industries are characterized by cobble/pebble raw material during their prehistory. In this paper, we studied the lithic collection of the Bailiandong Cave, an important site in Guangxi, southern China, dating back to 36–7 ka, from a new technological perspective, and revealed the chaînes opératoires of production and the objectives of prehistoric knappers. After a concise comparison with the Hoabinihian techno-complex in mainland southeastern Asia, the long-lasting suspicion about the Hoabinhian elements in this site was dispelled. So, technological analysis did construct a solid foundation to redefine the cobble-tool industry in South China and to reveal the variability of lithic industries on a larger regional scale. The application of this approach to more sites is expected to help to decipher more clearly the technological and cultural scenario of prehistoric humans in South China and adjacent Southeast Asia.


5. Discussion and conclusion
Although the relatively small number of artifacts and the macro-stratigraphic division of two units of the site make a quantitative analysis less meaningful, technological analysis from a qualitative point of view has yielded new insights about the lithic technology of the Bailiandong Cave from the late late Pleistocene to the early Holocene. Unlike previous research that defined the lithic industry of the Bailiandong Cave as small flake-tool industry in the lower unit and large cobble-tool industry in the upper unit and drew the conclusion that a significant change in lithic production had taken place from the lower to the upper units (Jiang, 2009, Wang, 2005, Wang, 2016, Zhou and He, 2016), our technological analysis has revealed that the nature and characteristics of lithic industries could have been much more complex than previously perceived, and we prefer not to take the flake-tool industry as an isolated technological phenomenon, but as one coexisting with shaped cobble tools during this period at the Bailiandong Cave site. (...)

https://i.ibb.co/tzNZfyc/7.png

P.S. Interestingly, in the article about the Xiaodong site (Southwest China), which is not that far from the Bailiandong Cave in terms of geography, edge-grinding was reported for one unusual lithic sample, which was deposited in the layer dated 29,420 to 29,590 BP, that is, it appeared during the period when coming and influence of the Papuan-related component of the Hoabinhians was not detected in ancient samples of Southwestern China in 'Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia (11000bP)', that is, when the autosomal component distantly related to the Longlin individual still dominated.

okarinaofsteiner
02-21-2022, 06:59 PM
I am curious, why is there no sharing with Papuan groups?

Onge = Hoabinhian = "Basal East Asian", which explains the sharing with MY and PH Negritos, East Asian-enriched South Asians, and to a lesser extent Central Asians. Of course this doesn't explain why AASI-heavy South Asians also have higher affinity with Onge than Papuans, or why Australian Aborigines have more affinity than Papuans. Maybe it has to do with Papuans having a lot of Denisovan ancestry that other groups don't?

https://i.imgur.com/kP3vfex.png

okarinaofsteiner
02-21-2022, 07:03 PM
Interesting to see what the map looks like for Jomon. Fascinating that "Siamese" Thai and Burmese are Jomon "enriched" while Khmer and Lao are not.

I also find it interesting that Lao scores lower than all the other non-Mlabri/Htin/Khmer_Thailand Mainland SEA populations on many of the "East Eurasian" Siberian reference group maps.

Possibly due to higher drifted Hoabinhian-related or/and higher inland southern East Asian ancestry?

Lao is probably a more "pure" mainland SEA group than Siamese or Khmer. Javanese also scores lower on "Jomon" than most other non-Negrito Island SEA groups.