PDA

View Full Version : Chinese GEDmatch averages



okarinaofsteiner
07-29-2021, 01:10 AM
Creating a separate thread for this from my East Eurasian megathread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread&p=783117&viewfull=1#post783117): https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread

Anthroscape user @kushkush made some autosomal DNA (HarappaWorld) maps of Chinese provinces around the end of 2019, which were interesting but didn't seem completely accurate to me, since they weren't weighted by population distribution within specific provinces. I think these are just averages of random samples from specific provinces, they don't seem to be specific to Han Chinese.

Posting their findings here for reference:

HarappaWorld NE Asian
https://i.imgur.com/XXiQ5jM.png

HarappaWorld SE Asian
https://i.imgur.com/AlrCqsi.png

HarappaWorld Siberian
https://i.imgur.com/e0vq3KL.png

HarappaWorld table
https://i.imgur.com/Rg3PgpF.png

okarinaofsteiner
07-29-2021, 01:14 AM
Reposting my own version of @kushkush's maps with MDLP K23b results (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread&p=783117&viewfull=1#post783117) here for comparison.

This was based on the DNAConnect.org dataset as well as other samples found on GEDmatch and the WeGene forum. I'd like to think this is more representative of the Han in each province, since I tried to weigh my assigned samples for each province I had more than 10 samples for according to the population distibution for that province.

The first 4 maps are of the 4 largest MDLP K23b East Eurasian ancestry components found among Chinese samples. The 5th one is of a North-South cline I created for East Asian MDLP K23b results. Basically "Tungus_Altaic" = northern, "Austronesian" = southern, while "South_East_Asian" and the 2 "Siberian" components are defined relative to T_A and AN. The original idea was that a Han Chinese person who scores the same amount of T_A and AN will score 0.5 on my North-South cline.

https://i.imgur.com/cw2QvTF.png

https://i.imgur.com/hwr2amo.png

https://i.imgur.com/rT227Kd.png

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

https://i.imgur.com/EQjAhu7.png

Original methodology post (link is defunct)- https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/anthroscape/mdlp-k23b-results-and-pca-plots-for-east-asians-t85446-s120.html#p1848187

TL;DR- I tried to weigh my available data according to the actual population distribution within each province (the DNAConnect.org data was geographically biased for most of the provinces- especially Jiangxi, Guangdong, Hunan, and Chongqing- which make up most of the DNAConnect.org dataset). Most of the samples in my original dataset and from DNAConnect.org were from the southern provinces, with very few from the northern provinces, so I had to use whatever I could get my hands on. The samples I used in my original dataset were just the ones of known regional/provincial ancestry.

I weighed the Fujian, Jiangxi, Hunan, and Anhui DNAConnect.org subsets according to the population distribution of each province to make them more representative. The Guangdong and Shaanxi subsets only represented more remote parts of the provinces, and the Guizhou subset was mostly from minority-heavy areas. The only northern province represented in the DNAConnect.org dataset was Henan.

Kaazi
07-29-2021, 04:46 AM
Creating a separate thread for this from my East Eurasian megathread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread&p=783117&viewfull=1#post783117): https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread

Anthroscape user @kushkush made some autosomal DNA (HarappaWorld) maps of Chinese provinces around the end of 2019, which were interesting but didn't seem completely accurate to me, since they weren't weighted by population distribution within specific provinces. I think these are just averages of random samples from specific provinces, they don't seem to be specific to Han Chinese.

Posting their findings here for reference:

HarappaWorld NE Asian
https://i.imgur.com/XXiQ5jM.png

HarappaWorld SE Asian
https://i.imgur.com/AlrCqsi.png

HarappaWorld Siberian
https://i.imgur.com/e0vq3KL.png

HarappaWorld table
https://i.imgur.com/Rg3PgpF.png

That's pretty outdated table.

You should create new average based on the large no. of Tibetan, Han samples available in genoplot. Tibet surely isn't 78% NE-Asian on average. It would be sth around early 70s.


SampleNE-AsianPapuanSE-AsianS-IndianSiberianSW-AsianBeringianSanNE-EuroAmericanCaucasianBalochMediterraneanE-AfricanPygmyW-AfricanTibetan Xinlong ► XL7699.760.180.060000000000000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL6080.430.6207.4111.20000000000.030.31
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ14080.031.051.324.311.060.010.4001.130000.490.21 0
Tibetan Chamdo ► T27479.971.7205.1410.640.541.020.1000.8600000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ11179.81.382.573.7111.140000.2300.0400.71000.4
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ3779.32.5603.9411.810.490001.50.250000.140
Tibetan Chamdo ► T24778.991.090.347.8711.290.410000000000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T7478.421.1406.5813.300.55000000000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ0178.310.421.594.0212.5900.45000.86000.510.3200. 94
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ2578.140.310.935.0411.540.551.990.14000.1700.020 .1101.06
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ10478.012.13.023.8812.010.03000.4300000.5100
Tibetan Chamdo ► T28377.911.071.225.4312.2800.810.28000.9300.060.01 00
Tibetan Chamdo ► T27377.661.2914.8711.040100.591.230.950.370000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T7677.641.1905.7111.2101.990000.841.060.35000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T19477.642.212.494.512.5800.05000.17000.36000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T17377.581.2806.6412.4901.840.1700000000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL0577.420.8808.312.810.18000.120.29000000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T14477.421.9105.3812.5500.840010.900000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T19677.412.172.72.9511.230.22.9800.310.05000000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T23877.341.060.94.1612.490.591.840.081.530000000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T32077.261.971.14.6511.960.490.5701.4600.010.3100. 2200
Tibetan Chamdo ► T14177.151.090.715.9713.5600.3600.750.43000000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ1277.010.626.456.346.98000.320.261.2500.030.310. 4300
Tibetan Lhasa ► T18576.4710.198.3411.7600000.720.491.030000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T36376.261.660.595.813.5900.51000.1301.14000.340
Tibetan Lhasa ► T16576.210.8808.1111.301.410002.0900000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T8076.182.120.798.289.640.510.61001.1400.5400.1800
Tibetan Nagqu ► T6776.092.11.436.7511.7100.530.170.4700.7600000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T12175.651.6507.8711.80.481.03001.0500.100.3600
Tibetan Lhasa ► T18375.431.191.425.613.04000002.130.960.22000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T9175.271.3806.8113.550.310.770.3600.230.93000.410 0
Tibetan Shannan ► T12775.242.70.257.8311.0600.530.0600.940.360.660.3 5000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T2275.082.031.297.0211.710000.021.181.310.370000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T31274.921.1909.3114.060000.30.0600.170000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T28274.921.980.526.212.800.08001.241.7800.360.0900
Tibetan Shigatse ► T21574.71.830.927.4412.300.9800.1700.61.050000
Tibetan Shannan ► T28974.592.1608.2610.9800.9400.890.3401.840000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL6174.41.0710.964.288.25000.1200.840000.050.020
Tibetan Lhasa ► T17074.342.381.17.7910.811.521.060.090.440.28000.2 000
Tibetan Shannan ► T20074.281.7907.9612.840.030000.7901.6800.6400
Tibetan Shannan ► T18874.052.010.178.5110.4600.7200.751.431.8200.060 00
Tibetan Shigatse ► T7873.822.860.596.0413.790.30.040.1400.650.541.210 000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T18173.781.361.566.9312.2400.7101.81.1800.440000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T12573.781.880.527.1411.240.492.92000.3801.660000
Tibetan Shannan ► T24273.62.920.766.2120.211.65000.970.70.75000.230
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL12073.531.590.436.1613.350.232.0100.130.930.860. 130.100.30.25
Tibetan Nagqu ► T18773.521.652.266.5613.1400.71000.6101.560000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T29773.52.560.846.513.5400.34000.6202.10000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH473.351.7805.3912.6102.1601.020.6501.951.09000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T2173.231.412.17.4412.7301.390.1201.2600.320000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH2073.210.860.34.6715.2100001.41.532.810000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T19272.681.172.997.0611.4901.8901.650.2800.4500.35 00
Tibetan Lhasa ► T1872.451.34.326.1112.741.560000.170.510.830000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ1472.291.0613.073.458.710.52000.050.230.1100000. 5
Tibetan Shigatse ► T291721.681.957.6313.8100000.7801.3700.7800
Tibetan Shigatse ► T7771.921.791.158.3311.3101.2901.511.3101.410000
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB771.821.155.63.5410.732.2100.041.800.072.45000 .210.38
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1171.811.862.314.1914.60.560.450.111.1901.030.90 00
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH171.711.730.545.9712.270.91001.432.30.262.890000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH571.70.380.795.2514.513.610.180.181.121.30.180.3 90.3300.070
Tibetan Shigatse ► T4171.482.321.168.1113.53000.030.612.11000.66000
Tibetan Shannan ► T19071.281.893.036.8813.030.7800.110.731.261.01000 00
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1771.241.760.265.1214.370.922.5700.6301.980.320. 83000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1271.160.483.154.7115.4401.0502.021.370.6200000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T27871.041.743.517.6513.330.640.4700.061.550000.01 00
Tibetan Shannan ► T24870.551.773.617.612.470.91.260.0800.8200.930000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH870.52.560.185.3814.301.7202.6200.31.930.51000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T18970.22.243.589.1913.410.010.13000.30.510.31000. 110
Tibetan Shannan ► T19970.141.932.187.7212.3302.0500.060.630.432.1000 .430
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1070.11.560.884.6314.6700011.121.513.320.96000.2 6
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ3969.980.9814.613.368.970000.881.09000000.13
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1969.880.874.344.9615.1800.4700.6102.830.860000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1869.871.50.514.7415.40.481.0801.080.913.291.130 000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH669.732.173.224.0514.050.932.8200.1600.421.211.2 3000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL4769.48014.484.138.4700.980.150.9400.330.750.050 00.25
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1569.481.013.026.515.420000.350.932.500.300.490
Tibetan Shannan ► T12669.351.542.816.1115.250.630.9800.2202.470.5100 00.13
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL9268.9021.660.817.330.280.570000.1800000.25
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB2068.851.644.196.3510.6800.980.523.17000.820.2 9002.53
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1468.751.982.512.6816.4701.8300.9503.141.150.530 00
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH768.450.72.83.3816.4601.810.161.0800.962.51.6800 0
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL3768.270.7424.880.195.1400.78000000000
Tibetan Gannan ► GN1968.1907.23.3710.420.61.970.061.080.783.331.910 .4300.650
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB568.071.165.416.8412.3901.160.230.931.121.830. 79000.060
Tibetan Gannan ► GN0168.020.449.072.189.95000.4301.371.494.722.3400 0
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1667.941.362.257.1213.2201.0100.091.582.151.511. 76000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH967.760.965.323.8615.5500.350.141.7400.913.41000 0
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1367.30.3411.232.2410.010.721.5401.411.982.330.7 800.1300
Tibetan Gannan ► GN1067.18012.150.8110.1300.803.0101.792.821.10.200
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL2266.940.727.690.052.5101.520.1100.34000000.14
Tibetan Gannan ► GN1765.980.3712.023.028.780.51.2103.6402.571.050.8 7000
Tibetan Gannan ► GN0365.580.9512.131.768.851.190.301.2702.085.040.1 30.4100.31
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH364.671.422.65.9217.520.531.7302.70.940.870.660. 45000
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB1763.941.3814.61010.790.430.0401.1701.42.791.7 40.501.22
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ8663.290.6612.512.257.161.191.450.081.170.616.87 2.760000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH262.371.561.724.4318.981.161.760.020.961.911.683 .460000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL2059.360.1736.450.172.490.8800.100.140.12000.120 0

Shuzam87
08-05-2021, 12:30 AM
That's pretty outdated table.

You should create new average based on the large no. of Tibetan, Han samples available in genoplot. Tibet surely isn't 78% NE-Asian on average. It would be sth around early 70s.


SampleNE-AsianPapuanSE-AsianS-IndianSiberianSW-AsianBeringianSanNE-EuroAmericanCaucasianBalochMediterraneanE-AfricanPygmyW-AfricanTibetan Xinlong ► XL7699.760.180.060000000000000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL6080.430.6207.4111.20000000000.030.31
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ14080.031.051.324.311.060.010.4001.130000.490.21 0
Tibetan Chamdo ► T27479.971.7205.1410.640.541.020.1000.8600000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ11179.81.382.573.7111.140000.2300.0400.71000.4
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ3779.32.5603.9411.810.490001.50.250000.140
Tibetan Chamdo ► T24778.991.090.347.8711.290.410000000000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T7478.421.1406.5813.300.55000000000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ0178.310.421.594.0212.5900.45000.86000.510.3200. 94
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ2578.140.310.935.0411.540.551.990.14000.1700.020 .1101.06
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ10478.012.13.023.8812.010.03000.4300000.5100
Tibetan Chamdo ► T28377.911.071.225.4312.2800.810.28000.9300.060.01 00
Tibetan Chamdo ► T27377.661.2914.8711.040100.591.230.950.370000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T7677.641.1905.7111.2101.990000.841.060.35000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T19477.642.212.494.512.5800.05000.17000.36000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T17377.581.2806.6412.4901.840.1700000000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL0577.420.8808.312.810.18000.120.29000000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T14477.421.9105.3812.5500.840010.900000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T19677.412.172.72.9511.230.22.9800.310.05000000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T23877.341.060.94.1612.490.591.840.081.530000000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T32077.261.971.14.6511.960.490.5701.4600.010.3100. 2200
Tibetan Chamdo ► T14177.151.090.715.9713.5600.3600.750.43000000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ1277.010.626.456.346.98000.320.261.2500.030.310. 4300
Tibetan Lhasa ► T18576.4710.198.3411.7600000.720.491.030000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T36376.261.660.595.813.5900.51000.1301.14000.340
Tibetan Lhasa ► T16576.210.8808.1111.301.410002.0900000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T8076.182.120.798.289.640.510.61001.1400.5400.1800
Tibetan Nagqu ► T6776.092.11.436.7511.7100.530.170.4700.7600000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T12175.651.6507.8711.80.481.03001.0500.100.3600
Tibetan Lhasa ► T18375.431.191.425.613.04000002.130.960.22000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T9175.271.3806.8113.550.310.770.3600.230.93000.410 0
Tibetan Shannan ► T12775.242.70.257.8311.0600.530.0600.940.360.660.3 5000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T2275.082.031.297.0211.710000.021.181.310.370000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T31274.921.1909.3114.060000.30.0600.170000
Tibetan Chamdo ► T28274.921.980.526.212.800.08001.241.7800.360.0900
Tibetan Shigatse ► T21574.71.830.927.4412.300.9800.1700.61.050000
Tibetan Shannan ► T28974.592.1608.2610.9800.9400.890.3401.840000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL6174.41.0710.964.288.25000.1200.840000.050.020
Tibetan Lhasa ► T17074.342.381.17.7910.811.521.060.090.440.28000.2 000
Tibetan Shannan ► T20074.281.7907.9612.840.030000.7901.6800.6400
Tibetan Shannan ► T18874.052.010.178.5110.4600.7200.751.431.8200.060 00
Tibetan Shigatse ► T7873.822.860.596.0413.790.30.040.1400.650.541.210 000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T18173.781.361.566.9312.2400.7101.81.1800.440000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T12573.781.880.527.1411.240.492.92000.3801.660000
Tibetan Shannan ► T24273.62.920.766.2120.211.65000.970.70.75000.230
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL12073.531.590.436.1613.350.232.0100.130.930.860. 130.100.30.25
Tibetan Nagqu ► T18773.521.652.266.5613.1400.71000.6101.560000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T29773.52.560.846.513.5400.34000.6202.10000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH473.351.7805.3912.6102.1601.020.6501.951.09000
Tibetan Lhasa ► T2173.231.412.17.4412.7301.390.1201.2600.320000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH2073.210.860.34.6715.2100001.41.532.810000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T19272.681.172.997.0611.4901.8901.650.2800.4500.35 00
Tibetan Lhasa ► T1872.451.34.326.1112.741.560000.170.510.830000
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ1472.291.0613.073.458.710.52000.050.230.1100000. 5
Tibetan Shigatse ► T291721.681.957.6313.8100000.7801.3700.7800
Tibetan Shigatse ► T7771.921.791.158.3311.3101.2901.511.3101.410000
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB771.821.155.63.5410.732.2100.041.800.072.45000 .210.38
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1171.811.862.314.1914.60.560.450.111.1901.030.90 00
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH171.711.730.545.9712.270.91001.432.30.262.890000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH571.70.380.795.2514.513.610.180.181.121.30.180.3 90.3300.070
Tibetan Shigatse ► T4171.482.321.168.1113.53000.030.612.11000.66000
Tibetan Shannan ► T19071.281.893.036.8813.030.7800.110.731.261.01000 00
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1771.241.760.265.1214.370.922.5700.6301.980.320. 83000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1271.160.483.154.7115.4401.0502.021.370.6200000
Tibetan Nagqu ► T27871.041.743.517.6513.330.640.4700.061.550000.01 00
Tibetan Shannan ► T24870.551.773.617.612.470.91.260.0800.8200.930000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH870.52.560.185.3814.301.7202.6200.31.930.51000
Tibetan Shigatse ► T18970.22.243.589.1913.410.010.13000.30.510.31000. 110
Tibetan Shannan ► T19970.141.932.187.7212.3302.0500.060.630.432.1000 .430
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1070.11.560.884.6314.6700011.121.513.320.96000.2 6
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ3969.980.9814.613.368.970000.881.09000000.13
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1969.880.874.344.9615.1800.4700.6102.830.860000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1869.871.50.514.7415.40.481.0801.080.913.291.130 000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH669.732.173.224.0514.050.932.8200.1600.421.211.2 3000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL4769.48014.484.138.4700.980.150.9400.330.750.050 00.25
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1569.481.013.026.515.420000.350.932.500.300.490
Tibetan Shannan ► T12669.351.542.816.1115.250.630.9800.2202.470.5100 00.13
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL9268.9021.660.817.330.280.570000.1800000.25
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB2068.851.644.196.3510.6800.980.523.17000.820.2 9002.53
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1468.751.982.512.6816.4701.8300.9503.141.150.530 00
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH768.450.72.83.3816.4601.810.161.0800.962.51.6800 0
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL3768.270.7424.880.195.1400.78000000000
Tibetan Gannan ► GN1968.1907.23.3710.420.61.970.061.080.783.331.910 .4300.650
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB568.071.165.416.8412.3901.160.230.931.121.830. 79000.060
Tibetan Gannan ► GN0168.020.449.072.189.95000.4301.371.494.722.3400 0
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1667.941.362.257.1213.2201.0100.091.582.151.511. 76000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH967.760.965.323.8615.5500.350.141.7400.913.41000 0
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH1367.30.3411.232.2410.010.721.5401.411.982.330.7 800.1300
Tibetan Gannan ► GN1067.18012.150.8110.1300.803.0101.792.821.10.200
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL2266.940.727.690.052.5101.520.1100.34000000.14
Tibetan Gannan ► GN1765.980.3712.023.028.780.51.2103.6402.571.050.8 7000
Tibetan Gannan ► GN0365.580.9512.131.768.851.190.301.2702.085.040.1 30.4100.31
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH364.671.422.65.9217.520.531.7302.70.940.870.660. 45000
Tibetan Xunhua ► XHTB1763.941.3814.61010.790.430.0401.1701.42.791.7 40.501.22
Tibetan Yajiang ► YJ8663.290.6612.512.257.161.191.450.081.170.616.87 2.760000
Tibetan Gangcha ► QH262.371.561.724.4318.981.161.760.020.961.911.683 .460000
Tibetan Xinlong ► XL2059.360.1736.450.172.490.8800.100.140.12000.120 0


Yeah, it would be cool if we can have an update.

okarinaofsteiner
08-10-2021, 11:54 PM
Yeah, it would be cool if we can have an update.

That was all Anthroscape user @kushkush- I have no idea if he's still into this stuff or have time for that. I don't even know how he found all those Tibetan GEDmatch samples back in the day.

I've considered making a HarappaWorld version of my MDLP K23b maps, but idk if the kits I used to calibrate results for different provinces are still publicly available. I'm guessing most have been deleted or removed from public access by now.

Kaazi
08-13-2021, 06:37 PM
Yeah, it would be cool if we can have an update.

Just made 100 Tibetans' average from genoplot.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?15471-South-Asian-HarappaWorld-results&p=791994&viewfull=1#post791994

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

okarinaofsteiner
10-03-2021, 08:18 AM
A former Anthroscape member sent me a chart of 23mofang averages for various suburban and rural districts in China, which are believed to be more autosomally "representative" of specific regions and linguistic subgroups (as opposed to the city centers, which are more cosmopolitan and therefore more "mixed".) https://imgur.com/a/pxuhh3D

https://i.imgur.com/1UYN0Tn.jpg

Map (latitude + longitude) with ChinaMAP study clusters added
https://i.imgur.com/GX11i2q.png

I attempted to model the MDLP K23b results for these averages earlier this year by substituting the listed ancestry components with various combinations of MDLP K23b reference populations. For example, I would model "She" with MDLP K23b's She, "Tibetan" with the average of the 2 MDLP K23b "Tibetan" reference populations, etc.

Full model for all non-Han 23mofang components:

Daic (Tai-Kradai) = 5/16 "Chinese_Dai" + 1/16 part "Tai_Lue" + 2/16 parts "Jiamao" + 2/16 parts "Zhuang" + 5/16 parts "Dai" + 1/16 part "Ami_Taiwan"
Tungusic = average of: "Xibo" + "Oroqen" + "Hezhen" + "Daur"
Hmong-Mien = average of: "Yao" + "Miao" + "Hmong_Miao" + "Hmong"
Japanese = "Japanese" (the one that scores highest on T_A)
Korean = average of: "Korean_" + "Korean_KR"
Lahu = "Lahu"
Buryat = "Buryat"
Yakut = "Yakut" (doesn't include the other "Yakut" reference pop)
Uyghur = average of: "Uygur" + "Uygur-Han"
Tibeto-Burman = average of: "Tibetian_Madou" + "Tibetian_TTR"


This was difficult to do for the N_Han and S_Han components, because using HGDP's "Han_North" and "Han_" did not result in the Taiwanese, Hakka, and Cantonese area averages resembling the "Chinese_Taiwan", "Hakka", and "Cantonese" reference populations, so I did some tweaking.

N_Han = 46.17% S_EA, 33.55% T_A, 18.43% AN, based on "Han_North" (HGDP)
S_Han v1 = 4/10 Han_ (HGDP) + 2/10 Chinese_Dai + 1/10 Tujia + 1/10 She + 1/10 Korean (avg) + 1/10 Vietnamese
S_Han v2 = 4/14 Han_ (HGDP) + 2/14 Korean (avg) + 2/14 Vietnamese + 2/14 Chinese_Dai + 1/14 Tujia + 1/14 She + 1/14 Ami + 1/14 Naxi

The N_Han reference component was modeled as something slightly more "NE Asian" shifted than most actual Northern Han, since this was highest among the Shandong, Hebei, and southern Shanxi averages. The S_Han reference component was modeled as something in-between "Chinese_Taiwan"/"Hakka" and "Cantonese", since this component was highest among the Teochew, Leizhou, and Hakka-speaking area averages in Guangdong [the Yue-speaking areas scored lower on this component].

I decided to make another model for S_Han after seeing how my averages plotted on the Austronesian vs Tungus_Altaic graph against the Chinese samples from my original GEDmatch dataset. S_Han v2 matched the distribution better than S_Han v1.

Old version (S_Han v1)
https://i.imgur.com/w1LLi62.png

New version (S_Han v2)
https://i.imgur.com/SE1mMcf.png

MNOPSC1b
10-04-2021, 02:10 AM
Thanks for this awesome chart. We can see that Yue-speaking peoples indeed scored very low on Northern Han but rather high on Zhuang-Dai, indicating that they're mostly sinicized natives.

okarinaofsteiner
10-16-2021, 07:12 AM
A former Anthroscape member sent me a chart of 23mofang averages for various suburban and rural districts in China, which are believed to be more autosomally "representative" of specific regions and linguistic subgroups (as opposed to the city centers, which are more cosmopolitan and therefore more "mixed".) https://imgur.com/a/pxuhh3D

https://i.imgur.com/1UYN0Tn.jpg

Map (latitude + longitude) with ChinaMAP study clusters added
https://i.imgur.com/GX11i2q.png

I attempted to model the MDLP K23b results for these averages earlier this year by substituting the listed ancestry components with various combinations of MDLP K23b reference populations. For example, I would model "She" with MDLP K23b's She, "Tibetan" with the average of the 2 MDLP K23b "Tibetan" reference populations, etc.


N_Han = 46.17% S_EA, 33.55% T_A, 18.43% AN, based on "Han_North" (HGDP)
S_Han v1 = 4/10 Han_ (HGDP) + 2/10 Chinese_Dai + 1/10 Tujia + 1/10 She + 1/10 Korean (avg) + 1/10 Vietnamese
S_Han v2 = 4/14 Han_ (HGDP) + 2/14 Korean (avg) + 2/14 Vietnamese + 2/14 Chinese_Dai + 1/14 Tujia + 1/14 She + 1/14 Ami + 1/14 Naxi

The N_Han reference component was modeled as something slightly more "NE Asian" shifted than most actual Northern Han, since this was highest among the Shandong, Hebei, and southern Shanxi averages. The S_Han reference component was modeled as something in-between "Chinese_Taiwan"/"Hakka" and "Cantonese", since this component was highest among the Teochew, Leizhou, and Hakka-speaking area averages in Guangdong [the Yue-speaking areas scored lower on this component].

I decided to make another model for S_Han after seeing how my averages plotted on the Austronesian vs Tungus_Altaic graph against the Chinese samples from my original GEDmatch dataset. S_Han v2 matched the distribution better than S_Han v1.



Austronesian vs Tungus_Altaic with original GEDmatch dataset (S_Han v1)
https://i.imgur.com/w1LLi62l.png

Austronesian vs Tungus_Altaic with original GEDmatch dataset (S_Han v2)
https://i.imgur.com/SE1mMcfl.png

In the new version, the Foshan and Jiangmen averages score quite closely to the "Cantonese" reference population on Tungus_Altaic and Austronesian. The Quanzhou average is fairly close to "Chinese_Taiwan", which I believe corresponds to native Minnan/Hokkien speakers from Taipei and should also be a good proxy for Minnan/Hokkien speakers in Fujian itself. The relative positions of the 23mofang location averages are the same in both the old and new versions.


N-S cline with original GEDmatch dataset + DNAConnect.org adoptees (S_Han v1)
https://i.imgur.com/YBwj794l.png

N-S cline with original GEDmatch dataset + DNAConnect.org adoptees (S_Han v2)
https://i.imgur.com/FhIURm2l.png

The newer version also seems to fit the distribution of actual Chinese samples on the N-S cline + East Eurasian percentages graph better. Which makes sense because I used a greater number of source populations for S_Han v2 that aren't 100% East Eurasian. I thought this would better simulate how the "S_Han" component seems to include some of the Daic-like ancestry (but not necessarily "Dai") that the Lingnan/Min+Hakka-speaking Han groups which score highest on 23mofang's "Southern Han" seem to have.



https://i.imgur.com/Ejnw6QPl.png

https://i.imgur.com/APym4vql.png

Versions of the above with ChinaMAP clusters labeled. Gray = Southeast [Fujian], green = Hubei.

On the N-S cline graph, the Jianghuai Mandarin, Wu, and Mindong samples fall on the line between the Northern Han and Southern Han reference points. There also seems to be an inland-coastal cline in that the inland samples seem to be less pure East Eurasian; we can clearly see the transition from Min speakers (Fujian) to Gan speakers (Jiangxi), Xiang speakers (Hunan), and SW Mandarin speakers (Sichuan/Chongqing)- all of which seem similarly "southern" to some extent but as shown in the original 23mofang chart [in Chinese] have different affinities to different SEA-like ancestries.



https://i.imgur.com/ZJ0Z69E.png

Map showing where the 0.45 (blue), 0.50 (purple), and 0.55 (red) values of my N-S cline fall on my new model (S_Han v2). The 0.45 value corresponds almost exactly to the Qinling-Huaihe line. While the 0.55 value roughly corresponds to which Southern Han (rice area) groups are more SEA-influenced and which ones are more "Central"

Max_H
10-17-2021, 08:14 PM
When inland samples score less "East Eurasian" what component increases instead?

okarinaofsteiner
10-18-2021, 01:40 AM
When inland samples score less "East Eurasian" what component increases instead?

Looking at the original chart, the Southwest Mandarin, Xiang, and (to a lesser extent) Gan speaking averages generally score higher on "Hmong-Miao", "Tibeto-Burman", and "Lahu". The Sichuan/Chongqing/Guizhou averages also score higher on Daic (Tai-Kradai) than other Southwest Mandarin groups.

There is also a north-south gradient of increasing "Lahu" between Sichuan/Chongqing and everywhere to the south, as well as a northeast-southwest gradient between Gan, Xiang, and the previously mentioned Southwest Mandarin groups from Yunnan, Guizhou, etc. The Yue groups also score higher on "Lahu" than the Hakka groups, who score higher than the Gan groups, who average slightly higher than the Fujian Min groups + Shantou. "Lahu" is a Himalayan-speaking ethnic group, but it seems to be a proxy for Austroasiatic-like ancestry?

The Fujian Min samples score relatively high on "Korean", while also scoring lower than the surrounding Southern Han groups on almost every other non-Han component. The Hakka groups also have relatively high affinities with "Korean", although not as much as the Jianghuai Mandarin + Wu groups or the other Yellow Sea-area Northern Han groups.

This all means the inland Southern Han groups score slightly higher on MDLP K23b "Australoid" and "Melano-Polynesian", although given which reference populations were used to simulate these samples, some of the more "northern-shifted" Sichuanese averages also seem to have higher West Eurasian components too. The inland Northern Han groups score more West Eurasian (specifically Central Asian-like) components due to scoring higher on 23mofang "Mongol".

okarinaofsteiner
10-18-2021, 05:40 AM
When inland samples score less "East Eurasian" what component increases instead?

The thing about this model is that the input data is averages of various suburban/rural districts and counties in China. And I'm using averages of MDLP K23b reference populations to simulate the 23mofang ancestry components. So this doesn't predict how individuals will score very well.

https://i.imgur.com/APym4vql.png

Honestly the differences in "East Eurasian" (which is basically other people's definition of "East Asian") aren't that significant between the Sichuan averages and Fujian averages. 98.8% and 99.2%. The differences between the Northwestern Han averages and North China Plain Northern Han averages are much larger.

MNOPSC1b
10-19-2021, 12:02 AM
Looking at the original chart, the Southwest Mandarin, Xiang, and (to a lesser extent) Gan speaking averages generally score higher on "Hmong-Miao", "Tibeto-Burman", and "Lahu". The Sichuan/Chongqing/Guizhou averages also score higher on Daic (Tai-Kradai) than other Southwest Mandarin groups.

There is also a north-south gradient of increasing "Lahu" between Sichuan/Chongqing and everywhere to the south, as well as a northeast-southwest gradient between Gan, Xiang, and the previously mentioned Southwest Mandarin groups from Yunnan, Guizhou, etc. The Yue groups also score higher on "Lahu" than the Hakka groups, who score higher than the Gan groups, who average slightly higher than the Fujian Min groups + Shantou. "Lahu" is a Himalayan-speaking ethnic group, but it seems to be a proxy for Austroasiatic-like ancestry?

The Fujian Min samples score relatively high on "Korean", while also scoring lower than the surrounding Southern Han groups on almost every other non-Han component. The Hakka groups also have relatively high affinities with "Korean", although not as much as the Jianghuai Mandarin + Wu groups or the other Yellow Sea-area Northern Han groups.

This all means the inland Southern Han groups score slightly higher on MDLP K23b "Australoid" and "Melano-Polynesian", although given which reference populations were used to simulate these samples, some of the more "northern-shifted" Sichuanese averages also seem to have higher West Eurasian components too. The inland Northern Han groups score more West Eurasian (specifically Central Asian-like) components due to scoring higher on 23mofang "Mongol".

IMO, the Korean component most likely represents a eastern or coastal component, and it decreases as one moves further inland or further to the west.

It may also indicate that northern influence is stronger on the eastern and southeastern coast than the regions further to the west. I noticed years ago that the Northern Han component is significantly higher in Fujian and Chaoshan than in Western Guangdong and Guangxi. This might indicate that the historical migrations from Northern China to Southern China largely followed a coastal route, as opposed to moving across inland regions and the Nanling Range.

As for the Lahu component, I agree with you that it likely represents some sort of Austroasiatic influence. Despite speaking a Sino-Tibetan language, the Lahu people are quite southern-shifted on the autosomal graph, and their high frequencies of Y-chromosome haplogroup F2 also make them rather unique among Sino-Tibetan speaking peoples.

Max_H
10-20-2021, 09:04 PM
Looking at the original chart, the Southwest Mandarin, Xiang, and (to a lesser extent) Gan speaking averages generally score higher on "Hmong-Miao", "Tibeto-Burman", and "Lahu". The Sichuan/Chongqing/Guizhou averages also score higher on Daic (Tai-Kradai) than other Southwest Mandarin groups.

There is also a north-south gradient of increasing "Lahu" between Sichuan/Chongqing and everywhere to the south, as well as a northeast-southwest gradient between Gan, Xiang, and the previously mentioned Southwest Mandarin groups from Yunnan, Guizhou, etc. The Yue groups also score higher on "Lahu" than the Hakka groups, who score higher than the Gan groups, who average slightly higher than the Fujian Min groups + Shantou. "Lahu" is a Himalayan-speaking ethnic group, but it seems to be a proxy for Austroasiatic-like ancestry?

The Fujian Min samples score relatively high on "Korean", while also scoring lower than the surrounding Southern Han groups on almost every other non-Han component. The Hakka groups also have relatively high affinities with "Korean", although not as much as the Jianghuai Mandarin + Wu groups or the other Yellow Sea-area Northern Han groups.

This all means the inland Southern Han groups score slightly higher on MDLP K23b "Australoid" and "Melano-Polynesian", although given which reference populations were used to simulate these samples, some of the more "northern-shifted" Sichuanese averages also seem to have higher West Eurasian components too. The inland Northern Han groups score more West Eurasian (specifically Central Asian-like) components due to scoring higher on 23mofang "Mongol".

So in MDLP K23b East Eurasian is meant as East Asian? I know 23mofang but I haven't paid much attention to genetic testing kits and results yet... Lahu is probably Austroasiatic-related indeed as I said before I think there is a difference among inland and coastal Chinese groups in their southern component, inland scoring more Mekong_N-related and coastal scoring more Fujian_N-related.

I also think that Mekong_N-related components (a type of ancestry widespread in Austroasiatic groups) are a bit more Onge-like/southern-shifted compared to coastal Neolithic Fujian populations.

Korean seems like an eastern coastal component, perhaps also due to the southern ancestry in Koreans being more related to the Fujian-type of southern East Asian ancestry than to the Mekong-type.

I am not very sure about West Eurasian ancestry in Sichuanese samples (not to say that they don't have it, just usually don't show it) , except if they are Qiang that I've noticed sometimes score some low West Eurasian-related ancestry. But some Sichuanese have Tibetan-like ancestry so in this case, I can see how they would get excess of West Eurasian or Indian admixture relative to coastal southern Han.

okarinaofsteiner
10-20-2021, 10:47 PM
So in MDLP K23b East Eurasian is meant as East Asian? I know 23mofang but I haven't paid much attention to genetic testing kits and results yet... Lahu is probably Austroasiatic-related indeed as I said before I think there is a difference among inland and coastal Chinese groups in their southern component, inland scoring more Mekong_N-related and coastal scoring more Fujian_N-related.

I also think that Mekong_N-related components (a type of ancestry widespread in Austroasiatic groups) are a bit more Onge-like/southern-shifted compared to coastal Neolithic Fujian populations.

My "East Eurasian" for MDLP K23b is just "Austronesian", "South_East_Asian", "Tungus_Altaic", "East_Siberian", and "Paleo_Siberian". So basically just the "Mongoloid" ancestry components associated with East Asians proper- as opposed to any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, or the paraphyletic "Australoid" groups [AASI proper, Onge, Hoabinhian, Malaysian Negrito, Philippine Negrito, Australian aborigine, Papuan, the diverged ancestry component of Polynesians, the diverged component in Tibetans, the diverged component in Jomon, etc]

I don't consider being more "Onge-like" to be more "southern-shifted", at least if we're talking about strictly "Basal East Asian" ancestry. We know the ancestors of Austroasiatic speakers mixed with Onge-like populations while still in modern-day China, but this probably took place after the inland-coastal split among southern East Asians that took place over 10k years ago.

I wouldn't be surprised if Mekong_N has some shared drift in its "Basal East Asian" with the ancestors of Himalayans/Tibeto-Burmans that Fujian_N doesn't have. But this is all just guesswork on my part. I haven't had time to read or go back to the papers that discuss this in detail.

I don't think any of the 23mofang reference components have particularly strong affinities with Fujian_N aside from maybe Daic (Tai-Kradai), which some posters have suggested is genetically transitional between "Proto-Austroasiatic" and "Proto-Austronesian". But I agree that whatever "southern" affinities Korean and Japanese have are going to be with Fujian_N related groups, not Mekong_N related groups.

MNOPSC1b
10-20-2021, 11:44 PM
So in MDLP K23b East Eurasian is meant as East Asian? I know 23mofang but I haven't paid much attention to genetic testing kits and results yet... Lahu is probably Austroasiatic-related indeed as I said before I think there is a difference among inland and coastal Chinese groups in their southern component, inland scoring more Mekong_N-related and coastal scoring more Fujian_N-related.

I also think that Mekong_N-related components (a type of ancestry widespread in Austroasiatic groups) are a bit more Onge-like/southern-shifted compared to coastal Neolithic Fujian populations.

Korean seems like an eastern coastal component, perhaps also due to the southern ancestry in Koreans being more related to the Fujian-type of southern East Asian ancestry than to the Mekong-type.

Largely agree, though I think the similarity between Koreans and Eastern Chinese isn't because of Koreans being more related to the Fujian-type of southern East Asian ancestry, but rather because people from Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Fujian have received significant Northern Chinese / Neolithic Yellow River ancestry, which Koreans also have a fair amount. The actual Austronesian or Fujian_N related component among Koreans and Japanese is quite low, and Mekong_N related even lower. I don't think those are the causes of similarity.

Max_H
10-21-2021, 09:18 AM
Largely agree, though I think the similarity between Koreans and Eastern Chinese isn't because of Koreans being more related to the Fujian-type of southern East Asian ancestry, but rather because people from Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Fujian have received significant Northern Chinese / Neolithic Yellow River ancestry, which Koreans also have a fair amount. The actual Austronesian or Fujian_N related component among Koreans and Japanese is quite low, and Mekong_N related even lower. I don't think those are the causes of similarity.

I agree with eastern Chinese having received significant Neolithic Yellow River ancestry, but NW Han such as Shanxi Han are even more northern-shifted yet do not score similar as similar to Koreans as eastern Han too (nor do they resemble them more phenotypically-but this is a different story). So I was wondering if the explanation is sharing of a southern component instead.

Not sure Koreans even score above-trace-level Mekong_N related components.


Edit: An interesting possibility is higher Boshan_N-related (coastal Neolithic northern East Asian ancestry) in eastern Han relative to inland Han (including northern inland Han) which is probably also found in substantial amounts in Koreans. At least this looks to be the case based on Global 25.

Max_H
10-21-2021, 09:23 AM
My "East Eurasian" for MDLP K23b is just "Austronesian", "South_East_Asian", "Tungus_Altaic", "East_Siberian", and "Paleo_Siberian". So basically just the "Mongoloid" ancestry components associated with East Asians proper- as opposed to any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, or the paraphyletic "Australoid" groups [AASI proper, Onge, Hoabinhian, Malaysian Negrito, Philippine Negrito, Australian aborigine, Papuan, the diverged ancestry component of Polynesians, the diverged component in Tibetans, the diverged component in Jomon, etc]

I don't consider being more "Onge-like" to be more "southern-shifted", at least if we're talking about strictly "Basal East Asian" ancestry. We know the ancestors of Austroasiatic speakers mixed with Onge-like populations while still in modern-day China, but this probably took place after the inland-coastal split among southern East Asians that took place over 10k years ago.

I wouldn't be surprised if Mekong_N has some shared drift in its "Basal East Asian" with the ancestors of Himalayans/Tibeto-Burmans that Fujian_N doesn't have. But this is all just guesswork on my part. I haven't had time to read or go back to the papers that discuss this in detail.

I don't think any of the 23mofang reference components have particularly strong affinities with Fujian_N aside from maybe Daic (Tai-Kradai), which some posters have suggested is genetically transitional between "Proto-Austroasiatic" and "Proto-Austronesian". But I agree that whatever "southern" affinities Korean and Japanese have are going to be with Fujian_N related groups, not Mekong_N related groups.

What else could explain the southern pull of populations carrying Mekong_N-related ancestry compared to eastern ones carrying more Fujian_LN-related? Since you mentioned that affinities with "Southeast Asian" groups are included in MDLP K23b "East Eurasian" category.

23mofang components all look to reflect modern-day populations, but I think the Daic component is indeed transitional between "Proto-Austroasitic" and "Proto-Austronesian".

okarinaofsteiner
10-21-2021, 04:27 PM
What else could explain the southern pull of populations carrying Mekong_N-related ancestry compared to eastern ones carrying more Fujian_LN-related? Since you mentioned that affinities with "Southeast Asian" groups are included in MDLP K23b "East Eurasian" category.

As far as 23mofang is concerned, coastal Southern Han groups seem to have less SEA-like ancestry overall than inland Southern Han groups. Tbh none of the other "southern" components have particularly strong affinities with Fujian_N. I don't see why Hmong-Mien or Southern Han (which is highest in the coastal area between southern Fujian and the Leizhou Peninsula) would be better proxies for Fujian_N than Daic (Tai-Kradai).

The Fujian Min averages have slightly higher levels of Daic than the Wu averages (1.1-1.2% vs 0.9-1.0%), both of which are lower than the Gan averages, which are lower than the Xiang averages, which are around the same as the Hakka averages. It seems to me that the "southern" ancestry Fujian Han have is mostly in the "Southern Han" component, which isn't as good a fit for the "southern" ancestry in other Southern Han groups, so their "southern" ancestry tend to be modeled more as various "non-Han" components like Daic and Hmong-Mien.

MNOPSC1b
10-21-2021, 11:38 PM
I agree with eastern Chinese having received significant Neolithic Yellow River ancestry, but NW Han such as Shanxi Han are even more northern-shifted yet do not score similar as similar to Koreans as eastern Han too (nor do they resemble them more phenotypically-but this is a different story). So I was wondering if the explanation is sharing of a southern component instead.

Not sure Koreans even score above-trace-level Mekong_N related components.


Edit: An interesting possibility is higher Boshan_N-related (coastal Neolithic northern East Asian ancestry) in eastern Han relative to inland Han (including northern inland Han) which is probably also found in substantial amounts in Koreans. At least this looks to be the case based on Global 25.

The reason is most likely just as you mentioned, Koreans and Eastern Chinese inherited more coastal Neolithic Northern East Asian ancestry (represented by Boshan and Xiaojingshan). On the other hand, inland Northern Han inherited more Upper Yellow River Northern East Asian ancestry or steppe-related ancestry.

MNOPSC1b
10-21-2021, 11:56 PM
As far as 23mofang is concerned, coastal Southern Han groups seem to have less SEA-like ancestry overall than inland Southern Han groups. Tbh none of the other "southern" components have particularly strong affinities with Fujian_N. I don't see why Hmong-Mien or Southern Han (which is highest in the coastal area between southern Fujian and the Leizhou Peninsula) would be better proxies for Fujian_N than Daic (Tai-Kradai).

The Fujian Min averages have slightly higher levels of Daic than the Wu averages (1.1-1.2% vs 0.9-1.0%), both of which are lower than the Gan averages, which are lower than the Xiang averages, which are around the same as the Hakka averages. It seems to me that the "southern" ancestry Fujian Han have is mostly in the "Southern Han" component, which isn't as good a fit for the "southern" ancestry in other Southern Han groups, so their "southern" ancestry tend to be modeled more as various "non-Han" components like Daic and Hmong-Mien.

For the East-West difference among Southern Chinese I don't really see it as merely coastal vs inland but is more complicated than that. As I mentioned numerous times here and on Anthroscape, there's a clear decrease in Northern Han component and a clear increase in Daic component as we move from Fujian to Guangxi, with the highest concentration of Daic component found among the regional Cantonese populations in Western Guangdong and Guangxi, can reach to more than 20% according to some statistics I've seen, which is way higher than the Daic component found among Fujianese. And on average these regional Cantonese speakers are the southernmost shifted out of all Han Chinese groups, and are very close to SE Asians. IMO they're in fact sinicized Zhuang, and should really be granted minority status.

However, once we get to more inland regions like Guizhou and Yunnan, the Northern Han component starts to increase again as well as the Yi and Hmong-Mien components, but the Daic component decreases.

Max_H
10-27-2021, 03:06 PM
For the East-West difference among Southern Chinese I don't really see it as merely coastal vs inland but is more complicated than that. As I mentioned numerous times here and on Anthroscape, there's a clear decrease in Northern Han component and a clear increase in Daic component as we move from Fujian to Guangxi, with the highest concentration of Daic component found among the regional Cantonese populations in Western Guangdong and Guangxi, can reach to more than 20% according to some statistics I've seen, which is way higher than the Daic component found among Fujianese. And on average these regional Cantonese speakers are the southernmost shifted out of all Han Chinese groups, and are very close to SE Asians. IMO they're in fact sinicized Zhuang, and should really be granted minority status.

However, once we get to more inland regions like Guizhou and Yunnan, the Northern Han component starts to increase again as well as the Yi and Hmong-Mien components, but the Daic component decreases.

Do you think the west-east differentiation of southern Chinese is then in part at least due to different amounts of northern ancestry as well as coastal vs inland southern East Asian ancestry?

Max_H
10-27-2021, 03:08 PM
The reason is most likely just as you mentioned, Koreans and Eastern Chinese inherited more coastal Neolithic Northern East Asian ancestry (represented by Boshan and Xiaojingshan). On the other hand, inland Northern Han inherited more Upper Yellow River Northern East Asian ancestry or steppe-related ancestry.

I think the Steppe-related ancestry in modern-day northern Han is mostly a later phenomenon because it is very low to non-present in southern China. Shanxi Han are probably on average 4-5% West Eurasian but even in Shandong it is a lot lower.

okarinaofsteiner
10-28-2021, 05:23 AM
Do you think the west-east differentiation of southern Chinese is then in part at least due to different amounts of northern ancestry as well as coastal vs inland southern East Asian ancestry?

I think the differences between Fujian and the Pearl River Delta have more to do with different amounts of northern ancestry, but for Sichuan vs Yunnan vs Guizhou vs Hunan vs Jiangxi, it's likely different types of "southern" (non-Han) East Asian ancestries.


I think the Steppe-related ancestry in modern-day northern Han is mostly a later phenomenon because it is very low to non-present in southern China. Shanxi Han are probably on average 4-5% West Eurasian but even in Shandong it is a lot lower.

Yup, Razib Khan mentioned this 2 years ago (https://youtu.be/uR2puKcym60?t=995). That being said, I have noticed in my private GEDmatch samples and in the DNAConnect.org adoptees that Guangdong/Hong Kong samples have slightly higher levels of trace West Eurasian than Fujianese/Taiwanese. Guangdong and Pearl River Delta Han do seem to score slightly lower on East Eurasian than Fujianese and Taiwanese Han, but this could just as much be due to sample size issues as different levels of South Eurasian and West Eurasian trace ancestry.

From the WBBC study this year (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers/page158&p=798518#post798518)- smaller numbers/red = less genetic distance, larger numbers/blue = more genetic distance. Hunan, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, and Fujian being among the most "pure East Eurasian" provinces with the lowest amounts of non-East Asian affinities is consistent with what I've noticed in my private GEDmatch samples- the Han Chinese who score highest on East Eurasian are the Southern Han who are more southern than Yangtze Delta Han but more northern than Lingnan Han (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread&p=770762&viewfull=1#post770762).

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

MNOPSC1b
10-28-2021, 12:45 PM
I think the differences between Fujian and the Pearl River Delta have more to do with different amounts of northern ancestry, but for Sichuan vs Yunnan vs Guizhou vs Hunan vs Jiangxi, it's likely different types of "southern" (non-Han) East Asian ancestries.

There're two vectors of difference between Fujianese and people of Guangdong and Guangxi. First is that Fujianese have significantly higher Northern Han ancestry than those from Pearl River Delta and Western Guangdong. Second is that the Tai-Kradai ancestry of Fujianese is significantly lower than that of Cantonese-speaking populations. So it isn't just a difference in northern ancestry, but also a difference in Kradai-related ancestry.

Max_H
10-30-2021, 10:36 PM
I think the differences between Fujian and the Pearl River Delta have more to do with different amounts of northern ancestry, but for Sichuan vs Yunnan vs Guizhou vs Hunan vs Jiangxi, it's likely different types of "southern" (non-Han) East Asian ancestries.



Yup, Razib Khan mentioned this 2 years ago (https://youtu.be/uR2puKcym60?t=995). That being said, I have noticed in my private GEDmatch samples and in the DNAConnect.org adoptees that Guangdong/Hong Kong samples have slightly higher levels of trace West Eurasian than Fujianese/Taiwanese. Guangdong and Pearl River Delta Han do seem to score slightly lower on East Eurasian than Fujianese and Taiwanese Han, but this could just as much be due to sample size issues as different levels of South Eurasian and West Eurasian trace ancestry.

From the WBBC study this year (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers/page158&p=798518#post798518)- smaller numbers/red = less genetic distance, larger numbers/blue = more genetic distance. Hunan, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, and Fujian being among the most "pure East Eurasian" provinces with the lowest amounts of non-East Asian affinities is consistent with what I've noticed in my private GEDmatch samples- the Han Chinese who score highest on East Eurasian are the Southern Han who are more southern than Yangtze Delta Han but more northern than Lingnan Han (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20657-okarinaofsteiner-s-East-Eurasian-GEDmatch-megathread&p=770762&viewfull=1#post770762).

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

Agreed, but I think the lower Fst to West Eurasians or Africans is both a function of West Eurasian trace admixture and southern Han carrying more "basal" ancestry IMO. So Lingnan Han may not differ in their West Eurasian amounts to say Jiangxi Han

okarinaofsteiner
11-01-2021, 05:51 AM
https://i.imgur.com/NJabEYy.png
Agreed, but I think the lower Fst to West Eurasians or Africans is both a function of West Eurasian trace admixture and southern Han carrying more "basal" ancestry IMO. So Lingnan Han may not differ in their West Eurasian amounts to say Jiangxi Han

Guangdong has lower FST with Amerindian than all of its neighboring provinces, so you could argue that Guangdong Han are somewhat more Amerindian mixed thanks to post-Columbian Chinese migration to Latin American countries. For example, Chinese American YouTuber Bart Kwan has some Peruvian ancestry from a Guangdong ancestor who migrated to Peru (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxyQFZzjSBI).


There're two vectors of difference between Fujianese and people of Guangdong and Guangxi. First is that Fujianese have significantly higher Northern Han ancestry than those from Pearl River Delta and Western Guangdong. Second is that the Tai-Kradai ancestry of Fujianese is significantly lower than that of Cantonese-speaking populations. So it isn't just a difference in northern ancestry, but also a difference in Kradai-related ancestry.

This makes sense if you accept that the SEA-like ancestry of Fujianese Han is Daic, which the presence of Daic origin common-use words in Minnan topolects (e.g. /sui⁵³/ = beautiful (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%AA%A0#Chinese), /baʔ³²/ = meat (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%82%89#Etymology_2)) would suggest.

Some Common Min words appear to have an Austroasiatic origin- the Min words for mango (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%AA%A8#Chinese) and child (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%9B%9D#Etymology_1) resemble their Vietnamese and Khmer equivalents.

Searching
11-01-2021, 05:53 PM
My mother’s Chinese match

HarappaWorld 4-Ancestors Oracle

This program is based on 4-Ancestors Oracle Version 0.96 by Alexandr Burnashev.
Questions about results should be sent to him at: [email protected]
Original concept proposed by Sergey Kozlov.
Many thanks to Alexandr for helping us get this web version developed.

23 April 2013 - Oracle reference population percentages revised.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE-Asian 70.96
2 SE-Asian 13.96
3 Siberian 8.54
4 Caucasian 1.48
5 American 1.31
6 E-African 1.27
7 Baloch 1.10


Finished reading population data. 377 populations found.
16 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 naxi_hgdp @ 5.604744
2 yi_hgdp @ 6.029672
3 japanese_hgdp @ 6.145211
4 han-nchina_hgdp @ 7.871053
5 tu_hgdp @ 7.960814
6 chinese-beijing_1000genomes @ 8.973565
7 chinese-beijing_hapmap @ 9.224724
8 xibo_hgdp @ 15.481563
9 naga_metspalu @ 17.103523
10 tibet_simonson @ 17.210011
11 tujia_hgdp @ 17.559629
12 chinese-american_hapmap @ 18.134329
13 mongola_hgdp @ 18.509668
14 aonaga_reich @ 19.111969
15 nysha_reich @ 19.167425
16 han_hgdp @ 21.205057
17 han-chinese-south_1000genomes @ 21.941076
18 chinese_xing @ 22.382301
19 she_hgdp @ 23.454924
20 singapore-chinese_sgvp @ 25.318146

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% chinese-beijing_hapmap +50% xibo_hgdp @ 4.398166


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% han-nchina_hgdp +25% mongola_hgdp +25% tujia_hgdp @ 2.742718


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.504567
2 han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.563042
3 han_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.658762
4 han-chinese-south_1000genomes + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.678569
5 han-nchina_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp + tujia_hgdp @ 2.742718
6 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp @ 2.748417
7 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp @ 2.797407
8 chinese_xing + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.839340
9 han-nchina_hgdp + she_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.840758
10 chinese-beijing_1000genomes + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.851992
11 chinese-beijing_hapmap + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.875846
12 chinese-american_hapmap + chinese-beijing_1000genomes + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.877853
13 han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp @ 2.887650
14 chinese-american_hapmap + chinese-beijing_hapmap + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.916813
15 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + japanese_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.935339
16 chinese-beijing_hapmap + chinese-beijing_hapmap + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp @ 2.959428
17 han-nchina_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.959466
18 chinese-beijing_1000genomes + chinese-beijing_hapmap + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp @ 2.965104
19 aonaga_reich + han-nchina_hgdp + miao_hgdp + mongola_hgdp @ 2.968184
20 han-nchina_hgdp + japanese_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.981574

I believe this lady is from Changzhou. I remember growing up hearing of a distant ancestor who was Chinese.

MNOPSC1b
11-01-2021, 11:40 PM
Guangdong has lower FST with Amerindian than all of its neighboring provinces, so you could argue that Guangdong Han are somewhat more Amerindian mixed thanks to post-Columbian Chinese migration to Latin American countries. For example, Chinese American YouTuber Bart Kwan has some Peruvian ancestry from a Guangdong ancestor who migrated to Peru (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxyQFZzjSBI).



This makes sense if you accept that the SEA-like ancestry of Fujianese Han is Daic, which the presence of Daic origin common-use words in Minnan topolects (e.g. /sui⁵³/ = beautiful (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%AA%A0#Chinese), /baʔ³²/ = meat (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%82%89#Etymology_2)) would suggest.

Some Common Min words appear to have an Austroasiatic origin- the Min words for mango (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%AA%A8#Chinese) and child (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%9B%9D#Etymology_1) resemble their Vietnamese and Khmer equivalents.

I'm not sure if you were meant to be joking or serious when you said that Guangdong Han are more Amerindian-admixed compared to other Chinese. The origin of Amerindians had nothing to do with Cantonese, they originated from somewhere in Siberia and diverged from the ancestors of modern East Asians at least 27k years ago, and they carry around 30% ANE. Just like you said, modern-day Amerindians (especially those from Peru but also from other areas like Mexico or the west coast of US and CA) might be more Cantonese-admixed due to recent Cantonese migrations to the Americas.

I also feel that you have a tendency to forget what you've posted. In fact most of what I use to refute your arguments comes directly from what you've posted earlier. Here's a table about the admixtures in different Han sub-populations that you've posted in this thread.

https://i.imgur.com/1UYN0Tn.jpg

According to the picture Min-speaking peoples indeed have Tai-Kradai admixtures, however they carry them in very low amounts, merely around 1%. The only exception is the Zhanjiang Min speakers who carry 11.8% Daic admixtures, but judging by the fact that Zhanjiang is a city located on the Leizhou peninsula on the southwestern extreme of Guangdong bordering Guangxi and Hainan, such a result wouldn't be surprising.

For the Yue speakers however, even the one with the lowest Daic admixtures still carry 15.2% of them, whereas the one with the highest Daic admixtures reaches 26%. You can practically call them sinicized Dai or sinicized Zhuang with such high proportions of Daic admixtures. And the shared vocabulary between Yue and Daic languages are many, a lot more than the two you found for Min.

okarinaofsteiner
11-02-2021, 02:43 AM
My mother’s Chinese match

HarappaWorld 4-Ancestors Oracle

This program is based on 4-Ancestors Oracle Version 0.96 by Alexandr Burnashev.
Questions about results should be sent to him at: [email protected]
Original concept proposed by Sergey Kozlov.
Many thanks to Alexandr for helping us get this web version developed.

23 April 2013 - Oracle reference population percentages revised.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE-Asian 70.96
2 SE-Asian 13.96
3 Siberian 8.54
4 Caucasian 1.48
5 American 1.31
6 E-African 1.27
7 Baloch 1.10


Finished reading population data. 377 populations found.
16 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 naxi_hgdp @ 5.604744
2 yi_hgdp @ 6.029672
3 japanese_hgdp @ 6.145211
4 han-nchina_hgdp @ 7.871053
5 tu_hgdp @ 7.960814
6 chinese-beijing_1000genomes @ 8.973565
7 chinese-beijing_hapmap @ 9.224724
8 xibo_hgdp @ 15.481563
9 naga_metspalu @ 17.103523
10 tibet_simonson @ 17.210011
11 tujia_hgdp @ 17.559629
12 chinese-american_hapmap @ 18.134329
13 mongola_hgdp @ 18.509668
14 aonaga_reich @ 19.111969
15 nysha_reich @ 19.167425
16 han_hgdp @ 21.205057
17 han-chinese-south_1000genomes @ 21.941076
18 chinese_xing @ 22.382301
19 she_hgdp @ 23.454924
20 singapore-chinese_sgvp @ 25.318146

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% chinese-beijing_hapmap +50% xibo_hgdp @ 4.398166


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% han-nchina_hgdp +25% mongola_hgdp +25% tujia_hgdp @ 2.742718


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.504567
2 han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.563042
3 han_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.658762
4 han-chinese-south_1000genomes + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.678569
5 han-nchina_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp + tujia_hgdp @ 2.742718
6 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp @ 2.748417
7 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp @ 2.797407
8 chinese_xing + han-nchina_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.839340
9 han-nchina_hgdp + she_hgdp + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.840758
10 chinese-beijing_1000genomes + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.851992
11 chinese-beijing_hapmap + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.875846
12 chinese-american_hapmap + chinese-beijing_1000genomes + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.877853
13 han-nchina_hgdp + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp + tujia_hgdp @ 2.887650
14 chinese-american_hapmap + chinese-beijing_hapmap + tu_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.916813
15 chinese-american_hapmap + han-nchina_hgdp + japanese_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.935339
16 chinese-beijing_hapmap + chinese-beijing_hapmap + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp @ 2.959428
17 han-nchina_hgdp + han-nchina_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.959466
18 chinese-beijing_1000genomes + chinese-beijing_hapmap + mongola_hgdp + tu_hgdp @ 2.965104
19 aonaga_reich + han-nchina_hgdp + miao_hgdp + mongola_hgdp @ 2.968184
20 han-nchina_hgdp + japanese_hgdp + tujia_hgdp + xibo_hgdp @ 2.981574

I believe this lady is from Changzhou. I remember growing up hearing of a distant ancestor who was Chinese.

Very interesting HarappaWorld results! Her Siberian score is pretty high for someone who is allegedly from the Yangtze Delta area. The range for Northern Han (as in north of the Qinling-Huaihe line) seems to be 6-10%.

Do you have her MDLP K23b results by any chance?

okarinaofsteiner
11-02-2021, 02:53 AM
I'm not sure if you were meant to be joking or serious when you said that Guangdong Han are more Amerindian-admixed compared to other Chinese. The origin of Amerindians had nothing to do with Cantonese, they originated from somewhere in Siberia and diverged from the ancestors of modern East Asians at least 27k years ago, and they carry around 30% ANE. Just like you said, modern-day Amerindians (especially those from Peru but also from other areas like Mexico or the west coast of US and CA) might be more Cantonese-admixed due to recent Cantonese migrations to the Americas.

Modern-day Amerindians who are more culturally isolated definitely are not Chinese/Filipino/Japanese mixed lmao. The culturally dominant mestizos (mixed-race population) are a different story.

I'm completely serious though, the Guangdong FST with AMR on that subgraph is a greener color (less blue) than Guangxi, Hunan, Jiangxi, and Fujian. Although Guangdong is still higher (more blue) than Henan or Hebei, which are clearly light-green on the map.

MNOPSC1b
11-02-2021, 11:04 PM
Modern-day Amerindians who are more culturally isolated definitely are not Chinese/Filipino/Japanese mixed lmao. The culturally dominant mestizos (mixed-race population) are a different story.

I'm completely serious though, the Guangdong FST with AMR on that subgraph is a greener color (less blue) than Guangxi, Hunan, Jiangxi, and Fujian. Although Guangdong is still higher (more blue) than Henan or Hebei, which are clearly light-green on the map.

Minor differences. GD still has a quite dark bluish green color similar to neighboring southern provinces, meaning they're still quite distant from Amerindians, unlike Central and Northern China who are shades lighter. The reason why GD is a tiny bit lighter than neighboring provinces might be due to the fact that the metropolis of the Pearl Delta have received some recent immigrants from Central and Northern China, particularly Shenzhen which has been transformed from a Canto/Hakka speaking small town to a pred Mandarin speaking metropolis due to recent migrations.

No matter how hard you try to associate Cantonese with non-local populations like Northern Chinese or even Amerindians, you cannot ignore the high proportions of native Daic components in their genome.

Searching
11-03-2021, 02:08 PM
Very interesting HarappaWorld results! Her Siberian score is pretty high for someone who is allegedly from the Yangtze Delta area. The range for Northern Han (as in north of the Qinling-Huaihe line) seems to be 6-10%.

Do you have her MDLP K23b results by any chance?

Yeah here are the results. Growing up I assumed we had distant Hakka ancestry. I was told they are the ones who came to Caribbean.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.41
2 Tungus-Altaic 31.61
3 Austronesian 14.91
4 East_Siberian 4.12
5 Amerindian 1.86
6 East_African 1.27


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Korean_KR_ @ 8.879153
2 Han_North_ @ 8.980083
3 Tu_ @ 9.457696
4 Han-Mandarin_ @ 11.460402
5 Korean_ @ 11.521450
6 Japanese_ML_ @ 14.496802
7 Ryukyuan_ @ 17.150736
8 Xibo_ @ 17.985901
9 Mongola_China_ @ 19.069126
10 Jinuo_ @ 21.320864
11 Japanese_ @ 21.511366
12 Naxi_ @ 21.607758
13 Hakka_ @ 21.761303
14 Tujia_ @ 21.831999
15 Yi_ @ 22.328150
16 Chinese_Taiwan_ @ 22.463327
17 Tibetian_Madou_ @ 22.476599
18 Paluang_ @ 22.669994
19 Tibetian_TTR_ @ 23.186916
20 Han_Singapore_ @ 23.295523

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Korean_KR_ +50% Tu_ @ 4.017998


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Han_North_ +25% Jinuo_ +25% Mongol_Khalkha_ @ 2.769178


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Hezhen_ + She_ + Tu_ + Tu_ @ 2.338829
2 Daur_ + She_ + Tu_ + Tu_ @ 2.359536
3 Han-Mandarin_ + Korean_KR_ + Mongola_China_ + Yi_ @ 2.376791
4 Daur_ + Han_ + Han_North_ + Tu_ @ 2.383345
5 Hmong_ + Japanese_ML_ + Mongol_Khalkha_ + Naga_ @ 2.392039
6 Aonaga_ + Cantonese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Mongol_Khalkha_ @ 2.408614
7 Han_ + Mongola_China_ + Naxi_ + Xibo_ @ 2.414393
8 Daur_ + Hmong_Miao_ + Tu_ + Tu_ @ 2.416025
9 Hezhen_ + Hmong_Miao_ + Tu_ + Tu_ @ 2.417664
10 Han-Mandarin_ + Korean_KR_ + Mongola_China_ + Naxi_ @ 2.419817
11 Cantonese_ + Korean_KR_ + Mongol_Khalkha_ + Naga_ @ 2.421076
12 Han_ + Mongola_China_ + Xibo_ + Yi_ @ 2.445156
13 Han_ + Han_North_ + Mongol_Khalkha_ + Tu_ @ 2.445260
14 Han_Singapore_ + Korean_KR_ + Mongola_China_ + Tibetian_Madou_ @ 2.445333
15 Han_ + Hezhen_ + Tu_ + Tu_ @ 2.445534
16 Japanese_ML_ + Mongol_Khalkha_ + Tujia_ + Yi_ @ 2.445703
17 Han_Singapore_ + Korean_KR_ + Mongola_China_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 2.470982
18 Daur_ + Naga_ + Vietnamese_north_ + Xibo_ @ 2.475363
19 Han-Mandarin_ + Han_North_ + Mongola_China_ + Tu_ @ 2.490290
20 Aonaga_ + Daur_ + Vietnamese_ + Xibo_ @ 2.493130

Done.

okarinaofsteiner
11-04-2021, 01:43 AM
Yeah here are the results. Growing up I assumed we had distant Hakka ancestry. I was told they are the ones who came to Caribbean.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.41
2 Tungus-Altaic 31.61
3 Austronesian 14.91
4 East_Siberian 4.12
5 Amerindian 1.86
6 East_African 1.27


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.

Hmm, i’ve never seen any confirmed Han Chinese samples score that low on Austronesian… the average for southern Jiangsu (idk if there are any other Changzhou’s in China) would be somewhere between 22-26%. Maybe this person is ethnic Hui (Chinese-speaking Muslims, they usually have a little Central Asian ancestry)?

MNOPSC1b
11-04-2021, 02:15 AM
Yeah here are the results. Growing up I assumed we had distant Hakka ancestry. I was told they are the ones who came to Caribbean.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.41
2 Tungus-Altaic 31.61
3 Austronesian 14.91
4 East_Siberian 4.12
5 Amerindian 1.86
6 East_African 1.27


Too northern for Hakka. Likely from Eastern or Northern China.

Shuzam87
11-04-2021, 04:43 AM
Hmm, I’ve never seen any confirmed Han Chinese samples score that low on Austronesian… the average for southern Jiangsu (idk if there are any other Changzhou’s in China) would be somewhere between 22-26%. Maybe this person is ethnic Hui (Chinese-speaking Muslims, they usually have a little Central Asian ancestry)?

Probably not. He does not seem to score any distinct West Eurasian ancestry.

Searching
11-13-2021, 08:32 AM
Here is one of my Chinese matches. I believe he is from Guangdong

K13 Oracle ref data revised 21 Nov 2013

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Asian 73.60
2 Siberian 22.80
3 Red_Sea 1.76
4 Amerindian 1.54


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Yizu @ 5.213615
2 Naxi @ 6.348151
3 Tujia @ 9.665417
4 Japanese @ 11.923898
5 Miaozu @ 12.293698
6 Tu @ 13.794580
7 She @ 14.183617
8 Lahu @ 16.150291
9 Vietnamese @ 22.527840
10 Tibeto-Burman_Burmese @ 24.390671
11 Xibo @ 24.685841
12 Hezhen @ 26.086847
13 Cambodian @ 26.912516
14 Dai @ 27.458467
15 Malay @ 28.698317
16 Mongolian @ 50.608688
17 Kirgiz @ 54.068760
18 Uygur @ 55.417290
19 Kazakh @ 56.161499
20 Hazara @ 59.340611

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Japanese +50% Miaozu @ 2.198127


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Japanese +25% Miaozu +25% Miaozu @ 2.198127


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Japanese + She + Tu + Tujia @ 2.164868
2 Hezhen + She + She + Yizu @ 2.186690
3 Japanese + Japanese + Miaozu + Miaozu @ 2.198127
4 Japanese + Miaozu + She + Tu @ 2.249152
5 Hezhen + Tujia + Tujia + Tujia @ 2.249335
6 Japanese + Japanese + Miaozu + She @ 2.295932
7 Japanese + Japanese + She + Tujia @ 2.304203
8 Japanese + Japanese + Miaozu + Tujia @ 2.309614
9 Japanese + She + She + Tu @ 2.330396
10 Dai + Hezhen + Japanese + Tujia @ 2.334177
11 She + She + Xibo + Yizu @ 2.339176
12 Japanese + Miaozu + Miaozu + Tu @ 2.342459
13 Hezhen + Miaozu + She + Yizu @ 2.357302
14 Hezhen + Naxi + She + She @ 2.360351
15 Dai + Hezhen + Japanese + She @ 2.381162
16 Japanese + Miaozu + Tu + Tujia @ 2.386417
17 Dai + Hezhen + Japanese + Miaozu @ 2.405756
18 Japanese + Japanese + Lahu + Tujia @ 2.408715
19 Hezhen + Miaozu + Tujia + Tujia @ 2.429794
20 Miaozu + She + Xibo + Yizu @ 2.443003

Done.

Elapsed time 1.0078 seconds.

MDLP K23b Oracle Rev 2014 Sep 16

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.54
2 Tungus-Altaic 29.36
3 Austronesian 20.10
4 Melano_Polynesian 1.62
5 South_Central_Asian 1.34


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Han-Mandarin_ @ 6.632914
2 Han_North_ @ 7.564625
3 Korean_KR_ @ 10.826612
4 Tu_ @ 12.620770
5 Korean_ @ 13.903770
6 Tujia_ @ 16.000553
7 Hakka_ @ 16.032185
8 Jinuo_ @ 16.311775
9 Chinese_Taiwan_ @ 16.817802
10 Japanese_ML_ @ 17.186871
11 Han_Singapore_ @ 17.671244
12 Paluang_ @ 18.372627
13 Han_ @ 18.600760
14 Ryukyuan_ @ 19.712696
15 Naxi_ @ 20.669102
16 Yi_ @ 21.101274
17 Lawa_ @ 21.451939
18 She_ @ 22.330212
19 Miao_ @ 22.660694
20 Karen_ @ 22.681860

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Jinuo_ +50% Korean_ @ 2.865271


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Korean_ +25% Tibetian_TTR_ +25% Zhuang_ @ 1.941959


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Han_North_ + Japanese_ + Naga_ + Tagalog_ @ 1.797468
2 Aonaga_ + Korean_ + Korean_ + Tagalog_ @ 1.816949
3 Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.836923
4 Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Naga_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.851762
5 Cantonese_ + Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.858635
6 Japanese_ + Korean_KR_ + Naga_ + Yong_ @ 1.883814
7 Japanese_ML_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Naga_ @ 1.913381
8 Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Nysha_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.922335
9 Japanese_ + Naga_ + Tagalog_ + Tu_ @ 1.926772
10 Japanese_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.929158
11 Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Tu_ @ 1.936087
12 Korean_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Zhuang_ @ 1.941959
13 Aonaga_ + Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.943330
14 Han_North_ + Hmong_ + Japanese_ + Tu_ @ 1.945039
15 Cantonese_ + Han_North_ + Korean_ + Tu_ @ 1.948241
16 Hakka_ + Hakka_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.959553
17 Aonaga_ + Japanese_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_KR_ @ 1.981708
18 Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Korean_KR_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.987086
19 Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Yao_ @ 1.996159
20 Han_ + Han-Mandarin_ + Korean_ + Tu_ @ 1.999900

Done.

okarinaofsteiner
11-14-2021, 08:10 AM
Here is one of my Chinese matches. I believe he is from Guangdong

MDLP K23b Oracle Rev 2014 Sep 16

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.54
2 Tungus-Altaic 29.36
3 Austronesian 20.10
4 Melano_Polynesian 1.62
5 South_Central_Asian 1.34


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Han-Mandarin_ @ 6.632914
2 Han_North_ @ 7.564625
3 Korean_KR_ @ 10.826612
4 Tu_ @ 12.620770
5 Korean_ @ 13.903770
6 Tujia_ @ 16.000553
7 Hakka_ @ 16.032185
8 Jinuo_ @ 16.311775
9 Chinese_Taiwan_ @ 16.817802
10 Japanese_ML_ @ 17.186871
11 Han_Singapore_ @ 17.671244
12 Paluang_ @ 18.372627
13 Han_ @ 18.600760
14 Ryukyuan_ @ 19.712696
15 Naxi_ @ 20.669102
16 Yi_ @ 21.101274
17 Lawa_ @ 21.451939
18 She_ @ 22.330212
19 Miao_ @ 22.660694
20 Karen_ @ 22.681860

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Jinuo_ +50% Korean_ @ 2.865271


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Korean_ +25% Tibetian_TTR_ +25% Zhuang_ @ 1.941959


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Han_North_ + Japanese_ + Naga_ + Tagalog_ @ 1.797468
2 Aonaga_ + Korean_ + Korean_ + Tagalog_ @ 1.816949
3 Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.836923
4 Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Naga_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.851762
5 Cantonese_ + Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.858635
6 Japanese_ + Korean_KR_ + Naga_ + Yong_ @ 1.883814
7 Japanese_ML_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Naga_ @ 1.913381
8 Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Nysha_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.922335
9 Japanese_ + Naga_ + Tagalog_ + Tu_ @ 1.926772
10 Japanese_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.929158
11 Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Tu_ @ 1.936087
12 Korean_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Zhuang_ @ 1.941959
13 Aonaga_ + Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.943330
14 Han_North_ + Hmong_ + Japanese_ + Tu_ @ 1.945039
15 Cantonese_ + Han_North_ + Korean_ + Tu_ @ 1.948241
16 Hakka_ + Hakka_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.959553
17 Aonaga_ + Japanese_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_KR_ @ 1.981708
18 Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Korean_KR_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.987086
19 Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Yao_ @ 1.996159
20 Han_ + Han-Mandarin_ + Korean_ + Tu_ @ 1.999900

Done.

That is a lot more NEA-shifted than most Guangdong Han- this person scores lower on Austronesian than I do! Out of ~80 Guangdong adoptees in my DNAConnect.org adoptee dataset, maybe 2 of them were northern shifted to the point where they scored equally high on Tungus_Altaic as Austronesian, if not higher.

MNOPSC1b
11-14-2021, 04:28 PM
Here is one of my Chinese matches. I believe he is from Guangdong

K13 Oracle ref data revised 21 Nov 2013

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 East_Asian 73.60
2 Siberian 22.80
3 Red_Sea 1.76
4 Amerindian 1.54


Finished reading population data. 204 populations found.
13 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Yizu @ 5.213615
2 Naxi @ 6.348151
3 Tujia @ 9.665417
4 Japanese @ 11.923898
5 Miaozu @ 12.293698
6 Tu @ 13.794580
7 She @ 14.183617
8 Lahu @ 16.150291
9 Vietnamese @ 22.527840
10 Tibeto-Burman_Burmese @ 24.390671
11 Xibo @ 24.685841
12 Hezhen @ 26.086847
13 Cambodian @ 26.912516
14 Dai @ 27.458467
15 Malay @ 28.698317
16 Mongolian @ 50.608688
17 Kirgiz @ 54.068760
18 Uygur @ 55.417290
19 Kazakh @ 56.161499
20 Hazara @ 59.340611

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Japanese +50% Miaozu @ 2.198127


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Japanese +25% Miaozu +25% Miaozu @ 2.198127


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Japanese + She + Tu + Tujia @ 2.164868
2 Hezhen + She + She + Yizu @ 2.186690
3 Japanese + Japanese + Miaozu + Miaozu @ 2.198127
4 Japanese + Miaozu + She + Tu @ 2.249152
5 Hezhen + Tujia + Tujia + Tujia @ 2.249335
6 Japanese + Japanese + Miaozu + She @ 2.295932
7 Japanese + Japanese + She + Tujia @ 2.304203
8 Japanese + Japanese + Miaozu + Tujia @ 2.309614
9 Japanese + She + She + Tu @ 2.330396
10 Dai + Hezhen + Japanese + Tujia @ 2.334177
11 She + She + Xibo + Yizu @ 2.339176
12 Japanese + Miaozu + Miaozu + Tu @ 2.342459
13 Hezhen + Miaozu + She + Yizu @ 2.357302
14 Hezhen + Naxi + She + She @ 2.360351
15 Dai + Hezhen + Japanese + She @ 2.381162
16 Japanese + Miaozu + Tu + Tujia @ 2.386417
17 Dai + Hezhen + Japanese + Miaozu @ 2.405756
18 Japanese + Japanese + Lahu + Tujia @ 2.408715
19 Hezhen + Miaozu + Tujia + Tujia @ 2.429794
20 Miaozu + She + Xibo + Yizu @ 2.443003

Done.

Elapsed time 1.0078 seconds.

MDLP K23b Oracle Rev 2014 Sep 16

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.54
2 Tungus-Altaic 29.36
3 Austronesian 20.10
4 Melano_Polynesian 1.62
5 South_Central_Asian 1.34


Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Han-Mandarin_ @ 6.632914
2 Han_North_ @ 7.564625
3 Korean_KR_ @ 10.826612
4 Tu_ @ 12.620770
5 Korean_ @ 13.903770
6 Tujia_ @ 16.000553
7 Hakka_ @ 16.032185
8 Jinuo_ @ 16.311775
9 Chinese_Taiwan_ @ 16.817802
10 Japanese_ML_ @ 17.186871
11 Han_Singapore_ @ 17.671244
12 Paluang_ @ 18.372627
13 Han_ @ 18.600760
14 Ryukyuan_ @ 19.712696
15 Naxi_ @ 20.669102
16 Yi_ @ 21.101274
17 Lawa_ @ 21.451939
18 She_ @ 22.330212
19 Miao_ @ 22.660694
20 Karen_ @ 22.681860

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Jinuo_ +50% Korean_ @ 2.865271


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Korean_ +25% Tibetian_TTR_ +25% Zhuang_ @ 1.941959


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Han_North_ + Japanese_ + Naga_ + Tagalog_ @ 1.797468
2 Aonaga_ + Korean_ + Korean_ + Tagalog_ @ 1.816949
3 Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.836923
4 Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Naga_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.851762
5 Cantonese_ + Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.858635
6 Japanese_ + Korean_KR_ + Naga_ + Yong_ @ 1.883814
7 Japanese_ML_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Naga_ @ 1.913381
8 Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Nysha_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.922335
9 Japanese_ + Naga_ + Tagalog_ + Tu_ @ 1.926772
10 Japanese_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.929158
11 Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Tu_ @ 1.936087
12 Korean_ + Korean_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Zhuang_ @ 1.941959
13 Aonaga_ + Japanese_ + Japanese_ML_ + Vietnamese_central_ @ 1.943330
14 Han_North_ + Hmong_ + Japanese_ + Tu_ @ 1.945039
15 Cantonese_ + Han_North_ + Korean_ + Tu_ @ 1.948241
16 Hakka_ + Hakka_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.959553
17 Aonaga_ + Japanese_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_KR_ @ 1.981708
18 Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Korean_KR_ + Tibetian_TTR_ @ 1.987086
19 Han-Mandarin_ + Japanese_ + Tibetian_TTR_ + Yao_ @ 1.996159
20 Han_ + Han-Mandarin_ + Korean_ + Tu_ @ 1.999900

Done.

The results are too northern for someone from Guangdong, you probably misidentified his origin.

And if this person is indeed from Guangdong, he's most likely to be someone from the Chaoshan (Teochew) or the Hakka region, but not from the Yue or Canto region. Chaoshan, Hakka, and Canto are three distinct ethnolinguistic groups inhabiting Guangdong, with Canto being the most Daic-shifted/the most native-like, Chaoshan (Teochew) being the most northern-shifted/the most Sinitic-like, and Hakka lies somewhere in between.

okarinaofsteiner
11-14-2021, 05:22 PM
The results are too northern for someone from Guangdong, you probably misidentified his origin.

And if this person is indeed from Guangdong, he's most likely to be someone from the Chaoshan (Teochew) or the Hakka region, but not from the Yue or Canto region. Chaoshan, Hakka, and Canto are three distinct ethnolinguistic groups inhabiting Guangdong, with Canto being the most Daic-shifted/the most native-like, Chaoshan (Teochew) being the most northern-shifted/the most Sinitic-like, and Hakka lies somewhere in between.

That person is way too northern-shifted for the Teochew and Hakka range. If they’re from Guangdong, they almost certainly have to be from the Pearl River Delta. That’s the only area of Guangdong that’s cosmopolitan enough to have a nonzero probability of finding someone who scores within the range of Northern Han.

MNOPSC1b
11-14-2021, 09:45 PM
That person is way too northern-shifted for the Teochew and Hakka range. If they’re from Guangdong, they almost certainly have to be from the Pearl River Delta. That’s the only area of Guangdong that’s cosmopolitan enough to have a nonzero probability of finding someone who scores within the range of Northern Han.

Yep, agreed with you this time. The person in question is most likely a recent northern migrant living in the Pearl River Delta.

MNOPSC1b
11-25-2021, 12:59 AM
Very interesting contributions and remarks from a Portuguese amateur of human genetics, regarding the genetic distance of different Han Chinese populations and other East Asian / SE Asian populations.

His original post is on Quora, here's the link:

https://www.quora.com/Are-the-Han-Chinese-very-similar-to-each-other-genetically-and-who-are-they-most-closely-related-and-or-similar-regarding-their-genetic-ancestry

He concluded that on a world scale Han Chinese and East Asians seem to be rather homogeneous, but on a regional scale the diversity actually isn't that bad. He said that according to his analysis the largest genetic distance observed among Han Chinese is the one between Han_Shanxi and Han_Guangdong at 0.08754, and the distance is comparable to the one between Portuguese and Danish at 0.08705. He further added that Han_Guangdong is the most divergent among all Hans and is closer to Vietnamese, and that all Hans exist on a cline from Koreans to Vietnamese.

It's unfortunate that he doesn't have access to samples of Guangxi Han, cause according to some previous studies and analyses Guangxi Han are the most divergent out of all Hans, even more divergent than those from Guangdong. He also doesn't have access to samples from Guizhou and Yunnan, cause some of them can be rather divergent as well.

Anyways, here're the tables and graphs that he presented.

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-cbaf2d4043f3ba04346ab9ec5575e311

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-1237e042642acc38f74707ed0aac0d21

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-10e77f83e269ab834f7bf9cefb53a972

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-be095b42b73ca596e4ad60f003b03c9c

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8e6752ae547df9daa2e63d331876bda2

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-966e7ad80c5ac29bfccdfb6e6beccd83

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a23de62e3a73bd62c6df5ca2d0b64e22

okarinaofsteiner
11-27-2021, 06:06 PM
Very interesting contributions and remarks from a Portuguese amateur of human genetics, regarding the genetic distance of different Han Chinese populations and other East Asian / SE Asian populations.

His original post is on Quora, here's the link:

https://www.quora.com/Are-the-Han-Chinese-very-similar-to-each-other-genetically-and-who-are-they-most-closely-related-and-or-similar-regarding-their-genetic-ancestry

He concluded that on a world scale Han Chinese and East Asians seem to be rather homogeneous, but on a regional scale the diversity actually isn't that bad. He said that according to his analysis the largest genetic distance observed among Han Chinese is the one between Han_Shanxi and Han_Guangdong at 0.08754, and the distance is comparable to the one between Portuguese and Danish at 0.08705. He further added that Han_Guangdong is the most divergent among all Hans and is closer to Vietnamese, and that all Hans exist on a cline from Koreans to Vietnamese.

It's unfortunate that he doesn't have access to samples of Guangxi Han, cause according to some previous studies and analyses Guangxi Han are the most divergent out of all Hans, even more divergent than those from Guangdong. He also doesn't have access to samples from Guizhou and Yunnan, cause some of them can be rather divergent as well.

-snip-

I saw this post too- this person is Brazilian by the way. I agree that the G25 province samples are rather limited. I wonder if this person saw my MDLP K23b graphs on how Koreans, Han Chinese, and Vietnamese score on MDLP K23b Austronesian and Tungus_Altaic which also show the same thing.

I’m willing to bet that Qinghai and Gansu Han are fairly divergent from other Northern Han- possibly to the same extent as Guangxi from Guangdong, or from Guangdong to Fujian- if not more.

Max_H
11-27-2021, 08:03 PM
I saw this post too- this person is Brazilian by the way. I agree that the G25 province samples are rather limited. I wonder if this person saw my MDLP K23b graphs on how Koreans, Han Chinese, and Vietnamese score on MDLP K23b Austronesian and Tungus_Altaic which also show the same thing.

I’m willing to bet that Qinghai and Gansu Han are fairly divergent from other Northern Han- possibly to the same extent as Guangxi from Guangdong, or from Guangdong to Fujian- if not more.

I am curious as to what pulls Shandong Han that much toward Tibetans... You would think they would be part of the Guangdong-Korea cline instead. I have seen Shandong Han score various more "western" components such as Tibetan-related or even low West Eurasian (Shanxi and xibei Han overall score a lot more of that even if still low overall) but they appear a lot more "eastern/Korean-shifted" than Han from Shanxi or even Henan.

I agree with you many Qinghai and Gansu Han are fairly divergent, but these areas have also recently experienced high migration from further east and even south from what I know... However, unlike Guangxi Han Gansu and Qinghai Han will mostly be divergent due to increased Tibetan and West Eurasian-like components while in Guangxi ofc you have mostly increased southern components.

okarinaofsteiner
11-28-2021, 12:17 AM
I am curious as to what pulls Shandong Han that much toward Tibetans... You would think they would be part of the Guangdong-Korea cline instead. I have seen Shandong Han score various more "western" components such as Tibetan-related or even low West Eurasian (Shanxi and xibei Han overall score a lot more of that even if still low overall) but they appear a lot more "eastern/Korean-shifted" than Han from Shanxi or even Henan.

I agree with you many Qinghai and Gansu Han are fairly divergent, but these areas have also recently experienced high migration from further east and even south from what I know... However, unlike Guangxi Han Gansu and Qinghai Han will mostly be divergent due to increased Tibetan and West Eurasian-like components while in Guangxi ofc you have mostly increased southern components.

Actual Northern Han from north of the Qinling-Huaihe line are genetically quite homogeneous, so if one (non-Qinghai/Gansu) northern province is Tibetan-shifted or Central Asian-shifted then they all are. Also genotype =/= phenotype, and the G25 samples may suffer from small sample size issues.

The "Guangdong Han to Korean/Japanese" cline shows that Fujian Han are noticeably more southern shifted compared to Hubei Han, and also Chongqing Han, who actually seem to be on a Vietnamese to Korean/Japanese cline. "Chongqing Han" is more "Japanese + Vietnamese" while "Sichuan Han" is more "Korean + Vietnamese".

MNOPSC1b
11-28-2021, 04:05 PM
The "Guangdong Han to Korean/Japanese" cline shows that Fujian Han are noticeably more southern shifted compared to Hubei Han, and also Chongqing Han, who actually seem to be on a Vietnamese to Korean/Japanese cline. "Chongqing Han" is more "Japanese + Vietnamese" while "Sichuan Han" is more "Korean + Vietnamese".

Fujian Han aren't noticeably more southern-shifted than Chongqing Han, the two are at a similar level in terms of the north-south parameter, their only difference lies in the east-west parameter.

Although you love to group Fujian Han with Guangdong "Han", from the above analyses it's clear that Guangdong "Han" are noticeably more southern-shifted than Fujian Han. And I expect Guangxi "Han" to be even more southern-shifted and closer to SE Asians. Guangdong and Guangxi "Han" aren't really Han from a genetic POV, but rather they are sinicized Tai-Kradai.

Ajeje Brazorf
12-03-2021, 06:24 PM
What are the ancestral components of Eastern Eurasians? In Western ones we have EEF, WHG, CHG, and ANE: are there similar components for Asians?

okarinaofsteiner
12-03-2021, 10:28 PM
What are the ancestral components of Eastern Eurasians? In Western ones we have EEF, WHG, CHG, and ANE: are there similar components for Asians?

very comprehensive summary (https://genetichistoryofeastasians.quora.com/The-recent-findings-of-academic-studies-from-2021-including-archeologic-linguistic-and-genetic-research#comments) (not by me)


Among noteworthy branches:


Andamanese (samplified by the Onge) and Hoabinhians split from the common ancestor of East Asians between 40,000 to 27,000 years ago.
Ancestral Native Americans, split between 36,000 to 23,000 years ago.
Jōmon people of Japan and Himalayans (Ancient Tibetans) split between 25,000 to 15,000 years ago.
Paleo-Siberians split between 22,000 to 18,000 years ago.
Northern East Asian and Southern East Asian split with each other about 12,000 years ago.


For East Asians proper, probably Paleo-Siberian, Amur Neolithic, Yellow River Neolithic (millet-farmer), and Yangtze Neolithic (rice-farmer). The last 3 seem to cluster with each other, although Yellow River and Yangtze River split from each other sometime during the last Ice Age.

There are also other ancestries that only certain East Asian populations have, which the above link calls “Basal East Asian”. We have Jomon, Hoabinhian/Onge, and Tianyuan- the last of which is an extinct lineage. There is also a diverged ancestry component found in Tibetans, although idk what this group’s relationship is with “Basal East Eurasian”, “Sahul”, and AASI.

Philippine Negritos seem to be a mix between “Basal East Eurasian” and Sahul “South Eurasian”.

Modern-day Papuans are mostly “Sahul” but seem mixed with “Basal East Eurasian” and “Austronesian” rice farmer ancestry (“East Asian proper”).

Some Siberian and Central Asian groups may have some sort of ANE-like ancestry or admixture? I know modern-day Mongols have some West Eurasian ancestry. Many modern-day SE Asian groups have some South Asian (steppe + “Iran farmer” + actual AASI) ancestry on top of Hoabinhian.

Ajeje Brazorf
12-03-2021, 10:54 PM
very comprehensive summary (https://genetichistoryofeastasians.quora.com/The-recent-findings-of-academic-studies-from-2021-including-archeologic-linguistic-and-genetic-research#comments) (not by me)



For East Asians proper, probably Paleo-Siberian, Amur Neolithic, Yellow River Neolithic (millet-farmer), and Yangtze Neolithic (rice-farmer). The last 3 seem to cluster with each other, although Yellow River and Yangtze River split from each other sometime during the last Ice Age.

There are also other ancestries that only certain East Asian populations have, which the above link calls “Basal East Asian”. We have Jomon, Hoabinhian/Onge, and Tianyuan- the last of which is an extinct lineage. There is also a diverged ancestry component found in Tibetans, although idk what this group’s relationship is with “Basal East Eurasian”, “Sahul”, and AASI.

Philippine Negritos seem to be a mix between “Basal East Eurasian” and Sahul “South Eurasian”.

Modern-day Papuans are mostly “Sahul” but seem mixed with “Basal East Eurasian” and “Austronesian” rice farmer ancestry (“East Asian proper”).

Some Siberian and Central Asian groups may have some sort of ANE-like ancestry or admixture? I know modern-day Mongols have some West Eurasian ancestry. Many modern-day SE Asian groups have some South Asian (steppe + “Iran farmer” + actual AASI) ancestry on top of Hoabinhian.

Thank you for your response. These are some of the samples I normally use to make models, but the picture is not complete because there is a lot of ancient DNA missing from Asia.


Ami:NA13615,0.023903,-0.444802,-0.048649,-0.074613,0.14772,0.069723,0,-0.005077,-0.025565,-0.020046,0.049041,0.006444,-0.01219,-0.007844,0.006243,0.006762,0.006258,0.005194,0.007 29,-0.027263,0.008485,-0.029306,0.001356,-0.004338,-0.04778
CHN_Western_Liao_River_BA_o:91KLM2,0.022765,-0.468159,0.093149,-0.044251,-0.088632,-0.05271,0.013866,0.025614,0.006749,0.020046,-0.039948,0.001499,-0.006244,0.021882,0.003122,-0.002917,0.001434,-0.003674,0.01081,0.034016,-0.029822,-0.029306,-0.050408,-0.005784,-0.003832
Even:even2682,0.042115,-0.442771,0.144814,-0.019057,-0.142488,-0.086735,0.028201,0.038306,0.035587,0.024966,0.062 357,0.010041,-0.011596,0.003303,-0.026058,-0.017104,-0.000522,0.017483,0.040726,0.018009,0.058896,-0.062445,0.005916,0.014098,0.026824
JPN_Nagabaka_historic:NAG038,0.014797,-0.343249,-0.050157,0.013566,0.038469,0.008925,-0.004935,-0.002077,0.022089,0.02442,-0.051315,-0.004496,0.00996,-0.016377,-0.021851,-0.013524,0.006258,0.014189,0.016215,-0.012506,0.064511,-0.052305,0.009737,0.006025,-0.112206
Ket:584_R01C01,0.079676,-0.247789,0.126335,0.052326,-0.107097,-0.029562,0.00188,0.012461,0.002863,-0.028976,0.067878,0.00045,0.020515,-0.10886,-0.024837,-0.014187,0.005998,0.003927,0.014078,-0.002626,-0.028949,0.052676,0.069265,-0.029643,-0.020238
Mari:mari5,0.097888,-0.04773,0.092395,0.060078,-0.028005,0.001394,0.012456,0.019153,-0.006136,-0.041185,0.026307,-0.019483,0.041476,-0.044177,-0.037866,-0.016971,0.000913,-0.008361,-0.037081,-0.029889,0.01959,0.003957,-0.055831,0.010363,-0.003712
MYS_LN:Ma912,0,-0.395041,-0.084098,-0.034561,0.154183,0.068049,-0.007285,-0.010615,-0.005522,-0.018224,0.090938,0.017834,-0.015163,0.006331,0.006922,-0.001061,-0.001695,-0.006841,-0.003394,0.019259,-0.01697,0.012984,-0.009737,0.00723,0.048379
Paniya:PY-6,0.012521,-0.169593,-0.188183,0.142444,-0.049548,0.057173,-0.008225,0.017538,0.096944,0.059409,0.008931,0.001 049,-0.002527,0.018579,-0.025651,-0.03739,0.005737,0.002154,0.001006,0.031015,0.0061 14,0.01422,-0.012078,0.00482,-0.008263
Qiang_Danba:DBA01,0.020488,-0.438709,0.006034,-0.05168,0.023081,0.006693,0.004935,0.001154,-0.009613,0.012028,-0.097595,-0.005095,0.009068,-0.010184,-0.012351,-0.001591,0.000782,-0.00152,-0.015838,0.004502,0.005116,0.033015,0.017008,-0.006868,0.037721
RUS_AfontovaGora3:AfontovaGora3,0.093335,-0.01828,0.083344,0.231592,-0.091402,0.042949,-0.063688,-0.078228,-0.035383,-0.096221,0.047417,-0.010491,0.023637,-0.074454,0.020358,0.02254,-0.012908,0.003801,-0.003394,0.000625,-0.03706,0.015209,0.013927,0.009278,-0.005149
Surui:HGDP00843,0.053497,-0.311768,0.11653,0.11079,-0.119407,-0.026216,-0.33489,-0.398983,-0.019839,-0.022962,0.006496,-0.007943,0.005798,0.039635,-0.016151,0.000133,0.009127,-0.00266,-0.006788,0.001,-0.004118,0.012365,-0.010599,-0.00976,-0.007185
Yakut:455_A,0.044391,-0.378792,0.112759,-0.023579,-0.107097,-0.071954,0.029141,0.034845,0.026384,0.024602,0.034 914,0.015586,-0.025867,0.074454,0.045738,0.024927,0.001565,-0.01761,-0.042863,-0.033641,0.000624,0.039198,0.011092,-0.001325,-0.019759

MNOPSC1b
12-04-2021, 01:55 AM
What are the ancestral components of Eastern Eurasians? In Western ones we have EEF, WHG, CHG, and ANE: are there similar components for Asians?

I know okarina had already answered and provided a link, but I'd also like to share what I know, according to the papers I've read.

For the sake of simplicity I won't talk about peoples like Ust-Ishim, Oase, and Bacho Kiro, although it's very likely they were related to East Eurasians, their respective positions within the East Eurasian tree are still not well understood and remain somewhat controversial.

The first group that split off from East Eurasians were likely the ancestors of Papuans and Australian aborigines, they likely diverged some 50,000 to 45,000 years BP, and intermixed with Denisovans (direct ancestors of East Asians also intermixed with Denisovans, but not to the same extent as Papuans and Australian aborigines).

Hoabinhians / Onge likely split off some 40,000 years ago, along with ancestors of Longlin, Tianyuan, and Amur33K. They likely represent a very basal East Eurasian lineage.

Shortly after the Jomon split off, likely sometime between 40,000 to 30,000 years BP.

Then the ancestors of Native Americans split off around 27,000 years BP, and got intermixed with ANE. Native Americans can be modeled as roughly 70% East Eurasian + 30% ANE.

And finally the ancestors of Northern East Asian and Southern East Asian split off around 23,000 years BP.

For East Asian proper like okarina said, three components are dominant, Amur Neolithic, Yellow River Neolithic, and Yangtse Neolithic. Amur Neolithic peaks among Tungusic tribes, Mongols, and Koreans/Japanese; Yellow River Neolithic is the predominant component among modern East Asians and can be found all around from north to south, but peaks among certain Tibeto-Burman tribes, Northern Chinese, and as well as Koreans/Japanese; Yangtse Neolithic peaks among Taiwanese aborigines, but also reaches significant proportions among Far South Chinese, South Chinese minorities, and SE Asians.

Other minor components include Paleo-Siberian, which is mostly found among Siberian peoples like Yakut, Chukchi, etc. There's another minor component that I would label as Austroasiatic hunter-gatherers, which is probably an admixed component of Hoabinhians with Neolithic Yangtse. This component peaks among SE Asian tribal peoples like Mlabri and Htin, but can also be found among most SE Asians, and certain South Chinese minorities. Many SE Asians also have some West Eurasian ancestry that they likely acquired through contacts with South Asians.

This is my understanding of what has been shown to us in the papers so far published, feel free to correct any errors I've made.

And also I suggest be cautious with the Quora link that okarina provided, don't read too much into what the Saito Takashi guy wrote. I've debated with that guy on Quora before and I don't have a very good impression about him. He's a very stubborn supporter of the southern route hypothesis, even though we don't have that much evidence for that as of now. I'm not saying that the papers and sources he quotes are necessarily wrong, but his subjective interpretation of his sources can be quite misleading at times.

okarinaofsteiner
12-28-2021, 09:46 PM
A former Anthroscape member sent me a chart of 23mofang averages for various suburban and rural districts in China, which are believed to be more autosomally "representative" of specific regions and linguistic subgroups (as opposed to the city centers, which are more cosmopolitan and therefore more "mixed".) https://imgur.com/a/pxuhh3D

https://i.imgur.com/1UYN0Tn.jpg

Map (latitude + longitude) with ChinaMAP study clusters added
https://i.imgur.com/GX11i2q.png


I just saw some GEDmatch results for a Hui person (both parents are Hui from China proper (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/py5tjs/hui_chinese_results_photo_maternal_haplo_c4a/hes05mm/)) living outside China, thought I'd share them in this thread too for further analysis:

MDLP K23b (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/q1fvw5/gedmatch_results/): 44.65% S_EA, 32.91% T_A, 17.24% AN, 0.95% E_Sib [95.75% East Asian] + 0.46% Amerind + 0.86% S_CentralAsian, 1.66% EEF, 1.26% N_Afr [3.78% West Eurasian].

HarappaWorld: 75.18% NE Asian, 11.25% SE Asian, 5.83% Siberian, 2.41% Baloch, 1.69% American, 1.52% SW Asian, 0.98% Beringian, 0.5% NE Euro, 0.3% Pygmy, 0.21% Mediterranean, 0.12% W African

Dodecad K12b: 65.88% East Asian, 22.51% SE Asian, 5.86% Siberian, 2.27% N Euro, 1.61% Gedrosia, 1.48% NW African



Re: MDLP K23b- Those Tungus_Altaic and Austronesian numbers are very close to my Simulated Jin speaker averages (dark red dots), although their East Eurasian percentage is 1-2% lower than the simulated Jin averages.

(original AN vs T_A plot)
https://i.imgur.com/SE1mMcf.png

(original N-S cline vs % East Asian plot)
https://i.imgur.com/FhIURm2.png

This person scores 0.40825 on my N-S cline. Given that they score a little under 96% East Asian, this puts them in the range of the most northern-shifted and most-West Eurasian shifted Chinese samples in my original dataset.

(graph does not include this data point)
https://i.imgur.com/FhIURm2.png

For context, their 23andMe results were

96.0% East Asian/Amerindian (69.9% Chinese from Shandong, Jiangsu, Guangdong, Henan, and apparently Taiwan; 14.8% Mongolian/Manchurian, 8.9% Korean, 2.4% Broadly East Asian),
1.6% West Asian/North African (0.8% Iran + Caucasus + Mesopotamia, 0.8% General),
1.1% Central + South Asian (0.5% Bengali/NE Indian, 0.2% Central Asian, 0.3% South Indian/Sri Lankan, 0.1% General),
0.2% Trace Spanish/Portuguese,
1.1% Unassigned.

okarinaofsteiner
01-15-2022, 09:51 PM
Taiwanese American (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/o60mva/taiwanese_american_anyone_know_if_there_is/h2qiepb/), half waishengren half benshengren (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/o60mva/taiwanese_american_anyone_know_if_there_is/h2rgdg1/). Scored 100% "Chinese" on 23andMe, with Guangdong and Taipei as the top region matches.

This person is 47.2% S_EA, 30.33% AN, 21.38% T_A, 98.91% East Asian, and scores 0.545 on my North-South cline. A bit more northern-shifted than most Fujian Han but not completely outside the Fujian range it seems. This person also has some Hoabinhian-like trace (<1% unless we interpret the "Amerindian" noise as such) ancestry, which isn't unusual for South China Han. Although it would be interesting to find out whether it's from the waishengren and/or benshengren parents.

MDLP K23b Oracle results:


Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 47.2
2 Austronesian 30.33
3 Tungus-Altaic 21.38
4 Amerindian 0.61
5 South_Indian 0.32
6 Australoid 0.15

Single Population Sharing:
# Population (source) Distance
1 Hakka ( ) 3.36
2 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 4.4
3 Han_Singapore ( ) 4.62
4 Han ( ) 5.8
5 Tujia ( ) 7.16
6 Han-Mandarin ( ) 7.9
7 Jinuo ( ) 7.96
8 She ( ) 9.79
9 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9.98
10 Cantonese ( ) 10.27
11 Lawa ( ) 10.68
12 Paluang ( ) 11.39
13 Yao ( ) 11.51
14 Miao ( ) 11.69
15 Hmong ( ) 12.27
16 Wa ( ) 13.18
17 Karen ( ) 13.61
18 Plang ( ) 15.25
19 Han_North ( ) 15.88
20 Tai_Yuan ( ) 16.21

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:
# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 84.1% Han ( ) + 15.9% Japanese ( ) @ 0.77
2 81.9% Han ( ) + 18.1% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 0.83
3 80.9% Han ( ) + 19.1% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 0.88
4 75.7% She ( ) + 24.3% Japanese ( ) @ 1.24
5 72.7% She ( ) + 27.3% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.26
6 77% Han ( ) + 23% Korean_KR ( ) @ 1.29
7 69.3% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 30.7% Korean ( ) @ 1.33
8 89% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 11% Naga ( ) @ 1.34
9 67.5% Naga ( ) + 32.5% Atayal_Coriell ( ) @ 1.36
10 83.8% Hakka ( ) + 16.2% Han_North ( ) @ 1.4
11 91.7% Hakka ( ) + 8.3% Naga ( ) @ 1.43
12 71.5% She ( ) + 28.5% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 1.48
13 89.1% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 10.9% Nysha ( ) @ 1.51
14 91.1% Hakka ( ) + 8.9% Tibetian_TTR ( ) @ 1.52
15 85.3% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 14.7% Naxi ( ) @ 1.52
16 89.7% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 10.3% Aonaga ( ) @ 1.55
17 91.2% Hakka ( ) + 8.8% Tibetian_Madou ( ) @ 1.56
18 91.9% Hakka ( ) + 8.1% Nysha ( ) @ 1.56
19 69.1% Naga ( ) + 30.9% Igorot ( ) @ 1.58
20 85.3% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 14.7% Yi ( ) @ 1.58

Shuzam87
01-15-2022, 10:35 PM
My MDLP K23b:
Admix Results (sorted):
#Population Percent
1. South_East_Asian 44.97
2. Tungus-Altaic 27.77
3. Austronesian 25.32
4. European_Early_Farmers 0.79
5. Caucasian 0.35
6. Melano_Polynesian 0.32
7. European_Hunters_Gatherers 0.24
8. North_African 0.15
9. Arctic 0.09

My mom's MDLP K23b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. South_East_Asian 43.71
2. Tungus-Altaic 29.62
3. Austronesian 20.05
4. Caucasian 2.15
5. East_Siberian 1.82
6. Near_East 1.35
7. Arctic 0.63
8. European_Hunters_Gatherers 0.44
9. Khoisan 0.18
10. Archaic_Human 0.05
11. North_African 0.01

My grandpa's MDLP K23b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. South_East_Asian 45.23
2. Tungus-Altaic 31.5
3. Austronesian 19.13
4. East_Siberian 2.42
5. Arctic 1.45
6. East_African 0.28

My K12b:
Admix Results (sorted):
#Population Percent
1. East_Asian 60.37
2. Southeast_Asian 32.12
3. Siberian 4.06
4. Caucasus. 1.91
5. Atlantic_Med 0.77
6. North_European 0.5
7. Sub_Saharan 0.15
8. East_African 0.12

My mom‘s K12b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. East_Asian 60.8
2. Southeast_Asian 28.32
3. Siberian 5.84
4. Gedrosia 1.49
5. Southwest_Asian 1.33
6. Caucasus 0.99
7. East_African 0.64
8. North_European 0.47
9. Sub_Saharan 0.12

My grandpa's K12b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. East_Asian 65.43
2. Southeast_Asian 26.87
3. Siberian 7.34
4. Gedrosia 0.25
5. East_African 0.11

Ajeje Brazorf
01-17-2022, 10:39 PM
East Asian-related PCA

Samples included
Part 1: https://pastebin.com/raw/H0AA9XtE
Part 2: https://pastebin.com/raw/bxjci2MV

https://i.imgur.com/xlmnKW3.png
https://i.imgur.com/DoAPw1x.png
https://i.imgur.com/4EfikSj.png
https://i.imgur.com/3V93vqY.png
https://i.imgur.com/bkPFjJN.png

okarinaofsteiner
01-23-2022, 05:59 PM
My MDLP K23b:
Admix Results (sorted):
#Population Percent
1. South_East_Asian 44.97
2. Tungus-Altaic 27.77
3. Austronesian 25.32
4. European_Early_Farmers 0.79
5. Caucasian 0.35
6. Melano_Polynesian 0.32
7. European_Hunters_Gatherers 0.24
8. North_African 0.15
9. Arctic 0.09

My mom's MDLP K23b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. South_East_Asian 43.71
2. Tungus-Altaic 29.62
3. Austronesian 20.05
4. Caucasian 2.15
5. East_Siberian 1.82
6. Near_East 1.35
7. Arctic 0.63
8. European_Hunters_Gatherers 0.44
9. Khoisan 0.18
10. Archaic_Human 0.05
11. North_African 0.01

My grandpa's MDLP K23b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. South_East_Asian 45.23
2. Tungus-Altaic 31.5
3. Austronesian 19.13
4. East_Siberian 2.42
5. Arctic 1.45
6. East_African 0.28

My K12b:
Admix Results (sorted):
#Population Percent
1. East_Asian 60.37
2. Southeast_Asian 32.12
3. Siberian 4.06
4. Caucasus. 1.91
5. Atlantic_Med 0.77
6. North_European 0.5
7. Sub_Saharan 0.15
8. East_African 0.12

My mom‘s K12b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. East_Asian 60.8
2. Southeast_Asian 28.32
3. Siberian 5.84
4. Gedrosia 1.49
5. Southwest_Asian 1.33
6. Caucasus 0.99
7. East_African 0.64
8. North_European 0.47
9. Sub_Saharan 0.12

My grandpa's K12b:
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1. East_Asian 65.43
2. Southeast_Asian 26.87
3. Siberian 7.34
4. Gedrosia 0.25
5. East_African 0.11

Looks like your Hui ancestry is from your mom, and your West Eurasian ancestry seems to be from your maternal grandmother?

I responded to the PCA post in my autosomal megathread because it felt more appropriate there. But I’ll repost my thoughts here anyway

What I think the PCAs represent after 5 minutes of skimming:

1st PCA: X-axis is North-South cline within East Asia. Y-axis is distance/drift from East Asians (Southern China groups + Taiwanese aborigines are at bottom).

Eskimo groups are on the left, near the top.
Central Asians are in the center, almost at the top.
South Asians are at the very top, but separated from Central Asians.
Nepali-like groups are shifted towards Tibetans.
Munda-like groups are shifted toward West Indonesians and slightly closer to South Asians than Lao_Hoabinhian and Onge, which are near each other but don't cluster together.


2nd PCA: X-axis is (kind of) a North-South cline within East Asia. Y-axis separates Tibetans (near top) from Jomon + Austronesians (bottom). There is a Siberian/Central Asian cline from Nganassan (bottom left) to Tajik (top center). There is also a Tibetan (near top, center-left) to Daic (middle, center-right) cline among Han Chinese that cuts through the Siberian/Central Asian cline at a 120/60 degree angle.

3rd PCA: X-axis is a West Eurasia to East Eurasia cline. Y-axis is an "ANE" cline that separates most Eurasians on the bottom, Arctic peoples in the top-middle, and Amerindians at the very top. There is a "cline" of populations from Evenk to Amerindian that goes up and slightly to the left. There is no visible "North-South structure" on the Y-axis of East Asian populations south of Mongolia.

4th PCA: X-axis is a West Eurasia to East Eurasia cline. Y-axis has Tlingit/Eskimo on the bottom and Ket/Nents on the top. There are 2 "almost parallel" left-to-right clines- the "top" one contains "Siberian" populations, the "bottom" on contains South Asians, Hoabinhian, and almost all "core" (i.e. farmer-descended) East Asians.

5th PCA: X-axis is a West Eurasia to East Eurasia cline. Y-axis separates 3 parallel clines that contain different "East Eurasian" populations.

Bottom cline = South Asians, Onge/Hoabinhian, Vanuatu (Melanesian?), and farmer-descended East Asians.
Middle cline = west Eurasian to east Eurasian cline among Central Asians, with ancient Amur/Baikal populations on the right.
Top cline = west Eurasian to east Eurasian cline among Siberians (Tatar/Udmurt to Yukaghir/Evenk)

SG_Jun
01-28-2022, 03:29 AM
Taiwanese American (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/o60mva/taiwanese_american_anyone_know_if_there_is/h2qiepb/), half waishengren half benshengren (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/o60mva/taiwanese_american_anyone_know_if_there_is/h2rgdg1/). Scored 100% "Chinese" on 23andMe, with Guangdong and Taipei as the top region matches.

This person is 47.2% S_EA, 30.33% AN, 21.38% T_A, 98.91% East Asian, and scores 0.545 on my North-South cline. A bit more northern-shifted than most Fujian Han but not completely outside the Fujian range it seems. This person also has some Hoabinhian-like trace (<1% unless we interpret the "Amerindian" noise as such) ancestry, which isn't unusual for South China Han. Although it would be interesting to find out whether it's from the waishengren and/or benshengren parents.

MDLP K23b Oracle results:

I am Singaporean Chinese (with ancestry from Jieyang, Guangdong aka Chaoshan region which is also a Min Nan / Southern Min speaking area and Quanzhou, Fujian), I also scored 100% Chinese on 23andme with Guangdong and Tainan as my top matches, here is my MDLP K23b results:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.16
2 Austronesian 33.4
3 Tungus-Altaic 20.44


Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Hakka ( ) 1.67
2 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 2.32
3 Han_Singapore ( ) 2.89
4 Han ( ) 5.44
5 Cantonese ( ) 7.84
6 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.53
7 Tujia ( ) 8.73
8 She ( ) 9.34
9 Yao ( ) 9.44
10 Jinuo ( ) 9.48
11 Han-Mandarin ( ) 10.06
12 Hmong ( ) 10.54
13 Lawa ( ) 10.82
14 Miao ( ) 11.95
15 Paluang ( ) 12.86
16 Wa ( ) 13.27
17 Karen ( ) 14.05
18 Tai_Yuan ( ) 14.51
19 Plang ( ) 14.63
20 Tai_Khuen ( ) 15.18

Shuzam87
01-29-2022, 02:51 AM
Looks like your Hui ancestry is from your mom, and your West Eurasian ancestry seems to be from your maternal grandmother?

I responded to the PCA post in my autosomal megathread because it felt more appropriate there. But I’ll repost my thoughts here anyway

Yes, correct. My grandma is Guangdong Hui + Shandong Hui.

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 04:37 PM
Some ethnic Chinese Thai samples.

1. This one is Chinese Thai American. Don't know what Han group he actually is but likely Hainanese or Hakka because he score 75%-84% Hakka+ Viet or Dai in mixed mode sharing.

MDLP K23b

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.25
2 Austronesian 36.19
3 Tungus-Altaic 17.46
4 African_Pygmy 0.1

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Han_Singapore ( ) 3.09
2 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 3.82
3 Hakka ( ) 3.94
4 Cantonese ( ) 4.44
5 Han ( ) 5.08
6 Hmong_Miao ( ) 5.91
7 Yao ( ) 6.15
8 Hmong ( ) 7.45
9 She ( ) 7.92
10 Tujia ( ) 9.85
11 Lawa ( ) 10.06
12 Jinuo ( ) 10.38
13 Miao ( ) 11.12
14 Tai_Yuan ( ) 11.46
15 Vietnamese ( ) 11.77
16 Tai_Khuen ( ) 11.85
17 Wa ( ) 12.15
18 Plang ( ) 12.67
19 Tai_Lue ( ) 12.68
20 Yong ( ) 13.14

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 59.2% Chinese_Dai ( ) + 40.8% Korean ( ) @ 0.43
2 58.8% Dai ( ) + 41.2% Korean ( ) @ 0.54
3 61.5% Aonaga ( ) + 38.5% Atayal_Coriell ( ) @ 1.06
4 69.4% Yi ( ) + 30.6% Atayal_Coriell ( ) @ 1.2
5 71.1% Yi ( ) + 28.9% Igorot ( ) @ 1.22
6 71.8% Yi ( ) + 28.2% Ami_Taiwan ( ) @ 1.31
7 70.8% Yi ( ) + 29.2% Ami ( ) @ 1.31
8 71% Naxi ( ) + 29% Ami_Coriell ( ) @ 1.33
9 71.2% Yi ( ) + 28.8% Ami_Coriell ( ) @ 1.35
10 63.3% Aonaga ( ) + 36.7% Igorot ( ) @ 1.36
11 71.6% Naxi ( ) + 28.4% Ami_Taiwan ( ) @ 1.36
12 70.6% Naxi ( ) + 29.4% Ami ( ) @ 1.41
13 84.2% Hakka ( ) + 15.8% Dai ( ) @ 1.44
14 83.9% Hakka ( ) + 16.1% Chinese_Dai ( ) @ 1.46
15 70.9% Naxi ( ) + 29.1% Igorot ( ) @ 1.47
16 76.4% Hakka ( ) + 23.6% Vietnamese ( ) @ 1.59
17 69.2% Naxi ( ) + 30.8% Atayal_Coriell ( ) @ 1.61
18 58.8% Aonaga ( ) + 41.2% Atayal ( ) @ 1.61
19 70.5% Vietnamese ( ) + 29.5% Korean ( ) @ 1.61
20 63% Aonaga ( ) + 37% Ami ( ) @ 1.63


Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Cantonese_ +50% Hakka_ @ 1.882742


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Chinese_Dai_ +25% Japanese_ +25% Tujia_ @ 0.535862


Using 4 populations approximation:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++
1 Chinese_Dai_ + Chinese_Dai_ + Japanese_ + Tujia_ @ 0.535862
2 Chinese_Dai_ + Dai_ + Japanese_ + Tujia_ @ 0.568407
3 Dai_ + Dai_ + Japanese_ + Tujia_ @ 0.600950
4 Dai_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.661372
5 Chinese_Dai_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.752040
6 Ami_Taiwan_ + Han_ + Naga_ + Yi_ @ 0.776632
7 Atayal_ + Naga_ + Tujia_ + Tujia_ @ 0.821957
8 Ami_ + Aonaga_ + Han_North_ + Miao_ @ 0.835905
9 Chinese_Dai_ + Japanese_ + She_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.842071
10 Ami_Taiwan_ + Han_ + Naga_ + Naxi_ @ 0.861647
11 Ami_Coriell_ + Han_ + Naga_ + Yi_ @ 0.898204
12 Chinese_Dai_ + Han_ + Japanese_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ @ 0.916833
13 Chinese_Dai_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Zhuang_ @ 0.924259
14 Aonaga_ + Han_North_ + Igorot_ + Miao_ @ 0.932293
15 Han_ + Igorot_ + Naga_ + Yi_ @ 0.934202
16 Ami_Coriell_ + Han_ + Naga_ + Naxi_ @ 0.948288
17 Dai_ + Japanese_ + She_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.955039
18 Dai_ + Han_ + Japanese_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ @ 0.987483
19 Ami_Coriell_ + Aonaga_ + Han_North_ + Miao_ @ 1.013785
20 Dai_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + Zhuang_ @ 1.023394


2. Chinese Thai. Very likely Hakka based on him scoring Hakka as his top population and getting predominantly Hakka+ something else in the mixed mode.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 45.58
2 Austronesian 31.49
3 Tungus-Altaic 19.64
4 South_Indian 2.36
5 Archaic_African 0.32
6 Ancestral_Altaic 0.32
7 South_Central_Asian 0.29

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Hakka ( ) 2.87
2 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 3.37
3 Han_Singapore ( ) 3.56
4 Han ( ) 6.08
5 Jinuo ( ) 8.2
6 Cantonese ( ) 8.64
7 Tujia ( ) 8.69
8 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9
9 Han-Mandarin ( ) 9.23
10 Lawa ( ) 9.36
11 She ( ) 9.8
12 Yao ( ) 9.82
13 Paluang ( ) 10.73
14 Hmong ( ) 10.89
15 Karen ( ) 11.81
16 Wa ( ) 11.87
17 Miao ( ) 12.12
18 Plang ( ) 13.4
19 Tai_Yuan ( ) 14.12
20 Tai_Khuen ( ) 15.43

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 51.9% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 48.1% Korean ( ) @ 1.17
2 93.9% Hakka ( ) + 6.1% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.53
3 92.7% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 7.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.7
4 94.7% Hakka ( ) + 5.3% Pahari ( ) @ 1.77
5 97.5% Hakka ( ) + 2.5% Dhurwa ( ) @ 1.8
6 97.9% Hakka ( ) + 2.1% Paniya ( ) @ 1.81
7 97.6% Hakka ( ) + 2.4% Santhal ( ) @ 1.81
8 97.4% Hakka ( ) + 2.6% Kharia ( ) @ 1.81
9 97.9% Hakka ( ) + 2.1% Pulliyar ( ) @ 1.82
10 97.5% Hakka ( ) + 2.5% Bhunjia ( ) @ 1.83
11 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% Malayan ( ) @ 1.84
12 97.7% Hakka ( ) + 2.3% Nihali ( ) @ 1.85
13 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% Hallaki ( ) @ 1.86
14 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% Madiga ( ) @ 1.86
15 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% Mala ( ) @ 1.87
16 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% Hakkipikki ( ) @ 1.88
17 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% TN_Dalit ( ) @ 1.88
18 97.8% Hakka ( ) + 2.2% Kurumba ( ) @ 1.88
19 97.7% Hakka ( ) + 2.3% Chamar ( ) @ 1.88
20 97.7% Hakka ( ) + 2.3% Chenchu ( ) @ 1.89


Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Korean_ +50% Vietnamese_south_ @ 1.556785


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Han_ +25% Javanese_ +25% Korean_ @ 1.373067


Using 4 populations approximation:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Han_North_ + Japanese_ + Vietnamese_south_ + Vietnamese_south_ @ 0.653076
2 Htin_ + Japanese_ + She_ + She_ @ 0.914970
3 Cambodian_ + Japanese_ + She_ + She_ @ 0.989469
4 Han_North_ + Japanese_ + Vietnamese_central_ + Vietnamese_south_ @ 1.062957
5 Japanese_ + Khmer_Cambodian_ + She_ + She_ @ 1.134579
6 Cambodian_ + Han_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ @ 1.175495
7 Han_ + Japanese_ + Khmer_Cambodian_ + She_ @ 1.226853
8 Han_ + Htin_ + Japanese_ + She_ @ 1.229693
9 Cambodian_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ + She_ @ 1.266168
10 Han_ + Korean_ + Sunda_ + Tujia_ @ 1.269594
11 Cambodian_ + Hakka_ + Korean_ + She_ @ 1.269811
12 Chinese_Taiwan_ + Htin_ + Korean_ + She_ @ 1.282317
13 Iban_ + Japanese_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ + Nysha_ @ 1.321268
14 Cambodian_ + Han_ + Japanese_ + She_ @ 1.327772
15 Cambodian_ + Chinese_Taiwan_ + Korean_ + She_ @ 1.328271
16 Cambodian_ + Han_ + Han_ + Korean_ @ 1.347497
17 Hmong_Miao_ + Htin_ + Japanese_ + Miao_ @ 1.356196
18 Han_ + Ryukyuan_ + Tujia_ + Vietnamese_south_ @ 1.356298
19 Han_North_ + Japanese_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ + Vietnamese_south_ @ 1.365236
20 Han_ + Han_ + Javanese_ + Korean_ @ 1.373067


3. Another Chinese Thai. Prolly Hakka, Teochew or Hokkien. But most likely Hakka or Hokkien I guess since he got Hakka as the top pop and in the mixed mode, he got 93% Hakka+ some Tibeto-Burman pop like Naxi, Nysha, Naga, etc.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 47.69
2 Austronesian 31.17
3 Tungus-Altaic 20.79
4 Amerindian 0.23
5 South_Indian 0.12

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Hakka ( ) 3.06
2 Han_Singapore ( ) 4.09
3 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 4.18
4 Han ( ) 4.87
5 Tujia ( ) 6.74
6 Jinuo ( ) 7.88
7 Han-Mandarin ( ) 8.89
8 She ( ) 8.89
9 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9.1
10 Cantonese ( ) 9.5
11 Lawa ( ) 10.37
12 Yao ( ) 10.72
13 Miao ( ) 10.93
14 Hmong ( ) 11.43
15 Paluang ( ) 11.43
16 Wa ( ) 12.77
17 Karen ( ) 13.47
18 Plang ( ) 14.73
19 Tai_Yuan ( ) 15.5
20 Tai_Khuen ( ) 16.43

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 86.6% Han ( ) + 13.4% Japanese ( ) @ 0.61
2 67.1% Naga ( ) + 32.9% Atayal_Coriell ( ) @ 0.88
3 84.1% Han ( ) + 15.9% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 0.97
4 84.9% Han ( ) + 15.1% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 0.98
5 68.8% Naga ( ) + 31.2% Igorot ( ) @ 0.98
6 68.5% Naga ( ) + 31.5% Ami ( ) @ 1.15
7 69.5% Naga ( ) + 30.5% Ami_Taiwan ( ) @ 1.17
8 68.9% Naga ( ) + 31.1% Ami_Coriell ( ) @ 1.25
9 78% She ( ) + 22% Japanese ( ) @ 1.28
10 64.9% Naga ( ) + 35.1% Atayal ( ) @ 1.34
11 80.9% Han ( ) + 19.1% Korean_KR ( ) @ 1.34
12 93.1% Hakka ( ) + 6.9% Aonaga ( ) @ 1.49
13 92.8% Hakka ( ) + 7.2% Naga ( ) @ 1.5
14 83.4% Han ( ) + 16.6% Korean ( ) @ 1.51
15 90% Hakka ( ) + 10% Yi ( ) @ 1.52
16 90.1% Hakka ( ) + 9.9% Naxi ( ) @ 1.53
17 72.1% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 27.9% Korean ( ) @ 1.55
18 92.9% Hakka ( ) + 7.1% Nysha ( ) @ 1.57
19 75.4% She ( ) + 24.6% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.58
20 90.4% Chinese_Taiwan ( ) + 9.6% Aonaga ( ) @ 1.6


Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ +50% Korean_ @ 2.398478


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Han_ +25% Korean_ +25% Vietnamese_ @ 0.893625

Using 4 populations approximation:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++
1 Japanese_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ + She_ + Tujia_ @ 0.552576
2 Dai_ + Japanese_ + Tujia_ + Tujia_ @ 0.617042
3 Han_ + Korean_ + Tujia_ + Zhuang_ @ 0.660235
4 Chinese_Dai_ + Japanese_ + Tujia_ + Tujia_ @ 0.661011
5 Korean_ + Miao_ + Murut_ + Naga_ @ 0.702050
6 Japanese_ + Miao_ + Miao_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.728792
7 Japanese_ + Miao_ + Tujia_ + Vietnamese_north_ @ 0.782242
8 Han_ + Korean_ + Tujia_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.784550
9 Aonaga_ + Han_ + Korean_ + Murut_ @ 0.814484
10 Han_ + Jiamao_ + Korean_ + Tujia_ @ 0.851202
11 Han_ + Han_ + Korean_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.893625
12 Japanese_ + She_ + Tujia_ + Vietnamese_north_ @ 0.898179
13 Cantonese_ + Han_ + Korean_ + She_ @ 0.920572
14 Japanese_ + Miao_ + She_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.976867
15 Cantonese_ + Korean_ + She_ + She_ @ 0.988108
16 Han_ + Korean_ + She_ + Yao_ @ 0.990836
17 Hakka_ + Korean_ + Miao_ + Vietnamese_ @ 0.995326
18 Hakka_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ + Korean_ + Tujia_ @ 1.004047
19 Japanese_ + Kinh_Vietnam_KHV_ + Miao_ + Tujia_ @ 1.009224
20 Han_ + Korean_ + Tai_Lue_ + Tujia_ @ 1.021556


Btw:

I haven't taken a DNA test yet (If I got it correct, 23andme and most DNA testing companies aren't send to Thailand, so I will probably have to order one when I travel abroad). I wonder what I will score like? My dad is 100% Chinese (mix of Teochew and Hainanese) so he prolly will score like them while my mom's side seems more ambiguous, she is definitely heavily Chinese, probably around 50% at least, as both my maternal grandpa and grandma have very significant Han ancestry).

okarinaofsteiner
03-03-2022, 05:37 PM
Some ethnic Chinese Thai samples.

1. This one is Chinese Thai American. Don't know what Han group he actually is but likely Hainanese or Hakka because he score 75%-84% Hakka+ Viet or Dai in mixed mode sharing.

MDLP K23b

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.25
2 Austronesian 36.19
3 Tungus-Altaic 17.46
4 African_Pygmy 0.1

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Han_Singapore ( ) 3.09
2 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 3.82
3 Hakka ( ) 3.94
4 Cantonese ( ) 4.44
5 Han ( ) 5.08
6 Hmong_Miao ( ) 5.91
7 Yao ( ) 6.15
8 Hmong ( ) 7.45
9 She ( ) 7.92
10 Tujia ( ) 9.85
11 Lawa ( ) 10.06
12 Jinuo ( ) 10.38
13 Miao ( ) 11.12
14 Tai_Yuan ( ) 11.46
15 Vietnamese ( ) 11.77
16 Tai_Khuen ( ) 11.85
17 Wa ( ) 12.15
18 Plang ( ) 12.67
19 Tai_Lue ( ) 12.68
20 Yong ( ) 13.14

-snip-

2. Chinese Thai. Very likely Hakka based on him scoring Hakka as his top population and getting predominantly Hakka+ something else in the mixed mode.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 45.58
2 Austronesian 31.49
3 Tungus-Altaic 19.64
4 South_Indian 2.36
5 Archaic_African 0.32
6 Ancestral_Altaic 0.32
7 South_Central_Asian 0.29

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Hakka ( ) 2.87
2 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 3.37
3 Han_Singapore ( ) 3.56
4 Han ( ) 6.08
5 Jinuo ( ) 8.2
6 Cantonese ( ) 8.64
7 Tujia ( ) 8.69
8 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9
9 Han-Mandarin ( ) 9.23
10 Lawa ( ) 9.36
11 She ( ) 9.8
12 Yao ( ) 9.82
13 Paluang ( ) 10.73
14 Hmong ( ) 10.89
15 Karen ( ) 11.81
16 Wa ( ) 11.87
17 Miao ( ) 12.12
18 Plang ( ) 13.4
19 Tai_Yuan ( ) 14.12
20 Tai_Khuen ( ) 15.43

-snip-

3. Another Chinese Thai. Prolly Hakka, Teochew or Hokkien. But most likely Hakka or Hokkien I guess since he got Hakka as the top pop and in the mixed mode, he got 93% Hakka+ some Tibeto-Burman pop like Naxi, Nysha, Naga, etc.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 47.69
2 Austronesian 31.17
3 Tungus-Altaic 20.79
4 Amerindian 0.23
5 South_Indian 0.12

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Hakka ( ) 3.06
2 Han_Singapore ( ) 4.09
3 Chinese_Taiwan ( ) 4.18
4 Han ( ) 4.87
5 Tujia ( ) 6.74
6 Jinuo ( ) 7.88
7 Han-Mandarin ( ) 8.89
8 She ( ) 8.89
9 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9.1
10 Cantonese ( ) 9.5
11 Lawa ( ) 10.37
12 Yao ( ) 10.72
13 Miao ( ) 10.93
14 Hmong ( ) 11.43
15 Paluang ( ) 11.43
16 Wa ( ) 12.77
17 Karen ( ) 13.47
18 Plang ( ) 14.73
19 Tai_Yuan ( ) 15.5
20 Tai_Khuen ( ) 16.43

-snip-


2 and 3 are probably Teochew. They match with Hakka first because there is no Teochew reference population (Han_Singapore is a composite of Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, and Peranakan). 1 could still be part-Teochew or maybe Cantonese. Although he could be Hokkien or Hakka as well.

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 05:52 PM
2 and 3 are probably Teochew. They match with Hakka first because there is no Teochew reference population (Han_Singapore is a composite of Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, and Peranakan). 1 could still be part-Teochew or maybe Cantonese. Although he could be Hokkien or Hakka as well.

I see. Could 1 also be Hainanese? I never heard of Cantonese in Thailand; they exist but maybe in small numbers compared to Hakka, Teochew and Hokkien and Hainanese.

What do you think I will score like btw? Oh and did you check the PM I sent you?

okarinaofsteiner
03-05-2022, 06:55 AM
I see. Could 1 also be Hainanese? I never heard of Cantonese in Thailand; they exist but maybe in small numbers compared to Hakka, Teochew and Hokkien and Hainanese.

What do you think I will score like btw? Oh and did you check the PM I sent you?

Apparently the dictator who invented pad thai is 1/4 Cantonese through his paternal grandfather: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaek_Phibunsongkhram


Plaek Khittasangkha (Thai: แปลก ขีตตะสังคะ [plɛ̀ːk kʰìːt.tà.sǎŋ.kʰá]) was born on 14 July 1897 in Mueang Nonthaburi, Nonthaburi Province in the Kingdom of Siam to Keed Khittasangkha and his wife.[1] Plaek's paternal grandfather was said to be a Cantonese-speaking Chinese immigrant. However, the family was completely assimilated as Central Thai people and Plaek does not pass the criteria for being Chinese,[2] which is why he could later successfully conceal and deny his Chinese roots.[3]

1 could very well be Hainanese. I'm guessing you'd score similar to them on MDLP K23b.

okarinaofsteiner
03-06-2022, 07:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwJAAztHfvw

Taiwanese Canadian YouTuber- in the first part of the video he says his paternal grandfather was born in Jiangsu, his paternal grandmother was born in Taipei, and his mother's family is from southern Taiwan.

He scores 99.5% Chinese (order of the PRC provinces is Guangdong, Zhejiang, Fujian, Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Liaoning, Sichuan, Jilin, Hubei), 0.3% Filipino/Austronesian, and 0.2% Mongolian/Manchurian.

No GEDmatch results to speak of, but I haven't seen the whole video.

okarinaofsteiner
04-29-2022, 08:49 PM
https://old.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/s5supg/if_youre_wondering_who_is_getting_100_chinese/i6oll73/?context=3



Actual Ancestry

Me: 3/4 grandparents from Wu speaking areas of Southern Jiangsu + 1 grandparent from Shanghai (whose parents moved to Shanghai from Zhejiang Ningbo)

Wife: From Shandong Jinan but mother's family originally from Shandong Weihai

Haplogroups

Me:
Y-DNA: C-F2613
mtDNA: Z3

Wife:
mtDNA: B4b1

Gedmatch MDLP K23b Results

From what I understand Han Chinese mostly vary in terms of Tungus-Altaic to Austronesian ratio, as the Tibeto-Burman component (South_East_Asian) is almost always 45-50%

Me:
Ancestral_Altaic 0.08
Austronesian 22.19
Melano_polynesian 0.75
South_East_Asian 47.44
Tungus-Altaic 29.55

Wife:
Austronesian 22.58
East_Siberian 3.38
South_East_Asian 44.53
Tungus-Altaic 29.51

okarinaofsteiner
05-16-2022, 10:06 PM
@MNOPSC1b @observer_two @uisashi @Tsakhur

Nara introduced me to this Overseas Taiwanese Twitch streamer who judging from his 23andMe results is (at least part) non-South China waishengren. His #1 Chinese province match is Shandong, and he also scores 5.7% Korean (but also 0.4% Filipino and Austronesian, which implies he's at least part benshengren)

Not sure what his specific on-paper ancestry is, but he's definitely part (Yangtze Delta or further north) waishengren and probably part benshengren too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XMazLsVs9Y&t=158s

MNOPSC1b
05-16-2022, 11:43 PM
@MNOPSC1b @observer_two @uisashi @Tsakhur

Nara introduced me to this Overseas Taiwanese Twitch streamer who judging from his 23andMe results is (at least part) non-South China waishengren.

Do you still have connection with Nara? If so could you tell her to join this discussion board so that we could discuss things here just like what we used to do on Antrhoscape? I really missed the good old times that we had there. Or if not please tell me where you guys usually discuss things now so I could join as well.

okarinaofsteiner
05-19-2022, 01:20 AM
Do you still have connection with Nara? If so could you tell her to join this discussion board so that we could discuss things here just like what we used to do on Antrhoscape? I really missed the good old times that we had there. Or if not please tell me where you guys usually discuss things now so I could join as well.

Yes but she isn't really interested in population genetics. Judging from what she messages me, she seems more interested in phenotypes and cultural discussions.

okarinaofsteiner
05-19-2022, 01:30 AM
Agreed, I really don't understand the mentality of the Han nationalists, particularly if they're Cantonese or Hakka. I think they should cherish their native heritage as well.
Even more strangely is that lately I've noticed Hakka who try to claim Xiongnu heritage or ancestry. If anything it seems that some of these people are suffering an identity crisis at this point


Anecdotal, but I've seen a Hakka + Teochew Chinese Australian (I think) (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/ubagj1/teochew_hakka_chinese_results_from_23andme_wegene/) who scored 81% Neolithic YR + 19% Neolithic SEA.

Their MDLP K23b is something like 45% S_EA, 33% AN, and 22% T_A. Which is higher on Tungus_Altaic than what my DNAConnect.org adoptee-based and 23mofang-based models would suggest for eastern Guangdong. I've noticed many Taiwanese, Hoklo/Teochew, and Hakka individual results score higher on both Tungus_Altaic and Austronesian than my models would suggest.

My simulated Fujian average is 46.06% S_EA, 31.74% AN, and 21.17% T_A (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?24360-Chinese-GEDmatch-averages&p=788062&viewfull=1#post788062). My simulated Chaoshan Min (23mofang) average is ~34% AN and ~18% T_A, while my simulated Guangdong Hakka (23mofang) average is ~36% AN and ~17% T_A (which is more southern than a lot of individual Hakka samples I 've seen). I also get the impression that ordinary Taiwanese and Southern Fujian Han cluster around 20-22% T_A.

https://i.imgur.com/SE1mMcf.png

MNOPSC1b
05-19-2022, 10:39 PM
Yes but she isn't really interested in population genetics. Judging from what she messages me, she seems more interested in phenotypes and cultural discussions.

Discussions related to culture, history, and languages are allowed here, so she could join if she wants.

For phenotypes, do you know another forum where we could talk about them?

observer_t
05-22-2022, 11:13 PM
Discussions related to culture, history, and languages are allowed here, so she could join if she wants.

For phenotypes, do you know another forum where we could talk about them?

Honestly, the existing english-language phenotype boards are mostly eurocentric (eg. apricity)

since it seems to be the same few of us talking about this all the time, it would actually be possible for us to make a group chat/discord server

or just make a new forum I guess (not hard to do)

okarinaofsteiner
05-23-2022, 12:25 AM
Honestly, the existing english-language phenotype boards are mostly eurocentric (eg. apricity)

since it seems to be the same few of us talking about this all the time, it would actually be possible for us to make a group chat/discord server

or just make a new forum I guess (not hard to do)

I wouldn't want to move our East Asia-centered discussions to TheApricity, that place gives me alt-right vibes and I mostly associate it with the more troll-ish Anthroscape posters. I used to answer pop anthro-related (linguistics, phenotypes, etc.) questions on Quora anonymously but they got rid of that feature sometime in the last year or two.

I have a Reddit throwaway (u/okarinaofsteiner (https://www.reddit.com/user/okarinaofsteiner)) that I'm eventually going to share my East Asia population genetics content on. A Redditor who's seen my Anthrogenica megathread sent me screenshots of various GEDmatch kits they found several weeks ago.

While we're talking about non-genetics related stuff, here's a video of different regional accents of Mandarin from KevinInShanghai's channel


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLUUzOJFsUI

uisashi
05-23-2022, 03:58 AM
How common are mixed regional people in China today? My understanding is that bigger cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen are currently pretty mutt.

MNOPSC1b
05-23-2022, 02:49 PM
How common are mixed regional people in China today? My understanding is that bigger cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen are currently pretty mutt.

From my understanding this is the case, metropolis like Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and even Guangzhou and Hong Kong are pretty mixed.

However, smaller cities, towns, and villages still largely preserve the regional phenotypes.

uisashi
05-24-2022, 01:29 AM
From my understanding this is the case, metropolis like Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and even Guangzhou and Hong Kong are pretty mixed.

However, smaller cities, towns, and villages still largely preserve the regional phenotypes.

Yeah, FSC from smaller towns are def different to bigger cities.

Btw do you have reddit? I'll message you on there, PM.

Songtsen
05-24-2022, 12:24 PM
How common are mixed regional people in China today? My understanding is that bigger cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen are currently pretty mutt.

China is more than 60 percent urban. Lots of mixing going on.

MNOPSC1b
05-24-2022, 12:58 PM
China is more than 60 percent urban. Lots of mixing going on.

It’s mostly the metropolis that experience the heaviest mixing, smaller 3rd or 4th tier cities still preserve their regional characteristics.

Tsakhur
05-25-2022, 03:09 PM
Discussions related to culture, history, and languages are allowed here, so she could join if she wants.

For phenotypes, do you know another forum where we could talk about them?

There is a forum called Amazians which we can also discussed phenotypes. Its mainly Pinoy based though but there are also some other Asians/groups there: https://www.amazians.com/forum/anthropology-and-population-genetics/

BoxOf
06-04-2022, 12:19 PM
Hello, the Tibetan genoplot doesn't seem to be viewable anymore. Do you mind posting another one?

By the way do you have any Ladakhi, Balti or Kinnauri samples?

(Please ignore this I forgot to quote)

BoxOf
06-04-2022, 12:25 PM
Just made 100 Tibetans' average from genoplot.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?15471-South-Asian-HarappaWorld-results&p=791994&viewfull=1#post791994

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

Hello, the Tibetan genoplot doesn't seem to be viewable anymore. Do you mind posting another one?

By the way do you have any Ladakhi, Balti or Kinnauri samples?

BoxOf
06-04-2022, 01:17 PM
These are some helpful graphs I've found in Tieba, the author's account name "渤海187厘米" is in the picture. It should be based on Wegene results of all ethnicities by sub-provincial divisions.

They are the percentages of "North Han", "South Han", "Tibeto-Burman", "West Eurasia", "Mongolic (note here it represents the Tu/Mongour ethnic group)", "Northeast Asia (Korean+Japanese+Yakut)" present in the populations respectively.

"North Han" "South Han" "Tibeto-Burman"
49879 49880 49881

"West Eurasia" "Mongolic/Tu/Mongour" "Northeast Asia"
49882 49883

(I'm new to this forum so sorry about the odd formatting. The "Northeast Asia" one is in the "Attached Thumbnails". Apparently I cannot add more than five images. I don't know how to edit it out of the "Attached Thumbnail".)

BoxOf
06-04-2022, 04:20 PM
Just in case the "North Han" and "Northeast Asia" didn't come through

49886 49887

okarinaofsteiner
08-17-2022, 02:54 PM
First Chinese 23andMe result I’ve seen on r/23andMe post-algorithm update. Hong Konger whose grandparents are from Dongguan and Shantou: https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wqjmyf/hong_konger_results_with_all_grandparents_from/

85.3% Lingnan (Guangxi)
11.4% Yangtze + Fujian/Taiwan (order of provinces is interesting- Fujian, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai, etc)
3.3% Vietnamese


https://i.redd.it/u7qgl14rj8i91.jpg?
https://i.redd.it/o08m604rj8i91.jpg?

Pre-update results:
https://i.redd.it/pcv8b04rj8i91.jpg?


Very nice to see Chinese results post-update!

Shantou explains the Taiwan specific matches (Teochew and Hokkien are relatively closely related topolects). I suspect you’d still get some “Southern Chinese + Taiwanese” if you were 100% Canto, and your “South Chinese” percentage makes me suspect most Fujianese and Taiwanese are going to get significant “South Chinese” ancestry

MNOPSC1b
08-17-2022, 10:50 PM
First Chinese 23andMe result I’ve seen on r/23andMe post-algorithm update. Hong Konger whose grandparents are from Dongguan and Shantou: https://wwe.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wqjmyf/hong_konger_results_with_all_grandparents_from/

85.3% Lingnan (Guangxi)
11.4% Yangtze + Fujian/Taiwan (order of provinces is interesting- Fujian, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai, etc)
3.3% Vietnamese


https://i.redd.it/u7qgl14rj8i91.jpg?
https://i.redd.it/o08m604rj8i91.jpg?

Pre-update results:
https://i.redd.it/pcv8b04rj8i91.jpg?

It's good to see that they've updated their Chinese ref pops to more accurately assign the ancestry components of Chinese and other East Asian or SE Asian testers. It's a good step towards the right direction. However it's not enough. I think they should break down the giant Southern Chinese blob into at least 4 different sub-categories:

Yangtse Delta Chinese (Jiangsu, Anhui, Shanghai, and northern Zhejiang)

Southeast Chinese (southern Zhejiang, Fujian, and Taiwan)

South-Central Chinese (Hubei, Hunan, and Jiangxi)

Southwest Chinese (Sichuan, Chongqing, Guizhou, and Yunnan)

And the giant Northern Chinese + Tibetan category might deserve some break-downs as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Very nice to see Chinese results post-update!

Shantou explains the Taiwan specific matches (Teochew and Hokkien are relatively closely related topolects). I suspect you’d still get some “Southern Chinese + Taiwanese” if you were 100% Canto, and your “South Chinese” percentage makes me suspect most Fujianese and Taiwanese are going to get significant “South Chinese” ancestry

Well, TBH it's not that surprising that this person has significant South Chinese or Canto-related ancestry cause one of his grandparents came from Dongguan which is a Canto speaking area. He cannot serve as an example for those Fujianese and Taiwanese individuals without any Canto ancestry whatsoever. It'll be interesting to see how a Min-speaking person from Fujian/Taiwan without any known Canto ancestry scores under this updated algorithm, and I'd also like to see how a Canto-speaking individual from Western Guangdong or Guangxi without any known Min or Hakka ancestry would score.

observer_t
08-18-2022, 03:23 PM
[QUOTE=MNOPSC1b;865958]It's good to see that they've updated their Chinese ref pops to more accurately assign the ancestry components of Chinese and other East Asian or SE Asian testers. It's a good step towards the right direction. However it's not enough. I think they should break down the giant Southern Chinese blob into at least 4 different sub-categories:

Yangtse Delta Chinese (Jiangsu, Anhui, Shanghai, and northern Zhejiang)

Southeast Chinese (southern Zhejiang, Fujian, and Taiwan)

South-Central Chinese (Hubei, Hunan, and Jiangxi)

Southwest Chinese (Sichuan, Chongqing, Guizhou, and Yunnan)

And the giant Northern Chinese + Tibetan category might deserve some break-downs as well.


From what I saw, their "northern Chinese + Tibetan" category looks like it may actually peak in Shandong somewhere. This makes sense because there are a ton of overseas Chinese from Shandong/Dongbei.

I am presuming their "southern Chinese + Taiwanese" category will peak in Taiwan, because there are probably more Taiwanese 23andMe users than places farther inland.

okarinaofsteiner
08-18-2022, 06:45 PM
From what I saw, their "northern Chinese + Tibetan" category looks like it may actually peak in Shandong somewhere. This makes sense because there are a ton of overseas Chinese from Shandong/Dongbei.

I am presuming their "southern Chinese + Taiwanese" category will peak in Taiwan, because there are probably more Taiwanese 23andMe users than places farther inland.

You’re probably right about “Northern Chinese + Tibetan”. Not sure about Taiwanese although if a lot of the Taiwanese customers are (part) waishengren then I guess the category would make more sense.

This is probably the highest Mongolian percentage I’ve seen in a (pre-update) Chinese 23andMe: https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wrq34m/updated_results_completely_different/

Old: https://i.redd.it/x6yiwtw3gii91.jpg

New: https://i.redd.it/50q4vtw3gii91.jpg

okarinaofsteiner
08-18-2022, 06:48 PM
It's good to see that they've updated their Chinese ref pops to more accurately assign the ancestry components of Chinese and other East Asian or SE Asian testers. It's a good step towards the right direction. However it's not enough. I think they should break down the giant Southern Chinese blob into at least 4 different sub-categories:

Yangtse Delta Chinese (Jiangsu, Anhui, Shanghai, and northern Zhejiang)

Southeast Chinese (southern Zhejiang, Fujian, and Taiwan)

South-Central Chinese (Hubei, Hunan, and Jiangxi)

Southwest Chinese (Sichuan, Chongqing, Guizhou, and Yunnan)


Agreed, there’s no reason for Fujian + Taiwan to be lumped in with the rest of non-Lingnan Southern China.

observer_t
08-18-2022, 09:25 PM
It seems that benshengren are getting more "South Chinese" though with still mostly "Southern Chinese and Taiwanese"
https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wru83x/taiwanese_early_han_updated_results/

I would like to see a full Fujian result

observer_t
08-18-2022, 09:28 PM
This is probably the highest Mongolian percentage I’ve seen in a (pre-update) Chinese 23andMe:

Before she responds, Im might guess that her ancestry could be from possibly ~Hebei since Shandong people tend to get more Korean/Japanese rather than Mongolian pre-update

either that or Shanxi

okarinaofsteiner
08-18-2022, 09:55 PM
It seems that benshengren are getting more "South Chinese" though with still mostly "Southern Chinese and Taiwanese"
https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wru83x/taiwanese_early_han_updated_results/

I would like to see a full Fujian result

One of my 4th cousins (3/4 Fuzhou) still got 6.1% South Chinese and 2.7% Non-Viet/Filipino/Dai SEA. Guess my intuition was correct

https://i.imgur.com/qPt2gW1.jpg

MNOPSC1b
08-19-2022, 04:07 AM
Agreed, there’s no reason for Fujian + Taiwan to be lumped in with the rest of non-Lingnan Southern China.

There's no reason for Fujian + Taiwan to be lumped together with Lingnan either (apart from maybe the Teochew or Chaoshan region). Each region in Southern China is more or less distinct.

On PCA charts Lingnan samples are noticeably more southern-shifted and much closer to Tai-Kradai than Fujian-Taiwan

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=48608&d=1646276472

SG_Jun
08-19-2022, 06:41 AM
It's good to see that they've updated their Chinese ref pops to more accurately assign the ancestry components of Chinese and other East Asian or SE Asian testers. It's a good step towards the right direction. However it's not enough. I think they should break down the giant Southern Chinese blob into at least 4 different sub-categories:

Yangtse Delta Chinese (Jiangsu, Anhui, Shanghai, and northern Zhejiang)

Southeast Chinese (southern Zhejiang, Fujian, and Taiwan)

South-Central Chinese (Hubei, Hunan, and Jiangxi)

Southwest Chinese (Sichuan, Chongqing, Guizhou, and Yunnan)

And the giant Northern Chinese + Tibetan category might deserve some break-downs as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Well, TBH it's not that surprising that this person has significant South Chinese or Canto-related ancestry cause one of his grandparents came from Dongguan which is a Canto speaking area. He cannot serve as an example for those Fujianese and Taiwanese individuals without any Canto ancestry whatsoever. It'll be interesting to see how a Min-speaking person from Fujian/Taiwan without any known Canto ancestry scores under this updated algorithm, and I'd also like to see how a Canto-speaking individual from Western Guangdong or Guangxi without any known Min or Hakka ancestry would score.

Agree with you 100%. Found the new labeling by 23andme quite confusing as well, since southern China itself is pretty diverse from province to province. Would be more worthwhile splitting it into the separate categories as you've mentioned above. I'm pure Min Nan (Teochew on paternal side and Quanzhou Hokkien on maternal side) with no Canto ancestry, in this update I got 52.1% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 47.9% South Chinese (which I thought was on the higher side but it seems still in the range of some Min speakers / Taiwanese benshengren). Kind of strange that a Min speaking Taiwanese would score something similar (close to 40-50% Lingnan / South Chinese) instead of a higher percentage of 'Southern Chinese & Taiwanese'. I've seen others mention that the reference population for 'Southern Chinese & Taiwanese' is in Wenzhou, Zhejiang.


It seems that benshengren are getting more "South Chinese" though with still mostly "Southern Chinese and Taiwanese"
https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wru83x/taiwanese_early_han_updated_results/

I would like to see a full Fujian result

This benshengren actually has a lower South Chinese % compared to some of the other Taiwanese DNA matches I have. I assume it could mean that his ancestors largely came from Quanzhou, whereas those with a higher % of South Chinese came from Zhangzhou.

observer_t
08-19-2022, 06:46 PM
I've seen others mention that the reference population for 'Southern Chinese & Taiwanese' is in Wenzhou, Zhejiang.

I saw a result for someone who was 1/2 Tangshan (Hebei), 1/4 Ningbo (Zhejiang), 1/4 Wenzhou (Zhejiang) score ~57/43 north chinese/southern chinese + tw

So the reference population being Wenzhou makes sense to me

okarinaofsteiner
08-19-2022, 10:34 PM
Agree with you 100%. Found the new labeling by 23andme quite confusing as well, since southern China itself is pretty diverse from province to province. Would be more worthwhile splitting it into the separate categories as you've mentioned above. I'm pure Min Nan (Teochew on paternal side and Quanzhou Hokkien on maternal side) with no Canto ancestry, in this update I got 52.1% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 47.9% South Chinese (which I thought was on the higher side but it seems still in the range of some Min speakers / Taiwanese benshengren). Kind of strange that a Min speaking Taiwanese would score something similar (close to 40-50% Lingnan / South Chinese) instead of a higher percentage of 'Southern Chinese & Taiwanese'. I've seen others mention that the reference population for 'Southern Chinese & Taiwanese' is in Wenzhou, Zhejiang.



It seems that benshengren are getting more "South Chinese" though with still mostly "Southern Chinese and Taiwanese"
https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wru83x/taiwanese_early_han_updated_results/

I would like to see a full Fujian result
This benshengren actually has a lower South Chinese % compared to some of the other Taiwanese DNA matches I have. I assume it could mean that his ancestors largely came from Quanzhou, whereas those with a higher % of South Chinese came from Zhangzhou.

I would’ve expected a lot of Fujianese and Taiwanese Hoklo to get a 50-50 split. I wonder how a 100% Chaoshan person or a Xiamen local would score, surprised there would be a difference between Quanzhou and Zhangzhou tbh

Also wonder how Hunan and Jiangxi Chinese score in the new system. I suspect many Sichuanese are still going to get trace Viet and I/T/K/M SEA like they did before.

alchemist223
08-20-2022, 01:06 AM
A Chinese-descended 23andme user posted photos of the updated results of various relatives, all of whom had all four grandparents from the same location.

50800
50801

okarinaofsteiner
08-20-2022, 01:37 AM
A Chinese-descended 23andme user posted photos of the updated results of various relatives, all of whom had all four grandparents from the same location.

https://i.imgur.com/LnUXRo1.png
https://i.imgur.com/TGnk6eT.png

Interesting, where did you find this information? It would be helpful to see exact percentages.

The Anhui and Jiangsu individuals are surprisingly Northern.

Not 100% sure what the maroon color for Guangzhou #1 and #2 is (could it be Chinese Dai?)

observer_t
08-20-2022, 01:41 AM
Interesting result for the Wuhan user and one of the Shanghai ones...

SG_Jun
08-20-2022, 03:13 AM
A Chinese-descended 23andme user posted photos of the updated results of various relatives, all of whom had all four grandparents from the same location.

50800
50801

Thanks for sharing :) Yes seems like this confirms that the reference population used for 'Southern Chinese & Taiwanese' is based in Wenzhou, Zhejiang though the sample from Wuhan seems like a close second. Also this kind of suggests that Jiangsu Han are indeed much closer to northern Han compared to the rest of southern Han (divided along the Qinling-Huaihe line).

alchemist223
08-20-2022, 03:13 AM
Interesting, where did you find this information? It would be helpful to see exact percentages.

The Anhui and Jiangsu individuals are surprisingly Northern.

Not 100% sure what the maroon color for Guangzhou #1 and #2 is (could it be Chinese Dai?)

Someone posted it on 23andme's Reddit page.

okarinaofsteiner
08-20-2022, 06:55 AM
Someone posted it on 23andme's Reddit page.

yeah I know who that person is (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wsszrv/v60_updated_results_for_some_southern_chinese/). Thanks trajan9



Hainan + Guangdong + Hubei + Shandong results

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wtf26a/chinese_updated_v6_results_used_to_be_100_chinese/

https://i.redd.it/xerqhz0j4xi91.jpg?width=320
https://i.redd.it/5b4rtwcj4xi91.jpg?width=640

Shuzam87
08-21-2022, 07:50 PM
50836

50837

My DNA relative, Hakka from Meizhou, Guangdong

Skhznamk
08-21-2022, 08:20 PM
Minnan area should be fairly diverse, in the past at least. There were all kinds of distinct stereotypes for people from different regions such as Putian vs Quanzhou vs Zhangzhou. Also surprised Teochew and Hokkien were supposedly closely related when they could tell one another apart.

okarinaofsteiner
08-22-2022, 06:56 AM
https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=50836&d=1661111375

My DNA relative, Hakka from Meizhou, Guangdong

Not surprised that they score more "non-Lingnan Southern" than "Lingnan". Interesting that they score some Filipino and Austronesian though.




Minnan area should be fairly diverse, in the past at least. There were all kinds of distinct stereotypes for people from different regions such as Putian vs Quanzhou vs Zhangzhou. Also surprised Teochew and Hokkien were supposedly closely related when they could tell one another apart.

Hainanese and Leizhou Min are arguably subdivisions of Minnan when you consider branching order of Min Chinese languages. But genotype =/= phenotype =/= behavioral stereotypes.

I heard from a Teochew diasporan in SoCal (who was on Anthroscape during the pandemic, throway and uisashi might remember him) that Teochews have higher and more prominent nose bridges than Hokkiens, which he suspected was a She-influenced trait but I felt like sounded like a Northern/NEA trait.

Songtsen
08-22-2022, 09:18 AM
What the hell is Northern Han + Tibet ? Southern Chinese + Taiwan ?

SG_Jun
08-23-2022, 05:35 AM
Not surprised that they score more "non-Lingnan Southern" than "Lingnan". Interesting that they score some Filipino and Austronesian though.





Hainanese and Leizhou Min are arguably subdivisions of Minnan when you consider branching order of Min Chinese languages. But genotype =/= phenotype =/= behavioral stereotypes.

I heard from a Teochew diasporan in SoCal (who was on Anthroscape during the pandemic, throway and uisashi might remember him) that Teochews have higher and more prominent nose bridges than Hokkiens, which he suspected was a She-influenced trait but I felt like sounded like a Northern/NEA trait.

According to historical records Teochews are supposed to be descendants from migrants who escaped Putian, Fujian en masse during the Song Dynasty to eastern Guangdong. If that is to be true then Teochews shouldn't be that "southern" compared to other Hokkiens since Putian is even further north than Quanzhou, Amoy (Xiamen) and Zhangzhou. Putian was a Min Nan / Southern Min speaking area but it was gradually influenced by neighbouring Fuzhounese to the point where a distinctive Heng-hwa or Putianese dialect was formed that is different from both Fuzhounese and Min Nan albeit leaning towards the latter.

As someone whose family is half Teochew and half Hokkien I don't really observe much difference in terms of nose bridge height on either side of my family. Also I myself do not have a prominent nose bridge so.. Lol. As far as nose bridge height goes I think there is considerable variation in East Asia. In my impression, Tibeto-Burman speakers from southwestern China and Tibet seems to have particularly high nose bridges compared to the rest of East Asia. Some ethnic groups from the northern East Asia (eg Korea, Mongolia) don't have high nose bridges either

I'm actually more surprised that Hokkiens from Quanzhou are still considered genetically very homogenous given the extremely important role Quanzhou played as the world's greatest trading port and the starting point of the Maritime Silk Road during the Song-Yuan era.

Sure there are some paternal lineages which have been discovered around Fujian area which are clearly of Middle Eastern (Arab/Persian) or West Eurasian origin, just very slightly more relative to further inland provinces like Hunan or Jiangxi (and seemingly even less compared to other parts of northern China). Still considered very rare among my matches on 23mofang (haplogroups such as R1a, R1b, J1 and J2), but besides that there seems to be little to no genetic impact left behind by the large amount of traders who once thrived in the region.

Skhznamk
08-24-2022, 05:28 AM
Asians being obsessed with sharp nose and small face seems like western influence to me. Based on casual remarks by Teochew I came across (never actually discussed beauty standards or anything), they adore this “money-collecting” nose LOL50888

A lot of their beliefs/superstitions are tied to business and money.

I suspect their occasional sharp nose might be from mixing with Arab traders.

SG_Jun
08-24-2022, 06:13 AM
Asians being obsessed with sharp nose and small face seems like western influence to me. Based on casual remarks by Teochew I came across (never actually discussed beauty standards or anything), they adore this “money-collecting” nose LOL50888

A lot of their beliefs/superstitions are tied to business and money.

I suspect their occasional sharp nose might be from mixing with Arab traders.

Hmm funnily enough the Hokkien side of my family is the one who has such superstitions that a bulbous tipped nose means someone who's wealthy. The Teochew side of my family never really held such beliefs.

Indeed Teochews are renowned for being shrewd and successful businessmen, and we are often stereotyped for being that way. Among many other stereotypes that Teochews have includes an unwillingness to marry outside of our dialect group, a strong emphasis on genealogical clan traditions, being very traditional & superstitious, having a lot of children etc.

There is negligible Arab or Persian autosomal admixture among Hokkiens or Teochews today to suggest that the occasional sharp nose could've came from them. Most likely it is just a naturally occurring trait that's rare but happens in the region

About having beliefs/superstitions tied to money, definitely I think it is a Chinese trait but the southerners esp from Fujian region tend to be especially particular when it comes to this. And this is evident in Singaporean Chinese culture. Eg when we move into a new house we have to throw a pineapple into the new home because pineapple is "Ong lai" in Hokkien which sounds like "fortune coming" LOL

xerxez
08-24-2022, 07:29 AM
A relative of mine, from Tianjin got her new results. She's now 99,3% northern chinese and 0,7% West asian. In the precedent version, she was 73% han and mainly korean and mongolian

MNOPSC1b
08-24-2022, 11:33 PM
A relative of mine, from Tianjin got her new results. She's now 99,3% northern chinese and 0,7% West asian. In the precedent version, she was 73% han and mainly korean and mongolian

Nice, you got yourself a Northern Chinese girlfriend, good job:amen:

okarinaofsteiner
08-25-2022, 12:39 AM
Alright, let's get back on topic. (Hi SG_Jun (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/ws0ol8/updated_results_100_chinese/))

Malaysian Chinese person with 1/16 confirmed Iban ancestry:

87.2% Chinese - 48.5% southern Chinese & Taiwanese - 30.6% south Chinese - 8.1% broadly Chinese

7.5% Indonesian, Thai, Khmer & Myanmar

2.4% Filipino & Austronesian

2.9% Broadly East Asian

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/ww7gmk/updated_results_chinese_parents_no_longer/

Guangdong + Jiangnan results with 0% Lingnan region
https://i.redd.it/2uszxe0rokj91.jpg

okarinaofsteiner
08-25-2022, 12:45 AM
https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wspuu2/updated_chinese_taiwanese_results_including_me/

Taiwanese American who's half benshengren and half Northern Chinese waishengren. Their benshengren parent is 91.4 : 8.6 non-Lingnan : Lingnan, but OP is 44.2 : 11.4 non-Lingnan : Lingnan (the other 44.4% is Northern)

OP's sibling scored 47% non-Lingnan, 46% Northern, 7% Lingnan (https://imgur.com/6ylUsU6)

Interesting that Fujianese/Taiwanese + Northern mixes can have higher Lingnan percentages than their Fujianese/Taiwanese parent.



uisashi's new results seem pretty accurate (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wrvv6a/updated_chinese_results_100_percent_north_han/)
https://i.redd.it/txt9dhttlji91.jpg?

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 01:28 AM
Guangdong + Jiangnan results with 0% Lingnan region
https://i.redd.it/2uszxe0rokj91.jpg

Do you know where this person's GD parent is from? Cause it actually matters a lot. I don't think this person's GD parent is Cantonese cause if that's the case he wouldn't score 0% Lingnan. His GD side could be Teochew, Hakka, or even recent Northern/Central Chinese migrant to GD.

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 01:36 AM
https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wspuu2/updated_chinese_taiwanese_results_including_me/

Taiwanese American who's half benshengren and half Northern Chinese waishengren. Their benshengren parent is 91.4 : 8.6 non-Lingnan : Lingnan, but OP is 44.2 : 11.4 non-Lingnan : Lingnan (the other 44.4% is Northern)

OP's sibling scored 47% non-Lingnan, 46% Northern, 7% Lingnan (https://imgur.com/6ylUsU6)

Interesting that Fujianese/Taiwanese + Northern mixes can have higher Lingnan percentages than their Fujianese/Taiwanese parent.

I'm really beginning to wonder which population they used as reference for South Chinese / Lingnan, do you have any idea about that? Lingnan is a quite diverse place and if Fujian + Taiwanese (and their mixed descendants with Northern/Central Chinese) are showing high Lingnan percentages this could only mean that they either used people from metropolis like HK or Shenzhen as ref pop or used pops from Eastern GD as ref (like the Teochew), but this is a quite bad ref for Lingnan I would say. I bet if they used pops from Western GD and GX as ref for Lingnan the results would be drastically different.

I think they need to dissect the South Chinese category even further, at least divide it into 2 categories Eastern South Chinese and Western South Chinese to better reflect the real situation.

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 01:44 AM
I heard from a Teochew diasporan in SoCal (who was on Anthroscape during the pandemic, throway and uisashi might remember him) that Teochews have higher and more prominent nose bridges than Hokkiens, which he suspected was a She-influenced trait but I felt like sounded like a Northern/NEA trait.

TBH Northern Chinese, Koreans, Mongols, and Tungusic peoples don't really give me chiseled vibes and their nose bridge isn't that prominent.

okarinaofsteiner
08-25-2022, 02:17 AM
I heard from a Teochew diasporan in SoCal (who was on Anthroscape during the pandemic, throway and uisashi might remember him) that Teochews have higher and more prominent nose bridges than Hokkiens, which he suspected was a She-influenced trait but I felt like sounded like a Northern/NEA trait.
TBH Northern Chinese, Koreans, Mongols, and Tungusic peoples don't really give me chiseled vibes and their nose bridge isn't that prominent.

You misunderstood my recollection of what that Teochew Chinese American on Anthroscape said, and let's not discuss phenotypes in my Anthrogenica threads.




I'm really beginning to wonder which population they used as reference for South Chinese / Lingnan, do you have any idea about that? Lingnan is a quite diverse place and if Fujian + Taiwanese (and their mixed descendants with Northern/Central Chinese) are showing high Lingnan percentages this could only mean that they either used people from metropolis like HK or Shenzhen as ref pop or used pops from Eastern GD as ref (like the Teochew), but this is a quite bad ref for Lingnan I would say. I bet if they used pops from Western GD and GX as ref for Lingnan the results would be drastically different.

I think they need to dissect the South Chinese category even further, at least divide it into 2 categories Eastern South Chinese and Western South Chinese to better reflect the real situation.

Seems accurate to me- this 1/2 Guangzhou Cantonese 1/4 Zhejiang 1/4 Chongqing person scored exactly how you'd expect someone with that ancestry to score on the updated algorithm (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wsksqu/updated_results_im_now_100_chinese/ilo701r/). 47 non-Lingnan, 47 Lingnan, 6 Northern.

https://i.redd.it/6qa6oi24opi91.jpg?width=320&crop=smart&auto=webp&60e60ce2

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 02:32 AM
Seems accurate to me- this 1/2 Guangzhou Cantonese 1/4 Zhejiang 1/4 Chongqing person scored exactly how you'd expect someone with that ancestry to score on the updated algorithm (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wsksqu/updated_results_im_now_100_chinese/ilo701r/). 47 non-Lingnan, 47 Lingnan, 6 Northern.

https://i.redd.it/6qa6oi24opi91.jpg?width=320&crop=smart&auto=webp&60e60ce2

Judging by the other examples that you've posted earlier, I don't think it's that accurate. It's only accurate sometimes but off other times. That's why I'm wondering which pop they used as ref for South Chinese / Lingnan, cause Lingnan itself is quite diverse.

For Chinese samples, I still trust Wegene and 23Mofang the most, since they are Chinese companies and have access to the largest databases regarding Chinese pops.

SG_Jun
08-25-2022, 03:08 AM
Judging by the other examples that you've posted earlier, I don't think it's that accurate. It's only accurate sometimes but off other times. That's why I'm wondering which pop they used as ref for South Chinese / Lingnan, cause Lingnan itself is quite diverse.

For Chinese samples, I still trust Wegene and 23Mofang the most, since they are Chinese companies and have access to the largest databases regarding Chinese pops.

Thus far I've only seen Cantonese with 100% South Chinese. Though it'd probably be interesting to get more Guangxi / Hainan samples to test this theory if Cantonese is indeed the reference pop (most likely around Guangzhou, Zhuhai area) . Highly doubt the reference pop is Teochew or Hakka.

I actually do feel 23mofang is more accurate (aside from the random % of Korean that people tend to get including myself which are most likely shared % with Han). There isn't a "Hmong" component in 23andme, though many Southern Han populations are autosomally quite close to Hmong


You misunderstood my recollection of what that Teochew Chinese American on Anthroscape said, and let's not discuss phenotypes in my Anthrogenica threads.





Seems accurate to me- this 1/2 Guangzhou Cantonese 1/4 Zhejiang 1/4 Chongqing person scored exactly how you'd expect someone with that ancestry to score on the updated algorithm (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/wsksqu/updated_results_im_now_100_chinese/ilo701r/). 47 non-Lingnan, 47 Lingnan, 6 Northern.

https://i.redd.it/6qa6oi24opi91.jpg?width=320&crop=smart&auto=webp&60e60ce2

This results are actually quite similar to mine (except the 6 Northern is shifted to non-Lingnan southern)

okarinaofsteiner
08-25-2022, 03:45 AM
Thus far I've only seen Cantonese with 100% South Chinese. Though it'd probably be interesting to get more Guangxi / Hainan samples to test this theory if Cantonese is indeed the reference pop (most likely around Guangzhou, Zhuhai area) . Highly doubt the reference pop is Teochew or Hakka.

I actually do feel 23mofang is more accurate (aside from the random % of Korean that people tend to get including myself which are most likely shared % with Han). There isn't a "Hmong" component in 23andme, though many Southern Han populations are autosomally quite close to Hmong

My main criticism of 23mofang is the lack of Southeast Asian reference populations and components, although my only knowledge of 23mofang is the compilation of 2nd-level division averages uisashi sent me last year (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?24360-Chinese-GEDmatch-averages&p=805580&viewfull=1#post805580).
https://i.imgur.com/ARwcdl0.jpeg

Hmong-Mien groups aren’t that similar to Guangdong and Fujian Han on MDLP K23b in that they score higher on South_East_Asian and lower on Tungus_Altaic and sometimes Austronesian. The similarity is mostly on a single-dimension north-south cline within East Asia.

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 04:17 AM
Thus far I've only seen Cantonese with 100% South Chinese. Though it'd probably be interesting to get more Guangxi / Hainan samples to test this theory if Cantonese is indeed the reference pop (most likely around Guangzhou, Zhuhai area) . Highly doubt the reference pop is Teochew or Hakka.

Highly doubt the ref pop is Guangxi cause if that's the case then Fujianese and Taiwanese wouldn't score that high on South Chinese (GX is significantly more southern-shifted than FJ-TW and is significantly closer to Tai-Kradai and SE Asians). I guess the most likely ref pop is somewhere around HK-SZ-GZ or the Bay Area for short. Although this metropolitan region is still largely Cantonese it does have significant influences from Teochew and Hakka as well as more recent influences from Central/Eastern and Northern China.

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 04:22 AM
Hmong-Mien groups aren’t that similar to Guangdong and Fujian Han on MDLP K23b in that they score higher on South_East_Asian and lower on Tungus_Altaic and sometimes Austronesian. The similarity is mostly on a single-dimension north-south cline within East Asia.

For the Nth time, please stop lumping together Fujian and Guangdong. Both regions are ethnolinguistically diverse and aren't necessarily related (except Minnan and Teochew). GD has 3 ethnolinguistically and genetically distinct pops, the Yue, the Hakka, and the Teochew. Only the Teochew has some ties to Fujian (more specifically to the Minnan region), whereas Hakka has ties to Jiangxi and the Yue or Cantonese has ties to Western GD and GX.

Shuzam87
08-25-2022, 09:02 PM
My result after the V6.0 update

50925

okarinaofsteiner
08-25-2022, 09:03 PM
Do you know where this person's GD parent is from? Cause it actually matters a lot. I don't think this person's GD parent is Cantonese cause if that's the case he wouldn't score 0% Lingnan. His GD side could be Teochew, Hakka, or even recent Northern/Central Chinese migrant to GD.

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/ww7gmk/updated_results_chinese_parents_no_longer/ilplubh/?context=3

Two were born in Wuxi and the other two were born in Taishan, Guangdong. The provinces are as follows: Jiangsu, Zhenjiang, Shanghai, Anhui, Sichuan, Jiangxi, Fujian, Hubei.

Guangdong grandparents are from Taishan (Jiangmen)





For the Nth time, please stop lumping together Fujian and Guangdong. Both regions are ethnolinguistically diverse and aren't necessarily related (except Minnan and Teochew). GD has 3 ethnolinguistically and genetically distinct pops, the Yue, the Hakka, and the Teochew. Only the Teochew has some ties to Fujian (more specifically to the Minnan region), whereas Hakka has ties to Jiangxi and the Yue or Cantonese has ties to Western GD and GX.

It does make sense to mention both provinces in this case, different Han subgroups resemble different Hmong-Mien ethnicities on the north-south cline. The MDLP K23b Yao reference population happens to resemble Guangfu Yue speakers.

Shuzam87
08-25-2022, 09:07 PM
As for my DNA relatives, people from Jiangmen, Guangdong tend to get 100% South Chinese. As for the Southern Chinese & Taiwanese, one of my DNA relatives from Wenzhou, Zhejiang, and another from Taizhou, Zhejiang got 100%. There was also a person from Hunan who got 98.0% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 2.0% South Chinese.

Shuzam87
08-25-2022, 09:19 PM
Almost 75% Broadly on 90% confidence...

50927

MNOPSC1b
08-25-2022, 11:15 PM
https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/ww7gmk/updated_results_chinese_parents_no_longer/ilplubh/?context=3


Guangdong grandparents are from Taishan (Jiangmen)

It's strange because Taishan is a Canto-speaking region and this person has Taishanese grandparents on one side yet got 0% South Chinese. Again I doubt about the accuracy.


It does make sense to mention both provinces in this case, different Han subgroups resemble different Hmong-Mien ethnicities on the north-south cline. The MDLP K23b Yao reference population happens to resemble Guangfu Yue speakers.

It doesn't make sense because both provinces are ethnolinguistically diverse. Cantonese speakers especially those from Western Guangdong and Guangxi are significantly more southern-shifted than Fujianese and are closest to Zhuang-Dai. The 23Mofang table that you posted earlier supports my POV.

okarinaofsteiner
08-26-2022, 02:17 AM
https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/ww7gmk/updated_results_chinese_parents_no_longer/ilplubh/?context=3

Two were born in Wuxi and the other two were born in Taishan, Guangdong. The provinces are as follows: Jiangsu, Zhenjiang, Shanghai, Anhui, Sichuan, Jiangxi, Fujian, Hubei.
Guangdong grandparents are from Taishan (Jiangmen)
It's strange because Taishan is a Canto-speaking region and this person has Taishanese grandparents on one side yet got 0% South Chinese. Again I doubt about the accuracy.


I don't think this is necessarily a problem with the algorithm, it's theoretically possible that this person's Jiangmen grandparents are of Hakka ancestry, so their father could score >50% "non-Lingnan". Wouldn't be worth sharing if it wasn't unusual or noteworthy.


Almost 75% Broadly on 90% confidence...

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=50927&d=1661462378

edit: I remember 23andMe shows the 50% confidence ancestry results by default, which is the lowest confidence setting. My 90% confidence breakdown is 24.6% Northern, 10.4% non-Lingnan, 62.7% Broadly Chinese, while my 50% confidence breakdown is 55.7% Northern, 43.6% non-Lingnan. (Random observation: my X chromosome from my Tianjin-born grandparent is like 75% Southern/Taiwanese 25% Northern at 50% confidence) So it's reasonably likely that most Chinese users' 90% results aren't that different from each other and all have really high percentages of Broadly Chinese.



It doesn't make sense because both provinces are ethnolinguistically diverse. Cantonese speakers especially those from Western Guangdong and Guangxi are significantly more southern-shifted than Fujianese and are closest to Zhuang-Dai. The 23Mofang table that you posted earlier supports my POV.

Hmong-Mien groups are also ethnolinguistically and genetically diverse, what's your point? More inland Yue speakers are unarguably shifted towards Daic groups but not to the point where they're indistinguishable from actual Daic groups like Xishuangbanna Dai, Tai Yuan, or Zhuang on GEDmatch calculators.

I haven't seen any confirmed Han Chinese samples score below 10% Tungus_Altaic on MDLP K23b (there are some Guangxi adoptees who are 8-9% but idk if they're Han), and I don't think any of the Daic reference populations are over 7% Tungus_Altaic (Zhuang reference is 6.38%).

MNOPSC1b
08-26-2022, 02:48 AM
I don't think this is necessarily a problem with the algorithm, it's theoretically possible that this person's Jiangmen grandparents are of Hakka ancestry, so their father could score >50% "non-Lingnan". Wouldn't be worth sharing if it wasn't unusual or noteworthy.

Even if his Jiangmen grandparents are of Hakka ancestry, it's still rather strange that he gets 0% South Chinese.




Hmong-Mien groups are also ethnolinguistically and genetically diverse, what's your point? More inland Yue speakers are unarguably shifted towards Daic groups but not to the point where they're indistinguishable from actual Daic groups like Xishuangbanna Dai, Tai Yuan, or Zhuang on GEDmatch calculators.

I haven't seen any confirmed Han Chinese samples score below 10% Tungus_Altaic on MDLP K23b (there are some Guangxi adoptees who are 8-9% but idk if they're Han), and I don't think any of the Daic reference populations are over 7% Tungus_Altaic (Zhuang reference is 6.38%).

I never claimed that Yue speakers from Western GD and GX are identical with Daic speakers, however they are undoubtedly shifted towards them and not towards Hmong-Mien as you claimed. And the table from 23Mofang that you posted earlier supports my POV, showing that Yue speakers from Wuzhou in GX score around 26% Zhuang-Dai. Geez, have you ever read the charts and tables that you yourself posted? I don't think so cause otherwise you wouldn't be making random claims like this.

Stop being sinocentric and admit the obvious fact that Yue speakers from Western GD and GX are sinicized Daic. Really I'm considering to put you on my ignore list cause you obviously know what I'm talking about but refuse to admit it due to your own sinocentric biases.

I circled in red the frequencies of the Zhuang-Dai components of the Yue-speaking pops and in orange the frequencies of their Hmong-Mien components on the 23Mofang table. Now let's see how you gonna deny.

And I'm also gonna provide a translation in English for those who don't understand Chinese

Foshan Yue speakers 2.8% Miao (Hmong) and 16.5% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

Jiangmen Yue speakers 3.2% Miao (Hmong) and 15.2% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

Zhaoqing Yue speakers 3.7% Miao (Hmong) and 22.2% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

Wuzhou Yue speakers 3.5% Miao (Hmong) and 26% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

So Yue speakers are shifted towards Hmong and not towards Daic, huh? What do the numbers say?

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=50930&d=1661483060

And another PCA chart, courtesy of @Granary, originally posted in this thread: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?26096-Genetic-composition-of-the-peoples-of-Guangdong/page8

https://i.imgur.com/7QQ6laQ.png

We can see that Miao-She are situated at the northern end of the Han_Guangdong cline and are much closer to Han_Fujian and Han_Chongqing. And even the Hmong aren't as southern-shifted as certain Han_Guangdong samples on the extreme left of the cline, and plus the Hmong are shifted upwards compared to Han_Guangdong, whereas Dong and Zhuang samples are roughly located on the same plain as GD. And this is just Han_Guangdong, if we have Han_Guangxi samples on the graph I'm sure they would be shifted towards Dong and Zhuang even more.

50930

okarinaofsteiner
08-29-2022, 06:31 PM
I never claimed that Yue speakers from Western GD and GX are identical with Daic speakers, however they are undoubtedly shifted towards them and not towards Hmong-Mien as you claimed. And the table from 23Mofang that you posted earlier supports my POV, showing that Yue speakers from Wuzhou in GX score around 26% Zhuang-Dai.

I circled in red the frequencies of the Zhuang-Dai components of the Yue-speaking pops and in orange the frequencies of their Hmong-Mien components on the 23Mofang table. Now let's see how you gonna deny.

And I'm also gonna provide a translation in English for those who don't understand Chinese

Foshan Yue speakers 2.8% Miao (Hmong) and 16.5% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

Jiangmen Yue speakers 3.2% Miao (Hmong) and 15.2% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

Zhaoqing Yue speakers 3.7% Miao (Hmong) and 22.2% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

Wuzhou Yue speakers 3.5% Miao (Hmong) and 26% Zhuang-Dai (Daic)

So Yue speakers are shifted towards Hmong and not towards Daic, huh? What do the numbers say?

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=50930&d=1661483060


I don't even know why I bother with you, you keep repeating the same points over and over again without responding to evidence that contradicts you.

Yue speakers can't be exactly as southern as the Daic groups they're shifted towards if they have more northern ancestry (which we know Yue speaking Han do). It makes perfect sense for Han groups with a lot of Daic ancestry to resemble SEA-like groups that are less southern than Daic groups on the N-S cline, because they won't be exactly as southern as Daic groups.

FWIW 23mofang also shows that Yue speaking areas have more Hmong-Mien ancestry that isn't already picked up in the "Southern Han" composite population than neighboring Han groups like Min and Hakka speakers. The only Chinese that have more than that are Xiang and Southwestern Mandarin speakers.



And another PCA chart, courtesy of @Granary, originally posted in this thread: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?26096-Genetic-composition-of-the-peoples-of-Guangdong/page8

https://i.imgur.com/7QQ6laQ.png


This PCA chart does not include Yao, who seem to be more Daic-shifted than Miao and She.

okarinaofsteiner
08-29-2022, 06:42 PM
1/2 Fujian Hakka + 1/4 Anhui Han + 1/4 Liaoning Manchu results (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/x0t2g0/chinese_ancestry_update_after_and_before_update/)

Old: 95.2% Chinese + 1.7% Manchu/Mongol + 0.7% Japanese + 0.3% Korean + 0.4% Broadly Jap/Kor + 1.4% Broadly East Asian/Native American
New: 98.8% Chinese (48.3% non-Lingnan Southern (Jiangsu, Taipei et al) + 38.6% Northern (Shandong et al) + 9.5% Lingnan (Guangxi) + 3.4% Broadly Chinese) + 0.2% Manchu/Mongol

https://i.redd.it/39pumxesiok91.jpg?width=827



In other news- I requested to upload my 23andMe raw file to 23mofang. Have no idea how long it'll take to get my results, it looks like I need to pay 299 yuan to actually see them?

MNOPSC1b
08-30-2022, 11:46 PM
I don't even know why I bother with you, you keep repeating the same points over and over again without responding to evidence that contradicts you.

Yue speakers can't be exactly as southern as the Daic groups they're shifted towards if they have more northern ancestry (which we know Yue speaking Han do). It makes perfect sense for Han groups with a lot of Daic ancestry to resemble SEA-like groups that are less southern than Daic groups on the N-S cline, because they won't be exactly as southern as Daic groups.

FWIW 23mofang also shows that Yue speaking areas have more Hmong-Mien ancestry that isn't already picked up in the "Southern Han" composite population than neighboring Han groups like Min and Hakka speakers. The only Chinese that have more than that are Xiang and Southwestern Mandarin speakers.

This PCA chart does not include Yao, who seem to be more Daic-shifted than Miao and She.

I dunno either why I bother with you cause you keep repeating exactly the same pts that I already responded to many times before.

For the Nth time, I never ever claimed that Yue speakers are 100% identical to Daic groups, however it's undeniable that compared to other Sinitic subgroups they're significantly shifted towards Daic peoples. Yes they do have some HM admixture I never denied about that, but it's only around 3% according to the 23Mofang table that you posted, which isn't that significant compared to other Sinitic subgroups since even some Northern Sinitic groups have around 2% HM, and certain Xiang and SW Mandarin speaking groups have higher HM. What truly makes Canto speakers unique is their high frequency of Daic-related components, which are near or over 20%, several times the amount of other Sinitic speakers. Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge this obvious fact? It's like there's an elephant and a mouse in the same room yet you claim that you only saw the mouse and not the elephant.

I speak from evidence. There's no Yao on the PCA chart and plus you claimed earlier that Cantonese are Miao-related, so why are you suddenly changing your claim now? The PCA chart from Granary clearly shows that Guangdong_Han are more southern-shifted than Miao-She by a significant margin and a portion of them are also more southern-shifted than Hmong, and plus Hmong are dragged upwards whereas Guangdong_Han are dragged downwards so they aren't even shifted in the same direction. And plus this is just Guangdong_Han, if we add Cantonese speakers from GX onto the chart then they would be even more shifted towards the Daic groups.

The reason why I still haven't put you on my ignore list is because you do post some very pertinent sources/tables/charts from time to time and they're of great interest to me and I must say that you've been doing a great job at copy pasting, however I doubt that you ever took the time to read or think about the data you posted.

SG_Jun
08-31-2022, 05:34 AM
1/2 Fujian Hakka + 1/4 Anhui Han + 1/4 Liaoning Manchu results (https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/x0t2g0/chinese_ancestry_update_after_and_before_update/)

Old: 95.2% Chinese + 1.7% Manchu/Mongol + 0.7% Japanese + 0.3% Korean + 0.4% Broadly Jap/Kor + 1.4% Broadly East Asian/Native American
New: 98.8% Chinese (48.3% non-Lingnan Southern (Jiangsu, Taipei et al) + 38.6% Northern (Shandong et al) + 9.5% Lingnan (Guangxi) + 3.4% Broadly Chinese) + 0.2% Manchu/Mongol

https://i.redd.it/39pumxesiok91.jpg?width=827



In other news- I requested to upload my 23andMe raw file to 23mofang. Have no idea how long it'll take to get my results, it looks like I need to pay 299 yuan to actually see them?

Hmm 23mofang has increased their prices a bit lately even though its largely still affordable compared to other companies such as FTDNA for the accuracy and level of service. That said I dont think 299 yuan is worth it for a raw data upload since that costs as much as one of their regular tests (iirc, at least that was what I paid about 1.5-2 years ago)

okarinaofsteiner
08-31-2022, 07:15 AM
I speak from evidence. There's no Yao on the PCA chart and plus you claimed earlier that Cantonese are Miao-related, so why are you suddenly changing your claim now? The PCA chart from Granary clearly shows that Guangdong_Han are more southern-shifted than Miao-She by a significant margin and a portion of them are also more southern-shifted than Hmong, and plus Hmong are dragged upwards whereas Guangdong_Han are dragged downwards so they aren't even shifted in the same direction. And plus this is just Guangdong_Han, if we add Cantonese speakers from GX onto the chart then they would be even more shifted towards the Daic groups.

The reason why I still haven't put you on my ignore list is because you do post some very pertinent sources/tables/charts from time to time and they're of great interest to me and I must say that you've been doing a great job at copy pasting, however I doubt that you ever took the time to read or think about the data you posted.

https://i.imgur.com/UW4LGLK.png

This information is from the GEDmatch Oracle. I arranged various East Asian reference populations on a N-S cline based on their East Asian ancestry component percentages.

The N-S score of the Cantonese reference population is around halfway between the Minnan/Hakka reference populations and Jiamao/Zhuang. This score is also in the middle of the Hmong-Mien groups- She is more northern-shifted while Yao is similarly northern/southern.




Hmm 23mofang has increased their prices a bit lately even though its largely still affordable compared to other companies such as FTDNA for the accuracy and level of service. That said I dont think 299 yuan is worth it for a raw data upload since that costs as much as one of their regular tests (iirc, at least that was what I paid about 1.5-2 years ago)

299 yuan is $40-45 USD, this is less than half of the cost of an Ancestry-only 23andMe kit without any discounts. For comparison, the Illustrative DNA raw data upload was around 25 UK pounds, or $25-30 USD.

The bigger hassle for me would be setting up WeChat Pay (not included in WeChat by default), which I don't currently have and would need in order to pay for the service.

uisashi
08-31-2022, 08:51 AM
Hmongs differ by region. E.g Hunan Hmong is obviously going to be different than Thailand Hmong.

MNOPSC1b
08-31-2022, 12:51 PM
https://i.imgur.com/UW4LGLK.png

This information is from the GEDmatch Oracle. I arranged various East Asian reference populations on a N-S cline based on their East Asian ancestry component percentages.

The N-S score of the Cantonese reference population is around halfway between the Minnan/Hakka reference populations and Jiamao/Zhuang. This score is also in the middle of the Hmong-Mien groups- She is more northern-shifted while Yao is similarly northern/southern.

The table isn't necessarily in conflict with my POV. Cantonese is still the most Daic-shifted out of all Sinitic groups, hands down. And plus available data on Cantonese seems to mostly come from the Canto speakers in Guangdong, if we add Canto speakers from Guangxi then it's gonna be more southern and Daic-shifted.

And not all HM groups are the same either. Some HM groups like Miao and She are shifted more towards Hunan and Fujian respectively, whereas other HM groups are more Daic or SE Asian shifted. So it's not surprising that Cantonese would resemble some Daic shifted HM groups.

I'm not sure why it is so hard for you to accept the fact that Canto speakers have a lot of Daic admixtures, you seem to have some underlying sinocentric biases on the origin of Cantonese.

observer_t
08-31-2022, 03:21 PM
I do not understand the argument that has been happening here over the past few pages...

It's obvious that Cantonese are a Sinitic group (given their culture and language), but with a heavy SEA component. Even if many are "sinicized Daic" they still tend to have more "northern Sinitic" ancestry than pure Daic for obvious reasons.

Being an admixed Sinitic group, rather than pure Daic, it makes sense that they would cluster closer to Hmong-Mien on a north-south cline, who are also more "northern" than Dai.

It does not matter whether Cantonese had more "direct" Daic or Hmong-Mien admixture as the point Oka made was just that Cantonese were similar to HM on the north-south axis?

MNOPSC1b
08-31-2022, 04:26 PM
I do not understand the argument that has been happening here over the past few pages...

It's obvious that Cantonese are a Sinitic group (given their culture and language), but with a heavy SEA component. Even if many are "sinicized Daic" they still tend to have more "northern Sinitic" ancestry than pure Daic for obvious reasons.

Being an admixed Sinitic group, rather than pure Daic, it makes sense that they would cluster closer to Hmong-Mien on a north-south cline, who are also more "northern" than Dai.

It does not matter whether Cantonese had more "direct" Daic or Hmong-Mien admixture as the point Oka made was just that Cantonese were similar to HM on the north-south axis?

Nobody here is claiming that Cantonese are pure Daic or that they aren’t Sinitic, however they are definitely unique among Sinitic speaking groups in having the highest Daic related admixtures, several times the amount of other Sinitic speaking groups.

And not all HM groups are the same. Cantonese tend to resemble the ones that are Daic shifted.

okarinaofsteiner
09-08-2022, 05:09 PM
Someone made a map of regional Taiwanese 23andMe results based on their DNA relatives. Sample sizes are very, very small (n=41) but there are enough samples to include Taiwanese aborigines.

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/x8uizu/map_of_taiwanese_averages_statistics_of_41_dna/

https://i.redd.it/w4vx44j7elm91.png

Shuzam87
09-08-2022, 06:21 PM
Someone made a map of regional Taiwanese 23andMe results based on their DNA relatives. Sample sizes are very, very small (n=41) but there are enough samples to include Taiwanese aborigines.

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/x8uizu/map_of_taiwanese_averages_statistics_of_41_dna/

https://i.redd.it/w4vx44j7elm91.png

I wouldn't be surprised if Taiwanese Indigenous people score 100% Filipino & Austronesian.

okarinaofsteiner
09-09-2022, 12:30 AM
Someone made a map of regional Taiwanese 23andMe results based on their DNA relatives. Sample sizes are very, very small (n=41) but there are enough samples to include Taiwanese aborigines.

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/x8uizu/map_of_taiwanese_averages_statistics_of_41_dna/

https://i.redd.it/w4vx44j7elm91.png

Apparently the OP excluded individuals who had at 1 or more grandparents born outside of Taiwan.


I did list and calculate the 21 people who's Waishengren or at least one side from China (recent paternal/maternal grandparents).

Waishengren Average (Samples: 21)

• ⁠Northern Chinese & Tibetan - 3.05%
• ⁠Southern Chinese & Taiwanese - 73.89%
• ⁠Broadly Chinese - 0.39%
• ⁠Filipino & Austroensian - 0.95%
• ⁠Indonesian, Thai, Khmer & Myanmar - 0.07%
• ⁠Mongolian & Manchurian - 0.05%
• ⁠Iranian, Caucasian & Mesopotamian - 0.02%
• ⁠Southern Indian & Sri Lankan - 0.02%
• ⁠Unassigned - 0.02%

But it's excluded after the discussion with friends. The map only shows the people who have all 4 sides of their families from Taiwan. Among 41 Benshengren, they have none Northern Chinese & Tibetan.

SG_Jun
09-18-2022, 05:37 AM
Someone made a map of regional Taiwanese 23andMe results based on their DNA relatives. Sample sizes are very, very small (n=41) but there are enough samples to include Taiwanese aborigines.

https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/x8uizu/map_of_taiwanese_averages_statistics_of_41_dna/

https://i.redd.it/w4vx44j7elm91.png

Surprisingly it seems that people from Kaohsiung and Yilan (both predominantly Zhangzhou accent leaning areas) have an ever lower % of South Chinese compared to people from Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan etc.; I wonder how does that work out..

Personally I think my % of South Chinese may have been pulled slightly to the higher end compared to my Southern Chinese & Taiwanese %, owing to my Teochew side.


I would’ve expected a lot of Fujianese and Taiwanese Hoklo to get a 50-50 split. I wonder how a 100% Chaoshan person or a Xiamen local would score, surprised there would be a difference between Quanzhou and Zhangzhou tbh

Also wonder how Hunan and Jiangxi Chinese score in the new system. I suspect many Sichuanese are still going to get trace Viet and I/T/K/M SEA like they did before.

Actually I do believe there is a difference between Quanzhou and Zhangzhou, that these two are distinguishable. Based on my 23mofang results, I have far more autosomal DNA matches with people from Quanzhou (and even Fuzhou) than I do with people from Zhangzhou. This is accurate because my maternal grandparents were indeed from Quanzhou (specifically Anxi county for my maternal grandfather, not sure about my maternal grandmother) and we speak a very Quanzhou leaning dialect of Hokkien at home (that would also be closest to the Lukang 鹿港 dialect of Taiwanese Hokkien), for example for the phrase "豬尾短短" we would say "tir ber ter ter" instead of the Zhangzhou "ti bue te te"

51261

Here are my matches for Guangdong province, where the paternal side of my family is from Jieyang and Puning. Again I think 23mofang did a great job at identifying my ancestral hometown based on my matches.

51262

Shuzam87
09-18-2022, 05:18 PM
Also wonder how Hunan and Jiangxi Chinese score in the new system. I suspect many Sichuanese are still going to get trace Viet and I/T/K/M SEA like they did before.

My 23andme DNA relative from Hunan: 98% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 2% South Chinese

51263

My 23andme DNA relative from Yichun, Jiangxi: 83.8% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese, 12.6% South Chinese, 2.5% Northern Chinese & Tibetan, 0.6% Broadly Chinese, and 0.5% Japanese

51264

I also have one Chengdu/Deyang Sichuan DNA relative on 23andme and he does not have Viet and I/T/K/M traces but has a significant amount of Chinese Dai:

51265

okarinaofsteiner
09-18-2022, 08:25 PM
Surprisingly it seems that people from Kaohsiung and Yilan (both predominantly Zhangzhou accent leaning areas) have an ever lower % of South Chinese compared to people from Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan etc.; I wonder how does that work out..

Personally I think my % of South Chinese may have been pulled slightly to the higher end compared to my Southern Chinese & Taiwanese %, owing to my Teochew side.


I think it's more of a small sample size issue than anything. I would only really trust the Tainan (n=12) and Greater Taipei (n=7) results for comparison purposes.



My 23andme DNA relative from Hunan: 98% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 2% South Chinese

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51263&d=1663519364

My 23andme DNA relative from Yichun, Jiangxi: 83.8% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese, 12.6% South Chinese, 2.5% Northern Chinese & Tibetan, 0.6% Broadly Chinese, and 0.5% Japanese

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51264&d=1663519485

I also have one Chengdu/Deyang Sichuan DNA relative on 23andme and he does not have Viet and I/T/K/M traces but has a significant amount of Chinese Dai:

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51265&d=1663521472

I have one DNA relative in Zunyi, Guizhou who scored 98.9% non-Lingnan + 1.1% Lingnan, and another one from around Wuhan who scored 98.6% non-Lingnan + 1.4% Northern.

Speaking of "significant amounts of Chinese Dai", here's one of my DNA relatives from Hong Kong who has 1 grandparent born in Shantou and another grandparent born in Thailand. Tsakhur

47.3% Chinese (34.2% non-Lingnan Southern, 7.7% Lingnan, 5.4% Broadly)
34.8% Dai
10.7% Vietnamese
1.4% Indo/Thai/Khmer/Myanmar
5.1% Broadly East Asian

0.5% Bengali + NE Indian

0.2% Finnish

https://i.imgur.com/e8TsGv2.png



I also have a Singaporean DNA relative (5th cousin on my northern Chinese mother's side) whose paternal grandparents were born in Putian and Fuzhou who scored 57.2% Southern + Taiwanese + 42.8% South Chinese.

Shuzam87
09-18-2022, 11:47 PM
Speaking of "significant amounts of Chinese Dai", here's one of my DNA relatives from Hong Kong who has 1 grandparent born in Shantou and another grandparent born in Thailand.

My DNA relative from Thailand has by far the highest Chinese Dai I have ever seen before:

51266

51267

Judging by his region, I am assuming he might be ethnic Lao in Thailand. (Laos likely match, Myanmar and Thailand Possible match)


I also have a Singaporean DNA relative (5th cousin on my northern Chinese mother's side) whose paternal grandparents were born in Putian and Fuzhou who scored 57.2% Southern + Taiwanese + 42.8% South Chinese.

My DNA relative whose grandparents were all from Putian got 84.3% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 15.7% South Chinese and 71.7% Southern Chinese & Taiwanese and 28.3% South Chinese from Xiamen.

MNOPSC1b
09-19-2022, 01:05 AM
Like I said earlier, judging by the looks of things if people from Fujian & Taiwan are scoring a lot of South Chinese, then I think the South Chinese sample is most likely based on a population in Eastern GD or Southern Fujian and not Western GD or GX.

I'm still curious to see how the pure Cantonese from Western GD and GX would score under this new calculator, and I'm also curious to see how the various Tai-Kradai and Hmong-Mien minorities in South and Southwest China would score. Does anyone have relevant samples to provide?

Shuzam87
09-19-2022, 01:36 AM
I'm still curious to see how the pure Cantonese from Western GD and GX would score under this new calculator, and I'm also curious to see how the various Tai-Kradai and Hmong-Mien minorities in South and Southwest China would score. Does anyone have relevant samples to provide?

Adopted from Nanning, Guangxi. I am guessing ethnic Zhuang.

51268

Ethnic Bai from Dali, Yunnan. High Northern Chinese & Tibetan (prob Tibetan) and relatively higher Southeast Asian ancestry. (around 10%)

51269

SG_Jun
09-19-2022, 04:02 AM
I think it's more of a small sample size issue than anything. I would only really trust the Tainan (n=12) and Greater Taipei (n=7) results for comparison purposes.




I have one DNA relative in Zunyi, Guizhou who scored 98.9% non-Lingnan + 1.1% Lingnan, and another one from around Wuhan who scored 98.6% non-Lingnan + 1.4% Northern.

Speaking of "significant amounts of Chinese Dai", here's one of my DNA relatives from Hong Kong who has 1 grandparent born in Shantou and another grandparent born in Thailand. Tsakhur

47.3% Chinese (34.2% non-Lingnan Southern, 7.7% Lingnan, 5.4% Broadly)
34.8% Dai
10.7% Vietnamese
1.4% Indo/Thai/Khmer/Myanmar
5.1% Broadly East Asian

0.5% Bengali + NE Indian

0.2% Finnish

https://i.imgur.com/e8TsGv2.png



I also have a Singaporean DNA relative (5th cousin on my northern Chinese mother's side) whose paternal grandparents were born in Putian and Fuzhou who scored 57.2% Southern + Taiwanese + 42.8% South Chinese.

Indeed the sample size is a tad too small.

As for the individual with one grandparent born in Thailand, I think its almost certain that grandparent is ethnic Thai instead of Thai Chinese. Based on the high % of Chinese Dai and Vietnamese maybe from northern Thailand? Trace percentages of South Asian (Bengali & Northeast Indian) are also quite typical for Thais.

42.8% South Chinese seems on the high side for Putian / Fuzhou individuals. His maternal grandparents could be from another "more southern" dialect group.

My closest DNA relative on 23andme (Singaporean, 1st cousin once removed); based on the data he has given with his last names I assume it could be from the Teochew side of my family (probably my paternal grandmother's relative). Tried reaching out to him but there's no reply.

51270

This Taiwanese "distant relative" has quite a similar % to mine (except the trace Arab which is interesting given Quanzhou's history) :

51271

MNOPSC1b
09-19-2022, 01:00 PM
Adopted from Nanning, Guangxi. I am guessing ethnic Zhuang.

51268

Ethnic Bai from Dali, Yunnan. High Northern Chinese & Tibetan (prob Tibetan) and relatively higher Southeast Asian ancestry. (around 10%)

51269

The Bai is a Tibeto-Burman ethnic group so it's not surprising that they would score rather high on Northern Chinese & Tibetan. I'm more interested to see the results for the various Tai-Kradai and Hmong-Mien speaking peoples.

And regardless of the ethnic group of the Guangxi adoptee, the fact that he/she only scored 20% South Chinese while those from Southern Fujian scored nearly 50% is a clear demonstration to me that the sampled location of the South Chinese group is somewhere in Eastern GD.

TBH I think further divisions are needed. If they're taking samples from Southern Fujian/Eastern GD then they'd better label it as "Minnan-Chaoshan" and not as South Chinese. For me I think only the Cantonese-speaking groups from Western GD and GX qualify as South Chinese or representatives of the Lingnan region.

Skhznamk
09-19-2022, 05:48 PM
It would be interesting to see how various Chinese Emperors score. This makes it seem like Northern Han & Tibetans came to the Central plains later and displaced Shang and Zhou dynasties.

Shuzam87
09-19-2022, 10:17 PM
And regardless of the ethnic group of the Guangxi adoptee, the fact that he/she only scored 20% South Chinese while those from Southern Fujian scored nearly 50% is a clear demonstration to me that the sampled location of the South Chinese group is somewhere in Eastern GD.

Most of my DNA relatives from Jiangmen, Guangdong tend to score 100% South Chinese.

Here is another person from Guangxi, who is also an adoptee (probably Han):

51282

MNOPSC1b
09-19-2022, 11:40 PM
Most of my DNA relatives from Jiangmen, Guangdong tend to score 100% South Chinese.

Here is another person from Guangxi, who is also an adoptee (probably Han):

51282

Jiangmen is close to the Pearl River Delta, so somewhere around the Bay Area or Eastern GD was where they've drawn their samples for South Chinese. By Western GD I mean places like Zhaoqing, Yunfu, Maoming, and Zhanjiang.

Again, this person scored a significant percentage of Chinese Dai, which seems to be the norm for GX individuals regardless of their ethnic group, and this also matches the result of Wegene and 23Mofang where GX individuals tend to score rather high on Zhuang-Dai. Though I'm a bit surprised by the complete lack of Filipino/Austronesian and Thai/Khmer on both GX samples, since on Wegene and 23Mofang they would often score some percentages of SE Asian or Thai and Khmer.

okarinaofsteiner
09-20-2022, 06:06 AM
Adopted from Nanning, Guangxi. I am guessing ethnic Zhuang.

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51268&d=1663551105

Ethnic Bai from Dali, Yunnan. High Northern Chinese & Tibetan (prob Tibetan) and relatively higher Southeast Asian ancestry. (around 10%)

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51269&d=1663551361


Most of my DNA relatives from Jiangmen, Guangdong tend to score 100% South Chinese.

Here is another person from Guangxi, who is also an adoptee (probably Han):

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51282&d=1663625837

Very interesting results. I'm also going through my dad's DNA relatives to see if there are any interesting Southern Chinese results

One of them is a Singaporean with a Hokkien/Minnan romanized surname. They have monolids and scored 61% South Chinese + 39% Southern Chinese and Taiwanese.

Another one is from Nanchang Jiangxi and scored 97.7% non-Lingnan + 2.3% Northern.

Here's a Hefei resident whose maternal grandparents were born in Sichuan. 75.9% non-Lingnan, 22.0% Northern, and 1.8% Vietnamese. I got in a mini-argument with someone on Reddit a few days ago over how much I/T/K/M certain Southern Chinese scored after the new update.
https://i.imgur.com/S4u7tlhl.png

Here's a Tianjin resident with 3 grandparents born in Fujian. Note the 0.4% Filipino and Austronesian
https://i.imgur.com/w9wxmMTl.png

For some reason, my dad's Hong Kong DNA relatives have more detailed family background sections and bios than mine do. They're also autosomally more southern, which is to be expected since my dad's ancestry is more southern than mine. There's one person whose "100% South Chinese (noted to be adopted)" whose grandparents were allegedly born in Foshan, Foshan, Zhongshan, and Shanghai respectively.



edit: found someone from Honghe, Yunnan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honghe_Hani_and_Yi_Autonomous_Prefecture) with Shuzam87-like results. All 3 Chinese subcategories represented + Vietnamese + trace West Eurasian. Could be (part) Hui?
https://i.imgur.com/CkO58T7.png

Goujian
09-20-2022, 06:56 AM
Me, they only updated my latest results from the latest version.

51283
51284
51285

okarinaofsteiner
09-20-2022, 07:10 AM
Me, they only updated my latest results from the latest version.

51283 51284 51285

Wow, those are some beautiful province match maps. I'm guessing you're of Zhejiang ancestry?



One of my DNA relatives whose grandparents are all from Shenzhen and grew up in a Hakka + Cantonese speaking household.
https://i.imgur.com/nOZ2HQY.png

MNOPSC1b
09-20-2022, 12:56 PM
I still find it rather weird that a lot of Minnan and Hokkien individuals are scoring high amounts South Chinese, there definitely needs to be a separation/division between Minnan-Chaoshan and Yue-Cantonese, cause according to Wegene results the former has much higher Northern Chinese than the later, whereas the later has much higher Zhuang-Dai than the former. From the looks of things, it seems that 23andme included both groups into South Chinese, that's why there's a bit of confusion.

I suggest breaking up the Southern Chinese groups even further, using the peoples from Western GD and GX as representatives of South/Lingnan Chinese, the ones from Eastern GD/Fujian/Taiwan as Southeast Chinese, the ones from Jiangsu/Shanghai/Anhui/Zhejiang as Yangtse Delta Chinese, the ones from Jiangxi/Hunan/Hubei as South-Central Chinese, and the ones from Sichuan/Chongqing/Guizhou/Yunnan as Southwest Chinese. If 23andme could organize its calculator like this, then the results for different Chinese subgroups would be much more accurate and would cause a lot less confusion.

MNOPSC1b
09-20-2022, 01:04 PM
Very interesting results. I'm also going through my dad's DNA relatives to see if there are any interesting Southern Chinese results

One of them is a Singaporean with a Hokkien/Minnan romanized surname. They have monolids (https://ttam-live-human-images-us-west-2.s3.amazonaws.com/e1327996e3d54bb795e97918dac5186f.jpg?AWSAccessKeyI d=AKIAJ4ZS4YATHQJZVJ5A&Signature=UySEYAxPcbm%2FS9PbptxPVouBM%2F8%3D&Expires=1664516522) and scored 61% South Chinese + 39% Southern Chinese and Taiwanese.

Why are you stressing the monolids part? Are you trying to say that because of they have monolids because of high South Chinese ancestry? That's not true at all, cause monolids are a Northern feature, and are indicative of Northern ancestry.

That's the reason why I think the 23andme calculator isn't entirely accurate because they included several distinct ethnolinguistic groups into the South Chinese/Lingnan category. You'd better try Wegene or 23Mofang, and I bet they would get around 20% or perhaps even more Northern Chinese (which is the average for Minnan-Chaoshan individuals on Wegene), whereas Yue-Cantonese would generally score less than 10% Northern Chinese on Wegene.

Goujian
09-20-2022, 01:25 PM
Wow, those are some beautiful province match maps. I'm guessing you're of Zhejiang ancestry?

Mostly northern Zhejiang, with a smattering of southern Jiangsu (including pre-migration Shanghai local).

Shuzam87
09-20-2022, 09:53 PM
edit: found someone from Honghe, Yunnan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honghe_Hani_and_Yi_Autonomous_Prefecture) with Shuzam87-like results. All 3 Chinese subcategories represented + Vietnamese + trace West Eurasian. Could be (part) Hui?
https://i.imgur.com/CkO58T7.png

What are the haplogroups for this person? It could be part of Hui ancestry as they are some Hui people living in Yunnan. Overall, my DNA relatives from Yunnan tend to have higher Northern Chinese & Tibetan, and Southeast Asian ancestry.

Here's another DNA relative of mine from Kunming, Yunnan:

51298

Also, do you have other Hui DNA relatives and anyone who has Xinjiang as a region? Somehow I got Xinjiang as a region I am guessing it has something to do with Hui ancestry.

51299

MNOPSC1b
09-20-2022, 10:17 PM
Here's my take on how the geno-graphic divisions of Southern China should be like (I'll leave the divisions within Northern China for those who are more informed about that region than me)

Blue: South Chinese or Lingnan Chinese

Orange: Southeast Chinese

Red: Yangtse Delta Chinese

Green: South-Central Chinese

Dark Red: Southwest Chinese

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51300&d=1663712239

51300

SG_Jun
09-21-2022, 03:54 AM
One of them is a Singaporean with a Hokkien/Minnan romanized surname. They have monolids and scored 61% South Chinese + 39% Southern Chinese and Taiwanese.

Interesting that most Singaporeans do indeed keep our last name according to its romanised form of our dialect, and its not changing anytime soon. In Singapore a surefire way to tell if someone is a new immigrant would be a last name romanised from Mandarin. Lol


Here's my take on how the geno-graphic divisions of Southern China should be like (I'll leave the divisions within Northern China for those who are more informed about that region than me)

Blue: South Chinese or Lingnan Chinese

Orange: Southeast Chinese

Red: Yangtse Delta Chinese

Green: South-Central Chinese

Dark Red: Southwest Chinese

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51300&d=1663712239

51300

Not sure I'd place Shenzhen/Guangzhou in the orange area, it seems a little too shifted to the west. I'd expand the blue area to at least the border with area of Shanwei (汕尾) and Hailufeng (海陆丰).

okarinaofsteiner
09-21-2022, 07:49 AM
What are the haplogroups for this person? It could be part of Hui ancestry as they are some Hui people living in Yunnan. Overall, my DNA relatives from Yunnan tend to have higher Northern Chinese & Tibetan, and Southeast Asian ancestry.

Here's another DNA relative of mine from Kunming, Yunnan:

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51298&d=1663710816&thumb=1

Also, do you have other Hui DNA relatives and anyone who has Xinjiang as a region? Somehow I got Xinjiang as a region I am guessing it has something to do with Hui ancestry.


Honghe Yunnan haplogroups
Y-DNA: O-CTS2498
mtDNA: B5b2

Re: Xinjiang region matches- Not that I know of. Haven’t gone through most of my or my dad’s DNA relatives. Not sure how many of them even show regional breakdowns.




Interesting that most Singaporeans do indeed keep our last name according to its romanised form of our dialect, and its not changing anytime soon. In Singapore a surefire way to tell if someone is a new immigrant would be a last name romanised from Mandarin. Lol

Are you suggesting that Peter Huang from MICappella is a PRC?


https://youtu.be/z30yUUjT1zs


https://youtu.be/OY4eyiGX66Y

Goujian
09-21-2022, 08:29 AM
Here's my take on how the geno-graphic divisions of Southern China should be like (I'll leave the divisions within Northern China for those who are more informed about that region than me)

Blue: South Chinese or Lingnan Chinese

Orange: Southeast Chinese

Red: Yangtse Delta Chinese

Green: South-Central Chinese

Dark Red: Southwest Chinese

https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=51300&d=1663712239

51300

I would say that Lishui and Wenzhou have some overlap with Fujian to the point that Wenzhou should be mostly in orange. Whereas there is some degree of overlap between northwestern Fujian, southwestern Zhejiang with northern Jiangxi and neighboring parts of southern Anhui.

MNOPSC1b
09-21-2022, 12:50 PM
Not sure I'd place Shenzhen/Guangzhou in the orange area, it seems a little too shifted to the west. I'd expand the blue area to at least the border with area of Shanwei (汕尾) and Hailufeng (海陆丰).

The borders were crudely drawn on a blank map of Chinese provinces without cities indicated, so I admit that I might have made some errors.

Regarding the Pearl River Delta, I'd include Guangzhou and Foshan in the blue area, but probably not Shenzhen and HK, cause the later 2 are mega metropolis with a lot of immigrants from other regions of China.

MNOPSC1b
09-21-2022, 12:57 PM
I would say that Lishui and Wenzhou have some overlap with Fujian to the point that Wenzhou should be mostly in orange. Whereas there is some degree of overlap between northwestern Fujian, southwestern Zhejiang with northern Jiangxi and neighboring parts of southern Anhui.

I'm not that familiar with the Yangtse Delta region so I could have made some errors there. But my map is not entirely based on linguistic divisions. I'm aware that there're some Min speaking groups in southern Zhejiang, but they have been heavily intermixed with other populations in Zhejiang to the point that their autosomal profile is probably closer to those in Zhejiang than to those in Fujian.

To give another example, the blue South Chinese/Lingnan region isn't entirely Cantonese there're also some Min, Hakka, and even Southwest Mandarin speakers, however they have been heavily intermixed with local Cantos and native Tai-Kradai peoples so that it'd be better to classify them in the blue region as opposed to other regions.

Shuzam87
09-21-2022, 08:58 PM
Re: Xinjiang region matches- Not that I know of. Haven’t gone through most of my or my dad’s DNA relatives. Not sure how many of them even show regional breakdowns.


Do you have more Tibeto-Burman matches from your DNA relatives?

Here are two Tibetan matches I had from Tibet:

51316

51317

Kachin (possible Lisu or Nung Rawang) from Puta-O, Putao, Kachin, Myanmar:

51320

Naga from Koshima, Nagaland:

51321

Kurteop/Sharchop(Eastern) Bhutanese from Bhutan:

51322

SG_Jun
09-22-2022, 03:40 AM
Are you suggesting that Peter Huang from MICappella is a PRC?



Not sure who that is.. But there could be a high possibility, maybe his dad is originally from China/Taiwan, or they/he decided to change the romanisation of their last name for various reasons. I do not know any Singaporean Chinese around me who have changed the romanisation of their last name to Mandarin. Interestingly the late LKY's grandsons have changed their last name from Lee to Li (Mandarin romanisation), but thus far they are one of the only examples locally I know of.

Since the 80s however there has been a shift of romanising given names using the Mandarin pronunciation instead of our local dialects. There are still some families who opt to romanise Chinese names according to our dialects, but these are becoming much less common than back in the day.

Hence personally my own official name is romanised as

Last name (in dialect: Teochew) + Given name (in Mandarin)

Goujian
09-23-2022, 02:26 PM
Is it even normal for eastern Chinese people to have high amounts of autosomal similarities to Tibeto-Burmese ethnic groups? I don’t have any recent or known southwestern Chinese ancestry that I know of.

Shuzam87
09-23-2022, 06:58 PM
Is it even normal for eastern Chinese people to have high amounts of autosomal similarities to Tibeto-Burmese ethnic groups? I don’t have any recent or known southwestern Chinese ancestry that I know of.

Because they grouped Tibetan with Northern Chinese after the V6.0 update, their high amount of Northern Chinese & Tibetan probably is all Tibetan related ancestry.

Songtsen
09-24-2022, 04:02 PM
Because they grouped Tibetan with Northern Chinese after the V6.0 update, their high amount of Northern Chinese & Tibetan probably is all Tibetan related ancestry.

This Tibet Burman classification is a fraud/wrong. Why does it not have have actual Burmese on it but lowlander tribes like Yi and Naxi ? What does Tibetans have to do with northern/Southern chinese ? Northen Hans are related to Japanese and koreans most . Also Tibetans become innocent bystanders who are slandered when north/south war is taking place in Tieba/Doujin :(

okarinaofsteiner
09-24-2022, 10:56 PM
Not sure who that is.. But there could be a high possibility, maybe his dad is originally from China/Taiwan, or they/he decided to change the romanisation of their last name for various reasons. I do not know any Singaporean Chinese around me who have changed the romanisation of their last name to Mandarin. Interestingly the late LKY's grandsons have changed their last name from Lee to Li (Mandarin romanisation), but thus far they are one of the only examples locally I know of.


Peter Huang is one of the founding members of Singaporean acapella group MICappella, he does percussion.


https://youtu.be/Bj5Z7buBBPI

This is the first video of theirs I know of that features all of the current members

https://youtu.be/83gWxvvRyos

Interesting that both Lee Hsien Loong and his brother’s children have all adopted fully pinyin names. The overseas Chinese Singaporeans and Malaysians I’ve met IRL pretty much all have non-pinyin surnames.

MNOPSC1b
09-25-2022, 12:46 AM
This Tibet Burman classification is a fraud/wrong. Why does it not have have actual Burmese on it but lowlander tribes like Yi and Naxi ? What does Tibetans have to do with northern/Southern chinese ? Northen Hans are related to Japanese and koreans most . Also Tibetans become innocent bystanders who are slandered when north/south war is taking place in Tieba/Doujin :(

Burmese are also mixed with Austroasiatic peoples so they aren't the best representatives of Tibeto-Burman. I think Yi and Naxi are better candidates than Burmese, though the best candidates imho are the Qiangic tribes of northwestern Sichuan, in particular the Rgyalrong.

Tibetans, culturally speaking, have very little in common with Northern/Southern Chinese, that I largely agree. However, genetically speaking, Tibetans are closer to Northern Chinese. In fact, Northern Hans are roughly the mid-point between Tibetan/Naxi/Yi and Korean/Japanese. The difference between Tibetans and Northern Hans, as we've discussed a few months ago in another thread, mostly lies on the east-west axis, but not really on the north-south axis.

I don't think Tibetans are being slandered on Tieba/Douyin/Zhihu. On the contrary, I often see certain Northern Hans on Chinese discussion boards glorify Tibeto-Burmans, claiming that you guys are their long-lost relatives. The ones that are being slandered the hardest by Northern Han ethnocentrists are people from Guangdong/Guangxi, the various southern minorities, and SE Asians.

MNOPSC1b
09-25-2022, 12:55 AM
Is it even normal for eastern Chinese people to have high amounts of autosomal similarities to Tibeto-Burmese ethnic groups? I don’t have any recent or known southwestern Chinese ancestry that I know of.

In the case of Eastern Chinese, it's likely because of Northern Chinese influences, 23andme grouped Northern Chinese & Tibetans into one group, and I think such a grouping is debatable and a bit of an oversimplification. It's true that Northern Chinese and Tibetans are related to some extent, but there're some differences between the two, particularly on the east-west axis.

In other calculators such as Wegene and 23Mofang, Eastern Chinese tend to score relatively high on Northern Chinese.