PDA

View Full Version : Northern Thais/Lanna and Lao are enetically much closer to Viets than to other Thais.



Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 04:01 AM
It seems that ethnic Tais (wrote Tai to distinguish them from the Thai) of Northern Thailand/locals of the Lanna (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lan_Na)region and many ethnic Lao from both Laos (the country) and Northern parts of Isaan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaan) aka NE Thailand such as Loei, Nong Khai, Udon Thani, Nakhon Phanom, etc. are genetically much closer to Vietnamese and indigenous peoples of Southern China such as the Hmong, Mulam, Lahu, etc. than to the Thais of Central (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Thailand), Eastern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Thailand)and Southern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Thailand)regions. I will mention that Southern Isaan is pretty different from Northern Isaan; the former is inhabited primarily by Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers.

I find this very interesting because it's fascinating how Northern Thais (comprises of many different Tai-Kadai ethnic groups such as Tai Yuan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Thai_people), Tai Lue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Lue_people), Tai Khuen (a subgroup of the Shan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_people)), Yong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yong_language), etc) and ethnic Lao (another Tai-Kadai group) of Laos and Northern Isaan can be so genetically close to the Kinh aka ethnic Vietnamese of Vietnam despite speaking totally different languages.

I know this forum doesn't allow taxonomy or phenotypical discussion, but I want to mention that this seems to correlate with genetics. When I visited the Northern Thailand and Northern parts of Isaan, I noticed a lot of the locals have lighter skin, much more East Asian-ish features (despite having no Chinese admixture from what they told me) and look much more like the Viets I have interacted with IRL and seen in Hanoi (I have been to Vietnam only once) and many ethnic Chinese Thai (I'm one myself ethnically) and ethnic minorities of Southern China than to most Thais south of the historical Lanna Kingdom who have darker complexion and look a lot more stereotypically SE Asian which indicate a lot of Mon, Khmer, Indian and Malay ancestries (the latter in Southern Thailand).

Here are some Northern Thai/Lanna and Laotian gedmatch samples to illustrate my point. I also have their G25 results which is simulated from their HarappaWorld (they haven't actually done G25 yet).

1. This kit is from Phayao (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phayao_province)in Northern Thailand. Not sure what Tai group she is but likely Tai Yuan.

MDLP K23b.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.28
2 Austronesian 41.54
3 Tungus-Altaic 8.22
4 South_Indian 3.62
5 Australoid 0.78
6 East_Siberian 0.54
7 Subsaharian 0.45
8 Paleo_Siberian 0.33
9 Khoisan 0.18
10 Archaic_Human 0.08

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Yong ( ) 4.08
2 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.1
3 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.35
4 Vietnamese ( ) 4.42
5 Tai_Khuen ( ) 4.84
6 Yao ( ) 5.48
7 Zhuang ( ) 5.67
8 Jiamao ( ) 5.76
9 Hmong ( ) 6.41
10 Cantonese ( ) 6.61
11 Htin ( ) 8.02
12 Vietnamese_north ( ) 8.09
13 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.56
14 Mlabri ( ) 8.83
15 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 8.84
16 Vietnamese_central ( ) 9.2
17 Vietnamese_south ( ) 9.53
18 Plang ( ) 9.6
19 Javanese ( ) 10.09
20 Jagoi ( ) 10.31

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 88.9% Zhuang ( ) + 11.1% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.12
2 80.1% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 19.9% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.3
3 55.4% Jagoi ( ) + 44.6% Han ( ) @ 1.5
4 65.2% Iban ( ) + 34.8% Aonaga ( ) @ 1.54
5 91.8% Vietnamese ( ) + 8.2% Pahari ( ) @ 1.66
6 89% Jiamao ( ) + 11% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.67
7 92.3% Tai_Lue ( ) + 7.7% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.71
8 79.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 20.9% Mon ( ) @ 1.75
9 66.2% Yao ( ) + 33.8% Jagoi ( ) @ 1.8
10 85% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 15% Hezhen ( ) @ 1.81
11 95.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 4.9% Dhaka_mixed_popul ( ) @ 1.84
12 54.6% She ( ) + 45.4% Dayak ( ) @ 1.87
13 85.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 14.7% Daur ( ) @ 1.88
14 95.8% Vietnamese ( ) + 4.2% Chenchu ( ) @ 1.9
15 96% Vietnamese ( ) + 4% Hakkipikki ( ) @ 1.91
16 82.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 17.7% Japanese ( ) @ 1.93
17 50.7% Dayak ( ) + 49.3% Miao ( ) @ 1.93
18 65.9% Yao ( ) + 34.1% Javanese ( ) @ 1.94
19 96.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.9% Malayan ( ) @ 1.94
20 96% Vietnamese ( ) + 4% Kurumba ( ) @ 1.95


PuntDNAL K13: score Kinh/Vietnamese, Dai and Lahu before Cambodian and Thai.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 48.01
2 SE_Asia 41.99
3 South_Asia 5.17
4 Oceania 1.93
5 East_Africa 0.95
6 SW_Europe 0.86
7 South_Africa 0.55
8 NE_Europe 0.5
9 SW_Asia 0.02
10 West_Africa 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dai 4.32
2 Vietnamese 4.96
3 Lahu 11.03
4 Thai 14.97
5 Cambodian 18.69
6 Burmese 19.89
7 Miaozu 20.81
8 Malayan 23.3
9 She 25.72
10 Han_South_China 25.89
11 Filipino 26.18
12 Luzon 26.36
13 Visayan 26.89
14 Dusun 34.3
15 Naxi 34.31
16 Murut 36.33
17 Han_North_China 39.14
18 Korean 42.71
19 Xibo 44.53
20 Japanese 46.9

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 79.6% Dai + 20.4% Thai @ 2.06
2 85.8% Vietnamese + 14.2% Filipino @ 2.44
3 95.2% Dai + 4.8% Mawasi @ 2.47
4 95.3% Dai + 4.7% Romani @ 2.48
5 84% Dai + 16% Cambodian @ 2.51
6 86.2% Vietnamese + 13.8% Visayan @ 2.51
7 95.5% Dai + 4.5% Gond @ 2.53
8 86% Vietnamese + 14% Luzon @ 2.54
9 96% Dai + 4% Paniya @ 2.57
10 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Pulliyar @ 2.57
11 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Tamil_Nadu_Caste @ 2.58
12 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Chenchus @ 2.58
13 95.9% Dai + 4.1% North_Kannadi @ 2.58
14 95.5% Dai + 4.5% Bengali @ 2.59
15 96% Dai + 4% Sakilli @ 2.6
16 95.9% Dai + 4.1% UP_Muslim @ 2.6
17 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Tamil_Nadu_Brahmin @ 2.61
18 95.9% Dai + 4.1% Piramalai_Kallars @ 2.63
19 96% Dai + 4% Hakkipikki @ 2.64
20 95.7% Dai + 4.3% Kashmir_Pandit @ 2.66


Her G25 population distance: the Vietnamese (Kinh and Dong profiles) comes from this thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?25781-The-Moriopoulos-Collection-(-3000-G25-Averages)-a-Valentine-s-Day-Gift). Michalis, thank you so much for sharing your wonderful collection. It's fascinating how she is closer to the Vietnamese, Dai, Southern Chinese ethnic minorities such as Gelao, Mulam, Dong, Lahu, Lawa than to other Thais and Cambodians.

Distance to: Phayao_1

0.02358892 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02435845 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02677338 Gelao
0.02763806 Tai_Lue
0.02977526 Lahu
0.03084605 Dai
0.03773484 Zhuang
0.03962704 Maonan
0.04112553 Mulam
0.04643903 Dong_Guizhou
0.04784120 Li
0.04982191 Lawa
0.05020075 Karen_Sgaw
0.05225082 Dong_Hunan
0.05380770 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05488653 Cambodian
0.05825672 Hmong
0.06251951 Akha
0.06309951 Han_Guangdong
0.07122919 Thai
0.07313662 Miao
0.07402471 Htin_Mal
0.08283232 Tujia
0.08290185 Han_Chongqing
0.08381104 Malay
0.08592360 She
0.08696019 Han_Fujian
0.08857581 Atayal
0.09070317 Han_Sichuan
0.09174318 Mlabri


Here is how she can be modelled using G25: Lawa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawa_people#:~:text=Lawa%20(Thai%3A%20%E0%B8%A5%E0 %B8%B1%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B0%20or,estimated%20to%20be% 20some%2017%2C000.)is an indigenous Austroasiatic speaking group from Northern Thailand, who is be one of the oldest settlers in the region before the arrival of Tai speaking migrants from Southern China.

Target: Phayao_1
Distance: 1.4499% / 0.01449925
72.0 Kinh_Vietnam
28.0 Lawa

Another model of her:

Target: Phayao_1
Distance: 1.4385% / 0.01438458
60.6 Kinh_Vietnam
26.4 Lawa
11.4 Tai_Lue
1.6 Karen_Sgaw


2. Another gedmatch kit from Northern Thailand. He is also much closer to the Kinh/Viet and Dai than to Thai and Cambodian. Don't know what province in the former Lanna area he is from and what Tai ethnic group he is.


MDLP K23b:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.2
2 Austronesian 43.44
3 Tungus-Altaic 4.21
4 South_Indian 3.83
5 Australoid 1.61
6 East_Siberian 0.57
7 East_African 0.14

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Yong ( ) 3.51
2 Vietnamese ( ) 4.07
3 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.35
4 Tai_Khuen ( ) 4.58
5 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.76
6 Vietnamese_north ( ) 5.15
7 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 5.31
8 Vietnamese_central ( ) 5.36
9 Zhuang ( ) 5.43
10 Vietnamese_south ( ) 5.43
11 Jiamao ( ) 6.23
12 Htin ( ) 7.01
13 Chinese_Dai ( ) 8.03
14 Dai ( ) 8.24
15 Hmong ( ) 8.32
16 Yao ( ) 8.5
17 Jagoi ( ) 9.01
18 Mlabri ( ) 9.03
19 Javanese ( ) 9.33
20 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 9.43

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 71% Vietnamese ( ) + 29% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.41
2 89.1% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 10.9% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.66
3 64.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 35.3% Htin ( ) @ 1.66
4 91.9% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.1% Daur ( ) @ 1.72
5 72% Vietnamese ( ) + 28% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.73
6 91.8% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.2% Hezhen ( ) @ 1.75
7 91.7% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.3% Mongol_Khalkha ( ) @ 1.76
8 90.5% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 9.5% Mongola_China ( ) @ 1.83
9 93.4% Vietnamese_north ( ) + 6.6% Onge ( ) @ 1.86
10 90.5% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 9.5% Xibo ( ) @ 1.88
11 92.6% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 7.4% Mongolian ( ) @ 1.89
12 91.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.7% Mongolian_QH ( ) @ 1.89
13 92.5% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 7.5% Kalmyk ( ) @ 1.9
14 89.2% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 10.8% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 1.91
15 69% Chinese_Dai ( ) + 31% Mon ( ) @ 1.94
16 94% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 6% Ulchi ( ) @ 1.97
17 68.5% Dai ( ) + 31.5% Mon ( ) @ 1.97
18 90.4% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 9.6% Japanese ( ) @ 2.02
19 93.1% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 6.9% Buryat ( ) @ 2.05
20 76.3% Vietnamese ( ) + 23.7% Thai ( ) @ 2.05


PuntDNAL Global K13: he is genetically closer to Dai, Vietnamese than to Thai and Cambodian.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 46.61
2 SE_Asia 43.24
3 South_Asia 6.71
4 Oceania 1.78
5 SW_Europe 0.57
6 Americas 0.54
7 SW_Asia 0.38
8 West_Asia 0.12
9 West_Africa 0.05

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dai 5.58
2 Vietnamese 6
3 Lahu 12.64
4 Thai 14.01
5 Cambodian 16.68
6 Burmese 20.65
7 Malayan 21.3
8 Miaozu 22.72
9 Filipino 24.5
10 Luzon 24.7
11 Visayan 25.16
12 She 27.64
13 Han_South_China 27.8
14 Dusun 32.54
15 Murut 34.54
16 Naxi 35.95
17 Han_North_China 40.93
18 Korean 44.49
19 Xibo 45.93
20 Japanese 48.67

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 81% Vietnamese + 19% Visayan @ 1.03
2 80.6% Vietnamese + 19.4% Filipino @ 1.04
3 75.4% Dai + 24.6% Cambodian @ 1.36
4 84.8% Vietnamese + 15.2% Dusun @ 1.36
5 80.8% Vietnamese + 19.2% Luzon @ 1.36
6 85.6% Vietnamese + 14.4% Murut @ 1.48
7 78.6% Vietnamese + 21.4% Malayan @ 1.57
8 91% Vietnamese + 9% Igorot @ 1.74
9 56.5% Malayan + 43.5% She @ 2.36
10 73.8% Dai + 26.2% Thai @ 2.71
11 93.5% Dai + 6.5% Mawasi @ 2.81
12 51.6% Malayan + 48.4% Miaozu @ 2.91
13 81.7% Dai + 18.3% Malayan @ 2.95
14 72.6% Lahu + 27.4% Dusun @ 3.12
15 94.6% Dai + 5.4% Paniya @ 3.15
16 66.7% Lahu + 33.3% Luzon @ 3.16
17 94.1% Dai + 5.9% Gond @ 3.17
18 94.5% Dai + 5.5% Pulliyar @ 3.17
19 94.6% Dai + 5.4% North_Kannadi @ 3.23
20 94.7% Dai + 5.3% Sakilli @ 3.26


His G25 distance: closest pops to him are Tai Lue, Dai, Kinh/Vietnamese, Gelao, etc. Meanwhile Thai is pretty far from him at a distance of 7.45 at least.

Distance to: Northern_Thai_2

0.01596160 Tai_Lue
0.01653396 Dai
0.01772728 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01789468 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02396359 Gelao
0.02972282 Maonan
0.03049204 Zhuang
0.03150581 Li
0.03414304 Mulam
0.04413963 Dong_Guizhou
0.04463818 Lahu
0.05060700 Dong_Hunan
0.05251360 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05918683 Cambodian
0.06098187 Hmong
0.06434555 Lawa
0.06435730 Han_Guangdong
0.06700945 Karen_Sgaw
0.07498072 Thai
0.07641566 Htin_Mal
0.07718728 Akha
0.07823715 Atayal
0.07866405 Miao
0.08080190 Luzon
0.08379137 Malay
0.08653921 She
0.08772406 Ami
0.08796307 Han_Chongqing
0.08896636 Han_Fujian
0.08931594 Tujia


Here is how he can be modelled:

Target: Northern_Thai
Distance: 1.3247% / 0.01324715
54.0 Dai
40.4 Kinh_Vietnam
5.6 Lawa

3. She is also from Phayao in Northern Thailand. She is also genetically closer to Dai and Viets than to Thais.

MDLP K23b.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.56
2 Austronesian 39.94
3 Tungus-Altaic 9.31
4 South_Indian 4.85
5 Australoid 0.38
6 East_African 0.35
7 Khoisan 0.32
8 South_Central_Asian 0.13
9 European_Hunters_Gatherers 0.12
10 Archaic_African 0.03

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.59
2 Yao ( ) 5.3
3 Yong ( ) 6.1
4 Vietnamese ( ) 6.24
5 Tai_Lue ( ) 6.27
6 Tai_Khuen ( ) 6.28
7 Hmong ( ) 6.34
8 Cantonese ( ) 6.38
9 Zhuang ( ) 7.82
10 Jiamao ( ) 7.84
11 Htin ( ) 7.87
12 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.07
13 Plang ( ) 8.69
14 Mlabri ( ) 9.51
15 Vietnamese_north ( ) 9.88
16 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 10.25
17 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 10.28
18 Cambodian ( ) 10.32
19 Lawa ( ) 10.72
20 Vietnamese_central ( ) 10.83

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62.2% Cantonese ( ) + 37.8% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.54
2 77.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.7% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.54
3 84.7% Zhuang ( ) + 15.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.76
4 88.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 11.9% Pahari ( ) @ 1.86
5 62.3% Cantonese ( ) + 37.7% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.86
6 63.7% She ( ) + 36.3% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 1.97
7 84.8% Jiamao ( ) + 15.2% Kusunda ( ) @ 2.01
8 67.5% Yao ( ) + 32.5% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.09
9 55.7% Cantonese ( ) + 44.3% Htin ( ) @ 2.1
10 62.6% She ( ) + 37.4% Batak_Toba ( ) @ 2.11
11 63.3% Iban ( ) + 36.7% Aonaga ( ) @ 2.13
12 51.8% Javanese ( ) + 48.2% Han ( ) @ 2.22
13 51.7% Han ( ) + 48.3% Sunda ( ) @ 2.23
14 77.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.7% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 2.25
15 62.5% Iban ( ) + 37.5% Nysha ( ) @ 2.3
16 65.2% Cantonese ( ) + 34.8% Thai ( ) @ 2.3
17 87.9% Tai_Lue ( ) + 12.1% Kusunda ( ) @ 2.35
18 79.9% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 20.1% Japanese ( ) @ 2.36
19 70.4% Vietnamese ( ) + 29.6% Mon ( ) @ 2.39
20 72.1% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 27.9% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 2.43


Her PuntDNAL Global K13: closest pops are Viet and Dai

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 49.08
2 SE_Asia 39
3 South_Asia 6.9
4 Oceania 1.29
5 SW_Asia 0.96
6 West_Asia 0.95
7 NE_Europe 0.83
8 West_Africa 0.49
9 South_Africa 0.41
10 SW_Europe 0.07
11 East_Africa 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Vietnamese 2.95
2 Dai 6.06
3 Lahu 8.58
4 Thai 13.55
5 Burmese 16.62
6 Miaozu 18.57
7 Cambodian 19.6
8 She 23.52
9 Han_South_China 23.67
10 Malayan 25.53
11 Filipino 29.08
12 Luzon 29.43
13 Visayan 29.6
14 Naxi 31.66
15 Han_North_China 36.63
16 Dusun 37.23
17 Murut 39.21
18 Korean 40.18
19 Xibo 42.3
20 Japanese 44.33

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Yemeni @ 1.7
2 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Palestinian @ 1.73
3 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Saudi @ 1.74
4 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Jordanian @ 1.74
5 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Egyptian @ 1.75
6 97% Vietnamese + 3% Chechen @ 1.75
7 97.2% Vietnamese + 2.8% Bedouin @ 1.76
8 97% Vietnamese + 3% Syrian @ 1.76
9 97% Vietnamese + 3% Adygei @ 1.77
10 97% Vietnamese + 3% Lebanese_Muslim @ 1.77
11 97% Vietnamese + 3% Iranian @ 1.78
12 97% Vietnamese + 3% Kurdish @ 1.78
13 96.7% Vietnamese + 3.3% Turkish_Aydin @ 1.79
14 97% Vietnamese + 3% Ossetian @ 1.79
15 97% Vietnamese + 3% Lebanese_Druze @ 1.79
16 96.8% Vietnamese + 3.2% Kumyk @ 1.79
17 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Turkish @ 1.8
18 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Lebanese_Christian @ 1.8
19 97% Vietnamese + 3% Dagestan_Azeri @ 1.8
20 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Assyrian @ 1.81


Her G25 distance: she is closest to Tai Lue, Vietnamese, Dai, Gelao, Zhuang meanwhile she is a bit distant from Thais and Cambodians.

Distance to: Phayao_2

0.02519161 Tai_Lue
0.02577257 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02604039 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03022425 Dai
0.03340472 Gelao
0.03880449 Maonan
0.03989359 Zhuang
0.04091673 Li
0.04323310 Mulam
0.04958400 Lahu
0.05168959 Dong_Guizhou
0.05418407 Cambodian
0.05883274 Dong_Hunan
0.05964350 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06521520 Lawa
0.06726914 Karen_Sgaw
0.06819853 Hmong
0.06985801 Thai
0.07082119 Han_Guangdong
0.07361609 Atayal
0.07375102 Htin_Mal
0.07412381 Luzon
0.07440396 Malay
0.08053926 Akha
0.08195604 Vizayan
0.08406290 Ami
0.08439009 Miao
0.08617945 Hawaiian
0.09176148 Mlabri
0.09208488 Murut


Her G25 model:

Target: Phayao_2
Distance: 2.4767% / 0.02476716
72.8 Kinh_Vietnam
18.4 Dai
8.8 Lawa

Another model of her:

Target: Phayao_2
Distance: 2.3308% / 0.02330775
54.0 Tai_Lue
37.2 Kinh_Vietnam
8.8 Lawa

4. This gedmatch user is from Chiang Mai. He is very likely Tai Yuan. He is also closer to Vietnamese, Dai, and some Southern Chinese ethnic minorities than to Thais and Cambodians.

MDLP K23b

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.81
2 Austronesian 40.51
3 Tungus-Altaic 7.65
4 South_Indian 3.98
5 Caucasian 0.77
6 Arctic 0.76
7 Melano_Polynesian 0.62
8 Archaic_African 0.57
9 Amerindian 0.32

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Yuan ( ) 3.56
2 Yong ( ) 4.56
3 Tai_Khuen ( ) 4.8
4 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.95
5 Vietnamese ( ) 5.08
6 Yao ( ) 5.5
7 Hmong ( ) 6.18
8 Zhuang ( ) 6.7
9 Jiamao ( ) 6.83
10 Cantonese ( ) 6.87
11 Htin ( ) 7.58
12 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.32
13 Vietnamese_north ( ) 8.36
14 Plang ( ) 8.56
15 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 8.78
16 Mlabri ( ) 9.14
17 Vietnamese_central ( ) 9.25
18 Vietnamese_south ( ) 9.51
19 Cambodian ( ) 10.15
20 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 10.15

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 75.5% Vietnamese ( ) + 24.5% Mon ( ) @ 1.76
2 90.5% Vietnamese ( ) + 9.5% Pahari ( ) @ 1.8
3 87.1% Zhuang ( ) + 12.9% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.87
4 90.5% Tai_Lue ( ) + 9.5% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.88
5 80.4% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 19.6% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.9
6 50% Sunda ( ) + 50% She ( ) @ 2.02
7 82.7% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 17.3% Xibo ( ) @ 2.11
8 61.3% Jagoi ( ) + 38.7% Tujia ( ) @ 2.14
9 66.2% Yao ( ) + 33.8% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.14
10 92.2% Vietnamese ( ) + 7.8% Nepalese ( ) @ 2.17
11 94.4% Vietnamese ( ) + 5.6% Dhaka_mixed_popul ( ) @ 2.2
12 60.4% Cantonese ( ) + 39.6% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.23
13 59.3% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 40.7% Sunda ( ) @ 2.25
14 77.6% Hmong ( ) + 22.4% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 2.25
15 53.8% Jagoi ( ) + 46.2% Han ( ) @ 2.25
16 80.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 19.7% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 2.3
17 74.2% Tai_Lue ( ) + 25.8% Karen ( ) @ 2.3
18 52.5% Jagoi ( ) + 47.5% She ( ) @ 2.31
19 67% Hmong ( ) + 33% Sunda ( ) @ 2.31
20 91.7% Yong ( ) + 8.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 2.32


PuntDNAL Global K13: He is also closer to Viet, Dai than to Thai and Cambodian.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 50.88
2 SE_Asia 36.29
3 South_Asia 5.78
4 Oceania 2.27
5 NE_Europe 1.93
6 Siberia 1.63
7 East_Africa 0.54
8 West_Asia 0.51
9 Americas 0.16

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Vietnamese 4.57
2 Lahu 5.56
3 Dai 7.81
4 Burmese 14.32
5 Thai 14.79
6 Miaozu 15.42
7 Han_South_China 20.44
8 She 20.51
9 Cambodian 22.35
10 Naxi 28.21
11 Malayan 28.52
12 Filipino 32.11
13 Visayan 32.27
14 Luzon 32.46
15 Han_North_China 33.16
16 Korean 36.69
17 Xibo 38.94
18 Dusun 40.33
19 Japanese 40.84
20 Murut 42.34

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 65.1% Miaozu + 34.9% Malayan @ 2.47
2 65.7% Dai + 34.3% Burmese @ 2.63
3 59.4% Miaozu + 40.6% Cambodian @ 2.65
4 58.3% She + 41.7% Malayan @ 2.77
5 93.9% Vietnamese + 6.1% Altaian @ 2.77
6 93.6% Vietnamese + 6.4% Mongolian @ 2.8
7 85.6% Lahu + 14.4% Malayan @ 2.82
8 82.4% Lahu + 17.6% Cambodian @ 2.93
9 52.2% She + 47.8% Cambodian @ 2.94
10 94.6% Vietnamese + 5.4% Tuvinian @ 2.95
11 93.8% Vietnamese + 6.2% Afghan_Hazara @ 3.04
12 92.8% Vietnamese + 7.2% Daur @ 3.07
13 95.6% Vietnamese + 4.4% Chuvash @ 3.09
14 87.4% Lahu + 12.6% Visayan @ 3.09
15 58.4% Han_South_China + 41.6% Malayan @ 3.12
16 96% Vietnamese + 4% Selkup @ 3.14
17 92.1% Vietnamese + 7.9% Xibo @ 3.16
18 93.8% Vietnamese + 6.2% Oroqen @ 3.16
19 95.5% Vietnamese + 4.5% Tatar @ 3.16
20 95.7% Vietnamese + 4.3% Aluet @ 3.18


His G25 distance: closest pops are Lahu, Kinh/Vietnamese, Gelao, Tai Lue meanwhile Thai is a bit far at a distance of 0.06 up.

Distance to: Chiang_Mai1

0.02218904 Lahu
0.02668662 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02895075 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03332661 Gelao
0.03534477 Tai_Lue
0.03825065 Dai
0.04227019 Zhuang
0.04343378 Mulam
0.04394282 Karen_Sgaw
0.04432054 Dong_Guizhou
0.04700567 Lawa
0.04718022 Maonan
0.04963608 Akha
0.04973490 Dong_Hunan
0.05048616 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05201860 Hmong
0.05471177 Li
0.05860401 Han_Guangdong
0.05885779 Cambodian
0.06378338 Miao
0.06653412 Thai
0.07270398 Tujia
0.07439522 Han_Chongqing
0.07851288 Han_Fujian
0.07866721 She
0.08093724 Han_Sichuan
0.08276432 Htin_Mal
0.08733057 Han_Hubei
0.08910211 Malay
0.09075757 Burmese


His G25 model:

Target: Chiang_Mai1
Distance: 1.1458% / 0.01145754
60.6 Kinh_Vietnam
29.2 Karen_Sgaw
10.2 Akha

Here are also some Laotian gedmatch kits who seem to be closer to Viet, Dai, Southern Chinese ethnic minorities than to Thai and Cambodian.

1. Don't know which part of Laos he is originally from but likely from Vientiane based on the frequency of his lastname there.

MDLP K23b:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.23
2 Austronesian 41.82
3 Tungus-Altaic 4.74
4 Australoid 2.39
5 South_Indian 2.14
6 Caucasian 1.31
7 Paleo_Siberian 0.57
8 Subsaharian 0.4
9 East_African 0.25
10 Melano_Polynesian 0.16

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Khuen ( ) 3.63
2 Yong ( ) 3.97
3 Vietnamese ( ) 4.19
4 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.38
5 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.64
6 Vietnamese_north ( ) 5.64
7 Zhuang ( ) 5.82
8 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 6.07
9 Vietnamese_central ( ) 6.48
10 Jiamao ( ) 6.6
11 Hmong ( ) 7.02
12 Yao ( ) 7.32
13 Vietnamese_south ( ) 7.39
14 Htin ( ) 8.45
15 Chinese_Dai ( ) 9
16 Cantonese ( ) 9.04
17 Dai ( ) 9.31
18 Plang ( ) 9.49
19 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9.56
20 Mlabri ( ) 10.05

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.8% Filipino ( ) + 49.2% Lahu ( ) @ 2.7
2 91.8% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.2% Kazakh ( ) @ 2.85
3 91.9% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.1% Karakalpak ( ) @ 2.88
4 91.7% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.3% Kyrgyz_Bishkek ( ) @ 2.94
5 92% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8% Kyrgyz ( ) @ 2.94
6 96.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.3% Roma_BH ( ) @ 2.95
7 96.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.3% Roma ( ) @ 2.95
8 96.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.3% Roma_Macedonian ( ) @ 2.96
9 96.6% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.4% Roma_Bulgarian ( ) @ 2.96
10 96.6% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.4% Roma_Slovenian ( ) @ 3.01
11 91.3% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.7% Kazahs ( ) @ 3.01
12 89.2% Vietnamese_central ( ) + 10.8% Xibo ( ) @ 3.05
13 91.7% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.3% Hazara ( ) @ 3.08
14 90.1% Vietnamese_central ( ) + 9.9% Mongolian_QH ( ) @ 3.09
15 91.1% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.9% Uygur ( ) @ 3.1
16 92.8% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 7.2% Crimean_Tatar_Step ( ) @ 3.13
17 91.1% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.9% Uygur-Han ( ) @ 3.14
18 92.2% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 7.8% Uzbek ( ) @ 3.15
19 78.8% Tai_Khuen ( ) + 21.2% Vietnamese_south ( ) @ 3.16
20 96.9% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.1% Romanian ( ) @ 3.16


PuntDNAL Global K13: he is much closer to Dai and Vietnamese than to Thai.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 46.66
2 SE_Asia 42.47
3 South_Asia 4.79
4 Oceania 2.18
5 SW_Asia 1.17
6 SW_Europe 1.15
7 Americas 0.98
8 East_Africa 0.61

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dai 5.38
2 Vietnamese 6.31
3 Lahu 12.2
4 Thai 14.66
5 Cambodian 17.86
6 Burmese 20.64
7 Miaozu 22
8 Malayan 22.06
9 Filipino 24.95
10 Luzon 25.22
11 Visayan 25.63
12 She 26.97
13 Han_South_China 27.08
14 Dusun 33.14
15 Murut 35.18
16 Naxi 35.34
17 Han_North_China 40.2
18 Korean 43.77
19 Xibo 45.24
20 Japanese 47.96

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 55.1% Malayan + 44.9% She @ 2.78
2 81.6% Vietnamese + 18.4% Filipino @ 2.91
3 82% Vietnamese + 18% Visayan @ 2.92
4 79.9% Dai + 20.1% Cambodian @ 3.04
5 50.1% Miaozu + 49.9% Malayan @ 3.04
6 82% Vietnamese + 18% Luzon @ 3.13
7 76.8% Dai + 23.2% Thai @ 3.2
8 86% Vietnamese + 14% Dusun @ 3.31
9 67.8% Lahu + 32.2% Filipino @ 3.34
10 68% Lahu + 32% Luzon @ 3.34
11 86.8% Vietnamese + 13.2% Murut @ 3.41
12 94.7% Dai + 5.3% Algerian @ 3.42
13 91.7% Vietnamese + 8.3% Igorot @ 3.43
14 94.7% Dai + 5.3% Tunisian @ 3.45
15 94.9% Dai + 5.1% Saharawi @ 3.45
16 53.2% Miaozu + 46.8% Filipino @ 3.47
17 94.8% Dai + 5.2% Moroccan @ 3.47
18 94.9% Dai + 5.1% Mozabite @ 3.48
19 94.6% Dai + 5.4% Romani @ 3.48
20 80.6% Vietnamese + 19.4% Malayan @ 3.5


His G25: closest to Tai_Lue, Vietnamese, Dai, Gelao, Maonan. Rather distant from Thai and Cambodian.

Distance to: Lao_American1

0.01952382 Tai_Lue
0.02087925 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02301288 Dai
0.02421157 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03007260 Gelao
0.03185030 Maonan
0.03300434 Li
0.03365490 Zhuang
0.03786589 Mulam
0.04815105 Dong_Guizhou
0.05103895 Lahu
0.05499344 Dong_Hunan
0.05565294 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06117232 Cambodian
0.06572461 Hmong
0.06735511 Atayal
0.06757554 Han_Guangdong
0.06919722 Lawa
0.06971141 Luzon
0.07107144 Karen_Sgaw
0.07659963 Htin_Mal
0.07738307 Thai
0.07794290 Ami
0.07924659 Malay
0.08126023 Vizayan
0.08264088 Akha
0.08272644 Miao
0.08306301 Hawaiian
0.08748592 Murut
0.09104489 She


Two G25 models of him

Target: Lao_American1
Distance: 2.1247% / 0.02124706
56.6 Dai
42.2 Kinh_Vietnam
1.2 Lawa

Target: Lao_American1
Distance: 1.9267% / 0.01926736
75.2 Tai_Lue
12.0 Dai
11.4 Kinh_Vietnam
1.4 Lawa

2. A Lao-American gedmatch kit. Not sure which part of Laos he is originally from but definitely somewhere in the north or Vientiane.

MDLP K23b: closest pops are Tai Yuan, Hmong, Yao, Tai Khuen, Vietnamese.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 45.7
2 Austronesian 39.33
3 Tungus-Altaic 9.11
4 South_Indian 4.92
5 Australoid 0.66
6 Melano_Polynesian 0.23
7 Subsaharian 0.05

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Yuan ( ) 3.91
2 Yao ( ) 4.96
3 Hmong ( ) 5.66
4 Tai_Khuen ( ) 6
5 Vietnamese ( ) 6.29
6 Cantonese ( ) 6.36
7 Yong ( ) 6.42
8 Tai_Lue ( ) 6.74
9 Hmong_Miao ( ) 7.37
10 Plang ( ) 7.66
11 Htin ( ) 7.79
12 Zhuang ( ) 8.32
13 Jiamao ( ) 8.5
14 Vietnamese_north ( ) 9.76
15 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 9.89
16 Lawa ( ) 9.89
17 Wa ( ) 10.14
18 Mlabri ( ) 10.15
19 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 10.16
20 Cambodian ( ) 10.5

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62% Cantonese ( ) + 38% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.57
2 87.3% Vietnamese ( ) + 12.7% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.66
3 87.9% Vietnamese ( ) + 12.1% Pahari ( ) @ 1.77
4 69.1% Yao ( ) + 30.9% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.79
5 83.7% Zhuang ( ) + 16.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.8
6 66.5% She ( ) + 33.5% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 1.83
7 68.5% Yao ( ) + 31.5% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.9
8 63% Cantonese ( ) + 37% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.91
9 55.5% Cantonese ( ) + 44.5% Htin ( ) @ 1.93
10 77.8% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.2% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.98
11 62% Iban ( ) + 38% Aonaga ( ) @ 2.15
12 62.6% Yao ( ) + 37.4% Htin ( ) @ 2.17
13 55.6% She ( ) + 44.4% Sunda ( ) @ 2.2
14 51.1% Han ( ) + 48.9% Javanese ( ) @ 2.22
15 77.6% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.4% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 2.24
16 71.8% Yao ( ) + 28.2% Thai ( ) @ 2.25
17 59.4% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 40.6% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.28
18 55.6% Jagoi ( ) + 44.4% Tujia ( ) @ 2.29
19 52.2% She ( ) + 47.8% Javanese ( ) @ 2.3
20 65.8% She ( ) + 34.2% Batak_Toba ( ) @ 2.31


PuntDNAL Global K13: closer to Vietnamese, Lahu, Dai than to Thai and Cambodian.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 51.13
2 SE_Asia 37.89
3 South_Asia 7.17
4 Oceania 1.3
5 Siberia 0.98
6 SW_Asia 0.85
7 West_Africa 0.51
8 NE_Europe 0.17

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Vietnamese 2.21
2 Lahu 6.27
3 Dai 6.5
4 Thai 14.79
5 Burmese 15.27
6 Miaozu 16.37
7 She 21.31
8 Han_South_China 21.44
9 Cambodian 21.51
10 Malayan 27.62
11 Naxi 29.49
12 Filipino 31.23
13 Luzon 31.46
14 Visayan 31.62
15 Han_North_China 34.43
16 Korean 37.98
17 Dusun 39.29
18 Xibo 40.47
19 Murut 41.26
20 Japanese 42.13

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Mongolian @ 1.31
2 96.3% Vietnamese + 3.7% Daur @ 1.37
3 97.3% Vietnamese + 2.7% Tuvinian @ 1.37
4 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Altaian @ 1.38
5 96.8% Vietnamese + 3.2% Oroqen @ 1.4
6 96% Vietnamese + 4% Xibo @ 1.44
7 90.4% Vietnamese + 9.6% Burmese @ 1.51
8 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Afghan_Hazara @ 1.53
9 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Yakut @ 1.55
10 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Dolgan @ 1.55
11 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Selkup @ 1.61
12 80.2% Vietnamese + 19.8% Lahu @ 1.62
13 98.6% Vietnamese + 1.4% Nganasan @ 1.64
14 95.2% Vietnamese + 4.8% Naxi @ 1.65
15 98.4% Vietnamese + 1.6% Koryak @ 1.68
16 98.3% Vietnamese + 1.7% Bedouin @ 1.69
17 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Moroccan @ 1.69
18 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Algerian @ 1.7
19 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Saharawi @ 1.7
20 98.3% Vietnamese + 1.7% Saudi @ 1.71


His G25 distance:

Distance to: Lao_American2

0.02052170 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02179450 Lahu
0.02485625 Gelao
0.02499494 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02888833 Tai_Lue
0.03294721 Dai
0.03408127 Zhuang
0.03467011 Mulam
0.03568181 Dong_Guizhou
0.03892998 Maonan
0.04160366 Dong_Hunan
0.04394089 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.04484820 Hmong
0.04792738 Li
0.05072387 Akha
0.05135219 Karen_Sgaw
0.05172123 Han_Guangdong
0.05356748 Lawa
0.05901337 Miao
0.06598875 Cambodian
0.06869279 Tujia
0.06974157 Han_Chongqing
0.07242425 She
0.07360042 Han_Fujian
0.07470299 Thai
0.07712859 Han_Sichuan
0.08310696 Han_Hubei
0.08655034 Htin_Mal
0.09272685 Han_Zhejiang
0.09563194 Malay


His G25 models:

Target: Lao_American2
Distance: 1.0286% / 0.01028624
69.0 Kinh_Vietnam
18.0 Akha
13.0 Lawa

When adding Tai Lue into the run:

Target: Lao_American
Distance: 0.9965% / 0.00996494
48.4 Kinh_Vietnam
21.2 Akha
19.2 Tai_Lue
9.4 Lawa
1.8 Karen_Sgaw

There are also other Thai and Laotian G25 samples who are also much closer to Kinh/Viet and Dai than to other Thais. For the Thai samples, they are all from Northern Thailand or Northern Isaan. While the Lao ones are definitely from Northern Laos where its much closer to Yunnan and Vietnam.

For example:

Distance to: Thai:CHI034

0.03603398 Tai_Lue
0.03648115 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03833166 Dai
0.04086186 Kinh_Vietnam
0.04418353 Gelao
0.04756641 Cambodian
0.04944565 Maonan
0.05154224 Li
0.05188973 Zhuang
0.05458160 Lahu
0.05713478 Mulam
0.06041138 Lawa
0.06070113 Htin_Mal
0.06365815 Karen_Sgaw
0.06607086 Dong_Guizhou
0.06797966 Malay
0.07065725 Thai
0.07127702 Dong_Hunan
0.07249380 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.07629384 Luzon
0.07789329 Atayal
0.07892870 Mlabri
0.08123973 Hmong
0.08160234 Indonesian_Java
0.08272455 Indonesian_Bali
0.08294693 Vizayan
0.08379585 Han_Guangdong
0.08507695 Lebbo
0.08600078 Ami
0.08744066 Murut


Distance to: Thai:DCH007

0.04232437 Kinh_Vietnam
0.04542723 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.04601409 Lahu
0.05198735 Gelao
0.05407750 Tai_Lue
0.05488001 Dong_Guizhou
0.05550704 Dai
0.05667084 Mulam
0.05710420 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05801079 Akha
0.05801482 Zhuang
0.05919016 Dong_Hunan
0.05935490 Thai
0.06020816 Hmong
0.06059129 Karen_Sgaw
0.06338171 Maonan
0.06408667 Han_Guangdong
0.06473404 Lawa
0.06533438 Miao
0.06823449 Li
0.06852769 Cambodian
0.07427350 Tujia
0.07602274 Han_Chongqing
0.07699813 Han_Fujian
0.07855148 She
0.08027896 Han_Sichuan
0.08098479 Burmese
0.08564762 Han_Hubei
0.09305897 Riang
0.09340587 Malay


Distance to: Laos32:Laos32

0.02271138 Dai
0.02356469 Tai_Lue
0.02852465 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03205832 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03247581 Gelao
0.03445278 Li
0.03477842 Maonan
0.03825324 Zhuang
0.04293043 Mulam
0.05300929 Lahu
0.05454011 Dong_Guizhou
0.06034399 Cambodian
0.06053842 Dong_Hunan
0.06338277 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06734896 Lawa
0.06965392 Htin_Mal
0.07150671 Hmong
0.07223886 Karen_Sgaw
0.07433950 Atayal
0.07456155 Han_Guangdong
0.07640658 Luzon
0.08149475 Malay
0.08214493 Ami
0.08237513 Thai
0.08816401 Akha
0.08845272 Murut
0.08849971 Mlabri
0.08989610 Vizayan
0.09047281 Miao
0.09175008 Hawaiian


Distance to: Laos24:Laos24

0.02472895 Dai
0.02737020 Tai_Lue
0.03163945 Li
0.03383852 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03430017 Maonan
0.03474384 Gelao
0.03593769 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03746257 Zhuang
0.04369345 Mulam
0.05581708 Dong_Guizhou
0.05983533 Lahu
0.06133661 Dong_Hunan
0.06405953 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06798126 Cambodian
0.07071379 Atayal
0.07388534 Hmong
0.07521506 Lawa
0.07523336 Han_Guangdong
0.07550565 Htin_Mal
0.07639271 Luzon
0.07789997 Ami
0.07923694 Karen_Sgaw
0.08747186 Murut
0.08789257 Malay
0.09040827 Thai
0.09181647 Miao
0.09229525 Vizayan
0.09334608 Akha
0.09447043 Mlabri
0.09481793 Lebbo


Another thing that's fascinating to me is how the Vietnamese are so close to these Northern Thai (Tai Yuan, Lue, Khuen, Yong, etc) and Lao samples that it convinces me the Kinh/Viets are actually Tai-Kadais or very close related groups to them who likely experience a linguistic shift to an Austroasiatic tongue. Vietnamese are literally the long lost cousins of the Northern Thais, Laos and other Tai-Kadai peoples! :)

I want to mention that those Northern Thai and Lao gedmatch users scoring mostly Kinh Vietnam in their simulated G25 models doesn't necessarily mean they actually have recent Vietnamese ancestry. Rather, it shows that the Kinh/ethnic Vietnamese are largely predominantly Tai-Kadai and that's why using them can give very good distances for these Thai and Lao individuals and when the Tai Lue component is added in the run, the Kinh Vietnam component drastically decrease.

G25 distance of Viets:

Distance to: Kinh_Vietnam

0.01093686 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.01582397 Gelao
0.01698625 Tai_Lue
0.01995171 Zhuang
0.02038470 Dai
0.02193853 Mulam
0.02427346 Maonan
0.02911786 Dong_Guizhou
0.03055380 Li
0.03527464 Dong_Hunan
0.03685476 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.03696558 Lahu
0.04527940 Hmong
0.04807757 Han_Guangdong
0.06266412 Miao
0.06530059 Akha
0.06568154 Karen_Sgaw
0.06627223 Lawa
0.06964796 Cambodian
0.07074879 She
0.07174049 Han_Chongqing
0.07275042 Han_Fujian
0.07287660 Tujia
0.08039915 Thai
0.08097469 Han_Sichuan
0.08278178 Atayal
0.08438026 Han_Hubei
0.08783757 Luzon
0.08930136 Htin_Mal
0.09337098 Ami


Distance to: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)

0.01093686 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01521441 Tai_Lue
0.01791376 Dai
0.01950009 Gelao
0.02204700 Zhuang
0.02464648 Maonan
0.02583755 Mulam
0.03042100 Li
0.03393293 Dong_Guizhou
0.03890898 Lahu
0.03994884 Dong_Hunan
0.04029366 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05008280 Hmong
0.05213754 Han_Guangdong
0.06512043 Karen_Sgaw
0.06514382 Lawa
0.06749285 Miao
0.06763971 Cambodian
0.06903364 Akha
0.07558323 She
0.07590985 Han_Chongqing
0.07708645 Han_Fujian
0.07788380 Tujia
0.07929379 Thai
0.07961465 Atayal
0.08416007 Luzon
0.08549291 Htin_Mal
0.08580005 Han_Sichuan
0.08902271 Han_Hubei
0.09037320 Ami


G25 model of Viets:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.2674% / 0.01267422
79.2 Dai
12.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.0 Karen_Sgaw

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.2986% / 0.01298634
82.4 Dai
8.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.8 Karen_Sgaw

Compared with the Tai-Kadai speakers: its interesting that the Zhuang and Mulam have more Han-related ancestry than Viets despite the latter being much more Sinicized culturally.

Target: Tai_Lue
Distance: 1.3872% / 0.01387189
93.6 Dai
3.6 Karen_Sgaw
2.8 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Maonan
Distance: 2.0065% / 0.02006524
90.0 Dai
10.0 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.5161% / 0.01516133
82.8 Dai
17.2 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Gelao
Distance: 1.5143% / 0.01514341
81.6 Dai
10.6 Han_Zhejiang
7.8 Karen_Sgaw

Target: Mulam
Distance: 1.4439% / 0.01443882
77.4 Dai
22.6 Han_Zhejiang

Ebizur
03-02-2022, 04:50 AM
Have you checked whether this pattern might be partially or totally explained by different degrees of admixture with genetically distant outgroups, such as Europeans or AASI?

In regard to their Y-DNA, the Siamese or Thai proper of Central Thailand appear to possess a greater degree of Chinese and/or Vietnamese affinity than Tai Khuen, Tai Yuan, Tai Lue, Lao, Lao Isaan, etc.

If the pattern that you have observed is not due to the Thai proper possessing a greater degree of South/West Eurasian admixture (most likely mediated by Indians, especially Indian males), then I suppose it should probably be explained through differences in female-mediated ancestry proportions.

okarinaofsteiner
03-02-2022, 08:02 AM
It seems that ethnic Tais (wrote Tai to distinguish them from the Thai) of Northern Thailand/locals of the Lanna (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lan_Na)region and many ethnic Lao from both Laos (the country) and Northern parts of Isaan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaan) aka NE Thailand such as Loei, Nong Khai, Udon Thani, Nakhon Phanom, etc. are genetically much closer to Vietnamese and indigenous peoples of Southern China such as the Hmong, Mulam, Lahu, etc. than to the Thais of Central (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Thailand), Eastern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Thailand)and Southern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Thailand)regions. I will mention that Southern Isaan is pretty different from Northern Isaan; the former is inhabited primarily by Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers.

I find this very interesting because it's fascinating how Northern Thais (comprises of many different Tai-Kadai ethnic groups such as Tai Yuan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Thai_people), Tai Lue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Lue_people), Tai Khuen (a subgroup of the Shan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_people)), Yong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yong_language), etc) and ethnic Lao (another Tai-Kadai group) of Laos and Northern Isaan can be so genetically close to the Kinh aka ethnic Vietnamese of Vietnam despite speaking totally different languages.

I know this forum doesn't allow taxonomy or phenotypical discussion, but I want to mention that this seems to correlate with genetics. When I visited the Northern Thailand and Northern parts of Isaan, I noticed a lot of the locals have lighter skin, much more East Asian-ish features (despite having no Chinese admixture from what they told me) and look much more like the Viets I have interacted with IRL and seen in Hanoi (I have been to Vietnam only once) and many ethnic Chinese Thai (I'm one myself ethnically) and ethnic minorities of Southern China than to most Thais south of the historical Lanna Kingdom who have darker complexion and look a lot more stereotypically SE Asian which indicate a lot of Mon, Khmer, Indian and Malay ancestries (the latter in Southern Thailand).

...

Another thing that's fascinating to me is how the Vietnamese are so close to these Northern Thai (Tai Yuan, Lue, Khuen, Yong, etc) and Lao samples that it convinces me the Kinh/Viets are actually Tai-Kadais or very close related groups to them who likely experience a linguistic shift to an Austroasiatic tongue. Vietnamese are literally the long lost cousins of the Northern Thais, Laos and other Tai-Kadai peoples! :)

I want to mention that those Northern Thai and Lao gedmatch users scoring mostly Kinh Vietnam in their simulated G25 models doesn't necessarily mean they actually have recent Vietnamese ancestry. Rather, it shows that the Kinh/ethnic Vietnamese are largely predominantly Tai-Kadai and that's why using them can give very good distances for these Thai and Lao individuals and when the Tai Lue component is added in the run, the Kinh Vietnam component drastically decrease.

G25 distance of Viets:

Distance to: Kinh_Vietnam

0.01093686 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.01582397 Gelao
0.01698625 Tai_Lue
0.01995171 Zhuang
0.02038470 Dai
0.02193853 Mulam
0.02427346 Maonan
0.02911786 Dong_Guizhou
0.03055380 Li
0.03527464 Dong_Hunan
0.03685476 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.03696558 Lahu
0.04527940 Hmong
0.04807757 Han_Guangdong
0.06266412 Miao
0.06530059 Akha
0.06568154 Karen_Sgaw
0.06627223 Lawa
0.06964796 Cambodian
0.07074879 She
0.07174049 Han_Chongqing
0.07275042 Han_Fujian
0.07287660 Tujia
0.08039915 Thai
0.08097469 Han_Sichuan
0.08278178 Atayal
0.08438026 Han_Hubei
0.08783757 Luzon
0.08930136 Htin_Mal
0.09337098 Ami


Distance to: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)

0.01093686 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01521441 Tai_Lue
0.01791376 Dai
0.01950009 Gelao
0.02204700 Zhuang
0.02464648 Maonan
0.02583755 Mulam
0.03042100 Li
0.03393293 Dong_Guizhou
0.03890898 Lahu
0.03994884 Dong_Hunan
0.04029366 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05008280 Hmong
0.05213754 Han_Guangdong
0.06512043 Karen_Sgaw
0.06514382 Lawa
0.06749285 Miao
0.06763971 Cambodian
0.06903364 Akha
0.07558323 She
0.07590985 Han_Chongqing
0.07708645 Han_Fujian
0.07788380 Tujia
0.07929379 Thai
0.07961465 Atayal
0.08416007 Luzon
0.08549291 Htin_Mal
0.08580005 Han_Sichuan
0.08902271 Han_Hubei
0.09037320 Ami


G25 model of Viets:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.2674% / 0.01267422
79.2 Dai
12.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.0 Karen_Sgaw

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.2986% / 0.01298634
82.4 Dai
8.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.8 Karen_Sgaw

Compared with the Tai-Kadai speakers: its interesting that the Zhuang and Mulam have more Han-related ancestry than Viets despite the latter being much more Sinicized culturally.

Target: Tai_Lue
Distance: 1.3872% / 0.01387189
93.6 Dai
3.6 Karen_Sgaw
2.8 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Maonan
Distance: 2.0065% / 0.02006524
90.0 Dai
10.0 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.5161% / 0.01516133
82.8 Dai
17.2 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Gelao
Distance: 1.5143% / 0.01514341
81.6 Dai
10.6 Han_Zhejiang
7.8 Karen_Sgaw

Target: Mulam
Distance: 1.4439% / 0.01443882
77.4 Dai
22.6 Han_Zhejiang

Agreed with Ebizur, Siamese are definitely more Han and Kinh mixed than Northern and Northeastern Thai. The difference might be due to the East Eurasian component of their Mon and Khmer ancestry.

I noticed that your non-Siamese samples consistently score lower on MDLP K23b Tungus_Altaic (only 3-5% ish as opposed to 6-10%) and higher on MDLP K23b South Indian + Australoid (almost all at least 3-4%) than the actual Vietnamese samples in my private dataset.

The Karen_Sgaw component that Viets are modeled with seems to be some combination of additional Tibeto-Burman ancestry than Han_Zhejiang doesn't have, plus some deep Mainland SEA (Austroasiatic-like) ancestry that isn't as Hoabinhian or South Asian-mixed as what we see with Thais and Khmers.

It doesn't surprise me that Zhuang and Mulam have the most Han_Zhejiang affinity; Zhuang are also relatively Sinicized, while Mulam is a relatively northern Daic group (I think?)

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 08:45 AM
Agreed with Ebizur, Siamese are definitely more Han and Kinh mixed than Northern and Northeastern Thai. The difference might be due to the East Eurasian component of their Mon and Khmer ancestry.

I noticed that your non-Siamese samples consistently score lower on MDLP K23b Tungus_Altaic (only 3-5% ish as opposed to 6-10%) and higher on MDLP K23b South Indian + Australoid (almost all at least 3-4%) than the actual Vietnamese samples in my private dataset.

The Karen_Sgaw component that Viets are modeled with seems to be some combination of additional Tibeto-Burman ancestry than Han_Zhejiang doesn't have, plus some deep Mainland SEA (Austroasiatic-like) ancestry that isn't as Hoabinhian or South Asian-mixed as what we see with Thais and Khmers.

It doesn't surprise me that Zhuang and Mulam have the most Han_Zhejiang affinity; Zhuang are also relatively Sinicized, while Mulam is a relatively northern Daic group (I think?)

Indeed, Siamese/Central Thai definitely have more Han admixture than Northern/Lanna and Isaan aka Northeastern Thai/Lao. Regarding Vietnamese affinity, the Siamese might still have more than those from Northern Thailand, but they might have it lower than those from Northern Isaan. There is actually quite a lot of Vietnamese migration and settlement in Northern Isaan especially in places like Udon Thani, Sakon Nakhon, Nong Khai, etc. Btw there is actually a difference between Northern Isaan and Southern Isaan, the former is much more Dai/Lao-shifted while the latter is much more Austroasiatic-shifted as the indigenous inhabitants there are Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers.

Btw those

Hmm, regarding the potential difference due to the ENA component of the Mon and Khmer ancestries, I'm not sure regarding that. Will have to investigate further.

Actually three of the Lanna/Northern Thai individuals (two from Phayao and one from Chiang Mai) score around 7-9% while one of the Lao individuals score 9% on the Tungus Altaic component. You could be right about almost all of them scoring at least 3-4% higher S Indian+Australoid than the Kinh in your collection though.

Furthermore, I want to point this out: those Northern Thai and Lao gedmatch users scoring mostly Kinh Vietnam in their simulated G25 models doesn't necessarily mean they actually have recent Vietnamese ancestry. Rather, it insinuates that the Kinh/ethnic Vietnamese seem to be predominantly Tai-Kadai and that's why using them can give very good distances for these Thai and Lao individuals and when the Tai Lue component is added in the run, the Kinh Vietnam component drastically decrease.


Do you want me to show a picture of what these individuals who these samples belong look like btw? I can send them to you in PM if you want. I think they look really Vietnamese or Southern Chinese in their phenotypes. Already got their permission.

Interesting, yes the Karen_Sgaw are a mix between Tibeto-Burman/Naxi-like with Austroasiatic (Mlabri)-related ancestires that seems to mostly lack the South Asian affinity from the G25 runs I have done on them.

The Zhuang have some Sinitic influences as well? Didn't know that before. The Mulam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulao_people)are apparently from Guangxi.

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 01:16 PM
Have you checked whether this pattern might be partially or totally explained by different degrees of admixture with genetically distant outgroups, such as Europeans or AASI?

In regard to their Y-DNA, the Siamese or Thai proper of Central Thailand appear to possess a greater degree of Chinese and/or Vietnamese affinity than Tai Khuen, Tai Yuan, Tai Lue, Lao, Lao Isaan, etc.

If the pattern that you have observed is not due to the Thai proper possessing a greater degree of South/West Eurasian admixture (most likely mediated by Indians, especially Indian males), then I suppose it should probably be explained through differences in female-mediated ancestry proportions.

Here are the two G25 models of each groups. First model:

Target: Thai
Distance: 1.0369% / 0.01036873
36.8 Dai
35.2 Mlabri
14.6 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu
13.4 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Phayao_1
Distance: 1.5155% / 0.01515541
36.8 Dai
34.0 Mlabri
28.6 Han_Zhejiang
0.6 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Northern_Thai1
Distance: 1.3080% / 0.01308017
87.6 Dai
7.4 Mlabri
3.6 Han_Zhejiang
1.4 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Phayao_2
Distance: 2.4272% / 0.02427206
74.8 Dai
16.0 Mlabri
7.2 Han_Zhejiang
2.0 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Chiang_Mai1
Distance: 1.0321% / 0.01032097
35.2 Han_Zhejiang
33.0 Mlabri
24.2 Dai
5.6 Akha
2.0 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Lao_American1
Distance: 2.1078% / 0.02107781
82.8 Dai
12.2 Mlabri
5.0 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Lao_American2
Distance: 1.2194% / 0.01219393
41.6 Dai
23.0 Han_Zhejiang
19.8 Mlabri
14.8 Akha
0.8 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Tai_Lue (forget to mention the Tai Lue samples are from Northern Thailand)
Distance: 1.3484% / 0.01348439
87.2 Dai
7.0 Han_Zhejiang
5.8 Mlabri

Compared to the Vietnamese (there seems to be some diversity among the Viets: one with the Kinh-like profile and another one with the Dong-like profile).

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.1943% / 0.01194269
70.6 Dai
19.8 Han_Zhejiang
9.6 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.2120% / 0.01211958
72.4 Dai
16.8 Han_Zhejiang
10.8 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.4874% / 0.01487446
57.6 Dai
42.4 Han_Zhejiang


Second model: adding Tai Lue, Mon and Khmer into the run and removing Dai

Target: Thai
Distance: 0.7372% / 0.00737154
39.0 K้hmer
31.0 Tai_Lue
15.8 Han_Zhejiang
12.0 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu
1.4 Mlabri
0.8 Mon

Target: Phayao_1
Distance: 1.3696% / 0.01369611
40.2 Tai_Lue
26.0 Han_Zhejiang
18.6 Mlabri
14.2 K้hmer
1.0 Akha

Target: Northern_Thai1
Distance: 1.2128% / 0.01212762
88.0 Tai_Lue
6.2 K้hmer
5.8 Mon

Target: Phayao_2
Distance: 1.8881% / 0.01888056
80.6 Tai_Lue
11.8 K้hmer
7.2 Mon
0.4 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Chiang_Mai1
Distance: 0.9035% / 0.00903547
29.4 Han_Zhejiang
25.4 K้hmer
25.4 Tai_Lue
13.2 Akha
6.2 Mlabri
0.4 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Laotian_1
Distance: 1.6700% / 0.01670012
89.0 Tai_Lue
10.0 K้hmer
0.8 Han_Zhejiang
0.2 Mon

Target: Laotian_2
Distance: 0.9803% / 0.00980292
49.6 Tai_Lue
24.0 Akha
13.8 K้hmer
12.6 Han_Zhejiang

Compared with Viets:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.9301% / 0.00930141
74.2 Tai_Lue
16.2 Han_Zhejiang
7.4 K้hmer
2.2 Mon

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.0081% / 0.01008129
74.2 Tai_Lue
15.0 Han_Zhejiang
10.8 K้hmer

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.5741% / 0.01574144
58.8 Tai_Lue
41.2 Han_Zhejiang

So the Siamese/Thai sample does indeed have substantial Indian ancestry (Tamil Brahmin-like) which could cause some divergences.

I'm surprised though that some of Northern Thai (Phayao_1 and Chiang_Mai1) and Lao (Lao_American2) sample seems much less Dai/Tai-Kadai-like in both models and much more Austroasiatic-shifted. But keep in mind these are simulated G25 samples and not actual G25 results (they haven't done G25 yet), so the runs might not be accurate. But its interesting that in Gedmatch calculators, its shows these individuals being genetically very close to Viets.


Btw, I want to emphasize this: those Northern Thai and Lao gedmatch users scoring mostly Kinh Vietnam in their simulated G25 models doesn't necessarily mean they actually have recent Vietnamese ancestry. Rather, it insinuates that the Kinh/ethnic Vietnamese seem to be predominantly Tai-Kadai and that's why using them can give very good distances for these Thai and Lao individuals and when the Tai Lue component is added in the run, the Kinh Vietnam component drastically decrease.

okarinaofsteiner
03-02-2022, 06:10 PM
The Zhuang have some Sinitic influences as well? Didn't know that before. The Mulam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulao_people)are apparently from Guangxi.

They’re allegedly relatively Sinicized in terms of identity. Genetically their Y-DNA distribution suggests that a decent amount of their paternal lineages are Austroasiatic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhuang_people#Identity


Some ethnologists view the Zhuang ethnicity as a modern constructed ethnic identity. In the eyes of the ethnologists, the Zhuang culture was not sufficiently divergent from what the ethnologists considered "Han culture", to warrant recognition as a separate ethnic identity.[32] One view is that Zhuang identity was created by the government to weaken Cantonese regional unity. In one instance, a Zhuang student said that he had previously regarded himself as Han Chinese before being taught that he was Zhuang.[33] The Zhuang did not perceive themselves as marginalized or in need of promotion. Zhuang peasants displayed resistance to the ideal of a formal Romanized Zhuang script, noting that they had used Han script for centuries. Formal classification of the Zhuang also ignored historical similarities between northern Zhuang and the Bouyei people.[32]



Also looking at my Viet samples, they’re mostly between 0-5% South Indian, with the mean and median being around 2%. They score much lower on Australoid and Melano-Polynesian, so the median percentage of all 3 components combined is around 2%. All of your Thai/Lao samples seem to be at least 4%, which isn’t outside the range of my Viet samples but is more Hoabinhian-like than most Viets who don’t have significant Cham, Khmer, or Bahnaric minority group ancestry.

Max_H
03-02-2022, 06:29 PM
Agreed with Ebizur, Siamese are definitely more Han and Kinh mixed than Northern and Northeastern Thai. The difference might be due to the East Eurasian component of their Mon and Khmer ancestry.

I noticed that your non-Siamese samples consistently score lower on MDLP K23b Tungus_Altaic (only 3-5% ish as opposed to 6-10%) and higher on MDLP K23b South Indian + Australoid (almost all at least 3-4%) than the actual Vietnamese samples in my private dataset.

The Karen_Sgaw component that Viets are modeled with seems to be some combination of additional Tibeto-Burman ancestry than Han_Zhejiang doesn't have, plus some deep Mainland SEA (Austroasiatic-like) ancestry that isn't as Hoabinhian or South Asian-mixed as what we see with Thais and Khmers.

It doesn't surprise me that Zhuang and Mulam have the most Han_Zhejiang affinity; Zhuang are also relatively Sinicized, while Mulam is a relatively northern Daic group (I think?)

It may be shared inland Mekong-like ancestry but also an earlier wave of Yellow River/Sino Tibetan-related admixture, possibly even earlier. In Global25 I notice that Han_Zhejiang (as all Han) take substantial amounts of Longshan (in order to use the labels of Global25)- related ancestry compared to the Vietnamese and Zhuang who seem to have some of an earlier wave, possibly related to the northern ancestry found in groups like Ami and Atayal.

In regards to their southern ancestry, Han (excepting those from Chongqing and Sichuan- I also suspect same applies to those originating from Gansu or Yunnan provinces) are usually more "eastern" Austronesian/Tai Kadai-shifted while Vietnamese have more Mekong_N/inland-related affinities which I think we have discussed before. So possibly what Tsakhur is describing is an outcome of both.

Also agree with Sinitic infuences in Zhuang and Mulam (bidirectional with south Sinitic groups actually)


Edit: Kinh Vietnamese usually do not show Indian influences in Global25 but most southern Vietnamese groups probably have some of that admixture, such as the Cham. The Champa Kingdom was after all heavily "Indianized".

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 06:36 PM
They’re allegedly relatively Sinicized in terms of identity. Genetically their Y-DNA distribution suggests that a decent amount of their paternal lineages are Austroasiatic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhuang_people#Identity





Also looking at my Viet samples, they’re mostly between 0-5% South Indian, with the mean and median being around 2%. They score much lower on Australoid and Melano-Polynesian, so the median percentage of all 3 components combined is around 2%. All of your Thai/Lao samples seem to be at least 4%, which isn’t outside the range of my Viet samples but is more Hoabinhian-like than most Viets who don’t have significant Cham, Khmer, or Bahnaric minority group ancestry.

Interesting. According to the quote, the Zhuang identity is perceived as something recently invented by some ethnic and cultural experts?

I see. What's the highest amount of South Indian have you seen in a Vietnamese gedmatch kit and do you have Viet samples with recent Cham, Khmer or Bahnar ancestry?

Max_H
03-02-2022, 06:41 PM
It seems that ethnic Tais (wrote Tai to distinguish them from the Thai) of Northern Thailand/locals of the Lanna (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lan_Na)region and many ethnic Lao from both Laos (the country) and Northern parts of Isaan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaan) aka NE Thailand such as Loei, Nong Khai, Udon Thani, Nakhon Phanom, etc. are genetically much closer to Vietnamese and indigenous peoples of Southern China such as the Hmong, Mulam, Lahu, etc. than to the Thais of Central (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Thailand), Eastern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Thailand)and Southern (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Thailand)regions. I will mention that Southern Isaan is pretty different from Northern Isaan; the former is inhabited primarily by Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers.

I find this very interesting because it's fascinating how Northern Thais (comprises of many different Tai-Kadai ethnic groups such as Tai Yuan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Thai_people), Tai Lue (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Lue_people), Tai Khuen (a subgroup of the Shan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_people)), Yong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yong_language), etc) and ethnic Lao (another Tai-Kadai group) of Laos and Northern Isaan can be so genetically close to the Kinh aka ethnic Vietnamese of Vietnam despite speaking totally different languages.

I know this forum doesn't allow taxonomy or phenotypical discussion, but I want to mention that this seems to correlate with genetics. When I visited the Northern Thailand and Northern parts of Isaan, I noticed a lot of the locals have lighter skin, much more East Asian-ish features (despite having no Chinese admixture from what they told me) and look much more like the Viets I have interacted with IRL and seen in Hanoi (I have been to Vietnam only once) and many ethnic Chinese Thai (I'm one myself ethnically) and ethnic minorities of Southern China than to most Thais south of the historical Lanna Kingdom who have darker complexion and look a lot more stereotypically SE Asian which indicate a lot of Mon, Khmer, Indian and Malay ancestries (the latter in Southern Thailand).

Here are some Northern Thai/Lanna and Laotian gedmatch samples to illustrate my point. I also have their G25 results which is simulated from their HarappaWorld (they haven't actually done G25 yet).

1. This kit is from Phayao (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phayao_province)in Northern Thailand. Not sure what Tai group she is but likely Tai Yuan.

MDLP K23b.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.28
2 Austronesian 41.54
3 Tungus-Altaic 8.22
4 South_Indian 3.62
5 Australoid 0.78
6 East_Siberian 0.54
7 Subsaharian 0.45
8 Paleo_Siberian 0.33
9 Khoisan 0.18
10 Archaic_Human 0.08

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Yong ( ) 4.08
2 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.1
3 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.35
4 Vietnamese ( ) 4.42
5 Tai_Khuen ( ) 4.84
6 Yao ( ) 5.48
7 Zhuang ( ) 5.67
8 Jiamao ( ) 5.76
9 Hmong ( ) 6.41
10 Cantonese ( ) 6.61
11 Htin ( ) 8.02
12 Vietnamese_north ( ) 8.09
13 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.56
14 Mlabri ( ) 8.83
15 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 8.84
16 Vietnamese_central ( ) 9.2
17 Vietnamese_south ( ) 9.53
18 Plang ( ) 9.6
19 Javanese ( ) 10.09
20 Jagoi ( ) 10.31

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 88.9% Zhuang ( ) + 11.1% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.12
2 80.1% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 19.9% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.3
3 55.4% Jagoi ( ) + 44.6% Han ( ) @ 1.5
4 65.2% Iban ( ) + 34.8% Aonaga ( ) @ 1.54
5 91.8% Vietnamese ( ) + 8.2% Pahari ( ) @ 1.66
6 89% Jiamao ( ) + 11% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.67
7 92.3% Tai_Lue ( ) + 7.7% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.71
8 79.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 20.9% Mon ( ) @ 1.75
9 66.2% Yao ( ) + 33.8% Jagoi ( ) @ 1.8
10 85% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 15% Hezhen ( ) @ 1.81
11 95.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 4.9% Dhaka_mixed_popul ( ) @ 1.84
12 54.6% She ( ) + 45.4% Dayak ( ) @ 1.87
13 85.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 14.7% Daur ( ) @ 1.88
14 95.8% Vietnamese ( ) + 4.2% Chenchu ( ) @ 1.9
15 96% Vietnamese ( ) + 4% Hakkipikki ( ) @ 1.91
16 82.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 17.7% Japanese ( ) @ 1.93
17 50.7% Dayak ( ) + 49.3% Miao ( ) @ 1.93
18 65.9% Yao ( ) + 34.1% Javanese ( ) @ 1.94
19 96.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.9% Malayan ( ) @ 1.94
20 96% Vietnamese ( ) + 4% Kurumba ( ) @ 1.95


PuntDNAL K13: score Kinh/Vietnamese, Dai and Lahu before Cambodian and Thai.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 48.01
2 SE_Asia 41.99
3 South_Asia 5.17
4 Oceania 1.93
5 East_Africa 0.95
6 SW_Europe 0.86
7 South_Africa 0.55
8 NE_Europe 0.5
9 SW_Asia 0.02
10 West_Africa 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dai 4.32
2 Vietnamese 4.96
3 Lahu 11.03
4 Thai 14.97
5 Cambodian 18.69
6 Burmese 19.89
7 Miaozu 20.81
8 Malayan 23.3
9 She 25.72
10 Han_South_China 25.89
11 Filipino 26.18
12 Luzon 26.36
13 Visayan 26.89
14 Dusun 34.3
15 Naxi 34.31
16 Murut 36.33
17 Han_North_China 39.14
18 Korean 42.71
19 Xibo 44.53
20 Japanese 46.9

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 79.6% Dai + 20.4% Thai @ 2.06
2 85.8% Vietnamese + 14.2% Filipino @ 2.44
3 95.2% Dai + 4.8% Mawasi @ 2.47
4 95.3% Dai + 4.7% Romani @ 2.48
5 84% Dai + 16% Cambodian @ 2.51
6 86.2% Vietnamese + 13.8% Visayan @ 2.51
7 95.5% Dai + 4.5% Gond @ 2.53
8 86% Vietnamese + 14% Luzon @ 2.54
9 96% Dai + 4% Paniya @ 2.57
10 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Pulliyar @ 2.57
11 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Tamil_Nadu_Caste @ 2.58
12 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Chenchus @ 2.58
13 95.9% Dai + 4.1% North_Kannadi @ 2.58
14 95.5% Dai + 4.5% Bengali @ 2.59
15 96% Dai + 4% Sakilli @ 2.6
16 95.9% Dai + 4.1% UP_Muslim @ 2.6
17 95.8% Dai + 4.2% Tamil_Nadu_Brahmin @ 2.61
18 95.9% Dai + 4.1% Piramalai_Kallars @ 2.63
19 96% Dai + 4% Hakkipikki @ 2.64
20 95.7% Dai + 4.3% Kashmir_Pandit @ 2.66


Her G25 population distance: the Vietnamese (Kinh and Dong profiles) comes from this thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?25781-The-Moriopoulos-Collection-(-3000-G25-Averages)-a-Valentine-s-Day-Gift). Michalis, thank you so much for sharing your wonderful collection. It's fascinating how she is closer to the Vietnamese, Dai, Southern Chinese ethnic minorities such as Gelao, Mulam, Dong, Lahu, Lawa than to other Thais and Cambodians.

Distance to: Phayao_1

0.02358892 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02435845 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02677338 Gelao
0.02763806 Tai_Lue
0.02977526 Lahu
0.03084605 Dai
0.03773484 Zhuang
0.03962704 Maonan
0.04112553 Mulam
0.04643903 Dong_Guizhou
0.04784120 Li
0.04982191 Lawa
0.05020075 Karen_Sgaw
0.05225082 Dong_Hunan
0.05380770 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05488653 Cambodian
0.05825672 Hmong
0.06251951 Akha
0.06309951 Han_Guangdong
0.07122919 Thai
0.07313662 Miao
0.07402471 Htin_Mal
0.08283232 Tujia
0.08290185 Han_Chongqing
0.08381104 Malay
0.08592360 She
0.08696019 Han_Fujian
0.08857581 Atayal
0.09070317 Han_Sichuan
0.09174318 Mlabri


Here is how she can be modelled using G25: Lawa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawa_people#:~:text=Lawa%20(Thai%3A%20%E0%B8%A5%E0 %B8%B1%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B0%20or,estimated%20to%20be% 20some%2017%2C000.)is an indigenous Austroasiatic speaking group from Northern Thailand, who is be one of the oldest settlers in the region before the arrival of Tai speaking migrants from Southern China.

Target: Phayao_1
Distance: 1.4499% / 0.01449925
72.0 Kinh_Vietnam
28.0 Lawa

Another model of her:

Target: Phayao_1
Distance: 1.4385% / 0.01438458
60.6 Kinh_Vietnam
26.4 Lawa
11.4 Tai_Lue
1.6 Karen_Sgaw


2. Another gedmatch kit from Northern Thailand. He is also much closer to the Kinh/Viet and Dai than to Thai and Cambodian. Don't know what province in the former Lanna area he is from and what Tai ethnic group he is.


MDLP K23b:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.2
2 Austronesian 43.44
3 Tungus-Altaic 4.21
4 South_Indian 3.83
5 Australoid 1.61
6 East_Siberian 0.57
7 East_African 0.14

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Yong ( ) 3.51
2 Vietnamese ( ) 4.07
3 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.35
4 Tai_Khuen ( ) 4.58
5 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.76
6 Vietnamese_north ( ) 5.15
7 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 5.31
8 Vietnamese_central ( ) 5.36
9 Zhuang ( ) 5.43
10 Vietnamese_south ( ) 5.43
11 Jiamao ( ) 6.23
12 Htin ( ) 7.01
13 Chinese_Dai ( ) 8.03
14 Dai ( ) 8.24
15 Hmong ( ) 8.32
16 Yao ( ) 8.5
17 Jagoi ( ) 9.01
18 Mlabri ( ) 9.03
19 Javanese ( ) 9.33
20 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 9.43

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 71% Vietnamese ( ) + 29% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.41
2 89.1% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 10.9% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.66
3 64.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 35.3% Htin ( ) @ 1.66
4 91.9% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.1% Daur ( ) @ 1.72
5 72% Vietnamese ( ) + 28% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.73
6 91.8% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.2% Hezhen ( ) @ 1.75
7 91.7% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.3% Mongol_Khalkha ( ) @ 1.76
8 90.5% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 9.5% Mongola_China ( ) @ 1.83
9 93.4% Vietnamese_north ( ) + 6.6% Onge ( ) @ 1.86
10 90.5% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 9.5% Xibo ( ) @ 1.88
11 92.6% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 7.4% Mongolian ( ) @ 1.89
12 91.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 8.7% Mongolian_QH ( ) @ 1.89
13 92.5% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 7.5% Kalmyk ( ) @ 1.9
14 89.2% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 10.8% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 1.91
15 69% Chinese_Dai ( ) + 31% Mon ( ) @ 1.94
16 94% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 6% Ulchi ( ) @ 1.97
17 68.5% Dai ( ) + 31.5% Mon ( ) @ 1.97
18 90.4% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 9.6% Japanese ( ) @ 2.02
19 93.1% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 6.9% Buryat ( ) @ 2.05
20 76.3% Vietnamese ( ) + 23.7% Thai ( ) @ 2.05


PuntDNAL Global K13: he is genetically closer to Dai, Vietnamese than to Thai and Cambodian.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 46.61
2 SE_Asia 43.24
3 South_Asia 6.71
4 Oceania 1.78
5 SW_Europe 0.57
6 Americas 0.54
7 SW_Asia 0.38
8 West_Asia 0.12
9 West_Africa 0.05

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dai 5.58
2 Vietnamese 6
3 Lahu 12.64
4 Thai 14.01
5 Cambodian 16.68
6 Burmese 20.65
7 Malayan 21.3
8 Miaozu 22.72
9 Filipino 24.5
10 Luzon 24.7
11 Visayan 25.16
12 She 27.64
13 Han_South_China 27.8
14 Dusun 32.54
15 Murut 34.54
16 Naxi 35.95
17 Han_North_China 40.93
18 Korean 44.49
19 Xibo 45.93
20 Japanese 48.67

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 81% Vietnamese + 19% Visayan @ 1.03
2 80.6% Vietnamese + 19.4% Filipino @ 1.04
3 75.4% Dai + 24.6% Cambodian @ 1.36
4 84.8% Vietnamese + 15.2% Dusun @ 1.36
5 80.8% Vietnamese + 19.2% Luzon @ 1.36
6 85.6% Vietnamese + 14.4% Murut @ 1.48
7 78.6% Vietnamese + 21.4% Malayan @ 1.57
8 91% Vietnamese + 9% Igorot @ 1.74
9 56.5% Malayan + 43.5% She @ 2.36
10 73.8% Dai + 26.2% Thai @ 2.71
11 93.5% Dai + 6.5% Mawasi @ 2.81
12 51.6% Malayan + 48.4% Miaozu @ 2.91
13 81.7% Dai + 18.3% Malayan @ 2.95
14 72.6% Lahu + 27.4% Dusun @ 3.12
15 94.6% Dai + 5.4% Paniya @ 3.15
16 66.7% Lahu + 33.3% Luzon @ 3.16
17 94.1% Dai + 5.9% Gond @ 3.17
18 94.5% Dai + 5.5% Pulliyar @ 3.17
19 94.6% Dai + 5.4% North_Kannadi @ 3.23
20 94.7% Dai + 5.3% Sakilli @ 3.26


His G25 distance: closest pops to him are Tai Lue, Dai, Kinh/Vietnamese, Gelao, etc. Meanwhile Thai is pretty far from him at a distance of 7.45 at least.

Distance to: Northern_Thai_2

0.01596160 Tai_Lue
0.01653396 Dai
0.01772728 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01789468 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02396359 Gelao
0.02972282 Maonan
0.03049204 Zhuang
0.03150581 Li
0.03414304 Mulam
0.04413963 Dong_Guizhou
0.04463818 Lahu
0.05060700 Dong_Hunan
0.05251360 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05918683 Cambodian
0.06098187 Hmong
0.06434555 Lawa
0.06435730 Han_Guangdong
0.06700945 Karen_Sgaw
0.07498072 Thai
0.07641566 Htin_Mal
0.07718728 Akha
0.07823715 Atayal
0.07866405 Miao
0.08080190 Luzon
0.08379137 Malay
0.08653921 She
0.08772406 Ami
0.08796307 Han_Chongqing
0.08896636 Han_Fujian
0.08931594 Tujia


Here is how he can be modelled:

Target: Northern_Thai
Distance: 1.3247% / 0.01324715
54.0 Dai
40.4 Kinh_Vietnam
5.6 Lawa

3. She is also from Phayao in Northern Thailand. She is also genetically closer to Dai and Viets than to Thais.

MDLP K23b.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.56
2 Austronesian 39.94
3 Tungus-Altaic 9.31
4 South_Indian 4.85
5 Australoid 0.38
6 East_African 0.35
7 Khoisan 0.32
8 South_Central_Asian 0.13
9 European_Hunters_Gatherers 0.12
10 Archaic_African 0.03

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.59
2 Yao ( ) 5.3
3 Yong ( ) 6.1
4 Vietnamese ( ) 6.24
5 Tai_Lue ( ) 6.27
6 Tai_Khuen ( ) 6.28
7 Hmong ( ) 6.34
8 Cantonese ( ) 6.38
9 Zhuang ( ) 7.82
10 Jiamao ( ) 7.84
11 Htin ( ) 7.87
12 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.07
13 Plang ( ) 8.69
14 Mlabri ( ) 9.51
15 Vietnamese_north ( ) 9.88
16 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 10.25
17 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 10.28
18 Cambodian ( ) 10.32
19 Lawa ( ) 10.72
20 Vietnamese_central ( ) 10.83

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62.2% Cantonese ( ) + 37.8% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.54
2 77.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.7% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.54
3 84.7% Zhuang ( ) + 15.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.76
4 88.1% Vietnamese ( ) + 11.9% Pahari ( ) @ 1.86
5 62.3% Cantonese ( ) + 37.7% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.86
6 63.7% She ( ) + 36.3% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 1.97
7 84.8% Jiamao ( ) + 15.2% Kusunda ( ) @ 2.01
8 67.5% Yao ( ) + 32.5% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.09
9 55.7% Cantonese ( ) + 44.3% Htin ( ) @ 2.1
10 62.6% She ( ) + 37.4% Batak_Toba ( ) @ 2.11
11 63.3% Iban ( ) + 36.7% Aonaga ( ) @ 2.13
12 51.8% Javanese ( ) + 48.2% Han ( ) @ 2.22
13 51.7% Han ( ) + 48.3% Sunda ( ) @ 2.23
14 77.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.7% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 2.25
15 62.5% Iban ( ) + 37.5% Nysha ( ) @ 2.3
16 65.2% Cantonese ( ) + 34.8% Thai ( ) @ 2.3
17 87.9% Tai_Lue ( ) + 12.1% Kusunda ( ) @ 2.35
18 79.9% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 20.1% Japanese ( ) @ 2.36
19 70.4% Vietnamese ( ) + 29.6% Mon ( ) @ 2.39
20 72.1% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 27.9% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 2.43


Her PuntDNAL Global K13: closest pops are Viet and Dai

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 49.08
2 SE_Asia 39
3 South_Asia 6.9
4 Oceania 1.29
5 SW_Asia 0.96
6 West_Asia 0.95
7 NE_Europe 0.83
8 West_Africa 0.49
9 South_Africa 0.41
10 SW_Europe 0.07
11 East_Africa 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Vietnamese 2.95
2 Dai 6.06
3 Lahu 8.58
4 Thai 13.55
5 Burmese 16.62
6 Miaozu 18.57
7 Cambodian 19.6
8 She 23.52
9 Han_South_China 23.67
10 Malayan 25.53
11 Filipino 29.08
12 Luzon 29.43
13 Visayan 29.6
14 Naxi 31.66
15 Han_North_China 36.63
16 Dusun 37.23
17 Murut 39.21
18 Korean 40.18
19 Xibo 42.3
20 Japanese 44.33

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Yemeni @ 1.7
2 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Palestinian @ 1.73
3 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Saudi @ 1.74
4 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Jordanian @ 1.74
5 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Egyptian @ 1.75
6 97% Vietnamese + 3% Chechen @ 1.75
7 97.2% Vietnamese + 2.8% Bedouin @ 1.76
8 97% Vietnamese + 3% Syrian @ 1.76
9 97% Vietnamese + 3% Adygei @ 1.77
10 97% Vietnamese + 3% Lebanese_Muslim @ 1.77
11 97% Vietnamese + 3% Iranian @ 1.78
12 97% Vietnamese + 3% Kurdish @ 1.78
13 96.7% Vietnamese + 3.3% Turkish_Aydin @ 1.79
14 97% Vietnamese + 3% Ossetian @ 1.79
15 97% Vietnamese + 3% Lebanese_Druze @ 1.79
16 96.8% Vietnamese + 3.2% Kumyk @ 1.79
17 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Turkish @ 1.8
18 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Lebanese_Christian @ 1.8
19 97% Vietnamese + 3% Dagestan_Azeri @ 1.8
20 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Assyrian @ 1.81


Her G25 distance: she is closest to Tai Lue, Vietnamese, Dai, Gelao, Zhuang meanwhile she is a bit distant from Thais and Cambodians.

Distance to: Phayao_2

0.02519161 Tai_Lue
0.02577257 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02604039 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03022425 Dai
0.03340472 Gelao
0.03880449 Maonan
0.03989359 Zhuang
0.04091673 Li
0.04323310 Mulam
0.04958400 Lahu
0.05168959 Dong_Guizhou
0.05418407 Cambodian
0.05883274 Dong_Hunan
0.05964350 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06521520 Lawa
0.06726914 Karen_Sgaw
0.06819853 Hmong
0.06985801 Thai
0.07082119 Han_Guangdong
0.07361609 Atayal
0.07375102 Htin_Mal
0.07412381 Luzon
0.07440396 Malay
0.08053926 Akha
0.08195604 Vizayan
0.08406290 Ami
0.08439009 Miao
0.08617945 Hawaiian
0.09176148 Mlabri
0.09208488 Murut


Her G25 model:

Target: Phayao_2
Distance: 2.4767% / 0.02476716
72.8 Kinh_Vietnam
18.4 Dai
8.8 Lawa

Another model of her:

Target: Phayao_2
Distance: 2.3308% / 0.02330775
54.0 Tai_Lue
37.2 Kinh_Vietnam
8.8 Lawa

4. This gedmatch user is from Chiang Mai. He is very likely Tai Yuan. He is also closer to Vietnamese, Dai, and some Southern Chinese ethnic minorities than to Thais and Cambodians.

MDLP K23b

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 44.81
2 Austronesian 40.51
3 Tungus-Altaic 7.65
4 South_Indian 3.98
5 Caucasian 0.77
6 Arctic 0.76
7 Melano_Polynesian 0.62
8 Archaic_African 0.57
9 Amerindian 0.32

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Yuan ( ) 3.56
2 Yong ( ) 4.56
3 Tai_Khuen ( ) 4.8
4 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.95
5 Vietnamese ( ) 5.08
6 Yao ( ) 5.5
7 Hmong ( ) 6.18
8 Zhuang ( ) 6.7
9 Jiamao ( ) 6.83
10 Cantonese ( ) 6.87
11 Htin ( ) 7.58
12 Hmong_Miao ( ) 8.32
13 Vietnamese_north ( ) 8.36
14 Plang ( ) 8.56
15 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 8.78
16 Mlabri ( ) 9.14
17 Vietnamese_central ( ) 9.25
18 Vietnamese_south ( ) 9.51
19 Cambodian ( ) 10.15
20 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 10.15

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 75.5% Vietnamese ( ) + 24.5% Mon ( ) @ 1.76
2 90.5% Vietnamese ( ) + 9.5% Pahari ( ) @ 1.8
3 87.1% Zhuang ( ) + 12.9% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.87
4 90.5% Tai_Lue ( ) + 9.5% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.88
5 80.4% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 19.6% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.9
6 50% Sunda ( ) + 50% She ( ) @ 2.02
7 82.7% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 17.3% Xibo ( ) @ 2.11
8 61.3% Jagoi ( ) + 38.7% Tujia ( ) @ 2.14
9 66.2% Yao ( ) + 33.8% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.14
10 92.2% Vietnamese ( ) + 7.8% Nepalese ( ) @ 2.17
11 94.4% Vietnamese ( ) + 5.6% Dhaka_mixed_popul ( ) @ 2.2
12 60.4% Cantonese ( ) + 39.6% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.23
13 59.3% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 40.7% Sunda ( ) @ 2.25
14 77.6% Hmong ( ) + 22.4% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 2.25
15 53.8% Jagoi ( ) + 46.2% Han ( ) @ 2.25
16 80.3% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 19.7% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 2.3
17 74.2% Tai_Lue ( ) + 25.8% Karen ( ) @ 2.3
18 52.5% Jagoi ( ) + 47.5% She ( ) @ 2.31
19 67% Hmong ( ) + 33% Sunda ( ) @ 2.31
20 91.7% Yong ( ) + 8.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 2.32


PuntDNAL Global K13: He is also closer to Viet, Dai than to Thai and Cambodian.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 50.88
2 SE_Asia 36.29
3 South_Asia 5.78
4 Oceania 2.27
5 NE_Europe 1.93
6 Siberia 1.63
7 East_Africa 0.54
8 West_Asia 0.51
9 Americas 0.16

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Vietnamese 4.57
2 Lahu 5.56
3 Dai 7.81
4 Burmese 14.32
5 Thai 14.79
6 Miaozu 15.42
7 Han_South_China 20.44
8 She 20.51
9 Cambodian 22.35
10 Naxi 28.21
11 Malayan 28.52
12 Filipino 32.11
13 Visayan 32.27
14 Luzon 32.46
15 Han_North_China 33.16
16 Korean 36.69
17 Xibo 38.94
18 Dusun 40.33
19 Japanese 40.84
20 Murut 42.34

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 65.1% Miaozu + 34.9% Malayan @ 2.47
2 65.7% Dai + 34.3% Burmese @ 2.63
3 59.4% Miaozu + 40.6% Cambodian @ 2.65
4 58.3% She + 41.7% Malayan @ 2.77
5 93.9% Vietnamese + 6.1% Altaian @ 2.77
6 93.6% Vietnamese + 6.4% Mongolian @ 2.8
7 85.6% Lahu + 14.4% Malayan @ 2.82
8 82.4% Lahu + 17.6% Cambodian @ 2.93
9 52.2% She + 47.8% Cambodian @ 2.94
10 94.6% Vietnamese + 5.4% Tuvinian @ 2.95
11 93.8% Vietnamese + 6.2% Afghan_Hazara @ 3.04
12 92.8% Vietnamese + 7.2% Daur @ 3.07
13 95.6% Vietnamese + 4.4% Chuvash @ 3.09
14 87.4% Lahu + 12.6% Visayan @ 3.09
15 58.4% Han_South_China + 41.6% Malayan @ 3.12
16 96% Vietnamese + 4% Selkup @ 3.14
17 92.1% Vietnamese + 7.9% Xibo @ 3.16
18 93.8% Vietnamese + 6.2% Oroqen @ 3.16
19 95.5% Vietnamese + 4.5% Tatar @ 3.16
20 95.7% Vietnamese + 4.3% Aluet @ 3.18


His G25 distance: closest pops are Lahu, Kinh/Vietnamese, Gelao, Tai Lue meanwhile Thai is a bit far at a distance of 0.06 up.

Distance to: Chiang_Mai1

0.02218904 Lahu
0.02668662 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02895075 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03332661 Gelao
0.03534477 Tai_Lue
0.03825065 Dai
0.04227019 Zhuang
0.04343378 Mulam
0.04394282 Karen_Sgaw
0.04432054 Dong_Guizhou
0.04700567 Lawa
0.04718022 Maonan
0.04963608 Akha
0.04973490 Dong_Hunan
0.05048616 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05201860 Hmong
0.05471177 Li
0.05860401 Han_Guangdong
0.05885779 Cambodian
0.06378338 Miao
0.06653412 Thai
0.07270398 Tujia
0.07439522 Han_Chongqing
0.07851288 Han_Fujian
0.07866721 She
0.08093724 Han_Sichuan
0.08276432 Htin_Mal
0.08733057 Han_Hubei
0.08910211 Malay
0.09075757 Burmese


His G25 model:

Target: Chiang_Mai1
Distance: 1.1458% / 0.01145754
60.6 Kinh_Vietnam
29.2 Karen_Sgaw
10.2 Akha

Here are also some Laotian gedmatch kits who seem to be closer to Viet, Dai, Southern Chinese ethnic minorities than to Thai and Cambodian.

1. Don't know which part of Laos he is originally from but likely from Vientiane based on the frequency of his lastname there.

MDLP K23b:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 46.23
2 Austronesian 41.82
3 Tungus-Altaic 4.74
4 Australoid 2.39
5 South_Indian 2.14
6 Caucasian 1.31
7 Paleo_Siberian 0.57
8 Subsaharian 0.4
9 East_African 0.25
10 Melano_Polynesian 0.16

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Khuen ( ) 3.63
2 Yong ( ) 3.97
3 Vietnamese ( ) 4.19
4 Tai_Yuan ( ) 4.38
5 Tai_Lue ( ) 4.64
6 Vietnamese_north ( ) 5.64
7 Zhuang ( ) 5.82
8 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 6.07
9 Vietnamese_central ( ) 6.48
10 Jiamao ( ) 6.6
11 Hmong ( ) 7.02
12 Yao ( ) 7.32
13 Vietnamese_south ( ) 7.39
14 Htin ( ) 8.45
15 Chinese_Dai ( ) 9
16 Cantonese ( ) 9.04
17 Dai ( ) 9.31
18 Plang ( ) 9.49
19 Hmong_Miao ( ) 9.56
20 Mlabri ( ) 10.05

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 50.8% Filipino ( ) + 49.2% Lahu ( ) @ 2.7
2 91.8% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.2% Kazakh ( ) @ 2.85
3 91.9% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.1% Karakalpak ( ) @ 2.88
4 91.7% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.3% Kyrgyz_Bishkek ( ) @ 2.94
5 92% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8% Kyrgyz ( ) @ 2.94
6 96.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.3% Roma_BH ( ) @ 2.95
7 96.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.3% Roma ( ) @ 2.95
8 96.7% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.3% Roma_Macedonian ( ) @ 2.96
9 96.6% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.4% Roma_Bulgarian ( ) @ 2.96
10 96.6% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.4% Roma_Slovenian ( ) @ 3.01
11 91.3% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.7% Kazahs ( ) @ 3.01
12 89.2% Vietnamese_central ( ) + 10.8% Xibo ( ) @ 3.05
13 91.7% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.3% Hazara ( ) @ 3.08
14 90.1% Vietnamese_central ( ) + 9.9% Mongolian_QH ( ) @ 3.09
15 91.1% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.9% Uygur ( ) @ 3.1
16 92.8% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 7.2% Crimean_Tatar_Step ( ) @ 3.13
17 91.1% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 8.9% Uygur-Han ( ) @ 3.14
18 92.2% Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) + 7.8% Uzbek ( ) @ 3.15
19 78.8% Tai_Khuen ( ) + 21.2% Vietnamese_south ( ) @ 3.16
20 96.9% Vietnamese ( ) + 3.1% Romanian ( ) @ 3.16


PuntDNAL Global K13: he is much closer to Dai and Vietnamese than to Thai.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 46.66
2 SE_Asia 42.47
3 South_Asia 4.79
4 Oceania 2.18
5 SW_Asia 1.17
6 SW_Europe 1.15
7 Americas 0.98
8 East_Africa 0.61

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Dai 5.38
2 Vietnamese 6.31
3 Lahu 12.2
4 Thai 14.66
5 Cambodian 17.86
6 Burmese 20.64
7 Miaozu 22
8 Malayan 22.06
9 Filipino 24.95
10 Luzon 25.22
11 Visayan 25.63
12 She 26.97
13 Han_South_China 27.08
14 Dusun 33.14
15 Murut 35.18
16 Naxi 35.34
17 Han_North_China 40.2
18 Korean 43.77
19 Xibo 45.24
20 Japanese 47.96

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 55.1% Malayan + 44.9% She @ 2.78
2 81.6% Vietnamese + 18.4% Filipino @ 2.91
3 82% Vietnamese + 18% Visayan @ 2.92
4 79.9% Dai + 20.1% Cambodian @ 3.04
5 50.1% Miaozu + 49.9% Malayan @ 3.04
6 82% Vietnamese + 18% Luzon @ 3.13
7 76.8% Dai + 23.2% Thai @ 3.2
8 86% Vietnamese + 14% Dusun @ 3.31
9 67.8% Lahu + 32.2% Filipino @ 3.34
10 68% Lahu + 32% Luzon @ 3.34
11 86.8% Vietnamese + 13.2% Murut @ 3.41
12 94.7% Dai + 5.3% Algerian @ 3.42
13 91.7% Vietnamese + 8.3% Igorot @ 3.43
14 94.7% Dai + 5.3% Tunisian @ 3.45
15 94.9% Dai + 5.1% Saharawi @ 3.45
16 53.2% Miaozu + 46.8% Filipino @ 3.47
17 94.8% Dai + 5.2% Moroccan @ 3.47
18 94.9% Dai + 5.1% Mozabite @ 3.48
19 94.6% Dai + 5.4% Romani @ 3.48
20 80.6% Vietnamese + 19.4% Malayan @ 3.5


His G25: closest to Tai_Lue, Vietnamese, Dai, Gelao, Maonan. Rather distant from Thai and Cambodian.

Distance to: Lao_American1

0.01952382 Tai_Lue
0.02087925 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02301288 Dai
0.02421157 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03007260 Gelao
0.03185030 Maonan
0.03300434 Li
0.03365490 Zhuang
0.03786589 Mulam
0.04815105 Dong_Guizhou
0.05103895 Lahu
0.05499344 Dong_Hunan
0.05565294 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06117232 Cambodian
0.06572461 Hmong
0.06735511 Atayal
0.06757554 Han_Guangdong
0.06919722 Lawa
0.06971141 Luzon
0.07107144 Karen_Sgaw
0.07659963 Htin_Mal
0.07738307 Thai
0.07794290 Ami
0.07924659 Malay
0.08126023 Vizayan
0.08264088 Akha
0.08272644 Miao
0.08306301 Hawaiian
0.08748592 Murut
0.09104489 She


Two G25 models of him

Target: Lao_American1
Distance: 2.1247% / 0.02124706
56.6 Dai
42.2 Kinh_Vietnam
1.2 Lawa

Target: Lao_American1
Distance: 1.9267% / 0.01926736
75.2 Tai_Lue
12.0 Dai
11.4 Kinh_Vietnam
1.4 Lawa

2. A Lao-American gedmatch kit. Not sure which part of Laos he is originally from but definitely somewhere in the north or Vientiane.

MDLP K23b: closest pops are Tai Yuan, Hmong, Yao, Tai Khuen, Vietnamese.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 South_East_Asian 45.7
2 Austronesian 39.33
3 Tungus-Altaic 9.11
4 South_Indian 4.92
5 Australoid 0.66
6 Melano_Polynesian 0.23
7 Subsaharian 0.05

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tai_Yuan ( ) 3.91
2 Yao ( ) 4.96
3 Hmong ( ) 5.66
4 Tai_Khuen ( ) 6
5 Vietnamese ( ) 6.29
6 Cantonese ( ) 6.36
7 Yong ( ) 6.42
8 Tai_Lue ( ) 6.74
9 Hmong_Miao ( ) 7.37
10 Plang ( ) 7.66
11 Htin ( ) 7.79
12 Zhuang ( ) 8.32
13 Jiamao ( ) 8.5
14 Vietnamese_north ( ) 9.76
15 Kinh_Vietnam_KHV ( ) 9.89
16 Lawa ( ) 9.89
17 Wa ( ) 10.14
18 Mlabri ( ) 10.15
19 Khmer_Cambodian ( ) 10.16
20 Cambodian ( ) 10.5

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62% Cantonese ( ) + 38% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.57
2 87.3% Vietnamese ( ) + 12.7% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.66
3 87.9% Vietnamese ( ) + 12.1% Pahari ( ) @ 1.77
4 69.1% Yao ( ) + 30.9% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.79
5 83.7% Zhuang ( ) + 16.3% Kusunda ( ) @ 1.8
6 66.5% She ( ) + 33.5% Batak_Karo ( ) @ 1.83
7 68.5% Yao ( ) + 31.5% Khmer_Cambodian ( ) @ 1.9
8 63% Cantonese ( ) + 37% Cambodian ( ) @ 1.91
9 55.5% Cantonese ( ) + 44.5% Htin ( ) @ 1.93
10 77.8% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.2% Ryukyuan ( ) @ 1.98
11 62% Iban ( ) + 38% Aonaga ( ) @ 2.15
12 62.6% Yao ( ) + 37.4% Htin ( ) @ 2.17
13 55.6% She ( ) + 44.4% Sunda ( ) @ 2.2
14 51.1% Han ( ) + 48.9% Javanese ( ) @ 2.22
15 77.6% Vietnamese_south ( ) + 22.4% Japanese_ML ( ) @ 2.24
16 71.8% Yao ( ) + 28.2% Thai ( ) @ 2.25
17 59.4% Hmong_Miao ( ) + 40.6% Cambodian ( ) @ 2.28
18 55.6% Jagoi ( ) + 44.4% Tujia ( ) @ 2.29
19 52.2% She ( ) + 47.8% Javanese ( ) @ 2.3
20 65.8% She ( ) + 34.2% Batak_Toba ( ) @ 2.31


PuntDNAL Global K13: closer to Vietnamese, Lahu, Dai than to Thai and Cambodian.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Asia 51.13
2 SE_Asia 37.89
3 South_Asia 7.17
4 Oceania 1.3
5 Siberia 0.98
6 SW_Asia 0.85
7 West_Africa 0.51
8 NE_Europe 0.17

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Vietnamese 2.21
2 Lahu 6.27
3 Dai 6.5
4 Thai 14.79
5 Burmese 15.27
6 Miaozu 16.37
7 She 21.31
8 Han_South_China 21.44
9 Cambodian 21.51
10 Malayan 27.62
11 Naxi 29.49
12 Filipino 31.23
13 Luzon 31.46
14 Visayan 31.62
15 Han_North_China 34.43
16 Korean 37.98
17 Dusun 39.29
18 Xibo 40.47
19 Murut 41.26
20 Japanese 42.13

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 96.9% Vietnamese + 3.1% Mongolian @ 1.31
2 96.3% Vietnamese + 3.7% Daur @ 1.37
3 97.3% Vietnamese + 2.7% Tuvinian @ 1.37
4 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Altaian @ 1.38
5 96.8% Vietnamese + 3.2% Oroqen @ 1.4
6 96% Vietnamese + 4% Xibo @ 1.44
7 90.4% Vietnamese + 9.6% Burmese @ 1.51
8 97.1% Vietnamese + 2.9% Afghan_Hazara @ 1.53
9 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Yakut @ 1.55
10 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Dolgan @ 1.55
11 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Selkup @ 1.61
12 80.2% Vietnamese + 19.8% Lahu @ 1.62
13 98.6% Vietnamese + 1.4% Nganasan @ 1.64
14 95.2% Vietnamese + 4.8% Naxi @ 1.65
15 98.4% Vietnamese + 1.6% Koryak @ 1.68
16 98.3% Vietnamese + 1.7% Bedouin @ 1.69
17 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Moroccan @ 1.69
18 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Algerian @ 1.7
19 98.2% Vietnamese + 1.8% Saharawi @ 1.7
20 98.3% Vietnamese + 1.7% Saudi @ 1.71


His G25 distance:

Distance to: Lao_American2

0.02052170 Kinh_Vietnam
0.02179450 Lahu
0.02485625 Gelao
0.02499494 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.02888833 Tai_Lue
0.03294721 Dai
0.03408127 Zhuang
0.03467011 Mulam
0.03568181 Dong_Guizhou
0.03892998 Maonan
0.04160366 Dong_Hunan
0.04394089 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.04484820 Hmong
0.04792738 Li
0.05072387 Akha
0.05135219 Karen_Sgaw
0.05172123 Han_Guangdong
0.05356748 Lawa
0.05901337 Miao
0.06598875 Cambodian
0.06869279 Tujia
0.06974157 Han_Chongqing
0.07242425 She
0.07360042 Han_Fujian
0.07470299 Thai
0.07712859 Han_Sichuan
0.08310696 Han_Hubei
0.08655034 Htin_Mal
0.09272685 Han_Zhejiang
0.09563194 Malay


His G25 models:

Target: Lao_American2
Distance: 1.0286% / 0.01028624
69.0 Kinh_Vietnam
18.0 Akha
13.0 Lawa

When adding Tai Lue into the run:

Target: Lao_American
Distance: 0.9965% / 0.00996494
48.4 Kinh_Vietnam
21.2 Akha
19.2 Tai_Lue
9.4 Lawa
1.8 Karen_Sgaw

There are also other Thai and Laotian G25 samples who are also much closer to Kinh/Viet and Dai than to other Thais. For the Thai samples, they are all from Northern Thailand or Northern Isaan. While the Lao ones are definitely from Northern Laos where its much closer to Yunnan and Vietnam.

For example:

Distance to: Thai:CHI034

0.03603398 Tai_Lue
0.03648115 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03833166 Dai
0.04086186 Kinh_Vietnam
0.04418353 Gelao
0.04756641 Cambodian
0.04944565 Maonan
0.05154224 Li
0.05188973 Zhuang
0.05458160 Lahu
0.05713478 Mulam
0.06041138 Lawa
0.06070113 Htin_Mal
0.06365815 Karen_Sgaw
0.06607086 Dong_Guizhou
0.06797966 Malay
0.07065725 Thai
0.07127702 Dong_Hunan
0.07249380 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.07629384 Luzon
0.07789329 Atayal
0.07892870 Mlabri
0.08123973 Hmong
0.08160234 Indonesian_Java
0.08272455 Indonesian_Bali
0.08294693 Vizayan
0.08379585 Han_Guangdong
0.08507695 Lebbo
0.08600078 Ami
0.08744066 Murut


Distance to: Thai:DCH007

0.04232437 Kinh_Vietnam
0.04542723 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.04601409 Lahu
0.05198735 Gelao
0.05407750 Tai_Lue
0.05488001 Dong_Guizhou
0.05550704 Dai
0.05667084 Mulam
0.05710420 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05801079 Akha
0.05801482 Zhuang
0.05919016 Dong_Hunan
0.05935490 Thai
0.06020816 Hmong
0.06059129 Karen_Sgaw
0.06338171 Maonan
0.06408667 Han_Guangdong
0.06473404 Lawa
0.06533438 Miao
0.06823449 Li
0.06852769 Cambodian
0.07427350 Tujia
0.07602274 Han_Chongqing
0.07699813 Han_Fujian
0.07855148 She
0.08027896 Han_Sichuan
0.08098479 Burmese
0.08564762 Han_Hubei
0.09305897 Riang
0.09340587 Malay


Distance to: Laos32:Laos32

0.02271138 Dai
0.02356469 Tai_Lue
0.02852465 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03205832 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03247581 Gelao
0.03445278 Li
0.03477842 Maonan
0.03825324 Zhuang
0.04293043 Mulam
0.05300929 Lahu
0.05454011 Dong_Guizhou
0.06034399 Cambodian
0.06053842 Dong_Hunan
0.06338277 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06734896 Lawa
0.06965392 Htin_Mal
0.07150671 Hmong
0.07223886 Karen_Sgaw
0.07433950 Atayal
0.07456155 Han_Guangdong
0.07640658 Luzon
0.08149475 Malay
0.08214493 Ami
0.08237513 Thai
0.08816401 Akha
0.08845272 Murut
0.08849971 Mlabri
0.08989610 Vizayan
0.09047281 Miao
0.09175008 Hawaiian


Distance to: Laos24:Laos24

0.02472895 Dai
0.02737020 Tai_Lue
0.03163945 Li
0.03383852 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03430017 Maonan
0.03474384 Gelao
0.03593769 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03746257 Zhuang
0.04369345 Mulam
0.05581708 Dong_Guizhou
0.05983533 Lahu
0.06133661 Dong_Hunan
0.06405953 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06798126 Cambodian
0.07071379 Atayal
0.07388534 Hmong
0.07521506 Lawa
0.07523336 Han_Guangdong
0.07550565 Htin_Mal
0.07639271 Luzon
0.07789997 Ami
0.07923694 Karen_Sgaw
0.08747186 Murut
0.08789257 Malay
0.09040827 Thai
0.09181647 Miao
0.09229525 Vizayan
0.09334608 Akha
0.09447043 Mlabri
0.09481793 Lebbo


Another thing that's fascinating to me is how the Vietnamese are so close to these Northern Thai (Tai Yuan, Lue, Khuen, Yong, etc) and Lao samples that it convinces me the Kinh/Viets are actually Tai-Kadais or very close related groups to them who likely experience a linguistic shift to an Austroasiatic tongue. Vietnamese are literally the long lost cousins of the Northern Thais, Laos and other Tai-Kadai peoples! :)

I want to mention that those Northern Thai and Lao gedmatch users scoring mostly Kinh Vietnam in their simulated G25 models doesn't necessarily mean they actually have recent Vietnamese ancestry. Rather, it shows that the Kinh/ethnic Vietnamese are largely predominantly Tai-Kadai and that's why using them can give very good distances for these Thai and Lao individuals and when the Tai Lue component is added in the run, the Kinh Vietnam component drastically decrease.

G25 distance of Viets:

Distance to: Kinh_Vietnam

0.01093686 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.01582397 Gelao
0.01698625 Tai_Lue
0.01995171 Zhuang
0.02038470 Dai
0.02193853 Mulam
0.02427346 Maonan
0.02911786 Dong_Guizhou
0.03055380 Li
0.03527464 Dong_Hunan
0.03685476 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.03696558 Lahu
0.04527940 Hmong
0.04807757 Han_Guangdong
0.06266412 Miao
0.06530059 Akha
0.06568154 Karen_Sgaw
0.06627223 Lawa
0.06964796 Cambodian
0.07074879 She
0.07174049 Han_Chongqing
0.07275042 Han_Fujian
0.07287660 Tujia
0.08039915 Thai
0.08097469 Han_Sichuan
0.08278178 Atayal
0.08438026 Han_Hubei
0.08783757 Luzon
0.08930136 Htin_Mal
0.09337098 Ami


Distance to: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)

0.01093686 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01521441 Tai_Lue
0.01791376 Dai
0.01950009 Gelao
0.02204700 Zhuang
0.02464648 Maonan
0.02583755 Mulam
0.03042100 Li
0.03393293 Dong_Guizhou
0.03890898 Lahu
0.03994884 Dong_Hunan
0.04029366 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05008280 Hmong
0.05213754 Han_Guangdong
0.06512043 Karen_Sgaw
0.06514382 Lawa
0.06749285 Miao
0.06763971 Cambodian
0.06903364 Akha
0.07558323 She
0.07590985 Han_Chongqing
0.07708645 Han_Fujian
0.07788380 Tujia
0.07929379 Thai
0.07961465 Atayal
0.08416007 Luzon
0.08549291 Htin_Mal
0.08580005 Han_Sichuan
0.08902271 Han_Hubei
0.09037320 Ami


G25 model of Viets:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.2674% / 0.01267422
79.2 Dai
12.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.0 Karen_Sgaw

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.2986% / 0.01298634
82.4 Dai
8.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.8 Karen_Sgaw

Compared with the Tai-Kadai speakers: its interesting that the Zhuang and Mulam have more Han-related ancestry than Viets despite the latter being much more Sinicized culturally.

Target: Tai_Lue
Distance: 1.3872% / 0.01387189
93.6 Dai
3.6 Karen_Sgaw
2.8 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Maonan
Distance: 2.0065% / 0.02006524
90.0 Dai
10.0 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.5161% / 0.01516133
82.8 Dai
17.2 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Gelao
Distance: 1.5143% / 0.01514341
81.6 Dai
10.6 Han_Zhejiang
7.8 Karen_Sgaw

Target: Mulam
Distance: 1.4439% / 0.01443882
77.4 Dai
22.6 Han_Zhejiang

Thank you for tagging, it is quite interesting.

I also agree with what Ebizur and okarina said, I think it is a result of two main factors:

a) Indian admixture in southern/central/eastern Thai groups as shown in the paper "Indian genetic heritage in Southeast Asian populations" by Changmai et al (2022) [Link: https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1010036] but also

b) as you say more Tai-Kadai genetic influence in northern Thai than other groups, which is shared with populations in Laos and Vietnam, a lot of it older but some possibly more recent. I think the hanging coffin custom is also shared between southern China and northern Thailand.

Also agree that this affinity probably is not due to Vietnamese admixture in northern Thai. Vietnamese (especially Kinh) also have some later more "northern" ancestry, mostly Sinitic that differentiates them as well as possibly some minor coastal/Austronesian-related admixture. That may in large part be due to recent/historic Chinese admixture in parts of Vietnam.

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 06:43 PM
It may be shared inland Mekong-like ancestry but also an earlier wave of Yellow River/Sino Tibetan-related admixture, possibly even earlier. In Global25 I notice that Han_Zhejiang (as all Han) take substantial amounts of Longshan (in order to use the labels of Global25)- related ancestry compared to the Vietnamese and Zhuang who seem to have some of an earlier wave, possibly related to the northern ancestry found in groups like Ami and Atayal.

In regards to their southern ancestry, Han (excepting those from Chongqing and Sichuan- I also suspect same applies to those originating from Gansu or Yunnan provinces) are usually more "eastern" Austronesian/Tai Kadai-shifted while Vietnamese have more Mekong_N/inland-related affinities which I think we have discussed before. So possibly what Tsakhur is describing is an outcome of both.

Also agree with Sinitic infuences in Zhuang and Mulam (bidirectional with south Sinitic groups actually)


Edit: Kinh Vietnamese usually do not show Indian influences in Global25 but most southern Vietnamese groups probably have some of that admixture, such as the Cham. The Champa Kingdom was after all heavily "Indianized".

What samples in G25 represent this Mekong_N ancestry? I want to try and run it in some models. Also I haven't been following or reading East Asian genetics for quite a while, but what is Longshan ancestry and where does it peak?

Yep or the Khmer. It seems even some Austroasiatic tribal groups in the Central Highlands of Vietnam have some minor Indian ancestry from a few of the gedmatch kits I collected from there.

Max_H
03-02-2022, 06:57 PM
What samples in G25 represent this Mekong_N ancestry? I want to try and run it in some models. Also I haven't been following or reading East Asian genetics for quite a while, but what is Longshan ancestry and where does it peak?

Yep or the Khmer. It seems even some Austroasiatic tribal groups in the Central Highlands of Vietnam have some minor Indian ancestry from a few of the gedmatch kits I collected from there.

I had in mind the Ziyang Xia paper actually but I think LAO_LN_BA is a good proxy although it is likely mixed a bit with Hoabinhian.

Longshan ancestry is what a collection of Neolithic samples from Yellow river are labeled in Global 25 (associated with the Longshan culture of northern China) , it peaks in modern-day northern Han and Koreans. Its presence in Vietnamese populations shows Chinese admixture (IMO).

And yes Khmer also likely have Indian influences, the Khmer originating in Cambodia do, and I think those from Vietnam as well.

Edit: I think Austroasiatic tribal groups may have Indian admixture but may also show this due to shared Onge/Hoabinhian/AASI-related ancestry.

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 08:25 PM
Thank you for tagging, it is quite interesting.

I also agree with what Ebizur and okarina said, I think it is a result of two main factors:

a) Indian admixture in southern/central/eastern Thai groups as shown in the paper "Indian genetic heritage in Southeast Asian populations" by Changmai et al (2022) [Link: https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1010036] but also

b) as you say more Tai-Kadai genetic influence in northern Thai than other groups, which is shared with populations in Laos and Vietnam, a lot of it older but some possibly more recent. I think the hanging coffin custom is also shared between southern China and northern Thailand.

Also agree that this affinity probably is not due to Vietnamese admixture in northern Thai. Vietnamese (especially Kinh) also have some later more "northern" ancestry, mostly Sinitic that differentiates them as well as possibly some minor coastal/Austronesian-related admixture. That may in large part be due to recent/historic Chinese admixture in parts of Vietnam.

a) Indeed. Most Thai groups including those from Central, Eastern, Southern regions and in many parts of Isaan have Indian admixture which could cause such divergence or genetic distance from northern Thai.

b) Yes. I briefly saw a genetic study (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.24.424294v1.full) about Thai and Lao populations and it shows the Northern Thai/locals of the historical Lanna Kingdom being mainly a mix of Dai and Kinh while the Lao of Northern Isaan also scoring a lot of Tai Kadai but also quite some Austroasiatic-related ancestry.

Hanging coffin custom in Northern Thailand? Hmm never heard of that before. That's totally new to me. Will have to read more about this.

c) I would also add that Central, Eastern and Southern Isaan Thais have high or even predominantly Austroasiatic/LAO_BA-related ancestry from mixing with the Mons, Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers that many are genetically very similar and indistinguishable from Khmers/Cambodians while Southern Thais have a lot of Austroasiatic and Austronesian ancestries from mixing with the Malays and other folks of the Malay Peninsula could cause this difference and genetic distance to Northern Thais/Lanna and Lao of both Laos (the country)/Northern Isaan as well.

Indeed, from what I know, Northern Thais don't actually have Vietnamese admixture unlike in Isaan, where some locals there have Vietnamese blood as there were some historical migration and settlements there from Vietnam. So its rather that the Kinh/Viets have significant or predominantly Tai Kadai ancestry themselves.

Is Sinitic ancestry represented by the Yellow River components?

And I have recently learn from somewhere that the Red River in Northern Vietnam, used to be inhabited by Tai-Kadai while the Austroasiatic (Vietic) speakers who the modern day Kinh inherited the language from, lived in Thanh Hoa, Nghe An and Ha Tinh which is still in the northern part of the coast pretty close to the Red River. And that the Tai and Vietic lived closely together so there must have been a lot of mixing to the point that the Kinh become genetically more Tai Kadai: https://www.quora.com/Were-the-original-people-of-Northern-Vietnam-at-the-time-before-the-Chinese-domination-Tai-people

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 08:45 PM
I had in mind the Ziyang Xia paper actually but I think LAO_LN_BA is a good proxy although it is likely mixed a bit with Hoabinhian.

Longshan ancestry is what a collection of Neolithic samples from Yellow river are labeled in Global 25 (associated with the Longshan culture of northern China) , it peaks in modern-day northern Han and Koreans. Its presence in Vietnamese populations shows Chinese admixture (IMO).

And yes Khmer also likely have Indian influences, the Khmer originating in Cambodia do, and I think those from Vietnam as well.

Edit: I think Austroasiatic tribal groups may have Indian admixture but may also show this due to shared Onge/Hoabinhian/AASI-related ancestry.

What was the Mekong_N component represented by in the Xia paper? I see, I utilized LAO_LN_BA quite a lot before but I didn't know it was related to Mekong_N stuff. Btw what modern groups does the Mekong_N peak in? Hoabinhian is genetically very similar to modern day Andamanese/Onge/Jarawa right?

I see. Is Longshan ancestry the Sinitic component? Does Longshan contains Northern/Neo-Siberian admixture such as Ulchi/Devil's Gate-like stuff? Thais should also score Longshan because they have quite a lot of recent Han admixture as well from recent Chinese migrations into Thailand especially the Hakka, Teochew and Hainanese (I'm mostly ethnically Chinese myself).

The ones in Vietnam should have Indian affinity indeed. Because the Khmer samples from Isaan/NE Thailand also have South Asian admixture.

Yep, it could be also from the Onge, Hoabinhian, AASI stuff, but from what I remember seeing those few gedmatch kits of those Vietnamese Central Highland tribal groups, they were scoring some West Eurasian in the several calculators as well, so it could be indeed actual Indian admixture, probably mediated from the Khmers as these tribes were located in the vinicities of the Khmer Empire.

Forget to mention that not only the Austroasiatic tribal groups have Indian admixture, but the Austronesian speaking minorities in the highlands such as the Ede, Giarai also have Indian (https://i0.wp.com/www.gnxp.com/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Screenshot-from-2021-01-23-02-49-53.jpg?w=597&ssl=1)ancestry: https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2021/01/23/indian-culture-came-to-southeast-asia-through-indian-people/


Our study revealed substantial South Asian admixture in various populations across Southeast Asia (~2-16% as inferred by qpAdm). We observed South Asian admixture in some populations (Cham, Ede, Giarai, Khmer, Kuy, Nyahkur, and Thai) for whom the admixture was not reported before. Most populations harboring South Asian admixture were heavily influenced by Indian culture in the past or are related to descendants of ancient Indianized states in Southeast Asia. In contrast, we failed to detect South Asian admixture in most “hill tribes” and in present-day hunter-gatherer groups from Thailand. Consequently, the spread of Indian influence in the region can be explained by extensive movement of people from India rather than by cultural diffusion only.

okarinaofsteiner
03-02-2022, 10:37 PM
Interesting. According to the quote, the Zhuang identity is perceived as something recently invented by some ethnic and cultural experts?

I see. What's the highest amount of South Indian have you seen in a Vietnamese gedmatch kit and do you have Viet samples with recent Cham, Khmer or Bahnar ancestry?

I'm not an expert on Zhuang identity but what I've read on Wiki suggests that they're relatively culturally similar to Sinitic-speaking Han in Guangxi.

Excluding the 2 outliers which score 7.5-8.7% South_Indian (one of which could plausibly be SailorNeptune), the highest I've seen are around 4.5%.

This is a likely Bahnar result I have saved (5.29% South Indian, 42.35% Austronesian, 45.01% South_East_Asian, 2.82% Tungus_Altaic. 90.18% Core East Eurasian).

0.2 1.28 0 0.83 5.29 0.75 42.35 0 0.13 0.13 0 0 0.13 0.67 0.41 0 0 0 0 45.01 0 2.82 0

Feel free to PM me if you'd like.

Tsakhur
03-02-2022, 11:39 PM
I'm not an expert on Zhuang identity but what I've read on Wiki suggests that they're relatively culturally similar to Sinitic-speaking Han in Guangxi.

Excluding the 2 outliers which score 7.5-8.7% (one of which could plausibly be SailorNeptune), the highest I've seen are around 4.5%.

This is a likely Bahnar result I have saved (5.29% South Indian, 42.35% Austronesian, 45.01% South_East_Asian, 2.82% Tungus_Altaic. 90.18% Core East Eurasian.

0.2 1.28 0 0.83 5.29 0.75 42.35 0 0.13 0.13 0 0 0.13 0.67 0.41 0 0 0 0 45.01 0 2.82 0

Feel free to PM me if you'd like.

Ah ok. I wonder if those Guangxi Han are also genetically identical to the Zhuang and thus are more like Sinicized Tais.

Do those two outliers that score 7-9% range and the likely Bahnar also score some West Eurasian stuff in MDLP K23b or other calcs?

Thx. Will PM

jortita
03-03-2022, 01:47 AM
Indeed, Siamese/Central Thai definitely have more Han admixture than Northern/Lanna and Isaan aka Northeastern Thai/Lao. Regarding Vietnamese affinity, the Siamese might still have more than those from Northern Thailand, but they might have it lower than those from Northern Isaan. There is actually quite a lot of Vietnamese migration and settlement in Northern Isaan especially in places like Udon Thani, Sakon Nakhon, Nong Khai, etc. Btw there is actually a difference between Northern Isaan and Southern Isaan, the former is much more Dai/Lao-shifted while the latter is much more Austroasiatic-shifted as the indigenous inhabitants there are Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers.

Btw those

Hmm, regarding the potential difference due to the ENA component of the Mon and Khmer ancestries, I'm not sure regarding that. Will have to investigate further.

Actually three of the Lanna/Northern Thai individuals (two from Phayao and one from Chiang Mai) score around 7-9% while one of the Lao individuals score 9% on the Tungus Altaic component. You could be right about almost all of them scoring at least 3-4% higher S Indian+Australoid than the Kinh in your collection though.

Furthermore, I want to point this out: those Northern Thai and Lao gedmatch users scoring mostly Kinh Vietnam in their simulated G25 models doesn't necessarily mean they actually have recent Vietnamese ancestry. Rather, it insinuates that the Kinh/ethnic Vietnamese seem to be predominantly Tai-Kadai and that's why using them can give very good distances for these Thai and Lao individuals and when the Tai Lue component is added in the run, the Kinh Vietnam component drastically decrease.


Do you want me to show a picture of what these individuals who these samples belong look like btw? I can send them to you in PM if you want. I think they look really Vietnamese or Southern Chinese in their phenotypes. Already got their permission.

Interesting, yes the Karen_Sgaw are a mix between Tibeto-Burman/Naxi-like with Austroasiatic (Mlabri)-related ancestires that seems to mostly lack the South Asian affinity from the G25 runs I have done on them.

The Zhuang have some Sinitic influences as well? Didn't know that before. The Mulam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulao_people)are apparently from Guangxi.

Siamese and Southern Thai do not have Tai Kadai ancestry as evident from the latest results of the Thai Genomics Research Project. These results refer to individuals with non Chinese ad-mixed ancestry. As evident from this research, the Central Thai are found to practically 100% similar to Monic groups including the Mon while Southern Thai are an admixture of Central Thai with Austronesian ancestry. The only Tai Kadai ancestry they show of 3-4% is similar to that in Monic groups, https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/38/8/3459/6255759

MNOPSC1b
03-03-2022, 02:04 AM
Interesting. According to the quote, the Zhuang identity is perceived as something recently invented by some ethnic and cultural experts?

Nope, if anything, the Han identity (as encompassing the majority of Chinese from both Northern and Southern China) is something recently invented. In the Yuan Dynasty, the Han only encompassed those from the Yellow River region and included some Khitans and Jurchens as well, which was completely different from the definition of Han that we have today.

The Zhuang ethnic group (by today's definition) was indeed coined after the founding of PRC. However it does have a valid historical basis, unlike Han. In the Song and Ming records there were already words like "僮" or “獞" (pronounced "Zhuang") when referring to the native peoples of Guangxi.

MNOPSC1b
03-03-2022, 02:12 AM
Back to the main topic.

I think the only explanation for this is that Central and Southern Thais are mostly native Mon-Khmer peoples assimilated by the Thais (genetically speaking of course), whereas the Northern Thais, Laotians, and the ethnic Tai-Kradai minorities of Southern China are the real Thais.

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 03:19 AM
Siamese and Southern Thai do not have Tai Kadai ancestry as evident from the latest results of the Thai Genomics Research Project. These results refer to individuals with non Chinese ad-mixed ancestry. As evident from this research, the Central Thai are found to practically 100% similar to Monic groups including the Mon while Southern Thai are an admixture of Central Thai with Austronesian ancestry. The only Tai Kadai ancestry they show of 3-4% is similar to that in Monic groups, https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/38/8/3459/6255759

They don't have any Tai Kadai at all or in a very negligible amounts? That would mean practically the Siamese, Eastern and Southern Thais who are not Chinese admixed are literally assimilated Austroasiatics (Mons, Khmers) and Austronesians (Malays).

This would literally mean the purest "Thais" genetically speaking are those from Northern Thailand/Lanna and Lao of Northern Isaan.

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 03:26 AM
Nope, if anything, the Han identity (as encompassing the majority of Chinese from both Northern and Southern China) is something recently invented. In the Yuan Dynasty, the Han only encompassed those from the Yellow River region and included some Khitans and Jurchens as well, which was completely different from the definition of Han that we have today.

The Zhuang ethnic group (by today's definition) was indeed coined after the founding of PRC. However it does have a valid historical basis, unlike Han. In the Song and Ming records there were already words like "僮" or “獞" (pronounced "Zhuang") when referring to the native peoples of Guangxi.

I see. When was the first time in history the term "Han" was used to refer to an ethnic group like we've seen today? In this case would be the actual "Han" be those from the Yellow River or Central China area?

Interesting. What was the native peoples of Guangxi called before the term "Zhuang" was used to refer to them? Would the Zhuang be one of the Baiyue tribes mentioned in ancient Chinese texts?

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 03:49 AM
Back to the main topic.

I think the only explanation for this is that Central and Southern Thais are mostly native Mon-Khmer peoples assimilated by the Thais (genetically speaking of course), whereas the Northern Thais, Laotians, and the ethnic Tai-Kradai minorities of Southern China are the real Thais.

Yes, Siamese/Central, Southern and I would also add Eastern and Southern Isaan (Northeast Region; Northern Isaan is different ethnically from the Southern parts where the latter is the homeland of Austroasiatics meanwhile the former is inhabited primarily by ethnic Lao and other Tai-Kadai speakers) Thais seem to be predominantly Mon-Khmers, Malays/Austronesians (especially for Southern Thais) who were assimilated by the actual Thais (Tai migrants from Yunnan) before later receiving additional Chinese admixture.

And yes, I also have come to the conclusion that the real "Thais" are those groups you mentioned. Although I would say that Central and Southern Laotians might be different than the Northern ones as the latter would have substantially more Austroasiatic (Mlabri/LAO_BA), Hoabinhian or even some Indian ancestry than the former.

Compare Lao32 individual (likely from Northern Laos or the heavily Tai-Kadai areas) to Lao26a (likely from Southern Laos close to Cambodia or areas with heavy Austroasiatic presence) for example:

Distance to: Laos32:Laos32

0.02271138 Dai
0.02356469 Tai_Lue
0.02852465 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.03205832 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03247581 Gelao
0.03445278 Li
0.03477842 Maonan
0.03825324 Zhuang
0.04293043 Mulam
0.05300929 Lahu
0.05454011 Dong_Guizhou
0.06034399 Cambodian
0.06053842 Dong_Hunan
0.06338277 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.06734896 Lawa
0.06965392 Htin_Mal
0.07150671 Hmong
0.07223886 Karen_Sgaw
0.07433950 Atayal
0.07456155 Han_Guangdong
0.07640658 Luzon
0.08149475 Malay
0.08214493 Ami
0.08237513 Thai
0.08816401 Akha
0.08845272 Murut
0.08849971 Mlabri
0.08989610 Vizayan
0.09047281 Miao
0.09175008 Hawaiian


Distance to: Laos26a:Laos26a

0.02349911 Htin_Mal
0.02994768 Mlabri
0.03498157 Indonesian_Java
0.04191901 Indonesian_Bali
0.04648897 Cambodian
0.05250882 Malay
0.06876823 Lebbo
0.07354213 Lawa
0.08186901 Dai
0.08302423 Tai_Lue
0.08329950 Thai
0.08418665 Karen_Sgaw
0.08639494 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.09077761 Gelao
0.09092352 Kinh_Vietnam
0.09135277 Murut
0.09210366 Dusun
0.09406480 Lahu
0.09696502 Maonan
0.09771681 Li
0.09855655 Vizayan
0.10012885 Luzon
0.10140075 Zhuang
0.10689332 Mulam
0.10871531 Atayal
0.10887015 Hawaiian
0.11404090 Ami
0.11701620 Dong_Guizhou
0.12353606 Dong_Hunan
0.12511999 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)


Do you agree that the fact these Northern Thai and certain Lao samples are much closer to the Kinh and Dai than to the Thai and the Vietnamese got Tai-Kadai populations in their closest G25 distances indicated that the Kinh Vietnamese are actually predominantly Tai-Kadais with some additional Han admixture who experienced linguistic shift to speaking an Austroasiatic (Vietic) language? Although there seem to be some diversity among Viets as well with one being Kinh-like and the other being Dong-like who seem to have much more Han ancestry.

Distance to: Kinh_Vietnam

0.01093686 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.01582397 Gelao
0.01698625 Tai_Lue
0.01995171 Zhuang
0.02038470 Dai
0.02193853 Mulam
0.02427346 Maonan
0.02911786 Dong_Guizhou
0.03055380 Li
0.03527464 Dong_Hunan
0.03685476 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.03696558 Lahu
0.04527940 Hmong
0.04807757 Han_Guangdong
0.06266412 Miao
0.06530059 Akha
0.06568154 Karen_Sgaw
0.06627223 Lawa
0.06964796 Cambodian
0.07074879 She
0.07174049 Han_Chongqing
0.07275042 Han_Fujian
0.07287660 Tujia
0.08039915 Thai
0.08097469 Han_Sichuan
0.08278178 Atayal
0.08438026 Han_Hubei
0.08783757 Luzon
0.08930136 Htin_Mal
0.09337098 Ami


Distance to: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)

0.01093686 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01521441 Tai_Lue
0.01791376 Dai
0.01950009 Gelao
0.02204700 Zhuang
0.02464648 Maonan
0.02583755 Mulam
0.03042100 Li
0.03393293 Dong_Guizhou
0.03890898 Lahu
0.03994884 Dong_Hunan
0.04029366 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05008280 Hmong
0.05213754 Han_Guangdong
0.06512043 Karen_Sgaw
0.06514382 Lawa
0.06749285 Miao
0.06763971 Cambodian
0.06903364 Akha
0.07558323 She
0.07590985 Han_Chongqing
0.07708645 Han_Fujian
0.07788380 Tujia
0.07929379 Thai
0.07961465 Atayal
0.08416007 Luzon
0.08549291 Htin_Mal
0.08580005 Han_Sichuan
0.08902271 Han_Hubei
0.09037320 Ami


Distance to: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)

0.01413153 Dong_Hunan
0.01727884 Han_Guangdong
0.01763980 Dong_Guizhou
0.02522727 Mulam
0.02532868 Hmong
0.03078686 Zhuang
0.03685476 Kinh_Vietnam
0.03708855 Miao
0.03863514 Maonan
0.04029366 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.04037473 Gelao
0.04083334 She
0.04137558 Han_Fujian
0.04387267 Han_Chongqing
0.04462496 Li
0.04653811 Tai_Lue
0.04695009 Tujia
0.04849824 Dai
0.05278773 Lahu
0.05328952 Han_Sichuan
0.05410944 Han_Hubei
0.06207706 Akha
0.06465956 Han_Zhejiang
0.07476012 Han_Jiangsu
0.08210720 Han_Shanghai
0.08705557 Karen_Sgaw
0.08929673 Han_Shandong
0.09122508 Lawa
0.09197819 Yi
0.09383221 Tibetan_Xinlong


Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.0809% / 0.01080916
76.0 Tai_Lue
16.6 Han_Zhejiang
7.4 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.1592% / 0.01159179
78.0 Tai_Lue
13.4 Han_Zhejiang
8.6 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.5741% / 0.01574144
58.8 Tai_Lue
41.2 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.4966% / 0.01496554
84.8 Tai_Lue
15.2 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Maonan
Distance: 1.8205% / 0.01820538
92.6 Tai_Lue
7.4 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Gelao
Distance: 1.4407% / 0.01440722
78.8 Tai_Lue
14.0 Han_Zhejiang
7.2 Mlabri

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.4966% / 0.01496554
84.8 Tai_Lue
15.2 Han_Zhejiang

MNOPSC1b
03-03-2022, 03:57 AM
I see. When was the first time in history the term "Han" was used to refer to an ethnic group like we've seen today? In this case would be the actual "Han" be those from the Yellow River or Central China area?

Interesting. What was the native peoples of Guangxi called before the term "Zhuang" was used to refer to them? Would the Zhuang be one of the Baiyue tribes mentioned in ancient Chinese texts?

I believe the first time in history when the term "Han" was used in its modern sense was the Republican Era, which was only about 100 years ago. Before that it referred to the peoples from the Yellow River region and included Khitans and Jurchens. The actual "Han" (genetically speaking) were those from Northern China along the Yellow River valley.

Before the term "Zhuang" was used to refer to the natives of GX sometime in the Song or the Ming period, they were called "獠" (Liao, most likely derived from "Raeu", which is the first person plural pronoun in Zhuang, equivalent of "we" or "us"). And they could be also called "Tu", which simply meant "aborigines" or "natives". They were part of the Baiyue, but more specifically the Luo Yue or Lac Viet.

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 08:36 AM
I'm not an expert on Zhuang identity but what I've read on Wiki suggests that they're relatively culturally similar to Sinitic-speaking Han in Guangxi.

Excluding the 2 outliers which score 7.5-8.7% South_Indian (one of which could plausibly be SailorNeptune), the highest I've seen are around 4.5%.

This is a likely Bahnar result I have saved (5.29% South Indian, 42.35% Austronesian, 45.01% South_East_Asian, 2.82% Tungus_Altaic. 90.18% Core East Eurasian).

0.2 1.28 0 0.83 5.29 0.75 42.35 0 0.13 0.13 0 0 0.13 0.67 0.41 0 0 0 0 45.01 0 2.82 0

Feel free to PM me if you'd like.

Btw you might find this interesting but the English are as close to other West Euro Germanics as the Viets are to the Tai-Kadais:

Distance to: English
0.00660888 English_Cornwall
0.00666391 Welsh
0.00762864 Scottish
0.00997250 Orcadian
0.01190820 French_Brittany
0.01206355 Irish
0.01301729 Dutch
0.01630074 Danish
0.01804201 Shetlandic
0.01914626 Icelandic
0.02108829 German
0.02112956 Norwegian
0.02383830 Afrikaner
0.02436539 Belgian
0.02626687 German_Hamburg
0.02710744 Swedish
0.02837387 French_Nord
0.02873726 French_Pas-de-Calais
0.02891337 German_Erlangen
0.03072663 French_Seine-Maritime
0.03182077 French_Paris
0.03210708 French_Alsace
0.03505637 Swiss_German
0.03653591 Austrian
0.03734138 German_East
0.04340810 French_Occitanie
0.04404061 Czech
0.04604270 Hungarian
0.04795214 French_Auvergne
0.05143130 Swiss_French

Distance to: Kinh_Vietnam
0.01093686 Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.01582397 Gelao
0.01698625 Tai_Lue
0.01995171 Zhuang
0.02038470 Dai
0.02193853 Mulam
0.02427346 Maonan
0.02911786 Dong_Guizhou
0.03055380 Li
0.03527464 Dong_Hunan
0.03685476 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.03696558 Lahu
0.04527940 Hmong
0.04807757 Han_Guangdong
0.06266412 Miao
0.06530059 Akha
0.06568154 Karen_Sgaw
0.06627223 Lawa
0.06964796 Cambodian
0.07074879 She
0.07174049 Han_Chongqing
0.07275042 Han_Fujian
0.07287660 Tujia
0.08039915 Thai
0.08097469 Han_Sichuan
0.08206685 Mon
0.08278178 Atayal
0.08438026 Han_Hubei
0.08783757 Luzon
0.08930136 Htin_Mal

Distance to: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
0.01093686 Kinh_Vietnam
0.01521441 Tai_Lue
0.01791376 Dai
0.01950009 Gelao
0.02204700 Zhuang
0.02464648 Maonan
0.02583755 Mulam
0.03042100 Li
0.03393293 Dong_Guizhou
0.03890898 Lahu
0.03994884 Dong_Hunan
0.04029366 Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
0.05008280 Hmong
0.05213754 Han_Guangdong
0.06512043 Karen_Sgaw
0.06514382 Lawa
0.06749285 Miao
0.06763971 Cambodian
0.06903364 Akha
0.07558323 She
0.07590985 Han_Chongqing
0.07708645 Han_Fujian
0.07788380 Tujia
0.07929379 Thai
0.07961465 Atayal
0.08221758 Mon
0.08416007 Luzon
0.08549291 Htin_Mal
0.08580005 Han_Sichuan
0.08902271 Han_Hubei

Max_H
03-03-2022, 09:32 AM
a) Indeed. Most Thai groups including those from Central, Eastern, Southern regions and in many parts of Isaan have Indian admixture which could cause such divergence or genetic distance from northern Thai.

b) Yes. I briefly saw a genetic study (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.24.424294v1.full) about Thai and Lao populations and it shows the Northern Thai/locals of the historical Lanna Kingdom being mainly a mix of Dai and Kinh while the Lao of Northern Isaan also scoring a lot of Tai Kadai but also quite some Austroasiatic-related ancestry.

Hanging coffin custom in Northern Thailand? Hmm never heard of that before. That's totally new to me. Will have to read more about this.

c) I would also add that Central, Eastern and Southern Isaan Thais have high or even predominantly Austroasiatic/LAO_BA-related ancestry from mixing with the Mons, Khmers and other Austroasiatic speakers that many are genetically very similar and indistinguishable from Khmers/Cambodians while Southern Thais have a lot of Austroasiatic and Austronesian ancestries from mixing with the Malays and other folks of the Malay Peninsula could cause this difference and genetic distance to Northern Thais/Lanna and Lao of both Laos (the country)/Northern Isaan as well.

Indeed, from what I know, Northern Thais don't actually have Vietnamese admixture unlike in Isaan, where some locals there have Vietnamese blood as there were some historical migration and settlements there from Vietnam. So its rather that the Kinh/Viets have significant or predominantly Tai Kadai ancestry themselves.

Is Sinitic ancestry represented by the Yellow River components?

And I have recently learn from somewhere that the Red River in Northern Vietnam, used to be inhabited by Tai-Kadai while the Austroasiatic (Vietic) speakers who the modern day Kinh inherited the language from, lived in Thanh Hoa, Nghe An and Ha Tinh which is still in the northern part of the coast pretty close to the Red River. And that the Tai and Vietic lived closely together so there must have been a lot of mixing to the point that the Kinh become genetically more Tai Kadai: https://www.quora.com/Were-the-original-people-of-Northern-Vietnam-at-the-time-before-the-Chinese-domination-Tai-people

Yes agreed with your points.

As for the hanging coffin custom, according to the paper "A Matrilineal Genetic Perspective of Hanging Coffin Custom in Southern China and Northern Thailand" by Zhang Xiaoming et al (2020) [Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004220302169] it likely originated in China (which is what most non-genetic papers also claim) and then recently spread to Thailand, but perhaps without much genetic admixture (cultural diffusion process). However, this paper suggests some admixture between northern and southern/central Thai groups also (likely north->central mostly)


The comparison of mtDNA lineage component frequency spectrum confirmed the close relationship of the southern populations with the Hanging Coffin populations (Figures 3C and 3D). The Hanging Coffin populations show the closest affinity with present-day Daic populations in southern China and northern Thailand, and some of the other surrounding populations in Southeastern Asia also share maternal lineages with the Hanging Coffin populations, an implication of gene flow among populations belonging to different language families. Of the eight lineages that appeared in the Hanging Coffin population from Yunnan, four are present in two present-day Thai populations from northern Thailand and Vietnam (Figure 3C). In contrast, the present-day Thai population from northern Thailand harbors six of the seven Hanging Coffin lineages in Thailand, a clear indication of genetic affinity with the historic Log Coffin population (Figure 3D, left panel)

As for Sinitic ancestry, I think most of it is represented by Yellow River components but there is also the possibility that some of the Yellow River-related ancestry is earlier than Sinitic in the region. For example northern waves into south China/Vietnam before the Han expansion, Ami for example are (slightly) more northern compared to populations such as the Igorot or the VUT_2900BP (Austronesians from Vanuatu).

And yes, from what I have read, Tai-Kadai-related ancestry in Vietnam certainly post-dates Austroasiatic-related ancestry there. Most likely from a Zhuang-like group. However, in one paper (still trying to find it) Indonesian populations carry Austroasiatic-related admixture while they do not show any Tai-Kadai-related. This Austroasiatic-like ancestry likely reflects the spread of the Dong Son culture into island Southeast Asia so perhaps most of Viet Tai-Kadai-related ancestry is a later phenomenon.

Tsakhur
03-03-2022, 12:50 PM
Yes agreed with your points.

As for the hanging coffin custom, according to the paper "A Matrilineal Genetic Perspective of Hanging Coffin Custom in Southern China and Northern Thailand" by Zhang Xiaoming et al (2020) [Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004220302169] it likely originated in China (which is what most non-genetic papers also claim) and then recently spread to Thailand, but perhaps without much genetic admixture (cultural diffusion process). However, this paper suggests some admixture between northern and southern/central Thai groups also (likely north->central mostly)



As for Sinitic ancestry, I think most of it is represented by Yellow River components but there is also the possibility that some of the Yellow River-related ancestry is earlier than Sinitic in the region. For example northern waves into south China/Vietnam before the Han expansion, Ami for example are (slightly) more northern compared to populations such as the Igorot or the VUT_2900BP (Austronesians from Vanuatu).

And yes, from what I have read, Tai-Kadai-related ancestry in Vietnam certainly post-dates Austroasiatic-related ancestry there. Most likely from a Zhuang-like group. However, in one paper (still trying to find it) Indonesian populations carry Austroasiatic-related admixture while they do not show any Tai-Kadai-related. This Austroasiatic-like ancestry likely reflects the spread of the Dong Son culture into island Southeast Asia so perhaps most of Viet Tai-Kadai-related ancestry is a later phenomenon.

Cultural diffusion without much genetic admixture? That's interesting. Do you think the hanging coffin tradition of Northern Philippines also comes from Southern China?

You mean the admixture is more one direction mostly from Northern Thai/Lanna towards Central according to that paper?

That's interesting. How much more northern or Yellow River-related stuff do the Ami have compared to Igorots or VUT_2900BP? That would mean the Dai and other Tai-Kadai groups would already have some Yellow River stuff then before migrating down into SE Asia. These Austronesians from Vanuatu created the Lapita culture right?

Hmm what's interesting is why the amount of Austroasiatic-related ancestry pretty low in Viets?:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.1896% / 0.01189585
73.0 Dai
18.0 Han_Jiangsu
9.0 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.2558% / 0.01255788
75.2 Dai
14.8 Han_Jiangsu
10.0 Mlabri

Replacing Dai with the Tai Lue, a Tai group from Yunnan, Northern Myanmar and Thailand. The Tai Lue average is from Northern Thailand btw:

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.1971% / 0.01197124
81.0 Tai_Lue
11.4 Han_Jiangsu
7.6 Mlabri

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.0773% / 0.01077335
78.4 Tai_Lue
14.8 Han_Jiangsu
6.8 Mlabri

Another model: combining the Dai and Tai Lue and also adding Brahmin_Tamil to see if there is any detectable Indian; the fit distance improves a little bit more. Surprisingly the Han and Austroasiatic (Mlabri) admixtures drastically decrease meanwhile there is now very negligible amounts of Indian that its' likely noise or its probably come from minor gene flow from Chams, Khmers and other pre-Kinh locals of Central and Southern Vietnam that were assimilated and absorbed.

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.8560% / 0.00855956
57.4 Tai_Lue
25.8 Dai
12.6 Han_Jiangsu
3.0 Mlabri
1.2 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 0.9812% / 0.00981233
53.2 Tai_Lue
31.6 Dai
9.8 Han_Jiangsu
4.4 Mlabri
1.0 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

A third model: this time using Henan_Han as the Chinese proxy and using Dai as the Tai-Kadai proxy:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.1691% / 0.01169113
78.8 Dai
14.6 Han_Henan
6.6 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.2493% / 0.01249307
80.4 Dai
11.8 Han_Henan
7.8 Mlabri

Replacing Dai with Tai_Lue

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 1.0657% / 0.01065716
83.2 Tai_Lue
12.0 Han_Henan
4.8 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.1992% / 0.01199210
85.2 Tai_Lue
9.0 Han_Henan
5.8 Mlabri

Finally combining Dai and Tai Lue together and also adding Brahmin_Tamil into the run: interestingly this time the Indian signal is not detected at all. Therefore, very likely just a noise.

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.9523% / 0.00952311
49.6 Tai_Lue
33.4 Dai
12.4 Han_Henan
4.6 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.0714% / 0.01071420
47.0 Tai_Lue
37.6 Dai
9.6 Han_Henan
5.8 Mlabri

I didn't add the Dong-like Vietnamese average sample into the run as they seems to be almost half Han Chinese. They were probably part Hoa (ethnic Chinese in Vietnam) or there are some internal diversity among the Kinh themselves.

From the above analyses, it's fascinating that the Kinh/ethnic Viets can range from 70-85% Tai-Kadai depending on the proxies used (Dai, Tai Lue) with a good dose of Han Chinese admixture. And it seems like the Austroasiatic (Mlabri)-related ancestry is pretty low in Viets. That is probably why they cluster so close to Tai-Kadais since they are predominantly Tai genetically themselves. I consider the Kinh to be long lost cousins of the Northern Thai/Tai Yuan, Lao, Dai, Zhuang, Tai Lue and other Tai-Kadais! :amen:

Thus, there is a high probability that their Vietic ancestors were very likely mostly Tai-Kadai genetically themselves despite speaking a Mon-Khmer tongue. And those Vietic ancestors of the Kinh were prolly Muong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muong_people)-like is because that the Muong are one of the closest groups to the Viets in terms of culture and language and its possible that the Kinh and Muong both descended from a "Proto-Vietnamese" group themselves. And from what I have read, the Muong lived and interacted a lot with the Tai who lived next to them to the point that the two groups are culturally and socially similar despite speaking totally different language families: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-Vietnamese-people-identify-with-and-appreciate-the-Chinese-culture-though-only-the-Muong-culture-is-the-real-Vietnamese-culture

So its possible that the Kinh already have very significant Tai-Kadai ancestry by the time they diverged from the Muong.

That would make sense though as the Zhuang are located literally next to Northern Vietnam and even today in the region, there are still several Tai-Kadai groups such as the Thai (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A1i_people_(Vietnam)) (different from the modern "Thai" of Thailand), Nung (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%B9ng_people), Tay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A0y_people), etc. These aforementioned Tai groups, etc. may have play a major role in the ethnogenesis and formation of Viets/Kinhs along with Vietic groups such as the Muong.

Megalophias
03-03-2022, 06:03 PM
However, in one paper (still trying to find it) Indonesian populations carry Austroasiatic-related admixture while they do not show any Tai-Kadai-related. This Austroasiatic-like ancestry likely reflects the spread of the Dong Son culture into island Southeast Asia so perhaps most of Viet Tai-Kadai-related ancestry is a later phenomenon.
The Austroasiatic-related ancestry in ISEA is generally thought to be Neolithic, based on archaeological evidence. Our Dong Son ancient samples are already relatively close to Tai and Kinh.

Tsakhur
03-04-2022, 05:42 AM
The Austroasiatic-related ancestry in ISEA is generally thought to be Neolithic, based on archaeological evidence. Our Dong Son ancient samples are already relatively close to Tai and Kinh.

Would it be safe to say that the Kinh/Vietnamese are genetically speaking Tai-Kadai (Dai, Tai Lue-like) who receive substantial Han-related admixture who speak an Austroasiatic language?

okarinaofsteiner
03-06-2022, 02:12 AM
Another model: combining the Dai and Tai Lue and also adding Brahmin_Tamil to see if there is any detectable Indian; the fit distance improves a little bit more. Surprisingly the Han and Austroasiatic (Mlabri) admixtures drastically decrease meanwhile there is now very negligible amounts of Indian that its' likely noise or its probably come from minor gene flow from Chams, Khmers and other pre-Kinh locals of Central and Southern Vietnam that were assimilated and absorbed.

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.8560% / 0.00855956
57.4 Tai_Lue
25.8 Dai
12.6 Han_Jiangsu
3.0 Mlabri
1.2 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 0.9812% / 0.00981233
53.2 Tai_Lue
31.6 Dai
9.8 Han_Jiangsu
4.4 Mlabri
1.0 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

A third model: this time using Henan_Han as the Chinese proxy... Finally combining Dai and Tai Lue together and also adding Brahmin_Tamil into the run: interestingly this time the Indian signal is not detected at all. Therefore, very likely just a noise.

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.9523% / 0.00952311
49.6 Tai_Lue
33.4 Dai
12.4 Han_Henan
4.6 Mlabri

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 1.0714% / 0.01071420
47.0 Tai_Lue
37.6 Dai
9.6 Han_Henan
5.8 Mlabri

I didn't add the Dong-like Vietnamese average sample into the run as they seems to be almost half Han Chinese. They were probably part Hoa (ethnic Chinese in Vietnam) or there are some internal diversity among the Kinh themselves.

From the above analyses, it's fascinating that the Kinh/ethnic Viets can range from 70-85% Tai-Kadai depending on the proxies used (Dai, Tai Lue) with a good dose of Han Chinese admixture. And it seems like the Austroasiatic (Mlabri)-related ancestry is pretty low in Viets. That is probably why they cluster so close to Tai-Kadais since they are predominantly Tai genetically themselves. I consider the Kinh to be long lost cousins of the Northern Thai/Tai Yuan, Lao, Dai, Zhuang, Tai Lue and other Tai-Kadais! :amen:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai_people#Tai_subgroups
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Lue_language

In Vietnam, Tai Lue speakers are officially recognised as the Lự ethnic minority, although in China they are classified as part of the Dai people, along with speakers of the other Tai languages apart from Zhuang.

According to Wikipedia Tai Lue are effectively the same group as (Xishuangbanna) The MDLP K23b "Tai Lue" reference population is closer to actual Vietnamese samples since it's 6% "Tungus_Altaic" and 1.3% "South_Indian". While "Dai" and "Chinese_Dai" are both 49-50% "South_East_Asia" and "49-50% "Austronesian".

I noticed the fit is slightly better with "Han_Jiangsu" than "Han_Henan", even though the first option includes "Brahmin_TN" in the model. I don't think "Han_Henan" has that much more West Eurasian than "Han_Jiangsu" (although there probably is some difference). "Brahmin_TN" is most likely picking up some sort of Basal East Eurasian noise that "Han_Henan" is also able to capture somehow.

It'd be interesting to see how the "Dong-like cluster" scores in your model, even though the Dong/Kam people are mostly from China and not Vietnam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kam_people).

Tsakhur
03-06-2022, 02:42 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dai_people#Tai_subgroups
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_Lue_language


According to Wikipedia Tai Lue are effectively the same group as (Xishuangbanna) The MDLP K23b "Tai Lue" reference population is closer to actual Vietnamese samples since it's 6% "Tungus_Altaic" and 1.3% "South_Indian". While "Dai" and "Chinese_Dai" are both 49-50% "South_East_Asia" and "49-50% "Austronesian".

I noticed the fit is slightly better with "Han_Jiangsu" than "Han_Henan", even though the first option includes "Brahmin_TN" in the model. I don't think "Han_Henan" has that much more West Eurasian than "Han_Jiangsu" (although there probably is some difference). "Brahmin_TN" is most likely picking up some sort of Basal East Eurasian noise that "Han_Henan" is also able to capture somehow.

It'd be interesting to see how the "Dong-like cluster" scores in your model, even though the Dong/Kam people are mostly from China and not Vietnam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kam_people).

I see. At first I was confused whether the Tai Lue are a separate ethnic group from the Dai or not. But now it seems like it's just another way of calling the "Dai". Btw here are other Tai populations to compare: Tai Khuen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh%C3%BCn_language) (I'm not sure if they are a subset of ethnic Shan or they are their own group) have 5.48% and 0.97%, Tai Yuan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Thai_people) possess 5.69% and 3.45%, Yong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yong_language) score 5.07% and 1.8%, Zhuang have 6.38% and 0.31% and Jiamao have 7% and 0.43% Tungus Altaic and South Indian respectively.

Its probably because "Han_Henan" is more northern genetically and has less Coastal Southern East Asian/Austronesian-related or mainland Southern East Asian/Austroasiatic-shifted affinity than "Han_Jiangsu". Viets probably need a more Austronesian or Austroasiatic-shifted Han group to get good fits. I see. That's what I thought. Aren't both "Han_Henan" and "Han_Jiangsu" 100% East Eurasian?

Well here is how the Dong-like Vietnamese samples score:

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.6503% / 0.01650294
61.6 Dai
38.4 Han_Jiangsu

I noticed that adding an Austronesian source (Igorot) and the distance fit improves:

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.4011% / 0.01401055
51.2 Dai
40.6 Han_Jiangsu
8.2 Igorot

Replacing Igorot with another Austronesian proxy (Ami/Taiwanese Aborigines)


Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.3822% / 0.01382189
48.2 Dai
41.2 Han_Jiangsu
10.6 Ami

Does this mean that the Vietnamese have minor Austronesian-like affinity or admixture as well and not only Tai-Kadai and Austroasiatic-related lineages?

okarinaofsteiner
03-07-2022, 03:26 AM
Its probably because "Han_Henan" is more northern genetically and has less Coastal Southern East Asian/Austronesian-related or mainland Southern East Asian/Austroasiatic-shifted affinity than "Han_Jiangsu". Viets probably need a more Austronesian or Austroasiatic-shifted Han group to get good fits. I see. That's what I thought. Aren't both "Han_Henan" and "Han_Jiangsu" 100% East Eurasian?

I've been told the G25 Northern Han averages, Han_Sichuan, and Han_Shanghai all have some minor West Eurasian component, although I'm not sure if this is real or just noise.



Well here is how the Dong-like Vietnamese samples score:

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.6503% / 0.01650294
61.6 Dai
38.4 Han_Jiangsu

I noticed that adding an Austronesian source (Igorot) and the distance fit improves:

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.4011% / 0.01401055
51.2 Dai
40.6 Han_Jiangsu
8.2 Igorot

Replacing Igorot with another Austronesian proxy (Ami/Taiwanese Aborigines)


Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.3822% / 0.01382189
48.2 Dai
41.2 Han_Jiangsu
10.6 Ami

Does this mean that the Vietnamese have minor Austronesian-like affinity or admixture as well and not only Tai-Kadai and Austroasiatic-related lineages?

Vietnamese having some minor Austronesian-like affinity would be another way they genetically resemble South China Sea coast Han. I wouldn't be surprised if this affinity predates the Vietnamese conquest of Champa, as this would suggest that this affinity is similar to that found among Guangdong and Fujian Han. (Although if the G25 models involving Liangdao 1 and 2 are to believed, the predominant Austronesian component in Fujian Han is similar to that among Taiwanese aborigines and Filipinos, but different from that among other Han groups).

jortita
03-07-2022, 04:08 AM
They don't have any Tai Kadai at all or in a very negligible amounts? That would mean practically the Siamese, Eastern and Southern Thais who are not Chinese admixed are literally assimilated Austroasiatics (Mons, Khmers) and Austronesians (Malays).

This would literally mean the purest "Thais" genetically speaking are those from Northern Thailand/Lanna and Lao of Northern Isaan.

Sharing this interview posted by a Facebook friend of mine involving Dr Wiphu Kutanan, who is retired former HR executive from Roi Et, and a Tai cultural revivalist, the Thai is better than the English translation







IN YOUR FOCUS จุดที่ท่านควรสนใจ

WHERE DID THE CONCLUSION ABOUT THE DAI/TAI/THAI PEOPLE COME FROM? I FOUND IT WITH LUCK AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK ASSOC. PROF. DR. WIPHU KUTANAN OF KHONKAEN UNIVERSITY OF THAILAND FOR HIS CONDUCTING A SCIENTIFIC STUDY/RESEARCH BASED ON DNA DATA AS A JUDGE. THIS IS A NEW YEAR 2022'S GIFT TO ALL DAI/TAI/THAI BROTHERS AND SISTERS.

บทสรุปเรื่องคนได/ไต/ไทมาจากไหนนี้ ผมได้ค้นพบด้วยความโชคดี และขอขอบคุณท่าน รศ. ดร.วิภู กุตะนันท์ แห่งมหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น ประเทศไทยที่เป็นผู้ทำการศึกษาวิจัยในทางวิทยาศาสตร์ โดยยึดข้อมูล ดีเอ็นเอ เป็นตัวตัดสิน นี่คือของขวัญปีใหม่ ๒๕๖๕ ถึงพี่น้องได/ไต/ไท ทุกๆ คนครับ

• Assoc. Prof. Dr. Wipu Kutanan is a biologist who specializes in anthropological genetics. He writes a report on the topic Reconstructing the Human Genetic History of Mainland Southeast Asia: Insights from Genome-Wide Data from Thailand and Laos published in the August 2021 issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution.

• รศ.ดร.วิภู กุตะนันท์ เป็นนักชีววิทยาผู้เชี่ยวชาญด้านพันธุศาสตร์เชิงมานุ ษยวิทยา เขียนรายงานในหัวข้อ Reconstructing the Human Genetic History of Mainland Southeast Asia: Insights from Genome-Wide Data from Thailand and Laos ตีพิมพ์ในวารสาร Molecular Biology and Evolution ฉบับเดือนสิงหาคม ๒๕๖๔

• This is the first study to detail the differences in the genetic structure of Tai/Thai people in each region that it shows the diversity of the DNA of people in Thailand. This research is to find the answer. 'Who are Tai/Thai people' through the most complete DNA test.

• นี่คืองานวิจัยชิ้นแรกที่บ่งบอกรายละเอียดโครงสร้างพ ันธุกรรมของคนไทยในแต่ละภูมิภาคว่ามีความแตกต่างกันอ ย่างไร แสดงให้เห็นความหลากหลายของดีเอ็นเอของผู้คนในประเทศ ไทย งานวิจัยชิ้นนี้เป็นการหาคำตอบว่า ‘คนไทยคือใคร’ ผ่านการตรวจดีเอ็นเอที่สมบูรณ์ที่สุด

• If the results of this study are included in the educational curriculum, the young researcher hopes that the results of the study will help build understanding of the origins of Tai/Thai people and various ethnic groups with diversity destroy poisonous myths and respect scientific facts without political bias.

• หากผลการศึกษาในครั้งนี้ถูกบรรจุในหลักสูตรการศ ึกษา นักวิจัยหนุ่มผู้นี้คาดหวังว่าผลการศึกษานี้จะช่วยสร ้างความเข้าใจที่มาของคนไทยและกลุ่มชาติพันธุ์ต ่างๆ ที่มีความหลากหลาย ทำลายมายาคติที่เป็นพิษ และเคารพข้อเท็จจริงทางวิทยาศาสตร์โดยไม่มีอคติทางกา รเมือง

The cover of Molecular Biology and Evolution, August 2021 is issued, with a backdrop of Sukhothai Kingdom that stacked with twisted pairs of DNA Light shines from the center of the image. The cover designer of a scientific journal is published by Oxford University Press said, "It shows the diversity of the DNA of the DAI/TAI/THAI people in Thailand and it also conveys the basics of people in Southeast Asia."

Dr. Wiphu Kutanan is not a designer and he is always humble when it comes to answering aesthetic questions. “The question is too abstract for me” is the humility of a biologist at Khon Kaen University in Isan Region or North Eastern Thailand.

ดร. วิภู กุตะนันท์ ไม่ใช่นักออกแบบ และท่านมักถ่อมตัวเสมอหากต้องตอบคำถามเชิงสุนทรียศาส ตร์ “คำถามมัน Abstract เกินไปสำหรับผม” คือถ้อยถ่อมตนของนักชีววิทยาแห่งมหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่นใ นภาคอีสาน หรือ ภาคตะวันออกเฉียงเหนือประเทศไทย

What is found in the genetic code of Thai people today in every region? พบอะไรในรหัสพันธุกรรมคนไทยในปัจจุบันทุกภูมิภา ค

After studying all forms of DNA The answer is that Thai people in the central region are Mon people. This answer is different from the DNA of the northern people. and the DNA of people in the Northeast

หลังจากศึกษาดีเอ็นเอทุกรูปแบบ คำตอบคือคนไทยภาคกลางเป็นคนมอญ ซึ่งคำตอนเอคนภาคเหนือ และดีเอ็นเอคนภาคอีสาน

In the study, my DNA was divided into two parts which is the study of human DNA today. I have done this research with researchers from both Thailand and from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Germany. Starting from 2016 to the present. The work, published in the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution, studies DNA in the form of SNPs in the genomes of ethnic groups in Thailand and compared to other populations in Southeast Asia.

ในการศึกษาดีเอ็นเอของผมแบ่งเป็นสองส่วน คือการศึกษาดีเอ็นเอคนในปัจจุบัน ผมทำวิจัยร่วมกับนักวิจัยจากทั้งในประเทศไทยและจากสถ าบันวิจัยแมกซ์พลังก์ (Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology) ประเทศเยอรมนี เริ่มตั้งแต่ปี พ.ศ.๒๕๕๙ จนถึงปัจจุบัน ผลงานชิ้นนี้เผยแพร่ในวารสาร Molecular Biology and Evolution ซึ่งศึกษาดีเอ็นเอในรูปแบบของ SNPs ในจีโนมของกลุ่มชาติพันธุ์ในประเทศไทย และเปรียบเทียบกับประชากรอื่นๆ ในเอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้

Main results in which it was found that the DNA of Thai people in each region was different. Urban people, the main population in northern Thailand. They have DNA similar to the Dai people from Sipsongpanna / Xishuangbanna in Southern China. Tai Isan orNorth Eastern people have a DNA that mixes between the Mon-Khmer speaking population and the DNA of the Tai people in Sipsongpanna. The DNA of Isaan people is different between men and women. Lao Isaan females have the same DNA as Tai Sipsongpanna. While Isan men have DNA like Mon-Khmer people. It should indicate past events and patterns of immigration.

ผลการศึกษาหลักๆ พบว่าดีเอ็นเอของคนไทยในแต่ละภูมิภาคมีความแตกต่างกั น คนเมืองซึ่งเป็นประชากรหลักในภาคเหนือของไทย มีดีเอ็นเอคล้ายกับชาวไดจากสิบสองปันนา ประเทศจีนตอนใต้ ส่วนคนอีสานมีดีเอ็นเอที่มีการผสมผสานระหว่างกลุ่มปร ะชากรที่พูดมอญ-เขมรกับดีเอ็นเอของคนไทยในสิบสองปันนา ซึ่งดีเอ็นเอของคนอีสานมีความต่างระหว่างชายกับ หญิง คนลาวอีสานเพศหญิงมีดีเอ็นเอเหมือนคนไทยสิบสองป ันนา ในขณะที่ผู้ชายอีสานมีดีเอ็นเอเหมือนคนมอญ-เขมร น่าจะบ่งบอกเหตุการณ์ในอดีต และรูปแบบของการอพยพ

In the immigration of the Isan Lao people is probably the immigration of both men and a large group of women. However, because the original population in the northeastern region is now Mon-Khmer people when the marriage pattern. This makes the DNA of the people of Isan today look like this.

ในการอพยพของคนลาวอีสานน่าจะเป็นการอพยพมาทั้งช าย และหญิงกลุ่มใหญ่ แต่เนื่องจากประชากรที่เป็นประชากรดั้งเดิมที่อยู่ใน พื้นที่ภาคอีสานปัจจุบันเป็นคนกลุ่มมอญ-เขมรมาก่อน เมื่อเกิดรูปแบบการแต่งงาน ทำให้ดีเอ็นเอของคนอีสานในปัจจุบันเป็นแบบนี้

As for Thai people in the Central and Southern regions, they have DNA that is similar to the DNA of the Mon people. And it was also found that the DNA of the Central and Southern people still have some of the same as those of South Indians which represents the genetic mix from South Asia to the land of Suvarnabhumi which can be estimated to be 600-700 years old, which corresponds to the Ayutthaya period of Thailand. This research is the first study to describe in detail how the genetic structure of Thai people in each region is different and how different is it. I was honored by the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution to design an image for the journal cover. It is a picture of Sukhothai (old captital of Thailand) and has a DNA strand at the center and a ray of light breaks from the center which shows the diversity of the DNA of people in Thailand.

ส่วนคนไทยภาคกลางและภาคใต้มีดีเอ็นเอที่เหมือนดีเอ็น เอของชาวมอญ และยังพบว่าดีเอ็นเอของคนภาคกลางและภาคใต้ยังมีบางส่ วนเหมือนกับชาวอินเดียตอนใต้ ซึ่งแสดงถึงการผสมผสานทางพันธุกรรมจากเอเชียใต้สู่ดิ นแดนสุวรรณภูมิ ซึ่งสามารถประมาณอายุได้ ๖๐๐-๗๐๐ ปี ซึ่งตรงกับสมัยอยุธยาของไทย งานวิจัยชิ้นนี้เป็นงานวิจัยชิ้นแรกที่บ่งบอกถึงรายล ะเอียดโครงสร้างพันธุกรรมของคนไทยในแต่ละภาคว่ามีควา มแตกต่างกันและแตกต่างกันอย่างไร ผมได้รับเกียรติจากวารสาร Molecular Biology and Evolution ให้ออกแบบภาพลงปกวารสารด้วย เป็นภาพของสุโขทัย (เมืองหลวงเก่าของประเทศไทย) และมีเกลียวดีเอ็นเอตรงศูนย์กลางและมีแสงรัศมีแตกออก จากจุดศูนย์กลาง ซึ่งแสดงถึงความหลากหลายของดีเอ็นเอของกลุ่มคนในประเ ทศไทย

Why did I choose Sukhothai as the background for the cover photo? ทำไมผมจึงเลือกภาพสุโขทัยเป็นฉากหลังของภาพปก

Because Sukhothai was the first kingdom of the Tai Kadai people in the historical period in Suvarnabhumi. And after Sukhothai, there has been a mass migration of people in Southeast Asia. And the diversity of ethnic groups in the territory of Thailand today also occurred during the historical period. So I choose Sukhothai because it is like the beginning of diversity.

เพราะเนื่องจากสุโขทัยเป็นอาณาจักรแรกของกลุ่มคนไทกะ ไดสมัยประวัติศาสตร์ในสุวรรณภูมิ และหลังจากสุโขทัยเป็นต้นมาได้มีการอพยพเคลื่อนย้ายข องผู้คนจำนวนมากในเอเชียอาคเนย์ และความหลากหลายของกลุ่มชาติพันธุ์ในดินแดนของประเทศ ไทยในปัจจุบันก็เกิดขึ้นในช่วงยุคประวัติศาสตร์ ดังนั้นผมจึงเลือกสุโขทัย เพราะเปรียบเสมือนจุดเริ่มต้นของความหลากหลาย

Studying the DNA like this, can you answer that the true Dainess/Tainess/Thainess really exists?

ศึกษาดีเอ็นเอมาแบบนี้ ตอบได้หรือไม่ว่า/ไต/ไทยแท้มีอยู่จริงไหม

(Laugh)
No, Thai people in the central region from about 300-400 samples from many provinces, including Ratchaburi, Kanchanaburi, Phichit, Singburi, Chachoengsao, both the upper middle, middle middle and lower middle. It's all Mon and then we have a lot of samples from Mon, Ban Phaeo Mon, Sangkhla Mon, Korat Mon, which these Mon people have similar DNA. And it's like the DNA of the people in the central region that I mentioned a lot. If the statistical test was not different among ethnic groups that means that Thai people in the central region are Mon people.

(หัวเราะ) ไม่มีครับ คนไทยภาคกลางจากตัวอย่างประมาณ 300-400 ตัวอย่างจากหลายจังหวัด ทั้งราชบุรี กาญจนบุรี พิจิตร สิงห์บุรี ฉะเชิงเทรา ทั้งกลางตอนบน กลางตรงกลาง และกลางข้างล่าง เป็นมอญหมดเลย แล้วเราก็มีตัวอย่างจากมอญเยอะมาก มอญบ้านแพ้ว มอญสังขละ มอญโคราช ซึ่งชาวมอญเหล่านี้มีดีเอ็นเอคล้ายกัน แล้วเหมือนกับดีเอ็นเอของกลุ่มตัวอย่างคนภาคกลางที่ผ มกล่าวไปมากๆ ถ้าเทสทางสถิติแล้วไม่แตกต่างกันในกลุ่มชาติพัน ธุ์ นั่นแปลว่าคนไทยภาคกลางคือคนมอญ

Tsakhur
03-07-2022, 08:30 AM
I've been told the G25 Northern Han averages, Han_Sichuan, and Han_Shanghai all have some minor West Eurasian component, although I'm not sure if this is real or just noise.


Vietnamese having some minor Austronesian-like affinity would be another way they genetically resemble South China Sea coast Han. I wouldn't be surprised if this affinity predates the Vietnamese conquest of Champa, as this would suggest that this affinity is similar to that found among Guangdong and Fujian Han. (Although if the G25 models involving Liangdao 1 and 2 are to believed, the predominant Austronesian component in Fujian Han is similar to that among Taiwanese aborigines and Filipinos, but different from that among other Han groups).

Was it Ryukendo who told you this? Like around 0-3%? Is Han_Jiangsu considered as Northern Han? I'm not too surprised though if Northern Han has it considering their geographic location and vicinity to the Mongols, Khitans, Tungusics other nomadic groups who seem to carry some Western admixture. It's weird for Han_Sichuan and Han_Shanghai and likely noise though. If Han_Sichuan have it, they probably got it from a Tibetan-like population. I can't think where any potential Western input into Shanghai Han could originated from.

Interesting. I believe the Zhejiang and Jiangsu Han could have some Tai-Kadai-like admixture because the Viets score more Han and less Dai when I utilize the two Han subgroups as proxy for Chinese admixture into Viets along with adding an Austronesian source (Igorot) into the model. But when I used Han_Henan and Han_Shandong, the Kinh/Viets score less Han and more Dai. What's interesting is that the Austroasiatic (Mlabri) score increase for the Viets when Han_Zhejiang and Jiangsu are used but decreased when Henan and Shandong are utilized as the Chinese source. I wonder is there some correlation or inverse relation there.

So the other Han populations have different type of Austronesian component than the Fujian Han when Liangdao 1,2 participated in the runs? I will have to investigate this.

Here are the new runs involving Viets and Tai-Kadais: this time adding an Austronesian input (Igorot) into the models.

Using Han_Zhejiang first: the Han Chinese ancestry in the Vietnamese seems slightly inflated when including Igorot into the run

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.9257% / 0.00925703
58.8 Dai
22.6 Han_Zhejiang
11.0 Mlabri
6.8 Igorot
0.8 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu


Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.2180% / 0.01218017
47.2 Dai
44.6 Han_Zhejiang
8.2 Igorot


Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 0.8324% / 0.00832413
58.0 Dai
20.2 Han_Zhejiang
12.6 Mlabri
8.4 Igorot
0.8 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Tai_Lue
Distance: 1.2536% / 0.01253578
77.2 Dai
9.8 Han_Zhejiang
8.0 Mlabri
5.0 Igorot

Target: Mulam
Distance: 1.2097% / 0.01209670
67.6 Dai
24.8 Han_Zhejiang
7.6 Igorot

Target: Dong_Guizhou
Distance: 1.3059% / 0.01305920
59.6 Dai
36.0 Han_Zhejiang
4.4 Igorot

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.2786% / 0.01278605
72.8 Dai
19.4 Han_Zhejiang
7.8 Igorot

Target: Gelao
Distance: 1.4637% / 0.01463660
70.6 Dai
18.2 Han_Zhejiang
10.0 Mlabri
1.2 Igorot

Target: Li
Distance: 1.9007% / 0.01900714
77.2 Dai
14.6 Igorot
8.2 Han_Zhejiang

Target: Maonan
Distance: 1.7346% / 0.01734596
77.8 Dai
12.6 Han_Zhejiang
9.6 Igorot

Target: Dong_Hunan
Distance: 1.4184% / 0.01418444
56.0 Dai
40.6 Han_Zhejiang
3.4 Igorot

Here are all individual Viets run with Han_Zhejiang and Igorot:

https://i.imgur.com/F1WT0jM.png

However, when Han_Shandong is utilized instead, the Han admixture in Viets seem to decrease:

Target: Kinh_Vietnam
Distance: 0.9658% / 0.00965837
67.4 Dai
17.2 Han_Shandong
8.0 Mlabri
6.8 Igorot
0.6 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Vietnamese_(Dong_Profile)
Distance: 1.7037% / 0.01703737
54.4 Dai
36.2 Han_Shandong
9.4 Igorot

Target: Vietnamese_(Kinh_Profile)
Distance: 0.9232% / 0.00923241
67.2 Dai
14.8 Han_Shandong
9.4 Mlabri
8.0 Igorot
0.6 Brahmin_Tamil_Nadu

Target: Tai_Lue
Distance: 1.2851% / 0.01285128
82.2 Dai
6.8 Han_Shandong
6.2 Mlabri
4.8 Igorot


Target: Mulam
Distance: 1.5069% / 0.01506874
72.6 Dai
19.4 Han_Shandong
8.0 Igorot

Target: Dong_Guizhou
Distance: 1.6436% / 0.01643586
65.8 Dai
29.0 Han_Shandong
5.2 Igorot

Target: Zhuang
Distance: 1.4895% / 0.01489533
77.0 Dai
15.0 Han_Shandong
8.0 Igorot

Target: Gelao
Distance: 1.5534% / 0.01553426
80.8 Dai
12.4 Han_Shandong
6.2 Mlabri
0.6 Igorot

Target: Li
Distance: 1.9816% / 0.01981625
80.6 Dai
14.2 Igorot
5.2 Han_Shandong

Target: Maonan
Distance: 1.8682% / 0.01868186
81.6 Dai
9.4 Igorot
9.0 Han_Shandong

Target: Dong_Hunan
Distance: 1.9059% / 0.01905914
63.0 Dai
32.6 Han_Shandong
4.4 Igorot

Here are also the run using Han_Shandong for all individual Viets:
https://i.imgur.com/xvag2LN.png

The distance fits hardly change when substituting Han_Zhejiang with Han_Shandong for the Vietnamese individuals, but interestingly, the fits worsen for all the Tai-Kadais. So looks like the latter really prefer Han_Zhejiang while for the Vietnamese it barely makes a difference where the Chinese source is from.

Also the Chinese and Austroasiatic ancestries in Viets now doesn't look as inflate when using the Shandong Han.

Max_H
03-07-2022, 10:33 AM
The Austroasiatic-related ancestry in ISEA is generally thought to be Neolithic, based on archaeological evidence. Our Dong Son ancient samples are already relatively close to Tai and Kinh.

Which study reported the Dong Son samples? Do you know if they are in Global25?

Max_H
03-07-2022, 10:45 AM
Cultural diffusion without much genetic admixture? That's interesting. Do you think the hanging coffin tradition of Northern Philippines also comes from Southern China?

You mean the admixture is more one direction mostly from Northern Thai/Lanna towards Central according to that paper?

That's interesting. How much more northern or Yellow River-related stuff do the Ami have compared to Igorots or VUT_2900BP? That would mean the Dai and other Tai-Kadai groups would already have some Yellow River stuff then before migrating down into SE Asia. These Austronesians from Vanuatu created the Lapita culture right?

Hmm what's interesting is why the amount of Austroasiatic-related ancestry pretty low in Viets?:

Truthfully, I do not know the exact amounts but I think Ami are around 10-15% more northern compared to Igorot or VUT_2900BP. And yes the Vanuatu samples are from Lapita sites. I do agree that Dai and other Tai-Kadai groups have some amount of northern admixture compared to Austroasiatic or Austronesian groups perhaps they also have some Austronesian ancestry (or originate from a mixture where the Austronesian component than the Austroasiatic-like, which agrees with linguistic).

However, Tai-Kadai should perhaps be better thought of in terms of inland vs coastal southern East Asian ancestry, with former more related to Austroasiatic speakers and latter to Austronesians.

Yes, I think admixture has mostly been north-> south among Thai groups.

As for the spread of the hanging coffin tradition, its spread is likely due to both genetic and cultural diffusion. In south-west China, for example, I believe it arrived with the Ba people or their ancestors (which may have interacted with the originators of the Dong Son culture as well). The origins of hanging coffin burial custom seem to be in eastern China around modern-day Fujian more than 3000 years ago. It is likely that the tradition arrived in Philippines from southern China as well but as to when, I do not know.


I've been told the G25 Northern Han averages, Han_Sichuan, and Han_Shanghai all have some minor West Eurasian component, although I'm not sure if this is real or just noise.

I think we had discussed this some time ago actually, yes Shanghai show some traces of it, not Sichuan in my runs. Shandong do not really do either but Shanxi and Henan do. Interestingly, in Shanghai Han looks Near East-related but in Henan more European/northern-like. I believe the Shanghai percentages to be noise, the fit is a bit higher than average too, in Henan and Shanxi is probably real.

Academic papers have shown low amounts of West Eurasian (2-5%) in most of NW Han, including Gansu, Qinghai (can exceed 7% in Han there) and traces in Shaanxi. However a recent paper by Guangling He did not found such admixture in Dongbei Han. Nor did Wang's big paper on East Asia found in it eastern Han such as those from Jiangsu or Zhejiang but it could be there in trace amounts of course.

Edit: Quick Global 25 of Han_Shanghai, Han_Sichuan and Han_Zhejiang for reference (notice how fit is worse for Shanghai Han)

Target: Han_Shanghai
Distance: 2.6138% / 0.02613818
88.0 CHN_Yellow_River_LN
10.8 TWN_Hanben
1.2 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N

Target: Han_Sichuan
Distance: 1.5852% / 0.01585188
75.6 CHN_Yellow_River_LN
21.2 TWN_Hanben
2.8 CHN_Liangdao2_N (Likely inland southern ancestry-related)
0.4 CHN_Upper_Yellow_River_LN

Target: Han_Zhejiang
Distance: 1.4022% / 0.01402165
82.0 CHN_Yellow_River_LN
18.0 TWN_Hanben

Megalophias
03-07-2022, 09:54 PM
Which study reported the Dong Son samples? Do you know if they are in Global25?
McColl et al (2018), "The prehistorical peopling of Southeast Asia" - but the samples are poor quality. Vt779 and Vt781, from Thanh Hoa province, 200-400 BC. Vt777, though labelled as Late Neolithic, is from the same time and area as the other two. I2497, from Lipson et al (2018), "Ancient genomes document multiple waves of migration in Southeast Asian prehistory", is probably a bit later, but genetically similar and maybe also counts as Dong Son, not sure; the supplement only talks about Dong Son material but mentions that the area was colonized by Han Chinese around this time.

MNOPSC1b
03-08-2022, 12:15 AM
Interesting. I believe the Zhejiang and Jiangsu Han could have some Tai-Kadai-like admixture

According to autosomal data from 23Mofang (a Chinese genetic testing company), only the Cantonese and certain Southwest Mandarin speaking groups have significant Tai-Kradai admixtures, whereas among the Wu-speaking populations in Jiangsu and Zhejiang, the Tai-Kradai component is negligible, only around 1% at most. For comparison, it can reach as high as 26% among the Cantonese speakers in Wuzhou, GX province.

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

Howard23
03-08-2022, 03:07 AM
IMO, the origin of the Tai-Kadai can be traced back to the Liangzhu culture five thousand years ago and the ancient Yue Kingdom three thousand years ago, both of which are located in Zhejiang. There were many Yue Kingdoms along the southeastern coast of China during the Warring States Period, but the Yue Kingdom located in Zhejiang is the most recorded in ancient documents. The paternal haplogroup that may be associated with the expansion of the ancient Yue Kingdom is O1a-F492. According to the paper below, the expansion of the Tai-Kadai-speaking population into Southeast Asia was relatively late, about 2,000 years ago.



Contrasting Paternal and Maternal Genetic Histories of Thai and Lao Populations
Wibhu Kutanan, Jatupol Kampuansai, Metawee Srikummool, Andrea Brunelli, Silvia Ghirotto, Leonardo Arias, Enrico Macholdt, Alexander Hübner, Roland Schröder, Mark Stoneking
Molecular Biology and Evolution, Volume 36, Issue 7, July 2019, Pages 1490–1506, https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msz083
Published: 12 April 2019

It is generally thought that AA languages were brought to the Thai/Lao region by Neolithic farmers from southern China, whereas TK languages were brought by a later, Bronze Age migration, also from southern China (Bellwood 2018). The Neolithic expansion was ∼2–3 ka before the expansion of TK languages; thus, the AA people were thought to be present before the TK expansion.
……
In addition, we found another significant expansion during the Bronze age ∼2 ka that involves TK-speaking populations, reflected by some haplogroups prevalent in the TK, for example, O1a* (fig. 8). This TK-related expansion is consistent with the strong expansion detected in the BSP of Xishuangbanna Dai (fig. 7) and corresponds with the results of a recent ancient DNA study (McColl et al. 2018). The southward expansion of the indigenous southern Chinese TK speakers to MSEA was probably driven by the Han Chinese expansion from the Yellow River basin to southern China during the Qin dynasty, starting ∼2.5 ka (Bellwood 2018). The migration and expansion of prehistoric TK groups during the Bronze Age has had a profound influence on the modern Thais and Laotians in term of languages and genes. Nowadays, TK languages are mostly concentrated in present-day Thailand and Laos, and the relatively high level of TK genetic homogeneity might be also driven by this recent expansion.

MNOPSC1b
03-08-2022, 04:10 AM
IMO, the origin of the Tai-Kadai can be traced back to the Liangzhu culture five thousand years ago and the ancient Yue Kingdom three thousand years ago, both of which are located in Zhejiang. There were many Yue Kingdoms along the southeastern coast of China during the Warring States Period, but the Yue Kingdom located in Zhejiang is the most recorded in ancient documents. The paternal haplogroup that may be associated with the expansion of the ancient Yue Kingdom is O1a-F492. According to the paper below, the expansion of the Tai-Kadai-speaking population into Southeast Asia was relatively late, about 2,000 years ago.

This view is rather outdated and simplistic.

The Tai-Kradai and Liangzhu connection is yet to be established. The Liangzhu didn't leave us any written records so there's no way to decipher what their language was, and AFAIK there's no confirmed and published genetic or autosomal data about the Liangzhu either, making the determination of their identity even more difficult. I don't think we can reliably say that Liangzhu is Tai-Kradai at the moment. According to Blench (2018), early Daic peoples most likely originated from the Pearl River Delta rather than Zhejiang, and I support this view, judging by the fact that Cantonese still shares a noticeable portion of substratum vocabulary with Tai-Kradai languages and that genetically speaking they also have a rather high proportion of Tai-Kradai related component, as shown by the autosomal graph from 23 Mofang that I posted above.

And I also find the practice of assigning a particular haplogroup to a linguistic family to be rather narrow-minded and simplistic. Genetics and linguistics don't necessarily have a 1 to 1 correspondence. O1a-F492 reaches rather high frequencies among the peoples of Zhejiang, however its frequency among Tai-Kradai speaking peoples is rather low. Instead, the predominant haplogroup among Tai-Kradai peoples is O1b1a1-M95.

Here's the map from Blench (2018), showing the early Daic nucleus in the Pearl River valley of Guangdong and Guangxi.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Genesis_of_Daic_languages_and_their_relation_with_ Austronesians.png

okarinaofsteiner
03-08-2022, 04:24 AM
According to autosomal data from 23Mofang (a Chinese genetic testing company), only the Cantonese and certain Southwest Mandarin speaking groups have significant Tai-Kradai admixtures, whereas among the Wu-speaking populations in Jiangsu and Zhejiang, the Tai-Kradai component is negligible, only around 1% at most. For comparison, it can reach as high as 26% among the Cantonese speakers in Wuzhou, GX province.

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

That doesn’t mean Jiangsu and Zhejiang Han can’t be modeled as being on a cline between Wuzhuangguoliang and Daic populations. They are still shifted towards Daic groups relative to Northern Han, just by less than Sichuan/Chongqing, Fujian, and Guangdong.


Was it Ryukendo who told you this? Like around 0-3%? Is Han_Jiangsu considered as Northern Han? I'm not too surprised though if Northern Han has it considering their geographic location and vicinity to the Mongols, Khitans, Tungusics other nomadic groups who seem to carry some Western admixture. It's weird for Han_Sichuan and Han_Shanghai and likely noise though. If Han_Sichuan have it, they probably got it from a Tibetan-like population. I can't think where any potential Western input into Shanghai Han could originated from.

Interesting. I believe the Zhejiang and Jiangsu Han could have some Tai-Kadai-like admixture because the Viets score more Han and less Dai when I utilize the two Han subgroups as proxy for Chinese admixture into Viets along with adding an Austronesian source (Igorot) into the model. But when I used Han_Henan and Han_Shandong, the Kinh/Viets score less Han and more Dai. What's interesting is that the Austroasiatic (Mlabri) score increase for the Viets when Han_Zhejiang and Jiangsu are used but decreased when Henan and Shandong are utilized as the Chinese source. I wonder is there some correlation or inverse relation there. Jiangsu is generally considered a “southern” province (outside of population genetics) due to mostly being south of the Qinling-Huaihe line. But yes, I’ve heard that from @Ryukendo and from Razib Khan in the Chinese autosomal genetics podcast episode he did with Carl Zha.

okarinaofsteiner
03-08-2022, 04:37 AM
Here's the map from Blench (2018), showing the early Daic nucleus in the Pearl River valley of Guangdong and Guangxi.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Genesis_of_Daic_languages_and_their_relation_with_ Austronesians.png

It's plausible that the ancestors of Daic people migrated from somewhere further north, even though the Daic linguistic homeland (as far as we know) is in Pearl River basin. Genetically, modern-day Daic peoples definitely share more drift with Tibeto-Burmans than modern-day Austronesians.


Yeah, the terminology can get confusing. There is significant historical overlap between southern East Asia and Indochina due to migrations of ethno-linguistic groups within the last 2-3 thousand years.

Going off of Ryukendo's post, I think Thais are less "southern" than Filipinos in that Daic groups share more drift with Tibeto-Burmans than Austronesian groups do. This makes sense geographically- if you look on a map, you'll see that Thailand is a lot closer to Central China than the Philippines are.

At the same time, Thais have more Hoabinhian (SE Asian hunter gatherer) and actual South Asian ancestry than Taiwanese aborigines and Filipinos do. So if we consider Onge- and Papuan-like ancestry to shift populations further south than rice farmer-like ancestry (if we use Taiwan_Hanben as a proxy for rice farmer ancestry), then Thais will be more southern-shifted overall.

MNOPSC1b
03-08-2022, 01:42 PM
It's plausible that the ancestors of Daic people migrated from somewhere further north, even though the Daic linguistic homeland (as far as we know) is in Pearl River basin. Genetically, modern-day Daic peoples definitely share more drift with Tibeto-Burmans than modern-day Austronesians.

That’s debatable. From the PCA charts that I’ve seen over the years, Daic peoples are definitely much closer to Austroasiatic and Austronesian peoples than to Tibeto-Burmans. Only a few southern Tibeto-Burman groups, such as the Lahu, are close to Daic, whereas the majority of Tibeto-Burmans are much more northern.

Tsakhur
03-08-2022, 05:05 PM
According to autosomal data from 23Mofang (a Chinese genetic testing company), only the Cantonese and certain Southwest Mandarin speaking groups have significant Tai-Kradai admixtures, whereas among the Wu-speaking populations in Jiangsu and Zhejiang, the Tai-Kradai component is negligible, only around 1% at most. For comparison, it can reach as high as 26% among the Cantonese speakers in Wuzhou, GX province.

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

Interesting. If the Tai Kadai ancestry in Wu speakers from Jiangsu and Zhejiang is negligible, it is strange that in the models I run for the Viets, the Dai component decrease while the Han component increase and looks a bit inflated when I used Han_Zhejiang as the proxy. There must be some explanation for that.

Tsakhur
03-08-2022, 05:31 PM
Truthfully, I do not know the exact amounts but I think Ami are around 10-15% more northern compared to Igorot or VUT_2900BP. And yes the Vanuatu samples are from Lapita sites. I do agree that Dai and other Tai-Kadai groups have some amount of northern admixture compared to Austroasiatic or Austronesian groups perhaps they also have some Austronesian ancestry (or originate from a mixture where the Austronesian component than the Austroasiatic-like, which agrees with linguistic).

However, Tai-Kadai should perhaps be better thought of in terms of inland vs coastal southern East Asian ancestry, with former more related to Austroasiatic speakers and latter to Austronesians.

Yes, I think admixture has mostly been north-> south among Thai groups.

As for the spread of the hanging coffin tradition, its spread is likely due to both genetic and cultural diffusion. In south-west China, for example, I believe it arrived with the Ba people or their ancestors (which may have interacted with the originators of the Dong Son culture as well). The origins of hanging coffin burial custom seem to be in eastern China around modern-day Fujian more than 3000 years ago. It is likely that the tradition arrived in Philippines from southern China as well but as to when, I do not know.



I think we had discussed this some time ago actually, yes Shanghai show some traces of it, not Sichuan in my runs. Shandong do not really do either but Shanxi and Henan do. Interestingly, in Shanghai Han looks Near East-related but in Henan more European/northern-like. I believe the Shanghai percentages to be noise, the fit is a bit higher than average too, in Henan and Shanxi is probably real.

Academic papers have shown low amounts of West Eurasian (2-5%) in most of NW Han, including Gansu, Qinghai (can exceed 7% in Han there) and traces in Shaanxi. However a recent paper by Guangling He did not found such admixture in Dongbei Han. Nor did Wang's big paper on East Asia found in it eastern Han such as those from Jiangsu or Zhejiang but it could be there in trace amounts of course.

Edit: Quick Global 25 of Han_Shanghai, Han_Sichuan and Han_Zhejiang for reference (notice how fit is worse for Shanghai Han)

Target: Han_Shanghai
Distance: 2.6138% / 0.02613818
88.0 CHN_Yellow_River_LN
10.8 TWN_Hanben
1.2 IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N

Target: Han_Sichuan
Distance: 1.5852% / 0.01585188
75.6 CHN_Yellow_River_LN
21.2 TWN_Hanben
2.8 CHN_Liangdao2_N (Likely inland southern ancestry-related)
0.4 CHN_Upper_Yellow_River_LN

Target: Han_Zhejiang
Distance: 1.4022% / 0.01402165
82.0 CHN_Yellow_River_LN
18.0 TWN_Hanben

Do you think the Ami received this northern admixture before their Austronesian ancestors left Southern China for Taiwan? I also believe the Dai and other Tai-Kadais might have some minor Austronesian ancestry because when in I did some G25 models on them, their distance fit seems to improve when I added an Austronesian source (Igorot) into the run. Would this mean the Tai-Kadai groups are genetically closer to Austronesians than they are to Austroasiatics as well?

So there are two main Southern East Asian ancestries; one inland/Austroasiatic-related and one coastal/Austronesian-related? I used to believe that Tai-Kadai would be the third separate Southern East Asian lineage. Would Tai-Kadai be mostly coastal+ some inland mix?

Can the Tibeto-Burman/NPL_Chokhopani-related ancestry which seems to be the main East Asian ancestry in the Burmese, Naxi, Karen and NE Indian groups be considered the third or fourth Southern East Asian lineage?

That's what I also thought regarding the admixture in Thai groups since the Tais who introduced the language to what's now known as Thailand (and Laos) are originally from Southern China.

Would the Ba people be Austronesian or Tai-Kadai?

Regarding the Western affinity in some Han groups, I also believe the signal in Shanghai Han to be noise. But assuming they have it, where would they get the minor Near East-related stuff from? Arab traders and merchants who come to trade and spread Islam? And it would be strange if they have it but the Han_Zhejiang and Han_Shandong don't have it since Shanghai seems to be located next to Zhejiang and not too far from Shandong.

Would the Western Eurasian in the Han from Gansu, Qinghai and Shaanxi come from the Iranic, Turkic, Mongolic traders, nomads and settlers who used to roam in the vicinities of the region or arrive in China through the Silk Road?

okarinaofsteiner
03-09-2022, 06:05 AM
So there are two main Southern East Asian ancestries; one inland/Austroasiatic-related and one coastal/Austronesian-related? I used to believe that Tai-Kadai would be the third separate Southern East Asian lineage. Would Tai-Kadai be mostly coastal+ some inland mix?

Can the Tibeto-Burman/NPL_Chokhopani-related ancestry which seems to be the main East Asian ancestry in the Burmese, Naxi, Karen and NE Indian groups be considered the third or fourth Southern East Asian lineage?

That's what I also thought regarding the admixture in Thai groups since the Tais who introduced the language to what's now known as Thailand (and Laos) are originally from Southern China.

Would the Ba people be Austronesian or Tai-Kadai?


I figured Chokhopani was a "northern" East Asian ancestry (Tibeto-Burman is generally thought of a "northern" branch of agriculturalist East Asia, but agriculturalist East Asia is "southern" compared to nomadic "Siberian-like" groups).

Daic is apparently some mix of Austroasiatic and an Austronesian-like component. I'm guessing their shared drift with Tibeto-Burmans has to do with both having some Proto-Austroasiatic like mixture that Proto-Austronesians don't have.
https://i.imgur.com/PfJUjN9.png

I agree with @MNOPS, I think at least some of the ancient Ba people could have been Austroasiatic speakers. They're an inland/continental group who lived in what is now the Chongqing area so they can't possibly be Austronesian.

Tsakhur
03-09-2022, 05:13 PM
I figured Chokhopani was a "northern" East Asian ancestry (Tibeto-Burman is generally thought of a "northern" branch of agriculturalist East Asia, but agriculturalist East Asia is "southern" compared to nomadic "Siberian-like" groups).

Daic is apparently some mix of Austroasiatic and an Austronesian-like component. I'm guessing their shared drift with Tibeto-Burmans has to do with both having some Proto-Austroasiatic like mixture that Proto-Austronesians don't have.
https://i.imgur.com/PfJUjN9.png

I agree with @MNOPS, I think at least some of the ancient Ba people could have been Austroasiatic speakers. They're an inland/continental group who lived in what is now the Chongqing area so they can't possibly be Austronesian.

What about Hmong_Mien, would it be a "northern East Asian component as well just like Chokhopani/Tibeto-Burman lineage?

Yes that could be the case. Proto-Austronesians lack this Proto-Austroasiatic-like admixture?

Thanks for the infographics btw.

Howard23
03-10-2022, 08:53 AM
According to the Y-Tree logic, it is speculated that the Austronesian (O1a) entered Taiwan Island through the glacial land bridge during the LGM period, and O1b-P49 entered the Korean Peninsula at the same time. Papers speculating gene flow based on archaeological culture are not credible, and can only fool some people who lack reasoning ability. There have been paper on Liangzhu culture(aDNA) for a long time. The upstream type of O1a-F492 appeared frequently in Taiwan's aDNA, but none of them appeared in mainland ancient DNA, which indicated that F492 was probably originated from Taiwan.

Ebizur
03-10-2022, 11:07 AM
According to the Y-Tree logic, it is speculated that the Austronesian (O1a) entered Taiwan Island through the glacial land bridge during the LGM period, and O1b-P49 entered the Korean Peninsula at the same time. Papers speculating gene flow based on archaeological culture are not credible, and can only fool some people who lack reasoning ability. There have been paper on Liangzhu culture(aDNA) for a long time. The upstream type of O1a-F492 appeared frequently in Taiwan's aDNA, but none of them appeared in mainland ancient DNA, which indicated that F492 was probably originated from Taiwan.Judging from the Y-DNA of present-day Chinese on 23mofang, it appears that O-F492 (TMRCA 3360 years), which accounts for about 47.3% of all members of O1a-M119 on 23mofang, should have originated near the lower reaches of the Yangtze River (Zhejiang, Shanghai, Jiangsu).

Do you mean that you think that O-F492 may have originated in a descendant of someone who has migrated from Taiwan to the area around the mouth of the Yangtze River?

O-F492 is a subclade of O-CTS8501 (TMRCA 4000 years), which is tabulated on the YFull tree as O-K612 (formed 4000 [95% CI 4800 <-> 3300] ybp, TMRCA 4000 [95% CI 4800 <-> 3300] ybp).

The following are members of O-CTS8501(xF492):

O-CTS8501 > O-CTS4585 > O-Y13986 > O-FGC15402 (TMRCA 1720 years) 34 members
Zhejiang x8
Beijing x4
Jiangsu x4
Anhui x3
Shanghai x3
Henan x2
Hubei x2
Sichuan x2
Hunan x1
Jiangxi x1
Liaoning x1
Shaanxi x1
Shanxi x1
undisclosed x1

O-Y13984/FGC15402 (formed 2700 [95% CI 3600 <-> 1950] ybp, TMRCA 2500 [95% CI 3600 <-> 1450] ybp) on YFull:
Jiangsu x3
Beijing (Han) x1
undisclosed x1

O-CTS8501 > O-CTS4585 > O-Y13986 > O-MF6441 (TMRCA 2400 years)
Zhejiang x11
Hubei x2
Shanghai x2
Sichuan x2
Hebei x1
Henan x1
Liaoning x1
Yunnan x1

O-Y71659/O-MF6441 (formed 2700 [95% CI 3600 <-> 1950] ybp, TMRCA 650 [95% CI 1250 <-> 325] ybp) on YFull:
Zhejiang x2

O-CTS8501 > O-CTS4585 > O-Y13986 (TMRCA 2400 years) 6 members
Ye 叶 from Lishui, Zhejiang x1
Cai 蔡 from Wuhan, Hubei x1
Cai Wei 蔡伟 from Wuhan, Hubei x1
Qu 曲 from Dalian, Liaoning x1
Qu 曲 from Daqing, Heilongjiang x1
Xu 徐 from Hangzhou, Zhejiang x1

O-CTS8501 > O-CTS4585 > O-BY77388 (TMRCA 2000 years) 4 members
Wang 汪 Han Chinese from Taizhou, Zhejiang x1
Zhang 张 Han Chinese from Jining, Shandong x1
Su 苏 Han Chinese from Shangqiu, Henan x1
Han 韩 Han Chinese from Lianyungang, Jiangsu x1

O-CTS8501 (TMRCA 4000 years) 22 members
Hubei x6
Jiangsu x6
Zhejiang x3
Guangdong x2
Henan x2
Beijing x1
Sichuan x1
Yunnan x1

Considering the present-day distribution of members of O-CTS8501(xF492), it appears to me that the entire O-CTS8501 clade should have originated somewhere near the Yangtze River downstream of its confluence with the Han River at Wuhan.

Note the lack of any known member of O-CTS8501(xF492) from Fujian.

MNOPSC1b
03-10-2022, 02:44 PM
According to the Y-Tree logic, it is speculated that the Austronesian (O1a) entered Taiwan Island through the glacial land bridge during the LGM period, and O1b-P49 entered the Korean Peninsula at the same time. Papers speculating gene flow based on archaeological culture are not credible, and can only fool some people who lack reasoning ability. There have been paper on Liangzhu culture(aDNA) for a long time. The upstream type of O1a-F492 appeared frequently in Taiwan's aDNA, but none of them appeared in mainland ancient DNA, which indicated that F492 was probably originated from Taiwan.

LOL there's nothing indicating F492 originated from Taiwan. Taiwanese aborigines mostly belong to P203, M110, and M50 branches, while F492 is clearly a Sinitic branch. Despite reaching the highest frequencies around Jiangsu/Shanghai/Zhejiang, F492 is actually quite widespread in China and can be found in many provinces of Northern China as well.

And AFAIK nothing has been published about Liangzhu (aDNA).

Skhznamk
03-10-2022, 05:28 PM
The Dai and Khmers definitely have been extensively mixed in Thailand. I can’t tell most Thais and Cambodians apart except some in the N and Upper NE. Even in Bangkok where it’s supposed to have the most Chinese immigrants, the generic “Chinese”-looking ones are few and far between compared to the former but concentrated in shopping malls. Same for Southern Thais and Malays. Modern Thais seem to be a mixture of Dai + Khmer + Chinese and a pinch of South Indian.

Megalophias
03-11-2022, 12:22 AM
And AFAIK nothing has been published about Liangzhu (aDNA).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17657509/
All the Y DNA from Liangzhu sites of Maqiao and Xindili was O1-M119. This is a very old study and only typed a few SNPs, so I would take it with a large grain of salt, but the results seem plausible.

Liangdao 1, ~6200 BC, from Liang Island off the coast of Fujian (much closer to mainland than to Taiwan), had O1a-M119(xO1a1a1-M307, O1a2-M110); at least one of the Late Neolithic individuals from Tanshishan, Fujian, ~2300 BC, had O1a2-M110. A number of samples from Taiwan (Hanben Iron Age) had O1a1a1-F140 or F78, upstream of F492; a couple others had O1a2-M110.

So it is true that the one sample from the mainland that has any data downstream of M119 was not in the F492 line, but that is not exactly a viable sample size. There is no need for F492 to have migrated back from Taiwan, since F78 is quite old and the Taiwanese ancient samples are quite young.

MNOPSC1b
03-11-2022, 03:38 AM
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17657509/
All the Y DNA from Liangzhu sites of Maqiao and Xindili was O1-M119. This is a very old study and only typed a few SNPs, so I would take it with a large grain of salt, but the results seem plausible.

Liangdao 1, ~6200 BC, from Liang Island off the coast of Fujian (much closer to mainland than to Taiwan), had O1a-M119(xO1a1a1-M307, O1a2-M110); at least one of the Late Neolithic individuals from Tanshishan, Fujian, ~2300 BC, had O1a2-M110. A number of samples from Taiwan (Hanben Iron Age) had O1a1a1-F140 or F78, upstream of F492; a couple others had O1a2-M110.

So it is true that the one sample from the mainland that has any data downstream of M119 was not in the F492 line, but that is not exactly a viable sample size. There is no need for F492 to have migrated back from Taiwan, since F78 is quite old and the Taiwanese ancient samples are quite young.

I don't trust Li Hui and his 2007 study. He's a notorious academic in China. He even tested his own haplogroup wrong, at first he claimed that he belongs to O1-M119, but later he said it was a mistake he actually belongs to O2-M134. If he cannot correctly test his own haplogroup, how much credibility do you think his study on Liangzhu have? And plus it was from 2007, if Li was already able to test ancient genome and identify ancient haplogroups at that time, then why we don't see more follow-up studies from him on this matter later as technology progressed? Why Fu Qiaomei (a student of David Reich) didn't do a paper on the same Liangzhu samples that Li tested? Really, I don't trust Li's 2007 study, and I think he was lying about the data.

The samples from Hanben Iron Age are too young, they cannot prove that F492 originated from Taiwan. IMO F492 most likely originated from somewhere in Eastern China.

SG_Jun
03-11-2022, 12:06 PM
I don't trust Li Hui and his 2007 study. He's a notorious academic in China. He even tested his own haplogroup wrong, at first he claimed that he belongs to O1-M119, but later he said it was a mistake he actually belongs to O2-M134. If he cannot correctly test his own haplogroup, how much credibility do you think his study on Liangzhu have? And plus it was from 2007, if Li was already able to test ancient genome and identify ancient haplogroups at that time, then why we don't see more follow-up studies from him on this matter later as technology progressed? Why Fu Qiaomei (a student of David Reich) didn't do a paper on the same Liangzhu samples that Li tested? Really, I don't trust Li's 2007 study, and I think he was lying about the data.

The samples from Hanben Iron Age are too young, they cannot prove that F492 originated from Taiwan. IMO F492 most likely originated from somewhere in Eastern China.

I'll have to echo that Li Hui is basically a joke in the Chinese field of genetic anthropology at this point. It is beyond me how he has managed to stay in this field for such a long period of time, and he does get plenty of flak from the community. Aside from his long-standing claim that Uralic languages originated in the Liao River valley region because of high concentration of Haplogroup N (and Finns are somehow descendants of these people who were 'chased' out of East Asia??? A well respected scholar wouldn't make such haphazard associations when Finnic and Chinese branches of N share tmrca mainly between 18000 and 11000 years ago).

There are also some videos published on YouTube of him spreading more misinformation, like the fact that 100% of Fujian paternal lineages are descended from Han Chinese in the Central Plains. He arrived at this conclusion when O-M134 has a TMRCA of some 14,000 ybp and some subclades of O-M134 (such as SK1730) could very well have existed among the Yue tribes indigenous to southern China well before the arrival of Central Plains Chinese.

In my opinion it is also more likely that F492 originated along the southeastern region of the Chinese mainland rather than on Taiwan.

Ebizur
03-11-2022, 12:59 PM
From 23mofang:

O-M119 > O-Y14027 > O-Z23193 > O-M307 > O-F446 > O-Z23448 > O-F140 > O-K611 > O-F206 > O-F78 > O-F81 > O-CTS2458 > O-F533 > O-ACT6568 (TMRCA 4200 years) 27 members total
Zhejiang x11
Fujian x4
Sichuan x4
Guizhou x2
Heilongjiang x2
Jiangxi x2
Guangxi x1
Jiangsu x1

O-M119 > O-Y14027 > O-Z23193 > O-M307 > O-F446 > O-Z23448 > O-F140 > O-K611 > O-F206 > O-F78 > O-F81 > O-CTS2458 > O-F533 > O-FGC30246 1 member (Fang 方 Han Chinese from undisclosed x1)

O-M119 > O-Y14027 > O-Z23193 > O-M307 > O-F446 > O-Z23448 > O-F140 > O-K611 > O-F206 > O-F78 > O-F81 > O-CTS2458 > O-F533 (TMRCA 4230 years) 282 members
Zhejiang x62
Jiangsu x34
Sichuan x26
Hubei x21
Fujian x14
Shanghai x13
Hunan x10
Guizhou x9
Henan x9
Yunnan x9
Anhui x8
Hebei x8
Shandong x8
Chongqing x7
Liaoning x7
Shaanxi x4
Shanxi x4
Guangdong x3
Beijing x2
Guangxi x2
Jiangxi x2
Jilin x2
Gansu x1
Hainan x1
Heilongjiang x1
Tianjin x1
undisclosed x14

Zhejiang also appears to be the most likely place of origin of O-F533 (TMRCA 4230 years), which is one level further upstream of O-F492 (TMRCA 3360 years) than O-CTS8501 (TMRCA 4000 years) on the current version of the phylogenetic tree at 23mofang.

A region encompassing Zhejiang, Shanghai, and Jiangsu is the strongest contender for the region of origin of every ancestor of O-F492 (TMRCA 3360 years) at least as far back as O-F206 (TMRCA 6040 years). However, a great deal of male-mediated gene flow between populations of the lower Yangtze basin and populations located further upstream (as far as the Sichuan Basin) appears to have occurred between the second half of the fourth millennium BCE and the first half of the second millennium BCE. It is not clear to me to what extent such gene flow has been effected in a large-scale, episodic manner versus to what extent it has been effected through small-scale migration of individuals over many generations. Cultural influence from the Lower Yangtze region is archaeologically apparent throughout the Daxi > Qujialing > Shijiahe cultural sequence in the Middle Yangtze region.

MNOPSC1b
03-12-2022, 01:31 AM
I'll have to echo that Li Hui is basically a joke in the Chinese field of genetic anthropology at this point. It is beyond me how he has managed to stay in this field for such a long period of time, and he does get plenty of flak from the community. Aside from his long-standing claim that Uralic languages originated in the Liao River valley region because of high concentration of Haplogroup N (and Finns are somehow descendants of these people who were 'chased' out of East Asia??? A well respected scholar wouldn't make such haphazard associations when Finnic and Chinese branches of N share tmrca mainly between 18000 and 11000 years ago).

There are also some videos published on YouTube of him spreading more misinformation, like the fact that 100% of Fujian paternal lineages are descended from Han Chinese in the Central Plains. He arrived at this conclusion when O-M134 has a TMRCA of some 14,000 ybp and some subclades of O-M134 (such as SK1730) could very well have existed among the Yue tribes indigenous to southern China well before the arrival of Central Plains Chinese.

In my opinion it is also more likely that F492 originated along the southeastern region of the Chinese mainland rather than on Taiwan.

Agreed with most of what you said. Yes Li Hui is indeed a joke, and he's in part responsible for the spread of Han nationalism on the Chinese Internet, since a lot of Han nationalists are still quoting his articles, despite they are severely outdated.

I'm not that sure about the frequencies of the paternal haplogroups in Fujian so I cannot comment on what you said about Fujian, but I think Lingnan (GD and GX)'s paternal haplogroups are mostly of native origin. SK1730 is a common lineage in GD and GX, but it's nearly completely absent from the Central Plains, and its upstream clades are found in Yunnan. This leads me to think that it may have had a Tibeto-Burman origin. Or alternatively, it could be of Austroasiatic origin and then mixed into both the Tibeto-Burman and the Tai-Kradai peoples. I don't think we can say that this lineage is of Sinitic origin at the moment cause it's not closely linked to the Central Plains at all, yet this doesn't stop Han nationalists from making absurd claims based on this lineage saying that GD and GX people are mostly of Central Plains descent.

Apart from SK1730, Cantonese and Kradai peoples also share some rare haplogroups like D1a1a2-F1070, C1b-B65, and F2-M427, which most likely had a pre-agricultural origin in Southern China or SE Asia, likely Hoabinhian. Far South Chinese D1a1a2-F1070 had separated from Tibeto-Burman D1a1a1-N1 around 35,000 years BP, close to the age of the entire NO clade.

Regarding F492, I don't think we can pinpoint its exact location of origin right now due to a lack of ancient samples belonging to this clade. But judging by the fact that it can be found in many Northern Chinese provinces as well (such as Henan and Liaoning), I don't think its origin was very southern.

Howard23
03-12-2022, 04:36 AM
Thank you @Ebizur and @Mnops* for the replies and data sorting, it was really hard work for me.

CC.Wang2020 demonstrated that the separation time of coastal populations and inland populations in southern China was ~16,400 years. Considering that recent mixing may make this time underestimated, the real separation time may be longer. ~7,000 years ago, China's coastal areas may have suffered marine transgression, this is demonstrated by many Chinese geology papers. China's coastal areas and inland have no geographical barriers and are vulnerable to the continuous expansion of the inland population. so I don't think Austronesians can survive long on the coasts of the mainland without being assimilated.

The Austronesians may have returned to the mainland ~6,000 years ago. They did not need to occupy a large area of land. They were good at water transportation for business and had no conflicts with the local indigenous people. The Taiwan natives (high frequency O1a) suffered from similar encounters with the American natives, showing an extra-long bottleneck period. Be careful of survivor bias when observing Y-tree.

M.Larenaa2021 argues that Austronesians came to the Philippines at least 8,000 years ago, prior to the appearance of rice. Some papers argue that the Austronesians did not arrive in Taiwan until 6,000 years ago, which is unconvincing.

In the PCA of QM.Fu2020, the ancient DNA (QIHE) of Fujian 8,000 years ago is closer to modern humans than the ancient DNA of 4,000 years ago, which can be interpreted as the return of Austronesians to the mainland, shifting the ancient DNA of 4,000 years ago.



Y chr Haplogroup Assignments:

XJS1309_M4 Xiaojingshan N1b1:F4201 (~N-F2905)
BS Boshan N1b1:F4201 (~N-F2905)
L5696_d Tanshishan O1b1a1a1a:F1252 (~O-F1252)
L5701_d Xitoucun O2a1:F573 (~O-L465) LowCoverage
L7415 Tanshishan O1a2:M50 (~O-M110)
LD1 Liangdao1 O1a (~O-M119)
I3612 Taiwan_Hanben O2a2b2a2b (~O-F706)
I3733 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a1 (~O-F78)
I3736 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a1 (~O-F78)
I3614 Taiwan_Hanben O2a2b2b1 (~O-Y125645)
I3618 Taiwan_Hanben O2a2b2a2b (~O-F706)
I3731 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a1 (~O-F78)
I3734 Taiwan_Hanben O2a2a1a2a2 (~O-Y26395)
I14934 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a1 (~O-F78)
I8080 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a (~O-F140)
I8081 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a (~O-F140)
I13695 Taiwan_Hanben O1a1a1a (~O-F140)

I used published genotype files to make these assignments.
List of positive and negative calls for each sample.

Last edited by kolgeh; 05-16-2020 at 08:06 PM.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20302-Mammoth-Paper-from-Qiaomei-Fu-s-group-on-Genetic-history-of-East-Asia&p=666845&viewfull=1#post666845


QM.Fu2020, https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20302-Mammoth-Paper-from-Qiaomei-Fu-s-group-on-Genetic-history-of-East-Asia&highlight=Hanben
CC.Wang2020, Genomic Insights into the Demographic History of Southern Chinese
M. Larenaa2021, Multiple migrations to the Philippines during the last 50,000 years

Ebizur
03-12-2022, 04:46 AM
I have found some data in some of Li Hui's papers to be a bit odd, but the large volume of high-resolution Y-DNA results available from 23mofang appears to support the primacy of the Yangtze Delta region for the origin of most Chinese members of haplogroup O1a-M119. It may be that he has happened to "guess" the region of origin of Chinese O-M119 correctly without having obtained reliable results from ancient DNA.

As for the sporadic appearance of O-F492 in other regions of China, the same can be said for almost any haplogroup, so I do not think it is a significant observation.

Even an extremely southern clade like O-M1280/M1283, which includes members of O-M95 from India, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Cambodia, Indonesia, etc., has some members on 23mofang from Heilongjiang and Inner Mongolia:

O-PK4 > O-M95 > O-M1310 > O-F1803 > O-M1280 (TMRCA 7850 years) 161 members
Sichuan x26
Guangdong x20
Hunan x18
Chongqing x15
Guangxi x15
Hubei x9
Henan x7
Fujian x6
Guizhou x6
Shanghai x5
Shaanxi x4
Gansu x3
Hebei x3
Heilongjiang x3
Yunnan x3
Shanxi x2
Zhejiang x2
Anhui x1
Beijing x1
Inner Mongolia (Baotou) x1
Jiangxi x1
Shandong x1
undisclosed x9

cf. C1b1a2b-AM00848 (TMRCA 4010 years):
Ma from Jilin, Jilin x2
Li from Panjin, Liaoning x1
Qiu from Shenyang, Liaoning x1
Zhang from Linxia Hui AP, Gansu x1
Ren from Tianshui, Gansu x1
Mou from Beijing x1
Murong 慕容 from Beijing x1
Si 四 from Beijing x1
Mei from Tianjin x1
Wei 卫 from directly administered area, Henan x1
Wang from Pingdingshan, Henan x1
Pan from Zhengzhou, Henan x1
Li from Zhumadian, Henan x1
Zhang Zilong 张子龙 from Tai'an, Shandong x1
Zhang from Zaozhuang, Shandong x1
Meng 蒙 from Suzhou, Jiangsu x1
Ge from Shanghai x1
Zhang from Shanghai x2
Liu from Jinhua, Zhejiang x1
Wei 韦 from Ningbo, Zhejiang x1
Yan 严 from Ningbo, Zhejiang x1
Cai from Quanzhou, Fujian x1
Chen from Quanzhou, Fujian x1
Lin from Taiwan x1
Tang from Xiaogan, Hubei x1
Pan from Changsha, Hunan x1
Qu from Changsha, Hunan x1
Peng from Chenzhou, Hunan x1
Zhou from Hengyang, Hunan x1
Chen from Huaihua, Hunan x1
Jing 荆 from Huaihua, Hunan x1
Ma from Huaihua, Hunan x1
Chen from Xiangxi Tujia & Miao AP, Hunan x1
Lu 陆 from Yongzhou, Hunan x1
Tan from Yueyang, Hunan x1
Gao from a county of Chongqing x1
Shi from a county of Chongqing x1
Xiang from a county of Chongqing x1
Zhao from a county of Chongqing x1
Li from a district of Chongqing x1
Mou 牟 from a district of Chongqing x1
Yang from a district of Chongqing x1
Zhang from a district of Chongqing x1
Chen from Bazhong, Sichuan x2
Chang 昌 from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Li from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Qing 青 from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Yu 喻 from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Gao from Liangshan Yi AP, Sichuan x1
Luo from Leshan, Sichuan x1
Tang from Leshan, Sichuan x1
Wang from Luzhou, Sichuan x1
Yi 易 from Luzhou, Sichuan x1
Li from Zigong, Sichuan x1
Liu from Zigong, Sichuan x1
Long from Anshun, Guizhou x1
Yu 余 from Anshun, Guizhou x1
Ban 班 from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Luo from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Meng 蒙 from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Wei 韦 from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Luo from Kunming, Yunnan x1
Gao from Qujing, Yunnan x1
Gao from Zhaotong, Yunnan x2
Zhang from Zhaotong, Yunnan x1
Li from Jieyang, Guangdong x1
Li from Shantou, Guangdong x1
Li from Yangjiang, Guangdong x1
Can 蚕 from Zhaoqing, Guangdong x1
Chen from Zhaoqing, Guangdong x1
Zhong from Zhaoqing, Guangdong x1
Liang from Baise, Guangxi x2
Lu 陆 from Baise, Guangxi x1
Luo from Baise, Guangxi x1
Li from Beihai, Guangxi x1
Luo from Beihai, Guangxi x1
Liang from Hechi, Guangxi x1
Long from Hechi, Guangxi x1
Mo from Hechi, Guangxi x1
Ling from Laibin, Guangxi x1
Liang from Liuzhou, Guangxi x1
Yang from Liuzhou, Guangxi x2
Meng 蒙 from Nanning, Guangxi x1
Ding from undisclosed x1
Pan from undisclosed x1
Tan from undisclosed x1
Tang from undisclosed x1
Zhang from undisclosed x1

Proper sampling is important, as is considering the totality of available data.

okarinaofsteiner
03-12-2022, 05:13 AM
What about Hmong_Mien, would it be a "northern East Asian component as well just like Chokhopani/Tibeto-Burman lineage?

Yes that could be the case. Proto-Austronesians lack this Proto-Austroasiatic-like admixture?

Thanks for the infographics btw.

Hmong-Mien seems to be a "southern" component, although the chart shows that Hmong-Mien groups have more ancient "northern" Trans-Himalayan admixture after Proto-Hmong-Mien split off from Austroasiatic.

SG_Jun
03-12-2022, 12:21 PM
Agreed with most of what you said. Yes Li Hui is indeed a joke, and he's in part responsible for the spread of Han nationalism on the Chinese Internet, since a lot of Han nationalists are still quoting his articles, despite they are severely outdated.

I'm not that sure about the frequencies of the paternal haplogroups in Fujian so I cannot comment on what you said about Fujian, but I think Lingnan (GD and GX)'s paternal haplogroups are mostly of native origin. SK1730 is a common lineage in GD and GX, but it's nearly completely absent from the Central Plains, and its upstream clades are found in Yunnan. This leads me to think that it may have had a Tibeto-Burman origin. Or alternatively, it could be of Austroasiatic origin and then mixed into both the Tibeto-Burman and the Tai-Kradai peoples. I don't think we can say that this lineage is of Sinitic origin at the moment cause it's not closely linked to the Central Plains at all, yet this doesn't stop Han nationalists from making absurd claims based on this lineage saying that GD and GX people are mostly of Central Plains descent.

Apart from SK1730, Cantonese and Kradai peoples also share some rare haplogroups like D1a1a2-F1070, C1b-B65, and F2-M427, which most likely had a pre-agricultural origin in Southern China or SE Asia, likely Hoabinhian. Far South Chinese D1a1a2-F1070 had separated from Tibeto-Burman D1a1a1-N1 around 35,000 years BP, close to the age of the entire NO clade.

Regarding F492, I don't think we can pinpoint its exact location of origin right now due to a lack of ancient samples belonging to this clade. But judging by the fact that it can be found in many Northern Chinese provinces as well (such as Henan and Liaoning), I don't think its origin was very southern.

Fujian likely has a greater percentage of paternal lineages originating from the Central Plains or other regions of northern China compared to Lingnan (Guangdong and Guangxi), but definitely nowhere near 100% like this man (who is under Li Hui's team) mentioned in this YouTube video: https://youtu.be/eMtlqrfEtBY; the majority of paternal lineages in Fujian are indeed still largely from southern China (which includes other southern regions like the ancient Chu, Wu and Yue kingdoms; and also the local Min population), not the Central Plains.

Indeed Li Hui's team actually has a knack for catering to Han nationalists' tastes, even if the information presented is always erroneous and an over generalization of the matter. I can't believe people are still lumping lineages which are tens of thousands of years old into 'Han', when the Han (or Huaxia) ethnicity in this case barely came into existence more than 4000 years ago. And for Fudan University to actually allow Li Hui's team to go around holding these conferences to appear 'legitimate' or 'professional' is worrying in itself, because it speaks volumes about the standard of the institution really.

I've actually engaged in debate with some ignorant or misinformed "newbies" or Han nationalists who have done little research on their own part to verify the content of the video, they just lap up whatever misinformation is being spread, and they always summon the argument that 'Li Hui is a professor, who are you?', which really pisses me off quite badly LOL because it is practically impossible for us to engage in meaningful discussion without being shut down by the existence of such "professors" around.

I stand corrected on what I had mentioned earlier that F492 originated in southeastern region of the Chinese mainland, which itself encompasses a pretty large territory. If I had to specifically pinpoint, indeed I'd also be inclined to think F492 originated somewhere further north, perhaps closer to the region of Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang etc. rather than Fujian or Guangdong.

MNOPSC1b
03-13-2022, 03:45 PM
I have found some data in some of Li Hui's papers to be a bit odd, but the large volume of high-resolution Y-DNA results available from 23mofang appears to support the primacy of the Yangtze Delta region for the origin of most Chinese members of haplogroup O1a-M119. It may be that he has happened to "guess" the region of origin of Chinese O-M119 correctly without having obtained reliable results from ancient DNA.

As for the sporadic appearance of O-F492 in other regions of China, the same can be said for almost any haplogroup, so I do not think it is a significant observation.

Even an extremely southern clade like O-M1280/M1283, which includes members of O-M95 from India, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Cambodia, Indonesia, etc., has some members on 23mofang from Heilongjiang and Inner Mongolia:

O-PK4 > O-M95 > O-M1310 > O-F1803 > O-M1280 (TMRCA 7850 years) 161 members
Sichuan x26
Guangdong x20
Hunan x18
Chongqing x15
Guangxi x15
Hubei x9
Henan x7
Fujian x6
Guizhou x6
Shanghai x5
Shaanxi x4
Gansu x3
Hebei x3
Heilongjiang x3
Yunnan x3
Shanxi x2
Zhejiang x2
Anhui x1
Beijing x1
Inner Mongolia (Baotou) x1
Jiangxi x1
Shandong x1
undisclosed x9

cf. C1b1a2b-AM00848 (TMRCA 4010 years):
Ma from Jilin, Jilin x2
Li from Panjin, Liaoning x1
Qiu from Shenyang, Liaoning x1
Zhang from Linxia Hui AP, Gansu x1
Ren from Tianshui, Gansu x1
Mou from Beijing x1
Murong 慕容 from Beijing x1
Si 四 from Beijing x1
Mei from Tianjin x1
Wei 卫 from directly administered area, Henan x1
Wang from Pingdingshan, Henan x1
Pan from Zhengzhou, Henan x1
Li from Zhumadian, Henan x1
Zhang Zilong 张子龙 from Tai'an, Shandong x1
Zhang from Zaozhuang, Shandong x1
Meng 蒙 from Suzhou, Jiangsu x1
Ge from Shanghai x1
Zhang from Shanghai x2
Liu from Jinhua, Zhejiang x1
Wei 韦 from Ningbo, Zhejiang x1
Yan 严 from Ningbo, Zhejiang x1
Cai from Quanzhou, Fujian x1
Chen from Quanzhou, Fujian x1
Lin from Taiwan x1
Tang from Xiaogan, Hubei x1
Pan from Changsha, Hunan x1
Qu from Changsha, Hunan x1
Peng from Chenzhou, Hunan x1
Zhou from Hengyang, Hunan x1
Chen from Huaihua, Hunan x1
Jing 荆 from Huaihua, Hunan x1
Ma from Huaihua, Hunan x1
Chen from Xiangxi Tujia & Miao AP, Hunan x1
Lu 陆 from Yongzhou, Hunan x1
Tan from Yueyang, Hunan x1
Gao from a county of Chongqing x1
Shi from a county of Chongqing x1
Xiang from a county of Chongqing x1
Zhao from a county of Chongqing x1
Li from a district of Chongqing x1
Mou 牟 from a district of Chongqing x1
Yang from a district of Chongqing x1
Zhang from a district of Chongqing x1
Chen from Bazhong, Sichuan x2
Chang 昌 from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Li from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Qing 青 from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Yu 喻 from Chengdu, Sichuan x1
Gao from Liangshan Yi AP, Sichuan x1
Luo from Leshan, Sichuan x1
Tang from Leshan, Sichuan x1
Wang from Luzhou, Sichuan x1
Yi 易 from Luzhou, Sichuan x1
Li from Zigong, Sichuan x1
Liu from Zigong, Sichuan x1
Long from Anshun, Guizhou x1
Yu 余 from Anshun, Guizhou x1
Ban 班 from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Luo from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Meng 蒙 from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Wei 韦 from Qiannan Buyei & Miao AP, Guizhou x1
Luo from Kunming, Yunnan x1
Gao from Qujing, Yunnan x1
Gao from Zhaotong, Yunnan x2
Zhang from Zhaotong, Yunnan x1
Li from Jieyang, Guangdong x1
Li from Shantou, Guangdong x1
Li from Yangjiang, Guangdong x1
Can 蚕 from Zhaoqing, Guangdong x1
Chen from Zhaoqing, Guangdong x1
Zhong from Zhaoqing, Guangdong x1
Liang from Baise, Guangxi x2
Lu 陆 from Baise, Guangxi x1
Luo from Baise, Guangxi x1
Li from Beihai, Guangxi x1
Luo from Beihai, Guangxi x1
Liang from Hechi, Guangxi x1
Long from Hechi, Guangxi x1
Mo from Hechi, Guangxi x1
Ling from Laibin, Guangxi x1
Liang from Liuzhou, Guangxi x1
Yang from Liuzhou, Guangxi x2
Meng 蒙 from Nanning, Guangxi x1
Ding from undisclosed x1
Pan from undisclosed x1
Tan from undisclosed x1
Tang from undisclosed x1
Zhang from undisclosed x1

Proper sampling is important, as is considering the totality of available data.

Agreed with your analysis on Li Hui, I also think he guessed Liangzhu’s haplogroups based on modern distribution of haplogroups in the Jiangzhe region.

However I don’t agree with your analysis on M95 and C1b. It’s true that they can be sporadically found in Northern China, however that could be due to historical or recent migrations from the south to north. In terms of overall frequency, they are still mostly found in the south, especially the far south and the southwest.

Max_H
03-14-2022, 04:26 PM
Thank you @Ebizur and @Mnops* for the replies and data sorting, it was really hard work for me.

CC.Wang2020 demonstrated that the separation time of coastal populations and inland populations in southern China was ~16,400 years. Considering that recent mixing may make this time underestimated, the real separation time may be longer. ~7,000 years ago, China's coastal areas may have suffered marine transgression, this is demonstrated by many Chinese geology papers. China's coastal areas and inland have no geographical barriers and are vulnerable to the continuous expansion of the inland population. so I don't think Austronesians can survive long on the coasts of the mainland without being assimilated.

The Austronesians may have returned to the mainland ~6,000 years ago. They did not need to occupy a large area of land. They were good at water transportation for business and had no conflicts with the local indigenous people. The Taiwan natives (high frequency O1a) suffered from similar encounters with the American natives, showing an extra-long bottleneck period. Be careful of survivor bias when observing Y-tree.

M.Larenaa2021 argues that Austronesians came to the Philippines at least 8,000 years ago, prior to the appearance of rice. Some papers argue that the Austronesians did not arrive in Taiwan until 6,000 years ago, which is unconvincing.

In the PCA of QM.Fu2020, the ancient DNA (QIHE) of Fujian 8,000 years ago is closer to modern humans than the ancient DNA of 4,000 years ago, which can be interpreted as the return of Austronesians to the mainland, shifting the ancient DNA of 4,000 years ago.



QM.Fu2020, https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20302-Mammoth-Paper-from-Qiaomei-Fu-s-group-on-Genetic-history-of-East-Asia&highlight=Hanben
CC.Wang2020, Genomic Insights into the Demographic History of Southern Chinese
M. Larenaa2021, Multiple migrations to the Philippines during the last 50,000 years

I think Larena and many papers on Southeast Asia rely too much on haplogroup split estimates and not archaeology or direct ancient DNA retrieval.