Page 37 of 40 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 394

Thread: okarinaofsteiner's East Eurasian GEDmatch megathread

  1. #361
    Registered Users
    Posts
    488
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    Mostly Chinese
    Nationality
    USA

    United States of America China
    Quote Originally Posted by observer_t View Post
    From Liu et al. 2021 (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...21.626710/full)

    Figure 1: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Ar...26710-g001.jpg



    On the PCA, Hui from Boshu (Sichuan) and Guizhou plot a bit separately from Nanchong Han (Sichuan)

    On the ADMIXTURE analysis, it can be seen that:
    - Boshu/Guizhou Hui have significantly more of a light blue component that maximizes in Afanasievo/Yamnaya compared to the Han samples
    - Boshu/Guizhou Hui have more of a light brown component that maximizes in Tibetans (more similar to eg. Shandong Han) than Nanchong Han or the other Southern Han populations sampled
    - Boshu/Guizhou Hui have a slight Anatolia_N related purple compoment that is minimal in Nanchong Han or other Han samples
    - Boshu/Guizhou Hui have somewhat more of a magenta component that maximizes in TW_Hanben than the northern Han populations, but slightly less than Nanchong Han or the other Southern Han populations
    - Boshu/Guizhou Hui have slightly less of a yellow Tai-Kadai associated component than Nanchong Han or the other southern Han populations, but significantly more than the northern Han populations
    - Finally, Boshu/Guizhou Hui have slightly less of a blue Hmong associated component than Nanchong Han or the other southern Han populations, but slightly more than the northern Han populations

    Overall,
    - Compared to Nanchong Han, Boshu/Guizhou Hui have more Steppe + Anatolian derived ancestry, more Tibetan-associated ancestry, slightly less TW Hanben/Austronesian-associated ancestry, slightly less Tai-Kadai-associated ancestry, and slightly less Hmong-associated ancestry
    - Compared to northern Han populations, Boshu/Guizhou Hui still have more Steppe + Anatolian ancestry, about the same (compared to Shandong Han) or slightly less (compared to Henan or Shanxi Han) Tibetan-associated ancestry, somewhat more TW Hanben/Austronesian-associated ancestry, much more Tai-Kadai-associated ancestry, and somewhat more Hmong-associated ancestry

    - Hence, the east Eurasian component of Boshu/Guizhou Hui is probably more "northern" shifted than nearby Han, but still more SEA-shifted compared to northern Han. There is still significant west Eurasian in these SW Hui populations. If they used 23andMe, I would expect the "Chinese" part to shift to either "Southern Chinese and Taiwanese", or a mixture of that and "Northern Chinese + Tibetan" in some proportion. There may be trace eg. "Chinese Dai" or "South Chinese", and finally some proportion of Central Asian related components (probably slightly less than that guy; maybe on the order of ~5-8%).
    I'd describe the yellow component as (non-Mlabri) Austroasiatic, which Guangdong Han has noticeably more of than Fujian Han, which has slightly more than Sichuan/Chongqing Han, which in turn has slightly more than Nanchong Han. Nanchong Han resembles the Sichuan/Chongqing samples but has more of the Tibetan-related component and slightly less of the Austroasiatic.

    The Korean sample stands out from the Northern Han as having less Tibetan-related, much less Austronesian-related, much more Evenk- and Jomon-related, and similar amounts of the orange component as Shandong and the more northern-shifted Jiangsu/Shanghai Han.

  2. #362
    Registered Users
    Posts
    23
    Sex

    I noticed that the Chuanyun historic sample also has quite high amounts of that orange component

  3. #363
    Registered Users
    Posts
    488
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    Mostly Chinese
    Nationality
    USA

    United States of America China
    Quote Originally Posted by observer_t View Post
    I noticed that the Chuanyun historic sample also has quite high amounts of that orange component
    Yeah, I wonder what it represents... it's highest among populations around the East China and Yellow Seas.




    https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comm...d_to_me_by_my/

    Lao-American results, family from Vientiane



    49.4% Dai, 28.8% Vietnamese (HCMC + 2), 12.8% I/T/K/M (Vientiane, Battambang + 3), 2.5% South Chinese (Guangdong + 1), 6.3% Broadly EA
    0.1% South Indian & Sri Lankan




    From the comments:

    A: “I believe north chinese also have some SEA ancestry or overlap with SEA groups. I have a relative from northern china with 1-2% Vietnamese added after the update and a Thai relative with 2% northern chinese and tibetan and no south chinese or southern chinese(had no chinese ancestry before the update). Another relative from Myanmar with 40% North chinese and tibetan.
    “When I look at the relatives in common for northern chinese relatives, it is common for 100% SEA relatives to appear as relatives in common.”

    B: “Where is your relative with 1-2% Vietnamese from in North China?
    When "Northern Chinese & Tibetan" show up in Southeast Asians, it's usually Tibeto-Burmese. Northern Chinese don't have a history of immigration there.
    It's likely the Thai relative have Karenic admixture. Around half "NC&T" is commonplace for ethnic Burmese, it can be even higher in Kuki-Chin ethnics.
    “It may look farfetched to see such "Northeast Asian" component being common in Southeast Asia, but when you look at the relief map (https://ibb.co/zb6BNvV) the homeland of these groups occupy the highlands stretching from the eastern ends of the Tibetan plateau to the Andaman Sea.”

    A: “The relative was from Shanxi. Before the update, the relative had Manchurian and Mongolian, Korean and Central Asian. After the update, mostly northern chinese and tibetan with 1-2% vietnamese.”
    Last edited by okarinaofsteiner; 11-07-2022 at 06:27 PM.

  4. #364
    Registered Users
    Posts
    488
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    Mostly Chinese
    Nationality
    USA

    United States of America China
    Quote Originally Posted by okarinaofsteiner View Post
    https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comm...d_to_me_by_my/

    Lao-American results, family from Vientiane



    49.4% Dai, 28.8% Vietnamese (HCMC + 2), 12.8% I/T/K/M (Vientiane, Battambang + 3), 2.5% South Chinese (Guangdong + 1), 6.3% Broadly EA
    0.1% South Indian & Sri Lankan
    Related: https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comm...ai_ancestry_i/

    my SIL is Thai with some known Chinese ancestry, too. Turns out she was far more mixed than she thought. Her results are as follows…

    Indonesian, Thai, Khmer & Myanma 64.1%

    Chinese-
    South Chinese 28.3%
    Broadly Chinese 0.2%

    Vietnamese 2.6%

    Broadly East Asian 0.6%


    Central & South Asian-

    Bengali & Northeast Indian 3.8%

    Broadly Central & South Asian 0.2%

    Sub-Saharan African 0.2%

  5. #365
    Registered Users
    Posts
    488
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    Mostly Chinese
    Nationality
    USA

    United States of America China
    https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comm...s_how_come_my/

    Mongolian result with 90% confidence: 29.1% Manchurian & Mongolian, 16.2% Northern Chinese & Tibetan, 35.2% Broadly EA, 1.2% Central Asian, 15.0% Unassigned


    Comment from observer_t:
    The amount of northern Chinese with heavy Mongolian/Central Asian ancestry is far lower than is commonly perceived. Rather, most northern Chinese are similar to a mixture of ancient yellow river Chinese but with additional SEA admixture.

    Instead, Khalkha mongols tend to have some proportion sino-tibetan (unsure if direct Chinese or not) related ancestry, which is higher than the amount of mongol ancestry in northern Han.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to okarinaofsteiner For This Useful Post:

     Tsakhur (11-24-2022)

  7. #366
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,124
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by okarinaofsteiner View Post
    Comment from observer_t:
    Mongolian and especially Manchurian populations share a great deal of their Y-DNA with other Chinese populations in general, not only with Northern Han.

    According to 23mofang, 4.29% (126/2938) of Manzu (ethnic Manchus) and 1.71% (26/1521) of Mengguzu (ethnic Mongols) who have tested with 23mofang belong to Y-DNA haplogroup O-F78 [TMRCA 5350 ybp]. O-F78 is a subclade of O1a-M119 that appears to have originated among the creators of the Neolithic Liangzhu culture in the Yangtze Delta region. O-F78 is estimated to account for the Y-DNA of 6.13% of all present-day males in China, with its frequency in a zone encompassing southern Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai, Anhui, and northeastern Jiangxi reaching 15% to 20%.

    More precisely, 3.34% (98/2938) of the tested Manzu and 1.31% (20/1521) of the tested Mengguzu belong to O-F78 > O-F619, a subclade whose TMRCA is estimated to be only 2760 ybp and which is presumed to represent the lineage of the dukes of Yue.

    It is clear that significant percentages of people who consider themselves to be Mongols and especially Manchus have patrilineal roots in central-to-southern China, probably reflecting intermarriage with Chinese males sometime after some southern aboriginal males had been assimilated into the Chinese population. Some portion of their Chinese-related ancestry must have reached Mongolia and Manchuria during the historical period, perhaps during the Qing Dynasty. On the other hand, I also have noticed some hints of possibly older influxes of Chinese-related Y-DNA; for example, O-M122 > O-F36 > O-M324 > O-L127.1 > O-IMS-JST002611 > O-F18 > O-F325 > O-F1365 > O-Y15976 [TMRCA 5680 ybp] accounts for 5.46% (83/1521) of the Mengguzu, but only about 1.95% of all males in present-day China.

    Edit:
    Only 2.59% (76/2938) of Manchus belong to O-Y15976 according to 23mofang. That proportion is somewhat greater than 23mofang's estimate for the entire male population of present-day China, but I think it should not be significantly greater than the proportion of O-Y15976 among males in the general population of the areas of northern and eastern China in which most Manchus live. It looks like a significantly higher-than-average frequency of O-Y15976 may be a peculiar feature of Mongols (at least those living in China).
    Last edited by Ebizur; 11-23-2022 at 07:39 AM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Ebizur For This Useful Post:

     BoxOf (11-24-2022)

  9. #367
    Registered Users
    Posts
    159
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebizur View Post
    Mongolian and especially Manchurian populations share a great deal of their Y-DNA with other Chinese populations in general, not only with Northern Han.

    According to 23mofang, 4.29% (126/2938) of Manzu (ethnic Manchus) and 1.71% (26/1521) of Mengguzu (ethnic Mongols) who have tested with 23mofang belong to Y-DNA haplogroup O-F78 [TMRCA 5350 ybp]. O-F78 is a subclade of O1a-M119 that appears to have originated among the creators of the Neolithic Liangzhu culture in the Yangtze Delta region. O-F78 is estimated to account for the Y-DNA of 6.13% of all present-day males in China, with its frequency in a zone encompassing southern Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai, Anhui, and northeastern Jiangxi reaching 15% to 20%.

    More precisely, 3.34% (98/2938) of the tested Manzu and 1.31% (20/1521) of the tested Mengguzu belong to O-F78 > O-F619, a subclade whose TMRCA is estimated to be only 2760 ybp and which is presumed to represent the lineage of the dukes of Yue.

    It is clear that significant percentages of people who consider themselves to be Mongols and especially Manchus have patrilineal roots in central-to-southern China, probably reflecting intermarriage with Chinese males sometime after some southern aboriginal males had been assimilated into the Chinese population. Some portion of their Chinese-related ancestry must have reached Mongolia and Manchuria during the historical period, perhaps during the Qing Dynasty. On the other hand, I also have noticed some hints of possibly older influxes of Chinese-related Y-DNA; for example, O-M122 > O-F36 > O-M324 > O-L127.1 > O-IMS-JST002611 > O-F18 > O-F325 > O-F1365 > O-Y15976 [TMRCA 5680 ybp] accounts for 5.46% (83/1521) of the Mengguzu, but only about 1.95% of all males in present-day China.

    Edit:
    Only 2.59% (76/2938) of Manchus belong to O-Y15976 according to 23mofang. That proportion is somewhat greater than 23mofang's estimate for the entire male population of present-day China, but I think it should not be significantly greater than the proportion of O-Y15976 among males in the general population of the areas of northern and eastern China in which most Manchus live. It looks like a significantly higher-than-average frequency of O-Y15976 may be a peculiar feature of Mongols (at least those living in China).
    The Mongol and Manchu with ydna associated with Chinese Hans occurs because there was/is massive fraud in ethnic identification. Due to positive ethnic policies regarding Mongols/ethnic minorities many people with one eight to outright zero Mongol identity became mongols. Incidentally mongols are the most educated and prosperous ethnic minority in China.

    In case of Manchus, it was a case of discrimination (right after revolution) and positive discrimination (after 1949) that resulted in case of many hidden Manchus (after revolution) and fake Manchus to for the coveted Manchu ethnic identity. They are the richest and powerful ethnic minority till this day.

  10. #368
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,124
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Songtsen View Post
    The Mongol and Manchu with ydna associated with Chinese Hans occurs because there was/is massive fraud in ethnic identification. Due to positive ethnic policies regarding Mongols/ethnic minorities many people with one eight to outright zero Mongol identity became mongols. Incidentally mongols are the most educated and prosperous ethnic minority in China.

    In case of Manchus, it was a case of discrimination (right after revolution) and positive discrimination (after 1949) that resulted in case of many hidden Manchus (after revolution) and fake Manchus to for the coveted Manchu ethnic identity. They are the richest and powerful ethnic minority till this day.
    I will reserve judgment on the Manchus until I have had time to consider the reported Y-DNA data in more detail.

    However, in regard to the Mongol (Mengguzu) data from 23mofang, how could Han individuals' falsely identifying themselves as Mongol result in elevated percentages of non-East Asian Y-DNA (135/1521 = 8.88% Y(xC, D, N, O, Q-M120)), a presumptively Western Xia lineage (17/1521 = 1.12% D-M533 > D-Y14736 > D-Y14813 [TMRCA 1370 ybp]), a presumptively Northern Samoyedic lineage (28/1521 = 1.84% N-P63 [TMRCA 3720 ybp]), a typically Buryat or ancient Avar lineage (32/1521 = 2.10% N-F4205 [TMRCA 3120 ybp]), a particular subclade of O-JST002611 (83/1521 = 5.46% O-F18 > O-F325 > O-F1365 > O-Y15976 total [TMRCA 5680 ybp]), and so forth? False self-identification of ethnicity can only have had a minor influence on this data set.

    It is clear from various scientific studies that present-day Mongolic speakers are genetically inhomogeneous. A group of Mongolic speakers will often resemble more closely their neighbors of other ethnolinguistic groups than that group of Mongolic speakers will resemble another group of Mongolic speakers from a geographically remote area. It should not be surprising that the difference between Mongols from southeastern Inner Mongolia and Northern Han in regard to both Y-DNA and autosomes is much smaller than the difference between Mongolic speakers from Baikalia (Buryats) and Northern Han.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Ebizur For This Useful Post:

     observer_t (11-27-2022)

  12. #369
    Registered Users
    Posts
    159
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Ebizur View Post
    I will reserve judgment on the Manchus until I have had time to consider the reported Y-DNA data in more detail.

    However, in regard to the Mongol (Mengguzu) data from 23mofang, how could Han individuals' falsely identifying themselves as Mongol result in elevated percentages of non-East Asian Y-DNA (135/1521 = 8.88% Y(xC, D, N, O, Q-M120)), a presumptively Western Xia lineage (17/1521 = 1.12% D-M533 > D-Y14736 > D-Y14813 [TMRCA 1370 ybp]), a presumptively Northern Samoyedic lineage (28/1521 = 1.84% N-P63 [TMRCA 3720 ybp]), a typically Buryat or ancient Avar lineage (32/1521 = 2.10% N-F4205 [TMRCA 3120 ybp]), a particular subclade of O-JST002611 (83/1521 = 5.46% O-F18 > O-F325 > O-F1365 > O-Y15976 total [TMRCA 5680 ybp]), and so forth? False self-identification of ethnicity can only have had a minor influence on this data set.

    It is clear from various scientific studies that present-day Mongolic speakers are genetically inhomogeneous. A group of Mongolic speakers will often resemble more closely their neighbors of other ethnolinguistic groups than that group of Mongolic speakers will resemble another group of Mongolic speakers from a geographically remote area. It should not be surprising that the difference between Mongols from southeastern Inner Mongolia and Northern Han in regard to both Y-DNA and autosomes is much smaller than the difference between Mongolic speakers from Baikalia (Buryats) and Northern Han.
    I suggest you look at northwestern Han who became mongols ..Northern Hans usually became Manchu if they had the desire to change . Please look at ydna difference between inner and outer mongols .. they are too different even when accounted for similarity between the northern Hans and mongols tribes.

    Northern Hans and mongols are relatively close especially those of gansu and ningxia so it was relatively easier to pretend to be one … phenotypically there are lots of Gansu and Ningxia who can pretend to be mongols. And they have some Mongol/similar ancestry too.

    It is a well known thing to change your ethnic identity to get state benefits. Mongols, Zhuang, Tujia , Manchu are the main ethnic groups that Hans converted into.

  13. #370
    Registered Users
    Posts
    488
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    Mostly Chinese
    Nationality
    USA

    United States of America China
    https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comm...d_colonialism/

    Comment from a Redditor I know from a non-anthro related forum:

    Almost every single Vietnamese person will have zero French DNA due to

    1. ⁠Extremely small population of French people in Vietnam compared to Vietnamese people (0.2% of French Indochina was French in 1940, 39k people)
    2. ⁠French colonization lasting less than 100 years
    3. ⁠Many colonizers came with families as government bureaucrats
    4. ⁠Europeans and colonized peoples were generally segregated

    This is true for honestly any country colonized during the 19th and 20th centuries.

    How many Koreans have Japanese ancestry from colonization? Virtually none. How many Bangladeshis, Nigerians, or Hong Kongers have British ancestry from British rule? Again, virtually none apart from probably a few high-profile individuals that got famous in part because of being part white.

    But all these areas experienced the brutalities of colonialism

Page 37 of 40 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-26-2021, 02:54 PM
  2. East Eurasian internal branching
    By ren in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-20-2019, 09:00 AM
  3. East Eurasian in 'Tajik people'
    By Kulin in forum General
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 02-12-2019, 05:15 AM
  4. What is South East Eurasian?
    By Lara101 in forum Southern
    Replies: 324
    Last Post: 11-12-2017, 09:50 PM
  5. Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-18-2015, 10:14 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •