Half of the Japanese are descended from their native Jomon (ie Ainu). But, the other half is from the Yayoi. These Yayoi are from 3 strains: Korean, Han Chinese and Wu-Yue Chinese.

25% of Japanese are of the Haplogroup O2b marker. This is also the most common marker found in Koreans.

20% of Japanese are of the Haplogroup O3 marker. Overwhelmingly, most of the O3 markers found among the Japanese are of the O3a5 subclade. it is also the most common one found among Han Chinese today.

4% of Japanese are of the Haplogroup O1 marker. This marker is found among the non-Han southern ethnic groups (ie Austronesian, Austroiloid, etc.). About 10% of southern Han in southern Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi also have this marker. Undoubtedly this was the original genetic marker of Wu-Yue and Bai-Yue people.

Basically, half of Yayoi Japanese originated from Koreans and the other half came from Chinese (Han and Wu-Yue).

hi dingy

if you're going to quote Wikipedia, do it correctly

20% of Japanese are from O3, not O3a5. O3 is found in Chinese as well as Viets, Manchus, Koreans, Polynesians, etc.
O3a5 is exclusive to Sino-Tibetan speakers.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O3_(Y-DNA)
In human genetics, Haplogroup O3 (M122) is a Y-chromosome haplogroup.

Haplogroup O3 is a descendant haplogroup of haplogroup O. Some researchers believe that it first appeared in China approximately 10,000 years ago. However, others believe that the high internal diversity of Haplogroup O3 indicates a late Pleistocene (Upper Paleolithic) origin in South China or Southeast Asia of the M122 mutation that defines the entire O3 clade, while the common presence among a wide variety of modern East and Southeast Asian nations of closely related haplotypes belonging to certain subclades of Haplogroup O3 is considered to point to a recent (e.g., Holocene) geographic dispersion of a certain subset of the ancient variation within Haplogroup O3. The spread of these particular subsets of Haplogroup O3 is conjectured to be closely associated with the sudden agricultural boom associated with rice farming.

Although Haplogroup O3 appears to be primarily associated with Chinese populations, it also forms a significant component of the Y-chromosome diversity of most modern populations of the East Asian region. Haplogroup O3 is found in over 50% of all modern Chinese males (ranging up to over 80% in certain regional subgroups of the Han ethnicity), about 40% of Manchurian, Korean, and Vietnamese males, about 35% of Filipino and Malaysian males, about 25%[1] of Zhuang males, and about 15%[2] to 20%[3] of Japanese males. The distribution of Haplogroup O3 stretches far into Central Asia (approx. 18% of Khalkh Mongols and approx. 6.2% of Altayans[4]) and Oceania (approx. 25% of Polynesians), albeit with reduced frequencies of most subclades. It should be noted that Haplogroup O3* Y-chromosomes, which are not defined by any identified downstream markers, are actually more common among certain non-Chinese populations than among Chinese ones, and the presence of these O3* Y-chromosomes among various populations of Central Asia, East Asia, and Oceania is more likely to reflect a very ancient shared ancestry of these populations rather than the result of any historical events. It remains to be seen whether Haplogroup O3* Y-chromosomes can be parsed into distinct subclades that display significant geographical or ethnic correlations.

Among all the populations of East and Southeast Asia, Haplogroup O3 is most closely associated with those that speak a Sinitic, Tibeto-Burman, or Hmong-Mien language. Haplogroup O3 comprises about 50% or more of the total Y-chromosome variation among the populations of each of these language families. The Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman language families are generally believed to be derived from a common Sino-Tibetan protolanguage, and most linguists place the homeland of the Sino-Tibetan language family somewhere in northern China. The Hmong-Mien languages and cultures, for various archaeological and ethnohistorical reasons, are also generally believed to have derived from a source somewhere north of their current distribution, perhaps in northern or central China. The Tibetans, however, despite the fact that they speak a language of the Tibeto-Burman language family, have a very high percentage of the otherwise rare Haplogroup D1, which is also found at much lower frequencies throughout Central and Northeast Asia. These facts suggest that Haplogroup O3 is characteristic of the easterly part of the zone of transition between the Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian genepools: namely, the region that comprises the North China Plain and the area between the Yellow and Yangtze rivers. It is notable that Haplogroup O3 is the only haplogroup that occurs at high frequencies among populations that possess Northeast Asian genetic characteristics as well as among populations that possess Southeast Asian genetic characteristics.

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

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

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

Uhm. Is there some obsession on genetics here?

Please put this discussion in anthropology.

Pls cite your source of references regarding your assertion or interpretation of such genetic reports otherwise it'd be considered as hearsay at best (of course ... subject for deletion as well)!

Here is " C & P " post written by a Japanophile @ J-oriented forum ....


Japanese genes(Haplogroups)

Hey, I'm a person interested in human genetics. And also how it ties into Japan.

Now I already know the male or Y-DNA of Japan.
Japan has Haplogroup N(Nordic), Haplogroup C(Mongol), Haplogroup D(Tibetan) and Haplogroup O(Sino) in their population.

But what of the mtDNA. The Female mtDNA?
That I'm not so knowledgeable about.

I do this about Japan's mtDNA thus far:
Japan has Haplogroup B(Mongol), Haplogroup F(Sino) and Haplogroup Y(Nivkh) in their population.
But what of the other haplogroups? Does Japan have Haplogroup G, Haplogroup Z or Haplogroup W?

Japanese DNA chart in specific percentages .....

http://www.kumanolife.com/History/dna.html

hhug has no knowledge of history and he refuses to cite any sources to support his evidence.

He even insists that since Koreans have 1 specific codon (mind you there are 50,000,000 codons in the human body) related to southern Chinese, then there must have been a massive rape of Koreans by southern Chinese and he doesnt even post any evidence of this!

In other words, I think it's best to ignore this person.

Here are some sites:

http://cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/10/pre-his...atrilineal.html

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/8503/geness6.jpg

your own link shows that the Japanese have only 12.4% of O3a5, Mongols at around 16%, Manchu around 15%, Koreans at 20% and Hans at 41%.
there's no data on Japanese O1 that backs up your claim, but does list quite a few non S.E Asian groups with O1 (Mongols, Manchus, etc) that may challenge your claim of it being limited to S.E Asian groups.

I just read one dull response from a Japanese forumite to hhug's identical thread title @ J-oriented forum ....


Japanese are a hybrid of all Asians,but all human beings are more or less hybrids.

WHY you are interested in genes ?

I have noticed several inaccuracies in hhug's post, which I will proceed to point out below.



First, 25% is a low (in other words, "conservative") estimate of the frequency of haplogroup O2b among Japanese. In fact, 25% is the lowest frequency of haplogroup O2b I have ever encountered in any published study of Japanese Y-chromosome DNA. The frequency of haplogroup O2b among most Japanese samples is over 30%.

Second, haplogroup O2b is generally not the most common Y-DNA haplogroup found among Koreans. The frequency of haplogroup O3-M122 exceeds the frequency of haplogroup O2b among the samples of Koreans that have been analyzed for most published studies of Korean Y-chromosome diversity. For example, Wells et al. (2001) "The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity" found haplogroup O3-M122 in 36%, haplogroup O*(xO1a-M119, O2a-M95, O3-M122) in 31%, and haplogroup O1a-M119 in 4% of a sample of 45 Koreans. Even if all the O*(xO1a, O2a, O3) were actually haplogroup O2b, the frequency would still be only 31%, which is less than the 36% of this sample who belonged to haplogroup O3-M122. Results from other studies, which sampled larger numbers of Koreans, are as follows:

Xue et al., "Male demography in East Asia: a north-south contrast in population expansion times":
19/68 = 28% haplogroup O2b
27/68 = 40% haplogroup O3
(Note that the 68 Korean samples of Xue et al. include both South Koreans (hanguk-saram) and Koreans in China (chaoxian-zu).)

Hammer et al., "Dual Origins of the Japanese: Common Ground for Hunter-Gatherer and Farmer Y-chromosomes":
28/75 = 37% haplogroup O2b
30/75 = 40% haplogroup O3
(Note that the 75 Korean samples of Hammer et al. were all obtained from South Korean subjects.)

Kim et al. (2007), "Lack of Association between Y-Chromosomal Haplogroups and Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population":
29/110 = 26% haplogroup O2b
50/110 = 45% haplogroup O3

Hong, S. B., Jin, H. J., Kwak, K. D., Kim, W. (2006), "Y-chromosome Haplogroup O3-M122 Variation in East Asia and Its Implications for the Peopling of Korea":
31/154 = 20% haplogroup O2b
65/154 = 42% haplogroup O3

As you may see in the above results, the proportion of haplogroup O2b among samples of Koreans has tended to be negatively correlated with the sample size; in other words, the trend in studies of Korean Y-DNA is to find lesser percentages of haplogroup O2b in studies with larger sample sizes, and the frequency of the various haplogroups among larger samples should approach the true frequency of haplogroup O2b among the entire Korean population. The studies that have taken small samples (e.g. Wells et al. 2001) have probably overestimated the frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans. In contrast, the frequency of haplogroup O3 has tended to be positively correlated with sample size, which means that the true frequency of haplogroup O3 among the entire Korean population is likely to be at the higher end of the estimates (e.g., higher than 40%). The true frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans is likely somewhere between 20% and 30%. Thus, haplogroup O3-M122 is clearly the predominant Y-chromosome haplogroup among Korean males, and hhug's claim that haplogroup O2b is the most common Y-chromosome haplogroup among Koreans is false.

Third, haplogroup O2b does not represent a homogenous group; the haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes found among Koreans are mostly not of the same type as the haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes typically found among Japanese. Among Koreans who belong to haplogroup O2b, about 4/5 of the haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes belong to the O2b1*(xO2b1a) clade, while only about 1/5 (or even fewer) of the Korean haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes belong to the O2b1a clade. On the other hand, among Japanese who belong to haplogroup O2b, the proportions are reversed; about 4/5 (or more) of the haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes among Japanese belong to the O2b1a clade, while only 1/5 (or fewer) of Japanese haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes belong to the O2b1*(xO2b1a) clade.

Fourth, although it is not often talked about, both the Korean type of haplogroup O2b (i.e. haplogroup O2b1*) and the Japanese type of haplogroup O2b (i.e. haplogroup O2b1a) are found among some populations in Southeast Asia. Haplogroup O2b (including the typically Japanese subclade, O2b1a) has been found in approximately 5% of several samples of populations in Thailand and Vietnam, for example. Besides the typically Korean haplogroup O2b1*(xO2b1a) and the typically Japanese haplogroup O2b1a, there exists yet another type (or types) of haplogroup O2b, namely haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1), which has been found at low frequency (<5%) among indigenous populations of Manchuria and Korea. Frankly speaking, at the present state of research, the origin, diversification, and dispersal of haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes all remain uncertain.



hhug has gotten one thing right: most of the haplogroup O3 Y-chromosomes found among Japanese samples belong to the O3a5 subclade. In fact, most Japanese haplogroup O3 Y-chromosomes can be defined all the way to haplogroup O3a5a-M117. Besides the Japanese, haplogroup O3a5a-M117 Y-chromosomes are the most common type of haplogroup O among the Tibetans and some other populations of western China, including western Mongol groups. In eastern China, and particularly in southeastern China, haplogroup O3*(xO3a5) is more common than haplogroup O3a5 or haplogroup O3a5a. In Korea, haplogroup O3a5 and haplogroup O3*(xO3a5) are distributed rather evenly, each accounting for about 50% of Korean haplogroup O3, but haplogroup O3a5a is not particularly common in Korea, as most Korean haplogroup O3a5 Y-chromosomes are O3a5-M134*(xO3a5a), and thus do not belong to the typically Japanese and Tibetan subclade, haplogroup O3a5a-M117. In case you were wondering, the haplogroup O3 Y-chromosomes found among Austronesians are mostly haplogroup O3-M122*(xO3a5); haplogroup O3*(xO3a5) is actually the most common haplogroup among Filipinos, and the second most common haplogroup among Polynesians. Haplogroup O3 Y-chromosomes among the Tibeto-Burman-speaking populations of India and Burma, on the other hand, are almost entirely haplogroup O3a5 (and especially haplogroup O3a5a), just like the Tibetans and Japanese. Thus, there seems to be a sort of Tibeto-Burman-Japanese ("Western China"?) linkage versus a Sino-Austronesian ("Eastern China"?) linkage in the distribution of haplogroup O3, while Koreans (and most other so-called "Altaic" groups, actually, as well as some samples of Han from North China) occupy an ambiguous, intermediate position, close to the Hmong-Mien groups, in regards to the subtypes of haplogroup O3 Y-chromosomes found among them.

However, the two other claims that hhug has made in regards to haplogroup O3 are questionable. For one, 20% is a rather high estimate of the frequency of haplogroup O3 among Japanese; the true frequency of haplogroup O3 among Japanese is likely to be somewhere between 15% and 20%. For another, haplogroup O3a5 is probably not the most common type of haplogroup O3 found among modern Han Chinese; Bo Wen et al.'s study of Han Chinese populations from North and South China, for example, found haplogroup O3*(xO3a5) to be the most common type of haplogroup O3, and overall the most frequently occurring haplogroup, among Han Chinese, especially in southern China. Xue et al. also found haplogroup O3*(xO3a5) to be most common among Han in southern China, whereas both O3*(xO3a5) and O3a5 are equally common among Han in northern China.



False. Provide sources for the figure of 4% haplogroup O1 among Japanese. According to reputable published sources, including Hammer et al.'s "Dual Origins of the Japanese" study, haplogroup O1 is completely absent from the Japanese population. Again, this is similar to the Tibetans, among whom haplogroup O1 is practically nonexistant.

And haplogroup O1 (which is almost always actually haplogroup O1a-M119) is not common among Australoids; it is only common among Austronesians (particularly Taiwanese Austronesians, AKA Formosans), Tai-Kadai peoples (particularly the Hlai/Li people of Hainan), and eastern/southern Han Chinese (particularly those in the region of the Yangtze river delta and around the southern coast of China). Thus, it can be said that haplogroup O1 is typical of Mongoloid populations of the eastern and southern coasts of China and nearby islands, such as Taiwan, the Philippines, Hainan, and parts of Indonesia.

I suspect that hhug has confused haplogroup O1 with haplogroup O2a-M95, which actually is found in a minority (approx. 4% or less) of Japanese samples. Haplogroup O2a-M95 is related to the haplogroup O2b Y-chromosomes that are much more common among the Japanese. The peak frequencies of haplogroup O2a are found among Austroasiatic-speaking tribal populations of India, such as the Juangs (aboriginal inhabitants of Orissa, India) and the Nicobarese (aboriginal inhabitants of the Nicobar Islands, just south of the Andaman Islands), who are both 100% haplogroup O2a.



This is completely unsubstantiated conjecture. hhug's claims do not merit much consideration.

^I don't know where you get your sources, but M117 is the original haplotype of Han Chinese (ie Zhou Dynasty). Later, it mixed with Shang and Bai Yue peoples: M122 (O3), M119 (01), M111 (O2a1) in other parts of China to form modern Chinese. Tibetans and Burmese were originally from the same race as the Han. They split away 5,000 years ago and moved west and southwest. M134 and M117 are the only Haplotype O3 found among them today. The Hans living in Sichuan and Yunnan have extremely high amount of M134 and M117 reflecting the fact that they live closest to the region where Sino-Tibetan-Burmese-Hmong/Mien people originated before the divergence and outward migrations.

Read this source:

Doctorate Li Hui from Fudan University of China had analyzed the DNA of Asians to derive a conclusion that the ancestors of Mongoloid Asians possessed a distinctive Mark M89 by the time they arrived in Southeast Asia. About 30,000 years ago, from the launching pad of Southeast Asia, the early Mongoloids went through a genetic mutation to Marker M122.

Li Hui, at http://web.wenxuecity.com/BBSView.php?SubI...amp;MsgID=56818, claimed that the early migrants to the Chinese continent took three routes via two entries of Yunnan and Guangxi-Guangdong provinces. In the timeframe of about 10,000 years and developing a genetic mutation to marker M134, this branch of people who went direct north would penetrate the snowy Hengduan Mountains of Tibetan-Qinghai Plateau to arrive at the area next to the Yellow River bends. Owning to cold weather, big nose, heavy lips and long face developed among this group of people. Splitting out of this northbound migrants would be those who went to the east with a new genetic marker M117, i.e., ancestors of modern Han Chinese. However, our ancestors forgot that they penetrated northward the Hengduan Mountains from the Indo-China "CORRIDOR" in today's Vietnam. "Walking down Mt Kunlun", i.e., the "collective memory of ethnic Han Chinese" that was echoed in Guo Xiaochuan's philharmonic-agitated epic, was the starting point of the eastward migration which our Chinese ancestors remembered. Li Hui grouped the 3000-year-old Chu and Qi people in the same category as Han Chinese, albeit meeting the ancient classics records as to Qi statelet's lineage from the Qiangic-Tibetan Fiery Lord. The rest would develop into ancestors of today's Tibetans. This seems to corroborate with Scholar Luo Xianglin's claim that early Sino-Tibetan peoples originated from Mt Minshan and upperstream River Min-jiang areas of Sichuan-Gansu provincial borderline and then split into two groups, with one going north to reach Wei-shui River and upperstream Han-shui River of Shenxi Prov and then east to Shanxi Prov by crossing the Yellow River.

The second branch of early Mongoloids, about 10,000 years ago, entered China's southeastern coastline with genetic marker M119. Li Hui, claiming the same ancestry as the Dai-zu and Shui-zu minorities of Southwestern China, firmly believed that his ancestors had dwelled in Hangzhou Bay and Yangtze Delta for 7-8 thousand years. The people with M119 marker would be the historical "Hundred Yue Peoples". Li Hui then pointed out that the ancient Wu people, with M7 genetic marker, came to the lower Yangtze area about 3000 years ago. While Li Hui claimed that the M7 Wu people had split away from the northbound M134 Sino-Tibetan people, historical classics pointed out that Wu Statelet was established by two uncles of Zhou Dynasty King Wenwang, i.e., migrants from the Yellow River area.

The last interesting theory adopted by Li Hui would be still one more possible Mongoloid branch of people who, at about 20,000 years, continued to travel non-stop along the Chinese coastline to reach the Liao-he River area of Manchuria where they developed into Altaic-speaking peoples, i.e., ancestors of Huns, Turks and Mongols. This claim did corroborate with this webmaster's historical analysis of Huns, Turks and Mongols which yielded the conclusion that i) there was no through traffic from west to east in the Gobi or the Steppe in early times and that ii) the Mongoloid had a pattern of raiding to the west, not the other way around by the Indo-Europeans. Today's Koreans, in the opinion of Li Hui, would be the mixtures of the early migrants to Manchuria and the later Dong-yi [Eastern Yi] migrants from Eastern China. This certainly dealt a blow to the Korean nationalists' claim of "Siberian origin". (See Assertions By Wang Zhonghan for clues as to the relationship between Qiangic Proto-Tibetan and Altaic Proto-Hun activities: "the northern barbarians and western barbarians were similar [i.e., Qiangs] at Spring-Autumn time period, but by the time of late Warring States, Chinese began to see the northern barbarians as different from the western barbarians".)

O3a5 and O3a5a does exist in eastern and southern China, albeit not as much compared to O3:

From Su etl al 2000 "Y chromosome haplotypes reveal prehistorical migrations to the Himalayas:

Shandong Han- 28.1% O3; 28.1% O3a5 (32 samples)
Zhejiang Han- 24% O3; 26% O3a5 (50 samples)
Jiangsu Han- 23.6% O3; 21.8% O3a5 (55 samples)
Shanghai Han- 23.3% O3; 16.7% O3a5 (30 samples)
Fujian Han- 38.5% O3; 38.5% O3a5 (13 samples)
Guangdong Han- 40% O3; 26.7% O3a5 (15 samples)

It reflects the mixing of Zhou with Shang

I don't know much about genetics aside from the math, but did you just use a BLOG as your source and NO ONE call you down for it? Interesting.

I am skeptical and not too trusting on the genetic studies on Manchus. They were mixing and assimilating Han Chinese and Koreans into their race even before they crossed the Great Wall. I think they did a DNA study on Giocangga, the father of Nurhachi (first emperor of Qing Dynasty) and found that he had the Haplogroup C3 (the most common one among Altaic peoples). Some of the modern Qing descendants refuse to participate in the genetic study, because it is said that the Manchus living in Beijing and Liaoning already shown to have fewer instance of Hap. C3. Only the Xibe and Manchus of Jilin/Heilongjiang/Inner Mongolia seem to be more pure.

Check your PM pls.

I cant believe someone is this ignorant. You say that by increasing the size of the number of people tested, there are fewer instances of haplogroup O2b. Here is a recent study on Korean DNA in 2004:

http://www.imbice.org.ar/es/lab_06_b/06.pdf


Haplogroup C3= 24/164
Haplogroup O2b= 66/164
Haplogroup O3= 52/164

Note: these numbers include South Koreans and Koreans in China only.

It is also interesting to mention the Manchus:

Haplogroup C3= 17/101
Haplogroup O2b= 34/101
Haplogroup O3= 43/101

The point of this post is that you can not predict majority population from such a small population. Some of the studies you mentioned only involved 40 people. Not to mention that one of the studies was biased "Lack of Association between Y-Chromosomal Haplogroups and Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population".

Answering your point about the origins of haplogroup O2b. Haplogroup O2b most likely came from ancient Manchurians (the Yemaek Tungus), who diverged from Manchuria into Korea and eventually into Japan. It is suspected that some of the tribes were pushed back from China into Southeast Asia, explaining why some Vietnamese and Thais have rare instances of haplogroup O2b. On the other hand some people argue that Y-haplogroup studies are not very accurate indicators.

If you add up all the results of my four studies in which haplogroup O2b was unambiguously identified, you will see that there are (19 + 28 + 29 + 31 =) a total of 107 Korean haplogroup O2b samples out of a total of 407 samples of Korean Y-DNA. In other words, 107/407 = 26.3% of the Korean samples belong to haplogroup O2b.

You say that your single study on Mongolian ethnic groups has found 66/164 = 40.2% haplogroup O2b among a sample of Koreans (from South Korea and China). Your 164 Korean samples do not carry even half the significance of my 407 Korean samples; 407 is 2.5 times as many as 164.

Even if we add your 66/164 haplogroup O2b Koreans to my pooled sample of 107/407 haplogroup O2b Koreans, we would only have 66 + 107 = 173 haplogroup O2b out of 164 + 407 = 571 Koreans, and 173/571 = 30.3% haplogroup O2b.

For haplogroup O3-M122, we would have 172 (from my four studies) + 52 (from your one study) = 224/571 = 39.2% haplogroup O3. There is no change to the fact that haplogroup O3-M122 is the predominant Y-DNA haplogroup among the Korean population.

So, do you really believe that this one study on Mongolian ethnic groups might invalidate the results of all the other studies I have referenced? Borrowing your words, "I cant believe someone is this ignorant."

No, you said that as the sample size increased, the proportion of Koreans with Haplogroup O2b decreased. I just said it is completely false. Plus the study I linked to you was not just "Mongolian ethnic groups". Not to mention one of the studies you linked were biased.

If you look at the numbers from the four studies I referenced, you should see that the frequency of haplogroup O2b has tended to decrease from the older studies with smaller sample sizes (Hammer et al., Xue et al.) to the more recent studies with larger sample sizes (Kim et al., Hong et al.). My statement of this factual correlation was based on the evidence that I provided, and you cannot refute the logical validity of my conclusion. All you could do would be to provide other evidence that might affect the correlation, and you have done that by providing us with an additional reference.

As for your reference, "Genetic features of Mongolian ethnic groups revealed by Y-chromosomal analysis" by Toru Katoh et al., the fact remains that this is a study conducted by mostly Japanese and Mongolian researchers (with a couple of Koreans and one Chinese thrown into the mix) with the financial support of some Japanese organizations. You can't expect someone who has not purchased this article to think of using it as a reference for features of the Korean Y-DNA composition, since the study's title and abstract do not mention anything about Koreans; they speak only of Mongolians, since Mongolians were the primary subject of the study. In addition, I am rather suspicious of this study's 66/164 = 40.2% frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans; this figure is so far above any other published study of Korean Y-DNA data (except for Hammer et al.'s 28/75 = 37% haplogroup O2b) that I can't refrain from doubting the randomness of their sampling method.

In any case, including your "Genetic features of Mongolian ethnic groups revealed by Y-chromosomal analysis" and excluding Wells et al. "The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity" (which did not test specifically for haplogroup O2b), we now have five published studies that provide figures specifically for haplogroup O2b among Korean samples. I have already mentioned in my previous post that the mean frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans in these five studies is 173/571 = 30.3% haplogroup O2b, while the mean frequency of haplogroup O3 among Koreans in these five studies is 224/571 = 39.2% haplogroup O3. Three of these studies have frequencies of haplogroup O2b among Koreans in the range of 20% to 30% (Xue et al. (2005) 19/68 = 28% haplogroup O2b, Kim et al. (2007) 29/110 = 26% haplogroup O2b, Hong et al. (2006) 31/154 = 20% haplogroup O2b), one of the studies has a frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans in the range of 30% to 40% (Hammer et al. (2005) 28/75 = 37% haplogroup O2b), and one of the studies has a frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans that exceeds 40% (Katoh et al. (2004) 66/164 = 40.2% haplogroup O2b). Thus, the modal frequency of haplogroup O2b among the published studies of Korean Y-DNA that we have referenced is in the range of 20% to 30% (3 out of 5 studies). Furthermore, the median frequency of haplogroup O2b among the published studies of Korean Y-DNA that we have referenced is Xue et al. (2005) 28% haplogroup O2b. This median frequency of 28% is right in the middle of the mean frequency of the four studies I initially referenced (i.e., minus Katoh et al.; mean frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans = 107/407 = 26.3%) and the mean frequency of the five studies including Katoh et al. (mean frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans = 173/571 = 30.3% haplogroup O2b), so it is a reasonable figure.

As I have shown, regardless of whether we take the mean, median, or mode to represent the "average" frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans, it is still only about 30% (or less), and it is lower than the frequency of haplogroup O3 among Koreans.

Also, you have contended that the results of Kim et al. (2007) are biased due to the premise of their research (determining whether or not there exists any association between Y-chromosome haplogroup and incidence of prostate cancer among Koreans). Your contention is completely groundless; please read the published abstract for this article, as it explains the situation very clearly:

"The Y chromosome has recently been suggested to have an association with prostate cancer risk in human populations. Since this chromosome is haploid and lacks recombination over most of its length, haplotypes constructed from binary markers throughout the chromosome can be used for association studies. To assess the possible Y-chromosomal contribution to prostate cancer risk, we have therefore analyzed 14 Y-chromosomal binary markers in 106 prostate cancer cases and 110 controls from the Korean population. In contrast to previous findings in the Japanese population, no statistically significant difference in the distribution of Y-chromosomal haplogroup frequencies was observed between the case and control groups of Koreans. Thus, our data imply that the previously reported associations between Y-chromosomal lineages and a predisposition to, or protection against, prostate cancer might be explained by statistical fluctuations, or by genetic effects that are seen only in some environments." (Abstract for Wook Kim et al., "Lack of Association between Y-Chromosomal Haplogroups and Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population," 2007)

Besides the fact that the researchers did not find any significant correlation between Y-chromosome haplogroup and incidence of disease among their Korean subjects, which makes your argument meaningless anyway (because if there is no correlation between Y-chromosome haplogroup and incidence of disease, then you cannot claim that the samples were skewed in any way regarding their haplogroup composition), I have only cited the figures for the control group, i.e. a random sample of Koreans who were not being treated for prostate cancer. You cannot dispute the validity of Kim et al.'s 110 person control sample.

You can't fight against numbers and expect to win, ChineseMythDragon; numbers are unyielding and merciless.

The most frequent haplogroup is D in Japan, which is Ainu-Japonic-Ryukyuan specific haplogroup

one of moonstone's studies "Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer
and farmer Y chromosomes"

O-P31 is present at a frequency of
31.8% and is split into two sub-clades, O-SRY465 and
O-M95 (Fig. 2). O-SRY465* and its derived haplogroup
O-47z are almost entirely restricted to, and have opposite
frequency patterns in, Japan (7.7 and 22.0%,
respectively) and Korea (33.3 and 4.0%, respectively)
(supplementary material). O-47z is found in all Japanese
populations except the Ainu, with higher frequencies on
mainland Japan (21.3–28.3%) than in Okinawa (11.1%).
O-M95, a marker found at notable frequencies in
Southeast Asia and south Asian tribal populations and
rarely in northeast Asia, is present at 1.9% in Japan
(supplementary material).

OSRY is haplogroup O2b1, O-47z is haplogroup O2b1a

As you can see Koreans have higher frequencies of haplogroup O2b around 37.4%, the Japanese have much lower frequencies of around 21.3-28.3%.


note: There is a possibility that O2b1 could have originated in Southeast Asia rather than Central Asia, this is because Thai and Vietnamese populations also have populations with O2b.

I never suggested that the strangeness of the results of the Katoh et al. study might have any relationship to the fact that most of the researchers involved in the study were Japanese or Mongolian. I simply noted that the study was performed by mostly Japanese and Mongolians under financing from Japanese organizations and the title and abstract of the study report did not include any mention of Koreans, so it would be excessive of you or anyone else to expect me to have purchased or illegally downloaded that article to use it as evidence in my presentation of data about the composition of the Korean Y-DNA pool.

And how have I "contradicted myself"? What part of my previous post are you referring to? You need to write more clearly, or else no one will know how to respond to you.

"The point of my post was to say that your logical deduction that by increasing sample size there were less instances of Haplogroup O2b was wrong and it still stands because what you did is only made a racist assumption." I have not made any "racist assumption," and the fact is that according to the data I have presented, it is true that the frequency of haplogroup O2b has tended to be inversely correlated with the sample size among published studies of Korean Y-DNA. The single study by Katoh et al. ("Genetic features of Mongolian ethnic groups revealed by Y-chromosomal analysis"), which you have brought into the discussion, is an exception from this trend.

By the way, I have reported your present post to the moderators of the forum for its groundless accusation of racism. You should try to put some meaningful content into your posts, maybe make a rational argument or two, instead of making personal attacks and rambling posts that contain little or nothing of interest to the other members of the forum.

Please review "Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer
and farmer Y chromosomes"

Koreans have 10% more instances of haplogroup O2b than mainland Japanese, so your statement that O2b is not a major haplogroup in Korean populations is false, and your claim that haplogroup O2b is a major haplgroup in Japanese populations is only true for populations in the Kanto area.

"so your statement that O2b is not a major haplogroup in Korean populations is false" -

I have never made such a claim. I stated that haplogroup O3, and not haplogroup O2b, is the most frequent haplogroup among the Korean population; according to the mean, median, and mode of the data that you and I have presented in this thread so far, my claim is irrefutably correct.

If you continue to misrepresent other posters' positions, you will certainly purchase someone's wrath. Please be more cautious when you presume to impute a claim to another person.

I never even made any sort of claim about haplogroup O2b being "a major haplogroup in Japanese populations." I have only stated that the frequency of this haplogroup among published studies of Japanese samples is usually about 30% or higher, as it also was in the study by Hammer et al. that you just mentioned (7.7% O2b1*(xO2b1a) + 22.0% O2b1a = 29.7% or approx. 30% O2b among the sample of Japanese in Hammer et al., and it would be even higher if Ryukyuans were excluded from the "Japanese" category). If you believe that 30% is not enough for haplogroup O2b to deserve being considered "a major haplogroup in Japanese populations" (which, again, is something I have never stated), then that is your own opinion. The numbers are the reality, and how you choose to describe them ("major haplogroup," "minor haplogroup," or whatever) is just your subjective interpretation of the reality.

Pls restraining from resolving genetic discussion into any form of personal attacks (which are not allowed in any form or shape here). Using genetic reports and/or evidences to assert one's view please also cite your sources or references as well. We might have different interpretations regarding certain studies; however with objective evidences, supportive data, and conclusions of any scientists who conducted these genetic studies certainly would be available for others to review as well.

Again, pls be considerate of other opinions without resolving into any form of personal attacks or belittlement.

Thanks.

Thank you for helping to get this thread back on track, MC420.
I hope the discussion will be more constructive from now on.

In regard to the matter of haplogroup O2b among Southeast Asians, this paper from 2003 (Han-Jun Jin, Kyoung-Don Kwak, Michael F. Hammer, Yutaka Nakahori, Toshikatsu Shinka, Ju-Won Lee, Feng Jin, Xuming Jia, Chris Tyler-Smith and Wook Kim, "Y-chromosomal DNA haplogroups and their implications for the dual origins of the Koreans," Human Genetics (2003)) is quite informative.

The following are the results of this study's testing for haplogroup O2b-SRY₊₄₆₅*(xO2b1a-47z) and haplogroup O2b1a-47z among several populations of East Asia and Southeast Asia:

Beijing-Han (n=69): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 4/69 = 5.8%
haplogroup O2b1a = 0/69 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b total = 4/69 = 5.8%

Manchurian (n=44): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 2/44 = 4.5%
haplogroup O2b1a = 5/44 = 11.4%
haplogroup O2b total = 7/44 = 15.9%

Japanese (n=108): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 7/108 = 6.5%
haplogroup O2b1a = 21/108 = 19.4%
haplogroup O2b total = 28/108 = 25.9%

Koreans (n=160): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 22/160 = 13.8%
haplogroup O2b1a = 9/160 = 5.6%
haplogroup O2b total = 31/160 = 19.4%

Buryats (n=51): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 1/51 = 2.0%
haplogroup O2b1a = 0/51 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b total = 1/51 = 2.0%

Khalkhs (n=49): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 0/49 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b1a = 0/49 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b total = 0/49 = 0.0%

S. Chinese/Yunnan (n=39): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 0/39 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b1a = 0/39 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b total = 0/39 = 0.0%

Indonesians (n=36): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 6/36 = 16.7%
haplogroup O2b1a = 1/36 = 2.8%
haplogroup O2b total = 7/36 = 19.4%

Philippines (n=77): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 1/77 = 1.3%
haplogroup O2b1a = 0/77 = 0.0%
haplogroup O2b total = 1/77 = 1.3%

Thais (n=55): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 1/55 = 1.8%
haplogroup O2b1a = 2/55 = 3.6%
haplogroup O2b total = 3/55 = 5.5%

Vietnamese (n=50): haplogroup O2b*(xO2b1a) = 5/50 = 10.0%
haplogroup O2b1a = 2/50 = 4.0%
haplogroup O2b total = 7/50 = 14.0%

Another interesting feature of this study is the oddly low frequency of haplogroup O2b among their samples of Koreans (19.4% total) and Japanese (25.9% total); these are the lowest figures I have ever encountered for the frequency of haplogroup O2b among Koreans and Japanese.

To be more precise, Hammer et al.'s "Japan" sample (n=259) included a small sample of Ainus (n=4) and a moderately sized sample of Ryukyuans (n=45). The values for haplogroup O2b among Hammer et al.'s samples from Japan were as follows:

Ainu:
0/4 = 0.0% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
0/4 = 0.0% O2b1a-47z
0/4 = 0.0% O2b (total)

Aomori (Toohoku region of Honshuu):
1/26 = 3.8% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
7/26 = 26.9% O2b1a-47z
8/26 = 30.8% O2b (total)

Okinawa (Ryuukyuu):
5/45 = 11.1% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
5/45 = 11.1% O2b1a-47z
10/45 = 22.2% O2b (total)

Shizuoka (Tookaidoo region/Western Kantoo region of Honshuu):
8/61 = 13.1% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
13/61 = 21.3% O2b1a-47z
21/61 = 34.4% O2b (total)

Tokushima (Eastern Shikoku):
4/70 = 5.7% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
17/70 = 24.3% O2b1a-47z
21/70 = 30.0% O2b (total)

Kyuushuu:
2/53 = 3.8% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
15/53 = 28.3% O2b1a-47z
17/53 = 32.1% O2b (total)

If we calculate the frequency of haplogroup O2b among the Japanese with the Ainus and Ryukyuans excluded, then we have:
(1 + 8 + 4 + 2)/(26 + 61 + 70 + 53) = 15/210 = 7.1% O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z)
(7 + 13 + 17 + 15)/(26 + 61 + 70 + 53) = 52/210 = 24.8% O2b1a-47z
(8 + 21 + 21 + 17)/(26 + 61 + 70 + 53) = 67/210 = 31.9% O2b (total)

Thus, the data of Hammer et al. would support a conclusion that haplogroup O2b is present in approximately 30% of Japanese males, or even more than 30%. Furthermore, 52/67 = 77.6% of Japanese haplogroup O2b individuals belong to the subclade O2b1a-47z, while only 15/67 = 22.4% of Japanese haplogroup O2b individuals belong to the subclade O2b1-P49(xO2b1a-47z); in other words, nearly 4/5 Japanese haplogroup O2b individuals belong to the subclade O2b1a-47z according to the data of Hammer et al. (2005).

It is also interesting to note that only 3 out of the 33 samples of non-Japanese/Ryukyuan/Ainu populations from Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, and Oceania contained any haplogroup O2b1a-47z Y-chromosomes:

Indonesia West: 2/25 = 8.0% O2b1a-47z

Korea: 3/75 = 4.0% O2b1a-47z (Koreans also had 3/75 = 4.0% haplogroup D, particularly of the types of haplogroup D that are common among the Ainu, so it looks like Koreans do not belong to the "Japanese" haplogroup O2b1a-47z any more frequently than they belong to the typically Ainu forms of haplogroup D.)

Vietnam: 2/70 = 2.9% O2b1a-47z

It seems that samples of populations in Western Indonesia and Vietnam consistently reveal a presence of the typically Japanese haplogroup O2b1a-47z. Populations in Thailand also tend to display haplogroup O2b1a-47z Y-chromosomes at a significant frequency, but unfortunately, no samples from Thailand were tested in this study.

http://www.kahaku.go.jp/special/past/japan...pix/5/5-14.html
More about the research:
In recent years, more archaeological and genetic evidence have been found in both eastern China and western Japan to lend credibility to this argument. Between 1996 and 1999, a team led by Satoshi Yamaguchi, a researcher at Japan's National Science Museum, compared Yayoi remains found in Japan's Yamaguchi and Fukuoka prefectures with those from early Han Dynasty (202 BC-8) in China's coastal Jiangsu province, and found many similarities between the skulls and limbs of Yayoi people and the Jiangsu remains.[8] Two Jiangsu skulls showed spots where the front teeth had been pulled, a practice common in Japan in the Yayoi and preceding Jōmon period. The genetic samples from three of the 36 Jiangsu skeletons also matched part of the DNA base arrangements of samples from the Yayoi remains.

Surprisingly, Japanese also display the highest frequency of haplogroup O3a5, which is a Han Chinese and Sino-Tibetan specific O3 branch.

http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content-nw/full/172/4/2431/TBL1

Xue et. al.

Japanese
Haplogroup O3a5 (O3e) 10/47= 23%

This frequency is about 5% higher than the frequency of O3a5 among Manchus, Koreans and other Northeast Asians.



So the haplogroup O3 found among Koreans and Manchurians are related to the southeast Asian ethnic groups (Miao, Hmong) who also live in China and the haplogroup O3 found among Japanese are related to the Sino-Tibetan ethnic groups (Han Chinese) who live predominantly in China.

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=21511

Wilhelm Solheim's views that the transfer of Yayoi culture to Japan was a gradual process that took several thousands of years.

http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1T4SKPB_e...mp;aq=f&oq=

The three sacred imperial regalia ( 3 sacred treasures 三種の神器 ) -- the mirror, sword and curved jade jewel ( magatama 勾玉 ) -- all date back to the Yayoi or Jomon periods ( magatama also found in Korea peninsula ). Authentic magatama jewels have been found at Jomon sites.The sword has been linked to Jomon phallic stones and the earliest bronze swords in Japan are probably of Korean origin and date back to the end of the early Yayoi period. However, ritual swords of Japanese origin appear also in the Yayoi era. Mirrors of Chinese origin date from the Middle Yayoi and probably were soon manufactured locally.

Yayoi culture dates at least to about 500-400 BCE, although some of the latest AMS datings suggest it could go back as far as 900 BCE.

You selectively misquote and cite genetic research and than say 'I am skeptical and not too trusting on the genetic studies on Manchus.' This is a problem that makes your position undefendable.

I also disagree with Solheim's conclusions. Korean migration and assimilation into the Japanese archepeligo took place over a much shorter period, probably from ~900 BCE to ~200-300 CE.

At least Solheim not as flaky as Jared Diamond ( a NE Asia history m**** discredited 40% Jomon & a good percentage of Chinese genes in Japanese ),from whom you drawn the conclusion that Japanese are basically Koreans.Totally hogwash.

As usual,hyper-inflate past ' Korean ' component & downplay the significance of Chinese to Japanese

If they were of same tribes,then how come they spoke ( still is today ) unintellegible languages ?! There were documented accounts of Korea migration between 4th-7th centuries,included nearly 50% of Han-Chinese ancestry.

The migrations in ' early ' Yayoi period happened way before there was any nation-state in Korea peninsula.

Using your logic,we can also say Chinese migration and assimilation into the Korea peninsula for being from present day CHINA !! In this case,both Japanese & Koreans are actually ' Chinese people ". How about that

I mean nations are made up of various peoples, tribes, clans who have united under a common language, culture, bond, historical ties etc Aren't Japanese Japanese because they speak Japanese, are from Japan, have a common culture, bond and history ?

How far do the results match different parts of Japan ? if you're from a region that received some migrants a few centuries ago how does it represent them ? Wouldn't it be more scientifically accurate to state, in Japan from the results conducted the findings were alot of so and so genetic markers were found. Instead of, Japanese aren't actually Japanese they are really just Chinese and Koreans with a bit of Japanese in them racially.

I don't think they were from the same tribes. Before nation states began to solidify in Korea, there must have been hundreds of tribes living on the peninsula. It's impossible to know if they were all the same people or not but it's certainly incorrect to say that the tribes who stayed behind in Korea were the same as the tribes who migrated to Japan. These tribes may have been totally different from each other for all we know. If you look at pre-colonial North America, there were hundreds of tribes there, who may have LOOKED similar to the stray explorer, but they all had their distinct languages and customs, even if they lived in the same area. Still, you can't discount the fact that a good deal of the immigrants WERE in fact, from the Korean peninsula. Where did you find that info about Chinese immigrants? Does it matter? I think every East Asian (Mongols included) must be part Han Chinese.


Still doesn't get rid of the fact the migrating tribes were from the Korean peninsula (and China). People call them "Korean tribes" because they lived in Korea, and if they lived in Korea, there is a good chance that they were the ancestors of the modern day Korean people. So while it may be incorrect to say that Japanese = Korean, it is true that Koreans and Japanese are very close genetically. The present day PRC does not, in my opinion, represent only Han Chinese. People call it "China," but it fact it is quite different from the earlier Chinese dynasties, where the only true citizens were the Han (Manchus and Mongols don't count because they only functioned as the upper classes). "Chinese people" in the modern sense can mean almost anything. If your parents were from Belgium but you were born and raised in China, spoke Chinese, and acted Chinese, then you are Chinese. Korean-Chinese who live in Yanbian today are counted as Chinese nationals, but they are still not Han Chinese, who represent the true historical Chinese people. English settled in America, but that does not mean the Americans today are English. In fact, both parties would probably be highly offended at such a claim.


I don't think anyone will try to claim that a Japanese is not a Japanese. "Japanese" is a valid ethnic group, just like "Mestizo" or "Filippino" are valid as ethnic terms. A lot of people say Japan is perfectly homogenous and that's all there is to it. That's as fallacious a statement as "there is such a thing as a pure Chinese." What are Koreans? Siberians, Han Chinese, steppe people and the stray Okinawan all mixed together. I don't think there is any pure "Japanese" gene unless you're looking at the Ainu, and attempting to tie the Ainu to every single Yamato to prove that Japanese are, in fact, unique would be a highly laughable endeavor.

Exactly ...


No one ever denied migrations from Korea peninsula,but only disputed hyper-inflated suggestion of Japanese are basically Koreans or predominate Korean ancestry because it's hogwash.

It's recorded in Japan's Shoban 諸蕃 ( or 蕃 別 banbetsu ),a family registry designated Japanese clans known to be of continental descent.


【漢帰化族】 naturalized Han-Chinese

周人の末裔【大里氏】【長野氏】【広野氏】【三宅氏】【山田氏】【伊部氏】【白鳥氏】【白原氏】【調氏】【 長岑氏】【首氏】【水海氏】
　
秦の始皇帝の末裔【秦氏】【太秦氏】【惟宗氏】【朝原氏】【大蔵氏】【河勝氏】【桜田氏】【宗氏】【高尾氏】【時原氏】【寺氏】【 秦原氏】【広幡氏】【物集氏】【三林氏】【井手氏】【川辺氏】【中家氏】【原氏】【小宅氏】【井手氏】【長 田氏】【巨知氏】【長岡氏】【奈良氏】【大滝氏】【山村氏】
　　　　　　　　
漢の高祖の末裔【厚見氏】【馬氏】【浄野氏】【栗栖氏】【古志氏】【高志氏】【桜野氏】【武生氏】【高道氏 】【玉作氏】【豊岡氏】【春沢氏】【桧前氏】【文氏】【尾津氏】【村主氏】
　　　　　　　　
後漢霊帝の末裔【坂上氏】【大蔵氏】【丹波氏】【調氏】【木津氏】【桧原氏】【内蔵氏】【山口氏】【平田氏 】【佐太氏】【谷氏】【桜井氏】【路氏】【文氏】【桧前氏】【蔵人氏】【志賀氏】【広原氏】【池辺氏】【栗 栖氏】
　
その他漢帝の末裔【桑原氏】【下氏】【桧前氏】【若江氏】【田辺氏】【谷氏】【豊岡氏】【八戸氏】【高安氏 】【高道氏】【春井氏】【河内氏】
　
漢の国人の末裔【大原氏】【吉水氏】【真神氏】【台氏】【交野氏】
　
魏人の末裔【高向氏】【上氏】【高根氏】【筑紫氏】【平松氏】【雲梯氏】【郡氏】【河内氏】【河原氏】【鋤 田氏】【野上氏】【広橋氏】【穴太氏】
　
呉人の末裔【蜂田氏】【深根氏】【松野氏】【和楽氏】【工氏】【祝部氏】【額田氏】【勝氏】【上氏】【刑部 氏】【茨田氏】【高向氏】【小豆氏】
　
漢人の末裔【伊吉氏（壱岐氏）】【交野氏】【広海氏】【吉水氏】
　
燕人の末裔【赤染氏】【赤染部氏】【常世氏】【筆氏】
　
唐人の末裔【江田氏】【清宗氏】【清海氏】【清川氏】【浄山氏】【栄山氏】【千代氏】【新長氏 】
　
その他の漢土帰化族【大山氏】【大石氏（生石氏）】【高丘氏】【朝妻氏】【清村氏】【春村氏】


http://www.myj7000.jp-biz.net/clan/03/03.htm


There are books published on non-Yamato indigenous Hayato & Kumaso were actually related to Chinese ' Wu-Yue ' peoples of China's coastal Jiangsu & Zhejiang provinces.

http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E9%9A%BC%E4%BA%BA...6/dp/4797471239


Although there is no doubt on genetic closeness of Japanese and Korean,but its relatedness is ' relative '.I am sure Japanese of ' definite ' Korean ancestry should be closest to modern Koreans,but most other Japanese aren't.in the case of multi-ethnic PRC,specific provinces & region ( combined area larger than Japan or Korea peninsula ) have populations genetically close to Japanese & Koreans.On the other hand,Koreans have no genetic relation to Jomon ancestry which is near 50% of Japanese gene pool.

Japanese typically consider themselves 50% 縄文人 ( Jomon ) & 50% 弥生人 ( Yayoi ) not Siberian Korean Chinese Mongol.

Jomon contribution to modern Japanese @ 40.3%, with the highest frequency in the Ainu (75%) and Ryukyuans (60%). On the other hand, Yayoi Y chromosomes account for 51.9% of Japanese paternal lineages, with the highest contribution in Kyushu (62.3%) and lower contributions in Okinawa (37.8%) and northern Honshu (46.2%). Interestingly there is no evidence of Yayoi lineages in the Ainu.More recently,Yayoi Y chromosomes that originated in Southeast Asia expanded to Korea and Japan with the spread of wet rice agriculture.

Koreans do not have Y chromosome D2.The D2 system is Ainu 88%, the Okinawa people 56%, mainland Japan 50～56% and Korea 0%.


1 academic research on ' dual origins ' of the Japanese.

A set of 81 Y chromosome single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) was used to trace the origins of Paleolithic and Neolithic components of the Japanese paternal gene pool, and to determine the relative contribution of Jomon and Yayoi Y chromosome lineages to modern Japanese. Our global sample consisted of >2,500 males from 39 Asian populations, including six populations sampled from across the Japanese archipelago. Japanese populations were characterized by the presence of two major (D and O) and two minor (C and N) clades of Y chromosomes, each with several sub-lineages. Haplogroup D chromosomes were present at 34.7% and were distributed in a U-shaped pattern with the highest frequency in the northern Ainu and southern Ryukyuans. In contrast, haplogroup O lineages (51.8%) were distributed in an inverted U-shaped pattern with a maximum frequency on Kyushu. Coalescent analyses of Y chromosome short tandem repeat diversity indicated that haplogroups D and C began their expansions in Japan ~20,000 and ~12,000 years ago, respectively, while haplogroup O-47z began its expansion only ~4,000 years ago. We infer that these patterns result from separate and distinct genetic contributions from both the Jomon and the Yayoi cultures to modern Japanese, with varying levels of admixture between these two populations across the archipelago.The results also support the hypothesis of a Central Asian origin of Jomonese ancestors, and a Southeast Asian origin of the ancestors of the Yayoi,contra previous models based on morphological and genetic evidence.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/p31g0300430k6215/


it's fallacy to regard Japanese and Korean nationalities are closer genetically than all other NE Asian groups.

It's like saying British ( English Scots Welsh Irish ) are more closer related to some specific continental European nationalities ( they too are mixed with other European tribes and people of non-European race ) than with multi-racial & multi-ethnic America ( by discounting 50 million+ British ancestry ) because the population has non Anglo-Saxon ( or Nordic ) genetic component of 45 million Italians,a few million Greeks,many million White-Hispanics,some racially intermixed Whites,Asian-Americans,' Asiatic ' native Americans,Black-American,etc ..... therefore ' pull ' North America away from Europe.

Frankly,it's a pathetic argument.

Let's me repeat,it's a bias has aspects that reflect cultural/social/historical currents of the moment ( This debate wouldn’t be worth mentioning if it's true or Koreans and non-NE Asian surrogates wouldn't harp on it in cyberspace ).It's a fad of late will fade in due time.

What group would you say the Japanese are closest to, if not the Koreans? Disregarding the Jomon gene (which no one has except Japanese, anyway), wouldn't Koreans be closest? Of course, Chinese peoples also figure into this, but as I said before, most East Asian peoples are mixed with them.

Perhaps the Japanese are truly unique. But a large number of people refuse to buy into that, so the debate must go on. I don't think it's a fad, though. I've seen just as much Japanese hogwash as Chinese or Korean hogwash on the matter, which leads me to believe that the Japanese themselves aren't so comfortable with their own genes as they claim to be. This argument isn't recent, and it'll probably continue until the irrefutable truth is discovered (which may never happen).

As I've previously stated that Japanese & Korean relatedness is ' relative ' and the subject is trivial except when it's used as ' political tool ' like 日鮮同祖論 by Japanese imperialists in the past to justified annexation of Korea peninsula.So,the debate isn't recent as you pointed out and a fad as I've proved it to be.It's some S Koreans pursue Japanese & Koreans brotherhood relationship now recycle this half-truth crap in recent years in cyberspace.Long before I got involved into Japanse ancient history and genetics,never thought they have been that related to Koreans or Chinese.As I went back and forth debating ( extensive reading of ) those issues and more assessible credible materials available online,I found out Japanese are more of ' indigenous stock ' than many of us have believed.In my opinion,Japanese and Siberian peoples ( include some of N America west coastal native tribes ) are genetically closer with highest percentage shared DNA.Of-course,you can say Koreans are closest kins of a percentage Japanese ethnicity on mutual ancestry but not overall average Japanese population though.

Only Japanese and Sinophobic non-East Asian Japanophiles romanticize ' Nihonjiron ' concept,a theory promotes uniqueness & superiorty of Japanese ethnicity.

Regarding the Japanese have been uncomfortable discussing their ' Asian ' roots.There is ' twofold ' to this matter .

( 1 ) Japanese is one Asian ethnicity consciously ' submerge ' their own family origins in the name of ' Yamatoizaton '.
( 2 ) Fukuzawa Yukichi ( 福澤 諭吉 ) instrumentally led Japan & Japanese ' out of Asia ' mentally and pschologically.

Which Siberian peoples and which North American tribes?