It seems quite clear that many ethnic groups of SE Asia, at one point originated in what is now southern China, quite possibly before the northerner migration south and before the expansion southward of older Chinese Dynasties.

its also a common view that some of the surviving inhabitants of southern China maintain some genetic relationships with the older inhabitants which are now found in SE Asia. So lets talk about how much relation there is.

some random links.

Résumé / Abstract
We report here the DNA polymerase chain reaction sequence-specific oligonucleotide (PCR-SSO) typing of the HLA-DR B1, B3, B4, B5 and DQB1 loci for a sample of 103 Vietnamese Kinh from Hanoi, and compare their allele and haplotype frequencies to other East Asiatic and Oceanian populations studied during the 11th and 12th International HLA Workshops. The Kinh exhibit some very high-frequency alleles both at DRB1 (1202, which has been confirmed by DNA sequencing, and 0901) and DQB1 (0301, 03032, 0501) loci, which make them one of the most homogeneous population tested so far for HLA class II in East Asia. Three haplotypes account for almost 50% of the total haplotype frequencies in the Vietnamese. The most frequent haplotype is HLA-DRB1*1202-DRB3*0301-DQB1*0301 (28%), which is also predominant in Southern Chinese, Micronesians and Javanese. On the other hand, DRB1*1201 (frequent in the Pacific) is virtually absent in the Vietnamese. The second most frequent haplotype is DRB1*0901-DRB4*01011-DQB1*03032 (14%), which is also commonly observed in Chinese populations from different origins, but with a different accessory chain (DRB4*0301) in most ethnic groups. Genetic distances computed for a set of Asiatic and Oceanian populations tested for DRB1 and DQB1 and their significance indicate that the Vietnamese are close to the Thai, and to the Chinese from different locations. These results, which are in agreement with archaeological and linguistic evidence, contribute to a better understanding of the origin of the Vietnamese population, which has until now not been clear.
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2082176

Using linguistic comparisons, BELLWOOD(1 985)
proposed two major prehistoric migrations into
Southeast Asia. The first was an ancient “Australoid”
migration from the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago
which settled Australia and New Guinea about 40,000
YBP. The second was the more recent “Southern
Mongoloid” or “Austronesian” migration that originated
from Fujianor Zhejiang provinces of contemporary
China and settled throughout much of island
and mainland Southeast Asia about 4,000-6,000
YBP

It is believed that the [n]remnant Australoid populations
in Southeast Asia were essentially replaced or
assimilated by the southern Mongoloid migration[/b]
(BELLWOO1D9 85), whereast he majorA ustraloid populations
in Australia and New Guinea were relatively
http://www.genetics.org/cgi/reprint/130/1/139.pdf

The Minnan and Hakka people groups, the so-called "Taiwanese", are the descendants of early settlers from the southeast coast of China during the last few centuries. Genetically they showed affinities to southern Asian populations, as determined by phylogenetic trees and correspondence analysis calculated from HLA allele frequencies. This corresponds historically with the fact that they are the descendants of the southeast coastal indigenous population (Yueh) of China and should therefore not be considered as descendants of "pure" northern Han Chinese. A33-B58-DRB1*03 (A33-Cw10-B58-DRB1*03-DQB1*02), the most common HLA haplotype among "Taiwanese", with a haplotype frequency of 6.3%, has also been found to be the most common haplotype among Thai-Chinese and Singapore Chinese, two other populations also originating from the southeast coast of China. These observations suggests that this haplotype is the most well-conserved ancient haplotype of the Yueh.http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118967451/abstract

It's also true that great majority of ethnic groups in Korea peninsula and Japan,at one point originated in what now northern China.

Simply put,ALL Asian peoples are in fact ' Chinese-stock '

So true, observation shows that the Yue in South China and the current Vietnamese are related, just as the Man (or Nuzhen) in northeast China and the current Korean are related. These 2 groups originated from what is now part of China, one in the north the other in the south. Therefore southern Chinese look like Vietnamese while northeastern Chinese look like Korean or the other way around Vientamese look like Southern Chinese, and Korean look like norhteastern Chinese...The distinguishing factor is that VN and Korean are 2 independent countries therfore separate history, while those in southern China and Northeastern China are not.

To add to that, all Chinese stock people are really African stock.

photo L = Hong-Kong southern Chinese actor & singer Kenny Bee 鍾鎮濤 ( ancestry: 新會 Xinhui in Canton province ) don't look Viet at all
photo R = former US vice-president Al Gore's daughter Sarah Gore married to a ' Yue ' looking southern Chinese-American guy can pass as ' Viet '

Some Cantonese looks like northern Chinese for sure, however majority do not look like northern Chinese. My mother side ancestral home is in Xizhao 西焦 (next to 佛山） and my relatives from that side mostly look like northwestern Chinese

The son-in-law of Al Gore looks like a popular Taiwanese talkshow host ...

Out of curiosity,can anyone explain as to why this ( photo L ) S Korean actor Ji Jin Hee 池珍熙 looks ' very Chinese ' and shares some facial similiarities with ( photo R ) Hong-Kong southern Chinese pop singer Wakin Chou 周華健 ( ancestral hometown:Shantou in Canton province )

http://www.wakin-chau.us/News%20Archives.htm

http://www.wakin-chau.us/gallery7.htm

Kenny bee has model look and model height. Are you saying that all chinese have model looks ?

THe average chinese don't look like him at all.

There are some ordinary southern Han-Chinese guys have tall height and handsome facial features,they need not be label model looking.


By the same token,average native Vietnamese absolutely don't look like Johnny Nguyen who happens to have ' some Han Chinese genes ' in order for him to have share facial similiarities with Chinese-looking S Korean actor Ji Jin Hee.Otherwise he would look typical native Vietnamese in attached photos below.

* a thread on Viet looks

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...p;#entry4952774

and what is Chinese stock supposed to be? A northern Chinese from Heilongjiang and a Chinese from Guangdong will have some noticeable facial differences. What is "Chinese" now may not be Chinese in the past, especially since what is NOW southern China was home to people that were not considered "Chinese" and possibly the origin of many older racial groups that have spread into SE Asia and Oceania. Read
http://www.genetics.org/cgi/reprint/130/1/139.pdf
"BELLWOOD19 79, 1985; TURNE1R98 7; ZHAO
and LEE 1989). Using dental morphological traits,
TURNE(1R98 3, 1987) hypothesized that two migrations
originated from central China about 20,000-
30,000 YBP (years before present). One group, the
Sinodonts, expanded northward into China, Siberia
and across the Bering land bridge to the New World.
The second group, the Sundadontsm, oved southward
into Southeast Asia and Indonesia, and later through
Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia"

20-30,000ybp is beyond any Chinese dynasty or the formation of the Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, whatever identity.




and who are you to define how a Yue is supposed to look like? Perhaps it is the other guy who is Yue looking and Al Gore's son in law being less Yue? How do you define Yue when successive Chinese dynasties used the term Yue to describe a broad range of people living in what is now Southern China, who spoke different languages and were probably racially different from each other.


others have pointed it out and I'll point it out again. Using celebrities is not only subjective but also misleading. Celebrities tend to look somewhat different than the average person, especially in Asia where there's a tendency to use people that don't look "every day" (key word tendency, it is not absolute but the norm).

In addition, CHF has been plagued with nationalistic Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese and Hmongs with certain agendas, especially in regards to history and human anthropology. These nationalists rely heavily on immediate facial features and SELECTIVELY choose certain images, articles, etc to suit their agenda. I could easily take some pictures of darker southern Chinese, flood the forum with them, and make the opposite claim such as







like wise I can do the reverse, take example the Nagas of India

I can selectively choose Nagas who are lighter skin


instead of Nagas who are darker


My point: pictures can be deceiving. All ethnicity have RANGES of features.. something that has been lost in these debates as people attempt to explain why some Vietnamese may look northern chinese, why some southern chinese may look northern chinese, why some Japanese may look south east asian, etc.

If you're going to post something meaningful, do it with data.


--

http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/HG_2000_v107_p582.pdf
see figure 4

If Kenny Bee ( 鍾鎮濤 - photo below ) is hypothetically more Yue-looking than Austronesian-looking son inlaw of Al Gore,then 95% plus of modern Viet population not Yue-origin ( because extremely few Viets look like him ) rather proto-Vietnamese have always lived in Vietnam peninsula.

interesting topic lol
however,I should draw a comparison,
this is slowly becoming like a discussion of different breeds of German.

How about this female chess player from Hanoi

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Thanh_Trang.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Full name Hoang Thanh Trang
Country Vietnam Hungary
Born April 25, 1980 (1980-04-25) (age 28)
Hanoi, Vietnam
Title Grandmaster, Woman Grandmaster
FIDE rating 2487
Peak rating 2493 (October 2000)
Hoang Thanh Trang (born 25 April 1980) is a Hungarian chess Grandmaster. Her current FIDE Elo rating (July 2008) is 2487.

Hoang was born in Hanoi, Vietnam, and was ten years old when her family moved to Budapest. She won the 1998 World Girls Junior (U-20) Championship. Hoang won the board 1 gold medal at the 2005 European Chess Club Championship in Saint-Vincent, Italy, with an 80.0% score. In 2005 she was studying economy at the University of Budapest.

Regarding the Minnan and Hakka people groups in Taiwan, the so-called " Taiwanese ", are the descendants of early settlers from the southeast coast of China during the last few centuries. Genetically,they showed affinities to southern Asian populations.Of-course,South Pacific and SE Asia countries have overseas Chinese originally migrated from deep south China region,so they should be related.What's new about that ???

On the other hand,indigenous Malays Indonesians Phillipinos absolutely have no blood relation to southern Yue descendants of southern China & Taiwan.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlere...cgi?artid=21714

Genetic relationship of populations in China on the PNAS website,it is quite long and I scanned through but still can't find anything that substantiate your claim.

Quote: " genetic evidence does not support an independent origin of Homo Sapiens in China ".The phylogeny also suggested that it is more likely that ancestors of the populations currently residing in East Asia entered from Southeast Asia." from the abstract, and " Now that we have established that populations in East Asia were subjected to genetic contributions from multiple sources: Southeast Asia, Altaic from northeast Asia, and mid-Asia or Europe. It would be interesting to estimate relative contributions from each source.Unfortunately,the current study involved only mostly minority populations.A study involving populations across the country is necessary to reveal such a picture " .

At the conclusion,what I see is that the study is more of Chinese minority groups than the larger Han Chinese majority.It seems to suggest and enforce Li Hui theory of at least one of the 3 streams of transmigratory routes taken by Chinese peoples,the stream of genetic marker M119 ( where the Viets belong ) whose path was through northern SE asia into China and they contain Bai Yue and other minorities like Dai but not Han Chinese.So it sort of confirm " the current study involved only mostly minority populations " in the article on PNAS and they " entered from Southeast Asia " ( not the Han Chinese, mind you).

Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets does not share the M122 genetic marker with the Hans. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.

I read the other article on PNAS, and quote

"Usually, most Chinese immigrants to the U.S. (and to other countries, like Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, etc.) come from southern China, and this is certainly true of the cell lines from California residents from China born in the mainland, collected by Louise Chen and Alice Lin at Stanford and used in our surveys (2, 7, 8). Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the North, but they did so at very different times, and thus had different times for gene flow from the earlier settlers,that is the minorities"

The statement sort of confirm Han Chinese from south China " mostly came originally from the north ", which substantiate Li Hui theory of one of his 3 streams where in one stream the peoples passed through tibetan plateau to arrive in North China were ancestors of the Han-Chinese and Tibetans, carrying the genetic marker M117.PNAS site states that "Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the north, but they did so at very different times".

Virtually all Han Chinese share the same paternal and maternal lineage except for few southern groups that had Austronesian maternal ancestors.The many migrations ( referenced Tang & Song history chronicles ) into southern China have diluted the bloodlines.

The fact is that the Han Chinese majority and ethnic Vietnamese didn't share a common root.Any culture similarity,language similarity and genetic similarity in the south are due to chinese expansion to the south,and cultural diffusion, and mixing with the local people but not by common root. its simple as that.It is a fact that Vietnamese culture shares similarities with Chinese culture is due to Chinese influence like how Chinese influenced Korean and Japanese,not by common root.Another fact that the northern Han-Chinese migrated southward in large numbers and some have mixed with the locals and thats the reason they are genetic related ( same scenario with both Japanese & Koreans because their ancestors originally from Asia continent which is today's China excluding Russian Far East Territory & outer Mongolia ).

Vietnamese is an Austro-asiatic language,not Austronesian.Thus the language is related to that of the Khmers and Mons.The negrito people of Malaya (Asli people) also speak this language.In this latter case,it is likely they were a mixed race adopting the language of the dominant group). We should also note that the original speakers of Austro-asiatic (and for that matter, Austronesian) are also Mongoloids.The differences in features only indicate the amount of negrito blood in them due to intermarriage. Paleolithic Negrito people (who look like the Australian Aborigines) lived in most of Southeast Asia and South China prior to the big migration of Mongoloids southwards, which displaced these peoples. Other contribution of course also include climate and diet.

It is a fact that Vietnamese language has at least 60% of Chinese loanwords due to Chinese cultural influence and dominance,50% of Chinese loanwords in Korean and Japanese languages,again not by common roots.

you are diverting away from the question I asked.

Under what premises do you argue how one looks more "Yue" than the other?
What is a "Yue" supposed to look like? You can argue 95% of people look like Yue or not and how Viets are supposed to look like (and this alone is questionable, where's your source? or is this your based on your own speculation>).. because you haven't even set the parameters in defining what "Yue" is.

Very few people in this forum use that term to describe physical features other than a few banned members like Ricecake.
Most people here know that the term Yue was a term used by the Chinese (and later the Vietnamese onto themselves) to classify a broad range of people
living in what is now southern China. These broad range of people did not speak the same language either.
You may argue that the southern Chinese and the Vietnamese both may have some "Yue" origins, but how do you know if these are even the same "yue"?


Another flaw in your arguement is also "Austronesian" looking. There is no such thing as an Austronesian ethnic group, only a family of languages spoken by
a diverse group of people i.e Malay, Micronesian, etc. Any scholarly journal will use the term "Austronesian speaking groups", not Austronesian groups because there is a
key difference in its meaning.

read ....

There is a Taiwan independence website pursuing a political agenda of trying to prove that " the Han-Taiwanese are not Chinese, but were aborigines in origin', as way of justifying that Taiwanese are not Chinese, therefore Taiwan is not part of China. Therefore, I caution all to read the sources with a political-filtering eye on such revisionist post. Although I agree that quite a number of Han-Taiwanese were originally 'aborigines' (assimilated to Han) largely because some tended to look like aborigines, I don't believe 80% of Taiwanese were aborigines in origin. The Taiwanese were probably mixed with Han/aborigines.

However, historical sources I've read mentioned that alot of Taiwanese aborigines were formerly one of the Yue tribes who migrated to Taiwan long before Han-Chinese migrated over to Taiwan.

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...=0#entry4950697

interesting that you're continue to side step the definition of Yue despite that you continue to use it many of your ethnic views. Perhaps you don't have a strong background on SE Asian history at all?

Give me five bro,as we both are in the same boat except you and I on the opposite sides of this argument

there's no boat. I've asked you two simple things.
1. explain the parameters to which you define what a Yue is
2. explain why you continue to use Yue in a generalized manner despite knowing full well that the Chinese historically used it
to a broad number of peoples.

you've continued avoiding these key questions by making nonsensical statements such as those, and posting irrelevant links.

Hey ... even the Japanese have 51% Southeast Asian paternal lineages.


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/

This thread is for Southern Chinese relations to SE Asians, not Japanese. No need to bring the same journal you keep posting in over 3 different threads. Of course
you also failed to answer previous questions about your past statements.. and in regards to that journal, how strongly you support it.

Peepee, may I ask that you provide an answer on how to define a Yue person? I'm also anxious to see your parameters.

there is a link between filipinos,guangdongren and ami tribe of taiwan.
http://robertlindsay.blogspot.com/2007/11/...of-mankind.html

Hmm I'm interested in this topic - please cheack my data

There were different names for the Yue people living in different areas. From the east coast of China to the northeast of Myanmar, there were such Yue groups as Wuyue 吳越, Yuyue 於越, Ouyue 甌越 (Eastern Ou), Nanyue 南越/南粵, Xi'ou 西甌 (Western Ou), Luoyue 雒越/駱越, Yangyue 揚越, Minyue 閩越, Shanyue 山越, Kuiyue, and Dianyue 滇越. According to the information recorded in some Han Chinese Historical books,² from the early Qin Dynasty through the Wei and Jin Dynasties, different groups of Yue lived in the areas from the Huaihe River Valley, through Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong and Guangxi to Guizhou and Yunnan Provinces.

Yue was a culturally relative term for the ancient Chinese

While most Yue peoples were eventually sinicized, the Kam-Tai (Daic): Zhuang, Buyi, Dai, Sui (Shui), Kam (Dong), Hlai(Li), Mulam, Maonan, Ong-Be(Lingao), Thai, Lao, Shan, and Vietnamese peoples retained their ethnic identities. Some of these peoples also have their own nation-states today. In particular, the Vietnamese people broke free from Chinese rule in the 10th century and have their own state to this day

Which would bring us to the Daic-
and Paternal genetic affinity between western Austronesians and Daic populations.

Hui Li, Bo Wen, Shu-Juo Chen, Bing Su, Patcharin Pramoonjago, Yangfan Liu, Shangling Pan, Zhengdong Qin, Wenhong Liu, Xu Cheng, Ningning Yang, Xin Li, Dinhbinh Tran, Daru Lu, Mu-Tsu Hsu, Ranjan Deka, Sangkot Marzui, Chia-Chen Tan, Li Jin

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Austronesian is a linguistic family spread in most areas of the Southeast Asia, the Pacific Ocean, and the Indian Ocean. Based on their linguistic similarity, this linguistic family included Malayo-Polynesians and Taiwan aborigines. The linguistic similarity also led to the controversial hypothesis that Taiwan is the homeland of all the Malayo-Polynesians, a hypothesis that has been debated by ethnologists, linguists, archaeologists, and geneticists. It is well accepted that the Eastern Austronesians (Micronesians and Polynesians) derived from the Western Austronesians (Island Southeast Asians and Taiwanese), and that the Daic populations on the mainland are supposed to be the headstream of all the Austronesian populations. RESULTS: In this report, we studied 20 SNPs and 7 STRs in the non-recombining region of the 1,509 Y chromosomes from 30 China Daic populations, 23 Indonesian and Vietnam Malayo-Polynesian populations, and 11 Taiwan aboriginal populations. These three groups show many resemblances in paternal lineages. Admixture analyses demonstrated that the Daic populations are hardly influenced by Han Chinese genetically, and that they make up the largest proportion of Indonesians. Most of the population samples contain a high frequency of haplogroup O1a-M119, which is nearly absent in other ethnic families. The STR network of haplogroup O1a* illustrated that Indonesian lineages did not derive from Taiwan aborigines as linguistic studies suggest, but from Daic populations.

CONCLUSION:

We show that, in contrast to the Taiwan homeland hypothesis, the Island Southeast Asians do not have a Taiwan origin based on their paternal lineages. Furthermore, we show that both Taiwan aborigines and Indonesians likely derived from the Daic populations based on their paternal lineages. These two populations seem to have evolved independently of each other. Our results indicate that a super-phylum, which includes Taiwan aborigines, Daic, and Malayo-Polynesians, is genetically educible

----------------------------
Austronesians being the oldest language family and the root Language for most Languages brings us also into Taiwan
Yue-Peoples would Generally be All of Southeast ASIA
----------------------------

which brings us to all of EAST ASIA (that includes Koreans and Japan)

Genetic structure of Hmong-Mien speaking populations in East Asia as revealed by mtDNA lineages
Genetic structure of Hmong-Mien speaking populations in East Asia as revealed by mtDNA lineages.

Bo Wen, Hui Li, Song Gao, Xianyun Mao, Yang Gao, Feng Li, Feng Zhang, Yungang He, Yongli Dong, Youjun Zhang, Wenju Huang, Jianzhong Jin, Chunjie Xiao, Daru Lu, Ranajit Chakraborty, Bing Su, Ranjan Deka, Li Jin

State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering and Center for Anthropological Studies, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Hmong-Mien (H-M) is a major language family in East Asia, and its speakers distribute primarily in southern China and Southeast Asia. To date, genetic studies on H-M speaking populations are virtually absent in the literature. In this report, we present the results of an analysis of genetic variations in the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) hypervariable segment 1 (HVS1) region and diagnostic variants in the coding regions in 537 individuals sampled from 17 H-M populations across East Asia. The analysis showed that the haplogroups that are predominant in southern East Asia, including B, R9, N9a, and M7, account for 63% (ranging from 45% to 90%) of mtDNAs in H-M populations. Furthermore, analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA), phylogenetic tree analysis, and principal component (PC) analysis demonstrate closer relatedness between H-M and other southern East Asians, suggesting a general southern origin of maternal lineages in the H-M populations. The estimated ages of the mtDNA lineages that are specific to H-M coincide with those based on archeological cultures that have been associated with H-M. Analysis of genetic distance and phylogenetic tree indicated some extent of difference between the Hmong and the Mien populations. Together with the higher frequency of north-dominating lineages observed in the Hmong people, our results indicate that the Hmong populations had experienced more contact with the northern East Asians, a finding consistent with historical evidence. Moreover, our data defined some new (sub-)haplogroups (A6, B4e, B4f, C5, F1a1, F1a1a, and R9c), which will direct further efforts to improve the phylogeny of East Asian mtDNAs.

Mesh-terms: Asia, Southeastern; Asian Continental Ancestry Group; Base Sequence; China; DNA, Mitochondrial :: genetics; Genetics, Population; Haplotypes; Humans; Molecular Sequence Data; Phylogeny; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.; Variation (Genetics);


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

Y-chromosomal DNA haplogroups and their implications for the dual origins of the Koreans.
Y-chromosomal DNA haplogroups and their implications for the dual origins of the Koreans।


Jin HJ, Kwak KD, Hammer MF, Nakahori Y, Shinka T, Lee JW, Jin F, Jia X, Tyler-Smith C, Kim W.
Department of Biological Sciences, Dankook University, 330-714 Cheonan, Korea.
We have analyzed eight Y-chromosomal binary markers (YAP, RPS4Y(711), M9, M175, LINE1, SRY(+465), 47z, and M95) and three Y-STR markers (DYS390, DYS391, and DYS393) in 738 males from 11 ethnic groups in east Asia in order to study the male lineage history of Korea. Haplogroup DE-YAP was found at a high frequency only in Japan but was also present at low frequencies in northeast Asia, including 2.5% in Korea, suggesting a northern origin for these chromosomes. Haplogroup C-RPS4Y(711) was present in Korea and Manchuria at moderate frequencies: higher than in populations from southeast Asia, but lower than those in the northeast, which may imply a northern Asian expansion of these lineages, perhaps from Mongolia or Siberia. The major Y-chromosomal expansions in east Asia were those of haplogroup O-M175 (and its sublineages). This haplogroup is likely to have originated in southern east Asia and subsequently expanded to all of east Asia. The moderate frequency of one sublineage in the Koreans, haplogroup O-LINE1 (12.5%), could be a result of interaction with Chinese populations. The age of another sublineage, haplogroup O-SRY(+465), and Y-STR haplotype diversity provide evidence for relatively recent male migration, originally from China, through Korea into Japan. In conclusion, the distribution pattern of Y-chromosomal haplogroups reveals the complex origin of the Koreans, resulting from genetic contributions involving the northern Asian settlement and range expansions mostly from southern-to-northern China

In Cheng Hsüan’s commentary on the Chou-Li, the gloss 越人谓死为札“The Yüeh people call ‘to die’札” occurs.** Cheng Hsüan lived during the Eastern Han (127-200 A.D.) and there seem to be no grounds to doubt the authenticity of this gloss. According to Karlgren’s Grammata Serica Recensa the OC reading of the character was *tsă. This is Karlgren’s group II. There is good reason to believe that his reconstruction is erroneous. Tuan Yü-ts’ ai assigns this character to his group twelve, which corresponds most nearly to Karlgren’s group V.** Chiang Yu-kao places it in his 脂 group which also corresponds most nearly to Karlgren’s group V.** How do we explain this discrepancy? There are several ways to assign a given character to an OC rhyme group. It may be assigned on the basis of its occurrence in a rhymed text, but if it dose not appear as a rhyme word, then there are only two alternative methods for determining its proper membership: a few Middle Chinese (hereafter MC) rhymes all go back to a single OC category; this is the case, for example, with the MC rhyme 唐 which derives from the OC 阳 group in its entirety. For such MC rhymes, the assignment to an OC rhyme category is mechanical. Frequently, however, a given MC rhyme has more than one OC origin. This, in fact, is true of the character in question. 札 belongs to the MC 黑吉 rhyme; this rhyme derives from three different OC rhyme categories: 祭，微，and 脂 corresponding roughly to Karlgren’s II, V, and X. The only way to determine which ÓC rhyme category such words as this belong to is to examine their hsieh-sheng connections. In the Shuowen, is defined as follows: 札牒也，从木乙声. In GSR 505 a reading *•iɛt is given for; this is Karlgren’s group V. And in the Shih-ming, written by Liu His, a younger contemporary of Cheng Hsan, the sound gloss is 札，木节也(木节 *ts*，OC 脂 group).** Clearly 札 should belong to the same group as 乙; the proper reconstructions is tsɛt and not tsăt as given in GSR 280b. Tung T’ungho does not give this character in his Shang-ku yin-yün piao-kao,** but it is simple enough to place it where it belongs—viz. on page 215 in Tung’s 微 group; the proper form in Tung’s system is *tsət.

There can be no doubt that this word represents the AA word for ‘to die’: VN chết; Muong chít, chét; Chrau chu’t, Bahnar kˠcit; Katu chet; Gua test; Hre ko’chit; Bonam kachet; Brou kuchêit; Mon ch*t. More cognate forms can be found in Pinnow, p. 259, item K324f. The Proto-Austro-asiatic form has been reconstructed by Shorto as kcət,** which is extremely close to our OC form. There is even the possibility that Proto-AA* k- is reflected in the glottal initial of the phonetic 乙.

'To die' in other east and southeast Asian languages are: Chinese 死*siər; Tib. * ‘chi-ba, šhi; Lolo-Burm *šei;** Proto-Tai *tai; ** Proto-Miao *daih. ** Here Chinese goes together wit Tibeto-Burman, and Proto-Tai goes together with Proto-Miao


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

According to the Vietnamese mystical history, 100 sons of Âu Cơ and Lạc Long Quân were the ancestors of the 100 Yue. The domain of Văn Lang (or Lingnan) matched the territory of the Bai Yue people.
Translation: In the beginning of the Han Dynasty, the Bách Việt (Bai Yue or 100 Viet) were divided into branches, among them are: Đông Âu (Eastern Ou), Mân Việt (Min Yue), Nam Việt (Nan Yue), Tây Âu (Xi Ou), Lạc Việt (Luo Yue) are the main branches.

1. Đông Âu (Eastern Ou) lived in the land that used to be territories of the Yue and Wu countries (nowaday is Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China)
2. Mân Việt (Min Yue) also lied in the former territory of the Yue country (Fujian province nowadays), is regarded as the ancestors of the modern Mân (Min) people of nowadays China (the people that speak the Minnan dialect).
3. Nam Việt (Nan Yue) located in Guangdong province today, later expanded into Guangxi territory and the Southern region. They are regarded as the ancestors of modern Cantonese.
4. Tây Ou (Xi Ou) located in present-day Western Guangdong and Southern Guangxi.
5. Lạc Việt (Luo Yue) located in the area of North Vietnam today, are the ancestors of modern Vietnamese peopleAnother more specific classification of the Yue tribes is dividing them into 3 branches based on their cultural traits. The three branches are:
1. Nam Việt (Nan Yue) group: distributed all over the region of Central and North Guangdong, joined with North and West Guangxi, and in the earlier time also expanded up to Fujian, Zhejiang, and Southern Jiangsu (same as the Northern branch in the two-branch classification).
2. Tây Âu (Xi Ou) group, also called Âu Việt (Ou Yue): distributed in the region of Quế Lâm (Guilin), Tây Giang (Xijiang) of Guangxi.
3. Lạc Việt (Luo Yue) group: distributed in Southwestern Guangdong, expanding to Southwestern Guangxi and North Vietnam

The Northern group (or branch), distributed all over the region of Central and North Guangdong, joined with North and West Guangxi, and in the earlier time also expanded up to Fujian, Zhejiang, and Southern Jiangsu.
+ The Southern group (or branch), distributed in an area extended from present-day Southwestern Guangdong, South and West Guangxi and Northern Vietnam
---------------------------------------
two groups Xi Ou (in the Southwest) and Luo Yue (in the Southeast) can be merged into one group when comparing to the Northern Yue branche, there are important differences between these two groups in the level of development. Geography is an important factor to explain this difference. The West was a mountainous area, transporting and communicating were difficult, local diversity could be preserved or developed in their own way. In the Southeast and the coastal areas, transporting and communicating were easier, and therefore were more open to influences. the cultural diversity in these areas had an inclination to develop into a similar culture

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

I can't find a good map off hand of the range of Yue-Peoples- the influence changes over a large span of time
from Cantonese, Vietnamese, and history clashs with Genetics ,in the way Genetics may find Yue peoples
closer to han - than in a historical perspective

Most recent study I have seen is this:



and a earlier study




http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v431/...ature02878.html


Conclusion:
Based on what I know of Chinese history, Southern China was settled by the Han much later than the North and the people in the South were considered “barbarian” referred to as the various types of “Yue” (known as the 100 Yue) in later times. Eventually the people region that became Guangdong and North Vietnam were referred to as (Nan Yue, or South Viet). Most of these people were likely Austroasiatic speakers in origin (like present day Vietnamese and Cambodians). Since Northern Vietnam (Annam) was part of China on and off for over 1,000 years; and the south, by the end of Chinese colonization was controlled by Champa, a Malay people (Austronesian).

As far as I know there was a massive influx of Han Chinese into the region during the Song Dynasty due to Barbarian pressure in the north. I know assimilation was fairly complete by the Tang Dynasty as Cantonese speakers often call themselves “Tong (Tang in Mandarin) People” and talk of giving their children “Tong names”. They also still refer to their province and themselves as “Yue” to this day. I’m guessing by the Late Tang, the Sinization of the area was complete, but for Annam. Vietnam became independent from China after the disintegration of the Tang, since the “Viet or Yue” people lived in what is now Guangdong as well, I’m guessing by that time the people in Guangdong were mostly Sinized, and considered themselves Han Chinese, but most of the people further South did not.

Also, “South,” in China is the area from Shanghai down to the border of the Southeast Asian nations of Laos and Vietnam.

Other nonHan ethnicities lived in the South, such as the Lao/Thai (Tai-Kadai language group) folks also came from Central China and were pushed South by the Han, they still have relatives in modern China like the Zhuang and Dong peoples.

To wrap it up, it is not shocking that Han men (like many men before them all over the world) would move to an area and take it over, while enslaving, killing, or running off the native men using their superior technology and social organization. Then they would marry, rape, or concubine the local women. Men, historically, are not picky about who they have sexual relations with. In a desperate spot any woman (even a barbarian) will do.


This is complicated by the fact... at different times, hundreds of thousands of Han Chinese moved into Vietnam, especially in the North and around Saigon.

Those Chinese were manly from the North. I've met more than one Vietnamese person with a Han Chinese grandmother or grandfather, but many of those Han Chinese from the South already had ancient admixture with Yue people.

I'm not sure how much Chinese changed the Vietnamese gene pool, probably a lot less than Yue, Thai-related people, etc changed the Southern Chinese gene pool.

Basically I think you have the first Southern Peoples that headed North establishing Cultures left and right
becoming the Areas Natives , and starting to clash with the NEW Southern peoples heading North - unable to seperate them
genetically if Southeast asia spread to all of east Asia- but in history you have a perspective of "foreign people" coming into the northern area-

which is why the other guy kept saying all Asians come from China - when actually all come Southeast Asia , which "ALSO"
include South CHINA- so he right -AND- wrong- you can actually say it different ways
you can say all are Malayo-Polynesians-Austronesians
you can say all derive from Yue-Peoples
you can say all come from Southeast Asia
you can say all come fro South China
you can say all come from Taiwan aboriginals
you can say Indonesians are Southeast Asians
you can Polynesians come from Southeast Asia
you can say Polynesians founded Southeast Asia
you can Malayo-Polynesian and Polynesian are the same people
you can say many many many things in different ways- all being true in way
all talking about the same people- ASIA

You can also say All are Han if yue-peoples and han are more genetically similar than
other Asiatic groups which would be combining both Yue-Peoples and Han dynasty
I read that one - on HAN - the data can be interpreted different ways
it's pretty foolish to think one group was plopped in from the sky and settled east Asia
and the group next to it came from the south.

You 3 choices by basic to choose from anyway- as the oldest places of Homo-Sapien
Africa-India-or Southeast Asia

I leave that one alone, I'd say the Hans study consists of the Many Yue-Peoples
Diac - etc etc etc etc etc - because if not you'd have no diversity in ethnography
"AND" and awful lot of inbreeding-
it most certainly must be that they were in fact all similar enough to be grouped together

All Asians did not come from Southeast Asia to the North. Some Asians never lived in Southeast Asia, in fact the majority never lived there (as in their ancestors never lived there).



Only a minority of people took the "Southern Route" out of Africa, the majority went into the Eurasian Steppe to the North.

There is no evidence Chinese civilization started by migrants from the South, it appears they came through central Asia coming out around present day Tibet and moved SouthWest.

The Map you posted has all Asians coming from the South- and one group coming strait north from India through the Caucasus - This map is wrong - west Asia created the Caucasus this map shows no migrations from Est Asia into the Western regions-
Even with-out picking on that map , the map it self shows only one branch going north - UM a southern climate culture walking barefoot through the the Himalayan Mountains I might add-
I don't know what this map represents but it's not the first migrations - I saw something like this on show on PBS, the an was British of course giving credit to the Caucasus as the founders of north America

a Caucasian does no unmix and turn into an Asian
Around the Caucasus Mountains is West Asia (Kazakhstan) -(Iran)- Turkey
Turks are a mix of West Asiatic today
Tatars were early Asiatic
Proto Germanic groups



these groups DID not sweep back east and turn back into an original Asian



These people above -would be the original west Asiatic groups that
migrated into Europe- later with more wave s of Indo-Asiatic Turkish groups
and Indo-Arabic nomadic groups

European groups settle at 35000KYA
Southeast Asia is at least 50-60,000 kya




Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome Variation in the Caucasus


I. Nasidze 1,*, E. Y. S. Ling 1,2 , D. Quinque 1 , I. Dupanloup 3 , R. Cordaux 1 , S. Rychkov 4 , O. Naumova 4 , O. Zhukova 4 , N. Sarraf-Zadegan 5 , G. A. Naderi 5 , S. Asgary 5 , S. Sardas 6 , D. D. Farhud 7 , T. Sarkisian 8 , C. Asadov 9 , A. Kerimov 9 and M. Stoneking 1
1 Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, D-04103, Germany ; 2 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK (current address: The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK) ; 3 Ferrara University, Department of Biology, Via L.Borsari 46, 44100, Ferrara, Italy ; 4 Vavilov Institute of General Genetics, Gubkin str.3, 119991, Moscow, Russia ; 5 Isfahan Cardiovascular Research Center, Isfahan, Iran ; 6 Gazi University, Toxicology Department 06330, Ankara, Turkey ; 7 Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Department of Human Genetics, Tehran, P.O. Box 14155-6446, Iran ; 8 Center of Medical Genetics, National Academy of Sciences of Republic of Armenia, 5/1 Zakyan Str., 375010, Yerevan, Armenia ; 9 Scientific-Research Institute of Hematology and Transfusiology, Azerbaijan Republic Ministry of Health, Gashgay Str. 87, Baku, Azerbaijan

*Correspondence: Dr. Ivan Nasidze, Phone: (49) 341 3550505. Fax: (49) 341 3550555, e-mail: nasidze@eva.mpg.de Copyright University College London 2004KEYWORDSY chromosome • mtDNA • CaucasusSummaryWe have analyzed mtDNA HVI sequences and Y chromosome haplogroups based on 11 binary markers in 371 individuals, from 11 populations in the Caucasus and the neighbouring countries of Turkey and Iran. Y chromosome haplogroup diversity in the Caucasus was almost as high as in Central Asia and the Near East, and significantly higher than in Europe. More than 27% of the variance in Y-haplogroups can be attributed to differences between populations, whereas mtDNA showed much lower heterogeneity between populations (less then 5%), suggesting a strong influence of patrilocal social structure. Several groups from the highland region of the Caucasus exhibited low diversity and high differentiation for either or both genetic systems, reflecting enhanced genetic drift in these small, isolated populations. Overall, the Caucasus groups showed greater similarity with West Asian than with European groups for both genetic systems, although this similarity was much more pronounced for the Y chromosome than for mtDNA, suggesting that male-mediated migrations from West Asia have influenced the genetic structure of Caucasus populations.

Y genetic data support the Neolithic demic diffusion model

Lounès Chikhi*,†,Richard A. Nichols‡,Guido Barbujani§, andMark A. Beaumont¶+Author Affiliations*Department of Biology, University College London, Darwin Building, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom; ‡School of Biological Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom; §Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Ferrara, via L. Borsari 46, I-44100 Ferrara, Italy; and¶ School of Animal and Microbial Sciences, University of Reading, Whiteknights, P.O. Box 228, Reading RG6 6AJ, United KingdomEdited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, and approved June 11, 2002 (received for review March 18, 2002)

A counter-clockwise northern route of the Y-chromosome haplogroup N from Southeast Asia towards Europe


Siiri Rootsi1,10, Lev A Zhivotovsky2,10, Marian Baldovi1,3, Manfred Kayser4, Ildus A Kutuev1,5, Rita Khusainova1,5, Marina A Bermisheva1,5, Marina Gubina1,6, Sardana A Fedorova1,7, Anne-Mai Ilumäe1, Elza K Khusnutdinova5, Mikhail I Voevoda6, Ludmila P Osipova6, Mark Stoneking8, Alice A Lin9, Vladimir Ferak3, Jüri Parik1, Toomas Kivisild1, Peter A Underhill9 and Richard Villems11
Department of Evolutionary Biology,
University of Tartu and Estonian Biocentre, Tartu,
Estonia2N.I. Vavilov Institute of General Genetics,
Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow,
Russia3Department of Molecular Biology,
Faculty of Natural Sciences,
Comenius University, Bratislava,
Slvakia4Department of Forensic Molecular Biology,
Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam,
The Netherlands5Institute of Biochemistry and Genetics,
Ufa Research Center,
Russian Academy of Sciences,Ufa,Russia6Institute of Cytology and Genetics,
Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russia7
Department of Molecular Genetics,
Yakut Research Center,
Russian Academy of Medical Sciences and Government of the Sakha Republic, Yakutsk,Yakutia8Department of Evolutionary Genetics,
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology,
Leipzig, Germany9Department of Genetics,

Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USACorrespondence: Dr S Rootsi, Department of Evolutionary Biology, University of Tartu and Estonian Biocentre, Riia 23, Tartu, 51010, Estonia. Tel.: +372 7 375054; Fax: +3727 7 420194;
E-mail: sroots@ebc.ee10
These authors contributed equally to this work.Received 26 June 2006; Revised 17 October 2006; Accepted 20 October 2006;Published online 6 December 2006.




A large part of Y chromosome lineages in East European and East Asian human populations belong to haplogroup (hg) NO, which is composed of two sister clades N-M231 and O-M175. The O-clade is relatively old (around 30 thousand years (ky)) and encompasses the vast majority of east and Southeast Asian male lineages, as well as significant proportion of those in Oceanian males. On the other hand, our detailed analysis of hg N suggests that its high frequency in east Europe is due to its more recent expansion westward on a counter-clock northern route from inner Asia/southern Siberia, approximately 12–14 ky ago. The widespread presence of hg N in Siberia, together with its absence in Native Americans, implies its spread happened after the founder event for the Americas. The most frequent subclade N3, arose probably in the region of present day China, and subsequently experienced serial bottlenecks in Siberia and secondary expansions in eastern Europe. Another branch, N2, forms two distinctive subclusters of STR haplotypes, Asian (N2-A) and European (N2-E), the latter now mostly distributed in Finno-Ugric and related populations. These phylogeographic patterns provide evidence consistent with male-mediated counter-clockwise late Pleistocene–Holocene migratory trajectories toward Northwestern Europe from an ancestral East Asian source of Paleolithic heritage.

Climate Change and Postglacial Human Dispersals in Southeast Asia


Pedro Soares*,1, Jean Alain Trejaut,1, Jun-Hun Loo, Catherine Hill*, Maru Mormina*,, Chien-Liang Lee, Yao-Ming Chen, Georgi Hudjashov, Peter Forster¶, Vincent Macaulay#, David Bulbeck**, Stephen Oppenheimer, Marie Lin and Martin B. Richards** Institute of Integrative and Comparative Biology,
Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds,
UK Transfusion Medicine and Anthropology Laboratory, Mackay Memorial Hospital, Tamsui,
Taiwan Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,
UK Department of Health, Tainan Hospital, Tainan City,
Taiwan The Estonian Biocentre, Tartu, Estonia¶ Department of Forensic and Chemical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK# Department of Statistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK** School of Archaeology and Anthropology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia School of Anthropology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKE-mail: m.b.richards@leeds.ac.ukAccepted for publication March 17, 2008.


Modern humans have been living in Island Southeast Asia (ISEA) for at least 50,000 years. Largely because of the influence of linguistic studies, however, which have a shallow time depth, the attention of archaeologists and geneticists has usually been focused on the last 6,000 years—in particular, on a proposed Neolithic dispersal from China and Taiwan. Here we use complete mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) genome sequencing to spotlight some earlier processes that clearly had a major role in the demographic history of the region but have hitherto been unrecognized. We show that haplogroup E, an important component of mtDNA diversity in the region, evolved in situ over the last 35,000 years and expanded dramatically throughout ISEA around the beginning of the Holocene, at the time when the ancient continent of Sundaland was being broken up into the present-day archipelago by rising sea levels. It reached Taiwan and Near Oceania more recently, within the last 8,000 years. This suggests that global warming and sea-level rises at the end of the Ice Age, 15,000–7,000 years ago, were the main forces shaping modern human diversity in the region.Key Words: complete mtDNA genomes • Island Southeast Asia • Neolithic • postglacial • late glac

Y-Chromosome Evidence of Southern Origin of the East Asian–

Specific Haplogroup O3-M122Hong Shi1, 2, 6, Yong-li Dong3, Bo Wen4, Chun-Jie Xiao3, Peter A. Underhill5, Pei-dong Shen5, Ranajit Chakraborty7, Li Jin4, 7 and Bing Su1, 2, 7, , 1 Key Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Yunnan University, Kunming, China2 Kunming Primate Research Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming, China3 Key Laboratory of Bio-resources Conservation and Utilization and Human Genetics Center, Yunnan University, Kunming,
China4 State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering and Center for Anthropological Studies, School of Life Sciences,
Fudan University,
Shanghai5 Department of Genetics,
Stanford University, Stanford, CA6 Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Science,
Beijing7 Center for Genome Information,
University of Cincinnati, CincinnatiAddress for correspondence and reprints: Dr. Bing Su, Key Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming, China



Abstract



The prehistoric peopling of East Asia by modern humans remains controversial with respect to early population migrations. Here, we present a systematic sampling and genetic screening of an East Asian–specific Y-chromosome haplogroup (O3-M122) in 2,332 individuals from diverse East Asian populations. Our results indicate that the O3-M122 lineage is dominant in East Asian populations, with an average frequency of 44.3%. The microsatellite data show that the O3-M122 haplotypes in southern East Asia are more diverse than those in northern East Asia, suggesting a southern origin of the O3-M122 mutation. It was estimated that the early northward migration of the O3-M122 lineages in East Asia occurred 25,000–30,000 years ago, consistent with the fossil records of modern humans in East Asia.

Genetic relationship of populations in China

J. Y. Chua,b, W. Huangb,c, S. Q. Kuang, J. M. Wang, J. J. Xud, Z. T. Chua, Z. Q. Yanga, K. Q. Lina, P.Lie, M. Wuf, Z. C. Gengg, C. C. Tang, R. F. Dud, and L. Jing,h,i +Author AffiliationsaInstitute of Medical Biology,
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Kunming, People’s Republic of China; cRui-Jin Hospital, Shanghai Second Medical University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China; dInstitute of Genetics,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; eDepartment of Biology,
Harbin Medical University, Harbin, People’s Republic of China; fInstitute of Cancer Research,
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; gInstitute of Genetics, Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China; and hHuman Genetics Center, University of Texas-Houston, Houston, TX 77225Contributed by Jiazhen Tan



Abstract
Despite the fact that the continuity of morphology of fossil specimens of modern humans found in China has repeatedly challenged the Out-of-Africa hypothesis, Chinese populations are underrepresented in genetic studies. Genetic profiles of 28 populations sampled in China supported the distinction between southern and northern populations, while the latter are biphyletic. Linguistic boundaries are often transgressed across language families studied, reflecting substantial gene flow between populations. Nevertheless, genetic evidence does not support an independent origin of Homo sapiens in China. The phylogeny also suggested that it is more likely that ancestors of the populations currently residing in East Asia entered from Southeast Asia.

Y-chromosomal DNA haplogroups and their implications for the dual origins of the Koreans.

in HJ, Kwak KD, Hammer MF, Nakahori Y, Shinka T, Lee JW, Jin F, Jia X, Tyler-Smith C, Kim W.
Department of Biological Sciences, Dankook University, 330-714 Cheonan, Korea.



We have analyzed eight Y-chromosomal binary markers (YAP, RPS4Y(711), M9, M175, LINE1, SRY(+465), 47z, and M95) and three Y-STR markers (DYS390, DYS391, and DYS393) in 738 males from 11 ethnic groups in east Asia in order to study the male lineage history of Korea. Haplogroup DE-YAP was found at a high frequency only in Japan but was also present at low frequencies in northeast Asia, including 2.5% in Korea, suggesting a northern origin for these chromosomes. Haplogroup C-RPS4Y(711) was present in Korea and Manchuria at moderate frequencies: higher than in populations from southeast Asia, but lower than those in the northeast, which may imply a northern Asian expansion of these lineages, perhaps from Mongolia or Siberia. The major Y-chromosomal expansions in east Asia were those of haplogroup O-M175 (and its sublineages). This haplogroup is likely to have originated in southern east Asia and subsequently expanded to all of east Asia. The moderate frequency of one sublineage in the Koreans, haplogroup O-LINE1 (12.5%), could be a result of interaction with Chinese populations. The age of another sublineage, haplogroup O-SRY(+465), and Y-STR haplotype diversity provide evidence for relatively recent male migration, originally from China, through Korea into Japan. In conclusion, the distribution pattern of Y-chromosomal haplogroups reveals the complex origin of the Koreans, resulting from genetic contributions involving the northern Asian settlement and range expansions mostly from southern-to-northern China.

Y chromosomal DNA variation in east Asian populations and its potential for inferring the peopling of Korea.Kim W, Shin DJ, Harihara S,
Kim YJ.Department of Biology,
Dankook University,
Cheonan,
Choong-Nam, Republic of Korea. wookkim@ansco.dankook.ac.kr




We have examined variations of five polymorphic loci (DYS287, DXYS5Y, SRY465, DYS19, and DXYS156Y) on the Y chromosome in samples from a total of 1260 males in eight ethnic groups of East Asia. We found four unique haplotypes constructed from three biallelic markers in these samples of East Asians. The Japanese population was characterized by a relatively high frequency of either the haplotype I-2b (-/Y2/T) or II-1 (+/Y1/C). These dual patterns of the distribution of Y chromosomes (I-2b/II-1) were also found in Korea, although they were present at relatively low frequencies. The haplotype II-1 was present in Northeast Asian populations (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and Mongolians) only, except for one male from the Thai population among the Southeast Asian populations (Indonesians, Philippines, Thais, and Vietnamese). The Japanese were revealed to have the highest frequency of this haplotype (27.5%), followed by Koreans (2.9%), Mongolians (2.6%), and mainland Chinese (2.2%). In contrast, the frequency of the haplotype I-2b was found to be 17.1% in the Japanese, 9.5% in Indonesian, 6.3% in Korean, 3.8% in Vietnamese, and 2.7% in Thai samples. These findings suggested that the chromosomes of haplotype I-2b were likely derived from certain areas of Northeast Asia, the region closest to Southeast Asia. Phylogenetic analysis using the neighbor-joining tree also reflected a general distinction between Southeast and Northeast Asian populations. The phylogeny revealed a closer genetic relationship between Japanese and Koreans than to the other surveyed Asian populations. Based on the result of the dual patterns of the haplotype distribution, it is more likely that the population structure of Koreans may not have evolved from a single ancient population derived from Northeast Asians, but through dual infusions of Y chromosomes entering Korea from two different waves of East Asians.

Old World sources of the first New World human inhabitants: A comparative craniofacial view

C. Loring Brace,A. Russell Nelson, Noriko Seguchi, Hiroaki Oe, Leslie Sering, Pan Qifeng, Li Yongyi, and Dashtseveg Tumen Author Affiliations*
Museum of Anthropology,
University of Michigan, 1109 Geddes Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109; ‡
Department of Anthropology,

University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071; §
Department of Statistics,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109; ¶
Institute of Archaeology,
Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 27 Wangfujing Dajie, Beijing 100710, China; ‖Department of Anatomy,
Chengdu College of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 13 Xing Lo Road, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China; and **
Department of Anthropology, Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar-51, Mongolia
Communicated by Kent V. Flannery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI (received for review January 2, 2001)



Abstract



Human craniofacial data were used to assess the similarities and differences between recent and prehistoric Old World samples, and between these samples and a similar representation of samples from the New World. The data were analyzed by the neighbor-joining clustering procedure, assisted by bootstrapping and by canonical discriminant analysis score plots. The first entrants to the Western Hemisphere of maybe 15,000 years ago gave rise to the continuing native inhabitants south of the U.S.–Canadian border. These show no close association with any known mainland Asian population. Instead they show ties to the Ainu of Hokkaido and their Jomon predecessors in prehistoric Japan and to the Polynesians of remote Oceania. All of these also have ties to the Pleistocene and recent inhabitants of Europe and may represent an extension from a Late Pleistocene continuum of people across the northern fringe of the Old World. With roots in both the northwest and the northeast, these people can be described as Eurasian. The route of entry to the New World was at the northwestern edge. In contrast, the Inuit (Eskimo), the Aleut, and the Na-Dene speakers who had penetrated as far as the American Southwest within the last 1,000 years show more similarities to the mainland populations of East Asia. Although both the earlier and later arrivals in the New World show a mixture of traits characteristic of the northern edge of Old World occupation and the Chinese core of mainland Asia, the proportion of the latter is greater for the more recent entrants.

Evolution of Pacific/Asian populations inferred from HLA class II allele frequency distributions.




Evolution of Pacific/Asian populations inferred from HLA class II allele frequency
distributions.distributions.Mack SJ, Bugawan TL, Moonsamy PV, Erlich JA, Trachtenberg EA, Paik YK, Begovich AB, Saha N, Beck HP, Stoneking M, Erlich HA.




The allele frequency distributions for the HLA class II loci, DRB1, DQB1 and DPB1, in eight Pacific/Asian populations: Hawaiian, Samoan, Malay, Papua New Guinea (PNG) Highlands, and two Indonesian and PNG Lowland groups, were determined using high-resolution polymerase chain reaction/sequence-specific oligonucleotide probe (PCR/SSOP) typing methods. The allele frequency distributions for the HLA-DRB1 locus were determined for a third Indonesian population as well as for an additional Filipino population. DRB1 alleles in the DR2 serogroup (or allelic lineage) are very common in this region; in some populations, more than 50% of the alleles belong to this serogroup. The DRB1*1502 allele is frequent in nine of the ten populations studied, reaching a frequency of 0.48 in one Indonesian population and among Filipinos. Extensive DR-DQ haplotype diversity was detected in these populations. Seven different DR2-DQB1 haplotypes were observed in the Indonesian and PNG Lowland populations, eight in the PNG Highlands and ten in Malays and Filipinos. The DRB1*0410 allele, commonly observed in Australia, is observed in the PNG Highlands at a low frequency (f=0.03) and is absent in the other populations. Two additional DRB1 alleles commonly observed in Australia, DRB1*0405 and *1407, are also observed in the PNG Highlands at high frequencies (f=0.132 and 0.126), while they are rare in the PNG Lowlands (f=0.039 and 0.013). These alleles are generally rare or absent in the other populations. The DPB1*0501 allele, common in Chinese and Japanese populations, is most frequent in the Samoan, Hawaiian, Indonesian, and Malay populations, and the *0401 allele is the most frequent DPB1 allele in the PNG Lowlands. Both of these alleles have the same very high frequency (f=0.34) in the PNG Highlands. Analyses of homozygosity (the Ewens-Watterson F statistic) in these and other populations indicate that, while most allele frequency distributions are consistent with balancing selection, values of F for the Indonesian and Javan populations may reflect positive directional selection. Phylogenetic trees constructed using the allele frequencies at the DRB1 locus of the populations reported here, as well as those for additional Pacific, Asian, and Australian populations, indicate that the PNG Highland population is more closely related to Australian populations than to PNG Lowland populations, while the PNG Lowlands are more closely related to other Melanesian populations



Modern Humans Did Not Admix with Neanderthals during Their Range Expansion into Europe

Mathias Currat1,2 and Laurent Excoffier1
1Computational and Molecular Population Genetics Lab, Zoological Institute, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Genetics and Biometry Laboratory,
Department of Anthropology and Ecology, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland



The process by which the Neanderthals were replaced by modern humans between 42,000 and 30,000 before present is still intriguing. Although no Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) lineage is found to date among several thousands of Europeans and in seven early modern Europeans, interbreeding rates as high as 25% could not be excluded between the two subspecies. In this study, we introduce a realistic model of the range expansion of early modern humans into Europe, and of their competition and potential admixture with local Neanderthals. Under this scenario, which explicitly models the dynamics of Neanderthals' replacement, we estimate that maximum interbreeding rates between the two populations should have been smaller than 0.1%. We indeed show that the absence of Neanderthal mtDNA sequences in Europe is compatible with at most 120 admixture events between the two populations despite a likely cohabitation time of more than 12,000 y. This extremely low number strongly suggests an almost complete sterility between Neanderthal females and modern human males, implying that the two populations were probably distinct biological species.



Interesting Map - where'd you get it?

Just wanted to test this out...can you pick out who are the SOuth East Asians from this group of pictures

2 and 3, possibly 5?

Kids aren't really fair, because they don't have fully developed ethnic features at that young an age.

Southeast Asians:

2, 4, and 5

4 is a maybe...her dress looks ethnic...but she could be a Chinese minority.

I will try this as well:

Guess the Southeast Asian:

3, 5, and 6

but definetly 3...that powder on their face I have seen Burmese use

You only got two right Gwailo.

Hsin_Hpyu_Shin~:

You got all of them right for the most part.

The last picture was in Macau (Aomen).


To me the people in Macau don't look much different than the Vietnamese in the forth picture.

The Japanese were from Okinawa...thought that might trick some people, but my wife thought that only two of them look like stereotypical Okinawans...the rest look like typical Japanese.

wow you got them all right...the 4th one was ethnic chinese in Bangkok and last one was lao

thanks guys


try this :




match monks to country of origin

ok i am bad at this but i will give it a try anyway

a)bhutan
b)mongolia
c)laos
d)myanmar
e)myanmar
f)indonesia
g)china
h)korea
i)indonesia
j)china
k)bhutan
l)japan
m)cambodia
n)myanmar
o)thailand
p)china

N doesn't look like monk to me, he's looking like pirate. LoL

Anyway, that monk picture puzzle is too hard, can't distinguish them.