Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Korean Y-DNA; A place to collect all available data regarding Korean Y-DNA haplogroups.
Topic Started: Sep 28 2014, 10:01:58 PM (1,236 Views)
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Su et al. (1999)
Korean
4/7 = 57.1% K-M9(xM1-M5, O1a-M119, O2a1-M95, O3-M122, P-M45)
3/7 = 42.9% O3a2c1-M134

----------

Wells et al. (2001)
Korean
3/45 = 6.7% D-M174
7/45 = 15.6% C-M130(xM48)
1/45 = 2.2% F-M89(xI-M170, J2-M172, H1a-M52)
1/45 = 2.2% K-M9(xO-M175, L-M20, N1c1-M46, P-M45)
14/45 = 31.1% O-M175(xO1a-M119, O2a1-M95, O3-M122)
16/45 = 35.6% O3-M122
2/45 = 4.4% O1a-M119
1/45 = 2.2% Q1a1a1-M120

----------

Katoh et al. (2005)
Korean Chinese
10/79 = 12.7% C(xC3c)
2/79 = 2.5% D
1/79 = 1.3% J
1/79 = 1.3% K(xN3, O, P)
2/79 = 2.5% O(xO1, O2b, O3)
38/79 = 48.1% O2b
23/79 = 29.1% O3
2/79 = 2.5% P(xR1a)

Korean
14/85 = 16.5% C(xC3c)
3/85 = 3.5% D
4/85 = 4.7% K(xN3, O, P)
2/85 = 2.4% N3
3/85 = 3.5% O(xO1, O2b, O3)
2/85 = 2.4% O1
28/85 = 32.9% O2b
29/85 = 34.1% O3

Korean total
24/164 = 14.6% C(xC3c)
5/164 = 3.0% D
1/164 = 0.6% J
5/164 = 3.0% K(xN3, O, P)
2/164 = 1.2% N3
5/164 = 3.0% O(xO1, O2b, O3)
2/164 = 1.2% O1
66/164 = 40.2% O2b
52/164 = 31.7% O3
2/164 = 1.2% P(xR1a)

----------

Cox and Lahr (2006)
Korea
2/25 = 8.0% F-M89(xK-M9)
3/25 = 12.0% C-M130
2/25 = 8.0% K-M9(xM230, M4/M106, M175, M74/92R7, M207)
16/25 = 64.0% O-M175
1/25 = 4.0% P-M74/92R7(xR-M207)
1/25 = 4.0% R-M207

----------

Hammer et al. (2006)
Korea
7/75 = 9.3% C2-M217(xM86)
1/75 = 1.3% D-P37.1(xM116, M125, P42)
2/75 = 2.7% D-M125(xP42)
1/75 = 1.3% N1-LLY22g(xPg43, M178, M128)
1/75 = 1.3% N-M128
15/75 = 20.0% O3-M122(xM134)
15/75 = 20.0% O-M134
2/75 = 2.7% O1a-M119(xM110)
2/75 = 2.7% O2-P31(xSRY465, P49, M95)
25/75 = 33.3% O2b-SRY465/P49(x47z)
3/75 = 4.0% O2b1-47z
1/75 = 1.3% R-M207

----------

Xue et al. (2006)
Korean (China)
2/25 = 8.0% Y*(xA, C, DE, J, K)
3/25 = 12.0% C3(xC3c)
1/25 = 4.0% K(xNO, P)
1/25 = 4.0% N(xN1, N2, N3)
1/25 = 4.0% O2(xO2a, O2b)
5/25 = 20.0% O2b(xO2b1)
2/25 = 8.0% O2b1-47z
6/25 = 24.0% O3*
4/25 = 16.0% O3e1

Korean (Korea)
7/43 = 16.3% C3(xC3c)
1/43 = 2.3% D
1/43 = 2.3% J
1/43 = 2.3% K(xNO, P)
1/43 = 2.3% NO-M214(xN, O)
1/43 = 2.3% N(xN1, N2, N3)
1/43 = 2.3% O2(xO2a, O2b)
6/43 = 14.0% O2b(xO2b1)
6/43 = 14.0% O2b1-47z
7/43 = 16.3% O3*
5/43 = 11.6% O3e(xO3e1)
5/43 = 11.6% O3e1
1/43 = 2.3% P(xR1a)

Korean (total)
2/68 = 2.9% Y*(xA-SRY10831-, C-RPS4Y, DE-YAP, J-12f2, K-M9)
10/68 = 14.7% C2-M217(xM48)
1/68 = 1.5% DE-YAP(xE-SRY4064)
1/68 = 1.5% J-12f2
2/68 = 2.9% K-M9(xNO-M214, P-92R7)
1/68 = 1.5% NO-M214(xN1-LLY22g, O-M175)
2/68 = 2.9% N1-LLY22g(xM128, P43, Tat)
2/68 = 2.9% O2-P31(xO2a1-M95, O2b-SRY465)
11/68 = 16.2% O2b-SRY465(xO2b1-47z)
8/68 = 11.8% O2b1-47z
13/68 = 19.1% O3-M122(xM159, M7, M134)
5/68 = 7.4% O3a2c1-M134(xM117)
9/68 = 13.2% O3a2c1a-M117
1/68 = 1.5% P-92R7(xR1a-SRY10831.2)

----------

Kim Wook et al. (2007)
Korean/Seoul & Daejeon, South Korea
2/216 = 0.9% Y*(xC-RPS4Y, DE-YAP, K-M9)
30/216 = 13.9% C-RPS4Y
5/216 = 2.3% K-M9(xNO-M214)
6/216 = 2.8% NO-M214(xO-M175)
3/216 = 1.4% O-M175(xO1a-M119, O2-P31, O3-M122)
7/216 = 3.2% O1a-M119
3/216 = 1.4% O2-P31(xO2a1-M95, O2b-SRY465)

37/216 = 17.1% O2b-SRY465(x47z)
21/216 = 9.7% O2b1-47z
58/216 = 26.9% O2b total

48/216 = 22.2% O3-M122(xM7, M134)
54/216 = 25.0% O3a2c1-M134
102/216 = 47.2% O3 total

----------

Jin et al. (2009)
Korean
1/154 = 0.6% Y*(xC-RPS4Y, DE-YAP, K-M9)
23/154 = 14.9% C-RPS4Y
3/154 = 1.9% DE-YAP
1/154 = 0.6% K-M9(xNO-M214)
10/154 = 6.5% NO-M214(xO-M175)
6/154 = 3.9% O-M175(xO1a-M119, O2-P31, O3-M122)
6/154 = 3.9% O1a-M119
8/154 = 5.2% O2-P31(xO2a1-M95, O2b-SRY465)

22/154 = 14.3% O2b-SRY465(xO2b1-47z)
9/154 = 5.8% O2b1-47z
31/154 = 20.1% O2b total

45/154 = 29.2% O3-M122
20/154 = 13.0% O3-M122(+LINE)
65/154 = 42.2% O3 total

----------

Kim et al. (2011)

Korean/Seoul-Gyeonggi
1/110 = 0.9% C-RPS4Y(xM105, M38, M217)
14/110 = 12.7% C-M217
1/110 = 0.9% D1b-M55
1/110 = 0.9% L-M20
2/110 = 1.8% N-M231
1/110 = 0.9% O1a-M119

23/110 = 20.9% O2b-SRY465(x47z) [22 different haplotypes]
8/110 = 7.3% O2b1-47z [8 different haplotypes]
31/110 = 28.2% O2b total

1/110 = 0.9% O3*(xO3a)
19/110 = 17.3% O3a(xO3a3) [19 different haplotypes]
36/110 = 32.7% O3a3 [35 different haplotypes]
56/110 = 50.9% O3 total

3/110 = 2.7% Q [3 different haplotypes]

Korean/Jeju
1/87 = 1.1% C-M105
6/87 = 6.9% C-M217 [6 different haplotypes]
1/87 = 1.1% D1b-M55
6/87 = 6.9% N-M231 [3 different haplotypes]
5/87 = 5.7% O1a-M119 [5 different haplotypes]

20/87 = 23.0% O2b-SRY465(x47z) [17 different haplotypes]
8/87 = 9.2% O2b1-47z [8 different haplotypes]
28/87 = 32.2% O2b total

1/87 = 1.1% O3*(xO3a)
5/87 = 5.7% O3a(xO3a3) [5 different haplotypes]
32/87 = 36.8% O3a3 [30 different haplotypes]
38/87 = 43.7% O3 total

1/87 = 1.1% Q
1/87 = 1.1% R

Korean/Gyeongsang
14/84 = 16.7% C-M217
2/84 = 2.4% D1b-M55
1/84 = 1.2% L-M20
4/84 = 4.8% N-M231
2/84 = 2.4% O1a-M119 [2 different haplotypes]
3/84 = 3.6% O2-P31(xO2b-SRY465) [3 different haplotypes]

15/84 = 17.9% O2b-SRY465(x47z) [15 different haplotypes]
10/84 = 11.9% O2b1-47z [10 different haplotypes]
25/84 = 29.8% O2b total

19/84 = 22.6% O3a(xO3a3) [19 different haplotypes]
12/84 = 14.3% O3a3 [12 different haplotypes]
31/84 = 36.9% O3 total

1/84 = 1.2% Q
1/84 = 1.2% R

Korean/Chungcheong
8/72 = 11.1% C-M217
1/72 = 1.4% D1b-M55
3/72 = 4.2% N-M231
1/72 = 1.4% O1a-M119

15/72 = 20.8% O2b-SRY465(x47z) [15 different haplotypes]
7/72 = 9.7% O2b1-47z [7 different haplotypes]
22/72 = 30.6% O2b total

11/72 = 15.3% O3a(xO3a3) [11 different haplotypes]
25/72 = 34.7% O3a3 [24 different haplotypes]
36/72 = 50.0% O3 total

1/72 = 1.4% Q

Korean/Gangweon
8/63 = 12.7% C-M217
4/63 = 6.3% N-M231
1/63 = 1.6% O1a-M119

20/63 = 31.7% O2b-SRY465(x47z) [19 different haplotypes]
5/63 = 7.9% O2b1-47z [5 different haplotypes]
25/63 = 39.7% O2b total

8/63 = 12.7% O3a(xO3a3) [8 different haplotypes]
16/63 = 25.4% O3a3 [16 different haplotypes]
24/63 = 38.1% O3 total

1/63 = 1.6% Q

Korean/Jeolla
12/90 = 13.3% C-M217
3/90 = 3.3% D1b-M55
1/90 = 1.1% L-M20
4/90 = 4.4% N-M231
1/90 = 1.1% O1a-M119
2/90 = 2.2% O2-P31(xO2b-SRY465) [2 different haplotypes]

21/90 = 23.3% O2b-SRY465(x47z) [20 different haplotypes]
7/90 = 7.8% O2b1-47z [7 different haplotypes]
28/90 = 31.1% O2b total

14/90 = 15.6% O3a(xO3a3) [14 different haplotypes]
25/90 = 27.8% O3a3 [24 different haplotypes]
39/90 = 43.3% O3 total

Korean/total (Kim et al. 2011)
1/506 = 0.2% C-RPS4Y(xM105, M38, M217)
1/506 = 0.2% C-M105
62/506 = 12.3% C2-M217
8/506 = 1.6% D1b-M55
3/506 = 0.6% L-M20
23/506 = 4.5% N-M231
11/506 = 2.2% O1a-M119
5/506 = 1.0% O2-P31(xO2b-SRY465)
114/506 = 22.5% O2b-SRY465(xO2b1-47z)
45/506 = 8.9% O2b1-47z
2/506 = 0.4% O3-M122(xO3a-M324)
76/506 = 15.0% O3a-M324(xO3a2-P201)
146/506 = 28.9% O3a2-P201
7/506 = 1.4% Q
2/506 = 0.4% R

-----------

Park et al. (2012)

Korean/Seoul & Daejeon, South Korea total
18/706 = 2.5% D-M174
91/706 = 12.9% C-RPS4Y711
1/706 = 0.1% J1-M267

27/706 = 3.8% N-M231

3/706 = 0.4% O1a-M119(xO1a1-P203, O1a2-M110)
19/706 = 2.7% O1a1-P203
22/706 = 3.1% O1a-M119 total

10/706 = 1.4% O2-P31(xO2a1-M95, O2b-SRY465)
155/706 = 22.0% O2b-SRY465(xO2b1a-47z)
71/706 = 10.1% O2b1a-47z
226/706 = 32.0% O2b-SRY465 total
236/706 = 33.4% O2-P31 total

2/706 = 0.3% O3-M122(xO3a-M324)

11/706 = 1.6% O3a1-KL2(xO3a1c-JST002611)
72/706 = 10.2% O3a1c-JST002611
83/706 = 11.8% O3a1-KL2 total

42/706 = 5.9% O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164)
3/706 = 0.4% O3a2b-M7
9/706 = 1.3% O3a2c-P164(xO3a2c1-M134)
68/706 = 9.6% O3a2c1-M134(xO3a2c1a-M117)
82/706 = 11.6% O3a2c1a-M117+/M133+
8/706 = 1.1% O3a2c1a-M117+/M133-
90/706 = 12.7% O-M117 total
158/706 = 22.4% O-M134 total
167/706 = 23.7% O-P164 total
212/706 = 30.0% O-P201 total
295/706 = 41.8% O-M324 total
297/706 = 42.1% O-M122 total

13/706 = 1.8% Q-M242
1/706 = 0.1% R-M207

Korean/Seoul
13/573 = 2.3% D-M174
76/573 = 13.3% C-RPS4Y711
1/573 = 0.2% J1-M267
12/573 = 2.1% Q-M242
1/573 = 0.2% R-M207
23/573 = 4.0% N-M231
1/573 = 0.2% O1a-M119(xO1a1-P203, O1a2-M110)
16/573 = 2.8% O1a1-P203
7/573 = 1.2% O2-P31(xO2a1-M95, O2b-SRY465)
125/573 = 21.8% O2b-SRY465(xO2b1a-47z)
56/573 = 9.8% O2b1a-47z
2/573 = 0.3% O3-M122(xO3a-M324)
10/573 = 1.7% O3a1-KL2(xO3a1c-JST002611)
61/573 = 10.6% O3a1c-JST002611
36/573 = 6.3% O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164)
1/573 = 0.2% O3a2b-M7
8/573 = 1.4% O3a2c-P164(xO3a2c1-M134)
54/573 = 9.4% O3a2c1-M134(xO3a2c1a-M117)
64/573 = 11.2% O3a2c1a-M117+/M133+
6/573 = 1.0% O3a2c1a-M117+/M133-
70/573 O-M117 total

Korean/Daejeon
5/133 = 3.8% D-M174
15/133 = 11.3% C-RPS4Y711
1/133 = 0.8% Q-M242
4/133 = 3.0% N-M231
2/133 = 1.5% O1a-M119(xO1a1-P203, O1a2-M110)
3/133 = 2.3% O1a1-P203
3/133 = 2.3% O2-P31(xO2a1-M95, O2b-SRY465)
30/133 = 22.6% O2b-SRY465(xO2b1a-47z)
15/133 = 11.3% O2b1a-47z
1/133 = 0.8% O3a1-KL2(xO3a1c-JST002611)
11/133 = 8.3% O3a1c-JST002611
6/133 = 4.5% O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164)
2/133 = 1.5% O3a2b-M7
1/133 = 0.8% O3a2c-P164(xO3a2c1-M134)
14/133 = 10.5% O3a2c1-M134(xO3a2c1a-M117)
18/133 = 13.5% O3a2c1a-M117+/M133+
2/133 = 1.5% O3a2c1a-M117+/M133-
20/133 O-M117 total

----------

Myung Jin Park, Hwan Young Lee, Na Young Kim et al., "Y-SNP miniplexes for East Asian Y-chromosomal haplogroup determination in
degraded DNA." Forensic Science International: Genetics 7 (2013) 75–81.

"DNA samples from 300 unrelated Korean males were obtained
from the National Biobank of Korea."

3/300 = 0.010 DE-M145

2/300 = 0.007 C-RPS4Y711(xC3-M217)
48/300 = 0.160 C3-M217(xM48, M407, P53.1)
2/300 = 0.007 C3e1a-M407
50/300 = 0.167 C3-M217 total
52/300 = 0.173 C-RPS4Y711 total

5/300 = 0.017 K-M9(xNO-M214)

5/300 = 0.017 NO-M214(xO-M175)

8/300 = 0.027 O1a-M119

5/300 = 0.017 O2-P31(xM95, SRY465)
88/300 = 0.293 O2b-SRY465(x47z)
25/300 = 0.083 O2b1-47z
113/300 = 0.377 O2b-SRY465 total
118/300 = 0.393 O2-P31 total

2/300 = 0.007 O3-M122(xM324)
27/300 = 0.090 O3a-M324(xP201)
23/300 = 0.077 O-P201(xM159, M7, M134)
1/300 = 0.003 O-M7
23/300 = 0.077 O-M134(xM133)
33/300 = 0.110 O-M133
56/300 = 0.187 O-M134 total
109/300 = 0.363 O3-M122 total

----------

Also, a study for which I now can find only an abstract:

Quote:
 
HGM2002 Poster Abstracts: 11. Genome Diversity

POSTER NO: 542

Study of Korean Male Origins

Sunghee Hong, Seong-Gene Lee, Yongsook Yoon, Kyuyoung Song
University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 388-1 Poongnap-dong, Songpa-ku, Seoul, Korea

Population studies of genetic markers such as HLA variation and mitochondrial DNA have been used to understand human origins, demographic and migration history. Recently, diversity on the nonrecombining portion of the Y chromosome (NRY) has been applied to the study of human history. Since NRY is passed from father to son without recombination, polymorphisms in this region are valuable for investigating male-mediated gene flow and for complementing maternally based studies of mtDNA. Haplotypes constructed from Y-chromosome markers were used to trace the paternal origins of Korean. By using 38 Y chromosome single nucleotide polymorphism markers, we analyzed the genetic structure of 195 Korean males. The Korean males were characterized by a diverse set of 4 haplogroups (Groups IV, V, VII, X) and 14 haplotypes that were also present in Chinese. The most frequent haplogroup in Korean was Group VII (82.6%). It was also the most frequent haplogroup in Chinese (95%) as well as in Japanese (45%). The frequencies of the haplogroups V, IV, and X were 15.4%, 1%, and 1%, respectively. The second most frequent haplogroup V in Korean was not present in Chinese, but its frequency was similar in Japanese. We have tried to correlate the Y variation with surname to determine how well the clan membership corresponds to Y variation. There were 37 surnames in our sample but genetic variation structure did not correlate with surnames.
161/195 = 82.6% Group VII (=O-M175 or NO-M214)
30/195 = 15.4% Group V (=C-M130)
2/195 = 1.0% Group IV (=D-M174 or DE-YAP)
2/195 = 1.0% Group X (=P-M45)

----------

Any others?

From the data I have listed above, one may infer that the composition of the modern Korean Y-DNA pool is approximately as follows:
41% O3-M122
31% O2b-SRY465 (including 22% O2b-SRY465(x47z) and 9% O2b1a-47z)
14% C2-M217
4% NO-M214(xO-M175)
3% O1a-M119
2% O-M175(xO1a-M119, O2b-SRY465, O3-M122) [Most of this probably belongs to O2a(xM95).]
2% DE-YAP [Most or all of this seems to belong to D1b-M55.]
2% P-M45
1% Other (J1-M267, L-M20, C1a1-M105, C-RPS4Y(xM105, M38, M217), etc.) [About half of the 1% Other, i.e. 0.5%, should belong to F-M89(xK-M9), much of which appears to belong to haplogroup J, including at least some J1-M267. The remaining 0.5% should belong to L-M20, C-M130(xM217), etc.]

What exactly is "the National Biobank of Korea" mentioned by Park et al. (2013)? Is it the same pool from which the Korean samples from Seoul and Daejeon analyzed by Park et al. (2012) have been drawn? Are the clinical samples of Koreans from Seoul and Daejeon studied by Kim Wook et al. (2007) also part of the same database?

Note that Park et al. (2012) have reported finding O3a2c1a-M117+/M133- in 8/706 = 1.1% of Koreans from Seoul and Daejeon. This is the first time I have seen any data indicating a phylogenetic nonequivalence of the M117 and M133 SNPs. I hope other researchers will start to test for both M117 and M133 so that we may discern whether the M117+/M133- combination is present in populations outside Korea.

Assuming that Korean traditional genealogies are accurate and that the published Y-DNA samples are truly random samples (and they have not been filtered for genealogical patrilineal relatedness), these data also entail that the Y-DNA of the Gimhae Kims (supposed descendants of the king of that petty state in ancient Korea, Geumgwan Gaya, who married a bride from what might have been an Indian or Indianized kingdom; cf. my reply in the thread about Y-DNA L-M20 in Koreans) must belong to O3-M122, O2b-SRY465(x47z), or C2-M217 (O2b1a-47z is also marginally possible if Gimhae Kim happens to be the only major Korean clan that belongs to that clade). The Y-DNA of the Gyeongju Kims (supposed descendants of the Kim royal family of ancient Silla) must belong to O3-M122, O2b-SRY465(x47z), C2-M217, or O2b1a-47z (N-M231 is also marginally possible but unlikely because Korean N-M231 seems to be divided among several very divergent subclades).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Korean O1a-M119 based on Park et al. (2012)
3/22 = 13.6% O1a-M119(xO1a1-P203, O1a2-M110)
19/22 = 86.4% O1a1-P203

Chinese O1a-M119 based on Yan et al. (2011) and Karafet et al. (2010)
6/71 = 8.5% O1a-M119(xO1a1-P203, O1a2-M110)
62/71 = 87.3% O1a1-P203
3/71 = 4.2% O1a2-M110

Korean O3-M122 based on Park et al. (2012)
2/297 = 0.7% O3-M122(xO3a-M324)
11/297 = 3.7% O3a1-KL2(xO3a1c-JST002611)
72/297 = 24.2% O3a1c-JST002611
42/297 = 14.1% O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164)
3/297 = 1.0% O3a2b-M7
9/297 = 3.0% O3a2c-P164(xO3a2c1-M134)
68/297 = 22.9% O3a2c1-M134(xO3a2c1a-M117)
90/297 = 30.3% O3a2c1a-M117

Chinese O3-M122 based on Yan et al. (2011)
6/204 = 2.9% O3-M122(xO3a-M324)
11/204 = 5.4% O3a1-KL2(xO3a1c-JST002611)
61/204 = 29.9% O3a1c-JST002611
6/204 = 2.9% O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164)
1/204 = 0.5% O3a2a-M159
7/204 = 3.4% O3a2b-M7
12/204 = 5.9% O3a2c-P164(xO3a2c1-M134)
41/204 = 20.1% O3a2c1-M134(xO3a2c1a-M117)
59/204 = 28.9% O3a2c1a-M117

Korean O1a-M119 and Chinese O1a-M119 do not appear to be significantly different at the present level of phylogenetic resolution, so there does not yet seem to be any basis for arguing against their being derived from the same population (perhaps the bearers of the Liangzhu culture of the Yangtze river delta), although this population would have affected the Chinese (especially those in East China) much more strongly than it would have affected the Koreans.

Korean O3-M122 and Chinese O3-M122 also seem to be fairly similar overall, but there is one salient difference: the Koreans of Park et al. (2012) have much more O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164) than the Chinese of Yan et al. (2011) both as a proportion of their total O3-M122 (4.8 times as much as the Chinese) and as a proportion of the population as a whole (3.6 times as much as the Chinese). However, the Han Chinese sample of Karafet et al. (2010) has a O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/total O3-M122 ratio that is much closer to that of the Koreans of Park et al. (2012), so even this difference may not be statistically significant; furthermore, when the Korean sample of Park et al. (2012) is subdivided according to sampling location (Seoul vs. Daejeon), only the subgroup from Seoul has a high O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/total O3-M122 ratio:

Batak Toba: 21/21 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Flores: 18/18 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Mandar: 9/9 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Tonga: 5/5 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Taiwanese Aboriginals: 3/3 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Micronesia: 3/3 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Moluccas: 3/3 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Samoa: 3/3 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Papua New Guinea: 2/2 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Timor: 1/1 = 100% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Bali: 34/47 = 72.3% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Philippines: 12/17 = 70.6% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Maewo (Vanuatu): 2/3 = 66.7% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Borneo: 14/31 = 45.2% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Tahiti: 3/7 = 42.9% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Malaysia: 4/11 = 36.4% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Sumba: 3/10 = 30.0% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Tujia: 7/26 = 26.9% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Japanese: 11/44 = 25.0% O3a2-JST021354(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Nonaka et al. (2007))
Korean/Seoul: 44/242 = 18.2% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Park et al. (2012))
Korean total: 51/297 = 17.2% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Park et al. (2012))
Han Chinese: 14/91 = 15.4% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Korean/Daejeon: 7/55 = 12.7% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Park et al. (2012))
Han Chinese/South China: 4/32 = 12.5% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Yan et al. (2011))
Java: 1/8 = 12.5% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Han Chinese/composite: 33/295 = 11.2% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (composite of Karafet et al. (2010) & Yan et al. (2011))
Han Chinese/East China: 10/99 = 10.1% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Yan et al. (2011))
Han Chinese total: 19/204 = 9.3% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Yan et al. (2011))
Han Chinese/North China: 5/73 = 6.8% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Yan et al. (2011))
Vietnam: 1/28 = 3.6% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Miao: 1/40 = 2.5% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
She: 0/32 = 0.0% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))
Yao: 0/32 = 0.0% O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 (Karafet et al. (2010))

The Korean proportion of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) (i.e. the total of all O3a2-P201(xO3a2a-M159, O3a2b-M7, O3a2c-P164) and O3a2c-P164(xO3a2c1-M134)) may be intermediate between that of the Japanese and that of the Chinese as a whole, but the Korean proportion might be closest to that of Han from southern China and Taiwan. More sampling is needed to determine whether this pattern is robust. O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) is the category to which the major Austronesian type(s) of O3-M122 belong. It is a paragroup, of course, but it does leave open the possibility that some Koreans might have a relatively close patrilineal relationship with many Filipinos, Polynesians, etc. It looks like Austronesian O3-M122 might have influenced Japan and its vicinity (or vice versa if later influxes of other types of O3-M122 to Japan are assumed). Of course, one needs to keep in mind that the entirety of O3a2c1-M134 (including O3a2c1a-M117) is also part of the O3a2-P201 clade; the higher proportion of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) in Austronesia and Japonesia might merely reflect descent from an older wave or older waves of influence that have been more thoroughly overwritten by descendants of O3a2c1-M134 on the continent.

The following are the percentages of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) as a proportion of the total population in samples of various Austronesian and other groups (as per Karafet et al. (2010) unless otherwise noted):
O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)
21/38 = 55.3% Batak Toba
5/12 = 41.7% Tonga
12/48 = 25.0% Philippines
3/16 = 18.8% Micronesia
9/54 = 16.7% Mandar
3/18 = 16.7% Samoa
14/86 = 16.3% Borneo
7/49 = 14.3% Tujia
4/32 = 12.5% Malaysia
3/24 = 12.5% Tahiti
1/9 = 11.1% Timor
3/30 = 10.0% Moluccas
14/165 = 8.5% Han Chinese (approx. half from Taiwan, approx. 1/4 from Shaanxi or Shanxi, and approx. 1/4 from Guangdong)
44/573 = 7.7% Korean/Seoul (Park et al. 2012)
51/706 = 7.2% Korean total (Park et al. 2012)
1/15 = 6.7% Papua New Guinea (Coastal)
3/48 = 6.3% Taiwanese Aboriginals
4/65 = 6.2% Han/South China (Yan et al. 2011)
10/167 = 6.0% Han/East China (Yan et al. 2011)
34/641 = 5.3% Bali
19/361 = 5.3% Han Chinese total (Yan et al. 2011)
7/133 = 5.3% Korean/Daejeon (Park et al. 2012)
18/394 = 4.6% Flores
2/44 = 4.5% Maewo (Vanuatu)
11/263 = 4.2% Japanese (O3a2-JST021354(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134); Nonaka et al. 2007)
5/129 = 3.9% Han/North China (Yan et al. 2011)
1/33 = 3.0% Papua New Guinea (Highland)
1/58 = 1.7% Miao
1/61 = 1.6% Java (n=35 "Dieng" + n=26 "Java-composite group")
1/70 = 1.4% Vietnam
3/350 = 0.9% Sumba
0/10 = 0.0% Nasioi
0/10 = 0.0% Rapa Nui
0/28 = 0.0% Alor
0/51 = 0.0% She
0/60 = 0.0% Yao
0/60 = 0.0% Nias
0/74 = 0.0% Mentawai
0/92 = 0.0% Lembata

Again, the additional Han Chinese data make it look less likely that the Koreans might have a frequency of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) significantly greater than the East Asian average. At present, Korean O3-M122 does not appear to be significantly different from Chinese O3-M122 (and if the somewhat high O3a2-JST021354(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 ratio of the Japanese samples of Nonaka et al. is a fluke, then neither Korean O3-M122 nor Chinese O3-M122 is significantly different from Japanese O3-M122). O3-M122 seems to have spread over all East Asia proper, including Japan, without many founder effects or genetic drift. In Southeast Asia, however, the relative frequencies of various subclades of O3-M122 appear to be significantly different from those in East Asia, so Southeast Asian O3-M122 must predate the most recent (Han Chinese?) East Asian wave of O3-M122 expansion or else have been filtered through various founder effects and drift.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
black man
The Right Hand
[ *  *  * ]
JCA
Sep 29 2014, 08:08:28 AM
14/165 = 8.5% Han Chinese (approx. half from Taiwan, approx. 1/4 from Shaanxi or Shanxi, and approx. 1/4 from Guangdong)

(...)

Again, the additional Han Chinese data make it look less likely that the Koreans might have a frequency of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) significantly greater than the East Asian average. At present, Korean O3-M122 does not appear to be significantly different from Chinese O3-M122 (and if the somewhat high O3a2-JST021354(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134)/O3-M122 ratio of the Japanese samples of Nonaka et al. is a fluke, then neither Korean O3-M122 nor Chinese O3-M122 is significantly different from Japanese O3-M122). O3-M122 seems to have spread over all East Asia proper, including Japan, without many founder effects or genetic drift. In Southeast Asia, however, the relative frequencies of various subclades of O3-M122 appear to be significantly different from those in East Asia, so Southeast Asian O3-M122 must predate the most recent (Han Chinese?) East Asian wave of O3-M122 expansion or else have been filtered through various founder effects and drift.
12 of these 14 are from Taiwan according to S2. (See the first sheet.) Even more, maybe all of them are Hoklo or all of them are Hakka. Since no less than 22 of Karafet's Taiwan Han samples have the LY1+ mutation according to an earlier paper by Karafet et al., all of these 12 men could have it, too.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
black man
Oct 2 2014, 02:25:26 PM
12 of these 14 are from Taiwan according to S2. (See the first sheet.) Even more, maybe all of them are Hoklo or all of them are Hakka. Since no less than 22 of Karafet's Taiwan Han samples have the LY1+ mutation according to an earlier paper by Karafet et al., all of these 12 men could have it, too.
I do not see where you have obtained the information that 12/14 of the Karafet team's Han representatives of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) are from Taiwan.

As for the LY1/LINE1 retroposon insertion, a comparison with the data regarding the Karafet team's samples as presented in Hammer et al. (2006) shows that nearly all Austronesian representatives of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) are negative for LY1. I suppose some (or, yes, even all) of the Han representatives of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) might be positive for the LY1 insertion, but, judging from the data of Xue et al. (2006) and Nonaka et al. (2007), LY1 should be at least as common among O-M7 and O-JST002611 as it is among O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134). Furthermore, Nonaka et al. (2007) actually have tested both O3a2-JST021354 and LINE1, and have found 11/44 of their Japanese representatives of O3-M122 to be positive for JST021354 and negative for LINE1. They have not reported finding any Japanese Y-chromosomes that are both JST021354+ and LINE1+. So O3a2-P201/JST021354(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) in both Austronesians and Japanese, at least, appears to be overwhelmingly negative for LY1. If a substantial proportion of Han Chinese representatives of O3a2-P201(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) are positive for LY1 as you have conjectured, then they probably should belong to a subclade distinct from the subclade(s) to which nearly all Austronesian and Japanese representatives of O3a2-P201/JST021354(xO3a2b-M7, O3a2c1-M134) belong.

According to the main text of Karafet et al. (2010):
Quote:
 
M122 chromosomes were further analyzed for the biallelic markers P197 (phylogenetically equivalent to M324), P201=JST021354, M7, M134, and JST002611. Supplementary figure S4 (Supplementary Material online) shows their geographic distribution. The derived O-M134, O-M7, and O-JST002611 subhaplogroups are absent or found at very low frequencies in Indonesia but are prevalent in different ethnic groups in China and SEA. Paragroup O-P197* is found at low frequency in Vietnam, the Philippines, and China (Han). A total of 17 O-M122* chromosomes were found, but only 2 of them were observed outside of Indonesia. Only paragroup O-P201* has a wide geographic distribution and is found in all geographic regions surveyed. To explore the potential root of O-P201 chromosomes in Indonesia, we calculated genetic distances (RST) based on O-P201* STR haplotypes (supplementary table S4, Supplementary Material online). The divergence between Filipinos/Taiwanese aboriginals and Indonesians was insignificant and 10-fold less than that between Southeast Asians and Indonesians (0.027, P50.11 vs. 0.349, P50.00). Genetic distances between Oceania and Philippines/Taiwanese aboriginals were even lower (0.007, P 5 0.35).

...

More notable are the results of typing the novel marker P201, which has the effect of converting almost all chromosomes outside of mainland Asia that were previously identified as O-M122* to O-P201*. Given this widespread pattern, it may be that O-M122 chromosomes previously found at high frequency on many Pacific Islands (Kayser et al. 2006) are actually O-P201* (in our small sample of 64 Polynesians typed here, 11 of 15 O-M122 carriers are also O-P201*). Unlike the lineages discussed so far, the frequencies of O-P201* chromosomes are fairly constant (~7%) right across the major regions sampled here (fig. 2). Importantly, despite its relatively low frequency on Taiwan (~6%), genetic distances based on STR variation associated with P201 chromosomes reveal a much closer relationship among Taiwanese aboriginals/Filipinos, Indonesians, and Oceanians than between any of these groups and mainland Southeast Asians (supplementary table S4, online). Therefore, we hypothesize that this new marker traces the large population expansion associated with the spread of Austronesian languages and culture.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
I have compared the Han Chinese data of the Karafet team as presented in Hammer et al. (2006) against the same data as presented in Karafet et al. (2010):

Hammer et al. (2006)
Han total
14/168 O-M122(xM134, LINE1)
30/168 O-M122+LINE1(xM134)
47/168 O-M134

Karafet et al. (2010)
China (Han)
2/165 O-M122(xP197)
7/165 O-P197(xP201, M7, JST002611, M134)
14/165 O-P201(xM7, M134)
3/165 O-M7
18/165 O-JST002611
47/165 O-M134

Three individuals have been shaved off between 2006 and 2010: one Q1-P36 individual and one R-M207 individual from the Shanxi or Shaanxi sample plus one R-M207 individual from the Taiwan sample.

Note that there is no need for any of the Karafet team's O-P201(xM7, M134) Han to be LINE1+ because the total of O-M122(xP197), O-P197(xP201, M7, JST002611, M134), O-M7, and O-JST002611 is 2 + 7 + 3 + 18 = 30, which is equal to the number of LINE1+ individuals in the team's pool of Han Chinese samples. Of course, that would entail that 100% of the Karafet team's O-M122(xM134, LINE1) Han are actually O-P201(xM7, M134, LINE1).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
You do seem to have picked up on something interesting regarding the distribution of LY1/LINE1, black man. Y-chromosomes that contain the LY1/LINE1 retroposon insert seem to comprise a significantly greater percentage of Han Chinese, Korean, and possibly also Okinawan O3-M122 than they do Japanese (proper) O3-M122 or even O3-M122(xM134). Does this mean that Japanese O3-M122 has undergone a founder effect or drift since separation from Han Chinese and Korean O3-M122, or does the LY1/LINE1 retroposon insertion induce some sort of selective pressure?

By the way, after comparing the Korean data from several papers (Hammer et al. 2006, Kim et al. 2007, Jin et al. 2009), I have come to the conclusion that Korean O3-M122 is intermediate between Japanese O3-M122 and Chinese O3-M122, but tending toward the latter. Autosomal data also have indicated that modern (South) Koreans are intermediate between modern Japanese and modern (northern) Han Chinese, but being insignificantly different from the latter rather than the former; is this because the Koreans contain a residual, ancient element of Japanese affinity overlain by a more recent element of northern Han Chinese affinity?

This also reminds me of the reference in the Book of Sui to a Chinese-like people in some part of ancient Japan, and comments made by modern Filipinos and Indonesians regarding certain isolated "Chinesey" tribes in their countries. Could there be some sort of prehistoric para-Sinitic (or even para-Sino-Tibetan or Hmong-Mien) influence in the islands off the eastern coast of Asia?

cf. Fabricio R. Santos, Arpita Pandya, Manfred Kayser et al. (2000), "A polymorphic L1 retroposon insertion in the centromere of the human Y chromosome," the paper in which the LY1/LINE1 mutation was first described:

China (Miao) 6/23 = 26.1%
China (Han) 17/75 = 22.7%
China (Tujia) 1/9 = 11.1%
Taiwan Aborigines 1/47 = 2.1% (found in 1/14 Ami, 0/9 Atayal, 0/10 Bunun, and 0/14 Paiwan)
Mongolia 1/61 = 1.6%
Japan 2/145 = 1.4%
Indonesia 2/211 = 0.9% (found in 1/12 Pekanbaru, 1/94 "Indonesia (other)," 0/8 Borneo, 0/9 Bali, 0/12 Medan, 0/17 Palu, 0/17 Padang, 0/20 Alor, 0/22 Manado. In regard to the "Indonesia (other)" sample, the authors have stated, "The one LY1-positive chromosome was the single sample from Toraja.")
Buryat 1/106 = 0.9%
India 1/317 = 0.3%
Pakistan 1/578 = 0.2%

The Karafet team's pool of Polynesian samples contains only 1/60 = 1.7% O3-M122(xM134) LY1/LINE1+ as reported in Hammer et al. (2006). I suspect that the relevant individual is probably the O3a-P197(xO3a1c-JST002611, O3a2-P201) individual from Tahiti reported in Karafet et al. (2010) because the Karafet team's sample from Tahiti also includes three O3a2c1-M134 individuals, which suggests that Chinese males might have left a significant genetic legacy among the Polynesian natives in Tahiti.

Anyway, it looks pretty clear that O3-M122 in Japan (with a question mark regarding Okinawa, where preliminary data suggest that a LY1/LINE1+ variant might comprise a significant proportion of local O3-M122; Hammer et al. 2006 have 3/45 = 6.7% O3-M122(xM134)+LY1/LINE1 in their sample from Okinawa, and Nonaka et al. 2007 have predicted five or six of the 87 Okinawans of Uchihi et al. 2003 to be O-JST002611+/LINE1+) and in the less mainland-influenced parts of Austronesia (i.e. aboriginal Taiwan, eastern Indonesia, and Oceania) essentially lacks the LY1/LINE1 retroposon insertion. I suppose the LY1/LINE1+ variant(s) in Okinawa might be ascribable to historically recorded Chinese influence, and the same is likely for the Philippines. The presence of LY1/LINE1+ variants in Malaysia and western Indonesia (e.g. 3/32 = 9.4% of the "Malay" sample and 4/25 = 16% of the "Indonesia West" sample of Hammer et al. 2006) is probably due in large part to the influence that has brought O-M7 to that region, and correlated with the introduction of O-M95; although more recent Chinese influence may also play some part in this, I suspect that Malaysian and Indonesian individuals with recent Chinese ancestry would be more likely to ethnically identify with or at least be aware of their Chinese ancestry (even if they may be somewhat mixed with the locals) and therefore not volunteer to be tested for genetic research of this sort (unless the researchers were specifically recruiting Malaysians or Indonesians of Chinese ancestry).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
black man
The Right Hand
[ *  *  * ]
According to one paper on ancient DNA, y hg N seems to have been more aboriginal to Dongbei than y hg O. Thus, one might conclude that the patrilineal ancestors of Koreans and Japanese in y hg O2b might have been in what is now Hebei and Shandong. Men in y hg O3 could have been together with them right from the start. But they could have joined them later on as well. Maybe there were even more successive waves of people pushed to the east.

In the Jiangnan area there is a continuity concerning M119+. And M122+ appears to have moved there later on. Then again, the major Polynesian M122+ variant is quite close to M134+. So in theory M122+ could have preceeded M119+ in the Jiangnan area. Similarly, M117+ carriers as well as others could have split in what is now Hubei. I.e., M122+ doesn't need to be aboriginal to the north. Plus, there might have been several routes by which its carriers could have moved to Korea.
http://s6.zetaboards.com/man/topic/8784312/1/#new
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
black man
Oct 5 2014, 04:44:44 PM
According to one paper on ancient DNA, y hg N seems to have been more aboriginal to Dongbei than y hg O. Thus, one might conclude that the patrilineal ancestors of Koreans and Japanese in y hg O2b might have been in what is now Hebei and Shandong. Men in y hg O3 could have been together with them right from the start. But they could have joined them later on as well. Maybe there were even more successive waves of people pushed to the east.

In the Jiangnan area there is a continuity concerning M119+. And M122+ appears to have moved there later on. Then again, the major Polynesian M122+ variant is quite close to M134+. So in theory M122+ could have preceeded M119+ in the Jiangnan area. Similarly, M117+ carriers as well as others could have split in what is now Hubei. I.e., M122+ doesn't need to be aboriginal to the north. Plus, there might have been several routes by which its carriers could have moved to Korea.
http://s6.zetaboards.com/man/topic/8784312/1/#new
Ebizur
 
Niuheliang site (the border of Lingyuan County and Jianping County, Liaoning Province, PRC)/Hongshan culture/approx. 6500 YBP ~ 5000 YBP/Neolithic (Cui et al. 2013)
2/6 N-M231(xN1c2a-M128, N1c1-Tat)
2/6 N-M231(xN1c1-Tat)
1/6 C-M216 (subclade undetermined)
1/6 O3-M122 (subclade undetermined)

Miaozigou site (Chahar Right Front Banner, Ulanqab, Inner Mongolian Autonomous Region, PRC)/Miaozigou phase of the Yangshao culture (Yangshao with Hongshan influence?)/approx. 6000 YBP ~ 5000 YBP/Neolithic (Cui et al. 2013)
3/3 ?N1c2a-M128/?N-M231(xN1c2a-M128, N1c1-Tat) (There is a discrepancy between Table 1 of the main article, in which these three Y-DNA samples are described as N1(xN1a, N1c), and Table S1 of the data supplement, in which the Y-SNP genotyping data indicate an assignment of N1c2a-M128.)

Niuheliang is located in western Liaoning, just a bit NE of Beijing/Hebei, and Miaozigou is located in south-central Inner Mongolia, just a bit WNW of Beijing/Hebei. The occurrence of O3-M122 and C-M216 as singletons among the sampled remains of people at the Niuheliang site is not insignificant considering the small sample size. In other words, O3 and C (possibly C2, but the haplogroup of this individual has not been determined any further than C) already existed among the people of the most ancient archaeological site in Northeast China for which Y-DNA results are available, though, as you have mentioned, haplogroup N-M231 appears to have been much more common among ancient Neolithic people of the area than it is among modern ones, who are predominantly O3-M122 or C2-M217.

As for O2b-SRY465, its presence has never been confirmed in any ancient sample as far as I know. Among modern populations, it seems to have only a sporadic presence outside the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Archipelago, and its separation from its nearest non-O2b relatives (O2a) is extremely ancient, nearly (to be more precise, approximately 87%) as old as the most recent common ancestor of all extant O-M175 (and about 72% as old as the MRCA of all N-M231 and O-M175, or about 65% as old as the MRCA of all P-M45 and NO-M214). However, the overwhelming majority of extant O2b (including the prolific Korean and Japanese clusters) appears to have derived from some Neolithic expansion, and the extremely sparse Palaeolithic branches of O2b do have a (very minor) presence among modern Chinese; therefore, I think it is plausible that, as you have suggested, a subset of O2b might have expanded in tandem with a subset of O3 among certain ancestors of Koreans and Japanese. On the other hand, the notable presence of LY1/LINE1+ variants of O3-M122 among modern Koreans and Chinese to the exclusion of most modern Japanese and Austronesians suggests some more recent common history of the O3-M122 segment of the continental populations vis-a-vis the archipelagic ones. Therefore, I suppose the most plausible hypothesis for now might be that a certain subset of Korean and Japanese O3-M122 has evolved alongside O2b-SRY465 for several thousands of years (since the onset of the Neolithic in some part of northeastern Asia?), whereas another subset of O3-M122 has influenced Korea and Japan (especially the former) more recently, perhaps in the last two millennia, since the inception of frequent cultural interactions among China, Korea, and Japan, and the Sinicization of the Korean and Japanese cultures.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
black man
The Right Hand
[ *  *  * ]
Speaking of O2b, it is possibly present in 4 of 31 Udeghes according to Kharkov's dissertation. And the two Udeghes whom Jin et al. identified as belonging to hg O2b both lack one downstream mutation very common in the Japanese. I don't know much about the historical background(s) of the Udeghe. But, as far as I remember, their known ancestors (or predecessors) were described as sinicised rather than koreanised. M134+ (without the M117+ mutation) was detected in one of Kharkov's samples. And it could be present in one more of Jin's 21 samples.

Interestingly, neither O2b nor O3-M134+ appear to be important among the Nivkhs (the major descendants of the sea mammal hunters of the Tatar Strait region) although the latter could include relatively many men in y hg O as a whole according to Kharkov. So O2b and O3-M134 might not have arrived Tatar Strait until recently.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
black man
Oct 7 2014, 04:40:26 PM
Speaking of O2b, it is possibly present in 4 of 31 Udeghes according to Kharkov's dissertation. And the two Udeghes whom Jin et al. identified as belonging to hg O2b both lack one downstream mutation very common in the Japanese. I don't know much about the historical background(s) of the Udeghe. But, as far as I remember, their known ancestors (or predecessors) were described as sinicised rather than koreanised. M134+ (without the M117+ mutation) was detected in one of Kharkov's samples. And it could be present in one more of Jin's 21 samples.

Interestingly, neither O2b nor O3-M134+ appear to be important among the Nivkhs (the major descendants of the sea mammal hunters of the Tatar Strait region) although the latter could include relatively many men in y hg O as a whole according to Kharkov. So O2b and O3-M134 might not have arrived Tatar Strait until recently.
What is the origin of the ethnonym "Udeghe/Udihe/Udekhe/Udeghe/Udegey/Udeghei," anyway? It sounds sort of similar to the "real" (colloquial) Korean endonym, uri ("we, us, our; Koreans") < *urgheuy ~ *urheuy. Published Udeghe mtDNA is more similar as a group to Japanese or even Ainu than it is to Chinese, and it is different from the mtDNA of other Siberians, even other Tungusic-speaking ones.

It is quite implausible that O2b could be derived from recent (or even historical) Chinese influence because it has been completely absent from or present only as singletons in almost every published Chinese sample. Furthermore, the clusters found frequently among Koreans or Japanese are not that young; estimates vary depending on assumptions of mutation rate, generation time, etc., but these clusters are almost certainly of "Neolithic" (in the true sense of that term, i.e. New Stone Age) and not "post-Neolithic" age. One also might point out the fact that some of the Chinese O2b is actually part of an outgroup to the expansive subset of O2b that is common among modern Japanese, Ryukyuans, and Koreans; it could be considered a sort of "proto-O2b" rather than O2b proper, although it does share the SRY465 SNP. It is impossible to recently derive the types of O2b that are now common in Japan and Korea from the rare types of "proto-"O2b that have been found in some Chinese people. Although more typical O2b types also have been found in some Chinese with similarly low frequency, it seems more likely to me that they reflect admixture in the other direction (i.e. from Korea/Japan) since it is recorded in historical documents that some people did move (under duress or otherwise) from ancient Korea or Japan to ancient China (e.g. many people from Goguryeo, including the erstwhile royal family of Baekje, who had fled to Goguryeo after the Baekje restoration movement was crushed; some collateral members of the royal family of Baekje who had sought asylum in Japan upon the original destruction of Baekje remained there instead).

I recall in connection with the O2b in Udeghe that O2b also has been found sporadically among the nearby (and likewise Tungusic-speaking) Nanai/Hezhe people, but at least one of the Nanai O2b individuals has turned out to be very closely related to some Japanese representatives of O2b (and nested within a Japanese branch), although Koreans apparently were not included in that study (so the Nanai individual might actually belong to a shared Korean-Japanese branch). It looks more like minor influence from the south (Korea and/or Japan) in the Primorye and Lower Amur regions (coastal Outer/Russian-occupied Manchuria, near the northern shore of the Sea of Japan).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
JCA
Oct 3 2014, 09:17:28 PM
Anyway, it looks pretty clear that O3-M122 in Japan (with a question mark regarding Okinawa, where preliminary data suggest that a LY1/LINE1+ variant might comprise a significant proportion of local O3-M122; Hammer et al. 2006 have 3/45 = 6.7% O3-M122(xM134)+LY1/LINE1 in their sample from Okinawa, and Nonaka et al. 2007 have predicted five or six of the 87 Okinawans of Uchihi et al. 2003 to be O-JST002611+/LINE1+) and in the less mainland-influenced parts of Austronesia (i.e. aboriginal Taiwan, eastern Indonesia, and Oceania) essentially lacks the LY1/LINE1 retroposon insertion. I suppose the LY1/LINE1+ variant(s) in Okinawa might be ascribable to historically recorded Chinese influence, and the same is likely for the Philippines.
In regard to the question of the origin of the LINE1+ lineage(s) of Okinawans, I thought I should mention the fact that, of the 4/263 = 1.5% of the Nonaka team's Japanese sample who are LINE1+, three of them are O-JST002611+/LINE1+. If I am not mistaken, the three O-JST002611+/LINE1+ Japanese individuals are from the prefectures of Tokyo (southeastern Honshu), Aichi (south-central Honshu), and Fukuoka (northern Kyushu), each of which contains at least one large port and conurbation.

It is still plausible that at least some of the (O-JST002611+?/)LINE1+ Okinawans may descend from historical Chinese immigrants, but since about 1% of the general Japanese male population seems to belong to the same haplogroup at the current level of resolution, it is not necessarily true that all such Okinawans are direct patrilineal descendants of historical Chinese immigrants. However, I suspect that both the Okinawans and the other Japanese in this haplogroup probably share an ancient patrilineal origin in China, though their ancestors may have immigrated to the archipelago separately and in different eras.

Nonaka et al. (2007) also have found one O3-M122(xO3a1a-M121, O3a1b-M164, O3a1c-JST002611, O3a2-JST021354) individual who is LINE1+ in their sample from Tokyo; this individual stands out for being LINE1+ while being both JST002611- and M7-. I do not recall ever having seen any evidence of the existence of a JST021354+/M7-/LINE1+ genotype; most LINE1+ Y-chromosomes (at least in China or Japan) seem to be either JST002611+ or M7+, with a few being M122+/JST002611-/JST021354-/M7- like the aforementioned individual from Tokyo.

By the way, Santos et al. (2000) have included in their study a median-joining network of seven-marker microsatellite haplotypes of Y-chromosomes carrying LY1 (Figure 4). One of their two Japanese LY1 carriers, J135, is at one edge of the network, differing from its nearest neighbors (m259 = a Han from China, M(i)33 = a Miao from China, and Tor23 = a Toraja from Indonesia) at two of seven microsatellite loci. J135 has +2 repeats at DYS390 (27 vs. 25) and +2 repeats at DYS392 (15 vs. 13) in comparison with m259. J135 has +3 repeats at DYS390 (27 vs. 24) and +2 repeats at DYS392 (15 vs. 13) in comparison with M(i)33. J135 has +4 repeats at DYS390 (27 vs. 23) and +2 repeats at DYS392 (15 vs. 13) in comparison with Tor23.

The other one of their two Japanese LY1 carriers, J141, connects the haplotype of M(i)19, another Miao from China, to the rest of the network. Toward the center of the network, J141's haplotype is nearest to a haplotype shared between one Buryat (D25) and one Han from China (m39). As in the case of J135, J141 differs from each of its nearest neighbors at two of the seven tested microsatellite loci. J141 has +1 repeat at DYS390 (25 vs. 24) and -2 repeats at DYS393 (12 vs. 14) in comparison with M(i)19. J141 has -1 repeat at DYS19 (16 vs. 17) and +1 repeat at DYS391 (11 vs. 10) in comparison with the haplotype shared by D25 and m39.

Overall, I think the greatest significance of Figure 4 of Santos et al. (2000) is that it does not provide any evidence upon which to reject the frequency-based hypothesis of an origin of the LY1 retroposon insertion in roughly Central China (Han/Miao/Tujia territory) followed by diffusion of LY1+ lineages outward in every direction.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Frequency of LY1/LINE1 retroposon insertion in various populations

Yao/Liannan, Guangdong 21/35 = 60.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
She 29/51 = 56.9% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Yao 29/60 = 48.3% (Hammer et al. 2006)
She 15/34 = 44.1% (Xue et al. 2006)
Miao 22/58 = 37.9% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Miao total 28/81 = 34.6% (Hammer et al. 2006 + Santos et al. 2000)
Han/Meixian, Guangdong 12/35 = 34.3% (Xue et al. 2006)
Yao/Bama, Guangxi 12/35 = 34.3% (Xue et al. 2006)
Han/Taiwan 22/84 = 26.2% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Miao/China 6/23 = 26.1% (Santos et al. 2000)
Han/China 17/75 = 22.7% (Santos et al. 2000)
Han/Chengdu, Sichuan 7/34 = 20.6% (Xue et al. 2006)
Buyi 7/35 = 20.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Tujia 9/49 = 18.4% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Han total 30/168 = 17.9% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Han total 91/515 = 17.7% (Hammer et al. 2006 + Xue et al. 2006 + Jin et al. 2009 + Santos et al. 2000)
Han total 29/166 = 17.5% (Xue et al. 2006)
Tujia total 10/58 = 17.2% (Hammer et al. 2006 + Santos et al. 2000)
Indonesia, West 4/25 = 16.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Han/Beijing 10/65 = 15.4% (Jin et al. 2009)
Daur 6/39 = 15.4% (Xue et al. 2006)
Vietnam 10/70 = 14.3% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Philippines 9/69 = 13.0% (Jin et al. 2009)
Korean 20/154 = 13.0% (Jin et al. 2009)
Han/Yili, Xinjiang 4/32 = 12.5% (Xue et al. 2006)
Han/Yunnan 5/41 = 12.2% (Jin et al. 2009)
Korean total 51/445 = 11.5% (Kim et al. 2007 + Jin et al. 2009 + Hammer et al. 2006)
Han/Shanxi or Shaanxi 5/44 = 11.4% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Korean/Seoul & Daejeon, South Korea 24/216 = 11.1% (Kim et al. 2007)
Indonesians 4/36 = 11.1% (Jin et al. 2009)
Tujia/China 1/9 = 11.1% (Santos et al. 2000)
Han/Lanzhou, Gansu 3/30 = 10.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Korean total 51/513 = 9.9% (Kim et al. 2007 + Jin et al. 2009 + Hammer et al. 2006 + Xue et al. 2006)
Manchurian Evenk 4/41 = 9.8% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Oroqen 3/31 = 9.7% (Xue et al. 2006)
Manchu 5/52 = 9.6% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Malay 3/32 = 9.4% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Korea 7/75 = 9.3% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Hezhe 4/45 = 8.9% (Xue et al. 2006)
Manchu total 12/135 = 8.9% (Hammer et al. 2006 + Jin et al. 2009 + Xue et al. 2006)
Han/Harbin, Heilongjiang 3/35 = 8.6% (Xue et al. 2006)
Hui 3/35 = 8.6% (Xue et al. 2006)
Manchu 3/35 = 8.6% (Xue et al. 2006)
Manchurians 4/48 = 8.3% (Jin et al. 2009)
Han/Guangdong 3/40 = 7.5% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Okinawa 3/45 = 6.7% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Khalkh 3/48 = 6.3% (Jin et al. 2009)
Philippines 3/48 = 6.3% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Buryat 3/50 = 6.0% (Jin et al. 2009)
Thais 3/50 = 6.0% (Jin et al. 2009)
Japan/Kyushu 3/53 = 5.7% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Vietnamese 2/41 = 4.9% (Jin et al. 2009)
Xibe 2/41 = 4.9% (Xue et al. 2006)
Inner Mongolian 2/45 = 4.4% (Xue et al. 2006)
Mongolia 6/149 = 4.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Ewenki 1/26 = 3.8% (Xue et al. 2006)
(Khalkh) Mongolian total 13/368 = 3.5% (Hammer et al. 2006 + Xue et al. 2006 + Santos et al. 2000 + Jin et al. 2009)
Qiang 1/33 = 3.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Uygur 2/67 = 3.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Japan/Tokushima 2/70 = 2.9% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Buryat total 6/237 = 2.5% (Santos et al. 2000 + Hammer et al. 2006 + Jin et al. 2009)
Buryat 2/81 = 2.5% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Japan/Tokushima+Shizuoka+Kyushu+Aomori total 5/210 = 2.4% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Yizu/Butuo, Sichuan 1/43 = 2.3% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Taiwan Aborigines total 1/47 = 2.1% (found in 1/14 Ami, 0/9 Atayal, 0/10 Bunun, and 0/14 Paiwan; Santos et al. 2000)
Japanese 2/107 = 1.9% (Jin et al. 2009)
Japanese total 13/772 = 1.7% (Nonaka et al. 2007 + Hammer et al. 2006 + Santos et al. 2000 + Jin et al. 2009 + Xue et al. 2006)
Polynesia 1/60 = 1.7% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Mongolia 1/61 = 1.6% (Santos et al. 2000)
Outer Mongolian 1/65 = 1.5% (Xue et al. 2006)
Japanese 4/263 = 1.5% (Nonaka et al. 2007)
Japan 2/145 = 1.4% (Santos et al. 2000)
Indonesia 2/211 = 0.9% (found in 1/12 Pekanbaru, 1/94 "Indonesia (other)," 0/8 Borneo, 0/9 Bali, 0/12 Medan, 0/17 Palu, 0/17 Padang, 0/20 Alor, 0/22 Manado. In regard to the "Indonesia (other)" sample, the authors have stated, "The one LY1-positive chromosome was the single sample from Toraja." Santos et al. 2000)
Buryat 1/106 = 0.9% (Santos et al. 2000)
India 1/317 = 0.3% (Santos et al. 2000)
India 1/405 = 0.2% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Pakistan 1/578 = 0.2% (Santos et al. 2000)
Micronesia 0/17 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Zhuang 0/20 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Oroqen 0/22 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Japan/Aomori 0/26 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Even 0/31 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Uygur/Urumqi, Xinjiang 0/31 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Australian Aborigines 0/33 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Hani 0/34 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Li 0/34 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Tibetans 0/35 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Uygur/Yili, Xinjiang 0/39 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Papua New Guinea 0/46 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Japanese 0/47 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006)
Taiwan Aborigines 0/48 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Melanesia 0/53 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Indonesia, East 0/55 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Japan/Shizuoka 0/61 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Korean (Korea=43 + China=25) 0/68 = 0.0% (Xue et al. 2006) [Is this datum valid or not?]
Sri Lanka 0/91 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Siberian Evenk 0/95 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Altai 0/98 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)
Tibet 0/105 = 0.0% (Hammer et al. 2006)

The absence of LY1+ variants from both Korean samples of Xue et al. may be spurious. I suspect that the authors may have obtained a Korean data set for which the LY1 retroposon insertion has not been tested from an unpublished study or a Korean collaborator and included it in their data table beside other samples for which LY1 has been tested and tabulated correctly.

Of course, the Japanese datum of Xue et al. may suffer from the same problem, but their Japanese sample contains only 1/47 = 2.1% O3-M122(xM134) (i.e. potential LY1+), whereas their Korean samples contain 13/68 = 19.1% O3-M122(xM134) (7/43 Koreans from Korea and 6/25 Koreans from China).

Again, note the usual pattern in regard to Han, Korean, and Japanese: the frequency of LY1+ Y-DNA among the Koreans is intermediate between the LY1+ frequency among Han Chinese and the LY1+ frequency among Japanese, but somewhat closer to the LY1+ frequency among Han Chinese (even if we accept the figure from Xue et al. 2006 as valid).

I also have noted that the maximal LY1+ frequencies observed in the She and Yao samples of Hammer et al. 2006 are entirely due to O-M7 according to Table S2 of Karafet et al. 2010. The same team's sample of Miao must contain at least one O-JST002611+/LY1+ or O-P201+/LY1+/M7-/M134- individual, but a majority of their LY1+ variants likewise should belong to O-M7. In the case of the Xue team's sample of Yao from Liannan, Guangdong (perhaps Zaomin/Bapai Yao), 18/35 = 51.4% of the sample is O-M7+/LY1+; the other three LY1+ individuals are O3-M122+/LY1+/M159-/M7-/M134-.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
black man, I have just discovered the first evidence known to me of LY1+ variants existing within O-P201(xM7, M134).

According to Hammer et al. (2006), that team's sample of Tujia contains 9/49 = 18.4% O-M122(xM134) that is also LY1+.

According to Karafet et al. (2010), that team's sample of Tujia contains the following types of O-M122 Y-DNA:

7/49 O-P201(xM7, M134)
3/49 O-M7
4/49 O-JST002611
12/49 O-M134

Because the total of O-M7 plus O-JST002611 in this sample of Tujia is only 7/49, at least two of the seven O-P201(xM7, M134) individuals must be LY1+ for the numbers to match. It looks like you were right that some P201+/LY1+/M7-/M134- variants do exist (at least in Central China).


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Another type of P201+/LY1+/M7-/M134- Y-DNA has been sitting right under my nose this whole time: O-M159. Xue et al. 2006 have reported finding one M175+/M122+/LY1+/M159+ individual in their sample of Han from Meixian, Guangdong (n=35). The current versions of the ISOGG and YFull trees for haplogroup O seem to agree that the rare O-M159 is a subclade of O-P201. Therefore, this M159+ individual from Meixian also should qualify as a representative of P201+/LY1+/M7-/M134- Y-DNA. It would be nice to know whether any of the Karafet team's Tujia samples belongs to O-M159.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
I have updated my original post in this thread with some additional data.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
black man
The Right Hand
[ *  *  * ]
JCA
Oct 19 2014, 07:51:25 AM
Another type of P201+/LY1+/M7-/M134- Y-DNA has been sitting right under my nose this whole time: O-M159. Xue et al. 2006 have reported finding one M175+/M122+/LY1+/M159+ individual in their sample of Han from Meixian, Guangdong (n=35). The current versions of the ISOGG and YFull trees for haplogroup O seem to agree that the rare O-M159 is a subclade of O-P201. Therefore, this M159+ individual from Meixian also should qualify as a representative of P201+/LY1+/M7-/M134- Y-DNA. It would be nice to know whether any of the Karafet team's Tujia samples belongs to O-M159.
Unfortunately, relatively few researchers are interested in the spread of M159+. But there one paper by Huang Daixin et al. according to which this mutation was not detected in any of 160 Wuhan Han samples. And since Wuhan is one of the major cities along the Yangzi river, this implies that there was no significant spread of M159+ along this particular river. This impression is confirmed by the fact that M159+ was detected among Fujian Han, Taiwan Han and Taiwanese aborigines, the Taiwanese aboriginal hts not being particularly similar to the Han hts (Trejaut et al. 2014).

Now, M159+ neither common in the highland aborigines of Taiwan nor in the Philippines, it seems (ibid.). So M159+ is IMO probably more or less restricted to Fujian and part of Taiwan. And, again, this doesn't tell much about its origins. There is a major Polynesian clade very close to the M134+ clades, too. And its marker P164+ is upstream to M134+ but neither to M7+ nor to M159+ (Mirabal et al., Increased Y-chromosome resolution of haplogroup O suggests genetic ties between the Ami aborigines of Taiwan and the Polynesian Islands of Samoa and Tonga). Therefore, I'd consider M159+ to be a regionally restricted phenomenon the background of which is still hard to tell.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
What about Altaic influences here? Haven't gotten a chance to take a look.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
ren
May 9 2018, 01:35:51 PM
What about Altaic influences here? Haven't gotten a chance to take a look.
There is not much in the Y-DNA of Koreans that would suggest gene flow between them and nearby "Altaic" ethnic groups (e.g. Manchus, Mongols). The Koreans appear quite like a mixture of Han Chinese and Japanese with a predominance of the Han Chinese element (at least in regard to their Y-DNA).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
luxemen
Member
[ *  * ]
Ebizur
May 9 2018, 01:58:23 PM
ren
May 9 2018, 01:35:51 PM
What about Altaic influences here? Haven't gotten a chance to take a look.
There is not much in the Y-DNA of Koreans that would suggest gene flow between them and nearby "Altaic" ethnic groups (e.g. Manchus, Mongols). The Koreans appear quite like a mixture of Han Chinese and Japanese with a predominance of the Han Chinese element (at least in regard to their Y-DNA).
Yes, I believe Korean Y-dna is more "Chinese" (at least 30%, figures going up to 50% in Korean-Chinese samples), then Japanese/Korean (at least 30% in most Korean samples), then some Mongolian/North Asian gene (about 15-20%).

After that, some minority N's, D's and Q's. There's usually about 2-5% N, with some D's but usually very minor.

Koreans are more "Northern/Tungusic" on the female side than on the male side.
Edited by luxemen, May 9 2018, 02:10:06 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ebizur
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Nurizone
May 9 2018, 02:09:14 PM
Yes, I believe Korean Y-dna is more "Chinese" (at least 30%, figures going up to 50% in Korean-Chinese samples), then Japanese/Korean (at least 30% in most Korean samples), then some Mongolian/North Asian gene (about 15-20%).

After that, some minority N's, D's and Q's. There's usually about 2-5% N, with some D's but usually very minor.

Koreans are more "Northern/Tungusic" on the female side than on the male side.
Many subclades of O2-M122, C2c1-F2613, O1a-M119, N-M231, and Q-M120 seem to be shared among Han Chinese and Koreans with only gentle clines of differentiation (e.g. O1a-M119 tending to be more frequent toward the Yangtze River delta, Q-M120 tending to be more frequent toward Huabei).

O1b2a1a2a-L682, O1b2a1a1-CTS713, D1b-M55, and C1a1-M8 seem to be shared mainly among Japanese and Koreans, with only O1b2a1a2a-L682 being more frequent among Koreans than among Japanese; O1b2a1a2a-L682 (and, more generally, its parent clade, O1b2a1a2-F2868) is also the one among these four clades that has been found with a certain regularity (though still very low in frequency) among Han Chinese.

Koreans actually share very little Y-DNA with Mongolians or North Asians that they do not also share with Northern Han. C2c1-F2613 belongs to C2-M217 like a great deal of Mongolian and North Asian Y-DNA, but the C2c1-F2613 clade is very deeply divergent from all but one of the major Mongolian/North Asian subclades of C2-M217. Both in regard to diversity and total population size, most of C2c1-F2613 is concentrated in Han Chinese and Koreans, and members of that clade among e.g. Japanese appear most likely to be descended from Chinese or Korean immigrants. I think it is a bit hasty to say that Koreans have about 15% to 20% of "Mongolian/North Asian" Y-DNA.

Modern Korean Y-DNA seems to be basically a composite of a major constituent that is only very slightly differentiated from the major constituent of the Han Chinese Y-DNA pool plus a minor constituent that is more closely related to the Japanese than to any other extant population, but is nevertheless quite drifted away from them, exhibiting a greatly elevated proportion of O1b2a1a2a-L682 (Bak Hyeokkeose or Hogong founder effect? Higher resolution data are needed).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
luxemen
Member
[ *  * ]
Ebizur
May 9 2018, 04:29:04 PM
Nurizone
May 9 2018, 02:09:14 PM
Yes, I believe Korean Y-dna is more "Chinese" (at least 30%, figures going up to 50% in Korean-Chinese samples), then Japanese/Korean (at least 30% in most Korean samples), then some Mongolian/North Asian gene (about 15-20%).

After that, some minority N's, D's and Q's. There's usually about 2-5% N, with some D's but usually very minor.

Koreans are more "Northern/Tungusic" on the female side than on the male side.
Many subclades of O2-M122, C2c1-F2613, O1a-M119, N-M231, and Q-M120 seem to be shared among Han Chinese and Koreans with only gentle clines of differentiation (e.g. O1a-M119 tending to be more frequent toward the Yangtze River delta, Q-M120 tending to be more frequent toward Huabei).

O1b2a1a2a-L682, O1b2a1a1-CTS713, D1b-M55, and C1a1-M8 seem to be shared mainly among Japanese and Koreans, with only O1b2a1a2a-L682 being more frequent among Koreans than among Japanese; O1b2a1a2a-L682 (and, more generally, its parent clade, O1b2a1a2-F2868) is also the one among these four clades that has been found with a certain regularity (though still very low in frequency) among Han Chinese.

Koreans actually share very little Y-DNA with Mongolians or North Asians that they do not also share with Northern Han. C2c1-F2613 belongs to C2-M217 like a great deal of Mongolian and North Asian Y-DNA, but the C2c1-F2613 clade is very deeply divergent from all but one of the major Mongolian/North Asian subclades of C2-M217. Both in regard to diversity and total population size, most of C2c1-F2613 is concentrated in Han Chinese and Koreans, and members of that clade among e.g. Japanese appear most likely to be descended from Chinese or Korean immigrants. I think it is a bit hasty to say that Koreans have about 15% to 20% of "Mongolian/North Asian" Y-DNA.

Modern Korean Y-DNA seems to be basically a composite of a major constituent that is only very slightly differentiated from the major constituent of the Han Chinese Y-DNA pool plus a minor constituent that is more closely related to the Japanese than to any other extant population, but is nevertheless quite drifted away from them, exhibiting a greatly elevated proportion of O1b2a1a2a-L682 (Bak Hyeokkeose or Hogong founder effect? Higher resolution data are needed).
Okay, fair points. Thanks for your reply btw.

Would it be more accurate to say then that the seemingly greater tungid admixture among Korean than say Han Chinese is mainly coming from the mtDNA? There's often the well-shared notion that Koreans are far more tungid, and perhaps one of the most tungid East Asians, both in genotype and phenotype.

However, on autosomal DNA, it appears that Koreans are not even the most Northern-shifted on calculators such as on Gedmatch's calculators; in fact Gedmatch's MDLP K23b calculator puts Japanese at a higher tungus/altaic percentage (based on the matches I've seen, Japanese have around 5% or more tungus/altaic percentage than your average Korean).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
black man
The Right Hand
[ *  *  * ]
Nurizone
May 9 2018, 05:31:18 PM
Ebizur
May 9 2018, 04:29:04 PM
Nurizone
May 9 2018, 02:09:14 PM
Yes, I believe Korean Y-dna is more "Chinese" (at least 30%, figures going up to 50% in Korean-Chinese samples), then Japanese/Korean (at least 30% in most Korean samples), then some Mongolian/North Asian gene (about 15-20%).

After that, some minority N's, D's and Q's. There's usually about 2-5% N, with some D's but usually very minor.

Koreans are more "Northern/Tungusic" on the female side than on the male side.
Many subclades of O2-M122, C2c1-F2613, O1a-M119, N-M231, and Q-M120 seem to be shared among Han Chinese and Koreans with only gentle clines of differentiation (e.g. O1a-M119 tending to be more frequent toward the Yangtze River delta, Q-M120 tending to be more frequent toward Huabei).

O1b2a1a2a-L682, O1b2a1a1-CTS713, D1b-M55, and C1a1-M8 seem to be shared mainly among Japanese and Koreans, with only O1b2a1a2a-L682 being more frequent among Koreans than among Japanese; O1b2a1a2a-L682 (and, more generally, its parent clade, O1b2a1a2-F2868) is also the one among these four clades that has been found with a certain regularity (though still very low in frequency) among Han Chinese.

Koreans actually share very little Y-DNA with Mongolians or North Asians that they do not also share with Northern Han. C2c1-F2613 belongs to C2-M217 like a great deal of Mongolian and North Asian Y-DNA, but the C2c1-F2613 clade is very deeply divergent from all but one of the major Mongolian/North Asian subclades of C2-M217. Both in regard to diversity and total population size, most of C2c1-F2613 is concentrated in Han Chinese and Koreans, and members of that clade among e.g. Japanese appear most likely to be descended from Chinese or Korean immigrants. I think it is a bit hasty to say that Koreans have about 15% to 20% of "Mongolian/North Asian" Y-DNA.

Modern Korean Y-DNA seems to be basically a composite of a major constituent that is only very slightly differentiated from the major constituent of the Han Chinese Y-DNA pool plus a minor constituent that is more closely related to the Japanese than to any other extant population, but is nevertheless quite drifted away from them, exhibiting a greatly elevated proportion of O1b2a1a2a-L682 (Bak Hyeokkeose or Hogong founder effect? Higher resolution data are needed).
Okay, fair points. Thanks for your reply btw.

Would it be more accurate to say then that the seemingly greater tungid admixture among Korean than say Han Chinese is mainly coming from the mtDNA? There's often the well-shared notion that Koreans are far more tungid, and perhaps one of the most tungid East Asians, both in genotype and phenotype.

However, on autosomal DNA, it appears that Koreans are not even the most Northern-shifted on calculators such as on Gedmatch's calculators; in fact Gedmatch's MDLP K23b calculator puts Japanese at a higher tungus/altaic percentage (based on the matches I've seen, Japanese have around 5% or more tungus/altaic percentage than your average Korean).
Ebizur might correct me in case that he found an older Japanese source. (Plus, a Japanese definition of the term could be different from its definition in, e.g., von Eickstedt's works.) Anyway, AFAIK, von Eickstedt was the one who introduced the term "Tungid" as a preliminary means to address a kind of North Asian phenotype or range of phenotypes. Apparently, he first relied on Russian literature based on which he defined a phenotype or range of phenotypes present among Tungus (hence "Tung" plus "-id"). However, he never examined any Tungus on his own probably because he couldn't simply enter Russia for political reasons. Then he seems to have decided to modify the definition of the term possibly after having examined Kalmyk men. The precise redefinition might have been in a paper which he planned to get published in the 1940s. But that paper was never published maybe because von Eickstedt had to flee from from his institute by the end of WW2. And the status of the according materials is now unknown. Considering the events during WW2 and thereafter, it's not unlikely that nobody will recover them. Nevertheless, there is still the fact that von Eickstedt wrote books for laymen. So his diffuse concepts keep on confusing people who read what others claim to have read in von Eickstedt's works.

As I tried to point out in my thread on North Asian physical anthropology according to Russian typological approaches, a Russian anthropologist found out differences between coastal and inland populations in eastern North Asia. These populations might have been atypical for the majority of present-day North Asian aboriginal populations. Nevertheless, Levin's data imply that most present-day North Asians have both the features of stereotypical inland populations and the features of stereotypical coastal populations. I.e., their backgrounds are likely to be "mixed".

There are probably more or less recent historical reasons for these observations. In short, the spread of patrilineal cultures and the "father tongues" and linguae francae of the men dominant in these cultures seems to have reduced lots of phenotypical and cultural diversity within eastern North Asia. However, some of the mtDNA diversity is likely to have survived. So there were still relatively many different local physical anthropological "types" when anthropologists went to North Asia in the 20th century. In the context of Korean physical anthropology this means that Koreans could be mostly descendants of patrilineal East Asian men who took wives from meanwhile extinct North Asian ethnic groups. And these extinct North Asian groups were possibly a "mix" of "inland" and "coastal" North Asians. The peoples von Eickstedt called "Tungid" were probably "mixes" of "inland" and "coastal" North Asians as well. But their y-chromosomes, their "father tongues" and their exact (re-)combinations of "inland" and "coastal" genetic "components" are different.

If I'm not mistaken, present-day variants of y hgs N and O might be relatively recent arrivers in the region later known as Manchuria when compared with certain variants of y hg C. (Those who know better than me might correct me if I'm mistaken.) So, in case that, e.g., early versions of Korean and Japanese O-SRY465+ migrated to the Korean peninsula from a more western location, they could have done so together with women whose families they encountered in the region to the northwest of the peninsula. And these women could have had a "specific mix of coastal and inland North Asian features". The language(s) of their ancestors are not clear, though. They could have been Manchu-Tungusic, "Amuric" or even beyond what present-day linguistics can imagine. That said, the bearers of Dawenkou culture (to the southeast of the Korean peninsula) seemed to have had "less North Asian" features according to Chinese researchers.

So, yes, there were probably matrilateral genetic contributions from North Asia but not necessarily "Tungid" or Manchu-Tungusic ones. Future archaeogenetic studies will have to clarify the exact origins. Possibly North Asian matrilineages are not extremely uncommon among Han Chinese and even among relatively "southern" Tibeto-Burman and Tai-Kadai ethnic groups, though. I previously mentioned D4j and G2 in particular. Such matrilineages are relatively common among, e.g., Mongols.
Edited by black man, May 9 2018, 08:58:30 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
luxemen
Member
[ *  * ]
@BlackMan: Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

Could we perhaps start a thread on Korean mtDNA if we don't have one already?

I admit I don't have much knowledge in this area but can help translate some documents (or studies published in Korean into English) if needed.
Edited by luxemen, May 9 2018, 09:15:58 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
black man
The Right Hand
[ *  *  * ]
Nurizone
May 9 2018, 09:15:01 PM
@BlackMan: Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

Could we perhaps start a thread on Korean mtDNA if we don't have one already?

I admit I don't have much knowledge in this area but can help translate some documents (or studies published in Korean into English) if needed.
Thanks for your interest, Nurizone. I'd be especially interested in, e.g., the social networks of mudang, haenyo and other feminine occupational groups and their respective continuities. Moreover, your knowledge about women and their social networks in "more egalitarian" occupational groups in general could be of interest as well. I already addressed the latter in a Mongolian context.

Matrilineage-related studies are matrivicinal and matrilocal studies among others. The more matrilineally related women at one location, the higher the chance that they support each other. Therefore, I'm trying to add contributions on different locations and regions separately.

So far, we already addressed Korean mtDNA hg profiles in Jeju-do, "Seoul-Gyeonggi" and "Chungcheong" samples and China besides one general mtDNA hg profile of samples from southern Korea (which, if I remember correctly, consists of more or less the same samples when pooled). Furthermore, I already addressed M10 separately because it's generally rather rare.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ren
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Updated with a publically viewable spreadsheet.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTteM4Fiw31k3AXJppPrq7jJ_7NBsRvYp1O7IpW7pmJWYLXy2Dr4T2RGW3BoCev-v4yPPbP2Eot5era/pub?output=xlsx

I think we should collate all Korean Y-chromosome frequencies in a Google sheet that I've linked to above, that Ebizur and black man has access to.

Edited by ren, May 11 2018, 02:38:56 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
« Previous Topic · Korean · Next Topic »
Add Reply