Which has greater autosomal genetic diversity: Europe or China?

johen said:
Here is: Chinese samples were all north Chinese; Beijing and Manchurian.
Capture.png


As a gene expert, you can know where the yayoi originated in without Razib Khan' comment.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/07/koreans-not-quite-the-purest-race/#.V9cOB_krKUm
Click to expand...

China in the center, that is logical.
Except for Mongalians, all these people descend in large part from the Chinese neolithic.
Expansion northbound started 5.5 ka, southbound 4 ka.
 
bicicleur said:
China in the center, that is logical.
Except for Mongalians, all these people descend in large part from the Chinese neolithic.
Expansion northbound started 5.5 ka, southbound 4 ka.
Click to expand...
I just kept the following map, but too lazy to find the original research paper. Modern Korean is close to Yayoi and kofun, locating in the middle of modern chinese people and japanese.

Capture.png


and another chinese scholar work(2011): best match
image
 
Last edited:
I believe this upcoming paper is pertinent to the discussion:

Reconstructing population history in East Asia
Chuan-Chao Wang1 ,3, Nadin Rohland1, Shop Mallick1, Longli Kang6, Shi Yan2, Rukesh Shrestha2, Shaoqing Wen2, Oleg Balanovsky5, Elena Balanovska5, Yuri Bogunov5, Qiongying Deng7, Hongbing Yao8, Kumarasamy Thangaraj10, Lalji Singh10, Rong Lin9, Wangwei Cai9, Dongna Li9, Ling-Xiang Wang2, Manfei Zhang2, Lan-Hai Wei2, Alexander Kim1, Pontus Skoglund1, Iosif Lazaridis1, Iain Mathieson1, Stephan Schiffels3, Wolfgang Haak3, Chris Stringer11, Nick Patterson1, Li Jin2, Alexander N Popov4, Hui Li2, Johannes Krause3, David Reich1

"The deep population history of East Asia remains poorly understood compared to that of West Eurasia, due to the lack of ancient DNA data as well as limited sampling of present-day populations especially on the Tibetan Plateau and in southern China. We report a fine scale survey of East Asian history based on genome-wide data from ancient samples in the Amur River Basin, as well as 435 newly reported individuals from 53 populations. Present-day groups can be broadly classified into highly differentiated clusters, corresponding to Amur River Basin, Tibetan Plateau, southern natives and Han Chinese. Populations of the Amur River Basin show a high degree of genetic continuity from seven thousand years ago until today, and are closely related to the strain of East Asian related ancestry present in Native Americans. Tibetan Plateau populations are all admixed, deriving about 5%-10% of their ancestry from an anciently divergent population that plausibly corresponds to the Paleolithic population on the Plateau, and the remaining part from an ancient population that no longer exists in unmixed form but that likely corresponds to expanding farmers from the Middle and Upper Yellow River Basin who also contributed 40-90% of the ancestry of Han Chinese. A total of 10-60% of Han Chinese ancestry derives from southern Native populations, and we show that the type of southern Native ancestry that contributed to Taiwan Island Austronesian speakers is most closely related to present-day speakers of Tai-Kadai languages in southern mainland China."

To answer the original question wouldn't we have to know the proportion that the Han represent of the total population of the modern nation state of China?
 
I would say China. On Chinese anthropology forums such as ranhaer and WeGene I've seen members with Y-HG R1a and N, which are Indo-European and Siberian in origin. One guy on WeGene has mt-HG H6a, which is Central Asian / Middle Eastern. Although most people don't think of China as a melting pot, the Han have assimilated many other ethnic groups for thousands of years. I am 3/4 southwestern Chinese (Chongqing), which gives me some Baiyue admixture. I'm also 1/4 northwestern (Xi'an).

I tested 23andme a long time ago, don't remember my exact results but they were approximately something like this:
96.9% Chinese
0.5% Korean
0.6% SE Asian
1.0% Broadly EA
0.3% Broadly EA and NA

0.5% European
0.1% East European
Less than 0.1% Broadly Southern European
0.4% Broadly European

0.1% South Asian

Less than 0.1% Central and South African

0.1% Unassigned


What do you guys think? Is the European / South Asian / African due to recent colonialism and foreign aggression in China? Would a percentage of say .5% be considered significant?
 
There is research showing East asian are more homogeneous than european

By

Genetic distance map by Magalhães et al. (2012)

I can't post link but u can search and find a genetic map which show genetic homogeneity
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 19599 times.

Back
Top