Chams show closer matrilinear link to Mainland vs. Insular Southeast Asians

 A new study (abstract below) suggests that the Austronesian-speaking Cham people are more closely related in terms of mtDNA to Mainland Southeast Asians as compared to other Austronesian speakers in Island Southeast Asia.

"...our results suggested that the origin of the Cham was likely a process of assimilation of massive local Mon-Khmer populations accompanied with language shift, thus indicating that the Austronesian diffusion in MSEA was mainly mediated by cultural diffusion, at least from the matrilineal genetic perspective, an observation in agreement with the hypothesis of the Nusantao Maritime Trading and Communication Networks (NMTCN)."

Wilhelm Solheim something similar happened in the Neolithic period further north along the coast of Southeast and East Asia, with evidence of the NMTCN turning up at various coastal archaeological sites. However, in this case any linguistic influence either vanished or was submerged as adstrata.

Would be interesting to see what the Y chromosome data reveals about the Chams, who created an ancient kingdom in central Vietnam.

Mol Biol Evol. 2010 May 31. [Epub ahead of print]

Tracing the Austronesian Footprint in Mainland Southeast Asia: A Perspective from Mitochondrial DNA.

Peng MS, Quang HH, Dang KP, Trieu AV, Wang HW, Yao YG, Kong QP, Zhang YP.

State Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650223, P.R. China.

Abstract

As the relic of the ancient Champa Kingdom, the Cham people represent the major Austronesian speakers in Mainland Southeast Asia (MSEA) and their origin is evidently associated with the Austronesian diffusion in MSEA. Hitherto, hypotheses stemming mainly from linguistic and cultural viewpoints on the origin of the Cham people remain a welter of controversies. Among the points of dissension is the muddled issue of whether the Cham people arose from demic or cultural diffusion from the Austronesians. Addressing this issue also helps elucidate the dispersal mode of the Austronesian language. In the present study, we have analyzed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) control-region and coding-region sequence variations in 168 Cham and 139 Kinh individuals from Vietnam. Around 77% and 95% matrilineal components in the Chams and the Kinhs, respectively, could be assigned into the defined mtDNA haplogroups. Additionally three common East Eurasian haplogroups B, R9, and M7 account for the majority (>60%) of maternal components in both populations. Entire sequencing of 20 representative mtDNAs selected from the thus far unclassified lineages, together with four new mtDNA genome sequences from Thailand, led to the identification of one new haplogroup M77 and helped to re-evaluate several haplogroups determined previously. Comparing the Chams with other Southeast Asian populations reveals that the Chams had a closer affinity with the Mon-Khmer populations in MSEA than with the Austronesian populations from Island Southeast Asia (ISEA). Further analyses failed to detect the potential homelands of the Chams in ISEA. Therefore, our results suggested that the origin of the Cham was likely a process of assimilation of massive local Mon-Khmer populations accompanied with language shift, thus indicating that the Austronesian diffusion in MSEA was mainly mediated by cultural diffusion, at least from the matrilineal genetic perspective, an observation in agreement with the hypothesis of the Nusantao Maritime Trading and Communication Networks (NMTCN).

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Sacramento

Pre-Columbian chickens, dates, isotopes, and mtDNA

Below is the abstract for the latest in a series of studies involving pre-Columbian chickens in the Americas. The issue is a highly-politicized one.

The article basically defends the original contention of Storey et al. claiming evidence through carbon dating and mtDNA testing of pre-Columbian chickens at El Arenal, Chile. There was a surprinsingly quick response by Gongora et al. claiming to refute Storey et al. on both the mtDNA analysis and the isotope dating.

Unfortunately, I have not yet had a chance to read this article and the Storey et al. defense. The original study compared chicken mtDNA from El Arenal-1 to similarly-dated samples from Kualoa on O'ahu, Anakena on Rapa Nui and in Tonga and Samoa.

Pre-Columbian chickens, dates, isotopes, and mtDNA

Alice A. Storey et al.

Published online before print November 24, 2008, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0807625105 PNAS December 2, 2008 vol. 105 no. 48 E99

Recently Gongora et al. (1) stated that their analyses of chicken mtDNA and potential offsets for dietary marine carbon cast doubt on “claims for pre-Columbian chickens” in the Americas. We present additional data supporting the interpretation of Storey et al. (2) showing that evidence for pre-Columbian chickens at the site of El Arenal, Chile, is secure.

Gongora et al. (1) analyzed …

[Full Text of this Article]

Zimbabwean village chickens originate from Southeast Asia and India

A new study shows that village chickens (Gallus gallus) in Zimbabwe originate from two maternal mtDNA lineages. One of these lineages is from Southeast Asia, while the other is from India. The research also identified a third lineage that did not appear in Zimbabwe or other African chickens and likely originates in South China.

These chickens could have been brought by sea trade and logically then they would be related to the chicken species in Madagascar.

Anim Genet. 2008 Dec;39(6):615-22.

Mitochondrial DNA D-loop sequences suggest a Southeast Asian and Indian origin of Zimbabwean village chickens.

Muchadeyi FC, Eding H, Simianer H, Wollny CB, Groeneveld E, Weigend S.

Institute of Farm Animal Genetics, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Höltystrasse 10, 31535 Neustadt, Germany.

This study sought to assess mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diversity and phylogeographic structure of chickens from five agro-ecological zones of Zimbabwe. Furthermore, chickens from Zimbabwe were compared with populations from other geographical regions (Malawi, Sudan and Germany) and other management systems (broiler and layer purebred lines). Finally, haplotypes of these animals were aligned to chicken sequences, taken from GenBank, that reflected populations of presumed centres of domestication. A 455-bp fragment of the mtDNA D-loop region was sequenced in 283 chickens of 14 populations. Thirty-two variable sites that defined 34 haplotypes were observed. In Zimbabwean chickens, diversity within ecotypes accounted for 96.8% of the variation, indicating little differentiation between ecotypes. The 34 haplotypes clustered into three clades that corresponded to (i) Zimbabwean and Malawian chickens, (ii) broiler and layer purebred lines and Northwest European chickens, and (iii) a mixture of chickens from Zimbabwe, Sudan, Northwest Europe and the purebred lines. Diversity among clades explained more than 80% of the total variation. Results indicated the existence of two distinct maternal lineages evenly distributed among the five Zimbabwean chicken ecotypes. For one of these lineages, chickens from Zimbabwe and Malawi shared major haplotypes with chicken populations that have a Southeast Asian background. The second maternal lineage, probably from the Indian subcontinent, was common to the five Zimbabwean chicken ecotypes, Sudanese and Northwest European chickens as well as purebred broiler and layer chicken lines. A third maternal lineage excluded Zimbabwean and other African chickens and clustered with haplotypes presumably originating from South China.

Genetic history in mainland SE Asia as revealed by ancient and modern mtDNA

A new American Journal of Physical Anthropology article studies the mtDNA from both ancient human remains in northeast Thailand, and modern human samples from the same area and surrounding regions.

The findings basically show that the two ancient groups, from the Bronze and Iron ages, resemble Austro-Asiatic-speaking populations. The modern Tai-Kadai speakers were more closely related to Southeast Asians than to East Asians, but they formed a separate group in the region. Among Southeast Asians the Tai-Kadai of Thailand are closest to the Khmer and this is explained by the researchers as related to the Khmer subjugation of the Tai-Kadai after their arrival in Thailand in the 10th-11th CE.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Published Online: 9 Jul 2008

Genetic history of Southeast Asian populations as revealed by ancient and modern human mitochondrial DNA analysis

Patcharee Lertrit, Samerchai Poolsuwan, Rachanie Thosarat, Thitima Sanpachudayan, Hathaichanoke Boonyarit, Chatchai Chinpaisal, Bhoom Suktitipat

The 360 base-pair fragment in HVS-1 of the mitochondrial genome were determined from ancient human remains excavated at Noen U-loke and Ban Lum-Khao, two Bronze and Iron Age archaeological sites in Northeastern Thailand, radio-carbon dated to circa 3,500-1,500 years BP and 3,200-2,400 years BP, respectively. These two neighboring populations were parts of early agricultural communities prevailing in northeastern Thailand from the fourth millennium BP onwards. The nucleotide sequences of these ancient samples were compared with the sequences of modern samples from various ethnic populations of East and Southeast Asia, encompassing four major linguistic affiliations (Altaic, Sino-Tibetan, Tai-Kadai, and Austroasiatic), to investigate the genetic relationships and history among them. The two ancient samples were most closely related to each other, and next most closely related to the Chao-Bon, an Austroasiatic-speaking group living near the archaeological sites, suggesting that the genetic continuum may have persisted since prehistoric times in situ among the native, perhaps Austroasiatic-speaking population. Tai-Kadai groups formed close affinities among themselves, with a tendency to be more closely related to other Southeast Asian populations than to populations from further north. The Tai-Kadai groups were relatively distant from all groups that have presumably been in Southeast Asia for longer-that is, the two ancient groups and the Austroasiatic-speaking groups, with the exception of the Khmer group. This finding is compatible with the known history of the Thais: their late arrival in Southeast Asia from southern China after the 10th-11th century AD, followed by a period of subjugation under the Khmers. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2008. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Sacramento

The impact of the Austronesian expansion: Admiralty Islands

A new study examines again the Austronesian expansion from the view of migrating Austronesian speakers reaching Melanesia.

One problem with these studies is that they do clearly differentiate between Austronesian and Malayo-Polynesian expansion. Even if we grant that Austronesian speakers originated in Taiwan, as the new study claims, it is highly doubtful that the Malayo-Polynesian expansion radiated from that region. There are no Malayo-Polynesian languages in Taiwan, and the general distribution of the linguistic branches do not jibe with a Taiwan location.

Another thing is we should not assume anything about the "race" of the Austronesian speakers, or for that matter the "Melanesians" back in the Neolithic period when these expansions occurred.

Austronesian speakers in the Pacific -- Micronesians, Melanesians and Polynesians -- for example, all have significant percentages of Y chromosome C2 haplogroup. In some Polynesian areas, C2 is the dominant haplotype. However, C2 has not been found in Taiwan so far.

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Sacramento

Mol Biol Evol. 2008 Apr 3

The impact of the Austronesian expansion: evidence from mtDNA and Y-chromosome diversity in the Admiralty Islands of Melanesia.

Kayser M, Choi Y, van Oven M, Mona S, Brauer S, Suarkia D, Schiefenhövel W, Stoneking M.

Department of Forensic Molecular Biology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

The genetic ancestry of Polynesians can be traced to both Asia and Melanesia, which presumably reflects admixture occurring between incoming Austronesians and resident non-Austronesians in Melanesia before the subsequent occupation of the greater Pacific; however, the genetic impact of the Austronesian expansion to Melanesia remains largely unknown. We therefore studied the diversity of non-recombining Y-chromosomal (NRY) and mitochondrial (mt) DNA in the Admiralty Islands, located north of mainland Papua New Guinea, and updated our previous data from Asia, Melanesia and Polynesia with new NRY markers. The Admiralties are occupied today solely by Austronesian-speaking groups, but their human settlement history goes back 20,000 years prior to the arrival of Austronesians about 3,400 years ago. On the Admiralties we found substantial mtDNA and NRY variation of both Austronesian and non-Austronesian origin, with higher frequencies of Asian mtDNA and Melanesian NRY haplogroups, similar to previous findings in Polynesia, and perhaps as consequence of Austronesian matrilocality. Thus, the Austronesian language replacement on the Admiralties (and elsewhere in Island Melanesia and coastal New Guinea) was accompanied by an incomplete genetic replacement that is more associated with mtDNA than with NRY diversity. These results provide further support for the "Slow Boat" model of Polynesian origins, according to which Polynesian ancestors originated from East Asia but genetically mixed with Melanesians before colonizing the Pacific. We also observed that non-Austronesian groups of coastal New Guinea and Island Melanesia had significantly higher frequencies of Asian mtDNA haplogroups than of Asian NRY haplogroups, suggesting sex-biased admixture perhaps as a consequence of non-Austronesian patrilocality. We additionally found that the predominant NRY haplogroup of Asian origin in the Admiralties (O-M110) likely originated in Taiwan, thus providing the first direct Y-chromosome evidence for a Taiwanese origin of the Austronesian expansion. Furthermore, we identified a NRY haplogroup (K-P79, also found on the Admiralties) in Polynesians that most likely arose in the Bismarck Archipelago, providing the first direct link between northern Island Melanesia and Polynesia. These results significantly advance our understanding of the impact of the Austronesian expansion and of human history in the Pacific region.