4.3 Article

Genetic substructure in South African Bantu-speakers: Evidence from autosomal DNA and Y-chromosome studies

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 119, Issue 2, Pages 175-185

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.10097

Keywords

F-ST; genetic differentiation; correlations

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The extent of genetic differentiation between seven South African Bantu-speaking groups (Zulu, Xhosa, Tsonga/Shangaan, Southern Sotho, Pedi, Tswana, and Venda) was assessed from coancestry coefficients (F-ST) estimated from autosomal serogenetic, DNA, and Y-chromosome DNA haplotypes. The overall F-ST obtained from the autosomal data was 0.002, and that from the Y chromosome data was 0.014. The genetic relationships between groups examined were inferred from their cluster affinities in phylogenetic trees constructed from the genetic distances between them. Both autosomal and Y-chromosome DNA studies reveal that 6 of the 7 South African Bantu-speaking groups cluster according to their linguistic groupings, the exception being the Tsonga, who do not cluster with other Nguni language speakers, but rather with the Venda who live close to them. This suggests that the invading Shangaan-speakers, whose Nguni language was adopted by the Tsonga, did not have a major effect on the Tsonga gene pool, and that gene flow from the Venda into the Tsonga may have been considerable. Genetic distances were found to correlate with geographic distances between the regions where each group's apparent population density is the highest. Linguistic distances were also found to correlate with genetic distances, but linguistic and geographic distances showed no correlation. Together,. these results suggest that linguistic and some genetic differentiation took place before the groups (or their forerunners) reached their present-day locations, and that further genetic change occurred after their arrival. (C) 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available