4.8 Article

Evolutionary History of Continental Southeast Asians: Early Train Hypothesis Based on Genetic Analysis of Mitochondrial and Autosomal DNA Data

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 29, 期 11, 页码 3513-3527

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/mss169

关键词

Austronesian; Negrito; mitochondrial DNA; Southeast Asia; Orang Asli

资金

  1. University of Malaya [FP066-2007C]
  2. Monash University (Sunway Campus) [5140060]
  3. SOKENDAI Strategic Research Project Grant
  4. Max Planck Society
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23247040] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The population history of the indigenous populations in island Southeast Asia is generally accepted to have been shaped by two major migrations: the ancient Out of Africa migration similar to 50,000 years before present (YBP) and the relatively recent Out of Taiwan expansion of Austronesian agriculturalists approximately 5,000 YBP. The Negritos are believed to have originated from the ancient migration, whereas the majority of island Southeast Asians are associated with the Austronesian expansion. We determined 86 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) complete genome sequences in four indigenous Malaysian populations, together with a reanalysis of published autosomal single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data of Southeast Asians to test the plausibility and impact of those migration models. The three Austronesian groups (Bidayuh, Selatar, and Temuan) showed high frequencies of mtDNA haplogroups, which originated from the Asian mainland similar to 30,000-10,000 YBP, but low frequencies of Out of Taiwan markers. Principal component analysis and phylogenetic analysis using autosomal SNP data indicate a dichotomy between continental and island Austronesian groups. We argue that both the mtDNA and autosomal data suggest an Early Train migration originating from Indochina or South China around the late-Pleistocene to early-Holocene period, which predates, but may not necessarily exclude, the Austronesian expansion.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据