Comments on: Language, genes, & peoples of Southeast Asia http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/language-genes-peoples-of-southeast-asia/ Wed, 22 May 2013 18:12:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Razib Khan http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/language-genes-peoples-of-southeast-asia/#comment-34067 Razib Khan Thu, 16 Jun 2011 20:55:15 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12359#comment-34067 <i> but I’m not sure what to make of it. I imagine the varying levels of Austronesian admixture throw it off, but the Singapore Han and Taiwanese Han have almost identical bars but are still not put in the same clade. </i> the taiwanese would be 90% from fujian. the singapore han would be more more like 50% from fujian i think (with cantonese, baba, hakka, and even people from north china in the mix there). the paraphyly of the han shows up in several of these sorts of analyses. depends on coverage and the reference populations. but I’m not sure what to make of it. I imagine the varying levels of Austronesian admixture throw it off, but the Singapore Han and Taiwanese Han have almost identical bars but are still not put in the same clade.

the taiwanese would be 90% from fujian. the singapore han would be more more like 50% from fujian i think (with cantonese, baba, hakka, and even people from north china in the mix there). the paraphyly of the han shows up in several of these sorts of analyses. depends on coverage and the reference populations.

]]> By: Miley Cyrax http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/language-genes-peoples-of-southeast-asia/#comment-34066 Miley Cyrax Thu, 16 Jun 2011 20:27:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12359#comment-34066 In the figure from the HUGO Pan-Asia data, the Han are consistently paraphyletic... but I'm not sure what to make of it. I imagine the varying levels of Austronesian admixture throw it off, but the Singapore Han and Taiwanese Han have almost identical bars but are still not put in the same clade. Other than the Han and the Thais (who are scattered all over the place), the cladogram is just about what one might had expected. In the figure from the HUGO Pan-Asia data, the Han are consistently paraphyletic… but I’m not sure what to make of it. I imagine the varying levels of Austronesian admixture throw it off, but the Singapore Han and Taiwanese Han have almost identical bars but are still not put in the same clade. Other than the Han and the Thais (who are scattered all over the place), the cladogram is just about what one might had expected.

]]> By: Razib Khan http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/language-genes-peoples-of-southeast-asia/#comment-34065 Razib Khan Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:27:07 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12359#comment-34065 #1, http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5959/1541/F1.large.jpg i don't know that much southeast asian history, but it does look like the model you're positing works. it's kind of what i had in mind without knowing as much as you about the the region. #1,

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5959/1541/F1.large.jpg

i don’t know that much southeast asian history, but it does look like the model you’re positing works. it’s kind of what i had in mind without knowing as much as you about the the region.

]]> By: Eurasian Sensation http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/language-genes-peoples-of-southeast-asia/#comment-34064 Eurasian Sensation Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:42:22 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12359#comment-34064 The red element in the Malays and Indonesians is interesting in comparison to the lack of it in the Taiwanese and Filipino groups. Might that indicate that Austro-Asiatics were early immigrants to the archipelago, only to be culturally swamped by Austronesians moving southwest from the Philippines? It'd be interesting to see how much, if at all, that red element appears in Eastern Indonesia and Polynesia. Austro-Asiatic languages turn up in two interesting places which might illuminate this picture. Firstly, the Munda in Eastern India, and secondly the Negrito Orang Asli of central Malaysia, who are genetically distinct and are generally thought to have adopted those languages via farmers around them. So it seems like the Austro-Asiatics might have been the first rice farmers in the region, with the mastery of rice cultivation causing an explosion of their populations out of southern China, as far as India and Indonesia. Then gradually the other groups - Tibeto-Burman, Tai and Austronesian - invaded and dominated what were once Austro-Asiatic domains. The red element in the Malays and Indonesians is interesting in comparison to the lack of it in the Taiwanese and Filipino groups.
Might that indicate that Austro-Asiatics were early immigrants to the archipelago, only to be culturally swamped by Austronesians moving southwest from the Philippines?

It’d be interesting to see how much, if at all, that red element appears in Eastern Indonesia and Polynesia.

Austro-Asiatic languages turn up in two interesting places which might illuminate this picture. Firstly, the Munda in Eastern India, and secondly the Negrito Orang Asli of central Malaysia, who are genetically distinct and are generally thought to have adopted those languages via farmers around them. So it seems like the Austro-Asiatics might have been the first rice farmers in the region, with the mastery of rice cultivation causing an explosion of their populations out of southern China, as far as India and Indonesia. Then gradually the other groups – Tibeto-Burman, Tai and Austronesian – invaded and dominated what were once Austro-Asiatic domains.

]]>