Google

蓝海人类学在线 Ryan WEI's Forum of Anthropology

 找回密码
 注册
查看: 7113|回复: 9

Reconstructing Austronesian population history.

[复制链接]
发表于 2013-9-11 14:59 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Reconstructing Austronesian population history.
M. Lipson et al.
   Present-day populations that speak Austronesian languages are spread across half the globe, from Easter Island in the Pacific Ocean to Madagascar in the Indian Ocean. Evidence from linguistics and archaeology suggests that the "Austronesian expansion," a vast cultural and linguistic dispersal that began 4--5 thousand years ago, had its origin in Taiwan. However, genetic studies of Austronesian ancestry have been inconclusive, with some finding affinities with aboriginal Taiwanese, others advancing an autochthonous origin within Island Southeast Asia, and others proposing a model involving multiple waves of migration from Asia. Here, we analyze genome-wide data from a diverse set of 31 Austronesian-speaking and 25 other groups typed at 18,412 overlapping single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to trace the genetic origins of Austronesians. We use a recently developed computational tool for building phylogenetic models of population relationships incorporating the possibility of admixture, which allows us to infer ancestry proportions and sources of genetic material for 26 admixed Austronesian-speaking populations. Our analysis provides strong confirmation of widespread ancestry of Taiwanese origin: at least a quarter of the genetic material in all Austronesian-speaking populations that we studied---including all of the Asian ancestry in populations from eastern Indonesia and Oceania---is more closely related to aboriginal Taiwanese than to any populations we sampled from the mainland. Surprisingly, we also show that western Austronesian-speaking populations have inherited substantial proportions of their Asian ancestry from a source that falls within the variation of present-day Austro-Asiatic populations in Southeast Asia. No Austro-Asiatic languages are spoken in Island Southeast Asia today, although there are some linguistic and archaeological suggestions of an early connection between mainland and island populations. The most plausible explanation for these findings, in light of the historical evidence, is that western Island Southeast Asia was settled by Austronesian groups who had previously mixed with Austro-Asiatic speakers on the mainland.
 楼主| 发表于 2013-9-11 15:23 | 显示全部楼层
Our analysis provides strong confirmation of widespread ancestry of Taiwanese origin: at least a quarter of the genetic material in all Austronesian-speaking populations that we studied---including all of the Asian ancestry in populations from eastern Indonesia and Oceania---is more closely related to aboriginal Taiwanese than to any populations we sampled from the mainland.

Surprisingly, we also show that western Austronesian-speaking populations have inherited substantial proportions of their Asian ancestry from a source that falls within the variation of present-day Austro-Asiatic populations in Southeast Asia.

本研究分析顯示,東南亞島嶼的南島語族人群的常染色體SNP,其中起碼有四分之一的遺傳組成與台灣原住民的關係密切程度大於任何本研究涉及東南亞大陸人群。

特別值得注意的是,東南亞島嶼西部的南島語族人群(例如:印尼群島西部),除了來自台灣的影響,亦相當大程度繼承了源自東南亞大陸的南亞語族遺傳組成。本研究發現,顯然與先前印尼群島西部的南島語族高頻O2a,有互相呼應的關係。但本研究認為,這是南島語族渡海南下的時候,沿途經過中南半島的南亞語族聚居區產生的混血融合,並將此混血結構帶到東南亞島嶼西部地區。另外一種解釋是,除了南島語族南下至東南亞島嶼西部,在此之前或之後亦有南亞語族陸續遷移該地區。根據某些考古及語言學研究,婆羅洲某些南島語疑似有南亞語底層影響,此為南亞語族曾經駐足該地區的可能證據,他們後來在語言文化上被南島語族所同化。
发表于 2013-9-11 17:23 | 显示全部楼层
不是说台湾和东南亚的南岛语都来自北部湾吗
发表于 2013-9-11 19:36 | 显示全部楼层
5# linxiao 《澳泰族群的遗传结构》李辉,当然应该是一家之说
发表于 2013-9-12 07:44 | 显示全部楼层
5# linxiao


O2a比这两个语族古老多了。而且常染色体方面,广西的壮族没有南亚语族特有的成份,广东的汉族只有澳岱语人群底层没有南亚语人群特有的底层。
发表于 2013-9-14 12:59 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2013-9-14 13:41 编辑

从mtDNA看,我现在的观点是澳泰族群的原乡是西南壮侗族群分布的西南地区,台湾原住民的母系构成中有一定比例的F3b/F4b,这在古代的百越地区,也就是浙江至两广的沿海地区是很少见的。反而是中国傣族和泰国人的F3b/F4b都较多,而且两者的相对比例也与台湾和南岛族群接近。所以我基本上支持李辉的观点。
大陆东南的百越族群是以高B4而不是以高F3b/F4b为特征的,仅这一点就能把百越和台湾原住族群清楚地区分开来。所以东南地区不太可能是澳泰族群的原乡。
F34.png
发表于 2013-9-14 13:30 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 baiyueren 于 2013-9-14 13:41 编辑

此外,从岛屿东南亚F3b/F4b高发的地区可以看出,与台湾移民相关联的主要是菲律宾和印尼婆罗洲,西印尼的苏门答腊的F4和松巴岛的F3b更有可能是来自大陆东南亚的影响,
发表于 2013-9-14 18:48 | 显示全部楼层
侗台其实是南岛化的南亚而已,主体还是南亚,广东可能介于南岛和南亚之间,广西老挝泰国就更偏南亚了
sahaliyan 发表于 2013-9-14 18:13

萨哈对南方的感性认识和理性认识都太欠缺了,我觉得8楼的guwei比你说的贴切得多。
广西是壮侗(台卡岱语)、南亚、苗瑶三者混杂。广东主要是百越(台卡岱语)、苗瑶混杂,根本不关南亚太多事。
发表于 2013-9-14 18:53 | 显示全部楼层
其实就父系O1和O2属于很早就分离的同一大支(可能还有母系B4和B5)来说,澳泰的起源地当然更有可能是到百越-马来和南亚-苗瑶最纠缠不清的地区去找。
 楼主| 发表于 2013-10-19 03:33 | 显示全部楼层
Crossing the Luzon Strait: Archaeological Chronology in the Batanes Islands, Philippines and the Regional Sequence of Neolithic Dispersal

Atholl Anderson

http://beta.nmp.gov.tw/main/07/7-3/3-3-2/2.025-045.pdf

"In reviewing the chronological data in relation to linguistic and archaeological evidence, the existence of at least two neolithic dispersals can be proposed (Figure 5). Neolithic I, if it can be called that, may be represented by expansion from South China through Thailand and Vietnam then through Malaya to Borneo, if not more widely, of basket or cord-marked ceramics amongst other types (but amongst which red-slipped pottery is scarce or absent). This seems to have occurred relatively early and it has been associated, in part at least, with the expansion of Austroasiatic languages (Higham 2004). It is not necessarily a neolithic defined exclusively by agricultural expansion. At Gua Sireh, in Borneo there is rice at about 2500 BC but at Nong Nor, in coastal Thailand, and quite widely in coastal Vietnam, there are middle-Holocene sites containing polished stone tools and pottery, but no sign of food production (Higham 2004, Su 1997)."

這篇考古論文提出,島嶼東南亞曾經有兩波來自不同方向的新石器人群。Neolithic I來自中南半島,傳播至印尼西部和婆羅洲的時間比較早,已經有磨製石器和陶器,但是沒有真正意義上的農業,Higham認為Neolithic I可能和南亞語族有關係。再來是Neolithic II,來自台灣經菲律賓到印尼,發生的時間比較晚,這就是南島語族的南向擴張,他們帶來真正的農業。

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|人类生物学在线 ( 苏ICP备16053048号 )

GMT+8, 2020-7-11 12:35 , Processed in 0.189823 second(s), 23 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表