The genomic origins of the Bronze Age Tarim Basin mummies.

The identity of the earliest inhabitants of Xinjiang, in the heart of Inner Asia, and the languages that they spoke have long been debated and remain contentious1. Here we present genomic data from 5 individuals dating to around 3000-2800 BC from the Dzungarian Basin and 13 individuals dating to around 2100-1700 BC from the Tarim Basin, representing the earliest yet discovered human remains from North and South Xinjiang, respectively. We find that the Early Bronze Age Dzungarian individuals exhibit a predominantly Afanasievo ancestry with an additional local contribution, and the Early-Middle Bronze Age Tarim individuals contain only a local ancestry. The Tarim individuals from the site of Xiaohe further exhibit strong evidence of milk proteins in their dental calculus, indicating a reliance on dairy pastoralism at the site since its founding. Our results do not support previous hypotheses for the origin of the Tarim mummies, who were argued to be Proto-Tocharian-speaking pastoralists descended from the Afanasievo1,2 or to have originated among the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex3 or Inner Asian Mountain Corridor cultures4. Instead, although Tocharian may have been plausibly introduced to the Dzungarian Basin by Afanasievo migrants during the Early Bronze Age, we find that the earliest Tarim Basin cultures appear to have arisen from a genetically isolated local population that adopted neighbouring pastoralist and agriculturalist practices, which allowed them to settle and thrive along the shifting riverine oases of the Taklamakan Desert.

Genomic insights into the formation of human populations in East Asia.

The deep population history of East Asia remains poorly understood owing to a lack of ancient DNA data and sparse sampling of present-day people1,2. Here we report genome-wide data from 166 East Asian individuals dating to between 6000 BC and AD 1000 and 46 present-day groups. Hunter-gatherers from Japan, the Amur River Basin, and people of Neolithic and Iron Age Taiwan and the Tibetan Plateau are linked by a deeply splitting lineage that probably reflects a coastal migration during the Late Pleistocene epoch. We also follow expansions during the subsequent Holocene epoch from four regions. First, hunter-gatherers from Mongolia and the Amur River Basin have ancestry shared by individuals who speak Mongolic and Tungusic languages, but do not carry ancestry characteristic of farmers from the West Liao River region (around 3000 BC), which contradicts theories that the expansion of these farmers spread the Mongolic and Tungusic proto-languages. Second, farmers from the Yellow River Basin (around 3000 BC) probably spread Sino-Tibetan languages, as their ancestry dispersed both to Tibet-where it forms approximately 84% of the gene pool in some groups-and to the Central Plain, where it has contributed around 59-84% to modern Han Chinese groups. Third, people from Taiwan from around 1300 BC to AD 800 derived approximately 75% of their ancestry from a lineage that is widespread in modern individuals who speak Austronesian, Tai-Kadai and Austroasiatic languages, and that we hypothesize derives from farmers of the Yangtze River Valley. Ancient people from Taiwan also derived about 25% of their ancestry from a northern lineage that is related to, but different from, farmers of the Yellow River Basin, which suggests an additional north-to-south expansion. Fourth, ancestry from Yamnaya Steppe pastoralists arrived in western Mongolia after around 3000 BC but was displaced by previously established lineages even while it persisted in western China, as would be expected if this ancestry was associated with the spread of proto-Tocharian Indo-European languages. Two later gene flows affected western Mongolia: migrants after around 2000 BC with Yamnaya and European farmer ancestry, and episodic influences of later groups with ancestry from Turan.

Ancient DNA and multimethod dating confirm the late arrival of anatomically modern humans in southern China.

The expansion of anatomically modern humans (AMHs) from Africa around 65,000 to 45,000 y ago (ca. 65 to 45 ka) led to the establishment of present-day non-African populations. Some paleoanthropologists have argued that fossil discoveries from Huanglong, Zhiren, Luna, and Fuyan caves in southern China indicate one or more prior dispersals, perhaps as early as ca. 120 ka. We investigated the age of the human remains from three of these localities and two additional early AMH sites (Yangjiapo and Sanyou caves, Hubei) by combining ancient DNA (aDNA) analysis with a multimethod geological dating strategy. Although U-Th dating of capping flowstones suggested they lie within the range ca. 168 to 70 ka, analyses of aDNA and direct AMS 14C dating on human teeth from Fuyan and Yangjiapo caves showed they derive from the Holocene. OSL dating of sediments and AMS 14C analysis of mammal teeth and charcoal also demonstrated major discrepancies from the flowstone ages; the difference between them being an order of magnitude or more at most of these localities. Our work highlights the surprisingly complex depositional history recorded at these subtropical caves which involved one or more episodes of erosion and redeposition or intrusion as recently as the late Holocene. In light of our findings, the first appearance datum for AMHs in southern China should probably lie within the timeframe set by molecular data of ca. 50 to 45 ka.

Post-last glacial maximum expansion of Y-chromosome haplogroup C2a-L1373 in northern Asia and its implications for the origin of Native Americans.

OBJECTIVES: Subbranches of Y-chromosome haplogroup C2a-L1373 are founding paternal lineages in northern Asia and Native American populations. Our objective was to investigate C2a-L1373 differentiation in northern Asia and its implications for Native American origins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sequences of rare subbranches (n = 43) and ancient individuals (n = 37) of C2a-L1373 (including P39 and MPB373), were used to construct phylogenetic trees with age estimation by BEAST software. RESULTS: C2a-L1373 expanded rapidly approximately 17.7,000-14.3,000 years ago (kya) after the last glacial maximum (LGM), generating numerous sublineages which became founding paternal lineages of modern northern Asian and Native American populations (C2a-P39 and C2a-MPB373). The divergence pattern supports possible initiation of differentiation in low latitude regions of northern Asia and northward diffusion after the LGM. There is a substantial gap between the divergence times of C2a-MPB373 (approximately 22.4 or 17.7 kya) and C2a-P39 (approximately 14.3 kya), indicating two possible migration waves. DISCUSSION: We discussed the decreasing time interval of "Beringian standstill" (2.5 ky or smaller) and its reduced significance. We also discussed the multiple possibilities for the peopling of the Americas: the "Long-term Beringian standstill model," the "Short-term Beringian standstill model," and the "Multiple waves of migration model." Our results support the argument from ancient DNA analyses that the direct ancestor group of Native Americans is an admixture of "Ancient Northern Siberians" and Paleolithic communities from the Amur region, which appeared during the post-LGM era, rather than ancient populations in greater Beringia, or an adjacent region, before the LGM.

Uniparental Genetic Analyses Reveal the Major Origin of Fujian Tanka from Ancient Indigenous Daic Populations.

The Fujian Tanka people are officially classified as a southern Han ethnic group, whereas they have customs similar to Daic and Austronesion people. Whether they originated in Han or Daic people, there is no consensus. Three hypotheses have been proposed to explain the origin of this group: (1) the Han Chinese origin, (2) the ancient Daic origin, (3) and the admixture between Daic and Han. This study addressed this issue by analyzing the paternal Y chromosome and maternal mtDNA variation of 62 Fujian Tanka and 25 neighboring Han in Fujian. The southern East Asian predominant haplogroups (e.g., Y-chromosome O1a1a-P203 and O1b1a1a-M95, and mtDNA F2a, M7c1, and F1a1) had relatively high frequencies in Tanka. The interpopulation comparison revealed that the Tanka have a closer affinity with Daic populations than with Han Chinese in paternal lineages but are closely clustered with southern Han populations such as Hakka and Chaoshanese in maternal lineages. Network and haplotype-sharing analyses also support the admixture hypothesis. The Fujian Tanka mainly originate from the ancient indigenous Daic people and have only limited gene flows from Han Chinese populations. Notably, the divergence time inferred by the Tanka-specific haplotypes indicates that the formation of Fujian Tanka was a least 1033.8-1050.6 years before present (the early Northern Song dynasty), indicating that they are an indigenous population, not late Daic migrants from southwestern China.