Tai-Kadai mtDNA F1a1’4 in the Majiabang culture of Lower Yangtze (possibly affected by Near East)

[Oasis]

Ebizur (the Japanese person) is interested in the finding of the ancient mtDNA F1a1’4 in the Lower Yangtze Majiabang culture, where some Japanese are searching for their homeland. This mtDNA F1a1’4 was attributed to the Kra-Dai (Tai-Kadai) language family representatives by the researchers. However, one should remember that this mtDNA F1a1’4 branches were possibly influenced by the gene flow from the Near East. Unlike this, yDNA O1b-M268 who possibly interacted with yDNA N-M231 representatives in China, were not accompanied by mtDNA F1a1’4 branches, as such branches were not detected in ancient yDNA N-M231-related populations in ancient DNA.

Wuxi, Jiangsu Province obtained the first time that ancient human DNA dating back 6000,<> years was obtained
9/18/2023, 1:53:48 AM

Highlights: The East China Workstation of the Key Scientific Research Base of the State Administration of Cultural Heritage on the Protection of Cultural Relics at the Archaeological Excavation Site was inaugurated in Wuxi, Jiangsu Province. The seminar on preventive protection and restoration of cultural relics excavated under the background of national archaeology was held on the 17th. At the unveiling ceremony, the Institute of Culturalrelics and Archaeology and Fudan University jointly released a human bone detection report during the Majiabang culture period.

Wuxi, September 9 (Reporter Sun Quan) On the 17th, the seminar on preventive protection and restoration of cultural relics excavated under the background of national archaeology and the unveiling ceremony of the East China Workstation of the Key Scientific Research Base of the State Administration of Cultural Heritage on the Protection of Cultural Relics at the Archaeological Excavation Site were held in Wuxi, Jiangsu Province.

The East China Workstation of the Key Scientific Research Base of the State Administration of Cultural Heritage for the Protection of Cultural Relics at the archaeological excavation site was inaugurated. Photo courtesy of Wuxi Taihu National Tourism Resort Rong Media Center

At the unveiling ceremony, Wuxi Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Fudan University jointly released a latest scientific and technological archaeological achievement - human bone detection report during the Majiabang culture period at the Ma'an site in Wuxi.

"For the first time, we have successfully obtained ancient human genome data from the Majiabang culture period 6000,<> years ago, filling the gap in ancient DNA research in southern China due to environmental impact and poor preservation. At present, ancient DNA data in the Yangtze River Basin are still limited, and it is important to carry out this work. Du Panxin, a postdoctoral fellow at the Institute of Science and Technology Archaeology of Fudan University, said when releasing the report.

The Majiabang culture is the earliest Neolithic culture found in the Wuxi area. In June this year, the Wuxi Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology carried out laboratory archaeological exploration of two tombs from the Majiabang culture period more than 6,6000 years ago, and at the same time carried out public archaeological practice education in the form of online live broadcasts, opening the "blind box" that had been sealed for more than 6000,<> years.

In the "blind box", archaeologists found two ancient skeletons. At that time, the Institute of Science and Technology Archaeology of Fudan University extracted two skeleton samples, and successfully extracted ancient DNA from one of the skeletons.

Du Panxin introduced that the sample was male, and its maternal genetic type belonged to haplogroup F1a1'4. The search compared published mitochondrial DNA data extracted from ancient regions and existed in ancient sites in northern Vietnam (4000-2000 years ago), northern Laos (3000 years ago), Indonesia (2000 years ago), the Philippines (1800 years ago), Guangxi (1500 years ago), and hanging coffins in northern Thailand (2500-800 years ago).

"By comparing this genetic type of the ancient people of the Majiabang culture at the Wuxi saddle site with the genetic lineage of modern language groups, we believe that the ancient people of the Wuxi saddle site may be related to the ancestors of the Dongtai-speaking population." Du Panxin said.

It is reported that after the establishment of the East China Workstation, the key scientific research base of the State Administration of Cultural Heritage for the protection of cultural relics at the archaeological excavation site, the main tasks include vigorously developing basic research on cultural relics protection and archaeological application, strengthening the construction of talent teams, strengthening the transformation and application of scientific research achievements, and deepening scientific and technological cooperation and academic exchanges at home and abroad. (End)

Source: chinanews

[Oasis]

また、民間の幾つかの遺伝子検査会社によれば、O-K10/O-F1204の最も近い共通祖先の推定年代は約8,370年前[7]、

You lowered the age of O1b2-K10 ancestral to your O1b2-47z in order to better fit the distribution of this mtDNA F1a1’4 from the Majiabang culture of the Lower Yangtze.

Then how you explain that mtDNA F1a1’4 is so widely distributed in the populations of the Tai-Kadai language family, followed by the Austroasiatic Vietnamese and the Austronesians, but mtDNA F1a1’4 is quite rare in the Japanese?

[Oasis]

The mysterious Majiabang culture…
Though the Majiabang culture were not the most ancient rice farmes in East Asia, they were still an ancient rice farming culture.

The Japanese people claimed that such cultures in the Lower Yangtze River basin were their homeland.

However, the geographic and ethnic scope of the distribution of ca. 8200-year-old mtDNA F1a1’4 discovered in this culture’s ancient DNA is really wide. The Japanese have only 1,52% of F1a1, while Japonic-speaking Ryukyuans lack this mtDNA lineage (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC524407/)

The wide range of East Asian populations where mtDNA F1a1’4 is distributed quite resembles the distribution of the so called hypothetical linguistic macrofamilies:


[1] The more well substantiated Austro-Tai macrofamily proposed by Paul Benedict, where the author revealed at least some fragmentary reconstruction of common linguistic traits of Miao-Yao, Tai-Kadai, Austronesian and Japanese languages:

OR
[2] The core of the even less explained Austric macrofamily by John Bengston composed of Austronesian, Tai-Kadai, Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien:


Thus, it is not impossible that some populations distributed rice farming from the Majiabang culture, and they partially, to a smaller or larger degree, influenced the formation of Tai-Kadai, Miao-Yao, Austroasiatic, Austronesian and Japonic populations.

However, the Japanese anthropologist Hirofumi Matsumura issued his artice that Austronesians and Austroasiatics formed under the Northern Eurasian influence, which would leave cultures such as the Majiabang culture solely to the Japanese.

[b]Nonetheless, the study of the ancient DNA in "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" revealed rare ancient samples of relevant ethnic minorities in China which had small Western Eurasian influences, and showed that clines, along which these Western Eurasian-influenced samples are located unite in the Japanese people. This also includes the infamous Neandethal-like influence on the formation of Austronesians. It can be shown that the yDNA “northern C2-M217” of Devil’s Gate having mtDNA D4m with Neanderthal mutations exerted the same influence on an Austronesian-related sample, populations shifted in the direction of the Native American drift as the population carrying G417A mutation did. The Western Eurasian-influenced samples belonged to some ancestors of Tai-Kadai, Austronesians, Miao-Yao and Austroasiatics. However, their clines unite in the Japanese people.

Thus, the situation reversed contrary to the expectations of Hirofumi Matsumura. Some relatives of Tai-Kadai, Austronesians, Miao-Yao and Austroasiatics were represented by “pure East Asian” samples, while the formation of the Japanese people occurred under the influence of ancient samples influenced by Western Eurasians. The coming of Western Eurasian infliuences occurred on the territory to the south of the Majiabang culture prior to the formation of the Majiabang culture, and later Western Eurasian-influenced populations interacted with other populations related to the Majiabang culture.

[Oasis]

• W3a
o W3a1 – Armenians,[18] Turkey, Italy,[19] Poland, Berbers from Morocco[20]
 W3a1a
 W3a1a1 – Polish people, Ashkenazi Jews[21]
 W3a1a2 - Russia (Nizhny Novgorod Oblast[22], Tatar from Buinsk[23][22])
 W3a1a3 - Poland (Podkarpackie[22]), United States[22]
 W3a1b – Pakistan, India,[24] Thailand
 W3a1-T199C
 W3a1c - England[22], United States[22], Slovakia[22], Russia (Ryazan Oblast[22], Tambov Oblast[22], Bashkortostan[22]), Kazakhstan[22], China (Daur[22][25])
 W3a1d – Hungarians,[26][27] Serbia[28], Republika Srpska[22], Latvia[22], Poland[22], Ukraine[22], Russia (Ulyanovsk Oblast[22], Yakuts[29][22]), New Zealand[22]
o W3a2 – Poland, India,[30] Uygurs from China

Those who help you may be partially thinking in the right direction, but your choice of the modern mtDNA lineage to better fit your personal views is misleading.
As for W3a1b, it was detected in Iran_EMBA, according to “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China”:
Iran_EMBA_I11459 Iran_EMBA W3a1b - Iran 4703 0,90 Narasimhan et al., 2019
Iran_EMBA_I11456 Iran_EMBA W3a1b - Iran 4500 0,92 Narasimhan et al., 2019

The article “Ancient Xinjiang mitogenomes reveal intense admixture with high genetic diversity” calls the Xinjiang connection to Iran_Calcholithic and Iran_EMBA “the Turan connection”, which may cause an association with “Turanism”.

“The South IA population shows a Turan connection (SZGLK_IA, FST < 0.03, P > 0.05 in Iran_C and Iran_EMBA), similar to the W_IA (Fig. 2B)”

Thus, the coming of W3a1b and other W3a1 lineages to Eastern Eurasia was quite late and was possibly accompanied by some modern Near Eastern-related lineages which are today observed in “Altaic-speaking” populations, including the Yakut.

Unlike this, the basal mtDNA W* may be found in China not so far from the territory of the Majiabang culture’s province. The most correct Palaeolithic source for this lineage and Q-M120 in China would be the population related to the sample of AR19K (yDNA northern C2-M217, mtDNA G2). In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, other Kolyma-related samples are not more closely related to Kolymaa than to AR19K. Thus, the AR19K, “the first East Asian in the north” was the first to interact with various Western Eurasian-related entities and the AR19K became a substratum for other ancient East Asians. The AR19K clustered in the direct vicinity of the Japanese people in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. This explains why their population can look like a source for such a Western Eurasian affinity.

The connection described above was related to Homo Sapiens. The mutation A10398G contained in branches of mtDNA W is the mutation of anatomically modern humans and it is present in numerous Homo Sapiens mtDNA haplogroups. The appearance of Homo Heidelbergensis mutations was additionally caused by some mtDNA related to mtDNA R1b AfontovaGora3 who had a southern counterpart with the same affinity named Longlin. According to "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago", both waves, the southern wave and the northern wave, united in the ancient Late Palaeolithic (94%+6%) sample of Qihe3 (11747–11356 years ago) to the south of the Majiabang culture. The Qihe3 sample may be the source of some influences. In “Genomic inference of a severe human bottleneck during the Early to Middle Pleistocene transition”, the Yakut only have an ancestry which started to separate from Africans 206684 years ago which is within the range of human separations within Africa, while the Japanese people, who often say that they have low Neanderthal (and low Denisovan caused by the Dai people in the opinion of Kanzawa-Kiriyama) started to separate from Africans 357997 years ago… In any case, mtDNA R1b virtually did not survive in modern populations.