2016年，对波利尼西亚人祖先的dna常染分析
波人起源研究的最新成果。该研究已被收录进英文维基百科。
Abstract
The appearance of people associated with the Lapita culture in the South Pacific around 3,000 years ago marked the beginning of the last major human dispersal to unpopulated lands. However, the relationship of these pioneers to the long-established Papuan people of the New Guinea region is unclear. Here we present genome-wide ancient DNA data from three individuals from Vanuatu (about 3,100-2,700 years before present) and one from Tonga (about 2,700-2,300 years before present), and analyse them with data from 778 present-day East Asians and Oceanians. Today, indigenous people of the South Pacific harbour a mixture of ancestry from Papuans and a population of East Asian origin that no longer exists in unmixed form, but is a match to the ancient individuals. Most analyses have interpreted the minimum of twenty-five per cent Papuan ancestry in the region today as evidence that the first humans to reach Remote Oceania, including Polynesia, were derived from population mixtures near New Guinea, before their further expansion into Remote Oceania. However, our finding that the ancient individuals had little to no Papuan ancestry implies that later human population movements spread Papuan ancestry through the South Pacific after the first peopling of the islands.
Recent DNA studies show that the Kankanaey along with theAtayal people of Taiwan, were most probably among the original ancestors of the Lapita people and modernPolynesians.[2][3] They might even reflect a better genetic match to the original Austronesian mariners than the aboriginal Taiwanese, as the latter were influenced by more recent migrations to Taiwan, whereas the Kankanaey are thought to have remained an isolated relict population.
The preliminary analysis of skulls found at the Teouma and Talasiu Lapita sites is that the skulls lacks Australian or Papuan affinities and instead has affinities to mainland Asian populations.
All other graphs for Tongans and Kolombangara have 32 or more outlier statistics,and Ȥ2 > 15. The second best fitting graph for Tongans posits that Tongans received theirAustronesian ancestry from the Atayal lineage, but this graph has 50 outlier f4-statistics; forexample f4(Yoruba, Tongan; Atayal, ancient Oceanians) which is predicted to be ~0 in this graphis empirically 0.021 (Z=9.6). In addition, this graph has a chi-squared statistic of Ȥ2 = 41compared to 1.6 for the best fitting graph. For Nasioi the second best fitting graph has 10 outlierstatistics, but a slightly smaller Ȥ2-statistic (5.3). We conclude that there is overwhelmingevidence that all three populations received their non-Papuan ancestry from a source mostclosely related to the Lapita_Vanuatu, which in this paper we call the First Remote Oceanianlineage
Abstract
The appearance of people associated with the Lapita culture in the South Pacific around 3,000 years ago marked the beginning of the last major human dispersal to unpopulated lands. However, the relationship of these pioneers to the long-established Papuan people of the New Guinea region is unclear. Here we present genome-wide ancient DNA data from three individuals from Vanuatu (about 3,100-2,700 years before present) and one from Tonga (about 2,700-2,300 years before present), and analyse them with data from 778 present-day East Asians and Oceanians. Today, indigenous people of the South Pacific harbour a mixture of ancestry from Papuans and a population of East Asian origin that no longer exists in unmixed form, but is a match to the ancient individuals. Most analyses have interpreted the minimum of twenty-five per cent Papuan ancestry in the region today as evidence that the first humans to reach Remote Oceania, including Polynesia, were derived from population mixtures near New Guinea, before their further expansion into Remote Oceania. However, our finding that the ancient individuals had little to no Papuan ancestry implies that later human population movements spread Papuan ancestry through the South Pacific after the first peopling of the islands.
Recent DNA studies show that the Kankanaey along with theAtayal people of Taiwan, were most probably among the original ancestors of the Lapita people and modernPolynesians.[2][3] They might even reflect a better genetic match to the original Austronesian mariners than the aboriginal Taiwanese, as the latter were influenced by more recent migrations to Taiwan, whereas the Kankanaey are thought to have remained an isolated relict population.
The preliminary analysis of skulls found at the Teouma and Talasiu Lapita sites is that the skulls lacks Australian or Papuan affinities and instead has affinities to mainland Asian populations.
All other graphs for Tongans and Kolombangara have 32 or more outlier statistics,and Ȥ2 > 15. The second best fitting graph for Tongans posits that Tongans received theirAustronesian ancestry from the Atayal lineage, but this graph has 50 outlier f4-statistics; forexample f4(Yoruba, Tongan; Atayal, ancient Oceanians) which is predicted to be ~0 in this graphis empirically 0.021 (Z=9.6). In addition, this graph has a chi-squared statistic of Ȥ2 = 41compared to 1.6 for the best fitting graph. For Nasioi the second best fitting graph has 10 outlierstatistics, but a slightly smaller Ȥ2-statistic (5.3). We conclude that there is overwhelmingevidence that all three populations received their non-Papuan ancestry from a source mostclosely related to the Lapita_Vanuatu, which in this paper we call the First Remote Oceanianlineage
最新研究表明，从常染体分析，波利尼西亚人的祖先与台湾泰雅人，菲律宾Kankanaey 人最为接近。他们的祖先应该是构成波利尼西亚人祖先的重要一部分。
三千年前，在南太平洋地区分布着Lapita文化，主要分布在美拉尼西亚群岛及波利尼西亚群岛的西部。由于台湾地区有与Lapita文化类似的陶器，加上语言学的证据,很多人都认为，Lapita文化起源于台湾，Lapita文化的创造者就是波利尼西亚人的祖先。但是由于美拉尼西亚群岛地区古代也存在Lapita文化，加上东南亚暂时没找到类似文化的遗物，这又使人联想到，Lapita文化是否来自美拉尼西亚人的祖先？波利尼西亚群岛地区与美拉尼西亚群岛地区都存在Lapita文化，是否意味着二个群体古代就有大量交流呢？
Lapita文化的创造者与现在的美拉尼西亚人的祖先又是什么关系呢？
2016年，有关研究者从四个Lapita文化遗址，提取了4个古代妇女的dna,进行了常染分析。三个在瓦努阿图（大约3,100-2,700年前 ），一个在汤加（大约2,700-2,300年前）。
研究人员将他们的常染与亚洲东部、大洋洲的778个现代群体进行了比较分析。
今天人们认为，波利尼西亚人是古代亚洲东部地区的居民与美拉尼西亚人的混血，纯“亚洲”的波利尼西亚人几乎已经找不到了，但是在古代的波利尼西亚人中能找到。许多研究发现，波利尼西亚人有25%的美拉尼西亚人成份，许多研究者据此推断，波利尼西亚人在到达现在的波利尼西亚群岛以前，已经与美拉尼西亚人进行了一定程度的混血。
然而，此次研究中发现，古代的波利尼西亚人（Lapita人）并没有美拉尼西亚人成份（或者很少）。这表明，波利尼西亚人的祖先是到达现在的波利尼西亚群岛以后，才逐渐受到美拉尼西亚人血统的影响的。
古波人的常染几乎无美拉尼西亚人成份，与现在的泰雅人、Kankanaey 人最接近。在颅骨形态方面，古波人也几乎无美拉尼西亚人成份，而与亚洲大陆居民最接近。
Lapita文化分布地区
相关群体种系发展关系
三千年前，在南太平洋地区分布着Lapita文化，主要分布在美拉尼西亚群岛及波利尼西亚群岛的西部。由于台湾地区有与Lapita文化类似的陶器，加上语言学的证据,很多人都认为，Lapita文化起源于台湾，Lapita文化的创造者就是波利尼西亚人的祖先。但是由于美拉尼西亚群岛地区古代也存在Lapita文化，加上东南亚暂时没找到类似文化的遗物，这又使人联想到，Lapita文化是否来自美拉尼西亚人的祖先？波利尼西亚群岛地区与美拉尼西亚群岛地区都存在Lapita文化，是否意味着二个群体古代就有大量交流呢？
Lapita文化的创造者与现在的美拉尼西亚人的祖先又是什么关系呢？
2016年，有关研究者从四个Lapita文化遗址，提取了4个古代妇女的dna,进行了常染分析。三个在瓦努阿图（大约3,100-2,700年前 ），一个在汤加（大约2,700-2,300年前）。
研究人员将他们的常染与亚洲东部、大洋洲的778个现代群体进行了比较分析。
今天人们认为，波利尼西亚人是古代亚洲东部地区的居民与美拉尼西亚人的混血，纯“亚洲”的波利尼西亚人几乎已经找不到了，但是在古代的波利尼西亚人中能找到。许多研究发现，波利尼西亚人有25%的美拉尼西亚人成份，许多研究者据此推断，波利尼西亚人在到达现在的波利尼西亚群岛以前，已经与美拉尼西亚人进行了一定程度的混血。
然而，此次研究中发现，古代的波利尼西亚人（Lapita人）并没有美拉尼西亚人成份（或者很少）。这表明，波利尼西亚人的祖先是到达现在的波利尼西亚群岛以后，才逐渐受到美拉尼西亚人血统的影响的。
古波人的常染几乎无美拉尼西亚人成份，与现在的泰雅人、Kankanaey 人最接近。在颅骨形态方面，古波人也几乎无美拉尼西亚人成份，而与亚洲大陆居民最接近。
Lapita文化分布地区
相关群体种系发展关系
在《Melanesian origin of Polynesian Y chromosomes》一文中，对学术界的相关假说进行了归纳。大至有以下三种假说。第一 大约在公元前3000年到公元前1000年，波利尼西亚人的祖先从台湾岛出发，途经菲律宾以及印度尼西亚东部地区。再从新几内亚岛东北部的“鸟头部分”出发，大约公元前1400年来到了美拉尼西亚岛屿地区。再从这里出发，大约公元前900年来到了现在的波利尼西亚西部地区。这一理论得到了大量的基因研究、语言学以及考古学的支持。第二 认为是东南亚岛屿地区的居民、澳洲土著居民、美拉尼西亚地区的居民，长期在文化上、基因上进行相互融合的结果。第三 大致与第一种理论类似，只是认为波利尼西亚人的祖先在美拉尼西亚地区停留了较长的时间。二者在基因、语言、文化等方面进行了融合。此外，在20世纪中期，挪威人类学家海耶达尔提出了波利尼西亚人的美洲起源论，认为波利尼西亚人来自加拿大东北海岸、以及南美洲。许多人类学家批评了这种说法，加拿大人类学家韦德·戴维斯指出：“这种看法是完全错误的，它无视语言学、民族学、民族植物学的显著证据，以及最新的基因研究以及考古学的证据”[1]
In 2016, researchers extracted the DNA from the petrous bone of three of the individuals buried at Teouma.[3]This is the first successful DNA extraction from ancient samples taken from the tropics.[4] The remains date to around 3,110 to 2,740 years old.[3]
DNA analysis confirmed that all three of the individuals were female. They all belong to Haplogroup B4a1a1a, the typical 'Polynesian motif'.[3]
aDNA analysis shows that the three individuals cluster together with another Lapita sample, dating to around 2,680 to 2,340 years old, taken from Talasiu, Tongatapu, Tonga; all together, the samples form a genetically distinct population when compared against modern populations.[3]
When compared against modern populations, the ancient samples from Teouma and Talasiu are genetically closest to the Ami and Atayal people from Taiwan, and the Kankanaey people from the northern Philippines, while sharing little similarity with modern Papuans.[3] According to Matthew Spriggs, the ancient population at Teouma came "straight out of Taiwan and perhaps the northern Philippines".[4]
这次研究发现，瓦努阿图的三个古代女性全是B4a1a1a，典型的波人母系。常染分析中，她们三人与一个古代汤加女性一起，单独构成一组，与现代人各群体有一定距离。相对而言，她们明显更接近台湾的泰雅族与阿美族，以及菲律宾的Kankanaey人。
DNA analysis confirmed that all three of the individuals were female. They all belong to Haplogroup B4a1a1a, the typical 'Polynesian motif'.[3]
aDNA analysis shows that the three individuals cluster together with another Lapita sample, dating to around 2,680 to 2,340 years old, taken from Talasiu, Tongatapu, Tonga; all together, the samples form a genetically distinct population when compared against modern populations.[3]
When compared against modern populations, the ancient samples from Teouma and Talasiu are genetically closest to the Ami and Atayal people from Taiwan, and the Kankanaey people from the northern Philippines, while sharing little similarity with modern Papuans.[3] According to Matthew Spriggs, the ancient population at Teouma came "straight out of Taiwan and perhaps the northern Philippines".[4]
这次研究发现，瓦努阿图的三个古代女性全是B4a1a1a，典型的波人母系。常染分析中，她们三人与一个古代汤加女性一起，单独构成一组，与现代人各群体有一定距离。相对而言，她们明显更接近台湾的泰雅族与阿美族，以及菲律宾的Kankanaey人。
此外，在2013年的一篇研究文章中，研究者研究了14具巴西印第安人（女性）
遗骨的mtDNA ，发现其中2人具有典型的波利尼西亚人的单倍群（B4a1a1a ）
，而其他12具是典型的美洲印第安人单倍群（c1）。这2位女性估计大约生活
在19世纪后半期。结合其他一些证据，这说明，很可能在欧洲殖民者到达美洲
以前，波利尼西亚人与印第安人就有过相互交流。
遗骨的mtDNA ，发现其中2人具有典型的波利尼西亚人的单倍群（B4a1a1a ）
，而其他12具是典型的美洲印第安人单倍群（c1）。这2位女性估计大约生活
在19世纪后半期。结合其他一些证据，这说明，很可能在欧洲殖民者到达美洲
以前，波利尼西亚人与印第安人就有过相互交流。