08-21-2006, 03:13 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Aug 21 2006, 01:08 AM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Aug 21 2006, 01:08 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Genetic affinities among the lower castes and tribal groups of India: inference from Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Results</b>
No significant difference was observed in the mitochondrial DNA between Indian tribal and caste populations, except for the presence of a higher frequency of west Eurasian-specific haplogroups in the higher castes, mostly in the north western part of India. On the other hand, the study of the Indian Y lineages revealed distinct distribution patterns among caste and tribal populations. The paternal lineages of Indian lower castes showed significantly closer affinity to the tribal populations than to the upper castes. The frequencies of deep-rooted Y haplogroups such as M89, M52, and M95 were higher in the lower castes and tribes, compared to the upper castes.
<b>Conclusions</b>
The present study suggests that the vast majority (>98%) of the Indian maternal gene pool, consisting of <b>Indio-European and Dravidian speakers</b>, is genetically more or less uniform. Invasions after the late Pleistocene settlement might have been mostly male-mediated. However, Y-SNP data provides compelling genetic evidence for a tribal origin of the lower caste populations in the subcontinent. Lower caste groups might have originated with the hierarchical divisions that arose within the tribal groups with the spread of Neolithic agriculturalists, much earlier than the arrival of <b>Aryan speakers</b>. The Indo-Europeans established themselves as upper castes among this already developed caste-like class structure within the tribes.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is another piece of crap.
Result make sense but conclusion is full of DMK manure.
[right][snapback]55919[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is a 2006 paper by Sahoo et al which has a statistically a good sample of Indian population and they have concluded :
" It is not necessary, based on the current evidence, to look beyond South Asia for the origins of the paternal heritage of the majority of Indians at the time of the onset of settled agriculture. The perennial concept of people, language, and agriculture arriving to India together through the northwest corridor does not hold up to close scrutiny. Recent claims for a linkage of haplogroups J2, L, R1a, and R2 with a contemporaneous origin for the majority of the Indian castes' paternal lineages from outside the subcontinent are rejected, although our findings do support a local origin of haplogroups F* and H."
The paper is here:
Sahoo et al
And do read this piece for the motivation of why the British Indologists came up with Aryan Invasion theory:
[URL= http://www.iskcon.com/icj/6_1/6_1klostermaier.html]Motivation for AIT[/URL]
-Digvijay
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Results</b>
No significant difference was observed in the mitochondrial DNA between Indian tribal and caste populations, except for the presence of a higher frequency of west Eurasian-specific haplogroups in the higher castes, mostly in the north western part of India. On the other hand, the study of the Indian Y lineages revealed distinct distribution patterns among caste and tribal populations. The paternal lineages of Indian lower castes showed significantly closer affinity to the tribal populations than to the upper castes. The frequencies of deep-rooted Y haplogroups such as M89, M52, and M95 were higher in the lower castes and tribes, compared to the upper castes.
<b>Conclusions</b>
The present study suggests that the vast majority (>98%) of the Indian maternal gene pool, consisting of <b>Indio-European and Dravidian speakers</b>, is genetically more or less uniform. Invasions after the late Pleistocene settlement might have been mostly male-mediated. However, Y-SNP data provides compelling genetic evidence for a tribal origin of the lower caste populations in the subcontinent. Lower caste groups might have originated with the hierarchical divisions that arose within the tribal groups with the spread of Neolithic agriculturalists, much earlier than the arrival of <b>Aryan speakers</b>. The Indo-Europeans established themselves as upper castes among this already developed caste-like class structure within the tribes.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is another piece of crap.
Result make sense but conclusion is full of DMK manure.
[right][snapback]55919[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is a 2006 paper by Sahoo et al which has a statistically a good sample of Indian population and they have concluded :
" It is not necessary, based on the current evidence, to look beyond South Asia for the origins of the paternal heritage of the majority of Indians at the time of the onset of settled agriculture. The perennial concept of people, language, and agriculture arriving to India together through the northwest corridor does not hold up to close scrutiny. Recent claims for a linkage of haplogroups J2, L, R1a, and R2 with a contemporaneous origin for the majority of the Indian castes' paternal lineages from outside the subcontinent are rejected, although our findings do support a local origin of haplogroups F* and H."
The paper is here:
Sahoo et al
And do read this piece for the motivation of why the British Indologists came up with Aryan Invasion theory:
[URL= http://www.iskcon.com/icj/6_1/6_1klostermaier.html]Motivation for AIT[/URL]
-Digvijay