2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Confirmation of Y haplogroup tree topologies with newly suggested Y-SNPs for the C2, O2b and O3a subhaplogroups

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To discern the detailed relationship between the Ha Hlai and other language‐speaking populations with different language families, we performed a PCA which included 193 populations (Cadenas, Zhivotovsky, Cavalli‐Sforza, Underhill, & Herrera, 2008; Cai et al, 2011; Chennakrishnaiah et al, 2013; Deng et al, 2013; Fan et al, 2020; Fan, Wang, Chen, Long, et al, 2018; Fan, Zhang, et al, 2018; Gan et al, 2008; Gayden et al, 2007; Khurana et al, 2014; Kwon, Lee, Lee, Yang, & Shin, 2015; Li, Wen, et al, 2008; Regueiro, Cadenas, Gayden, Underhill, & Herrera, 2006; Rowold et al, 2016, 2019; Wells et al, 2001; Wen et al, 2004) from all over the world with eight language families, 11,197 individuals in total (dataset 1). The PC1, PC2, and PC3 of the total variances accounted for 13.97%, 10.83%, and 8.91%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To discern the detailed relationship between the Ha Hlai and other language‐speaking populations with different language families, we performed a PCA which included 193 populations (Cadenas, Zhivotovsky, Cavalli‐Sforza, Underhill, & Herrera, 2008; Cai et al, 2011; Chennakrishnaiah et al, 2013; Deng et al, 2013; Fan et al, 2020; Fan, Wang, Chen, Long, et al, 2018; Fan, Zhang, et al, 2018; Gan et al, 2008; Gayden et al, 2007; Khurana et al, 2014; Kwon, Lee, Lee, Yang, & Shin, 2015; Li, Wen, et al, 2008; Regueiro, Cadenas, Gayden, Underhill, & Herrera, 2006; Rowold et al, 2016, 2019; Wells et al, 2001; Wen et al, 2004) from all over the world with eight language families, 11,197 individuals in total (dataset 1). The PC1, PC2, and PC3 of the total variances accounted for 13.97%, 10.83%, and 8.91%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional population data of newly discovered Y-SNPs still remains necessary to obtain as Y-SNP expansion gives rise to some complications. First, universal names for Y-SNPs are non-existing, meaning that equality and comparisons between studies and different phylogenetic trees remain extremely difficult to achieve [ 55 ]. For example, the Y-SNP R-L11 has also been described as R-S127 and R-PF6539 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, many Y-SNPs are already mapped in a phylogenetic tree despite the lack of large-scale population data. Consequently, their position on the phylogenetic tree is deceitful and cannot be used as additional biogeographical background information [ 2 , 55 , 56 ]. For 183 Y-SNPs, a combination between ancestral and derivative alleles was observed within our samples indicating that these markers exhibit larger diversity within the population of the Low Countries (Belgium and the Netherlands).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To clear up the detailed relationship between the Lhasa € U-Tsang Tibetan population and other populations with diverse language families, the PCA was performed among 194 populations (in total 10 721 individuals) which included Austro-Asiatic, Austronesian, Altaic, Semito-Hamitic, Caucasian, Uralic, Dravidian, Indo-European, Tai-Kadai, Hmong-Mien, Tibeto-Burman, and Chinese (Southern and Northern Han) populations all over the world [37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50]. We used our in-house dataset, including 37 754 pieces of Y SNP/STR data and 109 142 Y-STR in total which mainly from Asia, to make predictions for Lhasa € U-Tsang Tibetan in this study [51].…”
Section: Y-haplogroup Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%