2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2016.01.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: In this study, 17 Y chromosomal short tandem repeats (Y-STRs) were analyzed in 302 male individuals from the Chinese Han and Korean populations of Jilin Province. The haplotype diversities of two populations reached 0.99969 and 0.99874, respectively. The Jilin Han and Korean populations differed from each other significantly. The Jilin Han population showed no significant difference from almost any other Han population, but it did show significant differences from most other Chinese ethnic populations. The hap… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Fst statistics is one of the most widely used measures for genetic differentiation and plays a central role in genetic studies [ 11 ]. Reference populations including Hui [ 12 , 13 ], Uygur [ 14 , 15 ], Eastern Han (from Zhejiang, China) [ 16 , 17 ], Salar [ 18 , 19 ], Miao [ 20 , 21 ], Tibetan [ 22 , 23 ], Yi [ 21 , 24 ], Shandong Han [ 25 , 26 ], Korean [ 27 , 28 ], Bangladeshis [ 29 , 30 ], Serbian [ 31 , 32 ], Xibe [ 33 , 34 ], Dong [ 21 , 35 ], Maonan [ 21 , 36 ], Moroccan [ 37 , 38 ], Croatian [ 39 , 40 ], Nepalese [ 41 , 42 ], Jilin Han [ 43 , 44 ] and Liaoning Han [ 45 , 46 ] were used for population genetic analysis based on the same of autosomal STRs or Y-STR loci, respectively. The pairwise Fst and p values based on 15 STR loci between Southern Shaanxi Han population and other 19 populations were shown in Supplementary Table 1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fst statistics is one of the most widely used measures for genetic differentiation and plays a central role in genetic studies [ 11 ]. Reference populations including Hui [ 12 , 13 ], Uygur [ 14 , 15 ], Eastern Han (from Zhejiang, China) [ 16 , 17 ], Salar [ 18 , 19 ], Miao [ 20 , 21 ], Tibetan [ 22 , 23 ], Yi [ 21 , 24 ], Shandong Han [ 25 , 26 ], Korean [ 27 , 28 ], Bangladeshis [ 29 , 30 ], Serbian [ 31 , 32 ], Xibe [ 33 , 34 ], Dong [ 21 , 35 ], Maonan [ 21 , 36 ], Moroccan [ 37 , 38 ], Croatian [ 39 , 40 ], Nepalese [ 41 , 42 ], Jilin Han [ 43 , 44 ] and Liaoning Han [ 45 , 46 ] were used for population genetic analysis based on the same of autosomal STRs or Y-STR loci, respectively. The pairwise Fst and p values based on 15 STR loci between Southern Shaanxi Han population and other 19 populations were shown in Supplementary Table 1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, in order to comprehensively investigate the genetic substructure of Liaoning Han population, the population comparison using the 16 shared Y-STR loci except for DYS627, DYS460, DYS518, DYS449, DYF387S1, DYS481, DYS533, DYS576 and DYS570 was performed between Liaoning Han and 22 East Asian groups. They included Anhui Han Chinese [ 25 ], Beijing Han Chinese [ 26 ], Guangdong Han Chinese [ 27 ], Guizhou Han Chinese (YP001096), Jiangsu Han Chinese [ 25 ], Jiangxi Han Chinese [ 25 ], Jilin Han Chinese [ 28 ], Shandong Han Chinese [ 29 ], Shanxi Han Chinese [ 30 ], Yunnan Bai (YP000902), Xishuangbanna Dai (YP000903), Liaoning Hui (YP000819), Liaoning Korean [ 31 ], Liaoning Manchu [ 16 ], Hunan Miao (YP001038), Liaoning Mongolian [ 32 ], Gansu Tibetan (YP001032), Hunan Tujia (YP001037), Liaoning Xibe [ 33 ], Guangxi Zhuang (YP000591), Japanese [ 34 ] and Korean [ 35 ]. Rst values for genetic distance demonstrated that haplotypes of the Liaoning Han population were significantly different from those of the other 22 populations (all p values < 0.05/22 after Bonferroni correction; Table 1 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the intercontinental perspective, a MDS was performed between Maoming Han and 21 worldwide populations (Kim et al, 2001;Miranda et al, 2001;Roewer et al, 2005;Mizuno et al, 2008;Alam et al, 2010;Laouina et al, 2011;Wolfgramm Ede et al, 2011;Ramos-Luis et al, 2014;Xu et al, 2015;Han et al, 2016;Rapone et al, 2016;Wang et al, 2017;Alonso Morales et al, 2018;Fan et al, 2018c;Singh et al, 2018;Henry et al, 2019;Lang et al, 2019;Li et al, 2019;Salvador et al, 2019;Reid and Heathfield, 2020). As shown in Supplementary Figure 1, (Yang et al, 2014;Shu et al, 2015;Han et al, 2016;Wang et al, 2016Wang et al, , 2017Xu et al, 2016;Yao et al, 2016;Jiang et al, 2017;Chen et al, 2018;Fan et al, 2018c;Lang et al, 2019;Yin et al, 2020) are listed in Supplementary 2B). We found that two main branches could be clearly identified in the N-J phylogenetic tree.…”
Section: Genetic Differences Between Maoming Han and Han Chinese Populations From Southern And Northern Mainland Chinamentioning
confidence: 99%