Dissecting the paternal founders of Mundari (Austroasiatic) speakers associated with the language dispersal in South Asia

Reconstructing the population history of the Nicobarese

The Nicobarese are the major tribal groups in the Nicobar district, situated south of the Andaman group of Islands. Linguistic phylogeny suggests that the linguistic ancestors of the Nicobarese settled the Nicobar archipelago in the early Holocene. So far, genetic research on them is low-resolution and restricted to the haploid DNA markers. Therefore, in the present analysis, we have used the high-resolution biparental (1554 published and 5 newly genotyped Nicobarese individuals) and uniparental genetic markers and looked at the genetic association of Nicobarese with the South and Southeast Asian populations. We report a common ancestral component shared among the Austroasiatic of South and Southeast Asia. Our analyses have suggested that the Nicobarese peoples retain this ancestral Austroasiatic predominant component in their genomes in the highest proportion. On the Southeast Asian mainland, the Htin Mal, who speak an Austroasiatic language of the Khmuic branch, represent a population that has preserved their ethnic distinctness from other groups over time and consequently shown the highest drift with the Nicobarese. The analysis based on haplotypes indicated a significant level of genomic segment sharing across linguistic groups, indicating an ancient broader distribution of Austroasiatic populations in Southeast Asia. Based on the temporal analyses of haploid DNA, it is suggested that the forebears of the Nicobarese people may have arrived on the Nicobar Islands in the last 5000 YBP. Therefore, among the modern populations, the Nicobarese peoples and the Htin Mal language community represent good genetic proxies for ancient Austroasiatics.

An initial investigation of dental morphology variation among three southern Naga ethnic groups of Northeast India

OBJECTIVES

This study examines dental morphology trait prevalence among three southern Naga groups and compares them to 10 ethnic groups from other regions of South Asia to accomplish two objectives: assess the biological relationship of these Tibeto-Burman-speakers to speakers of non-Tibeto-Burman languages in other South Asian regions, and determine which traits distinguish northeast Indians from other South Asians.

METHODS

Dental morphology traits were scored with the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System. Tooth-trait combinations were evaluated for significant inter-trait correlation and intra-trait correspondence within dental fields. Comparisons were based on simple trait prevalence and with Smith's MMD. Affinities based on the former were accomplished with correspondence analysis and principal components analysis. Affinities based on the latter were undertaken with neighbor-joining cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling.

RESULTS

After elimination due to inter-trait correlations and uniform prevalence, biodistances based on the remaining 17 tooth-trait combinations identify significant differences between northeast Indians and other South Asian ethnic groups due to high frequencies of shoveling on the maxillary incisors and Cusp 6 on the mandibular molars coupled with low frequencies of Carabelli's trait and Cusp 5 on UM1 and UM2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patterns of biodistances obtained from dental morphology are consilient with those obtained from DNA indicating statistically significant differences between northeast Indians from members of ethnic groups of other regions of South Asia. Researchers should explore the sex-specific patterns. Biodistances should not be limited to "key" teeth within dental fields, for in almost every case traits present on mesial and distal teeth yield non-redundant information.