遗传学报
遺傳學報
유전학보
ACTA GENETICA SINICA
2001年
4期
291-300
,共10页
钱亚屏%褚嘉佑%初正韬%卫灿东%戴青%S Horai
錢亞屏%褚嘉祐%初正韜%衛燦東%戴青%S Horai
전아병%저가우%초정도%위찬동%대청%S Horai
mtDNA%D-loop%多态性%云南少数民族
mtDNA%D-loop%多態性%雲南少數民族
mtDNA%D-loop%다태성%운남소수민족
对傣、佤、拉祜和藏族4个群体的99名个体mtDNA非编码区(D-loop)高变区Ⅰ16048~16569及1~41的563bp片段进行序列分析。计算了核酸多态度,并用Neighbor-Joining法构建系统进化树,在进化树中,99个mtDNA序列分别聚在4个群中。所有在COⅡ/tRANLys基因间序列存在9bp缺失的个体均聚在Cl群中,C2群由1个佤族个体和4个藏族个体组成,C3群中除2个藏族个体外均为其他3个民族个体,4个群体的大部分个体聚在C4群。根据核酸多态度计算的净遗传距离重建的进化树显示,傣族、佤族和拉祜族的亲缘关系较接近,与藏族距离较远。结果表明遗传距离与他们的地理分布是非常一致的。而拉祜族与相传同为氐羌后裔并有相近语言的藏族遗传距离却较远,这一结果提示这两个民族可能具有不同的起源。
對傣、佤、拉祜和藏族4箇群體的99名箇體mtDNA非編碼區(D-loop)高變區Ⅰ16048~16569及1~41的563bp片段進行序列分析。計算瞭覈痠多態度,併用Neighbor-Joining法構建繫統進化樹,在進化樹中,99箇mtDNA序列分彆聚在4箇群中。所有在COⅡ/tRANLys基因間序列存在9bp缺失的箇體均聚在Cl群中,C2群由1箇佤族箇體和4箇藏族箇體組成,C3群中除2箇藏族箇體外均為其他3箇民族箇體,4箇群體的大部分箇體聚在C4群。根據覈痠多態度計算的淨遺傳距離重建的進化樹顯示,傣族、佤族和拉祜族的親緣關繫較接近,與藏族距離較遠。結果錶明遺傳距離與他們的地理分佈是非常一緻的。而拉祜族與相傳同為氐羌後裔併有相近語言的藏族遺傳距離卻較遠,這一結果提示這兩箇民族可能具有不同的起源。
대태、와、랍호화장족4개군체적99명개체mtDNA비편마구(D-loop)고변구Ⅰ16048~16569급1~41적563bp편단진행서렬분석。계산료핵산다태도,병용Neighbor-Joining법구건계통진화수,재진화수중,99개mtDNA서렬분별취재4개군중。소유재COⅡ/tRANLys기인간서렬존재9bp결실적개체균취재Cl군중,C2군유1개와족개체화4개장족개체조성,C3군중제2개장족개체외균위기타3개민족개체,4개군체적대부분개체취재C4군。근거핵산다태도계산적정유전거리중건적진화수현시,태족、와족화랍호족적친연관계교접근,여장족거리교원。결과표명유전거리여타문적지리분포시비상일치적。이랍호족여상전동위저강후예병유상근어언적장족유전거리각교원,저일결과제시저량개민족가능구유불동적기원。
mtDNA D-loop noncoding region 16048~16569 and the following 1~41 (563bp) in 99 individuals of four Yunnan ethnic minorities (Dai, Wa, Lahu and Tibetan) were sequenced and then a phylogenetic tree was reconstructed by Neighbor-Joining method. These 99 mtDNA lineages were classified into 3 genotype groups in the tree. All lineages with 9 bp deletion in the COⅡ/tRANLys intergenic region were clustered in group Ⅰ, some individuals of Dai, Lahu, Wa and only 2 Tibetan individuals clustered in group Ⅱ, individuals of all four populations were included in group Ⅲ. A phylogenetic tree of the four populations was constructed by NJ method on the basis of estimate of net genetic distance among them. Our results showed, the genetic distance among Dai, Wa and Lahu is very close, but far from Tibetan, their genetic distance is similar to their geographic distance. Although both as descendants of ancient Di-Qiang tribe in history and speaking similar language,Lahu and Tibetan are not closely related. This result indicates that there are different origins of these two populations.