想了解匈奴人血統組成的看維基頁比較快,找維基頁Xiongnu(或找中文匈奴維基頁再轉去英文維基頁),在此頁中的Autosomal ancestry部分右邊有一張圖片,就可看的出人種來源比例。 圖片的說明為匈奴主要的是分兩部分,主要的部分以古東北亞人(ANA)人種為主,另外一部分由印歐與東方混血人組成的。蒙古高原的父系的西歐亞成分在匈奴時期的墓葬比例突然大增,母系比例卻沒多大變化,是否因為西歐亞人東來侵略或是聯姻,目前尚無結論。奇怪的是在匈奴時期(樣本n=32)下,46.88%的西歐亞父系當中的印歐父系(Y Haplogroup R1a/R1b)的比例竟減少了,但中亞、西亞的E1b(東非?)與J卻增加了(見論文: A Dynamic 6,000-Year Genetic History of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe 的圖Figure S2.)。基本上,蒙古高原這地方自青銅器時代就是東北黑龍江流域的人與西歐亞來的人一從東一從西在搶地盤,最後變成匈奴,但母系一直是東方人占約8成。 Mapping of Xiongnu ancestry per burial sites in Mongolia. Ancient Northeast Asians (ANA , Khövsgöl ) form the main contribution, followed by the hybrid Saka culture (Chandman ), and smaller contributions of Han, BMAC and Sarmatian 維基頁父系: { Paternal lineages According to Rogers & Kaestle (2022), roughly 47% of Xiongnu paternal haplogroups were of West Eurasian origin, while the rest were of East Asian origin. They observed that this contrasts strongly with the preceding Slab Grave period, which was dominated by East Asian patrilineages. They suggest that this may reflect an aggressive expansion of people with West Eurasian paternal haplogroups, or perhaps the practice of marriage alliances or cultural networks favoring people with Western patrilines.[249] Some examples of paternal haplogroups in Xiongnu specimens include Q1b,[250][251] C3,[252] R1, R1b, O3a and O3a3b2,[253] R1a1a1b2a-Z94, R1a1a1b2a2-Z2124, Q1a, N1a,[254] J2a, J1a and E1b1b1a } 維基頁Autosomal ancestry部分: { A study published in November 2020 examined 60 early and late Xiongnu individuals from across of Mongolia. The study found that the Xiongnu resulted from the admixture of three different clusters from the Mongolian region. The two early genetic clusters are "early Xiongnu_west" from the Altai Mountains (formed at 92% by the hybrid Eurasian Chandman ancestry, and 8% BMAC ancestry), and "early Xiongnu_rest" from the Mongolian Plateau (individuals with primarily Ulaanzuukh-Slab Grave ancestry, or mixed with "early Xiongnu_west"). The later third cluster named "late Xiongnu" has even higher heterogenity, with the continued combination of Chandman and Ulaanzuukh-Slab Grave ancestry, and additional geneflow from Sarmatian and Han Chinese sources. Their uniparental haplogroup assignments also showed heterogenetic influence on their ethnogenesis as well as their connection with Huns.[207][259] In contrast, the later Mongols had a much higher eastern Eurasian ancestry as a whole, similar to that of modern-day Mongolic-speaking population }
這個視頻的結論是錯誤的。基本上,匈奴人是多種族的,匈奴墓按不同地區的樣本來分析,父系基因來源的比例也不同。R1a絕非所有匈奴樣本的主流。總體上仍以東亞占大半,依維基的結論來說就是According to Rogers & Kaestle (2022), roughly 47% of Xiongnu paternal haplogroups were of West Eurasian origin, while the rest were of East Asian origin。
2023年最新的研究用的是外蒙古(今蒙古國)的兩區Takhiltyn Khotgor (TAK) 與Shombuuzyn Belchir (SBB)的匈奴統治精英的基因樣本,結果顯示R1a與R1b是少數,C才是多數,這也符合蒙古地區的主要人口分布。 論文名稱: Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales 取樣: Newly sequenced individuals were excavated from the aristocratic elite cemetery of Takhiltyn Khotgor (TAK) (yellow square) and the local elite cemetery of Shombuuzyn Belchir (SBB) (red circle) in western Mongolia.
@2023QQWZ5 ай бұрын
人家说的是古代匈奴的基因,你说今天的蒙古人的基因,这是两码事啊兄弟
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
@@2023QQWZ 你一定不懂英文,就古匈奴的基因就是用蒙古高原的古匈奴的遺址的DNA的樣本得出結論的。論文的英文你會嗎?Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales
@@2023QQWZ 我說的不是今天的蒙古人的基因,你自己去看我說的這篇論文是不是用今日蒙古國境內的兩區Takhiltyn Khotgor (TAK) 與Shombuuzyn Belchir (SBB)發現的古代匈奴統治精英的基因樣本去測定的? 論文的英文Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales的Xiongnu Empire也看不懂嗎?Xiongnu Empire叫匈奴帝國。 TAK與SBB是古匈奴遺址,都在今日蒙古國的的西部 地理位置你可用google的關鍵字查"Ritual sites of Iron Age Inner Asia (Xiongnu realm shaded)",就可看到圖片
這篇論文A Dynamic 6,000-Year Genetic History of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe的圖3(Figure 3. Genetic Changes in the Eastern Steppe across Time Characterized by qpAdm)可看的出你的結論是錯的: (A)在新石器時代與早青銅器時代,蒙古高原的人種仍以ANA(古代東北亞洲人)與ANE(Ancient north Eurasians)為主,6000年前移到蒙古西北的古印歐人祖先Afanasievo culture的成分在蒙古高原中部存在,但其體量與ANA的人口差很大。 (B)在中晚青銅器時代古東北亞人(ANA)西移至蒙古高原東部與中部,蒙古高原中部已是ANA(古東北亞人)的人種分布區,蒙古高原西北部與西部則有多數的貝加爾湖區西伯利亞人(Baikai_EBA)與少量的印歐Sintashta文化的人種的混血人。(C)在早鐵器時代,ANA(古代東北亞人)已經占了蒙古高原的北部了,加爾湖區西伯利亞人(Baikai_EBA)被取代,蒙古高原西部的居民則是一半是貝加爾湖區西伯利亞人(Baikai_EBA)與一半是印歐Sintashta文化的人種的混血人。(D)在匈奴時期ANA(古代東北亞人)已經在蒙古高原各區占人口優勢,但蒙古高原的中部有可觀的印歐部的薩馬提亞人(Sarmatians)與少量中亞人BMAC的人種分布,蒙古高原的北部到中部也有可觀的半東半西混血Chandman人的分布,但整體來說ANA(古代東北亞人)在蒙古高原是人口的主體。這代表匈奴時期東方來的鮮卑東胡ANA西進蒙古高原,蒙古以西的印歐中亞人東進蒙古高原並在蒙古高原中部有一定的數量,但整體上ANA在人口與蒙古高原各區占優勢,但蒙古高原的中部有可觀的印歐部的薩馬提亞人(Sarmatians)與中亞人BMAC的人種分布一直到晚中世紀才漸漸消失在ANA與漢人的優勢人口中。
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
從以下的這張圖(Figure S4)的(D) Xiongnu period(匈奴時期)中的Early Xiongnu黑字的兩分支可看出這時的西匈奴(west Xiongnu)以半東半西的混血Chandman人為主體,而其他的匈奴人(rest Xiongnu)則以ANA(古代東北亞人)為主。 Figure S4. Genetic Changes in the Eastern Steppe across Time Characterized by qpAdm with All Individuals Indicated, Related to Figures 3 and 4 Chandman人依維基可查到的基因資訊為半東半西混血: Chandman males were found to belong to be equally divided between the West Eurasian haplogroup R1a and East Eurasian haplogroup Q-L275.[9] 參考的論文是: Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales
說匈奴主要是R1a父系,並不正確。要考慮的是匈奴的基因樣本墓來自於何地區。取樣時不能只取特定地區的樣本才不會失真。比如,這篇2023年的論文就取了不同地區的樣本.結果R1a與R1b都是少數。 論文名稱: Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales。 不管如何,學界目前對匈奴的的父系來源的結論仍是57%是東亞來源,43%是西歐亞來源,西歐亞包括的是中亞、西亞與歐洲等。R1a看亞型才可知其來源。中國發現的小河墓葬區疑似是印歐人東移的木乃伊,在最近的研究已被証實是本地的人群,屬於Ancient North Eurasians,其中也有R1a的樣本。(可查維基:Xiongnu) 事實上,外蒙古區的人口一定較少,不是草原民族可大量放牧地,所以取那來代表主要的匈奴人口一定是錯的。
早期匈奴分兩部,西匈奴部是以東西混血人種為主,對應的人群是Chandman culture,匈牙利R1a應出自西匈奴,維基相關資料: Chandman males were found to belong to be equally divided between the West Eurasian haplogroup R1a and East Eurasian haplogroup Q-L275.[9] Jeong, et al. found that the early Western Xiongnu derived 93% of their ancestry from the Chandman culture, and 7% consisted of newly introduced BMAC ancestry. The rest of the Xiongnu in the study generally had mainly Eastern Asian (Ulaanzuukh or Slab Grave) ancestry, combined with smaller Western Eurasian (Chandman, Sarmatian, BMAC) contributions.
Xiongnu is a mixture of different groups, but the commoners have more Eastern Eurasian ancestry. The elites of the Xiongnu are Eastern Eurasians, ancestors of the Xianbei and Mongols.
目前他們驗的主要是蒙古的幾個著名匈奴時期的墓區Takhiltyn Khotgor (TAK)與 Shombuuzyn Belchir (SBB): 2023年最新的研究用的是外蒙古(今蒙古國)的兩區Takhiltyn Khotgor (TAK) 與Shombuuzyn Belchir (SBB)的匈奴統治精英的基因樣本,結果顯示R1a與R1b是少數,C才是多數,這也符合蒙古地區的主要人口分布。 論文名稱: Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales 取樣: Newly sequenced individuals were excavated from the aristocratic elite cemetery of Takhiltyn Khotgor (TAK) and the local elite cemetery of Shombuuzyn Belchir (SBB) in western Mongolia.
@@user-kr4uv2jt1w The Bible was man made. Hint: Sacrifices must without blemish. They are going to be burnt to smoke so difference does it make unless it is the priest who eats them using God's name..
新疆小河遺址出土的“白人骨骸”在最近的研究証實不屬於雅利安,屬於本地人叫Ancient North Eurasians(ANE)。就是古西伯利亞人。ANE是很早期就從東歐亞與西歐亞人種獨立分支,並且有東亞人祖先的混血。
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
最早的印歐Yamnaya的接近蒙古地區的文明叫Afanasievo culture,西元前3000年左右存在的。但最新的DNA研究証明新疆小河遺址出土的疑似“白人骨骸”,並不是這個印歐Yamnaya相關的人種,而是印歐Yamnaya的老祖先在西伯利亞的土著Ancient North Eurasians(ANE)單獨在該區存在的群體。ANE的歷史很古老2萬多年前就存在,詳細資訊找維基的Ancient North Eurasians
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
你找維基的Ancient North Eurasians頁,右下有一張圖說小河遺址的疑白人是最佳的ANE代表,"Princess of Xiaohe", one of the Tarim mummies, the "best representatives" of Ancient North Eurasians.
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
你說的年代表已經有基因研究來討論,你的年代表並不符合基因研究。這篇論文A Dynamic 6,000-Year Genetic History of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe的圖3(Figure 3. Genetic Changes in the Eastern Steppe across Time Characterized by qpAdm)有新石器時代到中世紀的蒙古高原各區的各人種的變化的基因研究
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
基因研究完全不支持你的雅利安入侵東方說。雅利安人根本一直沒機會進到東方,就算到青銅器時代,雅利安在蒙古高原都還是少數。這篇論文A Dynamic 6,000-Year Genetic History of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe的圖3(Figure 3. Genetic Changes in the Eastern Steppe across Time Characterized by qpAdm)就証明你是錯的。雅利安的神話與風俗完全在中原王朝的夏商周看不到
目前遺傳基因的研究並不支持這種說法。可看這篇論文A Dynamic 6,000-Year Genetic History of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe的圖
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
要查某一地區的人種的主要成分依現代的基因科學已不是問題。目前的結論是阿爾泰山以西才漸有西歐亞人種的成分。這個各篇基因研究論文的一個共識。至於如何東西混血的,可看這篇論文A Dynamic 6,000-Year Genetic History of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe的圖Figure S4. Genetic Changes in the Eastern Steppe across Time Characterized by qpAdm with All Individuals Indicated, Related to Figures 3 and 4 。
@user-kr4uv2jt1w5 ай бұрын
一般來說歐洲人種與東亞人長相差太多下,史書不可能不特別記載,蒙古人都用色目人當成另一類了。印歐大遷徒的考古與基因研究是分散歐亞大陸各地的統合工作,所以不難証明其時間與分布範圍。目前連新疆的小河墓地的疑歐洲東來人的木乃伊都被斷定為本地人種ancient north Eurasians。在阿爾泰山以西自古就有很多與東亞人體徵有異的人種居住著,但他們也不是真正的西歐亞種人。ancient north Eurasians是有歐洲人種與東亞人種的混血的。算是一個很早的非歐洲人種的分支。