Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations

Abstract

The origins and affinities of the ∼1 billion people living on the subcontinent of India have long been contested. This is owing, in part, to the many different waves of immigrants that have influenced the genetic structure of India. In the most recent of these waves, Indo-European-speaking people from West Eurasia entered India from the Northwest and diffused throughout the subcontinent. They purportedly admixed with or displaced indigenous Dravidic-speaking populations. Subsequently they may have established the Hindu caste system and placed themselves primarily in castes of higher rank. To explore the impact of West Eurasians on contemporary Indian caste populations, we compared mtDNA (400 bp of hypervariable region 1 and 14 restriction site polymorphisms) and Y-chromosome (20 biallelic polymorphisms and 5 short tandem repeats) variation in ∼265 males from eight castes of different rank to ∼750 Africans, Asians, Europeans, and other Indians. For maternally inherited mtDNA, each caste is most similar to Asians. However, 20%–30% of Indian mtDNA haplotypes belong to West Eurasian haplogroups, and the frequency of these haplotypes is proportional to caste rank, the highest frequency of West Eurasian haplotypes being found in the upper castes. In contrast, for paternally inherited Y-chromosome variation each caste is more similar to Europeans than to Asians. Moreover, the affinity to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans, particularly East Europeans. These findings are consistent with greater West Eurasian male admixture with castes of higher rank. Nevertheless, the mitochondrial genome and the Y chromosome each represents only a single haploid locus and is more susceptible to large stochastic variation, bottlenecks, and selective sweeps. Thus, to increase the power of our analysis, we assayed 40 independent, biparentally inherited autosomal loci (1 LINE-1 and 39 Aluelements) in all of the caste and continental populations (∼600 individuals). Analysis of these data demonstrated that the upper castes have a higher affinity to Europeans than to Asians, and the upper castes are significantly more similar to Europeans than are the lower castes. Collectively, all five datasets show a trend toward upper castes being more similar to Europeans, whereas lower castes are more similar to Asians. We conclude that Indian castes are most likely to be of proto-Asian origin with West Eurasian admixture resulting in rank-related and sex-specific differences in the genetic affinities of castes to Asians and Europeans.

Untitled

“…The M phylogenetic tree has largely aided in clarifying the position of the M5 lineage. Until recently, transition at G16129A along with basal motif for M, was used to characterize this lineage [34] and currently it is described by the presence of coding region mutation at T12477C [20]. The phylogenetic tree constructed in this study provides evidence to support our finding that at least two sub-lineages arose from M5 that share a transversion at site C10986A and may or may not possess the T12477C transition.…”

Genetic epidemiology of autoinflammatory disease variants in Indian population from 1029 whole genomes

“…On performing haplotype ancestry analysis, we found six out of seven individuals had admixed European ancestry. The occurrence of the European haplotype at the founder variant in the Indian population could be due to the invasion or migration of the Europeans in India [ 78 ]. The founder Dutch mutation p.V377I (rs28934897) along with the splicing mutation c.226+2delT in the MVK gene in trans compound heterozygous state was found to be more common in the Indian population than reported [ 48 ].…”

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

“…The results obtained have proven uneven with some claiming that the most important factor behind patterns of biological relatedness among the social groups of South Asia is geographic propinquity (Ayub et al, 2003; Kivisild et al, 2003; Krithika et al, 2009; Roychudhury, 1992; Sahoo et al, 2006; Sengupta et al, 2006). Others find language to be the best predictor of biological affinity (Majumder, 2010), while still others emphasize such cultural factors as technological innovation (ArunKumar et al, 2012) and social structure/stratification (Bamshad et al, 2001). Other researchers interpret the results of their investigations as implicating various combinations of factors underlying biological differentiation among South Asian ethnic groups.…”