Phylogenetic relationships of Muslim populations of Manipur … · 2012. 12. 16. · Shah et Al....

Shah et Al. – Phylogenetic Relationship of Muslim Populations of Manipur

Physical Anthropology 463 - 480

Phylogenetic relationships of Muslim populations of Manipur based on morphogenetic markers

Ahsana Shah, Mohd Fareed, Ruqaiya Hussain, Mohammad Afzal*

Abstract: In the present paper phylogenetic relationships of Muslim populations of Manipur and its genetic relations with Meitei

and Naga tribe based on the morphogenetic traits have been attempted. Till date, no biological research has been reported regarding

their phylogeny. Muslims with different castes shows differences in the distribution of these morpho-genetic traits, showing differences

of ancestor’s origin. On the basis of genetic distances, dendrogram was constructed using UPGMA Clustering method. Sheikh,

Syed, Pathan and Moghul settled in Manipur approximately the same time on the basis of their origin. Sheikh and Syed form one

common cluster while Moghul and Pathan show another common cluster, reflecting its genetic similarity. Meitei population stand

closer to Muslim population than to Naga tribe showing close conformity with the literature reported where Muslims were reported to

have arrived in Manipur mostly as sepoys of the king and without female counterpart, and were given permission by the then king to

get married with the Meitei women. Meiteis and Nagas belong to the Mongoloid racial stock or are at least more or less genetically

influenced by it, can also been seen as they show the presence of morpho-genetic trait characters characteristics to Japanese, Chinese

and Tibetans.

Keywords: Morpho-genetic traits, Manipur, allele frequency, heterozygosity, genetic distances

IntroductionThe North East India popularly known as seven sisters is inhabited by diverse populations of tribes, castes,

religions and various migrant populations. The region is particularly interesting as represented by several tribal

populations of mongoloid origin. They share similar physical features but speak different languages and show

differences in cultural, anthropological and genetic traits (Roy Choudhury 1992, Bhasin and Walter 2001). The

Mongoloids or the Indo-Mongoloids have come to India from different routes at different times and perhaps

earlier than the Caucasoid (Das et al. 1987).While the Mongoloids have migrated from Eastern, South Eastern

(Rapson 1955, Dani 1960), and Central Asian regions, the Caucasoid may have entered from Western and

Northern boundaries of this region. Both the Mongoloid and Caucasoid groups show a certain degree of

differentiation within themselves in cultural and biological traits such as anthropometry, genetic markers, and

* Section of Genetics, Department of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh,Uttar Pradesh, India. Corresponding author. Prof. Mohammad Afzal, email: [email protected]

Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology 2012, vol. 8. n. 2 – ISSN 1973 – 2880 463


dermatoglypics (Das 1971, 1973, 1979, Phookan 1974, Das and Das 1981, Roychoudhury 1992, Bhasin and

Walter 2001). Manipur ( fig. 1), one of the states of this region, is a small hilly state, situated at the North

Eastern extreme corner of India, that connects the Indian Subcontinent to East Asia and South East Asia as a

unique narrow passageway (Cardaux et al. 2004), and shares an international boundary with Myanmar (Burma).

Manipur erstwhile an independent princely state but formally annexed to Indian union on 15th October 1949

which lies between 23.830 and 25.680 N latitude and 93.030 and 94.780 E longitude (Singh & Singh 2008). It

consist mostly of a number of tribal and non-tribal populations who are predominately of Mongoloid stock and

speak dialects of the Tibeto-Burman linguistic group (Grierson 1903) reflecting their different ancestries and

migratory histories.

Researchers over the years have given different views about migratory routes of the peoples of Manipur. The

most popular among these are the migrations through China, Tibet, and Burma (Myanmar) during different

periods of time (Jacobs 1990). Thus, highly diversified Manipur populations under the umbrella of a similar

ethnic element (mongoloid) and linguistic group are expected to share more of their gene pools with Chinese

and Southeast Asians than with the rest of India ( Saraswathy et al. 2009). The population diversity could provide

an opportunity to study the morpho-genetic variation and similarities among different populations inhabiting the

region since they have cohabited for a long time and presumably there might have been gene flow between them,

since the existence of genetic variation in man is caused by many factors among which selection, migration, gene

flow and genetic drift are the most important (Bhasin et al. 1992).The present paper is to represent certain

morpho-genetical traits viz tongue rolling, tongue folding, hitchhiker’s thumb, dimple cheek, widow’s peak, cleft

chin, ear lobe free or attached) among six populations of Manipur. Genetic mechanism on morphogenetic trait is

still not clear understood as it is seen to occur with variable frequency in different populations and thus are

useful in evaluating and analysing evolutionary forces and classification as well (Das & Sengupta 2003) .

Material and methodsPopulations.

Manipuri Muslims comprise 8.32% of the total population according to the 2001 census. They are mostly

migrants who started coming to the state in the middle of the 16th century (Hodson 1975).They have been given

different clan names which in Manipur is called Yumnak or Sagei given by the king at that time. The term

“Sagei” is a corrupted word of Shaqzi” which is an Urdu terminology. About 74 clans are reported in present

times. Manipur Muslims belong to Sheikh, Syed, Pathan or Moghul castes (Khullachandra and Badruddin 1991).

They belong to Sunni sect only (Shah 2012). The Meiteis, represent the major tribal group, having 60% of the

total population (Lalit 2007) and they follow Hindu religion. Meitei are presumably formed by the admixture of

Koomal, Looang, Moirang and Meitei, all of whom are reported to have arrived at different periods of time,

coming from different directions and now represent the clans of the community (Hodson 1975).While the Naga

are the indigenous tribal population of Manipur, they belong to the Naga-Kuki-Chin group of the Tibeto-

Burman linguistic family and are believed to have migrated to Manipur from Burma probably 300 to 400 years



ago (Saha & Tay 1990).

Sample collection.

Data on morpho-genetical taits were collected and analysed from unrelated individuals belonging to both sexes

from the following population groups; Muslims with castes – Sheikh, Syed, Pathan and Mughal, Hindu (Meitei)

and tribal(Naga), by taking prior informed consent from the individuals, taking into consideration the factors like

caste, consanguity, age, religion etc. The survey was conducted with healthy individuals from the area of Imphal

East and Imphal west districts by house to house visit, which were selected on random a priori basis during the

day time with the help of volunteers. Survey was also conducted in various schools of Manipur by taking prior

permission from the respective headmasters. For tongue rolling and tongue folding, subjects were determined as

rollers and folders depending upon their ability to turn up the lateral edges of the tongue (Sturtevant 1940) and

folding of the tongue (Liu & Hsu 1949). The ability to roll and fold lateral edges of the tongue in U- shape is

reported to be due to a significant dominant gene while a recessive gene is responsible for its inability (Hsu

1948). Later Liu & Hsu (1949) have expressed that inability to fold tongue is due to a dominant gene and its

ability to roll is due to a recessive gene. Widow’s peak refers to the descending V-shaped point at the middle of

the head’s hairline just above the forehead of some individuals, while ‘cheek dimples’ are the small depressions

that lie on the cheeks of some individuals especially when they smile. Genetically, both are dominant traits and

those who do not express them are said to possess the recessive genes. It is believed that the presence of double

or bifid zygomaticus major muscle may explain the formation of cheek dimples. The terms cleft chin, chin

cleft, superhero chin, dimple chin, or a chin dimple refer simply to a dimple on the chin. It is a Y-shaped fissure

on the chin with an underlying bony peculiarity. The chin fissure follows the fissure in the lower jaw bone

resulting from the incomplete fusion of the left and right halves of the jaw bone, or muscle, during the

embryonal and fetal development. For other individuals it can develop over time, often because one half of the

jaw is longer than the other, leading to facial asymmetry. This is an inherited trait in humans, where the dominant

gene causes the cleft chin while the recessive genotype appears without a cleft. "Hitchhiker's thumb" is an

autosomal recessive trait, more formally known as "distal hyper extensibility of the thumb" Homozygous carriers

can extend the top of the thumb backwards by nearly 90° when the thumb is extended in a "thumbs up”. The

dimple, cleft chin, hitchhiker’s thumb and widow’s peak status of the subjects were determined by physical

examination. The types of ear lobe attachment have been divided here into two categories: free and attached.

“Free” means completely free ear lobes, while "attached" means completely attached lobes. The earlobe patterns

attached or free were classified after Martin & Saller (1961).

Genetic data analysis.

The phenotypes were recorded for each trait, and the allele frequencies were calculated according to Hardy-

Weinberg law using a gene counting method. The level of heterozygosity was calculated using the formula:

Heterozygosity= 1- ∑Ho

where Ho is the homozygosity of the allele, HO=∑Pi2



Chi-square test: It is used for the measurement of the size of the discrepancy between the observed and

expected values at particular degrees of freedom.

χ2 = ∑(Observed-Expected) 2

Expected

Gene diversity Estimation.

Genetic variation was estimated by calculating average heterozygosity or the gene diversity. Average

heterozygosity (H) is the average proportions of the hetrozygotes per locus in random mating populations.

Hi=1-Ji

{Hi=gene diversity, Ji=gene identity}

The average gene diversity within S number of subpopulations is

Hs=1-Js

{Hs=average heterozygosity, Js=average homozygosity}

Gene differentiation is the measure of gene variability and is calculated by using allele frequencies by the method

of Nei. The average gene frequencies of all subpopulations is representative of the entire population and gene

diversity of the total population HT was calculated as follows (Nei’1973): HT=H S+DST (Hs=average genotypic

diversity within the subpopulation, and DST is the average gene diversity between the subpopulation).

The coefficient of gene differentiation relative to the total population (GST)was calculated as follows:

GST=DST/HT

Finally, the genetic distance i.e. the extent of gene differences between populations is calculated by the Nei’s

standard Genetic Distance (D) (Nei 1972):

D=-logeI (I=Genetic Identity)

The matrix of standard gene distances was prepared.

Dendrogram.

The dendrogram was drawn according to the UPGMA clustering method, using Phylip version 3.67 software

(Felsenstein 1993).

Results and discussionTongue folding

In the present study tongue folding ability is found to be less frequent among the Naga tribes, in comparison to

the four Muslim populations and Meitei group (Table 1). Not a single case of tongue folders was reported in a

study by Singh, L.R. (2002) on Kom tribe of Manipur. Among the different Muslim populations, tongue folding

ability is found to be more frequent among males, except in the Syeds population where females exceed the

males in tongue folding ability. The chisquare value ( χ2) (Table 2,3) is 561.87,df-5, p-0.00,which is statistically



significant. The allele frequency ‘p’(Table 4 and Fig. 2) of this trait in present study are Sheikhs-13%, Syed-5%,

Pathan-4%, Moghul-18%, Meitei-8% and Naga-79%.The allele frequency shows that dominant allele ‘p’ is less

frequent in the populations under study except for Naga tribe. The heterozygosity value (Table 5) is highest in

Naga population i.e.32.77% while lowest in Pathans (7.13%).

Tongue rolling.

Tongue rolling ability is found to be less frequent among the Naga tribes Singh, L.R.( 2002) also reported

absence of tongue rollers in Kom tribe of Manipur. Among Muslim populations, male prevails the presence of

this trait, Sheikh-61.7% vs.59.4%; Syed-37.5% vs 33.3%; Pathan-63.6% vs 58%; Mogul-40% vs 22.2% (Table 1).

This result is found to be similar with the earlier findings on Assam Muslim population (Das et al. 1985) and

Sonowal Kacharis of Assam Das, B.M. and Sengupta, S. (2003), where tongue rolling ability was reported to be

more frequent among males. In Saryupari of Chattisgarh, Central India Mitra, M. et al,(1995) higher frequency

of tongue rollers are reported in females. The chisquare value ( χ2) (Table 2,3) is 223.05,df-5, p-0.00, which is

statistically significant. The allele frequency ‘p’ (Table 4 and Fig. 2) of this trait are Sheikh-37%, Syed-20%,

Pathan- 37%, Moghul-17%, Meitei-24% andNaga-3%. Only Naga tribe shows less frequency of dominant allele

‘p’. The heterozygosity value (Table 5) is exhibited highest by Sheikhs and Pathans i.e.46.7 % and lowest by Naga

tribes 6.5%.

Hitchhiker’s Thumb.

Presence of hitchhiker thumb among Muslims is found to be more frequent among males except Syeds which

doesn’t follow the trend. In Naga tribes, males and females show almost similar phenotypic frequency (Males-

46.2%, Females-46.9%). Among six populations under study Sheikh shows highest phenotypic frequency 62.7%

and lowest by Mughal 30.3% (Table 1). No data is available for comparison of this trait. The chisquare values

( χ2) (Table 2,3) is 58.42,df-5,p-0.00, which is statistically significant. The allele frequency ‘p’ (Table 4 and Fig. 2)

of this trait are Sheikh-21%,Syed-42%,Pathan- 30%,Moghul-45%, Meitei-28% andNaga-32%.The heterozygosity

value (Table 5) is exhibited highest by Syeds (48.80%) and lowest by Mughals (32.99%).

Dimple.

Higher percentage of population under study does not show presence of dimple. Syeds (21%) shows the highest

phenotypic frequency of dimple chin (Table 1). Naga tribe (8.9%) shows variation for phenotypic frequency of

dimple chin presence from Muslim populations while showing similarity to Kom tribe 8.46% Singh, L.R. (2002).

Meitei population in present study shows phenotypic frequency of 15.1%, which shows variation from previous

findings of Singh,S.J.((Meitei of Manipur-3%, Meitei of Assam-7%). The chisquare values ( χ2) (Table 2,3) is

13.89,df-5,p-0.016, which is statistically significant. This trait shows insignificant value in comparison to other

trait under study reflecting its less importance. The allele frequency ‘p’ of this trait are Sheikh-6%,Syed-11%,

Pathan- 5%,Moghul-5%, Meitei-8% andNaga-5% (Table 4 and Fig. 2).The heterozygosity value (Table 5) is



exhibited highest by Syeds 19.74% and lowest by Naga tribes 8.7%.

Widow’s peak.

Presence of widow’s peak trait is also found to be less frequent in the populations under study. Syeds (40.3%)

(Table 1) shows the highest phenotypic frequency of widow’s peak while lowest is exhibited by Moghul (4.55%).

Naga tribe (32.2%) again shows similarity with the Kom tribe 30.88% (Singh 2002) and study in Varanasi

population 30% Lata,S and Singh,B.N. (1996). The chisquare values ( χ2) (Table 2,3) is 49.79,df-5,p-0.00, which

is statistically significant. The allele frequency ’p’ of this trait are Sheikh-15%,Syed-23%, Pathan- 16%,Moghul-

2%, Meitei-6% andNaga-18% (Table 4 and Fig. 2). The heterozygosity value (Table 5) is exhibited highest by

Syeds (35.15) and lowest by Moghul(4.5%).

Cleft chin.

Frequency of individuals showing cleft chin is found to be less among populations under study. Syeds (29.9%)

(table 1) shows highest phenotypic frequency of cleft chin while lowest is exhibited by Naga (8.9%). In Kom

tribe of Manipur, the presence of cleft chin is recorded in 10.95% males, no females with cleft chin has been

noted Singh,L.R.(2002),but in present study Naga females with cleft chin is recorded. Presence of cleft chin is

more frequent among Muslims. The chisquare values ( χ2) (Table 2,3) is 55.14,df-5,p-0.00, which is statistically

significant. The allele frequency ‘p’ of this trait are Sheikh-9%,Syed-15%, Pathan- 14%,Moghul-5%, Meitei-8%

andNaga-5% (Table 4 and Fig. 2). The heterozygosity value (Table 5) is exhibited highest by Syeds (25.22%) and

lowest in Naga (8.8%).

Ear lobe (free).

Presence of free ear lobe is found to be more common among Muslim populations with Mughals showing

highest phenotypic frequency i.e. 69.7% (Table 1). The frequency of ear lobe attachement are characterstics for

mongoloid-Japanese 67.1%, Chinese: 64.3 % Lai,L.Y.C. and Walsh.R.J. (1966), Tibetans: 50.4 % Tiwari, S.C. and

Bhasin, M.K. (1969) the distribution pattern, which appears from Table 1, cannot surprise. In present study

Meitei and Naga shows the phenotypic frequency of attached ear lobe as 64.6% and 58.9%, which is close to the

above mentioned frequency. So this similarity shows Meiteis and Nagas belong to the Mongoloid racial stock or

are at least more or less genetically influenced by it. Muslims on the other hand are of Caucasoid origin, in which

the frequency of attached ear lobes is generally much lower. Thus the distribution pattern of this anthropological

trait among the Manipur populations under study reflects obviously their different racial affinities. The chisquare

values ( χ2) (Table 2,3) is 113.9,df-5,p-0.00, which is statistically significant. The allele frequency ’p’ of this trait

are Sheikh-40%,Syed-30%, Pathan- 37%,Moghul-45%, Meitei-19% andNaga-23% (Table 4 and Fig. 2). The

heterozygosity value (Table 5) is exhibited highest in Moghuls (49.49%) and lowest in Meitei (31.58%).

Gene diversity.

The coefficient of gene differentiation relative to the total population i.e. GST for total population group is



0.6367,0.3988,0.5355,0.2676,1.0475,0.5670,0.29998,and 0.5362 for tongue folding, tongue rolling, Hitchhiker’s

thumb, dimple, widows peak, cleft chin and ear lobe and for total loci respectively. The combined values of DST,

HT, HS and GST for all loci is 0.2581,0.5509,0.2928 and 0.5362. Within the group, diversity is more as compared

to the intergroup diversity; this is due to the population being closer in origin, and differentiation is not very

pronounced (see table 6).

Genetic distance.

The Nei’s genetic distances are given in table 7 which is given in matrix form. The Muslim population groups are

closer to each other than to Meitei and Naga population (fig. 1). A dendrogram is drawn to show the relationship

by neighbor joining method using phylip version 3.62. Sheikh and Syed form one cluster while Moghul and

Pathan form another group. These two cluster joins with Meitei population,while the Meitei group joins with

Naga population. These shows Muslims populations are closer to Meitei than to Naga (see Fig. 3).

ConclusionOur present study provides a comprehensive database of the phylogenetic relationships of Muslim populations

of Manipur based on the morphogenetic traits. Till date no genetic variation work has been reported regarding

the phylogenetic relationships of different castes of Manipuri Muslims. It can be observed from data presented

above that the six populations under study shows differences in the distribution of morpho-genetic traits.

Muslims with different castes also shows differences in the distribution of these morphogenetic traits. The

reason for these heterogeneties might be because of different ancestors of these castes, which started settling in

different parts of Manipur valley during different periods. Siddiqui (1979) and Basu (1985) have pointed out that

the Sunni Muslims section in rest of India, has subdivision based on marriage isolation. In Manipur no such

endogamous subdivision could be traced in Sunni Muslim of Manipur (Shah 1990).Generally Manipur Muslims

are conscious about their clans or the distance of marriagebility, cohabitation and relation or conjugal relation

are determined by different clan names, not by vague names like Syeds, Sheikhs, Pathan or Moghul which are

widely practised in other parts of India (Ahmed 2011). However still there is a practice in majorities of Muslim

families where cousin marriage occurs, selected by the family members from among their relatives whether it

may be far or closer one, and thus might have resulted in the minimising the genetic relationship contacts and

hence gene flow among them.

On the basis of genetic distances between different populations, dendrogram was constructed using UPGMA

clustering method. The dendrogram shows that sheikh and syed castes of Muslim Population have maximum

common gene loci and forms one cluster, thus are closer. While Moghul and Pathan forms another common

cluster. Sheikh, Syed, Pathan and Moghul settled in Manipur approximately the same time on the basis of their

origin. Meitei population stand closer to Muslim population than to Naga. Muslims came to Manipur mostly as

sepoys of the king and without female counterpart. The then king Khagemba Maharaj gave permission to get

married with the Meitei women (Singh 1986).These have cause closer genetic similarities between Muslims and



Meitei Population. Culturally and socially though Manipuri Muslims have came closer to Meitei society because

of religious boundary they remain isolated. The social isolation makes the Muslims an endogamous population

for the last 500 yrs and so. The differences observed among the Muslims, and Naga can be seen as all two

populations are endogamous unit with no or at least only minimal genetic contacts and hence gene flows among

them. The genetic differences which emerged in the course of time by locally acting factors like genetic drift and

or founder effects could be preserved until now due to marriage isolation from each other. The values of genetic

distance show close conformity with the present socio-cultural structure existing in Manipur.

An important observation is that among the six population, Sheikh shows significant differences in almost every

trait under study except dimple and widows peak trait, thus this particular population has least minimal genetic

contacts in comparison to other populations.

AcknowledgementsThanks are due to the Department of Science &Technology (DST), New Delhi for awarding INSPIRE

Fellowship ( No. IF10378) to the first author (Ahsana Shah) and to the Chairman, Department of Zoology,

A.M.U., Aligarh (U.P), India, for laboratory facilities. The author is also thankful to Yasir Hasan Siddique and

Gulshan Ara for their assistance. Thanks are also due to the headmasters, teachers, students of various schools

and also the individuals who voluntarily agreed for the present study.

ReferencesAhmed, F. (2011): Manipur Muslims Pharos Media& Publishing Pvt. Ltd, Delhi.

Basu, A. (1985): Dermatoglyphics of Mysore population, Anthropological Survey of India, Calcutta, 4-12.

Bhasin, M.K., Walter, H. & Danker-Hopfe, H. (1992): The Distribution of Genetical, Morphological and

Behavioural Traits among the people of Indian Region. Kamla –Raj Enterprises, Delhi.

Bhasin, M.K.,Walter, H. (2001): Genetics of caste and tribe of India. Kamla-Raj Enterprises, Delhi.

Cardaux, Richard, Gunter ,W., Nilmani, S., Mark, S.: (2004) The North East Indian Passageway, A barrier of

corridor for human migrations, Mol. Biol. and Evol. 21: 1525-33.

Dani, A.H. (1960): Prehistory and Protohistory of Eastern India. Calcutta: Firma KL Mukhopadhyay.

Das, B.M. (1971): Medullary structure of head hair in some Caucasoid and Mongoloid populations of Assam

India. Z. Morph. Anthrop. 53: 102-9.

Das, B.M. (1973): Caste and head hair. Indian Anthropol. 3: 135-8.

Das, B.M. (1979): Physical variation in three Assamese caste. Anthrop Anz. 3:204-10.

Das, B.M., Das, R. (1981): Intra and inter tribal variation in Palmer flexion crease: A population study. Indian J.

Phys. Anthrop. Hum. Genet. 7:173-8.

Das, B.M., Das, P.B., Das, R., Walter, H. & Danker-Hopfe, H. (1985): Anthropological studies in Assam, India.

Observations on Muslims. Anthrop. Anz. 43: 299-310.



Das, B.M., Walter, H., Gilbert, K., Lindenberg, P., Malhotra, K.C., Mukherjee, B.N., Deka R., Chakraborty R.

(1987): Genetic variation of five blood polymorphism in ten populations of Assam India. Int. J. Anthrop. 2: 325-

40.

Das, B.M., Sengupta, S. (2003): A Note on Some Morphogenetic Variables among the Sonowal Kacharis of

Assam. Anthropologist. 5: 211-2.

Felsenstein J. Phylip (Phylogeny Package) (1993) version 3.5c: Distributed by the author. Seattle, Dept. of

Genetics, University of Washington.

Grierson, G.A. (1903): The Linguistic Survey of India, Vol. III, Part II (Reprint 1967). Motilal Banarsidass,

Delhi, India.

Hodson, T.C. (1975): The Meiteis. (Reprint Edition) BR publishing Corporations, New Delhi.

Hsu, T.C. (1948): Tongue upfolding. J. Heredity. 39: 187-8.

Jacobs, J. (1990). Hill People of Northeast India ‘‘The Nagas.’’ Thame and Hudson Ltd., London.

Lalit, P. 2007. A brief history (Puwari) of the Meiteis of Manipur.http://themanipurpage.tri

Pod.com/history/puwarimeitei.html.

Lai, L.Y.C. & Walsh, R.J. (1966): Observations on ear lobe types. Acta. Genet. (Basel). 16: 250-57.

Liu, T.T. & Hsu, T.C. (1949): Tongue rolling and tongue folding a sample of Chinese population. J. Heredity. 40: 19-21.

Martin, R., & Sailer, K. (1961). Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Fischer, Stuttgart.

Meitei, M.S. (2007): A comparative study on Dermatoglyphical variation between the Brahmin and Muslim of

Manipur. Ph.D. Thesis, Manipur University.

Mitraa, M., Datta, U., Bajpai, H.R., Singhrol, C.S., & Mukherjee, B. N. (1995): Biology of Saryupari Brahmins of

Chhattisgarh, Central India. Anthro. Anz. 53: 137-51.

Nei, M. (1972): Genetic Distances between the populations.-Amer. Natural. 106: 283-92.

Nei, M.(1973): The theory and estimation of genetic distance In: Morton,N.E.(ed.): Genetics of population

structure - University of Hawaii, Honolulu. 45-54.

Phookan, M.N. (1974): The Kachari; a study of intra-tribal relations in respect to anthropometry, ABO blood

groups and taste sensitivity. Ph.D.Thesis, Dibrugarh University, Dibrugarh, Assam.

Rapson, E.J. (1955): People and languages. In: EJ Rapson(Ed.): Cambridge History of India. Vol.1. Ancient

India. Delhi: S Chand and Co. 33-57.

Roy choudhury, A.K. (1992): Genetic relationships of the populations in eastern India. Ann. Hum. Biol. 19: 489-501.

Saha, N.,Tay. ( 1990): Genetic studies among Nagas and Hmars of Eastern India. Amer. J. Phys. Anthro. 82: 101-

12.

Saraswathy, K.N., Kiranmala, N., Murry, B. Sinha E, Saksena D, Kaur H, Sachdeva MP, Kalla AK. (2009): A

genomic insight into the diversity among tribal and non-tribal population groups of Manipur, India. Biochem.

Genet. 47: 694–706.



Saraswathy, K.N., Mukhopadhyay, R, Shukla, Kaur H, Sachdeva MP, Rao AP, Saksena D, Kalla AK D. (2009):

Haplotype diversity and linkage disequilibrium at DRD2 locus-a study on four population groups of Andhra

Pradesh, India. Genet. Test. Mol. Biomarkers. 13:115–9.

Shah, A., Hussain, R., Fareed,M., Afzal, M.(2012): Gene frequency of sickle cell trait among Muslim

populations in a malarial belt of India, i.e., Manipur. 13: 323–30.

Shah, L.(1990): Bio-Anthropology of the Muslim of Manipur, Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Manipur University. 9-

13.

Sharma, K., Badaruddin. (1991): Meitei Pangal (Meitei Muslim). Laininghal Bapu Research center, Imphal.

Siddique,M., H.,A. (1970) Muslims of Calcutta 2nd edition Anthropological survey of India. Calcutta.

Singh, I.,W. (1986): The History of Manipur(An early period)Manipur Commercial Co. Thangal Bazar, Imphal.

216-19.

Singh L.R., (2002): The Kom tribe of Manipur their demography, culture and Bio-anthropology. Ph.D Thesis,

Manipur University.

Singh, M.R. & Singh T.S. (2008): Genetic polymorphism at three loci in two populations of Manipur, India.

Anthrop. Anz. 66: 191-8.

Sturtevant, A.H. (1940): A new inherited character in man: Tongue rolling. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 26: 100-102

Tiwari, S.C. & Bhasin, M.K. (1969): Frequency of hand clasping and ear lobe attachment in Tibetans. Hum.

Hered. 19: 658-61.



Fig. 1. Map showing location of Manipur in India



Fig. 2: Allele frequency of different morphological traits in different populations of Manipur



Fig. 3. Dendrogram showing genetic relationship among different populations of

Manipur, India

SHEIKH

SYED

MOGHUL

PATHAN

MEITEI

NAGA



Table 1. Phenotypic frequency of different morpho-genetic traits in different populations of Manipur

Populations Table1: Characters(Phenotype Frequency)

M-male, F-female, T-total, P-present, A-absent

Tongue folding

P A

Tongue rolling

P A

Hitchhiker’s thumb

P A

Dimple

P ASheikh M F T

163(79.1)174(51.6)337(76.6)

43(20.9)60(25.6)103(23.4)

127(61.7)139(59.4)266(60.5)

79(38.4)95(40.6)174(39.6)

157(65.4)140(59.8)297(62.7)

83(34.6)94(40.2)177(37.3)

15(8.7)26(14.7)41(11.7)

158(91.3)151(85.3)309(88.3)

Syed M

F T

53(82.8)58(96.7)111(89.5)

11(17.2)2(3.33)13(10.5)

24(37.5)20(33.3)44(35.5)

40(62.5)40(66.7)80(64.5)

20(27.8)44(36.7)64(33.3)

52(72.2)76(63.3)128(66.7)

10(15.6)16(26.7)26(21)

54(84.4)44(73.3)98(79)

Pathan M

F T

73(94.8)80(90.9)153(92.7)

4(5.2)8(9.09)12(7.27)

49(63.6)51(58)100(60.6)

28(36.4)37(42.1)65(39.4)

41(53.3)40(45.5)81(49.1)

36(46.8)48(54.6)84(50.9)

9(13.2)8(9)17(10.3)

68(86.8)80(91)148(89.7)

Moghul M F T

23(76.5)21(58.33)44(66.67)

7(23.3)15(41.7)22(33.3)

12(40)8(22.2)20(30.3)

18(60)28(77.8)46(69.7)

12(40)8(22.2)20(30.3)

18(60)28(77.8)46(69.7)

1(3.3)5(13.9)6(9.1)

29(96.7)31(86.1)60(90.9)

Meitei M F

T

52(76.5)82(91.11)134(84.8)

16(23.5)8(8.89)24(15.2)

28(41.2)38(42.2)66(41.8)

40(58.8)52(57.8)92(58.2)

30(44.1)52(57.8)82(51.9)

38(55.9)38(42.2)76(48.1)

4(6.45)18(21.4)22(15.1)

58(93.6)66(78.6)124(84.9)

Naga M F T

5(3.85)6(4.92)11(4.26)

125(96.2)122(95.3)247(96)

7(5.38)10(7.81)17(6.59)

123(94.6)118(92.2)241(93.4)

60(46.2)60(46.9)120(46.5)

70(53.9)68(53.1)138(53.5)

10(7.69)13(10.2)23(8.9)

120(92.3)115(89.8)235(91.1)

Populations Table1: Characters(Phenotype Frequency)

M-male, F-female, T-total, P-present, A-absent

Widow’s peak

P A

Cleft Chin

P A

Ear lobe (Free)

P ASheikh M F T

47(25.9)51(28.8)98(27.4)

134(74)126(71.2)260(72.6)

48(27.8)44(24.8)92(26.3)

125(72.3)133(75.1)258(73.7)

105(60.7)118(66.7)223(63.7)

68(39.3)59(33.3)127(36.3)

Syed M F

24(37.5)26(43.3)

40(62.5)34(56.7)

24(37.5)10(16.7)

40(62.5)50(83.3)

28(43.8)36(60)

36(56.3)24(40)



T 50(40.3)

74(59.7)

34(27.4)

90(72.6)

64(51.6)

60(48.4)

Pathan M F T

23(42.6)25(28.4)48(29.1)

54(57.4)63(71.6)117(70.9)

23(29.9)20(22.7)43(26.1)

54(70.1)68(77.3)122(74.6)

44(57.1)56(63.6)100(60.6)

33(42.9)32(36.4)65(39.4)

Moghul M F T

2(6.67)1(2.8)3(4.55)

28(93.3)35(97.2)63(95.5)

1(3.3)5(13.9)6(9.09)

29(96.7)31(86.1)60(90.9)

18(60)28(77.8)46(69.7)

12(40)8(22.2)20(30.3)

Meitei M F T

6(9.7)10(11.9)16(11)

56(90.3)74(88.1)130(89)

4(6.45)18(21.4)22(15.1)

58(93.6)66(78.6)124(84.9)

28(41.2)28(31.1)56(35.4)

40(58.8)62(68.9)102(64.6)

Naga M F T

55(42.3)28(21.9)83(32.2)

75(57.7)100(78.1)175(67.8)

10(7.69)13(10.2)23(8.9)

120(92.3)115(89.8)235(91.1)

53(40.8)53(41.4)106(41.1)

77(59.2)75(58.6)152(58.9)

Table 2. Observed and expected values of different morpho-genetic traits in different populations of Manipur

Populations Table 2 Characters(Observed and Expected)Absent

Tongue Upfolding

P A

Tongue rolling

P A


P A

Dimple

P A

Sheikh Obs

Exp

337

287

103

153

266

186

174

254

297

251

177

234

41

43

309

307

Syed Obs

Exp

111

80.9

13

43.1

44

52.5

80

71.5

64

97

128

94.9

26

15

98

108

Pathan Obs

Exp

153

107.6

12

57.4

100

69.9

65

95.1

81

83

84

81.5

17

20

148

145

Mughal Obs

Exp

44

43.1

22

23

20

28

46

38.0

20

33

46

32.6

6

8

60

58



Meitei Obs

Exp

134

103.1

24

55

66

67

92

91.1

82

80

76

78.1

22

18

124

128

Naga Obs

Exp

11

168

247

89.7

17

109

241

149

120

130

138

128

23

31

235

226

Populations Table 2 Characters(Observed and Expected)Widow’s peak

P A

Cleft Chin

P A

Ear lobe

P A Sheikh Obs

Exp

98

95.5

260

261

92

69.4

258

207

269

232

171

207

Syed Obs

Exp

50

33

74

90.4

34

24.6

90

99.4

64

65.6

60

58.4

Pathan Obs

Exp

48

44

117

120

43

32.7

122

132

100

87.3

65

77.6

Mughal Obs

Exp

3

17.6

63

48.1

6

13

60

52.9

46

34.9

20

31.07

Meitei Obs

Exp

16

39

126

106

22

29

124

117

56

83.6

102

74.4

Naga Obs

Exp

83

68.8

175

188

23

51.2

235

207

106

137

152

121.4

Table 3. Chisquare values of different morpho-genetic traits in different populations of Manipur

Populations Characters ( Chisquare χ2) Tongue

Upfolding

Tongue

rolling

Hitchhiker

’s thumb

Dimple Widow’

s peak

Cleft

Chin

Ear lobe

Sheikh 25.02 58.98 22.3 0.07 0.0705 20.04 68.526

Syed 32.24 2.405 22.82 8.98 11.6524 4.48 0.087

Pathan 54.98 22.487 0.144 0.54 0.4553 4.02 3.8991

Moghul 0.06 3.936 10.8 0.58 16.684 4.79 7.452

Meitei 26.7 0.022 0.61 1.15 17.0814 2.087 19.399

Naga 422.9 135.22 1.7 2.6 3.8496 19.36 14.529

Total 561.87 223.05 58.42 13.9 49.7932 55.137 113.892

The value in parenthesis represents the p-value.



Table 4. Allele frequency of different morpho-genetic traits in different populations of ManipurPopulations Characters (Allele frequency)

Tongue folding

p q

Tongue rolling

p q

Hitchhiker’s thumb p q

Dimple

p q

Widow’s peak

p q

Cleft Chin

p q

Ear lobe(free)

p qSheikh M F T

0.110.280.13

0.890.780.86

0.380.360.37

0.690.640.63

0.190.230.21

0.810.770.79

0.040.080.06

0.960.920.94

0.120.160.15

0.860.840.85

0.150.070.09

0.850.870.86

0.370.420.40

0.630.580.60

Syed M F T

0.090.020.05

0.910.980.95

0.210.180.20

0.790.820.80

0.470.390.42

0.530.610.58

0.080.140.11

0.920.860.89

0.210.250.23

0.790.750.77

0.210.090.15

0.790.910.85

0.250.370.30

0.750.630.70

Pathan M F T

0.030.050.04

0.970.950.96

0.400.350.37

0.600.650.63

0.270.330.30

0.730.670.70

0.070.050.05

0.930.950.95

0.240.150.16

0.760.850.84

0.160.120.14

0.840.880.86

0.350.400.37

0.650.600.63

Moghul M F T

0.120.240.18

0.880.760.82

0.230.120.17

0.770.880.83

0.370.530.45

0.630.470.55

0.020.070.05

0.980.920.95

0.030.010.02

0.970.990.98

0.020.070.05

0.980.930.95

0.370.530.45

0.630.470.55

Meitei M F T

0.130.050.08

0.880.950.92

0.230.240.24

0.770.760.76

0.340.240.28

0.660.760.72

0.030.110.08

0.970.890.92

0.050.060.06

0.950.940.94

0.030.110.08

0.970.890.92

0.230.170.19

0.770.830.81

Naga M F

T

0.800.780.79

0.200.220.21

0.030.040.03

0.970.960.97

0.320.320.32

0.680.680.68

0.040.050.05

0.960.950.95

0.200.120.18

0.760.880.82

0.040.050.05

0.960.950.95

0.230.230.23

0.770.770.77

p-Dominant allele frequency, q- Recessive allele frequency, M-Male, F-Female, T-Total

Table 5. Hetrozygosity values of different morpho-genetic traits in different populations of ManipurPopulations Characters ( Hetrozygosity )

Tongue folding

Tongue rolling


Dimple Widow’s peak

Cleft Chin Ear lobe

Sheikh 0.2184 0.467 0.3299 0.1135 0.2582 0.1511 0.4697Syed 0.102 0.316 0.4880 0.1974 0.3515 0.2522 0.4235Pathan 0.0713 0.4674 0.4195 0.1002 0.2659 0.2359 0.4669Moghul 0.2997 0.2758 0.4949 0.089 0.045 0.0896 0.4949Meitei 0.1455 0.3616 0.4028 0.1448 0.1064 0.1438 0.3158Naga 0.3277 0.065 0.434 0.087 0.2906 0.088 0.3562

Table 6. Gene diversity analysis for individual loci.LOCUS DST HT HS GST

Tongue folding 0.3475 0.5457 0.1983 0.6367Tongue rolling 0.2164 0.5427 0.3263 0.3988Hitchiker thumb 0.4942 0.9229 0.4287 0.5355Dimple 0.1002 0.3745 0.2743 0.2676Widow’s peak 0.2314 0.4523 0.2209 1.0475Cleft chin 0.2369 0.4178 0.1809 0.5670Ear lobe 0.1802 0.6007 0.4205 0.29998Combined 0.2581 0.5509 0.2928 0.5362

Hs is the average gene diversity within the subpopulations and DST is the average gene diversity between the subpopulations. The coefficient of gene differentiation relative to the total populations is GST



Table7. Genetic distance matrix among different populations of Manipur.Populations Sheikh Syed Pathan Moghul Meitei NagaSheikh _ 0.00370 0.0208 0.1808 0.0304 0.1245Syed _ _ 0.01216 0.0234 0.0294 0.1484Pathan _ _ _ 0.0245 0.0155 0.1253Moghul _ _ _ _ 0.02275 0.0945Meitei _ _ _ _ _ 0.1003Naga _ _ _ _ _ _


Date post:	13-Mar-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Phylogenetic relationships of Muslim populations of Manipur … · 2012. 12. 16. · Shah et Al....

Documents