Japanese Journal of Human Genetics

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 341–369

The theory of genetic distance and evolution of human races

The Japan societyof human genetics award lecture
  • Masatoshi Nei
Article
  • 63 Downloads

Summary

  1. 1.

    Theoretical works on Nei's genetic distance and its extensions are discussed. New formulae for the sampling variances of genetic distance estimates are presented. Formulae for the genetic identity of genes at the electrophoretic level when the mutation rate varies from locus to locus are also presented.

     
  2. 2.

    Empirical data suggests that the rate of gene substitution or mutation rate per locus varies considerably among protein loci, and if this factor is taken into account, the rate of decline of genetic identity (I) is no longer constant but decreases with evolutionary time. Using both the infiniteallele model and the stepwise mutation model, the numerical relationship betweenI and evolutionary time is presented. This relationship may be used for estimating the time after divergence between populations. The value of genetic distance or genetic identity is also affected considerably by the bottleneck effect. The bottleneck effect generally accelerates the increase of genetic distance with time, and the effect remains for a long time after the population size returns to the original level. A method for correcting for this effect is presented.

     
  3. 3.

    Application of the theory of genetic distance to data on protein polymorphism in man indicates that the genetic variation between the three major races, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid, is much smaller than the variation within them, despite the fact that there is a conspicuous difference in some morphological characters such as pigmentation, facial structure, and hair texture. It is proposed that the differentiation of these morphological characters was brought about by relatively strong natural selection through a small number of gene substitutions, whereas general protein loci are subject to little or very weak selection. Analysis of blood group gene frequency data gives essentially the same result as those from protein loci, though they are likely to have been affected by nonrandom sampling of the loci. It is also shown that at the protein level the racial differences in man correspond to those between local races in other organisms.

     
  4. 4.

    Rough estimates of the number of codon differences between an individual of man and his various relatives are presented. It seems that the mean number of codon differences between man and chimpanzee is about 10 times larger than that between second degree relatives in Caucasians or Japanese, but about 1/19 of that between man and horse.

     
  5. 5.

    Genetic distance estimates suggest that among the three major races of man the first divergence occurred about 120,000 years ago between Negroid and a group of Caucasoid and Mongoloid and then the latter group split into Caucasoid and Mongoloid around 60,000 years ago. It is also shown that the genetic identity between man and chimpanzee corresponds to a divergence time of 4–6 million years if the assumption of constant rate of amino acid substitution is correct.

     
  6. 6.

    Methods of constructing a phylogenetic tree from genetic distance estimates are discussed. For constructing the topology of a tree, Fitch and Margoliash's method is quite efficient. For estimating branch lengths, however, Nei's method of averaging distances seems to be better.

     
  7. 7.

    A phylogenetic tree for twelve races of man is constructed by using gene frequency data for 11 protein and 11 blood group loci. This tree roughly agrees with what we expect intuitively from the morphological characters and the historical record of these races.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayala, F.J. ed. 1976.Molecular Evolution. Sinauer Assoc. Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  2. Balakrishnan, V. and Sanghvi, L.D. 1968. Distance between populations on the basis of attribute data.Biometrics 24: 859–865.Google Scholar
  3. Bhattacharyya, A. 1946. On a measure of divergence between two multinomial populations.Sankhya 7: 401–406.Google Scholar
  4. Carlson, S.S., Wilson, A.C., and Maxon, R.D. 1978. Reply to L. Radinsky's comment: Do albumin clocks run on time?Science 200: 1183–1184.Google Scholar
  5. Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. 1966. Population structure and human evolution.Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 164: 362–379.Google Scholar
  6. Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. 1969. Human diversity.Proc. 12th Intl. Congr. Genet. (Tokyo) 3: 405–416.Google Scholar
  7. Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. and Bodmer, W.F. 1971.The Genetics of Human Populations. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  8. Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. and Edwards, A.W.F. 1964. Analysis of human evolution. In:Genetics today, Proc. 11th Intl. Cong. Genet., The Hague. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 923–933.Google Scholar
  9. Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. and Edwards, A.W.F. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: models and estimation procedures.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 19: 233–257.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Chakraborty, R. 1977. Estimation of time of divergence from phylogenetic studies.Can. J. Cytol. Genet. 19: 217–223.Google Scholar
  11. Chakraborty, R., Fuerst, P.A., and Nei, M. 1977. A comparative study of genetic variation within and between populations under the neutral mutation hypothesis and the model of sequentially advantageous mutation.Genetics 86: s10-s11.Google Scholar
  12. Chakraborty, R., Fuerst, P.A., and Nei, M. 1978. Statistical studies on protein polymorphism in natural populations. II. Gene differentiation between populations.Genetics 88: 367–390.Google Scholar
  13. Chakraborty, R. and Nei, M. 1974. Dynamics of gene differentiation between incompletely isolated populations of unequal sizes.Theor. Popul. Biol. 5: 460–469.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chakraborty, R. and Nei, M. 1976. Hidden genetic variability within electromorphs in finite populations.Genetics 84: 385–393.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Chakraborty, R. and Nei, M. 1977. Bottleneck effects on average heterozygosity and genetic distance with the stepwise mutation model.Evolution 31: 347–356.Google Scholar
  16. Coon, C.S. 1962.The Origin of Races. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Dayhoff, M.O. ed. 1969.Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, Vol. 4. Natl. Biomed. Res. Found., Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  18. Farris, J.S. 1972. Estimating phylogenetic trees from distance matrices.Am. Nat. 106: 645–668.Google Scholar
  19. Fitch, W.M. 1976. Molecular evolutionary clocks. In:Molecular Evolution, F.J. Ayala, ed., Sinauer Assoc. Inc., Sunderland, Mass., pp. 160–178.Google Scholar
  20. Fitch, W.M. and Margoliash, E. 1967. Construction of phylogenetic trees.Science 155: 279–284.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Fitch, W.M. and Neel, J.V. 1969. The phylogenic relationships of some Indian tribes of Central and South America.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 21: 384–397.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuerst, P.A., Chakraborty, R., and Nei, M. 1977. Statistical studies on protein polymorphism in natural populations. I. Distribution of single locus heterozygosity.Genetics 86: 455–483.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Goodman, M. 1961. The role of immunochemical difference in the phyletic development of human behavior.Human Biology 33: 131–162.Google Scholar
  24. Gorman, G.C. and Kim, Y.J. 1977. Genotypic evolution in the face of phenotypic conservativeness:Abudefduf (Pomacentridae) from the Atlantic and Pacific sides of Panama.Copeia 1977: 694–697.Google Scholar
  25. Harris, H. 1966. Enzyme polymorphisms in man.Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B. 164: 298–310.Google Scholar
  26. Harris, H. 1969. Enzyme and protein polymorphism in human populations.Br. Med. Bull. 25: 5–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Imaizumi, Y., Morton, N.E., and Lalouel, J.M. 1973. Kinship and race. In:Genetic structure of populations, N.E. Morton, ed., University of Hawaii, Honolulu, pp. 228–233.Google Scholar
  28. Johnson, G.B. 1974. On the estimation of effective number of alleles from electrophoretic data.Genetics 78: 771–776.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kafatos, F.C., Efstratiadis, A., Forget, B.G., and Weissman, S.M. 1977. Molecular evolution of human and rabbit β-globin mRNAs.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 74: 5618–5622.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kidd, K.K. and Cavalli-Sforza, L.L. 1971. Number of characters examined and error in reconstruction of evolutionary trees. In:Mathematics in the Archaeological and Historical Sciences, F.R. Hodson, D.G. Kendall, and P. Tautu, eds., University of Edinburgh Press, Edinburgh, pp. 335–346.Google Scholar
  31. Kimura, M. 1968. Evolutionary rate at the molecular level.Nature 217: 624–626.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Kimura, M. 1969. The number of heterozygous nucleotide sites maintained in a finite population due to steady flux of mutation.Genetics 61: 893–903.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Kimura, M. and Ohta, T. 1971.Theoretical Aspects of Population Genetics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  34. King, M. and Wilson, A.C. 1975. Evolution at two levels in humans and Chimpanzees.Science 188: 107–116.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Koehn, R.K. and Eanes, W.F. 1977. Subunit size and genetic variation of enzymes in natural populations ofDrosophila.Theor. Popul. Biol. 11: 330–341.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Lewontin, R.C. 1967. An estimate of average heterozygosity in man.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 19: 681–685.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewontin, R.C. 1972. The apportioment of human diversity.Evol. Biol. 6: 381–398.Google Scholar
  38. Lewontin, R.C. and Hubby, J.L. 1966. A molecular approach to the study of genic heterozygosity in natural populations. II. Amount of variation and degree of heterozygosity in natural populations ofDrosophila pseudoobscura.Genetics 54: 595–609.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Li, W.-H. 1976a. Electrophoretic identity of proteins in a finite population and genetic distance between taxa.Genet. Res. 28: 119–127.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Li, W.-H. 1976b. Effect of migration on genetic distance.Am. Natur. 110: 841–847.Google Scholar
  41. Li, W.-H. and Nei, M. 1975. Drift variances of heterozygosity and genetic distance in transient states.Genet. Res. 25: 229–248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Mahalanobis, P.C. 1936. On the generalized distance in statistics.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India 2: 49–55.Google Scholar
  43. Malécot, G. 1948.Les Mathématiques de l'hérédité. Masson et Cie, Paris.Google Scholar
  44. Malécot, G. 1950. Quelques schémas probabilistes sur la variabilité des populations naturelles.Ann. Univ. Lyon, Sci. Sect. A 13: 37–60.Google Scholar
  45. Margoliash, E. and Smith, E.L. 1965. Structural and functional aspects of cytochrome c in relation to evolution. In:Evolving Genes and Proteins, V. Bryson and H.J. Vogel, eds., Academic Press, New York, pp. 221–242.Google Scholar
  46. Maruyama, T. 1977.Stochastic Problems in Population Genetics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Nei, M. 1971. Interspecific gene differences and evolutionary time estimated from electrophoretic data on protein identiy.Am. Nat. 105: 385–398.Google Scholar
  48. Nei, M. 1972. Genetic distance between populations.Am. Nat. 106: 283–292.Google Scholar
  49. Nei, M. 1973a. The theory and estimation of genetic distance. In:Genetic Structure of Populations, N.E. Morton, ed., University of Hawaii, Honolulu, pp. 45–54.Google Scholar
  50. Nei, M. 1973b. Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 70: 3321–3323.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Nei, M. 1974. A new measure of genetic distance. In:Genetic Distance, J.F. Crow and C. Denniston, eds., Plenum Press, New York and London, pp. 63–76.Google Scholar
  52. Nei, M. 1975.Molecular Population Genetics and Evolution. North Holland, Amsterdam and New York.Google Scholar
  53. Nei, M. 1977a. Genetic distance. In:Genetics, E. Matsunaga and K. Omoto, eds., Yuzankaku Publ., Tokyo, pp. 29–62.Google Scholar
  54. Nei, M. 1977b. F-statistics and analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations.Ann. Hum. Genet., London 41: 225–233.Google Scholar
  55. Nei, M. 1978. Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals.Genetics 89: 583–590.Google Scholar
  56. Nei, M. and Chakraborty, R. 1973. Genetic distance and electrophoretic identity of proteins between taxa.J. Mol. Evol. 2: 323–328.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Nei, M., Chakraborty, R., and Fuerst, P.A. 1976a. Infinite allele model with varying mutation rate.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 73: 4164–4168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Nei, M. and Chakravarti, A. 1977. Drift variances of FST and GST statistics obtained from a finite number of isolated populations.Theor. Popul. Biol. 11: 307–325.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Nei, M., Chakravarti, A., and Tateno, Y. 1977. Mean and variance of FST in a finite number of incompletely isolated populations.Theor. Popul. Biol. 11: 291–306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Nei, M. and Feldman, M.W. 1972. Identity of genes by descent within and between populations under mutation and migration pressures.Theor. Popul. Biol. 3: 460–465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Nei, M., Fuerst, P.A., and Chakraborty, R. 1976b. Testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by distribution of single locus heterozygosity.Nature 262: 491–493.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Nei, M., Fuerst, P.A., and Chakraborty, R. 1978. Subunit molecular weight and genetic variability of proteins in natural populations.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.,75: 3359–3362.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Nei, M. and Roychoudhury, A.K. 1972. Gene differences between Caucasian, Negro, and Japanese populations.Science 177: 434–436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Nei, M. and Roychoudhury, A.K. 1974a. Sampling variances of heterozygosity and genetic distance.Genetics 76: 379–390.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Nei, M. and Roychoudhury, A.K. 1974b. Genic variation within and between the three major races of man, Caucasoids, Negroids, and Mongoloids.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 26: 421–443.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Nei, M. and Tateno, Y. 1975. Interlocus variation of genetic distance and the neutral mutation theory.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 72: 2758–2760.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Ohta, T. and Kimura, M. 1973. A model of mutation appropriate to estimate the number of electrophoretically detectable alleles in a finite population.Genet. Res. 22: 201–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Omoto, K. 1975. Genetic affinities of the Ainu as assessed from data on polymorphic traits. In:Anthropological and Genetic Studies on the Japanese, S. Watanabe, S. Kondo, and E. Matsunaga, eds., University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, pp. 296–303.Google Scholar
  69. Prager, E.M. and Wilson, A.C. 1978. Construction of phylogenetic trees for proteins and nucleic acids: comparison of alternative matrix methods.J. Mol. Evol. 11: 129–142.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Reed, T.E. 1969. Caucasian genes in American Negroes.Science 165: 841–858.Google Scholar
  71. Roychoudhury, A.K. 1977. Gene diversity in Indian populations.Hum. Gent. 40: 99–106.Google Scholar
  72. Sanghvi, L.D. 1953. Comparison of genetic and morphological methods for a study of biological differences.Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 11: 385–404.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Sarich, V.M. 1977. Rates, sample sizes, and the neutrality hypothesis for electrophoresis in evolutionary studies.Nature 265: 24–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Sarich, V.M. and Wilson, A.C. 1966. Quantitative immunochemistry and the evolution of primate albumins: micro-complement fixation.Science 154: 1563–1566.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Sarich, V.M. and Wilson, A.C. 1967. Immunological time scale for hominid evolution.Science 158: 1200–1203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Slatkin, M. and Maruyama, T. 1975. The influence of gene flow on genetic distance.Am. Nat. 109: 597–601.Google Scholar
  77. Smith, C.A.B. 1977. A note on genetic distance.Ann. Hum. Genet. 40: 463–479.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Sokal, R.R. and Sneath, P.H.A. 1963.Principles of Numerical Taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  79. Steinberg, A.G., Bleibtreu, H.K., Kurczynski, T.W., Martin, A.O., and Kurcyzynski, E.M. 1967. Genetic studies on an inbred human isolate. In:Proc. 3rd Intl. Cong. Human Genetics. The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, pp. 267–289.Google Scholar
  80. Weitkamp, L.R., Arends, T., Gallango, M.L., Neel, J.V., Schultz, J., and Shreffler, D.C. 1972.Google Scholar
  81. Nei, M. 1977c. Estimation of mutation rate from rare protein variants.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 29: 225–232.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. —. The genetic structure of a tribal population, the Yanomama Indians. III. Seven serum protein systems.Ann. Hum. Genet. 35: 271–279.Google Scholar
  83. Weitkamp, L.R. and Neel, J.V. 1972. The genetic structure of a tribal population, the Yanomama Indians. IV. Eleven erythrocyte enzymes and summary of protein variants.Ann. Hum. Genet. 35: 433–444.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Wilson, A.C., Carlson, S.S. and White, T.J. 1977. Biochemical evolution.Annu. Rev. Biochem. 46: 573–639.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Wilson, A.C. and Sarich, V.M. 1969. A molecular time scale for human evolution.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 63: 1088–1093.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Wright, S. 1931. Evolution in Mendelian populations.Genetics 16: 97–159.Google Scholar
  87. Wright, S. 1943. Isolation by distance.Genetics 28: 114–138.Google Scholar
  88. Wright, S. 1951. The genetic structure of populations.Ann. Eugenics 15: 323–354.Google Scholar
  89. Zouros, E. 1979. Mutation rates, population sizes, and amounts of electrophoretic variation of enzyme loci in natural populations.Genetics, in press.Google Scholar
  90. Zuckerkandl, E. and Pauling, L. 1962. Molecular disease, evolution, and genic heterogeneity. InHorizones in Biochemistry, M. Kasha and B. Pullman, eds., Academic Press, New York, pp. 189–225.Google Scholar
  91. Zuckerkandl, E. and Pauling, L. 1965. Evolutionary divergence and convergence in proteins. InEvolving Genes and Proteins, V. Bryson and H.J. Vogel, eds., Academic Press, New York, pp. 97–166.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Society of Human Genetics 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masatoshi Nei
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Demographic and Population GeneticsUniversity of Texas at HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations