| Title |
Y-chromosomal insights into the genetic impact of the caste system in India
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Genetics, October 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00439-006-0282-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tatiana Zerjal, Arpita Pandya, Kumarasamy Thangaraj, Edmund Y. S. Ling, Jennifer Kearley, Stefania Bertoneri, Silvia Paracchini, Lalji Singh, Chris Tyler-Smith |
| Abstract |
The caste system has persisted in Indian Hindu society for around 3,500 years. Like the Y chromosome, caste is defined at birth, and males cannot change their caste. In order to investigate the genetic consequences of this system, we have analysed male-lineage variation in a sample of 227 Indian men of known caste, 141 from the Jaunpur district of Uttar Pradesh and 86 from the rest of India. We typed 131 Y-chromosomal binary markers and 16 microsatellites. We find striking evidence for male substructure: in particular, Brahmins and Kshatriyas (but not other castes) from Jaunpur each show low diversity and the predominance of a single distinct cluster of haplotypes. These findings confirm the genetic isolation and drift within the Jaunpur upper castes, which are likely to result from founder effects and social factors. In the other castes, there may be either larger effective population sizes, or less strict isolation, or both. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 4 | 50% |
| Comoros | 1 | 13% |
| Andorra | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 35% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,312,801
of 24,898,480 outputs
Outputs from Human Genetics
#285
of 3,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,748
of 82,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Genetics
#4
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,898,480 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 82,319 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.