PDF《贵州 家人的体型》

收稿日期:2014-3-18;

定稿日期:2014-06-29 基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目资助(31271283) 作者简介 : 包金萍(1964-),女,天津人,教授,主要从事人类群体遗传学研究.

E-mail: balaqiang111@163.com 通讯作者 : 郑连斌(1948-),汉族,江苏淮阴人,天津师范大学教授,从事体质人类学与人类群体遗传学研究.E-mail: zhenglianbin@sina.com Citation: Bao JP, Li YL, Zheng LB. A study on the somatotypes of the Gejia People in Guizhou Province[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2017, 36(3): 381-388 DOI: 10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2015.0055 贵州 家人的体型 包金萍

1 ,李咏兰

2 ,郑连斌

3 1. 天津师范大学体育科学学院 , 天津市动植物抗性重点实验室,天津 300387;

2. 内蒙古师范大学生命科学与技术学院,呼和浩 特010022;

3. 天津师范大学生命科学学院 , 天津市动植物抗性重点实验室,天津

300387 摘要:采用 Heath-Carter 人体测量法对 家人成人

311 例(男159 例,女152 例)进行了体型研究.研 究发现, 家人男性的体型平均数为 3.4-4.8-2.1,属于偏内胚层的中胚层体型;

女性体型均数为 4.9-4.7- 1.3,属于内胚层 - 中胚层均衡型. 家人性别间

5 个年龄组体型差异均具有统计学意义.随年龄增长, 男性内因子值趋于变小,而且年龄组间内因子值具有明显差异.男性中因子、外因子与年龄均不相关, 年龄组间中因子、外因子值的差异亦无统计学意义.女性内因子与年龄呈负相关,中因子、外因子与年 龄均不具有相关(P>

0.05).内因子、中因子、外因子值在不同年龄组间的的差异具有统计学意义. 家人男性与云南汉族、布依族、客家人、\人、广西汉族体型接近, 家人女性与客家人、怒族、\人、 侗族体型最为接近.在中国南方族群中, 家人身体脂肪含量较多,骨骼、肌肉含量中等,身体相对粗 壮些. 家人与生活在南方的汉族族群体型相对接近. 关键词:Heath-Carter 体型法;

家人;

内因子;

中因子;

外因子 中图法分类号 : Q983;

文献标识码 :A;

文章编号 : 1000-3193(2017)03-0381-08 A study on the somatotypes of the Gejia people in Guizhou Province BAO Jinping1 , LI Yonglan2 , ZHENG Lianbin3 1. Institute of Sports Science, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Animal and Plant Resistance, Tianjin 300387;

2. College of Life Science and Technology, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot 010022;

3.College of Life Sciences, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Animal and Plant Resistance, Tianjin

300387 Abstract: The somatotypes of

311 Gejia adults (159 males and

152 females) in Guizhou were studied using the Heath-Carter somatotyping method. The results suggest that the endomorph- mesomorph somatotype in both males and females are similar, but that males are more mesomophic, in contrast to females that lie between endomorphs and mesomorphs. Mean somatotype values were males: 3.4-4.8-2.1 and females: 4.9-4.7-1.3. Gender differences in ? ?

381 ? 包金萍等:贵州 家人的体型 somatotypes were statistically significant in all five age groups but with increased age, male endomorphic values became smaller and there were significant differences in somatotypes between age groups. Male mesomorphic and ectomorphic types were not related to age, and there were no significant age differences in mesomorphic and ectomorphic somatotypes in males. Female endomorphic values were negatively correlated with age, while mesomorphic and ectomorphic types were not related to age in females (P>