PDA

View Full Version : The Genetic Admixture Of Most Latin Americans



jibarodepr
2011-04-16, 04:43
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmZ0T8nkT7I

What do you think of it people?

Tenochkatl
2011-04-16, 05:08
LOL @ 'African Mexican Genetic Admixture' in the related video section. SSA admixture from the colonial period proofs the Olmecs were black? Dumbasses.

jibarodepr
2011-04-16, 05:11
LOL @ 'African Mexican Genetic Admixture' in the related video section. SSA admixture from the colonial period proofs the Olmecs were black? Dumbasses.Ignore that, the owner of the video(Ölmec98) is the famous afrocentric Dr Clyde Winters, poster at egyptsearch, he blocked me from his channel because I argued with him about the Black Olmecs.

dbbrainer
2011-04-16, 10:40
Pause at sec. 46 according to that chart P.R. seems to have a tendency towards european influence.

jibarodepr
2011-04-16, 18:41
Pause at sec. 46 according to that chart P.R. seems to have a tendency towards european influence.Yes, majority of them go towards Euro, but also there are some who go toward african and native.

Bohecoa
2011-04-16, 18:46
Youtube is a crazy place.

jibarodepr
2011-04-16, 18:50
Youtube is a crazy place.Yes, but there are some serious channels on there also. ;)

Arminfrench
2011-04-16, 18:57
It looks accurated in general terms....

kilometro7
2011-04-17, 03:28
I think PR is more European then 51%.

rich86
2011-04-17, 03:33
Ehhhhhh yeah maybe but i dont know if it really matters in the end

jibarodepr
2011-04-17, 22:53
Ehhhhhh yeah maybe but i dont know if it really matters in the endWell, only to the people interested on it of course.;)

York
2011-04-17, 23:08
Winters is a delusional fraud.

jibarodepr
2011-04-17, 23:09
Who?

York
2011-04-17, 23:10
Who?

Winters.

jibarodepr
2011-04-17, 23:11
I agree.

Nordenskjöld
2011-04-17, 23:22
"Este vídeo incluye contenido de SME, que lo ha bloqueado en tu país por motivos de derechos de copyright"..

what does it say in a few words?

Cuetlachtli57
2011-04-25, 22:49
I agree.

Winters and Ivan van certima, are frauds.. no doubt about it

It's funny cuz they are teaching this type of shit in universities, lol

Maverick
2011-07-31, 21:31
Those results I believe are from ancerstry-by-Dna which I believe are considered worthless. This is compared to other companies.

Cuetlachtli57
2011-07-31, 21:42
Those results I believe are from ancerstry-by-Dna which I believe are considered worthless. This is compared to other companies.

they are worthless... do you really think george lopez is 32% indigenous? he took that test from that same DNA company :lol:

Boots
2011-08-01, 02:54
well I think it is truly ignorant **i* that any of the???? centrist use terms like african/ caucasian/ asian etc etc propa-gators ...these current social and political structures and concepts, which have been created and are only realities in the minds of these fools..
but really , to apply those political concepts to anyones ancestors anywhere in the world in any other age.
to how ignorant to people who would not have had a freaked clue what it is these centrist fools are talking about.
when chances are the ancients realities or politics or social constructs was never anything even kind of close to anything any of these ideas and the politics of the goofballs of today .
you know but it just goes to prove how our current narcissistic society is about to come to it's most "natural" conclusions.. implode on it's own ignorant big ass end!

kilometro7
2011-08-01, 03:11
Those results I believe are from ancerstry-by-Dna which I believe are considered worthless. This is compared to other companies.

:lol: you're right, I remember rtgu87 posting the ancestrybyDNA results of a Mexican Hip hop artist, as prove that Mexicans have 0 SSA admixture. :whoco:

Cuetlachtli57
2011-08-01, 03:24
:lol: you're right, I remember rtgu87 posting the ancestrybyDNA results of a Mexican Hip hop artist, as prove that Mexicans have 0 SSA admixture. :whoco:

that was me that posted the thread.

rtgu87 said that the mexicans were the puriest mestizos lol

kilometro7
2011-08-01, 04:23
that was me that posted the thread.

rtgu87 said that the mexicans were the puriest mestizos lol

Lol sorry, I thought he posted it, but I remember him saying something along those lines.

Tenochkatl
2011-08-01, 04:47
That rapper's European/indigenous admixture proportions coincided well with admixture studies and 23andme results for multigenerational Chicanos and Northern/Western Mexicans, sans the complete lack of African. It's not like every single Mexican must score SSA admix by default, Mexico is a very large country after all and has a very mountainous terrain which might constrict the flow of admixture both into and out of certain regions, the isolated Costa Chica being a prime example. However, there's no denying that so far the trend of random individuals tested so far indicates that a majority have it to a small degree, Decimator and Nomar are just making fools out of themselves by rejecting that so vehemently.

kilometro7
2011-08-01, 05:04
@ tenoch Agreed. I'm sure there are regions in Mexico where people have no SSA admixture, especially after seeing that some Colombians from particular regions have Zero SSA admixture. In fact, regions with no SSA admixture are probably more common in Mexico then Colombia, Considering the latter has had a historically big SSA influence.

RaFeSa
2011-08-03, 13:34
I'm downloading all pieces on South American autosomic admixture rates. So far I've able to gather quite a lot on Brazilians, and a bit on Argentinians, Chileans, and Uruguayans. If some of you can point me to some other papers, I would be very greatful. Below I post the results on the studies I found on whole South American nations. There are a few more on certain regions and cities. I can post those if people show an interest in.

***************************
On Argentina:

Source: "Inferring Continental Ancestry of Argentineans from Autosomal, Y-Chromosomal and Mitochondrial DNA" (2009)
Note: The paper also looks at ancestry in individual Argentine regions. The Northeast is the only one that isn't predominantly European.

78.5% European
17.3% Native
4.1% African

Numbers of markers used: 56

***************************
On Brazil:

Source: "Allele frequencies of 15 STRs in a representative sample of the Brazilian population" (2010)
Note: the paper breaks the country in regions instead of calculating a number for the whole population. IMO it underestimates European admixture in the Southeast. Along with the South, the Southeast was the main locus of European immigration from the mid XIX to the mid XX centuries. In the North and Northeast, on the other hand, the European component can be almost entirely traced to the times of colonial settlement. The Northeast is moreover the region that most received African slaves. That the European component in the North and the Northeast matches or surpasses that of the Southeast, is therefore very doubtful. In other words, the paper doesn't fit Brazilian history.


North:
60.6% European
21.3% African
18.1% Amerindian

Northeast:
66.7% European
23.3% African
10.0% Amerindian

Central West
66.3% European
21.7% African
12.0% Amerindian

Southeast:
60.7% European
32.0% African
7.3% Amerindian.

South:
81.5% European
9.3% African
9.2% Amerindian

Numbers of markers used: 15

----
Source: "Genetic Composition of Brazilian Population Samples Based on a Set of Twenty Eight Ancestry Informative SNPs"
Note: The paper also analyzes ancestry in individual regions. In contrast to the above paper, this one gets the picture mostly right, with the South and the Southeast being more European than other regions. IMO, however, it overestimates European ancestry and underestimates African ancestry, and this specially so for the Northeast. Compared to other papers, it also seems to overestimate African ancestry and underestimate Amerindian ancestry in the North.

77.1% European
14.3% African
8.5% Amerindian

Number of markers used: 28

---
Source: "The Genomic Ancestry of Individuals from Different Geographical Regions of Brazil Is More Uniform Than Expected" (2011)
Note: A comprehensive paper and one that fits historical data well. It breaks the country in regions and doesn't calculate ancestry for the entire population.

North:
68.8% European
10.5% African
18.5% Amerindian

Northeast:
60.1% European
29.3% African
8.9% Amerindian

Southeast:
74% European
17.3% African
7.3% Amerindian

South:
79.5% European
10.3% African
9.4% Amerindian

Numbers of markers used: 40

***************************
On Chile:

Source: "Genetic epidemiology of single gene defects in Chile" (1994)
Note: The paper is old and perhaps overestimates admixture. Along with an estimate for the total population (below), it also furnishes data on a number of individual cities (Concepción, Valparaíso, and East and North Santiago). The data on Santiago and Valparaíso are also broken down in socioeconomic categories. Unsurprisingly, in both cities the upper class is more European than the lower class. The Santiago upperclass is estimated to be more European than the Valparaíso lower class, though the inverse is true for the lower classes of both cities. There's no noticeable difference among the middle classes.

64% European
35% Amerindian
1% other

Number of markers used: (?) Considering the year it was released, it probably used few markers.

***************************
Uruguay:

Source: "Genetic Admixture Estimate in the Uruguayan Population Based on the Loci LDLR, GYPA, HBGG, GC and D7S8" (2005)
Note: The paper used a very small set of ancestry markers. The admixture rates, however, fit very well ideas regarding that country. The paper also calculates genetics distances between many peoples in the Americas based on those same markers. Uruguayans' closest relatives are Argentinians and white Brazilians. Their most distant relatives are Haitians and African-Americans.

84.1% European
10.4% Amerindian
5.6% African

Number of markers used: 5

randomguy
2011-08-04, 19:09
@ tenoch Agreed. I'm sure there are regions in Mexico where people have no SSA admixture, especially after seeing that some Colombians from particular regions have Zero SSA admixture. In fact, regions with no SSA admixture are probably more common in Mexico then Colombia, Considering the latter has had a historically big SSA influence.

Maybe so , but ssa influence is mainly only big in the coasts of Colombia, the interior where most Colombians come from generally have a very low ssa count pretty similiar to most Mexicans.

jibarodepr
2011-08-04, 19:15
Winters and Ivan van certima, are frauds.. no doubt about it

It's funny cuz they are teaching this type of shit in universities, lolWinters is an Afrocentrist by excellence, about van Sertima I can't speak because I haven't read any of his articles.

Malcolm Z
2011-09-06, 23:42
...

Using the paper I quoted here (http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=489712#post489712), I'll add:
***************************
On Mexico:

Source: "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and
admixture among Hispanic/Latino populations" (2010)

44.3% European
50.1% Native
5.6% African

Numbers of markers used: 73,000

***************************
On Ecuador:

Source: "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and
admixture among Hispanic/Latino populations" (2010)

53.9% European
38.8% Native
7.3% African

Numbers of markers used: 73,000

***************************

On Dominican Republic (using approximated data from the figures):

Source: "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and
admixture among Hispanic/Latino populations" (2010)

51.2% European
7.0% Native
41.8% African

Numbers of markers used: 73,000

***************************
On Puerto Rico (using approximated data from the figures):

Source: "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and
admixture among Hispanic/Latino populations" (2010)

62.0% European
14.4% Native
23.6% African

Numbers of markers used: 73,000

***************************

On Colombia (using approximated data from the figures):

Source: "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and
admixture among Hispanic/Latino populations" (2010)

60.0% European
32.0% Native
8.0% African

Numbers of markers used: 73,000

dbbrainer
2011-09-06, 23:48
Are people surprised that we are more euro on average instead of mullattos? Seems about right. Also we are more SSA (the admixed ones) than Amerindian which I always knew to be the least significant genetic component in P.R.

Maroon King
2011-09-07, 00:55
***************************

On Colombia (using approximated data from the figures):

Source: "Genome-wide patterns of population structure and
admixture among Hispanic/Latino populations" (2010)

60.0% European
32.0% Native
8.0% African

Numbers of markers used: 73,000

Pretty good as it's close to mine. Double my African. But the Native is on point! However I am a unique one because I am genetically a mix of regions. My ancestry comes from 3 different states and even another country (Ecuador) so I cannot at all represent for the populace of an entire country. Most Colombians have their heritage in one specific region and there will be drastic differences.

As I've also noticed on 23andMe and what you posted Malcolm Z, my African % seems the most in common with PR.

El Andullero
2011-09-07, 01:19
Are people surprised that we are more euro on average instead of mullattos?

Not at all. One trip to the island is enough to cure the most reasonable ones from that foolish notion (the one of you being mulattoes on average, that is).

Serge
2011-09-07, 01:31
I highly doubt Ecuador is more European than Mexico. It probably has to do with the areas that were tested. In my opinion, Mexico's Euro component is higher than Ecuador's. So while these studies are interesting and may shade some light, and be right in some cases, I don't think they are that accurate. Ecuador's Native population alone is much higher than Mexico's. So it is that fact that makes me doubt.

windmill
2011-09-07, 01:32
depends on the region of mexico...those were probaly the southern states but if they tested areas like monterrey, then the european ancestry will be much higher

Ubirajara
2011-09-07, 01:37
Yes, more important to me than the number of markers is a survey of all regions of the country. This is what is crutial. And also a portrayal - according to their respective % - of each of the segments of the society. A study from 2011 on Brazil actually did this. Of course the reality here and elsewhere in Latin America is really complex, but it still is important that the several regions of the country were covered. I tend to look for the global results but I also for look for the regional results in each study that I read.


I highly doubt Ecuador is more European than Mexico. It probably has to do with the areas that were tested. In my opinion, Mexico's Euro component is higher than Ecuador's. So while these studies are interesting and may shade some light, and be right in some cases, I don't they are that accurate. Ecuador's Native population alone is much higher than Mexico's. So it is that fact that makes me doubt.

Cuetlachtli57
2011-09-07, 01:48
my 23 and me percentages is almost average in ecuador, they score a bit more in african

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/suppl.2/8954/F3.large.jpg

dbbrainer
2011-09-07, 02:11
@ Andullero: What do you think of the downplaying of the SSA in PR that has been going on in favor of the Native component? I mean, I feel weird even saying it (I speak like an afro centrist), but in all fairness they do have a point in saying there is more SSA on average than Native and quite frankly when I see easily noticeable mixed looking puertoricans I see SSA (every now and then a real tri racial) over (opacando) Native.

El Andullero
2011-09-07, 02:16
@ Andullero: What do you think of the downplaying of the SSA in PR that has been going on in favor of the Native component? I mean, I feel weird even saying it (I speak like an afro centrist), but in all fairness they do have a point in saying there is more SSA on average than Native and quite frankly when I see easily noticeable mixed looking puertoricans I see SSA (every now and then a real tri racial) over (opacando) Native.

I just see it as some leftover from the indigenista movement there on the XIXth century. Unlike most places in Latin America, the movement really picked up momentum here on the Caribbean due to the scarcity of pure blooded Amerinds. That, coupled with the legitimating factor that Amerindianess give to the natives of a country, will give you a highly successful ideological force indeed.

Lemba
2011-09-07, 02:29
my 23 and me percentages is almost average in ecuador, they score a bit more in african

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/suppl.2/8954/F3.large.jpg

Interesting thing about that is if this if each bar is per individual, There are SOme Dominicans in whatever test methods used in that study that are nearly 50% Native, and some who are about 95% ssa. and some about 85% European which we already have proof of in 23andme.

Cuetlachtli57
2011-09-07, 02:44
Here is another study i found from american society of human genetics

http://www.ashg.org/2009meeting/abstracts/fulltext/f10463.htm

---------- Post added 2011-09-06 at 21:47 ----------


Interesting thing about that is if this if each bar is per individual, There are SOme Dominicans in whatever test methods used in that study that are nearly 50% Native, and some who are about 95% ssa. and some about 85% European which we already have proof of in 23andme.

there are dominicans that score 50% native?

El Andullero
2011-09-07, 02:48
I'd like to see one with the current Cuban population, even though I don't think the revolution have done that much in bringing down the huge barriers to mixing that existed there.

Lemba
2011-09-07, 03:02
Here is another study i found from american society of human genetics

http://www.ashg.org/2009meeting/abstracts/fulltext/f10463.htm

---------- Post added 2011-09-06 at 21:47 ----------



there are dominicans that score 50% native?

Im guessing so from the Bars in that graph. However one thing is for certain is that the average Puertorican is almost twice as native mixed as the average Dominican. Taino autosomal dna is very preserved in puertorico for an island.

El Andullero
2011-09-07, 03:06
As an interesting tidbit, here's some Cuban colonial census numbers for a few years:

1774

Whites 96,440
Blacks 75,180
Mixed race N/A

1792

Whites 153,559
Blacks 118,741
Mixed race N/A

1817

Whites 257,380
Blacks 314,983
Mixed race N/A

1821

Whites 290,021
Blacks 225,263
Mixed race 115,691

1823

Whites 317,000
Blacks 256,000
Mixed race 127,000

1827

Whites 311,051
Blacks 393,436
Mixed race N/A

1841

Whites 418,291
Blacks 583,333
Mixed race N/A

1861

Whites 793,480
Blacks 603,046
Mixed race N/A

source: Arredondo, Alberto. "Cuba, Tierra Indefensa". Editorial Lex, La Habana, 1945. Page 70

Serge
2011-09-07, 03:53
Well, this is the only thing I could find, the most recent study dealing with the prevalence of Alzheimer and the that gene associated with it, in Cubans according to their racial identification. This was posted by someone on the 23andMe Community Forum. It deals with medical issues, but also gives admixture percentages for the the three groups.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2350/12/43

dbbrainer
2011-09-07, 06:18
Those results of the colonial census present a very artificial divide between whites and blacks even despite the so called excessiveness of the selective barriers emplyoed in Cuba which could not be totally so given I have seen and witnessed admix in cubans my self when I lived in Miami. Same thing could be said of the supposedly 83% White majority in P.R.

El Andullero
2011-09-07, 12:26
Those results of the colonial census present a very artificial divide between whites and blacks even despite the so called excessiveness of the selective barriers emplyoed in Cuba which could not be totally so given I have seen and witnessed admix in cubans my self when I lived in Miami. Same thing could be said of the supposedly 83% White majority in P.R.

Yeah, but the thing is that, unlike the DR/PR cases, mixed race people were never given the chance to become the majority of the population on that place. The "juntas de inmigración blanca" existing there saw to that with the utmost rigor, even more after slavery was abolished there during the 1870's. Moreover, there is a curious tidbit that takes the Cuban slavery process to a whole different level than the one on Hispaniola/PR, namely, that coupled with his more discriminatory attitude, the Cuban planter understood at all times the uselessness of female slaves in the sugar cane labor, which translated itself on the fact that the slave population of the Cuban island would end up being overwhelmingly male as a result. To sum up: Scarcity of African females + Discriminatory attitude = Epic failure for race mixing.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if African maternal haplogroups ended up being a minority on any future spreadsheet about Cuban users of 23andMe.

jibarodepr
2011-09-07, 17:35
As an interesting tidbit, here's some Cuban colonial census numbers for a few years:

1774

Whites 96,440
Blacks 75,180
Mixed race N/A

1792

Whites 153,559
Blacks 118,741
Mixed race N/A

1817

Whites 257,380
Blacks 314,983
Mixed race N/A

1821

Whites 290,021
Blacks 225,263
Mixed race 115,691

1823

Whites 317,000
Blacks 256,000
Mixed race 127,000

1827

Whites 311,051
Blacks 393,436
Mixed race N/A

1841

Whites 418,291
Blacks 583,333
Mixed race N/A

1861

Whites 793,480
Blacks 603,046
Mixed race N/A

source: Arredondo, Alberto. "Cuba, Tierra Indefensa". Editorial Lex, La Habana, 1945. Page 70In PR case, it was teh opposite, there were more mixed people before 1830, but after 1830, thw white population grew up.

El Andullero
2011-09-07, 18:47
In PR case, it was teh opposite, there were more mixed people before 1830, but after 1830, thw white population grew up.

Even though the "Cédula de Gracias" would benefit the island economically speaking, it would be a setback from a political point of view, as a good chunk of the people that ended up there were Spanish Empire loyalists fleeing from the new regimes set up by the independence movement in Latin America (most notably, landlords from New Granada/Great Columbia and from the DR, the latter after the Haitian takeover of 1822). With the exception of Ramon Emeterio Betances (which came from an emigre Dom family) and a handful of others, the vast majority of these people would make PR basically into a loyalist stronghold, dealing a blow to any independence aspirations over there.

jibarodepr
2011-09-07, 21:26
Even though the "Cédula de Gracias" would benefit the island economically speaking, it would be a setback from a political point of view, as a good chunk of the people that ended up there were Spanish Empire loyalists fleeing from the new regimes set up by the independence movement in Latin America (most notably, landlords from New Granada/Great Columbia and from the DR, the latter after the Haitian takeover of 1822). With the exception of Ramon Emeterio Betances (which came from an emigre Dom family) and a handful of others, the vast majority of these people would make PR basically into a loyalist stronghold, dealing a blow to any independence aspirations over there.Yup, that is why independece would never be achieved an that moment, too much loyalist(and traitors)and even so, with Cedula and all, this didn't stop the racial mixing, even some migrants married with mixed locals(my Canarian family included)

Ubirajara
2012-11-01, 17:13
Good summary.


I'm downloading all pieces on South American autosomic admixture rates. So far I've able to gather quite a lot on Brazilians, and a bit on Argentinians, Chileans, and Uruguayans. If some of you can point me to some other papers, I would be very greatful. Below I post the results on the studies I found on whole South American nations. There are a few more on certain regions and cities. I can post those if people show an interest in.

***************************
On Argentina:

Source: "Inferring Continental Ancestry of Argentineans from Autosomal, Y-Chromosomal and Mitochondrial DNA" (2009)
Note: The paper also looks at ancestry in individual Argentine regions. The Northeast is the only one that isn't predominantly European.

78.5% European
17.3% Native
4.1% African

Numbers of markers used: 56

***************************
On Brazil:

Source: "Allele frequencies of 15 STRs in a representative sample of the Brazilian population" (2010)
Note: the paper breaks the country in regions instead of calculating a number for the whole population. IMO it underestimates European admixture in the Southeast. Along with the South, the Southeast was the main locus of European immigration from the mid XIX to the mid XX centuries. In the North and Northeast, on the other hand, the European component can be almost entirely traced to the times of colonial settlement. The Northeast is moreover the region that most received African slaves. That the European component in the North and the Northeast matches or surpasses that of the Southeast, is therefore very doubtful. In other words, the paper doesn't fit Brazilian history.


North:
60.6% European
21.3% African
18.1% Amerindian

Northeast:
66.7% European
23.3% African
10.0% Amerindian

Central West
66.3% European
21.7% African
12.0% Amerindian

Southeast:
60.7% European
32.0% African
7.3% Amerindian.

South:
81.5% European
9.3% African
9.2% Amerindian

Numbers of markers used: 15

----
Source: "Genetic Composition of Brazilian Population Samples Based on a Set of Twenty Eight Ancestry Informative SNPs"
Note: The paper also analyzes ancestry in individual regions. In contrast to the above paper, this one gets the picture mostly right, with the South and the Southeast being more European than other regions. IMO, however, it overestimates European ancestry and underestimates African ancestry, and this specially so for the Northeast. Compared to other papers, it also seems to overestimate African ancestry and underestimate Amerindian ancestry in the North.

77.1% European
14.3% African
8.5% Amerindian

Number of markers used: 28

---
Source: "The Genomic Ancestry of Individuals from Different Geographical Regions of Brazil Is More Uniform Than Expected" (2011)
Note: A comprehensive paper and one that fits historical data well. It breaks the country in regions and doesn't calculate ancestry for the entire population.

North:
68.8% European
10.5% African
18.5% Amerindian

Northeast:
60.1% European
29.3% African
8.9% Amerindian

Southeast:
74% European
17.3% African
7.3% Amerindian

South:
79.5% European
10.3% African
9.4% Amerindian

Numbers of markers used: 40

***************************
On Chile:

Source: "Genetic epidemiology of single gene defects in Chile" (1994)
Note: The paper is old and perhaps overestimates admixture. Along with an estimate for the total population (below), it also furnishes data on a number of individual cities (Concepción, Valparaíso, and East and North Santiago). The data on Santiago and Valparaíso are also broken down in socioeconomic categories. Unsurprisingly, in both cities the upper class is more European than the lower class. The Santiago upperclass is estimated to be more European than the Valparaíso lower class, though the inverse is true for the lower classes of both cities. There's no noticeable difference among the middle classes.

64% European
35% Amerindian
1% other

Number of markers used: (?) Considering the year it was released, it probably used few markers.

***************************
Uruguay:

Source: "Genetic Admixture Estimate in the Uruguayan Population Based on the Loci LDLR, GYPA, HBGG, GC and D7S8" (2005)
Note: The paper used a very small set of ancestry markers. The admixture rates, however, fit very well ideas regarding that country. The paper also calculates genetics distances between many peoples in the Americas based on those same markers. Uruguayans' closest relatives are Argentinians and white Brazilians. Their most distant relatives are Haitians and African-Americans.

84.1% European
10.4% Amerindian
5.6% African

Number of markers used: 5

Hoxxx
2012-11-05, 16:02
I highly doubt Ecuador is more European than Mexico. It probably has to do with the areas that were tested. In my opinion, Mexico's Euro component is higher than Ecuador's. So while these studies are interesting and may shade some light, and be right in some cases, I don't think they are that accurate. Ecuador's Native population alone is much higher than Mexico's. So it is that fact that makes me doubt.

Malcolm Z got the percentage numbers mixed up; that study revealed;

53.9% Native
38.8% European
7.3% African

for Ecuador not;

53.9% European
38.8% Native
7.3% African.

BTW has anyone seen studies on Peru, Venezuela, Paraguay, and Bolivia?

Hoxxx
2012-11-05, 18:12
Bump.

Hoxxx
2012-11-22, 19:18
Malcolm Z got the percentage numbers mixed up; that study revealed;

53.9% Native
38.8% European
7.3% African

for Ecuador not;

53.9% European
38.8% Native
7.3% African.

BTW has anyone seen studies on Peru, Venezuela, Paraguay, and Bolivia?

New data thanks to our friend El R5.


Reference Populations used on Geno 2.0.

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/5435/270ao.jpg (http://img33.imageshack.us/i/270ao.jpg/)
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/1397/271sy.jpg (http://img5.imageshack.us/i/271sy.jpg/)
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/7734/272mh.jpg (http://img208.imageshack.us/i/272mh.jpg/)
http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/2762/273q.jpg (http://img407.imageshack.us/i/273q.jpg/)

jibarodepr
2012-11-22, 19:19
That puts the average PR as a quadroon, which really they are more octoroon.

acevedoricky
2012-11-22, 19:22
That puts the average PR as a quadroon, which really they are more octoroon.

Saying they are octaroon or quadroon is misleading. I think the average PR is between the quadroon and octaroon range rather than one exclusively.

jibarodepr
2012-11-22, 19:23
Maybe you are right

dbbrainer
2012-11-22, 19:26
Well this just proves my point against supposed averages and these types of test. NONE are consistent and it is logical. The samples collected will vary in a place so varied. If they were to collect samples if Guaynabo very few would surpass 5% SSA.

I have seen like 4 types of results. The most recent from DNA tribes 11% SSA, others 16%, this one 25% (they must have done it with very mixed looking PR's) so maybe all of them put together and considered as a whole are more accurate than just one.

---------- Post Merged at 15:26 ----------

To me the average PR is someone like me genotypically but that is according to what I see mostly. I want to know where were the samples collected, where were the people from and what social class they were from.

jibarodepr
2012-11-22, 19:26
Well this just proves my point against supposed averages and these types of test. NONE are consistent and it is logical. The samples collected will vary in a place so varied. If they were to collect samples if Guaynabo very few would surpass 5% SSA.

I have seen like 4 types of results. The most recent from DNA tribes 11% SSA, others 16%, this one 25% (they must have done it with very mixed looking PR's) so maybe all of them put together and considered as a whole are more accurate than just one.You should invite your friends to take 23andme test, so people can see the results(not that I don't believe you, but that could also add more diversity to our average)

dbbrainer
2012-11-22, 19:37
I am trying. I have recently spoken to several classmates. But be warned. If I get 10 samples none would be as admixed as me. So in a sense it is futile. I don't believe there is an average in the sense where we all fit. I believe in regional averages and social class averages. Not national averages. That is a statistical fiction passing as fact.

jibarodepr
2012-11-22, 19:39
I am trying. I have recently spoken to several classmates. But be warned. If I get 10 samples none would be as admixed as me.That doesn't matter, what matters is to diversify our people genetics, so others stop telling we are this or that.

acevedoricky
2012-11-24, 02:50
That doesn't matter, what matters is to diversify our people genetics, so others stop telling we are this or that.

Yeah. Im probably more admixed than you guys.

jibarodepr
2012-11-24, 02:54
Yeah. Im probably more admixed than you guys.No more than me for sure. ;)

acevedoricky
2012-11-24, 03:27
No more than me for sure. ;)

Lol. Well I'm more than dbbrainer, that's for sure. Lol

dbbrainer
2012-11-24, 16:27
You never know. You never know.

acevedoricky
2012-11-24, 23:38
You never know. You never know.

lol. Im sure your more Euro and less African and Taino than me for sure.

El Andullero
2012-11-24, 23:42
lol. Im sure your more Euro and less African and Taino than me for sure.

If anything, your closest relatives are an example of what we should expect when/if you take the test. His are more Caucasoid by a mile.

acevedoricky
2012-11-24, 23:44
If anything, your closest relatives are an example of what we should expect when/if you take the test. His are more Caucasoid by a mile.

Yeah. Mine range from Arab looking to Euro to my great grandma looking like a quadroon. Its a admixed mess. lol

spins
2012-11-25, 00:02
I'd say phenotypically Acevedo ricky is off white and ~10% SSA.

(If it was true) it makes me wonder what is harder to dilute between native and SSA, cause even 10% native is visible in phenotype.

acevedoricky
2012-11-25, 00:09
I'd say phenotypically Acevedo ricky is off white and ~10% SSA.

(If it was true) it makes me wonder what is harder to dilute between native and SSA, cause even 10% native is visible in phenotype.

I think Native is easier to dilute. Even Spaniards believed when an castizo/a and a spaniard had a child it was a full blooded spaniard again and the native had been bred out.

spins
2012-11-25, 00:13
I think Native is easier to dilute. Even Spaniards believed when an castizo/a and a spaniard had a child it was a full blooded spaniard again and the native had been bred out.

And they called them an Epanol, I think I heard about that. But also a lot can be said about some "criollos"

acevedoricky
2012-11-25, 00:16
And they called them an Epanol, I think I heard about that. But also a lot can be said about some "criollos"

Yeah. But in the US one was deemed black even if she has 1/32 black blood in them. Thats one great great great grandparent thats African and the other 31 white... I think by then the black isnt noticeable unless you got some serious throwback pheno.

spins
2012-11-25, 00:22
1/32 thats insane. Ive even seen some supposed quadroons right here in this forum that look off white.

http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/29261-New-World-Quadroons?p=1036773&viewfull=1#post1036773

dbbrainer
2012-11-25, 00:55
Pheno does not correlate with Geno in plenty of cases. A lot of times it has to do with ''outbreeding'' phenotypical traits. For example, If you are an admixed with SSA and/or Native PR, like the average, and produce children with people that are more admixed than you it is only logical that randomness will occur concerning what phenos will be produced. If one mates with a similar type of PR or less admixed or non admixed (Criollos) then certain traits which might not even be present in one will be further outbred.

My paternal family apparently outbred non caucasoid traits. I suspect the sons and daughters of my paternal great great grandpa resented him (He was disowned of all land and inheritance for marrying a ''parda'') for making them non criollos in a time where this stuff was important so they did what is known as a ''backcross'' or a return to cross to the predominant component. My great grandpa (who was more likely 60/20/20 therefore married an Asturian woman who had just arrived (blonde bule eyes which have just come out in the son of a female cousin) and his son my grandpa who looked criollo probably was an octoroon. He married a criolla looking PR who is probably 81% + Euro and voila my paternal family of which you have seen my father and my uncle and auntie. Phenos range from Levantine looking to Fully Europid.

On my mother's side my great grandma (mom to my maternal grandpa) was a criolla who was disowned for marrying a ''very mixed looking PR'' produced 7 children out of which all but 2 look fully caucasoid (Sephardic phenos; I'll post their pics as soon as I can visit my granny's house). My grandpa married a castizoish looking PR women and out of 5 children only one looks suspect and even he has a canarian look alike in Yeray Rodriguez the canarian singer and show host that comes frequently to PR. Both my mom and Dad look Mediterranean of different origins (mom southern europe and dad Levantine).

I think if families have some selective barriers some traits can be outbred. To do that conciously is more than a bit of a turn off so I would suspect it was mere chance that further down the road my ancestors chose to mate with similar people just as much as the people who were disowned did it and sacrificed riches in the name of love. It is curious though that phenos are so stable in my family.

acevedoricky
2012-11-25, 01:25
Pheno does not correlate with Geno in plenty of cases. A lot of times it has to do with ''outbreeding'' phenotypical traits. For example, If you are an admixed with SSA and/or Native PR, like the average, and produce children with people that are more admixed than you it is only logical that randomness will occur concerning what phenos will be produced. If one mates with a similar type of PR or less admixed or non admixed (Criollos) then certain traits which might not even be present in one will be further outbred.

My paternal family apparently outbred non caucasoid traits. I suspect the sons and daughters of my paternal great great grandpa resented him (He was disowned of all land and inheritance for marrying a ''parda'') for making them non criollos in a time where this stuff was important so they did what is known as a ''backcross'' or a return to cross to the predominant component. My great grandpa (who was more likely 60/20/20 therefore married an Asturian woman who had just arrived (blonde bule eyes which have just come out in the son of a female cousin) and his son my grandpa who looked criollo probably was an octoroon. He married a criolla looking PR who is probably 81% + Euro and voila my paternal family of which you have seen my father and my uncle and auntie. Phenos range from Levantine looking to Fully Europid.

On my mother's side my great grandma (mom to my maternal grandpa) was a criolla who was disowned for marrying a ''very mixed looking PR'' produced 7 children out of which all but 2 look fully caucasoid (Sephardic phenos; I'll post their pics as soon as I can visit my granny's house). My grandpa married a castizoish looking PR women and out of 5 children only one looks suspect and even he has a canarian look alike in Yeray Rodriguez the canarian singer and show host that comes frequently to PR. Both my mom and Dad look Mediterranean of different origins (mom southern europe and dad Levantine).

I think if families have some selective barriers some traits can be outbred. To do that conciously is more than a bit of a turn off so I would suspect it was mere chance that further down the road my ancestors chose to mate with similar people just as much as the people who were disowned did it and sacrificed riches in the name of love. It is curious though that phenos are so stable in my family.

The racism in my family wasnt as bad as being disowned but "darkness" wasnt well like. My grandfathers grandmothers was half spaniard half Puerto Rican but was very fair and my grandfathers was not due to his father. So that raised problems for him and he was called ese oscuro, but his brother and sister were very fair and still are. I dont know if it was conscious or subconscious but the Afro was bred out, so much that me and my sisters really dont show any at all, only one of my cousins got a tad of throwback pheno in his hair and skin color. My dads father is on the more Euro side as well (as dbbrainer can vouch for seing the pics) and my grandmothers looks a tad mixed but is very fair as well. I dont know how but my fam has been going whiter and whiter every generation...

spins
2012-11-25, 01:31
I say I am pretty average in my family. I have seen all sorts of phenos in my family from mulatto to white (even though some are pretty dark skinned). We've never been selective at all about such things. The blackest people in my family, which is extending it, are the kids of a few of my cousins who've bred with African Americans. I don't know too much about my families history but I believe the bulk of my ancestry to be Iberian (Spaniard). I don't think Canarian.

dbbrainer
2012-11-25, 01:39
It happens with selective breeding. Sometimes it is due to racism while other times it may just be particular judgments of taste and mere preferences. My brother feels attracted to any type of Puertorican without regard to any type of concern about how his kids might not look like him. THis is him with the sister of a girl he used to out withhttps://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/481046_895393628049_1109723621_n.jpg and then him again with his half filipino half boricua ex and her bro. https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/296734_10150272375515509_490282_n.jpg

COnversely, that is my sort of narcicistic obssesion (IDK why but it is so), and I am currently worried because my castillian gf's bro is ugly as hell and I would HATE it if a son came out looking like him. This is a real case where I am the one bettering her race. Anyways, this stuff is not as important either as it seems to be on an anthro board. Live and let live... whatever....

spins
2012-11-25, 01:46
Ha^ I feel the same lol. I wasn't exactly prince charming in my taxonomy photos but I say I am a pretty good looking guy. I would be more worried about looks than raza. I really want my kids to have my looks.



Some of these folks are closely related to me, some are not ect. But this is more or less how we range in my family (which is huge).

Edit

dbbrainer
2012-11-25, 02:06
Pretty Diverse indeed. Nice pics.

acevedoricky
2012-11-25, 02:21
Pretty diverse. Im not the most Euro in my fam, nor the darkest. But most of my fam is in the off white to offwhite/arab like phenos.

---------- Post Merged at 21:21 ----------


Pretty Diverse indeed. Nice pics.

My fam is more admixed than yours. Though they have gotten more Euro down to me.
My parents.
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/543416_535223719824477_62112205_n.jpg
My mothers father.
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/550575_527858943894288_1470090469_n.jpg
my mothers mother and sister.
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/403258_524998494180333_1690320421_n.jpg
other sister.
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/251712_230771416936377_3868956_n.jpg
My fathers parents and brother.
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/168889_493108124507_880651_n.jpg
My aunt her husband. (uncle by marriage)
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/229170_2057664008092_1278428_n.jpg

dbbrainer
2012-11-25, 08:58
Sister on the third pic is really good looking. She's got a West central Asian kinda look (Persian). Thanks for the pics.

acevedoricky
2012-11-25, 16:31
My fam does tend to have that pseudo- euro with arabic/persian look. Its weird. I think my grandfather looks more on the arab side, and thats where we get it from.

Incanal
2012-11-25, 21:05
Sister on the third pic is really good looking. She's got a West central Asian kinda look (Persian). Thanks for the pics.

LOL you beat me to it. Total cutie indeed.

acevedoricky
2012-11-25, 21:16
LOL you beat me to it. Total cutie indeed.

You guys... -_- lol