Patterns of Admixture in Latin American Mestizos
RSS
Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
New PLOS paper, Geographic Patterns of Genome Admixture in Latin American Mestizos. Nothing new, but pushing the ball forward….
A = autosomal
X = X chromosomal
Related: Genetics, the myth-buster? The case of Argentina.
(Republished from Discover/GNXP by permission of author or representative)
Follow @razibkhan
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
“Nothing new”, as you say but still interesting. Anyhow there are a couple of things that drew my attention:
1. The graph showing the apportion of native blood by linguistic/geographical groups (figure 5) shows that many mestizos have not just native blood from the local area but from all the continent without much distinction (for instance, Mexico City mestizos have as much meso/north American native blood as South American). This probably implies that mestizo people moved around the Spanish colonial empire pretty much (at least that’s my first thought).
2. A couple of samples (Oriente-Guatemala and Salta-Argentine) show equal apportion of European autosomal and X-chr genetics. If I don’t understand wrongly, that means that admixture in those populations was balanced with similar male and female European input, right? I find this somewhat strange. This is a contrast to the general trend that is of significatively more autosomal than X-chr European apportion (mainly male input) and to the systematically much more X-chr (mainly female) than autosomal African input (that is about the same in all samples).
I hope I’m not reading that wrong but, as I see it, basically 67% of the X-chr is statistically female in origin in contrast with 50% of the autosomal pool, right?
re: #1, the paper somewhat argues the opposite based on their data.
re: #2, about right.