Analyses of the additional Caucasoid admixture in Middle and South American Indians

At the bottom of this post is a plot for a K = 18 ADMIXTURE analysis of a global dataset. Above the plot is a table of the average admixture percentages for the six Middle and South American Indian populations that show Caucasoid admixture beyond the Caucasoid admixture which is found in all Amerindians, and which is a part of the Amerindian components in the analysis below.

In the next six plots, the first bars show the average relative admixture proportions for the Caucasoid components in each of the six Amerindian populations with additional Caucasoid admixture. The remaining bars are for the 20 populations whose average relative Caucasoid admixture proportions are closest to those for each of the six Amerindian populations, in order of decreasing similarity.







The plots show that the makeup of the additional Caucasoid admixture in the Quechuas, Bolivians, and Mayans is similar, and that the Spanish are at or near the top of the rankings of the Caucasoid populations in their similarity to the admixture in these three populations.

The Spanish are a bit further down in the similarity ranking for the Mixtecs, and they’re not in the top 20 of the rankings for the Zapotecs and Pimas. This is undoubtedly due to the amount of additional Caucasoid admixture in these three populations being so small that the most similar Caucasoid population cannot be accurately determined.

The table below gives the results of running the ALDER program to determine when the six Amerindian populations received their additional Caucasoid admixture. The admixture dates were calculated assuming that there are 29 years to a generation, and that the sample individuals were born in 1980. All of the estimated admixture dates are in the 17th or 18th centuries.

Test Pop  Ref A    Ref B    Generations  Years     Date
Quechua   Piapoco  Spanish  7.31 ± 0.88  212 ± 26  1768 AD
Bolivian  Piapoco  Spanish  9.84 ± 1.87  285 ± 54  1695 AD
Mayan     Mixe     Spanish  8.29 ± 1.02  240 ± 30  1740 AD
Zapotec   Mixe     Spanish  9.61 ± 1.09  279 ± 32  1701 AD
Mixtec    Mixe     Spanish  8.79 ± 1.21  255 ± 35  1725 AD
Pima      Mixe     Spanish  7.74 ± 1.14  224 ± 33  1756 AD

The results of these analyses make it clear that the additional Caucasoid admixture in Middle and South American Indians is primarily from the post-Columbian Spanish, and that I was wrong in the past for believing that it wasn’t.

Although these results provide no evidence that Middle or South American Indians have admixture from the White Gods, they also cannot completely rule it out. But if there is any admixture from the White Gods in these Indians, the amount of it must be much smaller than the amount of admixture from the post-Columbian Spanish. This would make sense, given that the Spanish, with their modern ships, came to the Americas in much larger numbers than the White Gods did, in their more primitive oceangoing vessels.

                    Quechua Bolivian Mayan Zapotec Mixtec  Pima
Northern Amerindian   60.61    62.01 66.10   73.90  77.93 98.15
Southern Amerindian   29.04    29.84 26.05   22.20  19.71  1.74
Northern European      3.55     2.47  2.17    1.05   0.72  0.00
Southern European      3.38     2.96  2.06    0.64   0.74  0.09
Eskimo                 0.73     0.59  0.27    1.04   0.23  0.00
Northern Mideastern    1.11     0.86  0.81    0.03   0.00  0.00
Northern Mongoloid     0.27     0.06  0.48    0.55   0.28  0.00
Kalash                 0.01     0.77  0.35    0.31   0.08  0.00
Southern Mideastern    0.50     0.29  0.62    0.00   0.06  0.00
Tubalar                0.49     0.00  0.19    0.13   0.00  0.00
Western Negroid        0.00     0.00  0.59    0.00   0.00  0.00
Melanesian             0.00     0.11  0.07    0.04   0.10  0.00
Veddoid                0.10     0.00  0.08    0.10   0.04  0.00
Eastern Mongoloid      0.14     0.03  0.08    0.00   0.03  0.00
Papuan                 0.07     0.00  0.01    0.00   0.07  0.00
Eastern Negroid        0.00     0.00  0.04    0.00   0.00  0.00
European HG            0.00     0.01  0.02    0.00   0.00  0.00
Bushman and Pygmy      0.00     0.00  0.00    0.00   0.00  0.00


Posted in Uncategorized
3 comments on “Analyses of the additional Caucasoid admixture in Middle and South American Indians
  1. epoch2013 says:

    And also in this run such a strange result for Loschbour, just like K=20 in Haak.

  2. Frank J says:

    I reviewed your terrific blog recently, and – being someone sick and tired of hearing of how Whites ‘stole the US from its indigenous people’ – was disappointed to read this post, because it took away what seemed good evidence that the Pima had coexisted with native Whites. Today, I came across the article “Admixture in Pima Includes Greek and Sardinian: Genetic Signature of the Minoans, Sea Peoples and Other Mediterranean Peoples in the Southwest?” by Dr. Yates on the Ancient America site, which postdates this post by a few months.

    Yates’ article agrees with you that an ethnic union between Amerindian and White groups occurred around 1754 due to Spanish intrusion, but seems to indicate that the Amerindian group (Side 2) was brought to Arizona by the Spanish, while the original group (Side 1) was “Mediterranean-like”, primarily Greek and Sardinian…

    “The Pima case study from the genetic atlas of admixture by Hellenthal et al. is a simple instance of one-time collision between two interbreeding populations. A Mediterranean-like Side 1 is one of the parent populations of the mixture. Its largest distinctive element is Greek and Sardinian. Side 1 joined together with Side 2, a Maya-like population. Their union is estimated to have occurred around 1754.

    We suggest this date corresponds to the spread of Spanish Missions in Sonora (to which southern Arizona then belonged), which brought slaves and workers from within Mexico to work in the mines (Side 2). This means the Mediterranean-like Side 1 corresponded to the existing number of about 2,000 Pima and Papago Indians. Their distinctive marks, genetically speaking, were resemblances to Greeks, Sardinians and related Mediterranean populations.”

    He gives further ethnological details. I’m very curious to get your take on this? I’m looking for evidence of Whites in the ancient U.S., but a little wary of a Mediterraneanist bias here.

    • Genetiker says:

      I think that article is nonsense. I have no doubt that “Side 1” is the post-Columbian Spanish and that “Side 2” is the Amerindians who were in Sonora before the Spanish arrived.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: