White Americans non-caucasoid admixture from 23andme

[Tooting Carmen]

That's a lot less than I would have expected.

Jim Crow laws were largely obeyed it seems. In countries like Brazil, were such laws in place they'd have been routinely violated as people in Latin American countries tend to be much more disdainful towards laws and rules (good and bad) than in Anglo-Saxon/Germanic countries.

[KawaiiKawaii]

Jim Crow laws were largely obeyed it seems. In countries like Brazil, were such laws in place they'd have been routinely violated as people in Latin American countries tend to be much more disdainful towards laws and rules (good and bad) than in Anglo-Saxon/Germanic countries.

Nothing to do with the incapacity of Southerners to obey laws. They had a different way of managing racial differences. In the Anglo World, the rule was to be separated as much as possible, whereas the elites in South America and Central America thought that they could absorb the others, so as to not have too many differences between people and not to risk civil unrest and stuff. One drop rule with few categories (White, Black, Native and Asian) versus Castizo, Mestizo, Pardo, etc.

[TheForeigner]

Hasn't anyone looked at the second study which makes somewhat different claims? I'm begining to think some studies are bogus because of flawed methodology or agenda driven. Maybe they were concerned about not being able to ''prove'' all are hopelessly mixed and a few months later they deliver the goods.

[TheForeigner]

On the 23andme facebook page, we read (emphasis added):

23andMe Here's the response from our scientist who developed the algorithm underlying ancestry painting: "There's no case that I've seen where 9% Asian ancestry does not indicate genuine East Asian or Native American ancestry. I've looked at order thousands of individuals of known ancestry, that approximately cover the gamut of human diversity. Thus I would regard 9% as a reliable indication of East Asian or Native American ancestry. That said, 9% is close to the threshold above which the following statement can be made, so it is still theoretically possible, albeit very unlikely, that the prediction is not true.
December 20, 2009 at 4:34pm





Therefore, it seems that "Asian minority admixture" in non-Asian populations needs to be in the range of close to ~ 9% to be statistically significant. So, breathless genome forums agonizing over some Finn with a 1% Asian reading can probably stop hypothesizing about "deep Siberian ancestry" and other such nonsense.

Unfortunately, 23andme doesn't give out equivalent information for "African minority admixture" in non-African populations or "European minority admixture" in non-European populations. Given the greater genetic distance of Africans to both Europeans and Asians one would expect the "threshold" for "African minority admixture" to be significantly less than ~ 9%. I recall the ABD2.0 test had an "African minority admixture" threshold of ~ 2-3% which is likely the range for 23andme as well. "European minority admixture" would likely be the inverse - ~ 9% for Asians and ~ 2-3% for Africans to be above the threshold of reasonable confidence.

Finding the odd Chinaman with "1% European" likely does not mean "Tocharian admixture" and having some Cambodian with "1% African" likewise likely does not suggest "ancient Negrito migrations." The DTC companies need to be a little more forthright on these issues. Needless to say, I don't believe that the "genome bloggers" produce more accurate and precise data than do the companies.

This is all above and beyond the problem that the narrow choice of parental populations inflates "admixture" in populations that are within the same broad racial group but genetically somewhat distant, and with variant gene frequencies at some parts of chromosomes - variants not necessarily derived from any real "admixture."

Decodeme admits the following (on their site that requires login), and it obviously applies to 23andme, DNAPrint, and some of what the "genome Bloggers" produce as well (emphasis added):

The reference population samples were obtained from the HapMap project - they are:
1) European Americans from Utah - who most likely have a majority of north European ancestry
2) Yoruban Nigerians
3) Chinese from Beijing and Japanese from Tokyo.

The characteristics of these reference population samples and the clinal nature of human genetic variation (i.e. the fact that people typically become gradually more different as you travel further from your country) have several minor implications for the interpretation of the results. For example, a deCODEme user with a majority of ancestors (during the past >2 generations) from south-east Europe, will typically see higher percentages of African and Asian ancestry than a deCODEme user whose ancestry is mainly from north-west Europe. The difference will be small, but present.

At present, the Ancestral Origins analysis is likely to be most informative for deCODEme users who have recent mixed ancestry (for example African Americans, Hispanic Americans, inhabitants of Central and South America, and others) and and for individuals from populations with an ancient history of mixed ancestry, such as India, Pakistan, populations of Central Asia, Northern Africa and others. http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/5403479/1/

[Prince Of Macrobia]

1% is nothing unless you obsessed with white Americans.

Who owned this thread.

[Smeagol]

So only 4% of Whites have negro admixture. Even then, it only averages about 1%, and that's nothing, that's less admixture than some European countries. People who expected us to be far more admixed, don't know enough about American history.

[JohnSmith]

So now you have many Mexicans even in the Northeastern United States?

It depends where in the Northeast. 20 Years ago there were not many at all. Now they are a growing minority,however, there numbers are really not that large outside of farming,rural areas. There may be more Puerto Ricans in the Northeast than Mexicans. There is also a significant numbers of Cubans. The Midwest like Iowa has a lot of Mexicans in the farming areas.

[LightHouse89]

So now you have many Mexicans even in the Northeastern United States?

Not really. Puerto Ricans mostly which are a biological tragedy. Ugly afro-mestizos. At least mexicans are closer to us than them.

[LightHouse89]

Jim Crow laws were largely obeyed it seems. In countries like Brazil, were such laws in place they'd have been routinely violated as people in Latin American countries tend to be much more disdainful towards laws and rules (good and bad) than in Anglo-Saxon/Germanic countries.

Most blacks I bet can trace pure black ancestry too. Blacks in my neck of the woods only lived in boston and largely kept to themselves. They did not get along with the italians or irish very well.

[JohnSmith]

Most blacks I bet can trace pure black ancestry too. Blacks in my neck of the woods only lived in boston and largely kept to themselves. They did not get along with the italians or irish very well.

I think that is typical all throughout the Northeast. Italians and Irish are probably some of the most racist Americans.