Average IQ in Latin America

[curupira]

Genetic tests say it better. They measure real ancestry.

Uruguay:

For many years it has been assumed that the population of Uruguay is almost exclusively European-derived and that the biological contribution of the native population as well as of individuals of African descent is negligible. Several recent studies based on a variety of genetic markers, mostly morphological and serological markers, have produced quite a different picture of the constitution of the Uruguayan population. The Native American contribution varies from 1–20%, while the African contribution ranges from 7–15%, in different regions of the country. In the present study we examine the way the admixture process took place in Uruguay by analyzing the ancestry of maternal lineages in a sample from the northern city of Tacuarembó. To accomplish this goal we typed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) markers of Native American, African, and European origin and estimated the proportions of each parental group in the admixed population. We found that 62% of all mtDNA haplogroups were of Native American descent, a surprising figure considering the “European roots” of the country. Consequently, this result assimilates Uruguay to the rest of Latin American populations where sex-biased gene flow between European men and Native American women has been the rule. We further analyzed the distribution of the four major founding mitochondrial lineages in Tacuarembó and compared it to other South American populations. We discuss our findings in the light of historical records and assess the need for additional genetic studies. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 16:289–297, 2004. © 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...20025/abstract

These are the results of the 2 latest genetic studies on Brazil:

This 2011 study specifically aimed at describing the composition of the country with samples from nearly all regions (almost 1000 samples), with "white", "pardo" and "black" samples according to their respective proportions. The samples came for the most part from blood donors (http://www.amigodoador.com.br/estatisticas.html), which for the most part belong to the poorest classes of Brazil, therefore socio-economic levels mirror somewhat the situation of Brazil, where most people belong to the lower strata of society.

The composition of Brazil according to it:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0017063



The 2013 study:
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetch...esentation=PDF

There are many different studies that contribute to the global picture of the ethnic heterogeneity in Brazilian populations. These studies use different types of genetic markers and are focused on the comparison of populations at different levels. In some of them, each geographical region is treated as a single homogeneous population, whereas other studies create different subdivisions: political (e.g., pooling populations by State), demographic (e.g., urban and rural), or ethnic (e.g., culture, self-declaration, or skin colour). In this study, we performed an enhancedreassessment of the genetic ancestry of ~ 1,300 Brazilians characterised for 46 autosomal Ancestry Informative Markers (AIMs).

In addition, 798 individuals from twelve Brazilian populations representing the five geographical macro-regions of Brazil were newly genotyped, including a Native American community and a rural Amazonian community. Following an increasing North to South gradient, European ancestry was the most prevalent in all urban populations (with values up to 74%). The populations in the North consisted of a significant proportion of Native American ancestry that was about two times higher than the African contribution. Conversely, in the Northeast, Center-West and Southeast, African ancestry was the second most prevalent. At an intrapopulation level, all urban populations were highly admixed, and most of the variation in ancestry proportions was observed between individuals within each population rather than among population. Nevertheless, individuals with a high proportion of Native American ancestry are only found in the samples from Terena and Santa Isabel. Our results allowed us to further refine the genetic landscape of Brazilians while establishing the basis for the effective application of an autosomal AIM panel in forensic casework and clinical association studies within the highly admixed Brazilian population

http://www.plosone.org/article/fetch...esentation=PDF




The main difference from the 2011 study: the 2013 was based on random urban samples, the 2011 study was based on 'white', 'pardo' and 'black' samples according to their respective proportions. On this, the 2011 study may have had a better strategy. On the other hand, the 2013 studied focused on the urban population, which as they mentioned accounts for the vast majority of the Brazilian population.

[Annie999]

It is not by far at all, according to genetic studies. Argentina is in the 70% to 80% range. Uruguay just a little bit over 80%. And other South American countries such as Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil and Chile, in the 60% to 70% range.

How can you say that when half of Colombia are mestizos (49%) and another 10% are plain black? Also 3% are complete natives....whites only make 37% of the population.

Same goes to Brasil, 43% are mulatos, 7% afrobrasilians and only 47% are white.

In Uruguay 80-90% are white and we have 5% mulatos/black even less mestizos.

But lets forget the numbers, just take a trip all over Brasil and Colombia and then take a trip all over Uruguay and the difference stands out.

Only with Chile the difference is not as big.

[curupira]

I am speaking of genetic studies. Census is not reliable. Brazil does not have 43% "mulatos". The bulk of the 43% "pardo" are multiracial (on average with the three ancestries and euro leaning), including the North Brazilian population, which is significantly more Native American than African. The average "white" Brazilian is mixed too, though with a greater degree of European ancestry.

Did you have a look at the genetic studies I showed to you? They are much more reliable. Uruguay does not have 80% to 90% "whites". The average Uruguayan is "mixed", as the study I quoted showed to you, even if in a lower degree than other Latin American countries.

This study (http://www.pnas.org/content/107/Supp.../8954.full.pdf) found out Colombia to be: 60.0% European, 32.0% Native and 8.0% SSA African.

So it is not a "by far" difference at all.

How can you say that when half of Colombia are mestizos (49%) and another 10% are plain black? Also 3% are complete natives....whites only make 37% of the population.

Same goes to Brasil, 43% are mulatos, 7% afrobrasilians and only 47% are white.

In Uruguay 80-90% are white and we have 5% mulatos/black even less mestizos.

But lets forget the numbers, just take a trip all over Brasil and Colombia and then take a trip all over Uruguay and the difference stands out.

Only with Chile the difference is not as big.

[curupira]

But lets forget the numbers, just take a trip all over Brasil and Colombia and then take a trip all over Uruguay and the difference stands out. .

I have been to Uruguay twice. The guide there told us the natives were "wiped out", and the other said Uruguayans are a Italian/Spanish mix. My 23andme Uruguayan cousin from Salto, however, scored 36% native american and 7% african. Another Uruguayan I shared with on 23andme scored 13% native american. The native american did not disappear as the guide suggested, it was absorbed.

[Annie999]

I am speaking of genetic studies. Census is not reliable. Brazil does not have 43% "mulatos". The bulk of the 43% "pardo" are multiracial (on average with the three ancestries and euro leaning), including the North Brazilian population, which is more Native American than European.

Did you have a look at the genetic studies I showed to you? They are much more reliable. Uruguay does not have 80% to 90% "whites". The average Uruguayan is "mixed", as the study I quoted showed to you, even if in a lower degree than other Latin American countries.

This study (http://www.pnas.org/content/107/Supp.../8954.full.pdf) found out Colombia to be: 60.0% European, 32.0% Native and 8.0% SSA African.

So it is not a "by far" difference at all.

The fact natives were completly exterminated early in Uruguay (something that didn't happen in the rest of the latin countries) plus the huge European immigration waves made the base for the Uruguayan DNA.

The only native DNA we might have is the one from 2 centuries ago when the natives mixed with the Spaniards before they were exterminated. That makes a very little percentage. I am myself mixed but I don't think 1% of native makes much of a difference.

I repeat, it only takes a look around and learn about history to see why Uruguay is shaped this way... and its also in the statistics. Also just for the record, I'm a member of Couch Surfing (a community to host travellers or be hosted), and every single time someone from outside Latin America comes to Uruguay (ussually after visiting the countries in the north) say how different we act and look in comparison to the rest. So the reputation of Uruguay is real based on real stuff, and yeah I think the difference is by far.

[curupira]

They were not completely exterminated. They were absorbed. My cousin from Salto scored almost 40% Native American. Did you read the study I posted? Let's take 10% as the average (1% to 20% Native American variation) and 11% African input (7% to 15% variation). The average Uruguayan would be something like 80% european. If the average Colombian, Venezuelan or Brazilian is somewhere in the 60% to 70% range, the difference is not by far at all.

Read it again:

For many years it has been assumed that the population of Uruguay is almost exclusively European-derived and that the biological contribution of the native population as well as of individuals of African descent is negligible. Several recent studies based on a variety of genetic markers, mostly morphological and serological markers, have produced quite a different picture of the constitution of the Uruguayan population. The Native American contribution varies from 1–20%, while the African contribution ranges from 7–15%, in different regions of the country. In the present study we examine the way the admixture process took place in Uruguay by analyzing the ancestry of maternal lineages in a sample from the northern city of Tacuarembó. To accomplish this goal we typed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) markers of Native American, African, and European origin and estimated the proportions of each parental group in the admixed population. We found that 62% of all mtDNA haplogroups were of Native American descent, a surprising figure considering the “European roots” of the country. Consequently, this result assimilates Uruguay to the rest of Latin American populations where sex-biased gene flow between European men and Native American women has been the rule. We further analyzed the distribution of the four major founding mitochondrial lineages in Tacuarembó and compared it to other South American populations. We discuss our findings in the light of historical records and assess the need for additional genetic studies. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 16:289–297, 2004. © 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

The fact natives were completly exterminated early in Uruguay (something that didn't happen in the rest of the latin countries) plus the huge European immigration waves made the base for the Uruguayan DNA.

The only native DNA we might have is the one from 2 centuries ago when the natives mixed with the Spaniards before they were exterminated. That makes a very little percentage. I am myself mixed but I don't think 1% of native makes much of a difference.

I repeat, it only takes a look around and learn about history to see why Uruguay is shaped this way... and its also in the statistics. Also just for the record, I'm a member of Couch Surfing (a community to host travellers or be hosted), and every single time someone from outside Latin America comes to Uruguay (ussually after visiting the countries in the north) say how different we act and look in comparison to the rest. So the reputation of Uruguay is real based on real stuff, and yeah I think the difference is by far.

[curupira]

Here is another study, on Cerro Largo (a city in the interior of Uruguay):

Am J Hum Biol. 2006 Jul-Aug;18(4):513-24.
Population structure and admixture in Cerro Largo, Uruguay, based on blood markers and mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms.
Sans M1, Merriwether DA, Hidalgo PC, Bentancor N, Weimer TA, Franco MH, Alvarez I, Kemp BM, Salzano FM.
Author information

Abstract
Recent studies of the Uruguayan population revealed different amounts of Amerindian and African genetic contributions. Our previous analysis of Afro-Uruguayans from the capital city of the Department of Cerro Largo showed a high proportion of African genes, and the effects of directional mating involving Amerindian women. In this paper, we extended the analysis to a sample of more than 100 individuals representing a random sample of the population of the whole Department. Based on 18 autosomal markers and one X-linked marker, we estimated 82% European, 8% Amerindian, and 10% African contributions to their ancestry, while from seven mitochondrial DNA site-specific polymorphic markers and sequences of hypervariable segment I, we determined 49% European, 30% Amerindian, and 21% African maternal contributions. Directional matings between Amerindian women and European men were detected, but differences involving Africans were not significant. Data about the specific origins of maternal lineages were also provided, and placed in a historical context.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16788895

[King Claus]

Uruguay wins, followed by Argentina.

Couldn't see that for my self

[SupaThug]

How can you say that when half of Colombia are mestizos (49%) and another 10% are plain black? Also 3% are complete natives....whites only make 37% of the population.

Same goes to Brasil, 43% are mulatos, 7% afrobrasilians and only 47% are white.

In Uruguay 80-90% are white and we have 5% mulatos/black even less mestizos.

But lets forget the numbers, just take a trip all over Brasil and Colombia and then take a trip all over Uruguay and the difference stands out.

Only with Chile the difference is not as big.

How can Brazil have 43% of mulattos if most brazilians are more than 50% european and have amerindian ancestry too,and not only african as some people seem to believe?It seems that you take stereotypes in consideration when talking about the brazilian population!

[curupira]

Posting the genetic studies is enough to show Uruguay is not Europe and Brazil is not Nigeria. Furthermore, the degree of European ancestry in countries like Colombia and Venezuela is not "far" below that of Uruguay at all.

How can Brazil have 43% of mulattos if most brazilians are more than 50% and have amerindian ancestry too,and not only african as some people seem to believe?It seems that you take stereotypes in consideration when talking about the brazilian population!