ARGENTINA
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

ARGENTINA

on

  • 807 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
807
Views on SlideShare
807
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

ARGENTINA ARGENTINA Document Transcript

  • ARGENTINA Amerindians are native to Argentina, and without additional information, we assumed that all of their ancestors lived within the current country’s boundaries in 1500. Pure Amerindians are estimated to comprise 2% of today’s population (CF, EV). By the early 19th Century, the majority of Argentines were descendants of Spanish settlers. They were joined by a great wave of European immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Estimated shares of European descendants in the current population, by country, put Italians at about 44%, Spanish at about 30%, with a total of 15% from other European countries including France, Poland, Russia, Germany, and Great Britain (CF, EB, CQ, WCE). Without additional information, we attributed 3% to each of the last five countries. There is a mestizo population estimated at 6% (CF, WCE) whom we assume to have roughly equal numbers of Amerindian ancestors and European ancestors. We adjust the overall Amerindian contribution upwards to 5% to account for this, but we leave the contributions of European countries as above, assuming their combined 89% share to be adequate. Arab immigrants, who along with their descendants are said to account for 3% of Argentineans, began to arrive in the Americas in 1860s, and we apportion their ancestors 70% to Lebanon, 15% to Syria, and 15% to Israel/Palestine (CAGS, WCE). Africans came during the slave trade after 1500, and a DNA study suggests a significant percentage of people are partly descendents of the black Argentineans (WP, EB). Lacking better information, we assume that 2% of Argentineans’ ancestors were from African countries, coming from what are today’s African countries in the proportions specified in Part II.3 in the main Appendix for “other ports of disembarkation.” Jews (1%) began to arrive in Argentina not long after the expulsion from Spain in 1492, with the largest number coming later along with other groups from Europe, and with approximately 85% assumed to be Ashkenazi, and 15% Sephardic (EV, CE, JVL, WCE). Their ancestors are attributed to individual countries accordingly, using the shares set out in Part II.2 of the main Appendix. Estimate: Argentina: 5% (2% as ancestors of Amerindian, 3% as ancestors of Mestizos) France: 3.085% (0.085% as ancestors of Jews) Germany: 3.255% (0.255% as ancestors of Jews) Italy: 44.136% (0.136% as ancestors of Jews) Poland: 3.0255% (0.0255% as ancestors of Jews) Russia: 3.02125% (0.02125% as ancestors of Jews) Spain: 30.222% (0.222% as ancestors of Jews) UK: 3% Arab (Total 3%) Israel/Palestine: 0.45% Lebanon: 2.1% Syria: 0.45% Jewish: (Total 1%) France: (0.085%) Germany: (0.255%) Italy: (0.136%) Lithuania: 0.01275% Poland: (0.0255%) Portugal: 0.0555% Romania: 0.05525% Russia: (0.02125%) 1
  • Spain: (0.222%) Turkey: 0.1105% Ukraine: 0.02125% Mixed Africa: (Total 2%) Angola: 0.545905% Benin: 0.9863% Cameroon: 0.04524% Congo: 0.166145% Congo DRC: 0.118675% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.00948% Equatorial Guinea: 0.00936% Gabon: 0.149875% Ghana: 0.4238% Gambia: 0.00668% Guinea: 0.02093% Guinea-Bissau: 0.01002% Liberia: 0.02212% Madagascar: 0.019072% Mozambique: 0.030396% Nigeria: 0.1877% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.0234% Senegal: 0.0167% Sierra Leone: 0.04347% Tanzania: 0.010132% Togo: 0.04227% 2
  • BELIZE Most Belizeans are assumed to be of mixed ancestry. The mestizos (46% of the total population ) form the largest group and include Guatemalan mestizos (estimated at 21.5% of Belize’s population) and Honduran mestizos (estimated at 2.5%), both fleeing the civil unrest of the 1980s (CF, EV, NE, WCD). We found no credible genetic estimates of the Amerindian/European mixture in Belize itself, and therefore as with Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Panama, we assume that their ancestors came from Belize and from Spain in equal numbers (for further discussion, see the entry on El Salvador). Guatemalan mestizos in Belize correspond to Ladinos in Guatemala, and thus following the estimate for that group (below), we attribute 56% to Guatemala, 38.3% to Spain, and 5.7% to African countries. Honduran Mestizos in Belize are equally attributed to Honduras and Spain, as is done for Honduras itself. Creoles (26%) are people of mixed African and European descent, whose ancestors we attribute in equal number to England and to African countries (CF, NE, EV). The Garifuna (Black Caribs), estimated at 6.5% of the population, are people of mixed Caribbean Indian and African ancestry (CF, EB, WCD, NE, EV). They moved to Belize from the island of St. Vincent in the early 19th century (EB). We attributed equal percentages to Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and to African countries. The relative contributions of individual African countries to the Belize Creole and Garifuna populations are determined as specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for Caribbean ports of disembarkation, and for the African ancestors of Guatemalan mestizos, both the Caribbean and “other” ports of disembarkation are used, with equal weights. There are also 3.7% Mopan Mayans from Guatemala, 3% Yucatec Mayans from the Mexican State of Yucatán, and 4.3% Kekchi Mayans also from Guatemala (WCD). They moved to Belize in the 19th century so that their ancestors are assumed to have lived in 1500 in Guatemala and Mexico in the proportions indicated (EB). Chinese (0.5%) and East Indian (3.5%) laborers were brought to Belize in late 19th century (EB, WCD). The East Indians came from areas stretching from North India to Bangladesh, and from areas in South India (HBL), and we attribute 93% of their total number to India, 5% to Bangladesh, and 2% to Pakistan. A Jewish population accounts for 1.2% of Belize’s people (WCD). Lacking information, we assumed that Belizean Jews share the same ancestry as Jews from South American countries (Argentina, Chile), meaning that approximately 85% are Ashkenazi and 15% Sephardic, which determines countries of ancestral origin as specified in the Main Appendix, Part II, 2. In addition, about 0.6% of the population is described as U.S. Whites, 3% as German, 0.7% as British, and 1% as “Guatemalan white,” presumably of Spanish descent (WCD). U.S. Whites were attributed to the top seven European countries of origin according to proportions used for dividing the “White” group within the U.S. population. Estimate Belize: 11.25% (as ancestors of Belizean Mestizos) China: 0.5% France: 0.147% (0.045% as ancestors of U.S. Whites, 0.102% as ancestors of Jews) Germany: 3.486% (0.18% as ancestors of U.S. White, 0.306% as ancestors of Jews) Guatemala: 19.76% (11.76% as ancestors of Guatemalan Mestizos, 3.7% as ancestors of Mopan Maya, 4.3% as ancestors of Kekchi Maya) Honduras: 1.25% (as ancestors of Honduran Mestizos) Italy: 0.2232% (0.06% as ancestors of U.S.Whites, 0.1632% as ancestors of Jews) Mexico: 3% (as ancestors of Yucatec Maya) Poland: 0.0606% (0.03% as ancestors of U.S. Whites, 0.0306% as ancestors of Jews) Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: 3.25% (as ancestors of Garifuna) 3
  • Spain: 21.8094% (8.043% as ancestors of Guatemalan Mestizos, 1.25% as ancestors of Honduran Mestizos, 11.25% as ancestors of Belizean Mestizos, 1% as ancestors of Guatemalan White, 0.2664% as ancestors of Jews) UK: 13.85% (13% as ancestors of Creoles, 0.15% as ancestors of U.S. White) African Mix (Caribbean) (Total 16.8485% (13% as ancestors of Creoles from Belize, 3.25% as ancestors of Garifuna, 0.5985% as ancestors of Guatemalan Mestizos)) Angola: 2.446191594% Benin: 1.052610038% Cameroon: 1.267933868% Congo: 0.744493094% Congo DRC: 0.531780781% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.219872925% Equatorial Guinea: 0.262331145% Gabon: 1.406217931% Gambia: 0.16410439% Ghana: 2.5441235% Guinea: 0.246409313% Guinea-Bissau: 0.246156585% Liberia : 0.513036825% Madagascar: 0.114839376% Mozambique: 0.183025256% Nigeria: 2.81538435% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.655827863% Senegal: 0.410260975% Sierra Leone: 0.511773188% Tanzania: 0.061008419% Togo: 0.451118588% African Mix (Other): 0.5985% (as ancestors of Guatemalan Mestizos) Angola: 0.163362071% Benin: 0.029515028% Cameroon: 0.01353807% Congo: 0.049718891% Congo DRC: 0.035513494% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.00283689% Equatorial Guinea: 0.00280098% Gabon: 0.044850094% Gambia: 0.00199899% Ghana: 0.12682215% Guinea: 0.006263303% Guinea-Bissau: 0.002998485% Liberia: 0.00661941% Madagascar: 0.005707296% Mozambique: 0.009096003% Nigeria: 0.056169225% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.00700245% Senegal: 0.004997475% Sierra Leone: 0.013008398% Tanzania: 0.003032001% Togo: 0.012649298% 4
  • Indian Subcontinent: (Total 3.5%) Bangladesh: 0.175% India: 3.255% Pakistan: 0.07% Jews: (Total 1.2%) France: (0.102%) Germany: (0.306%) Italy: (0.1632%) Lithuania: 0.0153% Poland: (0.0306%) Portugal: 0.0666% Romania: 0.0663% Russia: 0.0255% Spain: (0.2664%) Turkey: 0.1326% Ukraine: 0.0255% U.S. Whites: (Total 0.6%) France: (0.045%) Germany: (0.18%) Ireland: 0.12% Italy: (0.06%) Netherlands: 0.015% Poland: (0.03%) UK: (0.15%) 5
  • BOLIVIA Amerindians, including Quechua and Aymara, are indigenous groups in Bolivia, reported to account for approximately 30% and 25% of the population respectively (CF, EB, CQ, NE, WCE). Spanish settlers arrived in the early 1500s, and Bolivians of largely Spanish descent are today reported to account for 12% of the population (CF, EB, CQ), with ethnic Germans said to account for 3% (EB, WCE). 30% of the population is reported to be mestizo, people of mixed ancestry assumed to be primarily Amerindian and Spanish (CF, EB, CQ, NE, WCE). However, with significant importation of African slaves during the early colonial period (Lipski, unpublished), a small African contribution is also likely. An alternative accounting comes from the Bolivian Census of 2001, in which 62% of the population considered themselves descendants of Amerindians and the rest either European or mestizo. Assuming fixed proportions of the three non-Amerindian groups and giving equal weight to the census and non-census estimates, we adopt as our estimate population proportions of 58.5% Amerindian, 27.5% mestizo, 11% Spanish and 3% German. Since we cannot find reliable genetic estimates to determine the relative contributions to the mestizo population, we import estimates from Wang et al. (2008) for three mestizo populations in northern Argentina and one in northern Chile which give an average admixture of 46.3% European, 3.3% African and 50.5% Amerindian. We apply these proportions to Bolivian mestizos, assuming the European contribution to come from Spain, the Amerindian one from Bolivia, and the African share from individual African countries in the proportions given in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for the “Other” region of disembarkation in the Americas. Lipski, John M.. “Afro-Bolivian language today: the oldest surviving Afro-Hispanic speech community,” The Pennsylvania State University, unpublished, www.personal.psu.edu/jml34/afrobol5.pdf Wang et al. (2008). “Geographic Patterns of Genome Admixture in Latin American Mestizos,” PLoS Genetics, www.plosgenetics.org, Volume 4, Issue 3. Estimate: Bolivia: 72.36% (13.86% as ancestors of Mestizos) Germany: 3% Spain: 23.7325% (12.7325% as ancestors of Mestizos) African Mix (Other): 0.9075% (as ancestors of Mestizos) Angola: 0.247704394% Benin: 0.044753363% Cameroon: 0.02052765% Congo: 0.075388294% Congo DRC: 0.053848781% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.00430155% Equatorial Guinea: 0.0042471% Gabon: 0.068005781% Gambia: 0.00303105% Ghana: 0.19229925% Guinea: 0.009496988% Guinea-Bissau: 0.004546575% Liberia: 0.01003695% Madagascar: 0.00865392% 6
  • Mozambique: 0.013792185% Nigeria: 0.085168875% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.01061775% Senegal: 0.007577625% Sierra Leone: 0.019724513% Tanzania: 0.004597395% Togo: 0.019180013% 7
  • BRAZIL Amerindian groups are indigenous in this region, but pure Amerindians currently comprise a negligible percentage of the population (CF, NE, RE). Mestizos, perceived as being of mixed European (mostly Portuguese) and Amerindian ancestry, are said to account for about 10% of the population (WCD, EB). The Portuguese started arriving in Brazil in the 16th century, and people of mainly Portguguese descent are believe to account for about 36.2% of the population (CQ, TFG, WCD). Other European groups, including people of Italian, German, and Spanish descent came in large numbers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and are taken to account for 11%, 5% and 3% of the population, respectively (EB, CQ, NE, JD, TFG). The ancestors of Afro-Brazilians arrived as slaves between the mid-1500s and 1850 when the slave trade was abolished (CF, LC, CQ, NE, WCD), and there is also a large population of mulattos, considered to be of mixed European (mostly Portuguese) and African ancestry (WCD, CF, EB, LC). Estimated population shares are 6% for Afro-Brazilians and 28% for mulattos. We assume that the African ancestors of today’s Brazilians came from specific African countries of today in the proportions listed in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for the Brazil port of disembarkation. Japanese also began to arrive in Brazil in the 19th century, with their descendents taken to account for 0.8% of the population (WCD, CF, EB, JD). Other countries contributed 0.1% or less of the population and are not considered. Because much of the population is considered to be of mixed descent, we looked for estimates of the relative contributions of different source populations based on genetic evidence. We found a few estimates for both groups identified as “mestizo and other” and ones called “African derived,” but these vary considerably, are based on small samples, and raise some questions of plausibility. We accordingly rely mainly on a general 2003 estimate for the entire Brazilian population, which is based on analysis of 12 “short tandem repeat polymorphisms” in 1037 individuals from cities in all major Brazilian regions, with 80% of the studied individuals being from the cities of Porto Alegre, Campinas, Brasilia, Goiania, Natal, Fortaleza, Recife and Manaus (Callegari- Jacques et al.). The overall population-weighted estimate from this study is that 75.03% of Brazilians’ ancestry is European, 9.15% Amerindian, and 15.82% African. Since the 0.8% estimated to be of Japanese origin in the sources of the previous paragraph are not covered, we assume that only the remaining 99.2% of Brazilians have ancestors divided in the above proportions, with 0.8% having ancestors from Japan. We assume that the resulting 74.43% who are of European origin consist of the 11%, 5% and 3% of Italian, German, and Spanish descent mentioned in the previous paragraph, with the remaining 55.43% being of Portuguese origin. If the estimates of 36.2% Portuguese and 6% pure African in the first paragraph above are accurate, this means that the overall source proportions in the 38% who are mestizo or mulatto would be 0.506 European, 0.239 Amerindian, and 0.255 African. Although the Amerindian share seems a bit high relative to the African one, if taken in isolation, we believe that the first paragraph’s assumptions of 0% pure Amerindian versus 6% pure African in the general population are likely to bias the overall estimate in the opposite direction sufficiently so that the final outcome is a quite plausible one.* The overall estimates for mestizos and mulattos combined can also be reconciled with a number of alternative estimates for the mestizo and mulatto sub- populations.** In summary, we accept the first paragraph’s estimates together with the implied shares of European, Amerindian and African ancestors among mestizos and mulattos derived from Callegari-Jacqaues et al.’s 2003 estimate, applying the African source country shares of the Main Appendix, as our estimate of where Brazilians’ ancestors lived in 1500. 8
  • * The distinction between Afro-Brazilians and mulattos is less clear than indicated in the first paragraph, and many viewed as Afro-Brazilian are likely to have some European and Amerindian ancestry. Thus, any underestimate of the African contribution to the mulatto population is likely to be offset by over-counting of the African contribution to the 6% counted as Afro-Brazilians. ** Weighted averages of the studies reviewed by Salzano and Bortolini (2002) put the European, Amerindian and African contributions to Brazilian “mestizo and other” and “African-derived” populations at 50%, 10% and 40% for mestizos and at 30%, 10%, and 60% for African-derived. That ratio of Amerindian to African proportion in the mestizo group seems to us implausibly high, and it contrasts, for example, with estimates for 5417 individuals from 11 populations in the Brazilian Amazon by dos Santos and Guerreiro, which put the genetic backgrounds of those individuals at 47% European, 41% Amerindian and 12% African, respectively. If we adopt the latter estimates for the 10% of Brazilians assumed to be mestizo, retain the other population share estimates in the first paragraph of this entry, and use the Callegari-Jacques et al. estimates of continent of ancestry for the 99.2% of Brazilians not of Japanese ancestry, we would obtain share estimates of 54.0% European, 15.6% Amerindian and 30.3% African for the mulatto population. While this provides one example of how the overall breakdown that we adopt for the mestizo and mulatto groups considered as a whole may be reconciled with plausible estimates for mestizos and mulattos taken individually, our procedure makes it unnecessary to assume specific estimates for the individual groups. Callegari-Jacques, S. et al., 2003, “Historical Genetcis: Spatiotemporal Analysis of the Formation of the Brazilian Population,” American Journal of Human Biology 15: 824-34. dos Santos, Sidney Emanuel Batista and João Farias Guerreiro, “The Indigenous Contribution to the Formation of the Population of the Brazilian Amazon Region,” Rev. Brasil. Genet. 18 (2): 311-315, 1995. Estimate: Brazil: 9.0768% Germany: 5% Italy: 11% Japan: 0.8% Portugal: 55.42976% Spain: 3% Africa mix (Brazil): 15.69344% Angola: 6.607173642% Benin: 0.249368762% Cameroon: 0.084195306% Congo: 2.010878934% Congo DRC: 1.436342096% Equatorial Guinea: 0.017419718% Gabon: 1.494407824% Gambia: 0.02354016% Ghana: 0.32171552% Guinea: 0.01428103% Guinea-Bissau: 0.03531024% Madagascar: 0.869291028% Mozambique: 1.385432577% Nigeria: 0.44333968% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.043549296% Senegal: 0.0588504% Sierra Leone: 0.029660602% Tanzania: 0.461810859% 9
  • Togo: 0.106872326% 10
  • CANADA A little over half of all Canadians are descended from British and French immigrants, with almost another quarter being descended from other European immigrants, including ones from Germany, Italy, Ireland, the Ukraine, the Netherlands, and Poland. Only about 3.3% are estimated to be descended from people indigenous to Canada before 1500. Immigrants from China (3.6%), India (2.6%), and West Indian countries are now well- represented, with the latter being mainly traceable to ancestors brought as slaves from African countries. Our estimates for the country are based on Statistics Canada, 2001 Canada Census, which lists ancestries reported by current Canadians. Some assumptions are required to reach a satisfactory estimate, among other reasons because many respondents of probable European ancestry did not list immigrant origins and because many listing origins in the Americas probably had earlier ancestors in Africa. The assumptions we used are: 1) given that respondents reported either single or multiple ancestries, we re-weighted the numbers for “single responses” and “multiple responses” to obtain a single percentage share for each ancestry. The steps are as follows: a) calculating the total number in the “single response” column, which accounts for 61% of Canada’s population in 2001; b) dividing up the remaining proportion based on the “multiple responses” column; c) allocating the 39% in proportion to the numbers in the “multiple responses” column. For example, if ancestry A accounts for 10% of the multiple responses and for 15% of the single responses, then A gets 15% + 39%*10% = 18.9%; d) prior to steps a) – c) we excluded ancestries with less than 0.1% population and normalized the proportions of the remaining groups. 2) People claiming “Canadian” ancestry in 2001 were assumed to have the same ancestry shares as the whole Canadian population in 1971. 3) People classified as “Jewish” were allocated to countries of origin according to rules specified in the main Appendix (see Part II, 2 in the main Appendix.) 4) The “Irish” was assigned to the UK and Ireland in proportion to the relative current populations of Northern Ireland (part of U.K.) and Ireland. 5) The method used in 4) was applied to the “Punjabi” originating in India and Pakistan 6) The “Métis” are people of mixed Amerindian and European descent (mainly French and British settlers), and we assumed half of their ancestors were from Canada, and the other half were equally divided between France and the UK. 7) The category “Yugoslav” was allocated to two of the component countries with a significant population in Canada (Croatia, and Serbia) in proportion to their shares in 2001 Canadian population. 8) The method used in 7) was also applied to “Arab” (attributed to Egypt and Lebanon) and 9) “South Asian” (attributed to India and Pakistan.) 10) People classified as “USA” were assigned to a number of European countries of origin according to proportions used for dividing the “White” group within the U.S. population. 11) People from the Americas, including Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, and Trinidad & Tobago were traced back to other countries of origin in the same manner as people still residing in those countries. For example, many people from Jamaica have ancestors from Africa, and thus Canadians of Jamaican origin contribute to the “Mixed Africa” share of Canadians’ overall ancestry.* 12) The categories “African”, “Black”, “West Indian”, and “Mixed Africa” from 11) were added together, and were assigned to African countries according to principles specified for the “Caribbean” in the main Appendix (see Part II, 3 in the main Appendix.) 13) The “Québécois” and “Acadian” are assumed to have ancestors from France. 14) The “Inuit” and “North American Indian” are treated as indigenous in Canada. 15) We assumed that all the “Tamil” are from India since the large majority of Tamils live in that country. 16) The category “Latin/Central/South American” was ignored because of its small percentage (0.1%) and lack of information about the relative shares of its component countries; its share was added to the country with the largest population share (i.e. UK). 11
  • * The Canada entry was not updated for version 1.1 because the share of population indicating mixed ancestry falls below 30% (see Main Appendix, Part II.4). Disaggregations for countries of origin in the Americas are accordingly still based on version 1.0 breakdowns for those countries of origin. Recalculating with version 1.1 breakdowns for populations from the Americas in Canada would lead to small changes in estimates of overall origins. Estimate Angola 0.20762% Armenia 0.1% Austria 0.3% Belgium 0.2% Benin 0.08934% Cameroon 0.10761% Canada 3.27% China 3.59% Congo 0.06319% Congo DRC 0.04513% Cote d'Ivoire 0.01866% Croatia 0.36% Czech Republic 0.2% Denmark 0.3% Egypt 0.12% Equatorial Guinea 0.02227% Finland 0.2% France 18.15% Gabon 0.11935% Gambia 0.01393% Germany 7.6% Ghana 0.21593% Greece 0.79% Guinea 0.02091% Guinea-Bissau 0.02089% Hungary 0.79% Iceland 0.1% India 2.63% Iran 0.3% Ireland 4.41% Italy 4.5% Japan 0.2% Lebanon 0.48% Liberia 0.04354% Lithuania 0.02% Madagascar 0.00975% Mozambique 0.01553% Netherlands 2.53% Nigeria 0.23896% Norway 0.85% Pakistan 0.29% Philippines 1% Poland 2.13% Portugal 1.05% Romania 0.38% 12
  • Russia 0.63% Sao Tome and Principe 0.05566% Senegal 0.03482% Serbia and Montenegro 0.24% Sierra Leone 0.04344% Slovakia 0.1% Somalia 0.1% South Korea 0.30% Spain 0.59% Sri Lanka 0.2% Sweden 0.56% Switzerland 0.2% Tanzania 0.00518% Togo 0.03829% Turkey 0.16% UK 35.18% Ukraine 2.97% Vietnam 0.5% *http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/products/highlight/ETO/Table1.cfm? Lang=E&T=501&GV=1&GID=0 **Perspective Canada: A compendium of Social Statistics, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, 1974, p.265 13
  • CHILE Amerindian tribes are indigenous to the country, and Chileans of purely Amerindian descent are assumed to account for about 3% of the population today (CF, CQ, NE, WCD). Spaniards began to arrive in Chile in the 16th century, and while many mixed with indigenous groups, about 20% of today’s population is taken to be of purely Spanish descent (LC, EV, WCD). Given the large mixed, or mestizo population (70%) in Chile (LC, EV, WCD), we consulted genetic studies to assign admixture proportions. These studies include evidence of an African contribution, which we attribute to individual countries according to the principles stated in the Main Appendix, Part II.3 for “other ports of disembarkation.” In the 19th century, a small number of immigrants from Germany, Italy, Britain, and France started to arrive in Chile (LC, EV). Without further information, we attribute 1% to each of these four countries. At the turn of the 19-20th centuries, some Palestinian Arabs fled to Chile, accounting for about 2% of today’s pouplpation (LC, WCD). Jews, estimated at 1% of the population, arrived in Chile in several waves, with approximately 85% considered to be Ashkenazi and 15% Sephardic (LC, JVL). We attribute them to individual source countries according to the principles specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.2. For Chile’s mestizos, Salzano and Bortolini (2002) reanalyze nine genetic studies and estimate the European, African, and Amerindian shares are 28%, 12%, and 60% or at 32%, 14%, and 54%, depending on the method used. However, we were unable to locate eight of the nine base studies and therefore were unable to determine what populations were sampled. The only one of the nine we could locate, Harb et al. (1998) studied a group which considered itself to be pure Amerindian, casting doubt on using Salzano and Bortolini’s estimates for Chilean mestizos. A more reliable study, we believe, is that by Wang et al, (2008), who calculate genetic admixture for 13 populations in Latin America, including two communities in Chile, using up-to-date genomic methods. They find that the European, African, and Amerindian shares are 48.5%, 1.3%, and 50.2% and 42%, 2.3%, and 55.7%, respectively. Relying mainly on this study, we use admixture shares of 49% European, 49% Amerindian, and 2% African for Chile’s mestizos.* * Some older studies, using thousands of observations but less current methods, calculate admixture estimates unconditioned on ethnicity and find high levels of European genetic inheritance. For example, Cruz-Coke and Moreno (1994) summarize four studies using approximately 85,000 observations from urban blood banks, and find that European admixture in Santiago North is 61%, Santiago East 81%, Valparaiso 77%, and Concepcion 75%. These estimates probably overstate the European share in Chile as a whole, since they are based on urban samples only. Cruz-Coke, Ricardo and Rodrigo R. Moreno. 1994. “Genetic epidemiology of single gene defects in Chile.” Journal of Medical Genetics. 31. 702-706. Harb, Z. et al. 1998. “Poblacciones costeras de Chile: marcadores geneticos en cuatro localidades.” Revista Medica de Chile. 126. 753-60. Wang, Sijia et al. 2008. “Geographic Patterns of Genome Admixture in Latin American Mestizos”. PLoS Genetics. 4(3) Estimate: Chile: 37.3% (34.3% as ancestors of Mestizos, 3% as ancestors of Amerindian France: 1.085% (0.085% as ancestors of Jews) 14
  • Germany: 1.255% (0.0255% as ancestors of Jews) Israel/Palestine: 2% Italy: 1.136% (0.136% as ancestors of Jews) Spain: 54.522% (54.3% as ancestors of Mestizos, 0.222% as ancestors of Jews) UK: 1% Jew (Total 1%) France (0.085%) Germany (0.255%) Italy (0.136%) Lithuania: 0.01275% Poland 0.0255% Portugal: 0.0555% Romania: 0.05525% Russia 0.02125% Spain (0.222%) Turkey: 0.1105% Ukraine: 0.02125% African Mix (Other): 1.4% (as ancestors of Mestizos) Angola: 0.3821335% Benin: 0.069041% Cameroon: 0.031668% Congo: 0.1163015% Congo DRC: 0.0830725% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.006636% Equatorial Guinea: 0.006552% Gabon: 0.1049125% Gambia: 0.004676% Ghana: 0.29666% Guinea: 0.014651% Guinea-Bissau: 0.007014% Liberia: 0.015484% Madagascar: 0.0133504% Mozambique: 0.0212772% Nigeria: 0.13139% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.01638% Senegal: 0.01169% Sierra Leone: 0.030429% Tanzania: 0.0070924% Togo: 0.029589% 15
  • COLOMBIA Amerindians are indigenous in this region, and have been in Colombia since long before 1500 (CF, LC, EB, NE). Spaniards began to arrive in 1525 while immigration from other countries has never been much encouraged in Colombia (CF, EB, CQ, NE, WCE). Africans came during the slave trade after Spanish conquest (CF, LC, NE). Some sources report a mestizos population of predominantly Amerindian and Spanish ancestry as accounting for about 58% of the total population (CF, LC, EB, CQ, NE), a mulatto population of predominantly African and Spanish ancestry as accounting for about 14% (CF, CQ, NE), and a population of zambos or people of mainly African and Amerindian ancestry as accounting for about 3% of the population (CF, NE). With most of the population seen as being of mixed ancestry, we sought genetically-based estimates of the relative contributions of the source populations and found most credible a 2008 study by Godinho et al., which studies 1429 unrelated individuals from 25 of Colombia’s 32 departments. It attempts to characterize the entire population except for 4% self-reporting as pure Amerindian, and thus does not distinguish between people socially or self- perceived as being white, black, mestizo, mulatto, or zambo. Taking a weighted average of its regional estimates, we obtain estimated Amerindian, European and African contributions to Colombia’s overall population of 37.1%, 45.6% and 17.3% respectively, with the first number also including the 4% assumed to be pure Amerindian. We assume that the Amerindians are indigenous, that the Europeans are from Spain, and that the Africans are from present-day African countries in the proportions specified in the main Appendix, Part II.3 for “other ports of disembarkation.” Godinho et al. (2008). “Regional patterns of genetic admixture in South America,” Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series 1: 329–330. Estimate Colombia: 37.1% Spain: 45.6% Mixed Africa (Other): 17.3% Angola: 4.72207825% Benin: 0.8531495% Cameroon: 0.391326% Congo: 1.43715425% Congo DRC: 1.02653875% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.082002% Equatorial Guinea: 0.080964% Gabon: 1.29641875% Gambia: 0.057782% Ghana: 3.66587% Guinea: 0.1810445% Guinea-Bissau: 0.086673% Liberia: 0.191338% Madagascar: 0.1649728% Mozambique: 0.2629254% Nigeria: 1.623605% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.20241% Senegal: 0.144455% Sierra Leone: 0.3760155% Tanzania: 0.0876418% 16
  • Togo: 0.3656355% 17
  • COSTA RICA Amerindians are indigenous in this region, settling in what is now Costa Rica long before 1500, with sources estimating about 1% of today’s population to be pure Amerindian (CF, EB, NE). Spaniards first arrived in Costa Rica in the early 16 th century, and gradually intermarried with the indigenous groups to form the mixed or mestizo population. Sources also suggest that about 3% of the population are descendants of African blacks originally brought in from Jamaica to build railroads and raise bananas (CF, NE). While estimates put mestizos at 17% (WCE, CF, CQ, NE) and more or less pure Spanish descendants at 78% of the overall population, we decided to revisit mestizo, Spanish, Amerindian and African proportions along with the question of source population shares in the mestizo admixture. We did this because we found credible genetic studies not conditioned on ethnicity, because findings from neighboring countries suggest that genetic differences often fail to coincide with ethnic perceptions, and because it seemed possible that perceptions of a largely Spanish-derived population might, as in Puerto Rico, fail to account for early genetic contributions by indigenous people, especially women. We treat the African ancestors of today’s Costa Ricans as coming from individual countries according to principles specified in the main Appendix, Part II.3, for “other ports of disembarkation.” The country also has an ethnic Chinese population, estimated at 1%, whose ancestors were brought in as laborers (CF, EB, NE). It is not reported and is thus assumed to be left out of the genetic investigations to which we turn presently. A study on genetic admixture by Morera et al. (2003) analyzes blood samples of 2196 unrelated adults born in Costa Rica distributed in each of five regions. It considers 32 different genetic markers. The authors provide estimates by region and then a country level admixture estimate of 61% European, 30% Amerindian, and 9% African. Their results are consistent with the history and demographics of the nation – more black admixture along the Atlantic coast, and more Amerindian admixture in the south. Madrigal et al. (2001) carried out a study in Lim´on, on the Caribbean coast of Costa Rica, using a different methodology. They studied the gene flow between the Afro- Limoneses (of Jamaican origin) and the Hispano-Limoneses (mestizos). Their admixture estimates for the mestizo group indicated an ancestry of 58.7% European, 33.8% Amerindian, and 7.5% African. These results are quite similar to those of Morera et al, (2003) for the Atlantic region. Finally, Wang et al. (2008) include an estimate for mestizos in the Central Valley of Costa Rica in their paper on Latin American mestizos. They employ a newer method that studies genomic data and thousands of genetic markers, but their sample size is very small. (See discussion under the entry for Chile). They find that mestizos in the Central Valley of Costa Rica are 66.7% European, 28.7% Amerindian, and 4.6% African. These estimates are similar to the Morera et al. (2003) country-level findings.* Following Morera et al. (2003), we conclude that the overall admixture of the Costa Rican population (besides the Chinese) is 61% European, 30% Amerindian, and 9% African. We note that the substantial Amerindian contribution in this estimate is consistent with our conclusions for other countries (see Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, and Cuba) where the original inhabitants are commonly believed to have been eliminated early in the colonial history, yet where there is evidence of substantial Amerindian genetic material surviving today. * Salzano and Bortolini (2002) reanalyze data from three older studies based on blood types and find that mestizos in Costa Rica are 65.5% European, 27% African, and 7.5% Amerindian. However, we believe the Morera et al (2003) study to be superior since the base data is more recent, considers more genetic systems, and attempts to be nationally representative. It is also difficult to justify historically the large African share obtained by Salzano and Bortolini. 18
  • Madrigal, L. et al. 2001, “Ethnicity, gene flow, and population subdivision in Limon, Costa Rica,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 114. 99-108. Morera, B., R. Barrantes, and R. Marin-Rojas, 2003, “Gene admixture in the Costa Rican Population, Annals of Human Genetics. 67. 71-80. Wang, Sijia et al., 2008, “Geographic Patterns of Genome Admixture in Latin American Mestizos, PLoS Genetics. 4(3) Estimate: China: 1% Costa Rica: 29.7% Spain: 60.39% Mixed Africa (Caribbean): (Total 8.91%) Angola: 1.293620625% Benin: 0.55665225% Cameroon: 0.67052205% Congo: 0.393710625% Congo DRC: 0.281221875% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.1162755% Equatorial Guinea: 0.1387287% Gabon: 0.743650875% Gambia: 0.0867834% Ghana: 1.34541% Guinea: 0.13030875% Guinea-Bissau: 0.1301751% Liberia: 0.2713095% Madagascar: 0.06073056% Mozambique: 0.09678933% Nigeria: 1.488861% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.34682175% Senegal: 0.2169585% Sierra Leone: 0.27064125% Tanzania: 0.03226311% Togo: 0.23856525% 19
  • CUBA Cuba’s indigenous population is commonly assumed to have few living descendants due to high mortality in the early colonial period (CQ). Spanish settlement began in the 16 th century, and individuals of mainly Spanish descent are reported to account for about 38% of the population (EB, CF, NE). Large numbers of Africans were brought to Cuba in the slave trade, and individuals of mainly African descent are estimated to comprise some 11% of the population (CF, EB, CQ, NE). Mulattos, of mixed Spanish and African origin, are said to comprise 50% of the population (CF, EB, NE). Given their numerical importance, we consulted genetic evidence for the actual mix of ancestry (see below). Ancestors of Cuba’s Chinese population (1%) came as indentured labourers in the 19 th and 20th centuries (CF, EB, NE). African ancestors are assigned to individual countries in the proportions specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for Caribbean ports of disembarkation. There are a number of good estimates of genetic admixture among mulattos in Cuba. Cintado et al. (2009), using a sample of 206 mulattos from Havana, find that the relative contributions to the ancestry of Cuban mulattos are 57-59% European, 41-43% African, and 0% Amerindian. Ferrer et al. (2007) find admixture percentages of 45.3% African, 50.9% European, and 3.8% Amerindian using a sample of 202 mulattos from across the country ‘not selected according to socio-economic status.’ These studies indicate a small Amerindian share. Salzano and Bortolini (2002) analyze data from 2 studies and find that the European, African, and Amerindian shares are 42%, 41%, and 17% by one method, 36%, 47%, and 17% by another, both indicating a high Amerindian component. Indeed, Mendizabal et al. (2008) find that 33% of the matriarchal lineages (determined from mtDNA) are Amerindian, compared with 0% of the patriarchal lineages.* Such a high Amerindian contribution to mtDNA is nevertheless consistent with a much lower share in overall ancestry since successive waves of mainly European- and African-descended males may have interbred with descendents of early Amerindian-European and Amerindian-African pairings. Leaning mainly on the more recent studies while increasing somewhat the Amerindian share, we choose admixture percentages of 5% Amerindian, 45% African, and 50% European for Cuban mulattos. * Alegre et al. (2007) also find that Amerindian HLA alleles exist in Cuba today, and conclude that there is “ . . . a certainty that Amerindian inheritance is still present in Cuban Islanders, even if Amerindians are now extinguished.” Alegre, Roberto et al., 2007, “HLA genes in Cubans and the detection of Amerindian alleles,” Molecular Immunology. 44(9): 2426-35. Cintado, Alberto et al., 2009, “Admixture estimates for the population of Havana City.” Annals of Human Biology. 36(3). 350-360. Ferrer, Annia et al., 2007, “HLA class I polymorphism in the Cuban population,” Human Immunology 68(11): 918-927. Mendizabal, Isabel et al., 2008, “Genetic origin, admixture, and asymmetry in maternal and parental human lineages in Cuba,“ BMC Evolutionary Biology. 8. 213. Estimate China: 1% Spain: 63% (25% as ancestors of Mulattos) 20
  • Cuba: 2.5% Mixed Africa: (Total 33.5% (22.5% as ancestors of Mulattos)) Angola: 4.86378125% Benin: 2.0929125% Cameroon: 2.5210425% Congo: 1.48028125% Congo DRC: 1.05734375% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.437175% Equatorial Guinea: 0.521595% Gabon: 2.79599375% Gambia: 0.32629% Ghana: 5.0585% Guinea: 0.4899375% Guinea-Bissau: 0.489435% Liberia: 1.020075% Madagascar: 0.228336% Mozambique: 0.3639105% Nigeria: 5.59785% Sao Tome and Principe: 1.3039875% Senegal: 0.815725% Sierra Leone: 1.0175625% Tanzania: 0.1213035% Togo: 0.8969625% 21
  • DOMINICAN REPUBLIC The indigenous population of the island of Hispañola is commonly assumed to have few living descendants due to high mortality in the early colonial period (LC, EB). The Spanish started to settle in what is now the Dominican Republic around 1500 (CF, LC, EV, EB, NE, WCD), and the slave trade, beginning in 1503, brought in large numbers of Africans (CF, LC, WCD, EV, NE). Today, 16% of the Dominican Republic’s population are viewed as being of largely Spanish descent, 12% as mainly African, according to the sources cited. More numerous, at 72%, are the mulattos, viewed as being of mixed white and African origin (CF, LC, WCD, NE). Given their numerical importance, we consulted genetic evidence for the actual mix of ancestry. There are small contributions of people from other countries including France, Lebanon and Japan, but none are numerous enough to justify inclusion in our estimate (WCD). African ancestors of today’s population are assigned to individual countries in the proportions specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for Caribbean ports of disembarkation. There are few admixture estimates for the Dominican Republic. Tajima et al. (2004) analyze genetic admixture using mitochondrial DNA for 33 healthy women and 50 women with type 2 diabetes. Since mtDNA only measure female admixture, their analysis is of value for indicating the presence of Amerindian ancestry but of little help in determining the Amerindian proportion of ancestors overall. Salzano and Bortolini (2002) reanalyze two studies, and using two different methods, they find that “African-derived” individuals in the Dominican Republic have proportions of European, African, and Amerindian ancestors estimated at 53%, 33%, and 14% or 59%, 25%, and 16%, depending on the method used. Those estimates resemble Salzano and Bortolin’s estimates for Cuba in having Amerindian shares well above expectation, and we were unable to locate the original studies to determine whether the sample was of mulattos or another group of people. Although for this case we lack the alternative sources available for Cuba, given that historical accounts suggest that the breakdowns should be similar and that we do not want to put undue weight on the Salzano and Bortolini estimates, we use the same admixture percentage for Dominican Republic mulattos as we do for Cuba’s, namely 5% Amerindian, 45% African, and 50% European. Tajima, Atsushi et al., 2004, “Genetic background of people in the Dominican Republic with or without obese type 2 diabetes revealed by mitochondrial DNA polymorphism,” Journal of Human Genetics 49: 495-9. Estimate Spain: 52% (36% as ancestors of Mulattos) Dominican Republic: 3.6% Mixed Africa: (Total 44.4% (32.4% as ancestors of Mulattos)) Angola: 6.446325% Benin: 2.77389% Cameroon: 3.341322% Congo: 1.961925% Congo DRC: 1.401375% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.57942% Equatorial Guinea: 0.691308% 22
  • Gabon: 3.705735% Gambia: 0.432456% Ghana: 6.7044% Guinea: 0.64935% Guinea-Bissau: 0.648684% Liberia: 1.35198% Madagascar: 0.3026304% Mozambique: 0.4823172% Nigeria: 7.41924% Sao Tome and Principe: 1.72827% Senegal: 1.08114% Sierra Leone: 1.34865% Tanzania: 0.1607724% Togo: 1.18881% 23
  • ECUADOR Amerindian groups settled in Ecuador long before 1500, and they are considered indigenous in this region (CF, LC, NE, EV, WCD). The Spanish first landed in Ecuador in 1526 (CF, LC, CQ, NE, EV, WCD), and ancestors of people of African descent came during slave trade in the sixteenth century (CF, LC, NE, CQ, EV, WCD). The largest identified ethnic group are mestizos, considered to be descended in roughly equal parts from Amerindian and Spanish ancestors (CF, LC, NE, CQ, EV, WCD). The sources cited put the shares of pure Amerindian, Spanish, Afro-Ecuadorians and mestizos at about 30%, 10%, 4% and 56%, respectively. In contrast, the 2001 Ecuadorian Census produced self-reported ethnic shares of 2.2% Afro-Ecuadorians, 2.7% mulattos, 6.8% Amerindians, 10.5% Europeans, and 77.4% mestizos. The large discrepancy regarding the shares of mestizos and Amerindians may be explained by shifting perceptions, with the required shifts not being large if WCD’s description of the largest indigenous group as “detribalized Quichua” (said to account for 25% of Ecuador’s population) is accurate. We adopt as a compromise ethnic breakdown the shares 65% mestizo, 20% indigenous, and 10.1% European, retaining the Afro-Ecuadoran and mulatto shares obtained by the census. Assuming that the European-derived population’s ancestors all lived in Spain, that Amerindian ancestors all lived in Ecuador, and assigning African ancestors to individual African countries according to the principles for “other ports of disembarkation” as listed in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, our remaining task is to estimate relative contributions of source populations to the mestizo and mulatto groups. We found the best available study for this purpose to be that by Gonzalez-Andrade et al. (2007), who reanalyze a published data set considering 15 forensic autosomal short tandem repeats with a sample size of 115 Quichua, 317 mestizo and 104 Afro-Ecuadorian individuals. They derive mean admixture proportion estimates of 73% Amerindian, 19.3% European and 7.8% African, for the mestizo individuals, and 27.9% Amerindian, 15.8% European, and 56.4% African, for the Afro-Ecuadorians. Because the reported margins of error are large and the 73/19 Amerindian/European ratio contrasts considerably with the popular perception of roughly equal contributions by those two groups to Ecuador’s mestizo population, we decided not to ignore entirely that perception and to adopt compromise shares of 62% Amerindian, 33% European, and 5% African for the mestizo population. We adopt Gonzalez-Andrade et al.’s mean estimates for the mulatto population’s origins without change. Census 2001: (in Spanish) http://www.inec.gov.ec/web/guest/ecu_est/est_soc/cen_pob_viv http://www.inec.gov.ec/web/guest/publicaciones/estudios/soc/pob_ind_ecu Gonzalez-Andrade, F.; Dora Sanchez, Jorge Gonzalez-Solorzano, Santiago Gascon and Begona Martinez-Jarreta, 2007, “Sex-Specific Genetic Admixture of Mestizos, Amerindian Kichwas, and Afro-Ecuadorans from Ecuador,” Human Biology 79 (1): 51–77. Estimate Ecuador: 61.05255% (40.3% as ancestors of Mestizos, 0.75255% as ancestors of Mulattos) Spain: 31.97617% (21.45% as ancestors of Mestizos, 0.42617% as ancestors of Mulattos) Mixed Africa: (Total 6.97128%, 3.25% as ancestors of Mestizos, 1.52128% as ancestors of Mulattos) Angola: 1.902827955% 24
  • Benin: 0.34378861% Cameroon: 0.157690325% Congo: 0.579121552% Congo DRC: 0.413658251% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.033043861% Equatorial Guinea: 0.032625584% Gabon: 0.522410199% Gambia: 0.023284071% Ghana: 1.477213961% Guinea: 0.072954432% Guinea-Bissau: 0.034926106% Liberia: 0.077102343% Madagascar: 0.066478114% Mozambique: 0.105949494% Nigeria: 0.654254508% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.081563961% Senegal: 0.058210177% Sierra Leone: 0.151520743% Tanzania: 0.035316498% Togo: 0.147337976% 25
  • EL SALVADOR Indigenous Amerindian groups settled in El Salvador long before 1500 (CQ, CF, LC, WCE). Spanish settlers first arrived in 1524 (CF, LC, CQ, WCE). The largest generally recognized population group are mestizos, understood as being of mixed Spanish and Amerindian origin (CF, LC, EB, WCE). The sources cited estimate the shares of purely indigenous, purely Spanish, and mestizo Salvadorans at about 5%, 5% and 90%, respectively. Given the large fraction of mestizos, we sought genetic evidence for the relevant Amerindian, Spanish, and perhaps African contributions, but found no estimates that appeared reliable.* As with Belize, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama, we make the simple assumption of equal Amerindian and Spanish contributions to the mestizo population for this case. We consider this to be reasonable in view of what is known about pre-colonial population densities and given our estimates for Mexico, Guatemala and Costa Rica.** * There is an estimate by Salzano and Bortolini (2002) but we chose not to use it both because it is based on older studies that we could not locate to determine details and because its conclusion that Salvadoran mestizos are 93% European and only 7% Amerindian strikes us as implausible given the social perception of roughly equal contributions (see our discussion of principles in the Main Appendix, Part II.4). ** Archeologists and historians believe that indigenous population densities in the Americas before 1500 were greatest in the heartlands of the Aztec and Inca empires, with lesser densities elsewhere, including the Central American land bridge between those two empires. We have credible genetic studies with which to estimate mestizo admixture for Mexico, Guatemala and Costa Rica, and these show a downward trend in the relative contribution of Amerindians consistent with expectations based on indigenous population density. Specifically, the Amerindian/European split is roughly 61/39 for Mexico, 59/41 for Guatemala, and 33/67 for Costa Rica. 50/50 estimates for the remaining countries of Central America thus appear to be reasonable. Estimate El Salvador: 50% (45% as ancestors of Mestizos) Spain: 50% (45% as ancestors of Mestizos) 26
  • GUATEMALA Various Mayan groups inhabited Guatemala before 1500. Ladinos are the largest population group, understood as being of mixed Mayan and European, predominantly Spanish, descent (CE, EB). Although the boundary-line between the two groups is somewhat unclear, with many ethnic Mayans having adopted the Spanish language and culture, most sources consider the mestizos more numerous, and we adopt the assumption that relatively pure Amerindians account for 40.3% and Ladinos for 55% of El Salvador’s population. The WCD lists a population called “West Indian Black” as accounting for 2% of the population; this is presumably the black Carib (Garifuna) population referred to in other sources (CE, EC), individuals whose ancestors were deported to Central America in the 18th century from the island of St. Vincent. Since they are of mixed Caribbean and African descent (EB), half of the black Caribs are attributed to Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, the other half to source countries in Africa in the proportions specified in Part II.3 of the Main Appendix for Caribbean ports of disembarkation. There is also a “Guatemalan White” population (0.9%) assumed to be of almost entirely Spanish ancestry. It is assumed that the remaining 1.8% of the population is indigenous; these include Aztecs and Xincas. Since the largest identified group is of mixed ancestry, we looked for genetic studies to estimate the contributions of the source populations. The best study using a Guatemalan mestizo sample appears to be the one included in Wang et al. (2008), which is based on 20 individuals from the Oriente region of Guatemala. They derive an admixture estimate of 52.8% Amerindian, 39.9% European and 7.3% African. Due to the small size and regional limitations of that sample, we also looked at data from Lisker et al. (1996) for two southern states of Mexico, Oaxaca and Yucatan. Lisker et al. obtain admixture estimates of 67.4% Amerindian, 30.3% European and 2.4% African for their Oaxaca sample and of 51% Amerindian, 43.1% European and 5.9% African for their Yucatan sample. As our estimate of source contributions in Guatemalan Ladinos, we put a weight of 0.25 on each of the Mexican state estimates and a weight of 0.5 on the Guatemalan regional estimate, arriving at the proportions 56% Amerindian, 38.3% European, and 5.7% African. We attribute the Amerindian ancestors to Guatemala and the European ancestors to Spain. With regard to the African ancestors of Guatemalan Ladinos, while division using the “other ports of disembarkation” numbers in the Main Appendix Part II.3 is our usual approach outside of the Caribbean, the U.S., and Brazil, but because Caribbean patterns of slave importation could have influenced where Africans brought to Guatemala originated and because we use the Caribbean proportions for the Garifuna (see above), we use an equally weighted mix of the “other” and “Caribbean ports of disembarkation” proportions for our estimate. Lisker R, Ramırez E. and Babinsky V., 1996, “Genetic structure of autochthonous populations of Meso-America: Mexico,” Human Biology 68: 395–404. Wang et al., 2008, “Geographic Patterns of Genome Admixture in Latin American Mestizos,” PLoS Genetics, www.plosgenetics.org, Volume 4, Issue 3. Estimate: Guatemala: 72.9% Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: 1% (as ancestors of Black Caribs) Spain: 21.965% 27
  • African Mix (Other): 1.5675% (As ancestors of Guatemalan Mestizos) Angola: 0.427853044% Benin: 0.077301263% Cameroon: 0.03545685% Congo: 0.130216144% Congo DRC: 0.093011531% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.00742995% Equatorial Guinea: 0.0073359% Gabon: 0.117464531% Gambia: 0.00523545% Ghana: 0.33215325% Guinea: 0.016403888% Guinea-Bissau: 0.007853175% Liberia: 0.01733655% Madagascar: 0.01494768% Mozambique: 0.023822865% Nigeria: 0.147109875% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.01833975% Senegal: 0.013088625% Sierra Leone: 0.034069613% Tanzania: 0.007940955% Togo: 0.033129113% African Mix (Caribbean): 2.5675% (1.5675% as ancestors of Guatemalan Mestizos, 1% as ancestors of West Indian Blacks) Angola: 0.372768906% Benin: 0.160404563% Cameroon: 0.193217213% Congo: 0.113451406% Congo DRC: 0.081036719% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.033505875% Equatorial Guinea: 0.039975975% Gabon: 0.214289969% Gambia: 0.02500745% Ghana: 0.3876925% Guinea: 0.037549688% Guinea-Bissau: 0.037511175% Liberia : 0.078180375% Madagascar: 0.01750008% Mozambique: 0.027890753% Nigeria : 0.42902925% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.099939938% Senegal: 0.062518625% Sierra Leone: 0.077987813% Tanzania: 0.009296918% Togo: 0.068744813% 28
  • GUYANA The indigenous Amerindian groups lived in Guyana long before 1500, and their descendants are assumed to account for 5% of the population today (CF, LC, EB, CQ, EV, WCD). The ancestors of Africans in Guyana came during slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries, and people of mainly African ancestry are reported to account for 35% of the population (CF, LC, EB, CQ, EV, WCD). Their respective proportion among African countries was decided according to principles specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for “other ports of disembarkation.” People from the Indian subcontinent arrived in the 19th century, and their descendants are said to comprise 50% of the population today (CF, LC, EB, CQ, EV, WCD). They came from areas stretching from North India to Bangladesh, and from areas in South India (HBL), and we attribute 93% of them to India, 5% to Bangladesh, 2% to Pakistan. People of Portuguese and Chinese ancestry are the descendants of indentured laborers who came in the 19th century and now account for 1.3% and 0.7% of Guyanese, respectively (WCD, LC, CQ). There are few Europeans other than Portuguese, and most are short-term inhabitants (EB). A mixed population, estimated to account for 8% of Guyanese, is assumed to have equal number of East Indian and African ancestors (CF, EV), with the East Indian proportion being attributed to India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan in the same proportions as above. Estimate China: 0.7% Guyana: 5% Portugal: 1.3% Indian subcontinent: (Total 54% (4% as ancestors of the mixed population)) India: 50.22% Bangladesh: 2.7% Pakistan: 1.08% Mixed Africa: (Total 39% (4% as ancestors of the mixed population)) Angola: 10.645148% Benin: 1.923285% Cameroon: 0.88218% Congo: 3.2398275% Congo DRC: 2.3141625% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.18486% Equatorial Guinea: 0.18252% Gabon: 2.9225625% Gambia: 0.13026% Ghana: 8.2641% Guinea: 0.408135% Guinea-Bissau: 0.19539% Madagascar: 0.371904% Mozambique: 0.592722% Liberia: 0.43134% Nigeria: 3.66015% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.4563% Senegal: 0.32565% Sierra Leone: 0.847665% Tanzania: 0.197574% Togo: 0.824265% 29
  • HAITI The indigenous population of the island of Hispañola is usually assumed to have almost no living descendants due to high mortality in the early colonial period (NE).* About 95% of Haiti's population are assumed to be of African origin, their ancestors having arrived as slaves after 1517 (CF, NE, WCE). The proportions of their ancestors from individual African countries of today are determined according to the Main Appendix, Part II.3, using the Caribbean ports of disembarkation shares. European settlers begin arriving in Haiti around 1500, contributing to the mixed or mulatto population that now accounts for about 5% of Haitians (CF, CQ, WCE). Without additional information, we attributed 2.5% of mulatto’s ancestors to African countries, 2.3% to France, and 0.2% to Spain since there was some Spanish settlement before the French colonial period (CQ, NE). * Our analysis for the Dominican Republic, which shares the same island with Haiti, suggests that this assumption is in error. However, we have not consulted genetic studies in Haiti’s case because the fraction reported to be of mixed ancestry in Haiti falls well below the 30% threshold (see Main Appendix, Part II.4). Estimate France: 2.3% (as ancestors of Mulattos) Spain: 0.2% (as ancestors of Mulattos) Mixed Africa: (Total 97.5% (2.5% as ancestors of Mulattos)) Angola: 14.155781% Benin: 6.0913125% Cameroon: 7.3373625% Congo: 4.3082813% Congo DRC: 3.0773438% Cote d'Ivoire: 1.272375% Equatorial Guinea: 1.518075% Gabon: 8.1375938% Gambia: 0.94965% Ghana: 14.7225% Guinea: 1.4259375% Guinea-Bissau: 1.424475% Liberia: 2.968875% Madagascar: 0.66456% Mozambique: 1.0591425% Nigeria: 16.29225% Sao Tome and Principe: 3.7951875% Senegal: 2.374125% Sierra Leone: 2.9615625% Tanzania: 0.3530475% Togo: 2.6105625% 30
  • HONDURAS Amerindian groups lived in Honduras before 1500, and people of predominantly Amerindian ancestry are said to account for about 7% of the population today (CF, LC). The Spanish began to arrive in the 16th century, with people of mainly Spanish ancestry accounting for 1% of Hondurans today (CF, LC, CQ). The ancestors of blacks, said to account for 2% of today’s Hondurans, were brought as slaves from Africa (CF, LC), the respective proportions coming from today’s African countries being decided according to the Main Appendix’s Part II.3 list for “other ports of disembarkation.” Mestizos, said to be of mixed Amerindian and Spanish origins, account for 90% of Honduras’s population (CF, LC). In the absence of credible genetic estimates,* we assume their relative contributions to be the same (see our remarks on attribution of mestizos in Central America in the entry for El Salvador). * Salzano and Bortolini (2002) reanalyze a previous study about the Duffy blood group and conclude that the correct contributions to Hondurans whom they identify as “Mestizo and other” is 59% European, 41% African, and 0% Amerindian. Estimate Honduras: 52% (45% as ancestors of Mestizos) Spain: 46% (45% as ancestors of Mestizos) Mixed Africa: (Total 2%) Angola: 0.545905% Benin: 0.09863% Cameroon: 0.04524% Congo: 0.166145% Congo DRC: 0.118675% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.00948% Equatorial Guinea: 0.00936% Gabon: 0.149875% Gambia: 0.00668% Ghana: 0.4238% Guinea: 0.02093% Guinea-Bissau: 0.01002% Liberia: 0.02212% Madagascar: 0.019072% Mozambique: 0.030396% Nigeria: 0.1877% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.0234% Senegal: 0.0167% Sierra Leone: 0.04347% Tanzania: 0.010132% Togo: 0.04227% 31
  • JAMAICA The indigenous tribes in Jamaica are reported to have disappeared by the 17 th century, with few if any descendants (EB).* Spanish settlers arrived in 1509 (CQ), and the English invaded in 1655 (EB, WCD). About 80% of all Jamaicans are considered to be of fully African descent, their ancestors having been brought from Africa as slaves between the 17th and 19th centuries (LC, CQ, WCD). We fixed proportions from individual African countries according to the main Appendix, Part II.3, for Caribbean ports of disembarkation. About 15% of Jamaicans are mulattos of Afro-European descent (LC, WCD). Since the Spaniards themselves left the island or were expelled shortly after English conquest, we attributed 7.5% out of the 15% mulattos to African countries (in the same proportions as other Africans), 6% to Britain, and 1.5% to Spain. An additional 0.5% of Jamaicans are said to be of fully English descent (EB, WCD). People from the Indian subcontinent, whose descendants account for 1.3% of the population today, arrived in the 19th century (CF, LC, EV, WCD). They came from areas stretching from North India to Bangladesh, and from areas in South India (HBL), and we attribute 93% of them to India, 5% to Bangladesh, 2% to Pakistan. There is an ethnic Chinese population of 0.2% who are descended from indentured laborers who came in the 19th century (CF, LC, EV, WCD). The country’s population also includes 2.4% of Afro-East Indian descent, and 0.6% of Afro-Chinese descent (LC, WCD). Of these two mixed populations, we attributed a total of 1.5% to African countries, 1.2% to Indian sub-continent, and 0.3% to China. Attribution to individual African and sub-continent countries is made in the same proportions as described above. * While at least a small indigenous genetic contribution appears likely in view of findings for Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico, genetic studies were not consulted in the case of Jamaica because the fraction reported to be of mixed ancestry falls below the 30% threshold (see Main Appendix, Part II.4). Estimate: China: 0.5% (0.3% as ancestors of Afro-Chinese) Spain: 1.5% (as ancestors of Mulattos) UK: 6.5% (6% as ancestors of Mulattos) Indian Subcontinent: (Total: 2.5% (1.2% as ancestors of Afro-East-Indians)) Bangladesh: 0.125% India: 2.325% Pakistan: 0.05% Mixed Africa: 89% (7.5% as ancestors of Mulattos, 1.5% ancestors of Afro-Asian and Afro-Chinese) Angola: 12.921688% Benin: 5.560275% Cameroon: 6.697695% Congo: 3.9326875% Congo DRC: 2.8090625% Cote d'Ivoire: 1.16145% Equatorial Guinea: 1.38573% Gabon: 7.4281625% Gambia: 0.86686% Ghana: 13.439% Guinea: 1.301625% Guinea-Bissau: 1.30029% Liberia: 2.71005% 32
  • Madagascar: 0.606624% Mozambique: 0.966807% Nigeria: 14.8719% Sao Tome and Principe: 3.464325% Senegal: 2.16715% Sierra Leone: 2.703375% Tanzania: 0.322269% Togo: 2.382975% 33
  • MEXICO Sources agree that the largest population groups in Mexico in terms of origins and ethnic identification are indigenous Amerindians (CF, CQ), Europeans of mainly Spanish descent (CF, CQ), and mestizos who are descended from members of both groups (CF, CQ) with a small contribution from Africans brought to the area as slaves in the 16th and 17th centuries and also giving rise to a small population of predominantly African derivation (CQ, WCD). Population shares based on these sources are about 29.5% Amerindian, 9% Spanish, 60% mestizo, and 0.7% Afro-Mexican. There were also Arab immigrations from Syria and Lebanon in the 19th and 20th Centuries, whose descendants are said to account for some 0.4% of the country’s population, each (ASQ, WCD). Given the numerical importance of the mestizo group, we sought out estimates of source region genetic contributions and found most credible a review of 19 separate estimates based on 16 different locales presented in Table 5 of Bonilla et al. (2005).* Weighting each estimate by the population share of the corresponding Mexican state according to the 2000 Mexican Census, the average of these estimates indicates a 35% European, 55% Amerindian and 10% African contribution to Mexico’s mestizo population. We apply these shares to the estimated 60% population share for mestizos, retain the estimates for Spaniards and Amerindians above, assume the European contributors to the mestizo gene pool to be from Spain, and assume the proportion of individual African country sources for the population of African ancestry to follow the shares specified in the main Appendix, Part II.3, using the average of the Caribbean and “Other” ports of disembarkation numbers. Bonilla, Carolina et al., 2005, “Admixture Analysis of a Rural Population of the State of Guerrero, Mexico,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 128: 861–869. * Salzano and Bortolini (2002) present estimates based on earlier data, but as these are less recent and appear to be less plausible in view of nearly equal African and Amerindian contributions and a higher European contribution, we rely on Bonilla et al.’s estimates. Estimate: Lebanon: 0.4% Mexico: 62.5% (33% as ancestors of Mestizos) Spain: 30% (21% as ancestors of Mestizos) Syria: 0.4% Mixed African (Other): (Total 3.35%) Angola: 0.914390875% Benin: 0.16520525% Cameroon: 0.075777% Congo: 0.278292875% Congo DRC: 0.198780625% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.015879% Equatorial Guinea: 0.015678% Gabon: 0.251040625% Gambia: 0.011189% Ghana: 0.709865% Guinea: 0.03505775% Guinea-Bissau: 0.0167835% Liberia: 0.037051% Madagascar: 0.0319456% Mozambique: 0.0509133% 34
  • Nigeria: 0.3143975% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.039195% Senegal: 0.0279725% Sierra Leone: 0.07281225% Tanzania: 0.0169711% Togo: 0.07080225% Mixed African (Caribbean): (Total 3.35%) Angola : 0.486378125% Benin: 0.20929125% Cameroon: 0.25210425% Congo: 0.148028125% Congo DRC: 0.105734375% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.0437175% Equatorial Guinea: 0.0521595% Gabon: 0.279599375% Gambia: 0.032629% Ghana: 0.50585% Guinea: 0.04899375% Guinea-Bissau: 0.0489435% Liberia : 0.1020075% Madagascar: 0.0228336% Mozambique: 0.03639105% Nigeria : 0.559785% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.13039875% Senegal: 0.0815725% Sierra Leone: 0.10175625% Tanzania: 0.01213035% Togo: 0.08969625% 35
  • NICARAGUA 5% of Nicaraguans are considered to be Amerindian, direct descendents of the people who lived in this region before 1500 (CF, LC, EB, CQ). Spanish colonizers began to arrive in the 16th century, and 14% of Nicaraguans are considered to be of almost purely Spanish descent. 2% are descendents of British settlers (CQ, CE). Blacks comprise 9% and are mainly descended from individuals brought to Nicaragua as slaves (CF, EB, CQ, WCD, LC). The respective proportion of each African country was decided according to the Main Appendix, Part II.3, putting equal weight on “other” and on “Caribbean ports of disembarkation.” The large majority of the population are considered mestizos (70%), or of mixed Amerindian and Spanish ancestry (CF, LC, CQ, WCD). In the absence of credible genetic estimates, we assume their relative contributions to be the same (see our remarks on attribution of mestizos in Central America in the entry for El Salvador). Estimate: Nicaragua: 40% (35% as ancestors of Mestizos) Spain: 49% (35% as ancestors of Mestizos) UK: 2% Mixed Africa (Other): 4.5% Angola: 1.22828625 Benin: 0.2219175 Cameroon: 0.10179 Congo: 0.37382625 Congo DRC: 0.26701875 Cote d'Ivoire: 0.02133 Equatorial Guinea: 0.02106 Gabon: 0.33721875 Gambia: 0.01503 Ghana: 0.95355 Guinea: 0.0470925 Guinea-Bissau: 0.022545 Liberia: 0.04977 Madagascar: 0.042912 Mozambique: 0.068391 Nigeria : 0.422325 Sao Tome and Principe: 0.05265 Senegal: 0.037575 Sierra Leone: 0.0978075 Tanzania: 0.022797 Togo: 0.0951075 Mixed Africa (Caribbean): 4.5% Angola: 0.65334375 Benin: 0.2811375 Cameroon: 0.3386475 Congo: 0.19884375 Congo DRC: 0.14203125 Cote d'Ivoire: 0.058725 Equatorial Guinea: 0.070065 Gabon: 0.37558125 Gambia: 0.04383 Ghana: 0.6795 36
  • Guinea: 0.0658125 Guinea-Bissau: 0.065745 Liberia: 0.137025 Madagascar: 0.030672 Mozambique: 0.0488835 Nigeria: 0.75195 Sao Tome and Principe: 0.1751625 Senegal: 0.109575 Sierra Leone: 0.1366875 Tanzania: 0.0162945 Togo: 0.1204875 37
  • PANAMA Amerindians lived in Panama long before 1500, and individuals of mainly Amerindian ancestry are said to account for 6% of the population today (CF, CQ, WCD). The Spanish first came to Panama in the 16th century, with additional Spanish immigration in the 19th century. People of mainly Spanish ancestry are said to account for 5% of the population today (EB). In the 19th century, people from North America, France, China, and the Indian sub-continent, arrived, with their descendants said to account for 4%, 1%, 1.5% and 4% of the population, respectively (EB, WCD, CF). A large mestizo population is said to account of 74.4% of today’s Panamanians. In the absence of credible genetic estimates,* we assume their ancestors to come in equal numbers from the local Amerindian population and from Spain (see comments on attribution of mestizos in Central America under the El Salvador entry). The East Indians came from areas stretching from North India to Bangladesh, and from areas in South India (HBL), and we attribute 93% of them to India, 5% to Bangladesh, 2% to Pakistan. The North Americans (primarily from the United States) were attributed to a number of European countries of origin according to proportions used for dividing the “White” or “European” group within the U.S. population. About 8% of the population was said to be of African descent, their ancestors having been brought from Africa as slaves during colonial times (LC, WCD, CQ). The respective proportion of each African country is assumed to follow the proportions listed in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, using the average of the “other” and “Caribbean ports of disembarkation” proportions. Descendants of Italians who arrived during the construction of the Panama Canal are said to account for 0.5% of the population (EB, WCD). There is also a small percentage of Arabs from Israel/Palestine (0.2%), Lebanon (0.2%), and Syria (0.2%) (WCD). * Salzano and Bortolini (2002) provide estimates that we judge to be unreliable due to high standard errors and to be implausible because they find positive African but zero Amerindian contributions. Estimate: China: 1.5% France: 1.3% (0.3% as ancestors of U.S. Whites) Israel/Palestine: 0.2% Italy: 0.9% (0.4% as ancestors of U.S. Whites) Lebanon: 0.2% Panama: 35.7% (29.7% as ancestors of Mestizos) Spain: 39.7% (34.7% as ancestors of Mestizos and Mulattos) Syria: 0.2% Indian Subcontinent: (Total 4%) Bangladesh: 0.2% India: 3.72% Pakistan: 0.08% Mixed Africa (Caribbean): 6.5% (2.5% as ancestors of Mulattos) Angola: 0.94371875 Benin: 0.4060875 Cameroon: 0.4891575 Congo: 0.28721875 Congo DRC: 0.20515625 Cote d'Ivoire: 0.084825 Equatorial Guinea: 0.101205 Gabon: 0.54250625 38
  • Gambia: 0.06331 Ghana: 0.9815 Guinea: 0.0950625 Guinea-Bissau: 0.094965 Liberia: 0.197925 Madagascar: 0.044304 Mozambique: 0.0706095 Nigeria: 1.08615 Sao Tome and Principe: 0.2530125 Senegal: 0.158275 Sierra Leone: 0.1974375 Tanzania: 0.0235365 Togo: 0.1740375 Mixed Africa (Other): 6.5% (2.5% as ancestors of Mulattos) Angola: 1.77419125 Benin: 0.3205475 Cameroon: 0.14703 Congo: 0.53997125 Congo DRC: 0.38569375 Cote d'Ivoire: 0.03081 Equatorial Guinea: 0.03042 Gabon: 0.48709375 Gambia: 0.02171 Ghana: 1.37735 Guinea: 0.0680225 Guinea-Bissau: 0.032565 Liberia: 0.07189 Madagascar: 0.061984 Mozambique: 0.098787 Nigeria: 0.610025 Sao Tome and Principe: 0.07605 Senegal: 0.054275 Sierra Leone: 0.1412775 Tanzania: 0.032929 Togo: 0.1373775 U.S. Whites: (Total 4%) France: (0.3%) Germany: 1.2% Holland: 0.1% Ireland: 0.8% Italy: (0.4%) Poland: 0.2% UK: 1% 39
  • PARAGUAY Amerindian groups are indigenous in this region, and individuals of mainly Amerindian descent are said to number 2% of the current population (NE, EV, WCD). The Spanish arrived in Paraguay in 16th century, and people of mainly Spanish descent are said to account for 3% (NE, WCD). Mestizos, or people of mixed European (mostly Spanish) and Amerindian ancestry, are said to account for 87.7% of the population (CF, NE, EV, WCD). Other European groups, including people of Italian (0.6%) and German (4.4%) descent came in the 19th century (NE, WCD), and a very small number of Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans also arrived in the 20th century (NE, WCD). During the 1970s, about 300,000 Brazilian settlers crossed the border into Paraguay (LC, EB, EV), including Brazilian Portuguese (0.1%) and mesticos (0.6%) (WCD). We treat these Brazilian mesticos as having equal numbers of ancestors from Brazil and Portugal. The population also includes some individuals of mainly African ancestry (1%) and a population of Ukrainian refugees (0.6%) (WCD). The African ancestors of contemporary Paraguayans are assumed to have lived in specific African countries of today according to the proportions specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for “other ports of disembarkation.” In view of Paraguay’s mestizo majority, we looked for admixture estimates based on genetic studies. Salzano and Bortolini (2002) reanalyze data from an old study and find, using two different methods, that the admixture percentages of mestizos into European, African, and Amerindian shares are 46%, 5% and 49%; and 54%, 0%, and 46% respectively. These estimates are based on only 50 observations, and have very large standard errors. Benitez et al. (2002) analyze the HLA-DRB1 polymorphism and determine that Paraguayan mestizos are more Spanish than Amerindian, but fail to estimate admixture percentages. In addition, their sample consists of 50 Paraguayans living in France, and therefore we are unsure as to how representative the study is. Since we consider the genetic evidence to be weak, and since the textual evidence gives us no basis to determine the correct admixture shares, we simply assume admixture shares for Paraguan mestizos to be 50% European and 50% Amerindian which, we note, is very similar to the weak genetic evidence from Salzano and Bortolini. Benitez, O. et al., 2002, “Hispano-Indian admixture in Paraguay studied by analysis of HLA-DRB1 polymorphism,” Pathologie Biologie 50(1): 25-9. Estimate: Brazil: 0.3% (as ancestors of Brazilian Mesticos) Germany: 4.4% Italy: 0.6% Paraguay: 45.85% (43.85% as ancestors of Mestizos) Portugal: 0.4% (0.3% as ancestors of Brazilian Mesticos) Spain: 46.85% (43.85% as ancestors of Mestizos, 3.3% to pure) Ukraine: 0.6% Mixed Africa: (Total 1%) Angola: 0.2729525% Benin: 0.049315% Cameroon: 0.02262% Congo: 0.0830725% Congo DRC: 0.0593375% 40
  • Cote d'Ivoire: 0.00474% Equatorial Guinea: 0.00468% Gabon: 0.0749375% Gambia: 0.00334% Ghana: 0.2119% Guinea: 0.010465% Guinea-Bissau: 0.00501% Liberia: 0.01106% Madagascar: 0.009536% Mozambique: 0.015198% Nigeria: 0.09385% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.0117% Senegal: 0.00835% Sierra Leone: 0.021735% Tanzania: 0.005066% Togo: 0.021135% 41
  • PERU Amerindian groups are indigenous in Peru, and lived in this region long before 1500 (CF, NE, EV, CQ). Spanish settlers began arriving in the 16th century (CF, NE, CQ). The largest commonly recognized population group in Peru following the Amerindians are mestizos, usually viewed as individuals with both Amerindian and Spanish ancestors (CF, NE, CQ). The sources lead to estimated population shares of 45% for (pure) Amerindians, 15% for (pure) Spanish-descended, and 37% for mestizo. There also exist a group of Afro-Peruvians, estimated at about 1% of the population, whose ancestors arrived in Peru as slaves in colonial times (CF, NE, EV, CQ, WCD). Some of the latter may have contributed to the mestizo gene pool as well. During the 19th century, Japanese and Chinese immigrants started to come to Peru, with their descendants each accounting for about 1% of the country’s population today (CF, NE, EV, CQ, WCD). We attribute the African ancestors of today’s Peruvians to individual African countries according to the proportions listed in the main Appendix, Part II.3 for “other” ports of disembarkation. Given its size, we looked for information from genetic sources to help estimate the relative contributions of Amerindians, Spaniards, and Africans to Peru’s mestizo population. Lopez-Camello et al. (1996) use data on newborns from a hospital in Lima, without reference to ethnicity, and find an admixture of 56%, 44%, and 0% of Amerindian, European, and African ancestry. Salzano and Bortolini (2002) use data from four previous studies and find admixtures of 47%, 21%, and 32%; and 49%, 32%, and 19% (Amerindian, European, and African respectively) using two different methods. Neither paper’s estimates are unproblematic, Lopez-Camello et al.’s due to its unconditional and highly local nature (it does not specify mestizo only) and the somewhat implausible zero contribution of Africans, Salzano and Bortolini’s due to African contributions that seem implausibly high given the historical record. The simple average between Lopez-Camello et al.’s estimate and the unweighted average of the two Salzano-Bortolini estimates is a more plausible 52%, 35.25%, 12.75% breakdown, one that resembles the unweighted average of our estimated breakdowns for the neighboring countries of Bolivia, Colombia, and Ecuador (50.5%, 40.0% and 9.5%). We accordingly adopt 52%, 35.25% and 12.75% as our estimates for the Amerindian, European and African contributions to Peru’s mestizo population. Lopez-Camello, J.S., P.H. Cabello and M.G. Dutra. 1996. “A simple model for the estimation of congenital malformation frequency in racially mixed populations.” Brazilian Journal of Genetics, 19(4), 659-663. Estimate China: 1% Japan: 1% Peru: 64.24% (19.24% as ancestors of Mestizos) Spain: 28.0425% (13.0425% as ancestors of Mestizos) Mixed Africa: (Total 5.7175%) Angola: 1.560605919% Benin: 0.281958513% Cameroon: 0.12932985% Congo: 0.474967019% Congo DRC: 0.339262156% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.02710095% Equatorial Guinea: 0.0267579% Gabon: 0.428455156% 42
  • Gambia: 0.01909645% Ghana: 1.21153825% Guinea: 0.059833638% Guinea-Bissau: 0.028644675% Liberia: 0.06323555% Madagascar: 0.05452208% Mozambique: 0.086894565% Nigeria: 0.536587375% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.06689475% Senegal: 0.047741125% Sierra Leone: 0.124269863% Tanzania: 0.028964855% Togo: 0.120839363% 43
  • PUERTO RICO Before the arrival of the Spanish in 1493, an Amerindian people called the Arawaks inhabited the island. While most are believed to have died due to disease and massacres (CE), indications of Amerindian ancestry have recently been found in genetic studies. Thus, the large segment of the population considered to be of primarily Spanish ancestry (CQ, WCE) includes some indigenous admixture. African slaves were imported beginning in the early 16th century, and our sources suggest that about 11% of the population are of primarily African ancestry (CE). Estimates suggest that 10% of Puerto Ricans are of mixed African and European descent, or mulatto (CQ). The African ancestors of Puerto Rican blacks and mulattos are attributed to countries of origin according to our estimates for slaves imported to the Caribbean (see Part II.3 in the Main Appendix), while their European ancestors are assumed to have been from Spain. 2.2% of Puerto Rico’s residents are identified as “whites” from the U.S. mainland. We attribute them proportionately among the ten European countries that account for the largest numbers of European ancestors of present-day Americans. There are two studies that give autosomal DNA admixture estimates for Puerto Rico. The first is by Salari et al. (2005), who analyze 44 genetic markers from 181 Puerto Ricans. The sample is unconditional on ethnicity and is taken from nine areas around the island. They estimate that 16.2% of these individuals’ genetic material is African, 65.5% European, and 18.3% Amerindian. The second study is by Bonilla et al. (2004), who analyzed 35 genetic markers for 64 women living in New York but born in Puerto Rico. They find admixture percentages of 53.3% European, 29.1% West African, and 17.6% Native American. We feel the Salari et al. (2005) study to be more accurate since it involves a larger sample, looks at more genetic markers, is slightly more recent, and avoids the issue of whether Puerto Rican’s in New York are representative. Since the study is not conditioned on ethnicity, we use it to estimate overall proportions for the 97.8% of Puerto Ricans not from the U.S., without reference to the previous paragraph’s breakdowns into mainly African, mainly European, and mulatto. Thus, we assume that the ancestors of the 97.8% of people in Puerto Rico aside from the 2.2% American were 65.5% Spanish, 16.2% African, and 18.3% Amerindian.* * Note that studies that have analyzed admixture using mtDNA and Y-chromosome data have also detected substantial Amerindian contributions. Martinez-Cruzado (2005), using mtDNA of a random sample of 800 individuals, found that maternal DNA in Puerto Ricans is 61.3% Amerindian, 27.2% sub-Saharan African, and only 11.5% European. They find that patrilineal input (as indicated by the Y- chromosome) is approximately 70% European, 20% African, and 10% Amerindian. These numbers are consistent with the idea that in the early years of colonization many births on the island were to male Spanish colonizers and indigenous women, with the overall non-native genetic contribution rising thereafter as purely indigenous people died and new immigrants, disproportionately male, came to the island from Europe and Africa. Bonilla, Carolina et al., 2004, “Ancestral proportions and their association with skin pigmentation and bone mineral density in Puerto Rican women from New York City,” Human Genetics 115(1): 57-68. Martı´nez-Cruzado, Juan C. et al., 2005, “Reconstructing the Population History of Puerto Rico by Means of mtDNA Phylogeographic Analysis -- mtDNA study,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 128: 131–155. 44
  • Salari, Keyan et al., 2005, “Genetic Admixture and Asthma-Related Phenotypes in Mexican American and Puerto Rican Asthmatics,” Annals of Human Genetics 66(1). 49-60. Estimate: Spain: 64.1% Puerto Rico: 17.9% African Mix (Caribbean): 15.8% Angola: 2.2939625% Benin: 0.987105% Cameroon: 1.189029% Congo: 0.6981625% Congo DRC: 0.4986875% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.20619% Equatorial Guinea: 0.246006% Gabon: 1.3187075% Gambia: 0.153892% Ghana: 2.3858% Guinea: 0.231075% Guinea-Bissau: 0.230838% Liberia: 0.48111% Madagascar: 0.1076928% Mozambique: 0.1716354% Nigeria: 2.64018% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.615015% Senegal: 0.38473% Sierra Leone: 0.479925% Tanzania: 0.0572118% Togo: 0.423045% USA White: (Total 2.2%) France: 0.026% Germany: 0.6214% Ireland: 0.4382% Italy: 0.2282% Netherlands: 0.0652% Norway: 0.0681% Poland: 0.1297% Russia: 0.0363% Sweden: 0.0597% UK: 0.5272% 45
  • TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO The indigenous tribes in Trinidad and Tobago are said to have “disappeared” soon after Spanish conquest (CQ).* Spanish settlers arrived in Trinidad and Tobago in the 16 th century (CQ, WCD), followed by French, English (and a few Dutch) settlers (CQ, WCD). People of mainly Spanish, French and English ancestry are now thought to account for 0.5%, 0.3% and 0.3% of the country’s population, respectively. About 40% of the population is considered to be of (mainly) African descent, their ancestors having been brought from Africa as slaves after the disappearance of indigenous tribes (CF, LC, CQ, NE, EV, WCE). The respective proportion of each African country was decided according to principles specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for Caribbean ports of disembarkation. People from the Indian sub-continent arrived in the 19th century, and their descendents are said to account for 39.4% of the population today (CF, LC, CQ, NE, EV, WCE). They came from areas stretching from North India to Bangladesh, and from areas in South India (HBL), and we attribute 93% of them to India, 5% to Bangladesh, and 2% to Pakistan. About 18% of the population are identified as mulattos (CF, CQ, NE, EV, WCE). Lacking information*, we assumed that the mulatto population shares equal amounts of African, (East) Indian and European ancestry, with African and Indian ancestors attributed to individual countries in the same manner as above and with European ancestors assumed to be drawn in equal numbers from Britain, France, and Spain. 1.5% of the population are ethnic Chinese descendants of laborers who arrived after slavery was abolished (LC, WCD, NE). * Genetic studies were not consulted because the fraction reported to be of mixed ancestry falls below the 30% threshold (see Main Appendix, Part II.4). Estimate: China: 1.5% France: 2.3% (2% as ancestors of mixed population) Spain: 2.3% (2% as ancestors of mixed population) UK: 2.5% (2% as ancestors of mixed population) Indian subcontinent: (Total 45.4% (6% as ancestors of mixed population)) Bangladesh: 2.27% India: 42.222% Pakistan: 0.908% Mixed Africa: (Total 46% (6% as ancestors of mixed population)) Angola: 6.678625% Benin: 2.87385% Cameroon: 3.46173% Congo: 2.032625% Congo DRC: 1.451875% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.6003% Equatorial Guinea: 0.71622% Gabon: 3.839275% Gambia: 0.44804% Ghana: 6.946% Guinea-Bissau: 0.67206% Guinea: 0.67275% Liberia: 1.4007% Madagascar: 0.313536% Mozambique: 0.499698% 46
  • Nigeria: 7.6866% Sao Tome and Principe: 1.79055% Senegal: 1.1201% Sierra Leone: 1.39725% Tanzania: 0.166566% Togo: 1.23165% 47
  • UNITED STATES The U.S. estimate is based on U.S. Census Bureau, Ancestry: 2000, issued June 2004. A number of assumptions were made to obtain our estimate. 1) We excluded listed ancestries with less than 0.1% of the U.S. population (although smaller fractions may result from allocating listed groups to countries). 2) Since the census allowed people to claim multiple ancestries but since the publication in question did not specify how many people listed a given ancestry exclusively versus together with other ancestries, the sum of the percentage shares in that source is more than 100% (by about 2%). We work from the numbers claiming given ancestries rather than the % claiming each ancestry, and accept the error potentially introduced by differences in which ancestries are claimed multiple times. 3) The 7.3% identifying their ancestry as “American” or “United States” and the 1.8% reported as “other ancestries” are assumed to be divided among specific countries of ancestry in the same proportions as those declaring specific countries of ancestry. This contrasts with the handling of the 2.8% reporting their ancestry to be “American Indian,” whose ancestors we assume to have lived in the United States in 1500 (see item 16, below). 4) Those reporting the ancestry “Yugoslavian” were apportioned to the five countries into which former Yugoslavia had divided as of 2000 (Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Serbia, Slovenia) in proportion to the population sizes of those five countries. 5) Those reporting “Arab” ancestry are attributed to Egypt, Syria and Lebanon in the same relative proportion as the U.S. census shows to have reported ancestry from those three countries in 2000. 6) Those reporting the ancestry “Czechoslovakian” are apportioned to the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic in the same relative proportions as the U.S. census shows to have reported Czech vs. Slovak ancestry. 7) Those giving their ancestry as “Scandinavian” are assumed to have had ancestors in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Norway in the same proportions as the U.S. census shows specifically report ancestry from those countries. 8) Those reporting their ancestry as “Hispanic” are assumed to have ancestors in Mexico, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Honduras or Nicaragua in the same relative proportions as those reporting those specific country ancestries in the U.S. census. 9) Those reporting “Latin American” ancestry are treated in the same manner except that the Spanish-speaking Caribbean countries (Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic and Cuba) and Guatemala are left out. 10) We attribute the ancestors of the 0.1% identifying their ancestry as “Asian” to China, Japan, S. Korea, India and Pakistan in the same relative proportions as census respondents identified their ancestries with those five countries; 11) We attribute the ancestors of those listing their ancestors as “Irish” to the U.K. (for Northern Island) and Ireland in proportion to the current populations of the two parts of that island. 12) People reporting ancestries in countries of the Americas with substantial representation in the U.S. census (Canada, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Colombia, Haiti, Guatemala, Ecuador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Brazil, and Trinidad and Tobago) and those reporting ancestry in Taiwan were traced back to other countries of origin according to entries for those countries in the migration matrix (for example, Mexicans have a combination of Mexican [Amerindian], Spanish and other ancestries; most ancestors of 20th century Taiwan residents migrated from China after 1500, etc.), on the assumption that migrants to the U.S. from those countries had ancestors in those and other countries in the same proportions as those still residing there. 13) People reporting their ancestry as “African” (about 0.4%) were attributed to specific African countries according to principles specified for the “U.S.A.” port of disembarkation in the main Appendix, Part II.3,+ while people reporting their ancestry as “African-American” (about 8.8%) are assumed to have 80% of their ancestors from those same African countries in the same proportions, to have 19% of their ancestors from specific European countries in the proportions indicated 48
  • in item 15 of this paragraph, and to have 1% of their ancestors from what is now the United States (i.e., 1% are assumed to have been U.S. Amerindians). See the discussion of genetic research in the next paragraph. 14) The 0.1% reporting their ancestry as “West Indian” are assumed to have the same ancestry proportions (from African countries and elsewhere) as the average for Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, weighted according to the ancestry proportions of those two countries in the U.S. census. 15) Those identifying their ancestry as “White” or “European” are assumed to have ancestors in specific European countries in the proportions given in the U.S. census for those specific countries (after working out the breakouts for “Scandinavia,” “Yugoslavia,” “Irish,” and “Czechoslovakia”). 16) Those identifying their ancestry as “American Indian” and “Hawaiian” were assumed to be indigenous to the United States. Note that these estimates are understood to include long-term Puerto Rican residents of the continental United States but not Puerto Ricans living permanently in Puerto Rico, which has its own entry in the migration matrix. Genetic admixture among African-Americans has been widely studied. We looked at five recent studies (Tishkoff et al. 2009, Parra et al. 2001, Parra et al. 1998, Smith et al. 2004, Lind et al. 2007) and found the estimates of European admixture among African- Americans generally fell between 15-20%, with 1-2% admixture from Amerindians. Lind et al. (2007) note that geneticists commonly use 20% as an estimate of white admixture in African-Americans. The five studies give data at local levels, with small sample sizes in individual cities or regions, usually between 20 and 45 individuals. However, the percentage of European and Amerindian admixture does not vary greatly, with the European share generally staying within 15-20%, and the Amerindian share around 1%. We treat 80% of the ancestors of contemporary African-Americans as having resided in Africa in 1500, allocating them among countries according to the principles in the Main Appendix. 19% of African-Americans’ ancestors are assumed to have resided in Europe and are divided among European countries in the same proportions as European ancestors of other Americans.* 1% of African-Americans’ ancestors are assumed to be Amerindian and thus native to the United States. + Although those migrating to the U.S. from Africa in recent years almost certainly do not originate in specific countries in the same proportions as did those coming as slaves before 1820, the census provides insufficient information to determine actual sources (only Nigeria achieves the 0.1% of population level in our source). * The contribution from European countries from which immigration to the United States occurred mainly in the late-19th and 20th centuries is likely to be overestimated by this procedure, but we know of no reliable estimates and judge this a minor source of error. Angela Brittingham and G. Patricia de la Cruz, “Ancestry: 2000 (Census 2000 Brief),” U.S. Census Bureau, June 2004. Lind, Joanne M. et al., 2007, “Elevated male European and female African contribution to the genomes of African American individuals,” Human Genetics 120: 713-722. Parra, Esteban J. et al., 1998, “Estimating African American Admixture Proportions by Use of Population-Specific Alleles,” American Journal of Human Genetics 63(6): 1839-1851. Parra, Esteban J. et al., 2001, “Ancestral Proportions and Admixture Dynamics in Geographically Defined African Americans Living in South Carolina,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology 114:18-29. 49
  • Smith, Michael W. et al., 2004, “A High Density Admixture Map for Disease Gene Discovery in African Americans, American Journal of Human Genetics 74(5): 1001-1013. Tishkoff, S.A. et al. 2009. “The genetic structure and history of Africans and African Americans.” Science. 324(5930): 1035-44. Estimate: Angola 1.73371% Armenia 0.100% Austria 0.310% Belgium 0.100% Benin 0.18274% Brazil 0.100% Cambodia 0.100% Cameroon 0.63157% Canada 0.010% China 0.931% Colombia 0.070% Congo 0.52766% Congo, D.R. 0.37690% Cote d'Ivoire 0.22626% Croatia 0.150% Czech Republic 0.550% Denmark 0.550% Ecuador 0.070% Egypt 0.125% El Salvador 0.165% Equatorial Guinea 0.13067% Finland 0.210% France 4.300% Gabon 0.81246% Gambia 0.43829% Germany 17.230% Ghana 1.39975% Greece 0.410% Guatemala 0.160% Guinea 0.34692% Guinea-Bissau 0.65744% Honduras 0.060% Hungary 0.520% India 0.623% Iran 0.100% Ireland 8.470% Italy 6.330% Japan 0.411% Laos 0.103% Lebanon 0.250% Liberia 0.52794% 50
  • Lithuania 0.200% Madagascar 0.04865% Mexico 5.540% Mozambique 0.07754% Netherlands 1.760% Nicaragua 0.040% Nigeria 1.01440% Norway 1.840% Pakistan 0.103% Peru 0.070% Philippines 0.921% Poland 3.520% Portugal 0.410% Romania 0.100% Russia 1.040% Sao Tome and Principe 0.32667% Senegal 1.09573% Sierra Leone 0.72054% Slovakia 0.380% Slovenia 0.150% South Korea 0.411% Spain 5.255% Sweden 1.630% Switzerland 0.310% Syrian Arab Republic 0.125% Taiwan 0.103% Tanzania 0.02585% Thailand 0.103% Togo 0.07831% UK 18.280% Ukraine 0.310% USA 3.100% Vietnam 0.411% 51
  • URUGUAY Uruguay had a relatively small pre-Colombian population, and purely indigenous tribes are said to have disappeared early in the colonial era (NE, EB CQ). The people of Uruguay are predominantly of European origin, mostly descendants of Spanish and Italian immigrants of the 19th and 20th centuries, with small shares also from France, Britain, and Germany. Today, Uruguayans of mainly Spanish and Italian descent are said to account for 44% and 36% of the population, respectively, with French, British and German-descended shares each put at about 2% (CF, LC, EB, NE, EV, WCD). Immigrants also came from Russia (0.5%) and Greece (0.5%) after World War II (CQ, WCD). About 4% of the population is of African descent (CF, NE, EV), and the respective proportion of each African country was decided according to principles specified in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for “other ports of disembarkation.” Some 8% of the population are mestizos, considered to be of mixed European (mostly Spanish) and indigenous ancestry. In the absence of other information, we assume them to have roughly equal numbers of ancestors from Uruguay and Spain (CF, EB, CQ, NE, EV). About 1% of Uruguayans are Jews most of whom arrived or descend from individuals who arrived during the 1930s (JVL, NYT, WCD). Approximately 85% are Ashkenazi, 15% are Sephardic (JVL), with each group being attributed to source countries in the proportions spelling out in Part II.2 of the Main Appendix. Estimate Germany: 2.255% (0.255% as ancestors of Jews) Greece: 0.5% France: 2.085% (0.085% as ancestors of Jews) Italy: 36.136% (0.136% as ancestors of Jews) Russia: 0.52125% (0.02125% as ancestors of Jews) Spain: 48.222% (4% as ancestors of mestizos, 0.222% as ancestors of Jews) Uruguay: 4% (as ancestors of Mestizos) UK: 2% Jew (Total 1%) France (0.085%) Germany (0.0255%) Italy (0.136%) Lithuania: 0.01275% Poland (0.0255%) Portugal: 0.0555% Romania: 0.05525% Russia (0.02125%) Spain (0.222%) Turkey: 0.1105% Ukraine: 0.02125% Mixed Africa: (Total 4%) Angola: 1.09181 Benin: 0.19726 Cameroon: 0.09048 Congo: 0.33229 Congo DRC: 0.23735 Cote d'Ivoire: 0.01896 Equatorial Guinea: 0.01872 Gabon: 0.29975 52
  • Gambia: 0.01336 Ghana: 0.8476 Guinea-Bissau: 0.02004 Guinea: 0.04186 Liberia: 0.04424 Madagascar: 0.038144 Mozambique: 0.060792 Nigeria: 0.3754 Sao Tome and Principe: 0.0468 Senegal: 0.0334 Sierra Leone: 0.08694 Tanzania: 0.020264 Togo: 0.08454 53
  • VENEZUELA Amerindian tribes are indigenous to the country (LC, CQ, NE, EV). Spaniards started to settle in Venezuela in the 16th century (CQ), and they largely mixed with indigenous groups (LC). The mixed or mestizo population in Venezuela are assumed to be descended primarily from Amerindians and Spaniards (LC, EB, CQ, NE, EV, WCD), although some African admixture appears likely. A substantial minority of the population is considered to be of mainly African descent (LC, EB, CQ, NE, EV, WCD). After 1948, immigration started to be encouraged mainly from Spain, and Italy (EB, NE, WCD). The sources given provide estimates of the population shares of these groups which suggest that about 2% of Venezuelans are pure Amerindian, 18.2% of primarily Spanish descent, 68% mestizo, and 10% of primarily African descent. There are also a small percentage of people identified as Arab, estimated at about 0.5% of the population. Lacking further information, we attributed 0.2% to Lebanon, 0.2% to Syria, and 0.1% to Israel/Palestine. Some Colombian whites, said to constitute 0.7% of the population, immigrated illegally into Venezuela, and most are also of Spanish descent. Since the largest population group is of mixed ancestry, we sought estimates of the contributions of the main source populations derived by genetic methods. We found only one recent study that uses a large and broad-based sample: Rodriguez-Larralde et al. (2001) use ABO allele frequencies and RH blood group identification for blood samples drawn from 13,313 individuals in five Venezuelan regions. The sample leaves out four areas (Amazonas, Apure, Cojedes and Delta Amacuro) believed to be populated almost entirely by pure Amerindians and accounting for 3.5% of the country’s population. Since they do not identify the ethnicity of those in their sample, we assume that it includes individuals who would be socially and/or self-identified with groups mentioned above in roughly their population proportions. Weighting each of the included regions by its population share and counting the four excluded regions as 100% Amerindian, their data leads to the conclusion that 55% of Venezuelans’ ancestors were European, 31% were Amerindian, and 14% were African. Assuming that the estimated 1.3% of the population that is of Italian ancestry and the 0.5% from the Middle East are included among the 55% European leaves 53.2% of ancestors to have lived in Spain, 31% to have lived in Venezuela itself, and 14% to have lived in what are now African countries. We assume the proportions of those countries to be as detailed in the Main Appendix, Part II.3, for “other ports of disembarkation.” Rodrıguez-Larralde A, Castro de Guerra D, Gonzalez-Coira M, Morales J., 2001, “Frecuencia genica y porcentaje de mezcla en diferentes areas geograficas de Venezuela, de acuerdo a los grupos RH y ABO,” Interciencia 26:8–12. Estimate: Italy: 1.3% Spain: 53.2% Venezuela: 31% Arab: (Total 0.5%) Lebanon: 0.2% Palestine/Israel: 0.1% Syria: 0.2% Mixed Africa (Other): 14% Angola: 3.821335% 54
  • Benin: 0.69041% Cameroon: 0.31668% Congo: 1.163015% Congo DRC: 0.830725% Cote d'Ivoire: 0.06636% Equatorial Guinea: 0.06552% Gabon: 1.049125% Gambia: 0.04676% Ghana: 2.9666% Guinea: 0.14651% Guinea-Bissau: 0.07014% Liberia: 0.15484% Madagascar: 0.133504% Mozambique: 0.212772% Nigeria: 1.3139% Sao Tome and Principe: 0.1638% Senegal: 0.1169% Sierra Leone: 0.30429% Tanzania: 0.070924% Togo: 0.29589% 55