Dominican Results

On this page i will attempt to provide some analysis for the Dominican AncestryDNA results which have kindly been shared with me. If you want to skip the discussion just scroll to the bottom of the page to see a selection of Dominican Ethnicity Estimates. I will restrict myself to the African part of their results as it’s in line with the theme of this blog. However i have also calculated some statistics for their Native American scores (see first screenshot). In order to enable easy comparison i have scaled the African breakdown to 100% for all, leaving aside any non-African admixture. For more details on my research methodology see the front page of this AncestryDNA section. Follow the link below for an overview of all the Dominican results (see columns N, O, P, Q for additional info on Amerindian, North African & West Asian %’s plus regional origins within the Dominican Republic):

Spreadsheet with Dominican results

As far as i was able to verify all of these Dominican results are from persons who are either born themselves in the Dominican Republic or have two Dominican-born parents. These are obviously first of all individual results reflecting unique family trees. Furthermore DNA testing at this stage cannot be expected to be 100% accurate in estimating regional origins from within Africa. See this page for more disclaimers, especially on how the country name labeling of the AncestryDNA regions should not always be taken at face value.  Even when limited in number the samplesize (n=68) of my spreadsheet is larger than the ones from published DNA studies, Moreno-Estrada et al. (2013) has 34 Dominicans for example while Montinaro et al. (2015) has only 27. There might however be a regional bias towards results from the socalled Cibao area, in the north of the Dominican Republic. Out of 41 persons who stated their regional origins within the Dominican Republic or which i was able to verify myself 30 were from the Cibao while 7 others had partial origins from the Cibao. Only 4 persons stated their origins as being solely from the eastern or southern part of the Dominican Republic.

Undoubtedly with more Dominican testresults available you might also see additional or different patterns. Still i think the screenshots i will post in the last section of this page might be representative to a large degree for how many other Dominicans would score hypothetically speaking and particularly from the Cibao. I will now proceed with discussing the main patterns i’m able to pick up on from the data. Of course merely expressing my personal opinions & thoughts and not meant to be conclusive in any way .

_____________________________________________________________________________

1) Summary of Findings

***(click to enlarge)

stats-original

 

***(click to enlarge)

stats

***

When reviewing the statistics i calculated above based on the data entered in the spreadsheet, it’s good to be aware that averages tend to hide underlying variation. That’s why it’s always advisable to also take into account other measures such as the median and also the minimum & maximum values to get a sense of the range of the scores.

The first chart is based on “unscaled” data, that is the original percentages provided by AncestryDNA while the second one is based on regional ratio’s of total African ancestry which together add up to 100%.

***(click to enlarge)

statsplus

***

This third chart features an additional macro-regional breakdown into “Upper Guinea”, “Lower Guinea” and “Central Africa” which is of my own making. In order to get a strictly “SSA” comparison i have excluded the region “North Africa” and corrected the other averages accordingly. Making this distinction is admittedly arbitrary and can only produce a rough proxy, given the limitations of AncestryDNA. Still I find it useful because you get to see some tendencies more clearly and it conforms with what’s common in slave trade literature. For ethnolinguistical and historical maps from these 3 main regions of provenance see: Upper Guinea, Lower Guinea, Central Africa.

_____________________________

Observations

• The overall impression is of wideranging diversity in surprisingly balanced proportions. With only “Senegal” standing out somewhat, based on its median especially. Implying it might be the most consistent region even when certainly not always the largest one. Most of the regional statistics are quite close in fact, with almost all of the “SSA” regions having averages in between 10-20%. Also the frequency of number 1 spots is telling a story of unpredictable heterogeneity. It seems to be indicating that Dominicans could be among the most evenly mixed Afro-descendants in the Americas (see also Afro-Diaspora AncestryDNA results: A Comparison). Despite having a low average degree of total African ancestry still most results show almost all of the nine African AncestryDNA regions, even if usually also designated as Trace regions.

• Combining the average scores for “Senegal” with “Mali” this AncestryDNA analysis seems to provide convincing confirmation of the Upper Guinean founder effect for Dominicans. Basically a disproportionate genetic legacy of the first Africans to arrive in Hispaniola, whose regional origins are known to have been overwhelmingly from Senegambia, Guinea Bissau/Conakry and Sierra Leone. See also Documented African Roots of Dominicans. This outcome has been obtained in other studies as well, however not before to such extent. This is probably due to the additional “Mali” region on AncestryDNA. See also:

• The “Nigeria”, “Benin/Togo” and “Ivory Coast/Ghana” regions are all well represented in Dominican results. To be combined as “Lower Guinea” it’s the biggest source of African origins for my samplegroup. Even if below 50% of the total and with “Upper Guinea” and “Central Africa” also having sizeable shares. The ethnic origins being implied by these 3 Lower Guinean regions are likely to be shared with people across the Americas, incl. the Anglo-Caribbean, Franco-Caribbean and the USA. Which indicates a great deal of overlap in African origins and it might be only the proportions which will be more distinct for each nationality.

• The ancestral contribution from Central Africa is also solidly present but a bit subdued, compared with the other regions. And also perhaps less prominent based on what you might expect going by cultural retention. The region “Cameroon/Congo” has a lower average than “Nigeria” for example and also it gets reported less frequently as number 1 main region. However the median score for “Cameroon/Congo” (12,1%) is second only to “Senegal” (15,6%) suggesting it’s widely spread and a rather consistent ancestral component among my sample results. “Southeastern Bantu” might in particular point to origins from Angola, dating mostly from the early 1600’s. It’s remarkable that sofar it’s only showing up in higher amounts for people with lower than average total African ancestry (<35%). It seems to suggest an additional founding effect reinforced perhaps by relative endogamy along social/regional/racial lines. Only a larger samplesize might confirm this however. The “South Central Hunter Gatherer” scores are only at trace level but it might be meaningful still that the average sofar for Dominicans is noticeably higher than for most other Afro-descendants.

• The noticeable “North African” scores for Dominicans are in line with other Hispanic results i’ve seen (see Afro-Diaspora AncestryDNA results: A Comparison). It seems to be negatively correlated with total African ancestry. Meaning that people of minor African descent will usually score highest for it. As i am scaling everyone’s African breakdown to 100% the “North African” proportions might appear inflated for people with little African ancestry otherwise. Based on the original percentages as provided by AncestryDNA, the average “North African” score would rather be 2,6% (see first screenshot above). For most people i imagine it might originate either from the Canaries (¡Guanches!) or indirectly via Spain, possibly a Morisco legacy or perhaps even dating from prehistorical times. In addition to these main ancestral scenarios a West African explanation (by way of the Sahel region) could still also be possible i suppose in individual cases. Especially when supported by additional clues. See also section 4 of this page for more detailed discussion.

_________________________________________________________________________

2) “Senegal”+ “Mali” = Upper Guinean founder effect?

***

Upper Guinean origins of free black campesinos in 1606

Red arrows are indicating persons from Guinean Bissau origin, “Bran”, “Biafara” and Sierra Leone ,”Cape”.

***(click to enlarge)

***

Upper Guinean origins circa 1547-1606

Red stars are indicating ethnic groups from Upper Guinea.

***(click to enlarge)

Deive - DR Slave Ethnicities 1547-1606

Source: “La esclavitud del negro en Santo Domingo: (1492-1844)” (Deive, 1980).

***

Dominican population circa 1606 & 1681

Keep in mind these are just rough estimates for a subset of the population within and nearby official Spanish settlements. Also racial classification would have been dependent on local perception.

***(click to enlarge)

DR census 1606 -1686

Source: “General History of the Caribbean. Volume IV: The Long Nineteenth Century: Nineteenth Century Transformations”, (ed. K.O. Laurence, 2011).

***

Dominican AncestryDNA averages in comparison with others

***(click to enlarge)

comparacion

***

____________________

“In addition, more than 30% of the total slaves arriving in mainland Spanish America up to the 1630s came from Senegambia, and we accordingly find that the relative contribution from the Mandenka is higher in all areas historically under the Spanish rule.(Montinaro et al., 2015, p.4)

____________________

One of the most intriguing results of my AncestryDNA survey for me personally has been the seemingly resounding confirmation of what might be called a founding effect from the earliest victims of Trans Atlantic Slave Trade (1500’s). A clear majority of these persons arrived in the Hispanic Americas from the Upper Guinea region, often by way of Cape Verde. It is astonishing to find out that the genetic legacy of these African pioneering co-builders of Hispanic colonial societies is still highly detectable and persistent. It seems to be a testimony to their survival skills and also their early integration in colonial populations. We can verify this by reviewing the last chart above. The combined average scores of “Senegal” and “Mali” are significantly higher for all Hispanic nationalities when compared with African Americans and West Indians. This goes especially for “Senegal” which peaks for my Cape Verdean samples, corroborating its ultimate Upper Guinean origins. A similar finding was also reported by:

Lest i be misconstrued let me repeat that overall the AncestryDNA results for Dominicans suggest a very high and proportionally balanced degree of diversity in African origins! Even while showing a considerable share of Upper Guinean origins other regions are also significant for Dominicans. As i am of Cape Verdean descent myself i have naturally been fascinated to discover the various historical connections and parallels existing between Cape Verde and the Dominican Republic. But obviously they are both unique countries to be placed in their own context. From my perspective and also supported by the genetic data it is apparent that the Dominican Republic is primarily a triracially mixed Hispanic country. With an African composition that is practically the same as the one for Puerto Rico when considering its regional distribution (see chart above). Aside from Puerto Rico it’s first of all also other Hispanic countries which will resemble the Dominican Republic in its particular mix of African origins. Still many of the ethnic origins being implied by especially the “Senegal” region will be shared in between Cape Verde and the Dominican Republic. And at times also prominently so by Dominican individuals with a higher degree of total African ancestry (see first 2 screenshots in last section below). Which might perhaps be rather uniquely so within the wider Hispanic context.

Interestingly the widespread preservation of Upper Guinean lineages in Dominicans seems very similar to the survival of their Amerindian genes. As it might be correlated to the same dynamics of early ethnogenesis and a common initial genepool which gave rise to the formation of currentday Dominicans. Ethnic/racial elements present at the very start of colonial society are known to have engaged in a great deal of intermixing which resulted in a growing segment of locally born and racially hybrid Dominicans. Through this proces the genes of the people who were absorbed were at the same times also preserved and spread around as the Dominican population slowly grew bigger. Eventhough not the subject of my research it’s still noteworthy that each Dominican result in my spreadsheet showed some degree of Amerindian ancestry. The range going from 4% to 12%. With an average of 7%, the genealogical equivalent of having one single Native American great-great grandparent. Even when in reality of course these genes date back from a much earlier timeperiod and were inherited on all lines by constant “recycling”. This recombination model might have operated in pretty much the same way for early Upper Guinean DNA markers.

Not many specifics have been recorded about the early ethnogenesis of Dominicans taking place outside of the (biased) view of Spanish authorities in Santo Domingo. Still it is known that the rural interior attracted both runaway and manumitted Africans as well as socially marginalized people of already mixed African background. They would most likely continue to mix in with a developing rural population carrying a strong additional Taino and European/Canarian imprint (aside from various Dominican historians see also insightful works by Lynne Guitar and David Wheat). It is therefore all the more valuable that surviving historical records are suggesting not only a predominance of Upper Guinean captives in the 1500’s but also a remarkable early presence of free black farmers of Upper Guinean origin (see first two charts above). It is often underestimated that free black people, many of Upper Guinean origin, played a significant role in the formation of early Hispanic populations. Due to widespread miscegenation, marronage and manumission the share of free people of (partial) African descent was a majority from at least the late 1600’s in the Dominican Republic (see third chart above). Which might imply that when exploring their African roots Dominicans must trace back many more generations on average than most other Afro-descendants (see also From African to Creole).

The Upper Guinean roots of Dominicans are not known in exact full detail or proportion however many valuable indications have been historically documented.  See for example:

The country name labeling of the AncestryDNA regions should not distract from the very real possibility that especially origins from Guinea Bissau and Sierra Leone might be signalled by “Senegal” and “Mali”.  As can be seen in the above charts and also to be verified from the links above the socalled “Bram” (= modernday Papel) and Biafara (a.k.a. Biafada) from Guinea Bissau and the “Zape” from Sierra Leone seem to have been very numerous. Of course there might be various other explanations for scoring high “Senegal” or “Mali” %’s on AncestryDNA. Genuine origins from especially Senegal (Wolof and Ladino’s) and in a later timeperiod also from Mali (“Bambara”) have also been historically documented. Also Upper Guinean lineages can still be traced to any given point of time within the entire slave trade period, that is up till the late 1700’s in individual cases (see screenshot of Ramon Bautista Pular in next section). But given that the greater majority of Dominican population was racially mixed and no longer enslaved in the 1700’s i suppose statistically the odds will be much greater for Upper Guinean roots to be dating from the 1500’s/1600’s.

______________________________________________________________________________

3)  Ghana/Benin/Nigeria origins greater than Congo/Angola?

***

(click to enlarge)

numero uno

***

(click to enlarge)

Fig.3 Moreno & Estrada (2013)

Source: “Reconstructing the Population Genetic History of the Caribbean”, (Moreno-Estrada et al., 2013).

***

Rare example of African-born Domincans in the early 1800’s

Ramon Bautista Pular, seems to have been a Fula while his wife would have been from southeastern Nigeria, likely Igbo or Efik, judging from their last names: “Pular” and “Carabali”.

***(click to enlarge)

____________________

We find that populations from the insular Caribbean are best modeled as mixtures absorbing two independent waves of African migrants. Assuming a 30-year generation time, the estimated average of 15 generations ago for the first pulse (circa 1550) agrees with the introduction of African slaves soon after European contact in the New World” [..]

“the second (and stronger) pulse of African tracts according to our model(e.g., 7 generations ago in Dominicans),pointing to the late 18th century.” (Moreno-Estrada et al., 2013, p.13)

“In the eighteenth century, the variety of African ethnic groups identified in the earlier period disappeared. This may be due to a general streamlining of the administrative process that reduced the available identifiers for this category to more common or generic ones. In the baptismal and marital registers the most utilized ones were definitely regional in nature, such as Congo, Angola, and Guinea. Identification by ethnic grouping was recorded less often but the most recurrent ones were Carabali (Hispanicized of Calabar), Mandinga and Mina.” (Rivas, 2008, p.253)

It is likely that for 150 years after 1640, three out of four Africans arriving in the Spanish Americas left from the coast between Elmina in Ghana and the Cross River in Nigeria.”(Borucki et al, 2015, p.446)

“La ley segunda del capitulo primero del Codigo Negro Carolino de 1784 cita entre los esclavos existentes en la Espanola a los Minas y Carabalies y dice que son los mas numerosos (Deive, 1980, p.234)

____________________

This section is just meant to briefly mention some possible explanations for one of my main findings that sofar the average “Benin/Togo”, “Ghana/Ivory Coast” and “Nigeria” scores for Dominicans seem to be higher than those from “Cameroon/Congo” and “Southeastern Bantu”. Given cultural retention (Palo music) and slave trade statistics from the Slave Voyages Database you might have expected it to be otherwise. Much more detailed discussion as well as complete references for citations can be found in Documented African Roots of Dominicans. One of the main conclusions in that blogpost being that the documented slave trade records for the Dominican Republic are highly incomplete, especially because of widespread contraband trade with the English, Dutch and French. It is therefore misleading to only go by those records if you want to get an approximate understanding of how significant each African region of provenance might possible have been for the Dominican genepool.

As confirmed also by DNA studies (Moreno-Estrada et al., 2013, see chart and quote above) it seems that the Dominican Republic received a major second geneflow from Africa especially around the late 1700’s when its economy was finally recovering somewhat after more than a century of stagnation. This in addition to the primary waves of mostly Upper Guinean captives in the 1500’s and Angolan ones in the early 1600’s. The documentary evidence for the Dominican Republic is not plentiful but judging from whatever has been recorded (see quotes above) it seems that origins from Nigeria (“Carabali”) and Ghana/Benin (“Mina”) might indeed have been predominant in later timeperiods. Which would be in line with the results i’ve collected sofar.

It’s probably too premature to make any further assessment. However the following factor might also partially account for the somewhat subdued Central African presence in the Dominican results i’ve collected. My samplegroup is likely to be very strongly reflecting the African origins of the Cibao region especially. Due to possibly different contraband tendencies (more so from Curacao perhaps in the south?) it could be that in other regions (Sur, Sureste) of the Dominican Republic we might see different patterns.

______________________________________________________________________________

4) Dominican Results

As far as has been confirmed to me all of these screenshots below are from persons who were themselves born in the Dominican Republic or else had two Dominican-born parents. Meant to illustrate the individual variation among Dominicans in the first place. Despite the limited samplesize these results should already be quite representative, especially for people from the Cibao area. I like to thank again all the persons who kindly agreed to share their results with me!

For more information on what type of ethnic origins could possibly be implied by these regional breakdowns, see also Documented African Roots of Dominicans or this overview of ethnic groups mentioned in documentation across Latin America.

High Senegal

Unlike what i’ve observed for Puerto Rican results the “Senegal” region is also appearing regularly as number 1 region for Dominicans of close to 50% total African ancestry. In some cases it might possibly indicate additional Upper Guinean origins from later timeperiods (1700’s). But otherwise it will be a remarkable testimony of the preservation of the earliest African component in the Dominican Republic. The first two results show some of the highest “Senegal” ratio’s i’ve observed. In between 40-50% of total African ancestry (20/50 & 18/39) it’s pretty close to the average “Senegal” ratio for Cape Verdeans which is about 60%. Still it’s apparent other regions are also showing up with significant percentages.

***

SEN1

***

SEN2

***

Notice also the relatively high “North African” %.

***

SEN4

***

Also  an above average amount of Native American being shown, in fact the highest Amerindian % i have observed myself among Dominicans was 12%.

.***

SEN8

***

A rather evenly split top 4 being shown in  this breakdown.

***

SEN3

***

SEN10

***

This result looks very similar to many Puerto Rican results i’ve seen. That is a minor degree of total African ancestry which is mostly showing up as a “Senegal” score. It seems likely that a very early Upper Guinean lineage is being detected. Which got preserved due to relative endogamy after initial dilution.

***

SEN5

***

Same scenario as above might apply for these next two results but it is reinforced by the relatively high “Southeastern Bantu”, which possibly indicates Angolan ancestry from the 1600’s.

***

SEN6     ***

SEN7

***

Combining “Senegal” with “Mali” this person’s African breakdown is practically 2/3 (20/30) Upper Guinean.

***

SEN9

***

sen11

***

sen12

***

High Mali

***

“Mali” is more difficult to interpret than “Senegal” (see AncestryDNA Regions). But it’s noteworthy that just like i’ve observed for Puerto Rican results, high “Mali scores appear for people of both relatively high and low degrees of total African ancestry.

***

MAL4

***

The highest relative “Mali” contributions i have seen sofar (15/31=48%) but also just as an amount it is among the highest scores among my Dominican sample group. Another exceptional aspect of this breakdown is the 9% “Middle East”.

***

MAL9

***

Very distinct breakdown, combining “Mali” with “Senegal” this person’s African origins would be about half Upper Guinean.

***

MAL3

***

Another distinct compostion with about half of it traceable to Upper Guinea, if you add in the 7% ” Senegal”,  but even more so characterised by a high “Mali” score . Also the 6% “North Africa” is very notable.

***

MAL5

***

Also notable Jewish % being shown.

***

MAL6

***

A rather uncommon combination of top 2 main regions being shown because of the 11% “Southeastern Bantu”. Adding the 7% “Senegal” to the 13% “Mali” this person’s African origins are practically 50% Upper Guinean.

***

MAL8

***

MAL7

***

Perhaps no coincidence that for these people with lower degrees of total African ancestry “Southeastern Bantu” is appearing as second biggest region. Their Amerindian scores are also among the highest, indicating early colonial roots.

***

MAL1

***

MAL2

***

High “Ivory Coast/Ghana”

***

Aside from Ghana & Ivory Coast this region also potentially covers ancestry from Liberia and parts of Sierra Leone (see African Results). Very high relative ratio shown for the first result, 21/33=63% of total African ancestry.

***

GHA1

***

GHA5

***

GHA6

***

GHA2

***

GHA4

***

GHA3

***

For a great blogpost detailing the family origins of this person and her siblings & uncle see:

gha7

***

gha8

***

High “Benin/Togo”

***

Perhaps only by coincidence but this region has appeared prominently for the two results who also show the highest degree of total African ancestry. Especially the first result has a very high “Benin/Togo” ratio of about 62% of total African ancestry (43/69). The second result also shows a remarkable “Mali” score. In both cases the “Native American” scores are noteworthy as well, it’s highlighting that no matter the degree of African ancestry all Dominicans in my samplegroup have Amerindian ancestry too.

***

BEN1

***

BEN2

***

BEN4

***

Next two results looking rather similar with “Senegal” in second place and “Cameroon/Congo” ranked third.

***

BEN5

***

BEN6

***

BEN9

***

BEN8

***

BEN7

***

BEN3

***

ben10

***

High “Nigeria”

***

This region also appears prominently for people of higher than average African descent. Which might imply relatively more recent origins for these lineages. However it’s also regularly showing up for people of minor African descent.

***

NIG1

***

The highest “Nigerian” score i have observed sofar among Dominicans. The North African score is also very noticeable.

***

nig11

***

NIG7

***

NIG3

***

Notice also the relatively high “North African” and “South Central Hunter-Gatherers” which might indicate that the “Cameroon/Congo” percentage is more so Congolese than Biafran.

***

NIG5

***

This result showed the second highest relative “Nigeria” score sofar , as a ratio of total African it’s 65% (19/29). Interestingly there is a connection to the socalled Samana Americans, also known as Cococlos. Who are the descendants of African Americans who migrated to the Dominican Republic in the 1800’s. Possibly it might account for the extra high level of “Nigeria” although in fact other Dominicans can also score high “Nigeria” levels as seen above.

For more details read also this very interesting blogpost by the person behind these results:

Getting To Know Myself Through DNA Testing

***

NIG2

***

Nig9

***

NIG4

***

nig10

***

NIG8.jpg

***

NIG6

***

One of the lowest amounts of total African amounts but also the highest relative “Nigerian” contribution (13/18=72%).

nig12

***

High “Cameroon/Congo”

***

Might be just a coincidence but sofar i haven’t really observed expectionally high ratio’s for this region. The maxium score being just below 40% of total African ancestry, while for the other regions i have seen maximum scores of above 60% of total African ancestry.

***

CON1

***

CON2

***

CON3

***

CON5

***

CON4

***

High “Southeastern Bantu”

***

This region is quite likely to be picking up on Angolan origins from the early 1600’s in particular. Even when other ancestral options are also still possible. It’s remarkable how sofar only people of relatively minor African descent (<35%) show the highest scores for this region. It seems to suggest an additional founding effect reinforced perhaps by relative endogamy. Only a larger samplesize might confirm this however.

Notice also how relatively high “Senegal” scores are reported as well for the first two results. It’s quite a striking combination as these two regions are on opposite ends of the African continent.

***

 

SEB2

***

SEB4

***

SEB3

***

SEB1

***

This result below is a bit atypical in that it’s only showing one single Trace region. Most Dominican results showing nearly all African regions in their breakdown.

***

SEB5

***

High “North Africa”

***

This is the only result to show “North Africa” as number 1 region and it’s also the highest absolute score for this category. It happens more regularly with other Hispanic results i’ve seen, but these results tend to show a much lower total African percentage. Curiously this person still has a good amount of African ancestry, but her “North African” just happens to be predominant.  It’s likely to be Canarian at such an elevated level but other options also still remain possible.

***

NAFR1

***

YouTube Results

***

Interesting discussion of both 23andme and AncestryDNA results (starts @14m:25s)

***

***

***

***

 ***

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

***

 

***

***

***

 

***

Advertenties

6 gedachten over “Dominican Results

  1. Nice to see all these Dominicans results. Thanks for sharing my video. I also saw my dna results here. Interesting to see such nice information without bias or racial attack on Dominicans.

    I appreciate your time..

    Liked by 1 persoon

    • Thanks a lot for your comment Danny! Also thanks for making that video! I completely agree with what you said about each country having its own experience and history when it comes to self-identification. And i fully respect that! I think your own results – with Senegal being the biggest African region and Native American being 11% – are very illustrative for one of the main patterns i’ve described on this page. Which is a founding effect of early colonial ancestry (1500’s):on the African side from Senegambia & Guinea Bissau/Conakry combined with a preservation of native Taino lineage, all blended in with Spanish bloodlines as well. I suppose it’s a testimony of a very long established presence of your family in the DR, which makes you very Dominican indeed! Although of course on some family lines you might have ancestors who arrived in later time periods as well.

      Like

    • Thanks for letting me know! I have added your video plus i also entered your results into my research spreadsheet.

      Overall your results are perfectly in line with the variation i have seen with 125 Dominican AncestryDNA results right now. However there are a couple of standout aspects about your breakdown. Keep in mind that i am comparing you with group averages but Dominicans are very much a mixed people so diversity is to be expected 😉

      1) your total amount of African (19%) is the second lowest i have seen up till now, the group average being around 39% and most people (88/125) scoring inbetween 25% and 50% African.
      2) your Native American score (14%) is the highest amount i have observed among my survey group. The group average being about 7% and each single Dominican result which i have seen in its entirety had at least 2% Native American. Which goes to show the widespread, practically universal, preservation of Amerindian lineage among Dominicans (even if diluted).
      3) proportionally speaking your biggest African region Mali is almost 50% of your African DNA (9/19), this is among the 5 highest relative Mali contributions i have seen for 125 Dominicans. So this means your African lineage is strongly Upper Guinean derived , especially when you combine with the 3% Senegal. Such a Upper Guinean flavoured profile can actually be detected among many other Dominicans, even if not always to this pronounced degree. This socalled Upper Guinean founding effect was one of my main research findings which i describe in greater detail in section 2 of this page.

      Also putting your above average 14% Native American score into the equation it all seems to indicate that many of your family origins in the DR might go back to the very earliest settlement period (1500’s).

      About your European breakdown i believe that your 21% socalled “Italy/Greece” as well the 4% socalled Ireland” and 1% socalled “Great Britain” could very well still be DNA which you inherited by way of Spanish ancestors. You have to understand that when a Spanish person takes an AncestryDNA test he will not receive a 100% “Iberian Peninsula” result. Rather his breakdown will be composed of several European regions. Which mostly reflect very ancient migrations and shared ancestry across Southern and Western Europe (going back thousands of years). Unless you have concrete evidence of non-Spanish lineage i would not take the regional labeling of these estimates too literally. Socalled “Italy/Greece” for most Hispanics and Iberians merely seems to describe a generic Mediterranean ancestral component. Possibly in part due to the Romans but likely also predating the Roman Empire. Socalled “Ireland” and “Great Britain” will in most cases be a genetic legacy of Celtic migrations or even pre- Celtic presence in Spain.

      Like

  2. This research is not empirically reviewed. People don’t even know how to read the reliability of the research and also see if that reliability has been empirically reviewed and published in a good journal. This has not been. Lo siento.

    Like

    • My research has indeed not been published in a journal nor has it been peer-reviewed. In it self this does not say anything about the quality of my research a priori. Throughout my blog i clearly outline any relevant limitations which should be kept in mind when reading my posts. The history, motivation and research goals of my AncestryDNA survey are described in greater detail on this page:

      AncestryDNA Survey

      I have also explicitly stated on this very page that my survey findings are in no way presented as conclusive or fully representative. Constructive criticism is always welcome (when done in a respectful manner). But anyone who seeks to judge the merits of my research should atleast first carefully read these disclaimers…

      In fact my AncestryDNA survey is very much based on empirical data, all of which can easily be verified in my online spreadsheet:

      Link to online spreadsheet with Dominican results

      On this page i feature the screenshots of nearly all the Dominican results which are also appearing in that spreadsheet. They are the underlying basis for the group statistics i discuss on this page. Therefore my data-entry & calculations can be counterchecked by anyone who feels the need to do so. In addition the more than a dozen Youtube videos by self-identified Dominicans independently corroborate the main variation i describe on this page.

      I will eventually provide a follow-up as my survey has been ongoing. I can already say that many of the findings i have presented on this page still remain valid even with increased sample size (right now n=142). However additional patterns seem to arise as well.

      This survey may be deemed a mere layman’s effort however my findings are not out of line with any of the published papers on Dominican genetics i have read sofar. And unike many published studies (which are often restricted in scope) i do make an extra effort to provide as much detail and context as possible. In order to avoid oversummarization and also highlight individual variation whenever i can. Recently the admixture proportions of 779 Dominican AncestryDNA samples have been published in the supplement (p.38 and onwards) of a very interesting paper by a researchteam of Ancestry.com:

      Clustering of 770,000 genomes reveals post-colonial population structure of North America

      Unfortunately the 6 West African regions (“Senegal”, “Mali”, “Ivory Coast/Ghana”, “Benin/Togo”, “Nigeria”, “Cameroon/Congo”) were combined into just one single category. Which doesn’t allow for the kind of finegrained analysis i have been attempting to pursue on this page. Also regrettably bar charts were chosen to depict the admixture proportions instead of providing the complete statistics, as done on this page.

      Like

Geef een reactie

Vul je gegevens in of klik op een icoon om in te loggen.

WordPress.com logo

Je reageert onder je WordPress.com account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Twitter-afbeelding

Je reageert onder je Twitter account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Facebook foto

Je reageert onder je Facebook account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Google+ photo

Je reageert onder je Google+ account. Log uit / Bijwerken )

Verbinden met %s