the outbreeding project continues apace…

…in the united states! (just as you all suspected.) amongst white folks anyway (that’s who was included in the study below).

from a study published in 2009, Measures of Autozygosity in Decline: Globalization, Urbanization, and Its Implications for Medical Genetics:

This research has definitively shown the existence of a trend for decreasing autozygosity with younger chronological age in the North American population of European ancestry. The ROHs we identified, larger than 1 Mb, are clearly representative of autozygosity due to distant consanguinity in our outbred populations, and not chromosomal abnormalities or common copy number variants. Using our predictive models of decreasing Fld, we show a quantifiable decrease in consanguinity over the twentieth century. Based on data provided in Carothers et al, this decrease in Fld found in our discovery population is on the order of individuals transitioning from a single inbreeding loop 4–5 generations prior, to no inbreeding loops within <6 generations. We postulate that the increased mobility, urbanization and outbreeding in North America in the last century has led to less consanguinity (and thus less homozygosity and homogeneity) in younger individuals.”

the researchers looked at two different sets of genomes — one from the ninds repository @the coriell institute, the other from the baltimore longitudinal study of aging (blsa). the blsa is, obviously, biased towards people on the east coast of the u.s. (in and around baltimore). glancing through the list of submitters to ninds, there’s also something of an east coast bias there, although many samples do come from other areas of the country (see the list of locations at the end of this post).

amongst the findings in this study are that 1) the number of runs of homozygosity (roh) has decreased in white americans over the last one hundred years or so, and 2) the lengths of the roh have shrunk as well. both of these are good indicators of outbreeding.

here are a couple of tables/charts from the paper (click on images for LARGER views):

measures of autozygosity in decline - table 02

measures of autozygosity in decline - percent of genome in roh

what’s interesting to contemplate, i think, is what this might mean wrt selection pressures on americans going forward? especially, what might it mean in light of european-americans encountering other, newer groups within american society that are not outbreeding so much (at least not at the moment) — newly arrived immigrants from many muslim countries, for example — or even, perhaps, latin americans (although i’m not 100% sure about how much they’ve been inbreeding over the past few hundred years or so — stay tuned!). how is that all going to play out? interesting times.

possibly related footnote — here is an abstract from the 2013 ashg conference:

“Reconstructing the Genetic Demography of the United States”

“The United States (U.S) is a complex, multiethnic society shaped by immigration and admixture, but the extent to which these forces influence the overall population genetic structure of the U.S is unknown. We utilized self-reported ancestry data collected from the decennial U.S Census 2010 and allele frequency data from over 2000 SNPs for over 40 of the most common ancestries in the U.S. that were available from the Pan Asian Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (PASNP), Population Reference Sample (POPRES), 1000 Genomes, and Human Genome Diversity Panel (HGDP) databases. We utilized the relative proportions of individuals of each ancestry within each county, state, region and nation and calculate the weighted average allele frequency in these areas. We reconstructed the genetic demography of the U.S by examining the geographic distribution of Wright’s Fst. Shannon’s diversity index, H was calculated to assess the apportionment of genetic diversity at the county, state, regional and national level. This analysis was repeated stratifying by race/ethnicity. We analyzed households with spouses, using the phi-coefficient as a measure of assortative mating for ancestry. This analysis was repeated stratifying by age of the spouses (older or younger than 50). Most of the genetic diversity is between ancestries within county, but this varies by race/ethnicity, and ranges from 95% for Whites to 43% for Hispanics illustrating that the White ancestries are relatively homogeneously scattered throughout the U.S whereas the Hispanic ancestries show significant clustering by geography. Analysis of the mating patterns show strong within ethnicity assortative mating for American Indian/Alaska Natives, Asians, Blacks, Hispanic, Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders, and Whites, with φ = 0.30, 0.864, 0.92, 0.863, 0.478 and 0.832 respectively (P<1×10-324 for each) and significantly less correlation in the younger cohort. These results show demographic patterns of social homogamy which are slowly decreasing over time. One major implication is that data collected from different locations around the U.S are susceptible to both within- and between-location population genetic substructure, leading to potential biases in population-based association studies.”
_____

origin cities of the ninds samples (from a quick-ish glance):

Burlington, VT
Lebanon, NH
Boston x 10
New York x 7
Albany
Rochester, NY x 4
New Haven x 3

Bethesda x 7
Baltimore x 5
Philadelphia
Washington, D.C.

Winston-Salem, NC
Charleston, SC

Atlanta
Birmingham x 3
Augusta

Jacksonville x 4
Tampa
Gainesville

Cincinnati x 5
Cleveland
Lexington
Louisville
Memphis
Indianapolis, IN
Ann Arbor

Chicago x 3
Springfield, IL
Rochester, MN
Minneapolis
Englewood, CO
Kansas City

Houston x 4

Phoenix
Salt Lake City

Los Angeles
Irvine, CA
Fountain Valley, CA
San Diego x 2
San Francisco x 3
_____

previously: runs of homozygosity and inbreeding (and outbreeding) and runs of homozygosity in the irish population and western europeans, runs of homozygosity (roh), and outbreeding and russians, eastern europeans, runs of homozygosity (roh), and inbreeding

(note: comments do not require an email. funky penguin!)

Advertisements

23 Comments

  1. Excellent! Getting us closer to the data we need. I think there may be interesting tidbits in that “Reconstructing the Genetic Demography of the United States” paper…

    Reply

  2. What’s interesting to me about this is the idea that puritans in New England may be on to something with regard to the melting pot philosophy. So long as new immigrants interbreed with the local population assimilating both genetically and culturally then the newly added population benefits from new genes and increased heterogeneity as does the older population by getting new genetic variants they might not have otherwise had. It then makes sense how you see less issues with interracial marriage among the out-bred populations. It’s basically the Borg strategy of social/cultural/biological management. What it can’t handle though are huge influxes of in-bred groups that remain culturally and biologically distinct.

    ~S

    Reply

  3. The parallels are pretty eerie actually: Coastal liberals believe in collective action, strong central controls on economic activity, the blank slate in which everyone has the potential to be like them given a proper puritan upbringing. Of course you would expect a people who assimilate others to be disposed to believe that everyone is the same, I wonder how hard wired that is.

    I am also reminded of how the Borg in Star Trek ignored when others would beam directly inside of their own ships, they didn’t seem to think just a few people were a threat, much like Boston’s treatment of those two recently infamous Georgian immigrants.

    However, unlike in star trek where the Borg were defeated by cunning and ingenuity, It seems that in real life the out-bred societies of Europe and the U.S. are most vulnerable to people like the Klingons: fiercely loyal warriors who see all others as enemies to be exploited ruthlessly and who attack in mobs. The question is: who wins over time? On a long enough timeline the Borg strategy would seem to win, except that real life out-bred folks stop breeding among themselves, leading to a situation where you have just a few ‘cubes’ surrounded by millions and millions of Klingons. Maybe it’s not so surprising that we’ve seen massive Zombie apocalypse scenarios become a recurring theme as an era of massive global migrations has dawned. Or maybe I’m just being dramatic, that’s my bag.

    ~S

    Reply

  4. Not to beat this horse to death, and I apologize to those for whom my speculative fiction comparisons are tiresome, but there is reason to hope. Much like with today’s liberal democracies, the strength of the Borg was how they could adapt to new situations. When people bomb us once, we get mad but then forget, but every other time they hurt us we start to change our society to defend against the threats we’re experiencing. It may be slow but it does happen. The change to a globalized society has been very quick but the liberal societies may well adapt. Heck, people like this very blog, Steve Sailer, Jayman, Staffan, Ed-Realist, these folks may very well be the agents of that adaptation.

    ~S

    Reply

  5. @jayman – “Excellent! Getting us closer to the data we need.”

    yes! (^_^)

    i wish, tho, that these genetics researchers (luv ’em!) would pick a standard roh measurement and stick to it. some measure roh @1Mb, other @1.5, etc., etc. — and they’re all searching different “window” sizes, too (different lengths in stretches of dna). it’s making it bloody awkward to compare different studies! =/

    Reply

  6. @jayman – “It’s also worth noting that any selection for ‘universalism’ that has been occurring thanks to outbreeding in America likely has reversed since at least the middle of the 20th century, when conservative fertility outpaced liberal fertility.”

    good point!

    Reply

  7. @sisyphean – “It’s basically the Borg strategy of social/cultural/biological management.”

    heh!

    and william hamilton thought that the genes brought in by the barbarians (my inbreeders, i think) could be rejuvenating to the old, outbred society.

    @sisyphean – “What it can’t handle though are huge influxes of in-bred groups that remain culturally and biologically distinct.”

    yes. that is the problem. big fly in the ointment.

    Reply

  8. Re: outbreeding and universalism among Anglos

    I’ve just been reading a great history of NYC and one of the things it reminded my of was the importance of class distinctions which, after Darwin (ie, latter half of 19th C) were widely assumed by the other classes to be genetic in origin, ie, heritable. Of course the nobility have long felt that way (!) even before Darwin, but I’m talking about the new haute bourgeosie and moneyed aristocracy, from which the Progressives were drawn. Social Darwinism was very widespread. As applied to the Irish (which it was especially) this could be explained by real genetic distance, but less so in the case of the English lower classes. Thus, at least to a certain extent, clannism was replaced by classism. Universalism was eclipsed by high rates of immigration, though there was a certain guilty conscience connected to memories of republican ideals. All this was especially the case in NYC, which I suppose may have been an outlier. They were into money to the exclusion of ideals.

    Reply

  9. @luke – “Thus, at least to a certain extent, clannism was replaced by classism.”

    yes, you mentioned this once before (in an email, i think), and i think you’re very right — after the clannishness disappeared in england and other parts of europe, class became very important.

    even though there are, of course, both wealthy and poor people in clannish societies, they’re very often tied together in the same clan, and the clan members are happy to have one or two wealthy guys at the top, ’cause they can help the rest of the clan (see early medieval ireland or egypt today). maybe you can move up in the world wealth-wise in a clannish society, but it’s hard to leave your clan behind, so you can’t — and won’t — exist entirely in a separate class.

    the indians (in india) came up with their own solution to this, though — combine clannishness and class … in a way.

    Reply

  10. Sisyphean

    “What’s interesting to me about this is the idea that puritans in New England may be on to something with regard to the melting pot philosophy….What it can’t handle though are huge influxes of in-bred groups that remain culturally and biologically distinct.”

    Yes, it’s a function of (numbers * level of difference) / time

    With the Dutch it was easy to create a combined American identity even with significant numbers because the level of difference was so low. It can’t work with large numbers of very different people over very short time periods (measured in units of generation length btw).

    Reply

  11. Sisyphean

    “The question is: who wins over time?”

    If the media told the truth about the problems then the outbred would win because they are better at collective action but they only act on problems they know exist.

    Reply

  12. “and william hamilton thought that the genes brought in by the barbarians (my inbreeders, i think) could be rejuvenating to the old, outbred society.”

    I think the net cost/benefit of that may depend on whether the barbarians come from the north or the south.

    Reply

  13. “they only act on problems they know exist.”

    “may depend on whether the barbarians come from the north or the south.”

    those make good sense. the second is what i see in the coverage of syria. I read somewhere that Sweden has opted to take all syrian refugees, is that a coincidence or a bit of damage limitation, I wonder, or am I too cynical these days!

    Reply

  14. @Sisyphean

    Actually the Han would probably be the best example, not expanding too much at a time but biting off a bite=size chunk of terriotory at a time and assimilating the locals into the Han.

    @BNK

    “I read somewhere that Sweden has opted to take all syrian refugees”

    I read that too but can’t bring myself to even think about that level of insanity.

    Reply

  15. “So long as new immigrants interbreed with the local population assimilating both genetically and culturally then the newly added population benefits from new genes and increased heterogeneity as does the older population by getting new genetic variants they might not have otherwise had.”

    Any actual evidence of this, or is it just another HBD just-so story?

    Reply

  16. @bleach – “Any actual evidence of this, or is it just another HBD just-so story?”

    i think it’s probably an hbd theory (with a small “t”) — not a “just-so-story” — but i should probably let sisyphean answer for himself.

    Reply

  17. bleach
    “Any actual evidence of this, or is it just another HBD just-so story?”

    well if you look at it on the basis of

    (numbers * level of difference) / time

    where time is measured in generations, then the limiting case at one extreme is the original population wouldn’t end up changed genetically at all *except* in those areas where immigrant versions of various alleles were better.

    I don’t think there can be evidence of this in the states because the principle wasn’t applied rigorously enough. There *might* have been evidence in say the 1820s in a region of English / Dutch admixture where for instance if the original Dutch had better genes for liver function and the descended mixed population all had the Dutch genes for liver function.

    However for there to be a net benefit from a Borg style immigration policy from the point of view of the receiving population the receiving population have to be the Borg not the immigrants.

    I think a more testable example might be neanderthal dna inside modern humans i.e. humans basically Borg-ing the neanderthals and keeping just those bits of neanderthal DNA which were better than what the humans had before.

    Reply

  18. @Bleach: The answer to your question is that my understanding of hybrid fitness is where I was coming from on the particular quote you selected. I wasn’t making a statement of fact, merely a what if supposition, thinking out loud about how things might work in the intersection of culture/biology which I find fascinating. I think the idea of a Borg like assimilating society is interesting, which is why I posted it. I wanted to see what others here thought. Racial purity isn’t always where it’s at. I’m glad to own a mutt dog and I’m very glad to be a European mutt. He doesn’t have hip dysplasia and I don’t suffer from Schizophrenia, alcoholism, or any of the other mental problems that one side of my family is currently plagued with.

    ~S

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s