Dominican Genetics

AlterEgo

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 9, 2009
24,158
7,738
113
South Coast
Interesting article in today's Diario Libre, computer translated. The article coincides with Ancestry.com revamping their ethnic breakdowns, and as indicated in the article, Mr. AE's now includes 4% Indigenous Dominican Republic & Haiti, and 1% each Indigenous Americas Andes and Indigenous Americas Mexico. His paternal ancestry is from the Cibao. After reading this article, that all makes sense.

==========================
GENETICS

The origin of the genetics of Dominican nationality

Dominicans have 15% Taino genetics

Several cultures influence the formation of the national

Domingo Apréu - SANTO DOMINGO 11/22/2019, 08:17 AM

It has been repeatedly said that Dominican nationality is the result of the initial mix of three cultures: the Taino culture, the African culture and the Spanish culture. To these cultures were added later migrations, such as the one from the Middle East, commonly identified as "Turks"; Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Egypt, Israel, Iraq, Jordan and others, including Turkey, whose name was chosen to designate them all. We have also had migration from Japanese, Chinese, Germans and other nationalities, but to a lesser extent.

That sum of nationalities was mainly taken the last hundred years for their integration into the Dominican. But you have to ask yourself, what other cultures joined the original groups that occupied our island for eight thousand years? Upon the arrival of the Spaniards were those who were named as Taínos, probably because of a misinterpretation of some inquiry by gentilicios, the Spaniards used to give importance to this differentiation by regions.

Other occupant groups on the Island and the Caribbean were identified as siboneyes, caribs, guanahatabeyes, igneris and ciguayos. But where did they originate from ?; when they arrived?; And how much of his ancestry do we keep genetically?

The archaeological studies that follow the trace of the material remains left by these groups, have insistently pointed to the south and southeast when inquiring about the origin of the Taíno culture. However, the rock trail, the one that these same groups and others left before those found by Europeans left in our caves, point farther and in other directions, such as west and southwest, that is, towards the Maya and the Incas , and even towards the Nahuas.

Some blood studies (Álvarez Perelló, 1948), and more recently mitochondrial DNA studies (Martínez-Cruzado, 2006-2010), show general data on the genetic presence of Taino, estimating the latter, present in 15% of Dominicans.

Recognizing the merit of the work done, and given the importance of its results, the healthy ambition of those interested is its continuity, both for the Island of Santo Domingo, the rest of the Caribbean islands and continental territories, mainly those inhabited by descendants of the Mayan, Inca and Nahua cultures, since, returning to the rock trail, and showing the evidence of the Mayan and Inca pictorial presence on the walls of several of our caves, there is the possibility that our presence is also in our genetics cultures, which would call the attention of a bright aboriginal ancestry, positively contrary to the Hispanic tendency to minimize the value of our most recent ancestors.

Now where to look?
Based on the information provided in 2010 (Fermín Mercedes de la Cruz-UCE), the search for the genetic trail was directed towards Cibao sites, based on “that 60,000 indigenous people took refuge in the mountains to avoid its extermination”. Likewise, the information draws attention to the fact that “the highest frequency of Dominicans that conserve Taino DNA was found in the Cibao region” (Mercedes de la Cruz, 2010).

But let's look in another direction. Returning to the cave, to the caves, it is known by all researchers in America and the Caribbean, without exception, that “for the pre-Hispanic peoples, the caves had a plurality of meanings: refuge, room site, mouth or belly of the earth , underworld, fantastic space, abode of the gods of water and those of death, funerary enclosure, place of lineage and passage rites, astronomical observatory, quarry ”. (Chamomile, 1994). Therefore, there can be no more suitable sites to search for the genomic trail than those near the caves and caverns that served as such to our aborigines. Faithfulness to their beliefs forced them to function as custodians of these, room and permanence in their vicinity, and surely,

This search can lead us to locate genetic links with Mayans and Incas, and logically, see that our aboriginal ancestry is related to an offspring that has been impossible to obscure, and that currently traces mythology towards a reality that within its dispersion touched the Caribbean, touched to the island of Haiti, Quisqueya, Babeque, or whatever you want to call him who adopts positions, and it is up to us who will be permanently maintaining that, by descent, by birth and by conviction, we are Taínos.

* The author is a caver, cultural researcher, and advisory member of CARIBEWA.

https://www.diariolibre.com/actuali...tica-de-la-nacionalidad-dominicana-PG15465912
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
44,416
7,139
113
I found the writing style to be, at best, "odd" in that article. Some useful information, but it could have been far better written.
 

NALs

Economist by Profession
Jan 20, 2003
14,679
3,769
113
The article is odd when most Dominicans that have done DNA tests show some Native American ancestry, probably Taino and a minority. According to the article only 15% of Dominicans have Taino DNA. I don't think so.

This isn't the first time I notice this type of errors in Dominican print media. Manuel Núñez published a book titled "La autodestrucción" (The Autodestruction), which I bought last year to see what he had to say. While I agree in somethings, he does commits errors that jump out to anyone that is versed on the subjects. On a chapter (first paragraph on page 305) he references a DNA study of the Dominican population done by National Geographic, and describes the genetic proportions as representations of the population size of each group, which is ridiculous when the results doesn't imply what he says at all. In fact, not even the news article that he cites implies his conclusion on that matter, starting with the title that contradicts him. He is suppose to be a doctorate at a university in France and committed this huge error.