Talk:Mexicans

Misinterpretation of sources
There are a couple of misinterpretations of two sources in this article here:

'''In studies made on the general Mexican population (this is, studies where there is no other kind of self-identification than that of being "Mexican") the European ancestral genetic component tends to overtake the indigenous composite. Said increase is the most pronounced on research done on chromosomal maternal ancestry, as while in studies made on self identified Mestizos the European maternal ancestry is as low as only 5%,[154] on studies done on the general Mexican population the European maternal ancestry increases more than 40 points, with it being 46%,[155] suggesting that nowadays a considerable segment of Mexico's population is left out when a study uses as samples only people who think of themselves as being Mestizos'''

Citation [154]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3217880 (Kumar, et al)

Citation [155]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1867092/ (Alkes et al)

Neither of these two sources are consistent with the Wikipedia statement. Kumar does not state anywhere that their sample identified as "Mestizo". The word Mestizo isn't anywhere in the article. The participants in that study are simply Mexican.

Furthermore, Alkes does not state anywhere that their Mexican sample is "46%" maternally European. Alkes compares the X-chromosomal Native American ancestry in their sample to the autosomal ancestry, to broadly infer the uniparental asymmetry of this Mexican sample. That's not the same thing as maternal ancestry. Kumar and Alkes both support a uniparental asymmetry for Mexicans, and nowhere in this resesrch is it implied that a Mexican's identification as "Mestizo" is related to their uniparental (haplogroup) ancestry.

From Alkes, et al (emphasis mine):

From Kumar, et al (emphasis mine):

There is nothing in any of these studies saying that any Mexican sample has a substantial European maternal ancestry. - Hunan201p (talk) 23:53, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Consider that the X chromosome is matrilineal aswell. Pob3qu3 (talk) 19:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Premiere Becky Zhu La cabeza de Joaquín Murrieta.jpg

South China
The following is just a copypaste from a recent discussion at another talk page that relates to the same content:

There is nothing in Zhang, et al. (2022) that substantiates this claim: 'Ancestral Native Americans' formed from an 'Ancestral Native American' lineage which diverged from East Asian people around 36,000 years ago somewhere in Southern China.

What they do say is that the Red Deer Cave people form one part of the amalgamation of Native American ancestry. The IP editor on the other hand speaks as if "Ancestral Native Americans" began with that one population. That is original research, and wrong. Even if Native Americans were direct descendants of Red Deer Cave, which they are not, the actual "Ancestral Native Americans" originate from the mixing of multiple populations, not from Red Deer Cave or ancient East Asians alone. And this mixing happened north of China. As Austronesier pointed out, it involved Ancient East Asians in Northeast Asia rather than southern China.

The "northward migration and mixing with ANE" scenario is original research; these papers don't tell this tale.

Further, regarding, their source cites Raghavan 2014 for the percentage of ANE-related ancestry in Paleo-Americans:

...so this is actually a secondary source for this figure. My main problem is that the IP has listed the ancestral components as "sister lineages" of East Asians and Europeans, when it is more accurate to describe them as ancient East Asians and ancient West Eurasians, or just ancient Eurasians. Hunan201p (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello, as I said at the talk page there, I have no problems with the part about Southern China to be removed. The other part is sourced by this 2022 book by Jennifer Raff:
 * AROUND 36,000 years ago, a small group of people living in East Asia began to break off from the larger ancestral populations in the region. By about 25,000 years ago, the smaller group in East Asia itself split into two. One gave rise to a group referred to by geneticists as the ancient Paleo-Siberians, who stayed in Northeast Asia. The other became ancestral to Indigenous peoples in the Americas.
 * I cited the summary article in Sapiens.


 * Another problem with the Wong paper may be that it is about Indigenous Andean Americans, rather than Indigenous Mexican groups. Other papers estimated different amounts of ANE ancestry for Native Americans. This (Moreno-Mayar et al. 2018) for example estimate between 14% and 38% of Native American ancestry may originate from gene flow from the Mal'ta–Buret' (ANE) population, and say:
 * Using demographic modelling, we infer that the Ancient Beringian population and ancestors of other Native Americans descended from a single founding population that initially split from East Asians around 36 ± 1.5 ka, with gene flow persisting until around 25 ± 1.1 ka. Gene flow from ancient north Eurasians into all Native Americans took place 25–20 ka, with Ancient Beringians branching off around 22–18.1 ka.
 * The book I cited, probably cites Moreno-Mayar et al. on that. Hope that helps.94.131.108.230 (talk) 17:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Sapiens.org is a 7 year old web magazine. Their faulty summary of Raff's book isn't Raff's book. If you actually read Raff's book and want to give a direct quote and page number where she says anything like that, I would be interested to hear it. Meanwhile Meltzer cites Moreno-Mayar and says on page 170:
 * - Hunan201p (talk) 23:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The Sapiens org report on her book gave excerpts out of the book, the quote I used is such an excerpt. (Excerpted from Origin: A Genetic History of the Americas. © 2022 by Jennifer Raff. Published by Twelve Books. All rights reserved). Furthermore, the article on Sapiens org seems to have been written by the author of the book, Jennifer Raff. There are also two graphics made by Jennifer Raff showing the same as in my used quote (the description of graphic 1: "Roughly 36,000 years ago, a group living in East Asia began journeying east, eventually crossing Beringia into present-day Alaska, where some populations expanded south as the ice sheets melted around 17,000 years ago. - Jennifer Raff")
 * The quote of Meltzer 2021 is basically saying the same. Except that he seems to make a mistake by calling the East Asian like ancestry among Native Americans as "signified by the Tianyuan individual". That's probably a mistake. Tianyuan probably did not directly contribute to Native Americans. But anyways, thank you for your points and the Meltzer paper link.94.131.108.230 (talk) 05:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I read Jennifer Raff's book day and night. The Sapiens.org webpage is not an excerpt, but a teaser. It stitches together various quotes from different parts of the book that will easily mislead any unassuming person who reads it.
 * From the Sapiens.org link, Raff refers to the Beringian standstill hypothesis where the mixing takes place in Beringia rather than Siberia or further south in East Asia, as a result of northward migration. What the Sapiens.org link fails to show is that this is only one hypothesis that she summarizes. Most of what she talks about involves migrations to the south where the mixing between them and the ancient East Asians took place in East Asia or Siberia.
 * This is the actual content from pages 188-189 of Raff's book:
 * So the Sapiens.org link is not at all an excerpt. - Hunan201p (talk) 11:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So the Sapiens.org link is not at all an excerpt. - Hunan201p (talk) 11:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So the Sapiens.org link is not at all an excerpt. - Hunan201p (talk) 11:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So the Sapiens.org link is not at all an excerpt. - Hunan201p (talk) 11:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)