Great Migration Left Genetic Legacy

Reseachers have started to examine the genetic traces of the movement of some six million African-Americans from the south to the north and west between 1910 and 1970.

 

Getty Images/Blend Images (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

It’s called the Great Migration—the journey of some six million African-Americans from the rural south to northern and western cities between 1910 and 1970. The cultural impact of the Great Migration has been well documented. But researchers have also started to look at its genetic implications. The most recent study finds that the migration had a significant effect on genomic diversity across the nation. That work is in the journal PLOS Genetics. [Soheil Baharian et al, The Great Migration and African-American Genomic Diversity]

To estimate patterns of ancestry, researchers analyzed genetic data from nearly four thousand African-Americans who had participated in three medical studies.

Their findings confirmed historical records—genetic evidence showed that female slaves often gave birth to children fathered by white slaveowners. The genetic analysis found that 82.1 percent of the average African-American’s ancestors came from Africa, while 16.7 percent were Europeans and 1.2 percent were Native American.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The team also could date when particular genes entered the mix. Native American genes were introduced into the typical African-American genome in the early 1600’s. Genes from Europeans were for the most part introduced in the decades before and during the Civil War.

Researchers also found those still living in the southern United States have a greater percentage of African ancestry than those in the north or west. And European-Americans who now live in the south are more genetically similar to African-Americans in the north and west than they are to African-Americans currently living in the South—because Blacks with a greater percentage of European ancestry were more likely to move, especially early in the migration’s history.

The analysis has implications for medical research and treatment. Most of the people in studies linking genes and disease have been white, thus potentially leaving gaps in medical information specific to other races. Filling in those gaps, along with better access to medical care, could help reduce the disparity in health experienced by many minority communities.

—Erika Beras

(The above text is a transcript of this podcast)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe