New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Salmonella Could Have Caused 16th-Century Epidemic

Using a new algorithm, geneticists uncovered the pathogen that could have caused a massive epidemic in the Aztec empire: Salmonella bacteria. Christopher Intagliata reports.

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!

When Europeans arrived in the New World, they carried with them microscopic, deadly organisms… like smallpox, measles and flu… which caused devastating outbreaks among the indigenous people.

One of those outbreaks was what became called the cocoliztli epidemic of 1545, among the people known as the Mixtecs, in what is today southern Mexico. The victims suffered rashes and fevers; blood streamed from their eyes, noses and mouths. Millions died. But we're still not sure what caused it.

So scientists looked to 10 victims, buried in communal graves in one of the afflicted towns, for clues. They sequenced DNA from within their pulpy tooth cavities. Most studies of ancient bones ditch all the associated microbial DNA, so that only the host’s DNA is analyzed. But in this case the bacterial and viral DNA were the stars of the show. Which also meant a lot more genetic data to sift through.


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 difference is the needle in the haystack." Noreen Tuross, a biochemist at Harvard University. "This is a much bigger haystack."

Using a new algorithm to help them dive into that huge haystack, they found a needle: genetic evidence of the deadly Salmonella enterica Paratyphi C bacterium, which causes enteric fever.

The results are in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. [Åshild J. Vågene et al., Salmonella enterica genomes from victims of a major sixteenth-century epidemic in Mexico]

The researchers stopped short of pinning the epidemic on the salmonella alone. "Could there have been other organisms around? Yes. We didn't find them. How do you know that what you didn't find isn't there? That's ridiculous."

And it's uncertain the disease had European origins—though there is evidence it existed in Norway, three hundred years before Columbus sailed. But this effort arms archaeologists with a new tool to study not just great civilizations…but also the world of microbes with which they coexisted.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe