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.]

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