I generally find these comparison charts by mormon apologist laughable. IF there was such a strong correlation to the bom - why does archaeology still relate a completely different story.
Take the Olmec. IF the bom story is true, then evidence for the end of the Olmec culture should be well documented as due to a massive genocidal war that completely kills all but one person.
There is no archaeological evidence of a war. Evidence points to an environmental crisis that forced the population centers to move. Due probably in part to the Olmecs practice of swidden (or slash-and-burn) agriculture to clear the forests and shrubs, and to provide new fields once the old fields were exhausted.
Zarahemla Research Foundation
Also likes to try to superimpose a hebraic / semetic linguistic development chart upon the mayan cultural development. Clearly this view is not held by modern archaeologists. Probably the most recognized scholar on Central America - Michael Coe - views the Olmec as the mayan predecessors, and if this is the case, then the Olmec didn't genocidally kill each other off as described in the bom. Other linguists have traced the trend from the Olmec language into the later Mayan linguistic groups. What is missing - anything resembling Hebrew / egyptian / or anything resembling a semitic / middle eastern linguistic system.
The Zarahemla Research Foundation is convinced that Mesoamerica is the area in which Book of Mormon peoples lived
They may be 'convinced', they are shy any real scholarship in the field. There is not a single professional article for a peer reviewed journal evidenced, nor is there evidence that the members hold any credible associated scientific degrees in the fields of archaeology or linguistics.
And in closing, there are many other similar mormon 'research' organizations that are convinced that the bom lands lie in other areas.