| Literature DB >> 29167359 |
Francesca Tassi1, Stefania Vai2, Silvia Ghirotto1, Martina Lari2, Alessandra Modi2, Elena Pilli2, Andrea Brunelli1, Roberta Rosa Susca1, Alicja Budnik3, Damian Labuda4, Federica Alberti5, Carles Lalueza-Fox6, David Reich7,8, David Caramelli9, Guido Barbujani10.
Abstract
It is unclear whether Indo-European languages in Europe spread from the Pontic steppes in the late Neolithic, or from Anatolia in the Early Neolithic. Under the former hypothesis, people of the Globular Amphorae culture (GAC) would be descended from Eastern ancestors, likely representing the Yamnaya culture. However, nuclear (six individuals typed for 597 573 SNPs) and mitochondrial (11 complete sequences) DNA from the GAC appear closer to those of earlier Neolithic groups than to the DNA of all other populations related to the Pontic steppe migration. Explicit comparisons of alternative demographic models via approximate Bayesian computation confirmed this pattern. These results are not in contrast to Late Neolithic gene flow from the Pontic steppes into Central Europe. However, they add nuance to this model, showing that the eastern affinities of the GAC in the archaeological record reflect cultural influences from other groups from the East, rather than the movement of people.Entities:
Keywords: Indo-European; Neolithic; ancient DNA; approximate Bayesian computation; migration; population genomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29167359 PMCID: PMC5719168 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.1540
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.349
Figure 1.Geographical location and timescale of the ancient individuals. Sampling locations and ages for the ancient samples. The colours and the symbols for each population are the same in all the analyses. In bold, the samples included in the optimized dataset. See also electronic supplementary material, table S2.
Figure 2.Scheme summarizing the five alternative models compared via ABC random forest. We generated by coalescent simulation mtDNA sequences under five models, differing as to the number of migration events considered. The coloured lines represent the ancient samples included in the analysis, namely Unetice (yellow line), Bell Beaker (purple line), Corded Ware (green line) and Globular Amphorae (red line) from Central Europe, Yamnaya (light blue line) and Srubnaya (brown line) from Eastern Europe. The arrows refer to the three waves of migration tested. Model NOMIG was the simplest one, in which the six populations did not have any genetic exchanges; models MIG1, MIG2 and MIG1, 2 differed from NOMIG in that they included the migration events number 1, 2 (from Eastern to Central Europe, respectively before and after the onset of the GAC), or both. Model MIG2, 3 represents a modification of MIG2 model also including a back migration from Central to Eastern Europe after the development of the Corded Ware culture.
Figure 3.(a) Principal component analysis on genomic diversity in ancient and modern individuals. (b) K = 3,4 ADMIXTURE analysis based only on ancient variation. (a) Principal component analysis of 777 modern West Eurasian samples with 199 ancient samples. Only transversions considered in the PCA (to avoid confounding effects of post-mortem damage). We represented modern individuals as grey dots, and used coloured and labelled symbols to represent the ancient individuals. (b) Admixture plots at K = 3 and K = 4 of the analysis conducted only considering the ancient individuals. The full plot is shown in electronic supplementary material, figure S7. The ancient populations are sorted by a temporal scale from Pleistocene to Iron Age. The GAC samples of this study are displayed in the box on the right.
Figure 4.Outgroup f3 statistics. (a) Test in the form f3 (X, Globular Amphorae; Mbuti). (b) Test in the form f3 (X, Corded Ware; Mbuti), where X is all other ancient populations. Black error bars represent two standard errors.