PDA

View Full Version : Kinship, acquired and inherited status, and population structure at the Early Bronze



kingjohn
20-05-20, 14:50
Kinship, acquired and inherited status, and population structure at the Early Bronze Age Mokrin necropolis in northern Serbia.
Aleksandra Zegarac, Laura Winkelbach, Jens Bloecher, Yoan Diekmann, Marija Kreckovic Gavrilovic, Marko Porcic, Biljana Stojkovic, Lidija Milasinovic, Mona Schreiber, Daniel Wegmann, Krishna R Veeramah, Sofija Stefanovic, Joachim Burger
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.18.101337
This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?].
AbstractInfo/HistoryMetrics Preview PDF
Abstract
Twenty-four ancient genomes with an average sequencing coverage of 0.85 were produced from the Mokrin necropolis, an Early Bronze Age (2,100-1,800 BC) Maros culture site in Serbia, to provide unambiguous identification of biological sex, population structure, and genetic kinship between individuals. Of the 24 investigated individuals, 15 were involved in kinship relationships of varying degrees, including 3 parent-offspring relationships. All observed parent-offspring pairs were mother and son. In addition to the absence of biological daughters, we observed a number of young women and girls with no biological relatives in our sample. These observations, together with the high mitochondrial diversity in our sample, are consistent with the practice of female exogamy in the population served by Mokrin. However, moderate-to-high Y-chromosomal diversity suggests a degree of male mobility greater than that expected under strict patrilocality. Individual status differences at Mokrin, as indicated by grave goods, support the inference that females could inherit status, but could not transmit status to all their sons. The case of a son whose grave good richness outstrips that of his biological mother suggests that sons had the possibility to acquire status during their lifetimes. The Mokrin sample resembles a genetically unstructured population, suggesting that the social hierarchies of the community were not accompanied by strict marriage barriers.

( r1b , I2 , j2b , bt)



mt haplogr. Y haplogr.
122E XY 6-9 1.09 U5a2b1a I2a1b

122S XX 35-50 0.78 H32 *

161 XX 9-11 1.20 H80 *

163 XY 45-55 1.21 U4a2 J2b

181 XX >18 0.62 U4a2 *

186 XX 8-11 0.33 H1aj *

211 XY 50-55 0.79 U5a2b1a I2a1b

220 XY 15-25 0.64 T2b11 R1b1a2a2c1

223 XX 7-10 0.39 U3a1 *

224 XX 25-40 0.77 T2b *

225 XY 25-35 0.82 J1b1a1 R1b1a2a2c1

228 XX 35-50 0.95 J1c *

237 XX 15-20 0.89 T2b *

243 XY 20-35 1.12 H BT

246 XX 45-50 0.98 H80 *

247 XX 10-12 0.90 H1 *

257 A XX 40-60 0.60 H *

257 B XY inf.I 0.61 K1a4 R1b1a2a2c1a1

260 XY 15-18 0.92 J1c I2a2a1a2a2

282 XY 15-20 1.41 H2b BT

287 XX 20-35 0.81 U5b2a2c *

288 XX 60+ 0.81 HV0e *

295 XY 15-20 0.82 H80 I2a1a

302 XX 20-35 0.89 J1c *

Angela
20-05-20, 15:59
Kinship, acquired and inherited status, and population structure at the Early Bronze Age Mokrin necropolis in northern Serbia.
Aleksandra Zegarac, Laura Winkelbach, Jens Bloecher, Yoan Diekmann, Marija Kreckovic Gavrilovic, Marko Porcic, Biljana Stojkovic, Lidija Milasinovic, Mona Schreiber, Daniel Wegmann, Krishna R Veeramah, Sofija Stefanovic, Joachim Burger
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.18.101337
This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?].
AbstractInfo/HistoryMetrics Preview PDF
Abstract
Twenty-four ancient genomes with an average sequencing coverage of 0.85 were produced from the Mokrin necropolis, an Early Bronze Age (2,100-1,800 BC) Maros culture site in Serbia, to provide unambiguous identification of biological sex, population structure, and genetic kinship between individuals. Of the 24 investigated individuals, 15 were involved in kinship relationships of varying degrees, including 3 parent-offspring relationships. All observed parent-offspring pairs were mother and son. In addition to the absence of biological daughters, we observed a number of young women and girls with no biological relatives in our sample. These observations, together with the high mitochondrial diversity in our sample, are consistent with the practice of female exogamy in the population served by Mokrin. However, moderate-to-high Y-chromosomal diversity suggests a degree of male mobility greater than that expected under strict patrilocality. Individual status differences at Mokrin, as indicated by grave goods, support the inference that females could inherit status, but could not transmit status to all their sons. The case of a son whose grave good richness outstrips that of his biological mother suggests that sons had the possibility to acquire status during their lifetimes. The Mokrin sample resembles a genetically unstructured population, suggesting that the social hierarchies of the community were not accompanied by strict marriage barriers.
( r1b , I2 , j2b , bt)
mt haplogr. Y haplogr.
122E XY 6-9 1.09 U5a2b1a I2a1b
122S XX 35-50 0.78 H32 *
161 XX 9-11 1.20 H80 *
163 XY 45-55 1.21 U4a2 J2b
181 XX >18 0.62 U4a2 *
186 XX 8-11 0.33 H1aj *
211 XY 50-55 0.79 U5a2b1a I2a1b
220 XY 15-25 0.64 T2b11 R1b1a2a2c1
223 XX 7-10 0.39 U3a1 *
224 XX 25-40 0.77 T2b *
225 XY 25-35 0.82 J1b1a1 R1b1a2a2c1
228 XX 35-50 0.95 J1c *
237 XX 15-20 0.89 T2b *
243 XY 20-35 1.12 H BT
246 XX 45-50 0.98 H80 *
247 XX 10-12 0.90 H1 *
257 A XX 40-60 0.60 H *
257 B XY inf.I 0.61 K1a4 R1b1a2a2c1a1
260 XY 15-18 0.92 J1c I2a2a1a2a2
282 XY 15-20 1.41 H2b BT
287 XX 20-35 0.81 U5b2a2c *
288 XX 60+ 0.81 HV0e *
295 XY 15-20 0.82 H80 I2a1a
302 XX 20-35 0.89 J1c *

Interesting. Only one J2b, but lots of I2a1. If J2b was brought by the steppe people I would have expected more. Certainly, it didn't take the Slavs to bring the I2a1. There's one I2a2 as well, probably local.

Lots of mtDna U5, vast majority probably from the steppe.

WHG 8%
"Aegean Neolithic" 55%
Steppe 37%

Anyone know off hand the steppe percentage in today's Serbs? It won't be exact because for precision you would need to be using the same reference samples, but it might be interesting.

Of course, the steppe number could have gone down with the "resurgence" of EEF ancestry that always seems to have happened, and then gone back up again with the Slavic migrations. Or, the Slavic migrations didn't have quite as large an impact as we thought.

Angela
20-05-20, 16:10
Nine females were not related to anyone, and scattered throughout the burial ground. I wonder if they were still practising the Indo-European "bride kidnapping", a la "Rapine of the Sabines".
As far as pigmentation is concerned:
SLC24A5 1 (So, already fixed)
SLC42A5 71% (Not very high compared to modern European populations, although as they point out, it's at 82% in Spain.
HERC2 45% (Similar to modern day Tuscans.)

It seems they didn't see the latest Mathiesen paper on depigmentation. If he's right there are other snps which are more important than SLC45A2.

I haven't gotten to the supplement, but I think the HERC2 derived number must include a lot of heterozygous samples. That's how it works in Italy too. The northern half of the country has higher Herc 2 than one would think looking the people's eyes.

Basically, I guess they looked like Tuscans and Spaniards.

Angela
20-05-20, 16:29
Has anyone found the Supplement?

Just saw that 4 of the samples had no WHG at all.

That would hint that perhaps, as I said, there was very little WHG in the Balkans before the arrival of the steppe people.

There's no question that it was a very minor player.

bicicleur
20-05-20, 18:25
R1b1a2a2c1

which one is this? what SNPs characterise this subclade?

bicicleur
20-05-20, 18:28
Has anyone found the Supplement?
Just saw that 4 of the samples had no WHG at all.
That would hint that perhaps, as I said, there was very little WHG in the Balkans before the arrival of the steppe people.
There's no question that it was a very minor player.

European genetic variation, clustering in the midst of modern northern, eastern, and southern
Europeans (Fig. S5).
We estimated individual admixture proportions under the assumption that the composition of
a European Bronze Age population can be sufficiently modeled with three components:
western hunter gatherers, Aegean Neolithic farmers, and eastern European steppe-like
populations. We observed no significant variation in the eastern European steppe-like
component between individuals (Fig. S6, Table S6). Pooling individuals, admixture proportions
are estimated to be around 8% (± 1.2% standard error (SE)) western hunter gatherers, 55% (±
2.5% SE) Aegean Neolithic farmers, and 37% (± 2.3% SE) Eastern European steppe-like
population (Fig. S7). Quantification of shared drift to other temporally and geographically close
ancient individuals via outgroup f3 statistics did not reveal any particularly close affinities (Fig.
S8), reflecting the genetic homogenization of Europe during the Bronze Age.

bigsnake49
20-05-20, 18:55
R1b1a2a2c1
which one is this? what SNPs characterise this subclade?

Z2105+ from looking at some tables

torzio
20-05-20, 19:47
the areas and time period covers the Vatin culture

https://www.academia.edu/2250330/WELL_DEFINED_OR_TAKEN_FOR_GRANTED_-_THE_BRONZE_AGE_VATIN_CULTURE_A_CENTURY_AFTER

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatin_culture

the area is also part of later proto-Triballi Thracian people

Aspurg
20-05-20, 20:15
the areas and time period covers the Vatin culture


This is not the Vatin culture. Vatin culture is MBA, this is late EBA. This is Maros culture, Vatin culture succeeded the Maros culture in many/most areas. There were already two samples of Maros culture before RISE373, RISE374 without the Y-DNA.

Vatin culture practiced cremation mostly.

It does look like some J-L283 is likely there. Might be a good candidate to pinpoint its origins, as Maros was also derived of some earlier cultures.

No E-V13, so this tells me V13 is not tied to Pannonian areal at all. But I believe it is connected to Glina III-Schneckenberg, at least the E-CTS1273. Maros had some trade relations with them. There are no Romanian aDNA BA finds atm at all.

Also it seems R-CTS7556 was found!!

Johane Derite
20-05-20, 21:43
The j2b sample according to the paper is "buried with grave goods indicative of higher social status". This J2b (almost definitely l283), taken in conjuction with the three R1b's the same as those of albanians, is consistent with having come from the steppe together.

No one says all I2a1 was brought by slavs, its the specific clades of cts10228 that south slavs have major founder effects in that came with the slavic migrations.

For example the two main ones i2a-s17250 & I2a-z17855. Those branches were not part of paleobalkan ethnicities like illyrians, thracian.

Lbk had i2a1, that is not controversial.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EXv_rCnXkAcJl4v?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

ihype02
20-05-20, 21:53
Interesting. Only one J2b, but lots of I2a1. If J2b was brought by the steppe people I would have expected more. Certainly, it didn't take the Slavs to bring the I2a1. There's one I2a2 as well, probably local.

Lots of mtDna U5, vast majority probably from the steppe.

WHG 8%
"Aegean Neolithic" 55%
Steppe 37%

Anyone know off hand the steppe percentage in today's Serbs? It won't be exact because for precision you would need to be using the same reference samples, but it might be interesting.

Of course, the steppe number could have gone down with the "resurgence" of EEF ancestry that always seems to have happened, and then gone back up again with the Slavic migrations. Or, the Slavic migrations didn't have quite as large an impact as we thought.
Is it the Slavic subclade?

Kelmendasi
20-05-20, 22:08
Is it the Slavic subclade?
The samples are only labelled as I2a1b, so I2a-M423 since the classifications are based on older nomenclature. I think that if we look at the current data, it's very unlikely that these samples are related to the Slavic clusters of CTS10228.

It's possible that they are M423>L161, possibly related to L161>Y13331 which has been found in a number of Bulgarians.

The other I2a1 sample is I-M26, wouldn't surprise me if there's a relation with the M26 found in the samples from the Baden Culture of Hungary.

ihype02
20-05-20, 22:25
The samples are only labelled as I2a1b, so I2a-M423 since the classifications are based on older nomenclature. I think that if we look at the current data, it's very unlikely that these samples are related to the Slavic clusters of CTS10228.

It's possible that they are M423>L161, possibly related to L161>Y13331 which has been found in a number of Bulgarians.

The other I2a1 sample is I-M26, wouldn't surprise me if there's a relation with the M26 found in the samples from the Baden Culture of Hungary.
Bulgarians have 35% to 40% I2a-Slavic and slavic R1a. Early Slavs were 2/3 to 3/4 of I2a and R1a but not entirely.
Will we get to see them in the autosomal PCA? :)

Sirm
01-06-20, 12:51
SFI-35 Iron Age III male I2a1b-M436 R0a1a
ERS4542983
SFI-35
Beirut SFI-1075
Iron Age III

5
0.3
321,527

Maciamo
01-06-20, 13:47
The 24 samples tested are from the Periam-Pecica/Mureş culture, which covered northern Serbia, southeastern Hungary and western Romania. It is contemporary with the late Bell Beaker phenomenon and the Unetice culture.


Interesting. Only one J2b, but lots of I2a1. If J2b was brought by the steppe people I would have expected more. Certainly, it didn't take the Slavs to bring the I2a1. There's one I2a2 as well, probably local.

The paper says that most of the tested males are related, so the fact that there are lots of I2a1 does not necessarily reflect a high percentage of I2a1 in the region - just in that family. Likewise the J2b and I2a2 are outsiders to that local clan.

I2a1 and I2a2 were found throughout Mesolithic Europe and survived in many Neolithic cultures too. Yet, none of the Mesolithic and Neolithic samples belong to the Slavic I2a1b-CTS10228. So it is undeniable that a more recent migration in the Late Antiquity diffused I2a1b-CTS10228 around central, SE and eastern Europe. I very much doubt that the origin of that migration was in the Balkans. The source was probably more around Belarus.


Lots of mtDna U5, vast majority probably from the steppe.

Not so sure. The U5 from the Yamna and subsequent Steppe cultures + in Corded Ware is typically U5a1. Here the samples are U5a2b and U5b2a, which have been found in Epipaleolithic France, Mesolithic Sweden and Neolithic Germany, but not in the Steppe.

Likewise, the U4 in Yamna and Corded Ware is U4a1, but in LBA Serbia we see U4a2, which is more central-northern European in origin.
There are a few Steppe mt-haplogroups though, such as H2b and J1b1a.


WHG 8%
"Aegean Neolithic" 55%
Steppe 37%

There is far more Steppe aDNA than uniparental haplogroups suggest.

Pax Augusta
10-08-20, 10:55
This is not the Vatin culture. Vatin culture is MBA, this is late EBA. This is Maros culture, Vatin culture succeeded the Maros culture in many/most areas. There were already two samples of Maros culture before RISE373, RISE374 without the Y-DNA.

Vatin culture practiced cremation mostly.

It does look like some J-L283 is likely there. Might be a good candidate to pinpoint its origins, as Maros was also derived of some earlier cultures.


That J2b-L283 might be there in the late EBA in the Maros culture is quite interesting.

Polska
23-08-20, 05:37
Assuming the J2b sample is, in fact, J2b L283, when will we know/determine which sub-branch of L283 it might have belonged to?

kingjohn
06-09-20, 16:56
pribislav anlaysed some of the calls from this paper i guess bam files are out:good_job: ( it is very hard for me to see farther as i am not a member of anthrogenica):thinking:



MOK12; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia; Maros_EBA; I2a1b-M423>Y3104>L161>pre-Y13336 (https://yfull.com/tree/I-Y13336/)

MOK12 also has one derived SNP at downstream level Y13331, but given that it's a G>A transition covered with only one read, and that it has two ancestral SNPs at level Y13336, I'm more inclined to assign it to pre-Y13336.




MOK19A; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia, Maros_EBA; R1b-Z2103>Z2106>Z2108>Y14415>Y14420* (xY14512) (https://yfull.com/tree/R-Y14420/)





MOK18A; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia, Maros_EBA; I2a1b-M423>Y3104>L161>pre-Y13336 (https://yfull.com/tree/I-Y13336/)

Y13336 level: Y13337+ C>T (1T); Y13603+ C>T (2T); Y13580+ G>A (1A); Y13605+ T>A (1A); Y167728- G>C (1G); Y167370- T>C (1T)




MOK28A; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia, Maros_EBA; I2a2a1a2a2-M223>CTS616>Y3670>L1229>S18331 (https://yfull.com/tree/I-S18331/)




MOK15. 2100-1800 BC. Mokrin necropolis. Serbia, Maros_EBA is: J2b-L283>Z600>Z615*: https://yfull.com/tree/J-Z615/

Some important Derived SNPs: Z590 (1A), Z600 (1A), Z2509/CTS3681 (1T), Z615 (1C)
Ancestral SNP: Z584- Z2505- Z628-
No call: Z585, Z8418, Y27530





MOK22; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia; Maros_EBA; R1b1a2a2c1-Z2103>Z2106>Z2108 (xZ2110) (https://yfull.com/tree/R-Z2108/)


Z2108 level: Z2109/CTS1843+ T>C (1C)

Z2108>Z2110 level: Z2110/CTS7822- A>T (1A); S17864- T>G (2T)

Z2108>Y14415 level: *no calls*

Z2108>Y14415>Y14420 level: *no calls*

Z2108>KMS67 level: *no calls*




MOK24A; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia; Maros_EBA; R1b1a2a2c1-Z2103>Z2106>Z2108>Z2110>CTS7556? (xCTS1450) (https://yfull.com/tree/R-CTS7556/)


Z2110 level: S17864+ T>G (1G)

Z2110>CTS7556 level: CTS7556+ C>T (1T); Y18960- C>T (2C)

Z2110>CTS7556>CTS1450 level: CTS1450- T>G (1T); Y5591/V3089- A>G (1A); Y5593- T>G (2T)





MOK29A and MOK32; 2100-1800 BC; Mokrin necropolis, Kikinda, Banat; Serbia; Maros_EBA; I2a1a-S21825>Y4213>pre-M838? (https://yfull.com/tree/I-Y4213/)



p.s
i got the last one:smile:
Sample MOK27 is R1b-M269>Z2103>Z2108>CTS7556+, and possibly R-CTS7556*