Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA.

real expert

Regular Member
Messages
821
Reaction score
526
Points
93
Reconstructing past human genetic variation with ancient DNA: case studies from ancient Egypt and medieval Europe.


Abstract

Recent advances in palaeogenomics have massively improved our knowledge of human history. An explosion in the number of sequenced ancient human genomes has allowed direct exploration of ancestry dispersion, and processes of assimilation of these ancestries (e.g., admixture, replacement). Despite this, some regions and periods remain under-studied. In this thesis, DNA is recovered from populations yet to be characterized in order to use genomics to answer archaeological and anthropological questions.
Despite the rapidly growing availability of ancient genomes from western Eurasia, the Picts of early medieval Scotland (ca. 300-900 CE) are under-represented among these genomes and remain poorly characterised. Chapter 2 describes the genetic relationship of the Picts with Iron Age, early medieval and present-day populations throughout Eurasia. Genome-wide data (0.1 – 16.5X coverage) were retrieved from four individuals representing two Pictish sites (5th-7th centuries CE), Balintore (Easter Ross, northern Pictland) and Lundin Links (Fife, southern Pictland), and mitochondrial genomes from seven individuals from a cemetery at Lundin Links. Using allele frequency-based methods (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm), their affinities to a reference panel of ancient and modern genomes were assessed. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroups were reconstructed to gain insight into social organisation at Lundin Links. Two Picts (BAL003 and LUN004) were genetically similar to north-western people dated from the Iron Age and early medieval period; the two remaining Picts (LUN001 and LUN003) showed admixture from a European source and a source related to present-day Native Americans, previously widely spread in eastern Eurasia, with uncertainties concerning the authenticity of this signal. At Lundin Links, the individuals did not share common maternal ancestors, consistent with high female exogamy at the site.
Chapter 3 assess the fine-scale relationship of the Picts with western Europeans dated from the Iron Age onward. A new combined set of imputed ancient European genomes (n = 285, coverage 0.7-16X), including re-imputed diploid genomes dated to the Iron Age through medieval periods from Britain, Iceland, Scandinavia and central Europe, were used to analyse the Pictish genomes with several haplotype-based methods (identity-by-descent, ChromoPainter and FineSTRUCTURE). These high-resolution techniques allow for a refined assessment of the biological relatedness of the Picts to populations of north-western Europe. Overall, the Picts showed a greater relative genetic affinity with Iron Age populations from the British Isles than with ancient Europeans. In addition, the Picts are genetically similar to present-day Welsh, Northern Irish and Scottish populations. The data presented here highlight the advantages of using high-quality DNA sequences, coupled with new haplotype-based analytic tools, to disentangle complex and recent demographic history between ancient populations.


Compared with Europe, palaeogenetics in Africa is poorly studied, in part because DNA degrades faster in tropical and dry environments. Chapter 4 aims to unveil population movements in Egypt and Sudan from the Neolithic onward. DNA was extracted from 94 samples from Armant (Egypt), Nuerat (Egypt) and Ghaba (Sudan) dated from the Early Neolithic to the historic period. Genome-wide data were successfully recovered from one sample from Nuerat sequenced to 0.22X coverage, dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability) - consistent with the 3rd-4th Dynasties of the Old Kingdom. Allele frequency-based analyses (PCA, ADMIXTURE, f-statistics, qpAdm) show a strong genetic affinity of this sample to Levantine Natufians. Compared with genomes dated from the end of the Dynastic period (Third Intermediate Period) and present-day Egyptians, the Nuerat sample did not carry the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer genetic component that started to spread across West Asia ~4,000 years ago and is widely spread in present-day populations. The presence of this component in Egypt is likely associated with admixture between local Egyptian populations and Bronze Age-related populations from West Asia. This admixture pattern might result from the dominance of Lower Egypt by Canaanite (Levantine) rulers during the Second Intermediate Period (ca. 1,650-1,550 BCE).
Even though optimised wet-laboratory techniques improved retrieval of aDNA, it is still a challenging technique, with a higher proportion of failure than success, especially for samples from tropical and sub-tropical regions. Alternative methods are required. Tooth crown and root traits, like those in the Arizona State University Dental Anthropology System (ASUDAS), are seemingly useful as genetic proxies. Chapter 5 investigates whether such traits can approximate genetic relatedness in the absence of aDNA, among continental and global samples. For 12 African and 32 global populations, Mantel correlations were calculated between the mean measure of divergence (MMD) distances from up to 36 ASUDAS traits, and FST distances from >350,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) among matched dental and genetic samples. A close ASUDAS/SNP association, based on MMD and FST correlations, is evident, with rm-values between 0.84 in Africa and 0.72 globally. Partial MMD/FST correlations controlling for geographic distances are strong for Africa (0.78) and moderate globally (0.4). Relative to prior studies, MMD/FST correlations imply greater dental and genetic correspondence. The implication is that ASUDAS traits can be used instead of genomic markers when the latter are unavailable.


http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/18979/

 
The data should be released in a few days. For some reason at some point between this post and now the paragraph about Egypt has been removed from the page. Maybe instead of the Hyksos bringing the CHG, they found evidence that suggested Sea Peoples settled and brought it? Unlikely but possible.
 
The data should be released in a few days. .....
Really? Many people gave up hope that the Egypt paper would ever be released. I'm looking forward to the DNA results, particularly those of King Tut and his family.
 
Really? Many people gave up hope that the Egypt paper would ever be released. I'm looking forward to the DNA results, particularly those of King Tut and his family.
It says restricted until February 2025, which is only a week away. Unless there is something I'm not seeing.
 
It says restricted until February 2025, which is only a week away. Unless there is something I'm not seeing.
This paper was released today. The ancient Egyptian sample from 2600 BC had mtdna I which is from 21k years ago from West Asia and and E1b y-DNA that is exclusively a North African marker. Genetically similar to Levantine Neolithic populations
 
So, NUE001 Old Kingdom Egyptian carries a Natufian lineage E-M34.

I know of E-M78 leaks, but it looks so far the only OK is Natufian derived.
 
So, NUE001 Old Kingdom Egyptian carries a Natufian lineage E-M34.

I know of E-M78 leaks, but it looks so far the only OK is Natufian derived.
Hawk: Yes, very Natufian From the paper in Morez (2025, page 210) reports "NUE001 shares the same main ancestry as present-day populations from the Arabian Peninsula as well as BedouinB, which ultimately derived from Levantine Epipaleolithic Natufians"

So peoples who had dreams of this sample looking like Vikings from the Northern Most regions of Europe on the one end or Nilo-Saharan or Niger-Congo Bantu Speakers from sub-Saharan Africa on the other end, the game is over.

Near Eastern/West Asian population autosomal wise and mtdna wise, North African Y-DNA paternal lineage.
 
e1b1b1b2 is e-z830 (not e-m34)
but given geography and all it is indeed likely this NUE001 individual is
under e-m34 or at least e-pf1962
the chances it is under e-v1515 ( which also downstream from e-z830 ) is low



from the paper:
“We present the first genome of an Old Kingdom individual from Nuerat, Egypt dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability), firmly placing this genome within the 3rd -4 th Dynasties.

4.3.3- Nuclear genome analysis
NUE001 is located close to present-day individuals living in the Arabian peninsula and northeast Africa.
NUE001 shows genetic affinities with both the Epipaleolithic and Neolithic groups from the Levant.
NUE001 shares the same main ancestry as present-day populations from the Arabian Peninsula as well as BedouinB, which ultimately derived from Levantine Epipaleolithic Natufians


4.4.1- Old Kingdom Egyptian affinities to Epipaleolithic Levantine populations
PCA, ADMIXTURE, outgroup-f3, and qpAdm to some extent, confirmed that NUE001 derived the majority of his ancestry from the ancestry present in the Natufians from the Levant, an Epipaleolithic group associated with the first agriculture practices.
Interestingly, although ADMIXTURE detects that NUE001 carried a subSaharan component (Fig 4.3), qpAdm contradicts the presence of this ancestry


NUE001 carried mtDNA haplogroup I, which originated 21,000 years ago in West Asia (Terreros et al., 2011; Fernandes et al., 2012; Olivieri et al., 2013). In present-day populations, this haplogroup is widely distributed but at low frequency. Haplogroup I was present but in low frequency (~5%) in ancient individuals from a study on pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman periods (Schuenemann et al., 2017). NUE001 carried the E1b1b1b2 Y-chromosome haplogroup which is descended from E1b1b1b and is exclusively North African, being associated with Berber and Western Desert Egyptian populations (Kujanová et al., 2009). Of two Third Intermediate Period individuals from Egypt, one carried a sub-haplogroup E1b1b1 (Schuenemann et al., 2017). Meta-haplogroup E1b and E1b1b and sister haplogroup E1b1b1a were common in Palaeolithic and Early Neolithic individuals from Morocco (Fregel et al., 2018; Loosdrecht et al., 2018). Three Y-chromosomes from individuals associated with the ancient Guanches from the Canary islands and with strong genetic affinity with modern Berber populations carried exclusively the haplogroup E1b1b1b1a1 (Rodríguez-Varela et al., 2017), a sister haplogroup of E1b1b1b2 carried by NUE001.



1738505521270.png

1738505583203.png



1738505553710.png



p.s
surprising to me that the ancient Egyptians(this NUE001 individual is damn old) were closer to modern day Arabians autosomaly speaking
 
Last edited:
e1b1b1b2 is e-z830 (not e-m34)
but given geography and all it is indeed likely this NUE001 individual is
under e-m34 or at least e-pf1962
the chances it is under e-v1515 ( which also downstream from e-z830 ) is low



from the paper:
“We present the first genome of an Old Kingdom individual from Nuerat, Egypt dated to 2,868-2,492 cal BCE (95.4% probability), firmly placing this genome within the 3rd -4 th Dynasties.

4.3.3- Nuclear genome analysis
NUE001 is located close to present-day individuals living in the Arabian peninsula and northeast Africa.
NUE001 shows genetic affinities with both the Epipaleolithic and Neolithic groups from the Levant.
NUE001 shares the same main ancestry as present-day populations from the Arabian Peninsula as well as BedouinB, which ultimately derived from Levantine Epipaleolithic Natufians


4.4.1- Old Kingdom Egyptian affinities to Epipaleolithic Levantine populations
PCA, ADMIXTURE, outgroup-f3, and qpAdm to some extent, confirmed that NUE001 derived the majority of his ancestry from the ancestry present in the Natufians from the Levant, an Epipaleolithic group associated with the first agriculture practices.
Interestingly, although ADMIXTURE detects that NUE001 carried a subSaharan component (Fig 4.3), qpAdm contradicts the presence of this ancestry


NUE001 carried mtDNA haplogroup I, which originated 21,000 years ago in West Asia (Terreros et al., 2011; Fernandes et al., 2012; Olivieri et al., 2013). In present-day populations, this haplogroup is widely distributed but at low frequency. Haplogroup I was present but in low frequency (~5%) in ancient individuals from a study on pre-Ptolemaic, Ptolemaic and Roman periods (Schuenemann et al., 2017). NUE001 carried the E1b1b1b2 Y-chromosome haplogroup which is descended from E1b1b1b and is exclusively North African, being associated with Berber and Western Desert Egyptian populations (Kujanová et al., 2009). Of two Third Intermediate Period individuals from Egypt, one carried a sub-haplogroup E1b1b1 (Schuenemann et al., 2017). Meta-haplogroup E1b and E1b1b and sister haplogroup E1b1b1a were common in Palaeolithic and Early Neolithic individuals from Morocco (Fregel et al., 2018; Loosdrecht et al., 2018). Three Y-chromosomes from individuals associated with the ancient Guanches from the Canary islands and with strong genetic affinity with modern Berber populations carried exclusively the haplogroup E1b1b1b1a1 (Rodríguez-Varela et al., 2017), a sister haplogroup of E1b1b1b2 carried by NUE001.



View attachment 17676
View attachment 17678


View attachment 17677


p.s
surprising to me that the ancient Egyptians(this NUE001 individual is damn old) were closer to modern day Arabians autosomaly speaking
It is indeed quite surprising. However, we have to keep in mind that Arabs were not similar to ancient Egyptians in terms of culture, language, or ethnicity. Arabs are Semites, which means they are culturally, linguistically, and ethnically similar to Hebrews, Canaanites, and other groups.
 
I'm a bit confused, is the sample from Nuerat under E-M123/E-M34 or this new branch E-V1515? Or is it still assigned to E-Z830, and if so, is it E-Z830*, meaning negative for the downstream subclades?
 
I'm a bit confused, is the sample from Nuerat under E-M123/E-M34 or this new branch E-V1515? Or is it still assigned to E-Z830, and if so, is it E-Z830*, meaning negative for the downstream subclades?

it is assigned to e1b1b1b2 that's e-z830
but given the remain is from 2600 bc and the age of the e-z830 snp is much farther
back in time
it is not really a case of e-z830*( x v1515 , e-pf1962)
and for sure derived for one of the e-z830 downstream
i am guessing the sample NUE001 is in low quality that's why it was assigned only to the basic e-z830 level
 
I'm a bit late to this thread. What were the qpAdm results of NUE001? 90% Natufian 10% East African HG? I've heard NUE001 has been modeled with Levant_N but I don't know the admix results. Also is the genome of NUE001 available for download and where can it be found?
 
Qh777
It is restricted :(
Restricted to Repository staff only until 18 February 2026.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.
Download (19MB)

No the genome of NUE001 is not open for download
And i am afraid that like usually with ancient egyptians genomes it might take years
 
There is some new data from the Sahara I believe the genetic component is very unique and there is some discussion on how it relates to Iberomaurisian, East African DNA, and Natufians.

Could this affect the 90% Natufian 10% East African HG of the Ancient Egyptian samples? I mean Egypt is just as close to the Sahara as it is to the Levant and East Africa.
 
Qh777
It is restricted :(
Restricted to Repository staff only until 18 February 2026.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.
Download (19MB)

No the genome of NUE001 is not open for download
And i am afraid that like usually with ancient egyptians genomes it might take years
That's what I was afraid of. I checked ENA and other repositories but couldn’t find it. I also couldn’t locate Egyptian_Old_Kingdom_Period_Gizeh:I6409 or Egyptian_Old_Middle_Kingdom_Period_Dahshur:I10020.
I really don’t understand what the hold up is. I’d be interested in seeing a range of different model runs using various combinations.
 
There is some new data from the Sahara I believe the genetic component is very unique and there is some discussion on how it relates to Iberomaurisian, East African DNA, and Natufians.

Could this affect the 90% Natufian 10% East African HG of the Ancient Egyptian samples? I mean Egypt is just as close to the Sahara as it is to the Levant and East Africa.
Are you talking about ANA? As far as I know it's a theoretical ghost population that is a genetically distinct indigenous north African lineage that is theorized to have separated from other human groups 50,000 years ago. The Authors of the paper in 2018 called Pleistocene North African genomes link Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African human populations speculated it's existence due to the fact SSA couldn't fully explain the Iberomaurusians ancestry.

I find the subject of uncovering what these ghost populations are very fascinating. I've heard there are few interpretations on what ANA is:

1. It's an even earlier back to Africa migration involving Basal Eurasians
2. A 100% genetically distinct north African lineage separate from other groups ~50,000 years ago
3. A hybrid theory of the previous two. ANA being a mix of back migration of Basal Eurasians and an ancient indigenous north African lineage.
 
Last edited:
Are you talking about ANA? As far as I know it's a theoretical ghost population that is a genetically distinct indigenous north African lineage that is theorized to have separated from other human groups 50,000 years ago. The Authors of the paper in 2018 called Pleistocene North African genomes link Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African human populations speculated it's existence due to the fact SSA couldn't fully explain the Iberomaurusians ancestry.

I find the subject of uncovering what these ghost populations are very fascinating. I've heard there are few interpretations on what ANA is:

1. It's an even earlier back to Africa migration involving Basal Eurasians
2. A 100% genetically distinct north African lineage separate from other groups ~50,000 years ago
3. A hybrid theory of the previous two. ANA being a mix of back migration of Basal Eurasians and an ancient indigenous north African lineage.
I'm talking about the Takarkori Libya samples. Could they be the from the people who were the ancestors of the Nuerat people (The small part that is not from the Levant)?
 
I'm talking about the Takarkori Libya samples. Could they be the from the people who were the ancestors of the Nuerat people (The small part that is not from the Levant)?
The ~10% ancestry in the Old Kingdom Egyptian from Nuerat (NUE001) from what I understand is East African Hunter Gatherer which isn't fully SSA itself.
 
This is great video that covers the Morez et al. study
I think it deserves a lot more views

I recommend watching the whole video

At about 11:39 in the video she states from the paper that the Third Intermediate Period samples can be modeled as 80-90% NUE001 and the other 10-20% from other bronze age near east populations.
1744162986521.png
 
Ok, I just saw a post where the G25 coordinates came out for NUE001. Does that mean the genome is available for download, or did Davidski get special permission to access it?

All credit to Ajeje Brazorf


egyptian:NUE001_merged,0.011382,0.129988,-0.043746,-0.122095,0.008925,-0.05271,-0.029141,-0.006,0.078128,-0.005832,0.008607,-0.017984,0.044152,0,0.00665,0.009546,-0.00326,-0.007348,-0.010559,0.023761,0.002496,-0.002844,0.00986,0.012532,-0.003832

1744985717055.png


1744985615544.png


1744985671132.png


1744985788691.png
 
Back
Top