New EBA paper:
Tracing social mechanisms and interregional connections in Early Bronze Age Societies in Lower Austria
In this study, we present the results of archaeogenetic investigations of Early Bronze Age
individuals from Lower Austria, specifically associated with the Únětice and Unterwölbling
cultural groups. Through analysing newly generated genome-wide data of 138 individuals, we
explore the social structure and genetic relationships within and between these communities.
Our results reveal a predominantly patrilocal society with non-strict female exogamic
practices. Additionally, Identity-by-Descent (IBD) analysis detects long-distance genetic
connections, emphasizing the complex network of interactions in Central Europe during this
period. Despite shared social dynamics, notable genetic distinctions emerge between the
Únětice and Unterwölbling groups. These insights contribute to our understanding of Bronze
Age population interconnections and call for a nuanced interpretation of social dynamics in
this historical context.
DewslothGlancing through the supplement [ISOGG alone will make you go blind]:
ULK012_ss.A0201 R1b1a2a1a2b1 HV+16311
ZWD002.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2b1 K1a4b
ZWD001.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2b1 K1a4b
SLB045_ss.A0201 R1b1a2a1a2b1 U5a1b
UZH010.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2b T2
FZH003.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2b H2a
DSH027.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 J2b1a1
PEB017_ss.A0201 R1b1a2a1a2 T2c1d1
ULK011_ss.A0201 R1b1a2a1a2 HV+16311
DSH006.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 X2d
UZH004.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 I2'3
DSH012.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 U5b2b4
PEB004.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 H1e
PEB012.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 NA
PEB019.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 H1m
UZH026.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a2 H2a2a
FZH001.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a T2e
UZH030.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2a1a K1a1a
DSH028.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2 H3ap
SLB003.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2 H2a
UZH011.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a2 J1c3g
DSH017.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2c1b2a1a H1b
DSH008.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1a1a1a1c1 T2a1b1a1
DSH025.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2c1a1a1a1a1a1a2 K1a+195
DSH023.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1 T2a1b1a1
DSH026.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1 U5a2b1a
SLB002.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1 T2b
SLB026.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1 U5a1
UZH012.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1 R1a1a
UZH029.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1 NA
UZH028.A0101.TF1.1 R1b1a1b1a1a2a1a1 I4a
DSH020.A0101.TF1.1 I2c T1a1
UZH044.A0101.TF1.1 I2a2a2a1a HV16
UZH046.A0101.TF1.1 I2a1a1a1a1a1a1c2a H
DSH013.A0101.TF1.1 G2a2b2a1a1b1a1b2b1 U5b2b4
FZH002.A0101.TF1.1 G2a2b2a1a1b1a1a1a1b4b1 R1b
SLB016.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b2a4 U5a2b
SLB028.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b1b H2a1
SLB035.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b1a3a2b2b I4a1
SLB024.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b1a2b3a4a2b K1a1
SLB010.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b1a2b3a1c2b H1+152
SLB022_ss.A0201 R1a1a1b1a2b U5b2b*
DSH014.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b1 X2b'd
SLB041.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a1b1 NA
DSH015.A0101.TF1.1 R1a1a X2d
SLB017_ss.A0201 R1a U5a2b
From the paper:
The genetic analysis indicates genetic differences between individuals from the areas north
and south of the Danube. These differences are evident through the mean values observed
on the second principal component (PC2) of the previously described PCA (Fig 1B and Fig 2A),
as well as in the relative proportions of ancestry components modeled with qpAdm (Fig. 2B,
SI table 3). Specifically, the individuals which inhabited the area south of the Danube (carrier
of Unterwölbling culture) from Pottenbrunn and Franzhausen I exhibit a higher relative
amount of Early Farmer ancestry in comparison to their Steppe-related ancestry. Conversely,
the Únětice individuals individuals north of the Danube display the opposite pattern, with a
greater proportion of Steppe-related ancestry relative to Early Farmer ancestry resulting in a
ratio of Yamnaya Samara to Anatolia Neolithic of 1.91 for the Únětice and 0.89 for the
Unterwölbling samples. These contrasting genetic profiles indicate significant genetic
differences between the two populations, emphasizing the distinct ancestral contributions
and genetic dynamics that influenced them. Analysis of runs of homozygosity (ROH, SI Note 3)
indicates that both groups had a large and outbreeding population (as seen from SI Fig. 2) with
no indication of unions between consanguineous parents.
What makes this paper, among many other things, so important, is that it provides yet another evidence for two known facts:
- physical anthropology can predict genetic patterns
- cultural complexes, archaeological patterns and groups can predict genetic patterns
- the ethnocultural formations which can derived from all these data points can predict the expansion and replacement events for patrilineages (= yDNA haplogroups)
Because both factor (physical anthropology and archaeological research) provided us with sufficient information to assume that there was a very significant difference between the Bell Beaker derived Unterwölbling group vs. the expansive Unetice culture, which was more mixed but still dominated very much by Epi-Corded and Northern Carpathian influences.
This is absolutely evident now by having such sites like
Schleinbach which brought us an R1a clan deep in former Bell Beaker territory. The same pattern repeated itself with the later expansion of a later group from the same kind of Epi-Corded background, namely the Nitra and Füzesabony-Otomani group, which too brought this kind of ancestry into other territories in the following periods.
What we also see is that a river, the Danube, served pretty much as a border for the two groups in that period. WIth Schleinbach, the site with so many R1a newcomers from the Unetice core, being North of the Danube - in clearly Unetice dominated territory, as it was recognised by archaeological finds.
Overall a great contribution to the EBA archaeogenetic research and probably others can read more out of it. I just took a first look at it. In any case, another piece of evidence that the archaeological context and group matter sometimes more than geography.
www.biorxiv.org
