Mittnik & Krause. Genetic Analysis of the Dolní Věstonice Human Remains. In Dolní Věstonice II. Chronostratigraphy, Paleoethnology, Paleoanthropology. Dolní Věstonice Studies 21 (ed. Jiří Svoboda), Brno 2016 (original) (raw)
Related papers
American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 2006
We present a method to distinguish authentic ancient DNA from contaminating DNA in a human bone. This is achieved by taking account of the spatial distribution of the various sequence families within the bone and the extent of degradation of the template DNAs, as revealed by the error content of the sequences. To demonstrate the veracity of the method, we handled two ancient human tibiae in order to contaminate them with modern DNA, and then subjected segments of the bones to various decontaminating treatments, including removal of the outer 1–2 mm, before extracting DNA, cloning, and obtaining a total of 107 mitochondrial DNA sequences. Sequences resulting from the deliberate contamination were located exclusively in the outer 1–2 mm of the bones, and only one of these 27 sequences contained an error that could be ascribed to DNA degradation. A second, much smaller set of relatively error-free sequences, which we ascribe to contamination during excavation or curation, was also located exclusively in the outer 1–2 mm. In contrast, a family of 72 sequences, displaying extensive degradation products but identifiable as haplogroup U5a1a, was distributed throughout one of the bones and represents the authentic ancient DNA content of this specimen. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
DNA Analysis of Ancient Skeletal Remains
2010
Non-Governmental Organization Archaia (http://www.archaia.cz) carried out the rescue archaeological research at Kněževes near Prague in 1998. Most of dating objects in Kněževes come from the period of Late and Final Bronze Age. The approximately 3,000 years old set, which included 11 human remains from three settlement features, was collected for the study. First, gender was determined according to anthropological characteristics. Ancient DNA from bones was extracted by the phenol-chloroform procedure and N-phenacetylthiazolum bromide reagent. Polymerase chain reaction amplification of AMEL XY, part of amelogenin gene, with subsequent polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and Short Tandem Repeats analysis followed. DNA profiles of skeletal remains were obtained by the fragmentation analysis of autosomal short tandem repeat markers. Genetic profiles showed us whether individuals from Kněževes were in mutual relationship (parent-descendant). The congruence of results in sex determination supported reliability of genetic methods, which are suitable for sex determination of fragmental and subadult skeletal remains.
Nondestructive sampling of human skeletal remains yields ancient nuclear and mitochondrial DNA
American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 2012
Museum curators and living communities are sometimes reluctant to permit ancient DNA (aDNA) studies of human skeletal remains because the extraction of aDNA usually requires the destruction of at least some skeletal material. Whether these views stem from a desire to conserve precious materials or an objection to destroying ancestral remains, they limit the potential of aDNA research. To help address concerns about destructive analysis and to minimize damage to valuable specimens, we describe a nondestructive method for extracting DNA from ancient human remains. This method can be used with both teeth and bone, but it preserves the structural integrity of teeth much more effectively than that of bone. Using this method, we demonstrate that it is possible to extract both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA from human in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).
Methodological strategies to assess the degree of bone preservation for ancient DNA studies
Background: Archaeological bones contain only small amounts of DNA due to post-mortem DNA degradation and the changes endogenous DNA is subjected to during diagenesis. An important step before undertaking such time-consuming and costly analyses as ancient DNA investigation is to predict the presence of DNA in ancient samples. To date, the leading screening method has been amino acid racemization; however, other analytical techniques can also be used to assess the degree of bone preservation. Aim: The aim of the present study was to relate the presence of DNA with bone preservation in order to select samples potentially suitable for ancient DNA analysis. Subjects and methods: Bones collected from several archaeological sites, different locations (cave, rockshelter or sub divo) and diachronic periods were selected for analytical and spectroscopic analysis in order to correlate bone tissue preservation with the presence of DNA. Different techniques were combined to assess the degree of preservation of organic and inorganic components. Results: As determined by different analytical methods, preservation of the inorganic component was best associated with the presence of DNA. Conclusion: Evaluation of the bone preservation state may be an efficient step to predict the presence of DNA in ancient samples prior to aDNA analysis.
Monitoring DNA Contamination in Handled vs. Directly Excavated Ancient Human Skeletal Remains
PLoS ONE, 2013
Bones, teeth and hair are often the only physical evidence of human or animal presence at an archaeological site; they are also the most widely used sources of samples for ancient DNA (aDNA) analysis. Unfortunately, the DNA extracted from ancient samples, already scarce and highly degraded, is widely susceptible to exogenous contaminations that can affect the reliability of aDNA studies. We evaluated the molecular effects of sample handling on five human skeletons freshly excavated from a cemetery dated between the 11 to the 14 th century. We collected specimens from several skeletal areas (teeth, ribs, femurs and ulnas) from each individual burial. We then divided the samples into two different sets: one labeled as ''virgin samples'' (i.e. samples that were taken by archaeologists under contamination-controlled conditions and then immediately sent to the laboratory for genetic analyses), and the second called ''lab samples''(i.e. samples that were handled without any particular precautions and subject to normal washing, handling and measuring procedures in the osteological lab). Our results show that genetic profiles from ''lab samples'' are incomplete or ambiguous in the different skeletal areas while a different outcome is observed in the ''virgin samples'' set. Generally, all specimens from different skeletal areas in the exception of teeth present incongruent results between ''lab'' and ''virgin'' samples. Therefore teeth are less prone to contamination than the other skeletal areas we analyzed and may be considered a material of choice for classical aDNA studies. In addition, we showed that bones can also be a good candidate for human aDNA analysis if they come directly from the excavation site and are accompanied by a clear taphonomic history.