scholarly journals Ancient genomes indicate population replacement in Early Neolithic Britain

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 765-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Selina Brace ◽  
Yoan Diekmann ◽  
Thomas J. Booth ◽  
Lucy van Dorp ◽  
Zuzana Faltyskova ◽  
...  
2003 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 115-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihael Budja

Paper discusses Early Neolithic seals, contracts and tokens in the context of Neolithization processes in southeastern Europe. Paper analyses the assemblages, contexts and the patterns of regional and interregional distributions. The results contradict traditional models as the objects appearance and distributions can no longer support the models of colonization, demic diffusion and population replacement in the context of the transition to farming in the Balkans. The paper argues they were well embeddedin the Early Neolithic Balkans koine, where the transformation of hunter- gathering into farming societies took place in an arena of selective integration of the new technologies and social practices as much as the result of intensive connections and exchange networks.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura R. Botigué ◽  
Shiya Song ◽  
Amelie Scheu ◽  
Shyamalika Gopalan ◽  
Amanda L. Pendleton ◽  
...  

AbstractEurope has played a major role in dog evolution, harbouring the oldest uncontested Paleolithic remains and having been the centre of modern dog breed creation. We sequenced the whole genomes of an Early and End Neolithic dog from Germany, including a sample associated with one of Europe’s earliest farming communities. Both dogs demonstrate continuity with each other and predominantly share ancestry with modern European dogs, contradicting a previously suggested Late Neolithic population replacement. Furthermore, we find no genetic evidence to support the recent hypothesis proposing dual origins of dog domestication. By calibrating the mutation rate using our oldest dog, we narrow the timing of dog domestication to 20,000-40,000 years ago. Interestingly, we do not observe the extreme copy number expansion of the AMY2B gene that is characteristic of modern dogs and has previously been proposed as an adaptation to a starch-rich diet driven by the widespread adoption of agriculture in the Neolithic.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 986-987 ◽  
Author(s):  
Selina Brace ◽  
Yoan Diekmann ◽  
Thomas J. Booth ◽  
Lucy van Dorp ◽  
Zuzana Faltyskova ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Selina Brace ◽  
Yoan Diekmann ◽  
Thomas J. Booth ◽  
Zuzana Faltyskova ◽  
Nadin Rohland ◽  
...  

The roles of migration, admixture and acculturation in the European transition to farming have been debated for over 100 years. Genome-wide ancient DNA studies indicate predominantly Anatolian ancestry for continental Neolithic farmers, but also variable admixture with local Mesolithic hunter-gatherers1–9. Neolithic cultures first appear in Britain c. 6000 years ago (kBP), a millennium after they appear in adjacent areas of northwestern continental Europe. However, the pattern and process of the British Neolithic transition remains unclear10–15. We assembled genome-wide data from six Mesolithic and 67 Neolithic individuals found in Britain, dating from 10.5-4.5 kBP, a dataset that includes 22 newly reported individuals and the first genomic data from British Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. Our analyses reveals persistent genetic affinities between Mesolithic British and Western European hunter-gatherers over a period spanning Britain’s separation from continental Europe. We find overwhelming support for agriculture being introduced by incoming continental farmers, with small and geographically structured levels of additional hunter-gatherer introgression. We find genetic affinity between British and Iberian Neolithic populations indicating that British Neolithic people derived much of their ancestry from Anatolian farmers who originally followed the Mediterranean route of dispersal and likely entered Britain from northwestern mainland Europe.


2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
David MacInnes

The nature of social organization during the Orcadian Neolithic has been the subject of discussion for several decades with much of the debate focused on answering an insightful question posed by Colin Renfrew in 1979. He asked, how was society organised to construct the larger, innovative monuments of the Orcadian Late Neolithic that were centralised in the western Mainland? There are many possible answers to the question but little evidence pointing to a probable solution, so the discussion has continued for many years. This paper takes a new approach by asking a different question: what can be learned about Orcadian Neolithic social organization from the quantitative and qualitative evidence accumulating from excavated domestic structures and settlements?In an attempt to answer this question, quantitative and qualitative data about domestic structures and about settlements was collected from published reports on 15 Orcadian Neolithic excavated sites. The published data is less extensive than hoped but is sufficient to support a provisional answer: a social hierarchy probably did not develop in the Early Neolithic but almost certainly did in the Late Neolithic, for which the data is more comprehensive.While this is only one approach of several possible ways to consider the question, it is by exploring different methods of analysis and comparing them that an understanding of the Orcadian Neolithic can move forward.


1996 ◽  
Vol 35 (4I) ◽  
pp. 385-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Caldwell

The significance of the Asian fertility transition can hardly be overestimated. The relatively sanguine view of population growth expressed at the 1994 International Conference for Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo was possible only because of the demographic events in Asia over the last 30 years. In 1965 Asian women were still bearing about six children. Even at current rates, today’s young women will give birth to half as many. This measure, namely the average number of live births over a reproductive lifetime, is called the total fertility rate. It has to be above 2— considerably above if mortality is still high—to achieve long-term population replacement. By 1995 East Asia, taken as a whole, exhibited a total fertility rate of 1.9. Elsewhere, Singapore was below long-term replacement, Thailand had just achieved it, and Sri Lanka was only a little above. The role of Asia in the global fertility transition is shown by estimates I made a few years ago for a World Bank Planning Meeting covering the first quarter of a century of the Asian transition [Caldwell (1993), p. 300]. Between 1965 and 1988 the world’s annual birth rate fell by 22 percent. In 1988 there would have been 40 million more births if there had been no decline from 1965 fertility levels. Of that total decline in the world’s births, almost 80 percent had been contributed by Asia, compared with only 10 percent by Latin America, nothing by Africa, and, unexpectedly, 10 percent by the high-income countries of the West. Indeed, 60 percent of the decline was produced by two countries, China and India, even though they constitute only 38 percent of the world’s population. They accounted, between them, for over threequarters of Asia’s fall in births.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document