Research Article

Stable population structure in Europe since the Iron Age, despite high mobility

Biomedical Informatics Program, Stanford University, United States
Department of Genetics, Stanford University, United States
Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, United States
Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Austria
Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Austria
Stanford Archaeology Center, Stanford University, United States
University of Chicago, Department of Human Genetics, United States
Department of History and Art History, Utrecht University, Netherlands
CIAS, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Portugal
Dipartimento di Storia Antropologia Religioni Arte Spettacolo, Sapienza University, Italy
Archaeological Museum Zadar, Croatia
LBEIG, Population Genetics & Conservation Unit, Department of Cellular and Molecular Biology – Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene, Algeria
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Armenia
French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP)/CAGT UMR 5288, France
Centre for Applied Bioanthropology, Institute for Anthropological Research, Croatia
Université Gustave Eiffel – Laboratoire ACP, France
Palisada Ltd, Croatia
Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali, Archeologia, Storia dell'arte, del Cinema e della Musica, Università di Padova, Italy
Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Poland
Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, Centre Camille Jullian, France
Kaducej Ltd, Croatia
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Bioarchaeology Service, Museum of Civilizations, Italy
Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Tarquinia, Direzione Regionale Musei Lazio, Italy
Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, Croatia
Institute of Archaeology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovakia
Département des Monuments et des Sites Antiques - Institut National du Patrimoine INP, Tunisia
University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department for Archaeology, Slovenia
Soprintendenza Archeologia, belle arti e paesaggio per le province di Sassari e Nuoro, Italy
Department of Oriental Studies, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Serbia
Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Vilnius University, Lithuania
Institute of Archaeology, Croatia
Université de Lorraine, Centre de Recherche Universitaire Lorrain d' Histoire (CRULH), France
Department of Archaeologi, Shirak Centere of Armenological Studies, National Academy of Sciences Republic of Armenia, Armenia
Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, Armenia
Musée Archéologique de l'Oise, France
Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
UMR 7041 ArScAn / French Institute of the Near East, Lebanon
Archaeology Division, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Croatia
CEF - University of Coimbra, Portugal
UNIARQ - University of Lisbon, Portugal
Skupina STIK Zavod za preučevanje povezovalnih področij preteklosti in sedanjosti, Slovenia
Cardiolo-Oncology Research Collaborative Group (CORCG), Faculty of Medicine, Benyoucef Benkhedda University, Algeria
Molecular Pathology, University Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, France
French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP), France
Museum of Croatian Archaeological Monuments, Croatia
L’Institut français du Proche-Orient, Lebanon
Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences, Centre of Interdisciplinary Archaeological Research, Poland
Department of Odontostomatological and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
Austrian Archaeological Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Austria
Institute of Prehistory and Early History, University of Vienna, Austria
Thuringia State Service for Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Weimar, Germany
Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University Medical Centre, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Germany
Mississippi State University, United States
University of Nevada, United States
Trogir Town Museum, Croatia
Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, France
Faculty of Archaeology, University of Warsaw, Poland
Dipartimento Asia, Africa e Mediterraneo, Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale”, Italy
Museum of Vojvodina, Serbia
Department of Anthropology, Natural History Museum Vienna, Austria
Chair and Department of Normal Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Pomeranian Medical University, Poland
Musée de La Cour d'Or, Eurométropole de Metz, France
Department of Archeology, Center for Conservation and Archeology of Montenegro, Montenegro
Insitut d’Archeologie, University Algiers 2, Algeria
Université de Franche Comté / UMR Chrono-Environnement, France
Anthropological Centre, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Croatia
Department of Anthropology, New York University, United States
Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, United States
Department of Biology, Stanford University, United States

Jan 30, 2024

Open access
Copyright information

Abstract
Editor's evaluation
Introduction
Results
Discussion
Materials and methods
Appendix 1
Data availability
References
Article and author information
Metrics

Abstract

Ancient DNA research in the past decade has revealed that European population structure changed dramatically in the prehistoric period (14,000–3000 years before present, YBP), reflecting the widespread introduction of Neolithic farmer and Bronze Age Steppe ancestries. However, little is known about how population structure changed from the historical period onward (3000 YBP - present). To address this, we collected whole genomes from 204 individuals from Europe and the Mediterranean, many of which are the first historical period genomes from their region (e.g. Armenia and France). We found that most regions show remarkable inter-individual heterogeneity. At least 7% of historical individuals carry ancestry uncommon in the region where they were sampled, some indicating cross-Mediterranean contacts. Despite this high level of mobility, overall population structure across western Eurasia is relatively stable through the historical period up to the present, mirroring geography. We show that, under standard population genetics models with local panmixia, the observed level of dispersal would lead to a collapse of population structure. Persistent population structure thus suggests a lower effective migration rate than indicated by the observed dispersal. We hypothesize that this phenomenon can be explained by extensive transient dispersal arising from drastically improved transportation networks and the Roman Empire’s mobilization of people for trade, labor, and military. This work highlights the utility of ancient DNA in elucidating finer scale human population dynamics in recent history.

Editor's evaluation

This important study provides an impressive dataset containing more than 200 novel ancient human genome sequences and a creative, robust, novel approach for studying human migration across time. The authors' conclusions are well supported by the data, and the methods used are convincing and solid. This paper will be of great interest to population geneticists and other scholars in the field of paleogenomics.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79714.sa0

Introduction

Ancient DNA (aDNA) sequencing has provided immense insight into previously unanswered questions about human population history. Initially, sequencing efforts were focused on identifying the main ancestry groups and transitions during prehistoric times, for which there is no written record. Recently, aDNA sampling has expanded to more recent times, allowing the study of movements of people using genetic data alongside the well-studied historical record. However, we lack a comprehensive assessment of historical genetic structure, including characterizing genetic heterogeneity and interactions across regions. Integrating historical period genetics will be instrumental to better understanding the development of European and Mediterranean population structure from prehistoric to present-day.

Prehistoric ancient genomes have allowed disentangling the movements of people and technologies across two major demographic transitions in prehistoric western Eurasia: first the farming transition ~7500 BCE (Lazaridis et al., 2014; Skoglund et al., 2012), and later the Bronze Age Steppe migrations ~3500 BCE (Haak et al., 2015). Over the course of generations, genetically differentiated peoples across western Eurasia came together and admixed. As a result, most present-day European genomes can be modeled as a three-way mixture of these prehistoric groups: Western Hunter-Gatherers, Neolithic farmers, and Bronze Age Herders from the Steppe (Haak et al., 2015; Lazaridis et al., 2014) with minor contributions from other groups (Antonio et al., 2019; Fernandes et al., 2020; Lazaridis et al., 2016; Morrison et al., 2020; Mathieson et al., 2018). These ancestry components are present at different proportions across western Eurasia, leading to a pattern where the genetic structure of Europe mirrors its geography (Novembre et al., 2008).

Given that the major ancestry components of present-day west Eurasians were largely established by the end of the Bronze Age, it is unclear how and what types of demographic processes impacted the genetic make-up of western Eurasia over the last ~3000 years, from the end of the Bronze Age to present-day. Recent studies of historical period genomes from individual regions shed light on this question; they paint a picture of heterogeneity and mobility, rather than of stable population structure. In the city of Rome alone, the population was dynamic and harbored a large diversity of ancestries from across Europe and the Mediterranean from the Iron Age (~1000 BCE) through the Imperial Roman period (27 BCE-300 CE; Antonio et al., 2019). Historical genomes from the Iberian Peninsula also highlight gene flow from across the Mediterranean (Olalde et al., 2019).

These regional reports fit well with archaeological and historical records. By the Iron Age, sea travel was already common, enabling peoples from across the Mediterranean to come into contact for trade (Abulafia, 2011; Broodbank, 2013). Subsequently, the Roman Empire leveraged its organization, labor force, and military prowess to build upon existing waterways and roads throughout Europe and create a united Mediterranean for the only time in history (Beard, 2015; Harper, 2017; Symonds, 2017). Not only did the Empire provide a means for movement, it also provided a reason for individuals to move. Empire building activities, broadly categorized into military, labor, and trade, pulled in people and resources from inside and outside the Empire (Scheidel, 2019).

We sequenced 204 new historical period genomes from across Europe and the Mediterranean to more comprehensively investigate the Roman Empire’s impact on the genetic landscape suggested by these regional reports of heterogeneous, mobile populations. By analyzing genetic similarities between individuals across historical Eurasia, we were able to quantify individual movements during this time. Based on population genetic simulations, we explore potential explanations of how population structure may be maintained in the face of frequent individual dispersal.

Results

204 new historical genomes from Europe and the Mediterranean

We collected whole genomes from 204 individuals across 53 archaeological sites in 18 countries spanning Europe and the Mediterranean (Figure 1—figure supplement 1), 26 of these individuals were recently reported (Moots et al., 2022). This collection includes the first historical genomes (Iron Age and later, i.e. after 1000 BCE) from present-day Armenia, Algeria, Austria, and France. Dates for 126 samples were directly determined through radiocarbon dating, and were used alongside archaeological contexts to infer dates for the remaining samples.

DNA was extracted from either the powdered cochlear portion of the petrous bone (n=203) or from teeth (n=1). Libraries were partially treated with uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG) and screened for ancient DNA damage patterns, high endogenous DNA content, and low contamination. We performed whole genome sequencing to a median depth of 0.92 x (0.16x to 2.38x).

For downstream integration with published data, pseudohaploid genotypes were called for the 1240 k SNP panel (Mathieson et al., 2015), resulting in a median of 685,058 SNPs (167,000–1,029,345) per sample. We analyzed newly reported genomes in conjunction with 2033 present-day genomes, 1998 prehistoric genomes, and 764 published historical period genomes (Clemente et al., 2021; Kovacevic et al., 2014, Mallick et al., 2023; Pagani et al., 2016; Saupe et al., 2021; Žegarac et al., 2021, primary AADR sources cited in Materials and methods). Genomes were grouped by regions and time periods (Figure 1) and analyzed using principal component analysis (PCA) and qpAdm modeling (Haak et al., 2015).

Figure 1 with 1 supplement see all

Download asset Open asset

Timeline of new and published genomes.

(A) 204 newly reported genomes (black circles) are shown alongside published genomes (gray circles), ordered by time and region (colored the same way as in B). (B) Sampling locations of newly reported (black) and published (gray) genomes are indicated by diamonds, sized according to the number of genomes at each location.

Local historical population structure varies across regions

To investigate historical population structure, we categorized the data into 14 geographical regions, split into three sub-periods of the historical period: Iron Age (1000–1 BCE), Imperial Rome & Late Antiquity (1–700 CE), and Medieval Ages & Early Modern (700–1950 CE). We then characterized inter-individual heterogeneity within these spatio-temporal groups by examining (1) variation of projections onto a PCA space of present-day genomes (Figure 2—figure supplement 1), (2) genetic groups identified by qpAdm and clustering across time within a region, and (3) admixture modeling of genetic groups.

A majority of regions have highly heterogeneous populations in at least one historical time period (Figure 2—figure supplement 2). This is illustrated by both the visual spread in PCA and the genetically distinct clusters of individuals based on pairwise modeling with qpAdm (Haak et al., 2015; Harney et al., 2021). On average, we identified 10 genetic clusters within each region present during the historical period, with a minimum of two and a maximum of 23. With genetically similar samples grouped together, we have more power relative to individual-level analyses when performing admixture modeling on clusters of interest using qpAdm.

Regional vignettes reveal various patterns of historical population structure. In Armenia, for example, the population is highly homogeneous at any given time (Figure 2). After the Copper Age, there are two distinct genetic clusters, separated by a temporal split around 772–403 BCE (Figure 2BC). The earlier cluster (C1) includes newly reported samples (n=5) from Beniamin and published ones (n=6) from five other sites. This cluster cannot be modeled by any single source of ancestry using existing data. The later cluster (C3), which contains newly reported samples (n=12) from Beniamin dating between 403 BCE-500 CE, is genetically similar to present-day Armenians (excluding two Kurdish individuals; Figure 2C). Despite the split, there is evidence of partial continuity between the earlier and later clusters: the later (C3) can be modeled using around 50% of the earlier cluster (C1) and an additional source of Steppe ancestry. Historical genomes from Northern Europe, particularly newly reported genomes from Lithuania and Poland, exhibit a similar level of homogeneity (Figure 2—figure supplement 2).

Figure 2 with 3 supplements see all

Download asset Open asset

Armenia: two homogeneous genetic clusters distinguished by a temporal shift.

(A) Sampling locations of ancient genomes (open circles) colored by their genetic cluster identified using qpAdm modeling. (B) Date ranges for the genomes: each line represents the 95% confidence interval for the radiocarbon date or the upper and lower limit of the inferred date, and the point represents the midpoint of that range. (C) Projections of the genomes onto a PCA of present-day genomes (gray points labeled by their population). Present-day genomes from Armenia are shown with dark gray open circles.

In contrast to the homogeneity of the Armenian population, most of the regions, including Italy, Southeastern Europe, and Western Europe, had strikingly heterogeneous populations. Newly collected samples reinforce previous findings of high heterogeneity in Rome, including a large portion of the population having affinities for present-day Near Eastern populations (Antonio et al., 2019; Posth et al., 2021; Figure 3—figure supplement 1). Interestingly, Southeastern European and Western European individuals during the Imperial Roman & Late Antiquity period also exhibit high heterogeneity, on par with that of contemporaneous Italy (Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 3 with 1 supplement see all

Download asset Open asset

Southeastern Europe: highly heterogeneous Imperial Roman and Late Antiquity period population.

(A) Sampling locations of genetic clusters are represented by a single point per location. Outlier ancestries are black stars, all others are open circles colored by genetic cluster. (B) Colored bars span the minimum and maximum of the date ranges of samples (95% confidence interval from radiocarbon dating or archaeological range). Points are the mean of an individual’s date range. (C) Projections of the ancient genomes onto a PCA of present-day genomes (gray points). Population labels for the PCA reference space are shown in Figure 2C. Present-day genomes from Southeastern Europe are shown with dark gray open circles.

Figure 4

Download asset Open asset

Western Europe: heterogeneous Imperial Roman and Late Antiquity period population.

(A) Sampling locations of genetic clusters are represented by a single point per location. Outlier ancestries are black stars, all others are open circles colored by genetic cluster. (B) Colored bars span the minimum and maximum of the date ranges of samples (95% confidence interval from radiocarbon dating or archaeological range). Points are the mean of an individual’s date range. (C) Projections of the ancient genomes onto a PCA of present-day genomes (gray points). Population labels for the PCA reference space are shown in Figure 2C. Present-day genomes from Southeastern Europe are shown with dark gray open circles.

Furthermore, these ancestries are often shared across regions. In Southeastern Europe, a core group of individuals have ancestry similar to that of present-day and contemporaneous Central Europeans (C6), while other clusters have ancestry similar to that of Northern Europeans (C7) and Eastern Mediterraneans (C8) (Figure 3C). These ancestry groups are found in contemporaneous Italy and Western Europe as well (Figure 4C, Figure 3—figure supplement 1). We also observe individuals of eastern nomadic ancestry, similar to that of Sarmatian individuals previously reported, in both Western Europe (C8, n=2) and Southeastern Europe (C2, n=2).

Overall, we see remarkable local genetic heterogeneity as well as cross-regional similarities which point to common ancestry sources and, on a broader scale, demographic events affecting different regions in similar ways.

At least 7-11% of historical individuals are ancestry outliers

The high regional genetic heterogeneity with long range, cross-regional similarities suggests historical populations were highly mobile. We therefore sought to quantify the amount of movement during the historical period by estimating the proportion of individuals who are ancestry outliers with respect to all individuals found in the same region. We considered an individual an outlier if they belonged to an ancestry cluster that is underrepresented (consisting of fewer than 5% of individuals in a region or at most two individuals) within their sampling region from the Bronze Age up to present-day. To focus on first-generation migrants as well as long-range movements, we further identified outlier individuals who can be modeled as 100% (i.e. ‘one-component model’) of a majority ancestry cluster found in a different region.

In total, we identified 11% of individuals as outliers, and could connect 7% of individuals to a putative source in a different region (Figure 5A). Based on the regions where these outliers and their sources originated, we created a network to illustrate their movements (Figure 5B). This network reveals the interconnectedness of Europe and the Mediterranean during the historical period. For example, as discussed above, the Armenian population is quite homogeneous (Figure 2). Unsurprisingly, no outliers were found within Armenia; however, we found outlier individuals in the Levant and Italy who can be putatively traced back to Armenia according to their ancestry (Figure 5C; blue outgoing arrows from Armenia). In contrast, the heterogeneous population in Italy connects it to many other regions, with bi-directional movement in most cases. In North Africa, outliers found in Iron Age Tunisia (Moots et al., 2022) indicate movements from many regions in Europe, and North African-like outliers were found in Italy and Austria (Western Europe). North African ancestry in Italy is supported by a single previously reported individual from the Imperial Roman period (R132; Antonio et al., 2019). Similar North African ancestry in Western Europe is supported by a single individual, R10667, from Wels, Austria, a site located on the frontier of the Roman Empire (C28 in Figure 4). This individual from Austria can be modeled using Canary Islander individuals from the Medieval Ages or an Iron Age outlier (distinguished by having more sub-Saharan ancestry) from Kerkouane, a Punic city near Carthage in modern-day Tunisia.

Figure 5 with 3 supplements see all

Download asset Open asset

Ancestry outliers and their potential sources.

(A) The proportions of outliers in each region were determined by individual pairwise qpAdm modeling followed by clustering. (B) Sources were inferred by one component qpAdm modeling of resulting clusters with all genetic clusters in the dataset. In the network visualizations, nodes are regions and directed edges are drawn from sources to outliers (i.e. potential migrants). The full network of source to outlier is shown. (C) Examples of individual regions are shown in greater detail.

The 7% estimate for outliers with source should be considered conservative for the proportion of ‘non-local’ individuals. There are several cases where a cluster comprises more than 5% of the individuals in the region, but are clearly of a different ancestry than the majority and seem to be transient (only found in a single sub-period of the historical period). For example, in Southeastern Europe (Figure 3B), Imperial Roman & Late Antiquity individuals in C8 are (1) of distant ancestry (Near Eastern) and (2) not found in previous or subsequent time periods. However, since there are five individuals in this cluster, it does not meet our strict criteria for outlier consideration. Additionally, many clusters of underrepresented ancestry cannot be modeled as one-component models because they are recently admixed (i.e. require two or more ancestry components) or of ancestry not sampled elsewhere. Thus, we expect the actual proportion of individuals involved in long distance movements to be higher than reported here.

Spatial population structure is relatively stable in the last 3,000 years

The remarkable amount of heterogeneity and mobility in the historical period leads to the question of what impact this might have had on population structure over time. To investigate this, we sought to quantify the overall change in population structure across time, from prehistoric to present-day. To assess the spatial structure of population differentiation, we calculated F_ST across groups of individuals on a sliding spatial grid in each time period and related it to their mean geographic distance. In each time period, we recovered the classical pattern of isolation-by-distance (Figure 6A), where individuals closer in geographic space are also more similar genetically. Across time periods, we see a large decrease in overall F_ST from the Mesolithic & Neolithic periods to the Bronze Age (approximately 10,000–2300 BCE), coinciding with the major prehistoric migrations (Haak et al., 2015; Lazaridis et al., 2014). From the Bronze Age onward, however, F_ST does not decrease further with time, indicating that the level of genetic differentiation across space is relatively stable from the Bronze Age to present-day.

Figure 6

Download asset Open asset

Relatively stable population structure from Bronze Age to present-day.

(A) Overall genetic differentiation between populations (measured by F_ST) and its relationship to geographical distance (spatial structure) is similar from Bronze Age onward. Confidence intervals were calculated through a bootstrap procedure, using 200 bootstrap replicates. (B) In PC space, each genome is represented by a point, colored based on their origin (for present-day individuals) or sampling location (for historical samples). The PC space is established by present-day samples (bottom), onto which either historical period (middle) or prehistoric genomes (top) were projected. For projections, the present-day samples are shown in gray, and their extent is visualized by a gray polygon.

To assess not only the amount, but also the structure of geographic population differentiation, we compared the ‘genetic maps’ of historical period and present-day genomes. To construct these ‘maps’, we performed principal component analysis on 829 present-day European and Mediterranean genomes sampled across geographical space (Figure 6B, bottom) and projected historical period genomes onto the same PC space. Echoing close correspondence between genetic structure and geographic space in present-day Europeans (Novembre et al., 2008), we recovered similar spatial structure for historical samples as well, although noisier due to a narrower sampling distribution and higher local genetic heterogeneity (Figure 6B, middle). The similarity in structure between present-day and historical period is especially striking in comparison to a projection of prehistoric genomes, which shows much weaker correspondence to the present-day PCA as well as to geographic space (Figure 6B, top). Together, our analyses indicate that European and Mediterranean population structure has been relatively stable over the last 3000 years.

This raises the question: is it surprising for stable population structure to be maintained in the presence of ~7–11% long-range migration? To address this, we simulated Wright-Fisher populations evolving neutrally in continuous space. In these simulations, spatial population structure is established through local mate choice and limited dispersal, which we calibrated to approximately match the spatial differentiation observed in historical-period Europe (Figure 6A, Figure 7A and Figure 7—figure supplement 1, maximum F_ST of ~0.03). We then allowed a proportion of the population to disperse longer distances, empirically matching the migration distances we observed in the data during the historical period (Figure 7—figure supplement 2). Even with long-range dispersal as low as 4%, we observe decreasing F_ST over 120 generations (~3000 years with a generation time of 25 years) as individuals become less differentiated genetically across space (Figure 7B). At 8%, F_ST decreases dramatically within 120 generations as spatial structure collapses to the point that it is hardly detectable in the first two principal components (Figure 7C). These simulations indicate that under a basic spatial population genetics model we would expect structure to collapse by present-day given the levels of movement we observe.

Figure 7 with 2 supplements see all

Download asset Open asset

Simulation of population structure with and without long-range dispersal.

(A) A base model of spatial structure is established by calibrating per-generation dispersal rate to generate a maximum F_ST of ~0.03 across the maximal spatial distance, and visualized using PCA. In addition to this base dispersal, either 4% (B) or 8% (C) of individuals disperse longer distances, and the effect is tracked by analyzing spatial F_ST through time, as well as PCA after 120 generations of long-range dispersal.

Discussion

In summary, we observed largely stable spatial population structure across western Eurasia and high mobility of people evidenced by local genetic heterogeneity and cross-regional connections. These two observations are seemingly incompatible with each other under standard population genetics assumptions.

A possible explanation for this apparent paradox is that our simulations did not capture some key features of human behavior and population dynamics. In the simulated populations, migration implies both movement and reproduction with local random mate choice. However, in real human populations migration can be more complex: people do not necessarily reproduce where they migrate, and reproduction is not necessarily random. We hypothesize that in the historical period there was an increasing decoupling of movement and reproduction, compared to prehistoric times. For the spread of Farmer and Steppe ancestry, we know that these prehistoric migrations would take hundreds of years to traverse the continent (Allentoft et al., 2015; Haak et al., 2015; Lazaridis et al., 2016). In contrast, in the historical period, there were dense travel networks of roads and waterways as well as clear incentives for cross-Mediterranean and cross-continental movement (Abulafia, 2011; Beard, 2015; Broodbank, 2013; Symonds, 2017). This enabled people to travel cross-continental distances on the order of weeks or months, well within their lifetimes (Figure 5—figure supplements 2 and 3; Scheidel, 2015).

The Roman Empire is particularly important in understanding how transient mobility could become a unique hallmark of this period. During the expansion of the Empire, existing and new cities quickly expanded as hubs for trade and labor. Urban-military complexes emerged along the frontier as military forces established themselves and drew in local communities which sought protection or economic benefit (Verhagen et al., 2019). To support these rapidly growing economic city-centers, human capital beyond the local population was necessary, thus drawing in people from far away places either freely or forcibly (e.g. slavery, military). According to a longstanding historical hypothesis, the Urban Graveyard Effect, the influx of migrants in city-centers disproportionately contributed to the death rate over the birth rate; a process which would contribute to observing individuals as ‘transient’ migrants (Tacoma, 2016). Long-range, transient migration, combined with the Roman Empire’s highly efficient travel networks (Scheidel et al., 2007; Oleson, 2009; Scheidel, 2015) may explain the genetically heterogeneous populations, especially along the frontier regions (e.g. Serbia, Croatia, and Austria).

With transient mobility as the main contributor to the observed heterogeneity, it remains unclear what additional demographic processes contributed to the maintenance of spatial genetic structure. The collapse of the Empire involved a loss of urban-military complexes and depopulation of cities, followed by ruralization (Burgess, 2007; Dey, 2015; Roymans et al., 2020). Without the Empire incentivising trade and movement, there may have been little motive for individuals to remain in these suddenly remote regions.

If this hypothesis is true, we would expect a reduction in local genetic heterogeneity after the collapse of the Empire. Unfortunately, we do not have this period sampled densely enough to assess this comprehensively. The lack of samples is further amplified by the fact that ancient DNA comes from archaeological excavations, which tend to be enriched in urban areas; a stone mausoleum in the city center, for example, will produce more surface scatter than a wood farmhouse, making urban areas more likely for excavation (Bowes, 2011). This makes it difficult to comprehensively address differences in rural versus urban demography. Collecting more genetic data from both urban and rural contexts across the historical period will be a valuable future step in understanding how spatial population structure was maintained. Furthermore, it could elucidate the role of other historical events and peoples, such as the Franks, Lombards, Visigoths, and Huns, during the Migration Period.

Based on genetic analyses and the rich historical record, we hypothesize that both the loss of transient migrants which contributed to population heterogeneity, as well as repopulation by less heterogeneous, but temporally stable, local populations could have helped maintain overall stability of genetic structure from the Iron Age to present-day. This work highlights the utility of ancient DNA in revealing complex population dynamics through direct genetic observations through time and the importance of integrating historical contexts to understand these complexities.

Materials and methods

Sample collection and archaeological sites

Request a detailed protocol

The archaeological context for ancient individuals reported in this study is detailed in Supplementary file 1. Site descriptions were written by the contributing archaeologists. Descriptions of individual-level burials are included where possible.

Sampling was performed to maximize coverage across Europe and the Mediterranean, as opposed to detailed site level sampling. We particularly focused on regions where there was no published genomic data for the Imperial Roman and Late Antiquity Period at the time of sampling (e.g. France, Austria, the Balkans, Armenia, and North Africa).

Although we aimed to collect samples in the Imperial Roman and Late Antiquity period (approximately 1 CE-700 CE), some samples fall outside of this period due to limited sample availability and/or lack of date specificity at the time of sampling (prior to radiocarbon dating).

Date determination for individuals and time periods

Request a detailed protocol

Determination of time periods and boundaries were influenced by (1) the wide geographic range represented in the newly reported and published data (including historical changes in those regions), (2) the amount of data available in the proposed time periods, (3) the amount of genetic change observed during a time interval, and (4) the types of temporal comparisons made in the analysis.

Mesolithic and Neolithic 10000 BCE - 3500 BCE
Copper Age 3500 BCE - 2300 BCE
Bronze Age 2300 BCE - 1000 BCE
Iron Age 1000 BCE - 1 CE
Imperial Rome & Late Antiquity 1 CE - 700 CE
Medieval Ages & Early Modern 700 CE - 1900 CE
Present-day 1900 CE - onward

Dates for newly reported study individuals were determined through a combination of radiocarbon dating and archaeologically inferred dates. Sample groups were created based on the finest grouping using a composite of criteria: site, projection in PCA, and archaeologically inferred date or period. We aimed to radiocarbon date at least one sample from each of these groups, summing to a total of 126 samples. For each sample, one gram of petrous bone was sent for radiocarbon dating by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) at the Keck Carbon Cycle AMS Facility at the University of California, Irvine. Resulting dates were calibrated using https://c14.arch.ox.ac.uk/oxcal.html.

For samples not directly dated, we assigned the range of directly dated samples within their sample group (n=49), or the archaeological date where the former was not available (n=29). Note that one individual (R3477, R3476) had two radiocarbon dates since two samples (a tooth and petrous) were dated and sequenced before they were determined to be from the same individual based on genetic information. Another individual (R9818, R9823) had two radiocarbon dates because both left and right petrosals were sampled, but the sequence data for one turned out to be contaminated. In both cases of identical samples the radiocarbon date ranges were almost entirely overlapping.

In the study we use a single date estimate (for both newly reported and published samples) which is the midpoint of the 95% confidence interval when using AMS dates, and the average of the lower and upper bound inference dates when using archaeological context for dating. The dating approach used for each sample is included in files Supplementary file 1 (archaeological context) and Supplementary file 2 (sample metadata). The full AMS and calibration results are reported in Supplementary file 3.

DNA extraction, library preparation, and sequencing

Request a detailed protocol

The 204 ancient genomes reported in this study, 26 of which were recently reported in Moots et al., 2022, represent a subset of samples screened from 53 archaeological sites across 18 countries. We isolated and finely ground the cochlear regions of the petrous bones in dedicated clean room facilities at the University of Vienna following the protocols described in Pinhasi et al., 2019; Pinhasi et al., 2015. Using 50 mg of bone powder, DNA was extracted by 18 hr incubation of the powder in a solution of Proteinase-K and EDTA. DNA was eluted in 50 μl 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.05% Tween-20, pH 8.0 as in Dabney et al., 2013; Rohland and Hofreiter, 2007. 12.5–25 µL of DNA extract was used to prepare partial uracil–DNA–glycosylase (UDG) double stranded libraries as described in Rohland et al., 2015. After a partial (30 minute) UDG treatment, library preparation followed a modified version of the Meyer and Kircher, 2010 protocol (Meyer and Kircher, 2010): the initial DNA fragmentation step was not required and MinElute PCR purification kits (Qiagen) were used for all library clean-up steps. Libraries were measured on a qPCR to determine the ideal cycle number to avoid over or under-amplification. 10-20 uL of library was then double indexed using Agilent PfuTurbo Cx HotStart DNA Polymerase with conditions: 95 °C for 5 min followed by the qPCR-determined cycles of 95 °C for 15 s, 60 °C for 30 s and 72 °C for 30 s with a final elongation at 72 °C for 5 min. After indexing, the libraries were purified using the MinElute system (Qiagen) and eluted in 25 μL of 1 mM EDTA, 0.05% Tween-20. Libraries were screened based on Qubit concentration and visual validation of Bioanalyzer peaks for an initial low coverage (NextSeq or Novaseq) screening run.

Processing sequence data and sample screening

Request a detailed protocol

Newly reported samples were initially sequenced to low coverage on MiSeq or NextSeq for screening. Following demultiplexing of the sequencing libraries, reads were trimmed, aligned, filtered for quality, and deduplicated. The following sequence data processing pipeline was applied to both screening and full sequencing runs for new data.

Adapters were removed from sequence reads using Cutadapt (v1.14) (Martin, 2011). Then, for each sample, reads were processed further (a) with the 2 base pairs at either end of the reads trimmed off and (b) without trimming. Since partial UDG treatment was performed on the libraries, a damage signature consisting of elevated C>T transitions on the 5’ end and G>A transitions on the 3’ end should remain at the ends of reads. Therefore, analyzing untrimmed, aligned reads would allow us to assess the amount of the ancient DNA damage signature present in a sample, and to use this as a criteria for authenticating that the sampled DNA is ancient. Other than the variable trimming parameter for the ends of the reads, all other parameters remained the same for both screening and high coverage sequencing data.

Following variable trimming, reads were filtered for minimum length of 30, then aligned to hg19 using bwa (0.7.15-r1140; Li and Durbin, 2009), with seed length disabled (-l 350). For each sample, aligned reads were sorted by coordinate using Picard’s SortSam (version 2.9.0–1-gf5b9f50-SNAPSHOT) and read groups were added using Picard’s AddOrReplaceReadGroups (version 2.9.0–1-gf5b9f50-SNAPSHOT) (http://broadinstitute.github.io/picard/). Reads with mapping quality <25 (including unaligned reads) were filtered out. For higher coverage sequencing runs, this process was parallelized by splitting raw fastq files and merging after alignment, sorting, and quality filtering. Duplicates were removed using samtools rmdup (http://www.htslib.org/doc/samtools.html). Genome-wide and chromosomal coverage were assessed using depth-cover (version 1.0.3, https://github.com/jalvz/depth-cover; Alvarez, 2017).

Samples were screened and selected using the following criteria: (1)>20% reads aligned to the hg19 build of the human genome; (2) a C>T mismatch rate at the 5’-end and G>A at the 3’-end of the sequencing read of 4% or above (characterized with mapDamage v2.0.8) (Jónsson et al., 2013); (3) library complexity estimates indicating that a minimum coverage of 0.5 x would be achievable with further sequencing, (4) with a contamination level ≤ 5%.

Contamination rates were estimated with three methods: (1) damage pattern and polymorphism in mitochondrial DNA with Schmutzi (Renaud et al., 2015), (2) atypical ratios of coverages of X and Y chromosomes to autosomes calculated with ANGSD (Korneliussen et al., 2014), and (3) for male samples, high heterozygosity on non-pseudo-autosomal region of the X chromosome (chrX:5000000–154900000 in hg19) with the ‘contamination’ tool in ANGSD (Korneliussen et al., 2014). If the contamination estimate for any of these three methods was above 5%, we considered the sample contaminated and excluded it from downstream analysis (n=9).

For passing samples, processed data from all sequencing runs were merged into a single BAM file. The 204 new samples that passed quality filters have a median genome-wide depth of 0.92 x (0.16x to 2.38x).

Calling pseudohaploid genotypes

Request a detailed protocol

Pseudohaploid genotypes for study samples were called by randomly choosing one allele from each site where there was read coverage, following the approach and software provided by Stephan Schiffels (https://github.com/stschiff/sequenceTools; Schiffels, 2022). Variants were called for the 1240 k SNP panel, which is commonly used for capture-based sequencing of ancient samples (Mathieson et al., 2015). For the newly reported samples, a median of 685,058 SNPs (167,000–1,029,345) were covered per sample. Data was output in eigenstrat format. This pipeline was also used to call genotypes for two published ancient DNA datasets which at the time were only available in BAM (sequence read) format (Clemente et al., 2021; Žegarac et al., 2021).

Combining new genotypes with ancient and present-day published data

Request a detailed protocol

Newly processed pseudohaploid data was merged with several datasets. Most of the published data was retrieved from the Allen Ancient Data Resource (AADR) v44.3 (January 2021) (Allen Ancient DNA Resource, 2021; Mallick et al., 2023): a compilation of pseudohaploid and diploid genotypes for 5,225 ancient and 3,720 present-day individuals (1000 Auton et al., 2015; Agranat-Tamir et al., 2020; Allentoft et al., 2015; Amorim et al., 2018; Antonio et al., 2019; Bergström et al., 2020; Biagini et al., 2019; Brace et al., 2019; Broushaki et al., 2016; Brunel et al., 2020; Cassidy et al., 2020; Cassidy et al., 2016; Damgaard et al., 2018; de Barros Damgaard et al., 2018; Ebenesersdóttir et al., 2018; Feldman et al., 2019a; Feldman et al., 2019b; Fernandes et al., 2020; Fernandes et al., 2018; Fregel et al., 2018; Fu et al., 2016; Furtwängler et al., 2020; Gamba et al., 2014; Gokhman et al., 2020; González-Fortes et al., 2019; González-Fortes et al., 2017; Günther et al., 2018; Günther et al., 2015; Haber et al., 2020; Haber et al., 2019; Haber et al., 2017; Harney et al., 2018; Broushaki et al., 2016; Järve et al., 2019; Jeong et al., 2019; Jones et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2015; Keller et al., 2012; Kılınç et al., 2016; Krzewińska et al., 2018b; Krzewińska et al., 2018a; Lamnidis et al., 2018; Lazaridis et al., 2017; Lazaridis et al., 2016; Lazaridis et al., 2014; Linderholm et al., 2020; Lipson et al., 2017; Mallick et al., 2016; Malmström et al., 2019; Morrison et al., 2020; Margaryan et al., 2020; Martiniano et al., 2017; Martiniano et al., 2016; Mathieson et al., 2018; Mathieson et al., 2015; Mittnik et al., 2019; Mittnik et al., 2018; Narasimhan et al., 2019; Nikitin et al., 2019; Olalde et al., 2019; Olalde et al., 2018; Olalde et al., 2015; Olalde et al., 2014; Omrak et al., 2016; O’Sullivan et al., 2018; Patterson et al., 2012; Prüfer et al., 2017; Rivollat et al., 2020; Rodríguez-Varela et al., 2017; Saag et al., 2019; Saag et al., 2017; Sánchez-Quinto et al., 2019; Schiffels et al., 2016; Schroeder et al., 2019; Schuenemann et al., 2017; Sikora et al., 2017; Skoglund et al., 2014; Skourtanioti et al., 2020; Unterländer et al., 2017; Valdiosera et al., 2018; van den Brink et al., 2017; Veeramah et al., 2018; Villalba-Mouco et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2019; Zalloua et al., 2018). We also included relevant genetic data made available by authors that were not in the AADR: present-day genomes from the Balkans (Kovacevic et al., 2014), present-day genomes from 4 Poles, 3 Germans, and 2 Moldavians (Pagani et al., 2016), and Bronze Age Italian genomes (Saupe et al., 2021). Pseudohaploid genotypes for published Bronze Age Aegean genomes (Clemente et al., 2021) and Bronze Age Serbian genomes (Žegarac et al., 2021) were generated from BAM files using our pipeline. All published genomes were filtered for contamination based on reported contamination levels in the original study and SNP coverage based on the genomic data. All published samples that contributed to this study are listed in Supplementary file 4. To ensure maximum overlap with present-day and ancient samples in analyses, the merged dataset was subset to SNPs in the Human Origin Panel array, resulting in a total of 481,259 SNPs. For PCA and qpAdm modeling, SNPs that are transitions at CpG sites (n=76,678) were excluded since they may have arisen from DNA damage as opposed to true genetic variation.

Principal component analysis (PCA)

Setting up the principal component analysis

Request a detailed protocol

Principal component analysis was performed on genotypes from present-day and Mediterranean individuals using smartpca v16000 (https://github.com/chrchang/eigensoft/blob/master/POPGEN/README; Chang, 2013). The following parameters were used: 5 outlier iterations (numoutlieriter), 10 principal components along which to remove outliers (numoutlierevec), altnormstyle set to NO, with least squares projection turned on (lsqproject set to YES). To calculate principal components only using present-day individuals, a file (poplistname) was provided with the population names of present-day individuals, randomly subsampled per population. After outlier removal (which removed 55 samples), 829 individuals and 480,712 SNPs were used in the initial analysis. All individuals (non ‘reference’ present-day genomes, and all of the ancient individuals) whose population was not listed in the poplistname file were projected onto the calculated principal components. In the paper, we refer to the individuals used in the calculation of principal components as belonging to the ‘reference PCA space’. These ‘reference’ genomes were used to calculate the PCs because (1) they represent a wide range of present-day variation and (2) the genotypes tend to be of high quality.

Visual representation of PCA

Request a detailed protocol

In the figures, present-day genomes used in the reference space are generally colored gray in order to illustrate the background space of genetic variation. To reduce visual clutter and emphasize the ancient genomes, these present-day ‘reference’ genomes are typically unlabeled. Labels for these populations are shown in Figure 2—figure supplement 1.

Calculation of F_ST

Request a detailed protocol

To assess the extent of genetic differentiation across geographic space within a time period, we calculated the Fixation index (F_ST) between groups of individuals on a sliding spatial grid. Each grid cell measured 10 degrees longitude by 10 degrees latitude, and was slid by 1 degree in both directions (north and east) nine times to build a total of 10 spatial grids. For each of these grids, pairwise F_ST was calculated between all populated 10-by-10 grid cells using Hudson’s estimator, correcting for unequal sample size (Bhatia et al., 2013). In addition to F_ST, we also calculated the average geographic distance (in kilometers) between all individuals across pairs of grid cells to assess how spatial distance relates to genetic differentiation. To visualize this relationship, we used lowess smoothing as implemented in python’s statsmodels package (statsmodels.api.nonparametric.lowess, v. 0.12.2). To infer confidence intervals for the lowess smoothing estimates, we devised a spatial bootstrapping procedure. Our bootstrap approach samples pairs of grid cells in a way that always samples all overlapping cells or none of them, so individuals are either fully included in a bootstrap replicate or not at all. This prevents double-counting individuals since they contribute to several comparisons across space due to the sliding grid.

Modeling ancestry and identifying outliers using qpAdm

We used the qpAdm tool of admixtools 2.0 to build a workflow that:

Identifies similar individuals within a region
Groups these into regional clusters
Compares these clusters both within and across regions

In this workflow, we heavily utilize what we call one-component models, where we test whether two individuals or clusters of individuals form a clade relative to a chosen set of reference populations (which we define below). To clarify what we mean by one-component model, assume that we have two focal individuals i1 and i2, as well as a set of reference populations. Using the terminology of admixtools 2 as well as (Harney et al., 2021), the following four tests are equivalent with respect to the resulting p-value:

qpWave(left = c(i1, i2), right = ref)
qpAdm(left = c(i1, i2), target = NULL, right = ref)
qpAdm(left = i1, target = i2, right = ref)
qpAdm(left = i2, target = i1, right = ref)

where we use the R-style notation of c(i1, i2) to denote a vector consisting of i1 and i2. In all four cases, we are testing against the null hypothesis that the two individuals do form a clade, with low p-values indicating a rejection of that hypothesis. We will call any implementation of this test a ‘one-component qpAdm model’, but the equivalence stated above shows that our one-component models are equivalent to what was called a ‘qpWave analysis’ by Fernandes et al., 2020.

For our reference populations, we chose a set similar to those previously used to model Eurasian historical genomes (Fernandes et al., 2020). However, we added two Asian populations (Laos_Hoabinhian and Onge) based on evidence of gene flow from further east in a subset of our data. The purpose of a set of reference populations in the qpAdm modeling setting is to represent components of ancestry which are differentially related to the focal individuals being tested (i.e. ‘left’, or ‘sources’ and ‘target’) in order to resolve differences in ancestry, but distally related enough to minimize the chance of recent gene flow between ‘left’ and ‘right’. Our final set of references is:

Mbuti.DG (n=4), WHG (n=8), Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG (n=1), CHG (n=2), EHG (n=3), Iran_GanjDareh_N (n=8), Israel_Natufian_published (n=3), Jordan_PPNB (n=6), Laos_Hoabinhian (n=1), Russia_EBA_Yamnaya_Samara (n=9), Onge (n=6), Spain_ElMiron (n=1), Turkey_N_published (n=8), Russia_MA1_HG (n=1), Morocco_Iberomaurusian (n=6), Czech_Vestonice16 (n=1).

Individual-based one-component models within regions

Request a detailed protocol

In the first step of our workflow, we perform one-component qpAdm tests between all pairs of individuals from the same region, from the Copper Age (inclusive) up to present-day (exclusive). As mentioned above, this approach tests against the null hypothesis that the two individuals do form a clade, with low p-values indicating a rejection of that hypothesis. Low qpAdm p-values thus suggest that the test individuals are not more closely related to each other than to one or more populations in the reference set. To convert the qpAdm p-value into a measure of dissimilarity (d), we calculate d = -log₁₀(p-value), where a large value of d indicates a low p-value, and thus a rejection of the null hypothesis of the two individuals forming a clade.

To cluster individuals into groups of genetically similar individuals, we performed hierarchical clustering on the dissimilarity matrix constructed from all pairwise values of d within a region. Hierarchical clustering was performed using the UPGMA algorithm as implemented in python’s scipy.cluster.hierarchy (v. 1.6.1). The hierarchical clustering was then split into flat clusters using a dissimilarity cutoff of 1.3, which corresponds to a nominal p-value cutoff of 0.05. Intermediate results from the pairwise analysis and clustering are shown for each region in Appendix 1.

Identifying ancestry outliers and their potential sources

Request a detailed protocol

Once clusters within regions were identified as described above, we classified them into two groups based on size. Clusters consisting of less than 5% of the total population or no more than two individuals in the region (across time) were classified as outlier candidates, whose ancestry is underrepresented in the region they were sampled. All other clusters were classified as majority clusters. Following this classification of clusters, we then split each cluster by time period (Copper Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Imperial Rome & Late Antiquity, Middle Ages and Early Modern), to end up with a region_period_cluster sub-classification. All downstream analyses were done using these region_period clusters.

For each cluster identified as an outlier candidate, we then tested all one-component models involving the candidate and a majority cluster within the same region. This was done to ensure that outlier candidates were truly distinct from majority ancestries identified in the region. If an outlier candidate could be connected to a majority cluster within its region through a valid one-component model (above a p-value threshold of 0.01), it was removed from the outlier candidate list, as it represented a majority ancestry within the region.

For all outlier candidates that remained, we aimed to identify potential source ancestries that were majority ancestries in other regions. To do so, we tested all one-component models for a given outlier candidate and each of the majority clusters across all other regions. A majority cluster from a different region that had a valid one-component model with an outlier candidate was considered a potential source. To find the most likely source(s), we then subjected these potential source populations to model competition.

Model competition involves re-testing the model fit of each potential source after adding another potential source to the right group, first described in Lazaridis et al., 2016, and more recently detailed in Harney et al., 2021. The idea is that if a population in the right group has significantly more allele sharing with the target than the source, then the model will be rejected. (This is why right group populations are chosen to be distal, yet relevant, to target and source). We use this property to our advantage by rotating all n-1 valid sources for the target through the right group set, one at a time, for the same target and a source x (the one source that is not included in the rotation). If the previously valid source x is rejected when including another valid source y in the right group then we remove source x from the list of potential sources. Note that this does not make source y the best source, only a better one than x. Thus, this scheme only eliminates sub-optimal sources, rather than selecting a best source.

If there were still multiple valid sources following the model competition scheme described above, we prioritized a candidate source that is from the same time period as the target cluster, or from a previous period going backwards in time. If there were still multiple candidate sources, they were considered equivalent and all kept in downstream analyses.

Among the outliers identified, we did not find a significant sex bias compared to non-outliers. Overall, there are more males than females in the dataset. However, the proportions of males in non-outliers, outliers with source, and outliers without source do not differ significantly by a Chi-squared test (p-value = 0.4117, df = 2; Figure 5—figure supplement 1). When outliers (with and without source) are treated as one group, there is still no significant association with outlier status and sex (p-value = 0.633, df = 1).

Admixture modeling with qpAdm

Request a detailed protocol

For targeted analyses of other clusters beyond just outlier candidates, for example to annotate Figures 2—4, we also used cluster-based qpAdm. In addition to one-component models as described above, we also used two-component models of admixture. These models test the hypothesis that a focal target cluster can be modeled as a two-way admixture of two sources (or ‘left’ populations). As above, a p-value below the threshold rejects this hypothesis, that is the proposed admixture model is not a good fit and a different model needs to be considered to disentangle the admixture scenario in question.

Simulations

Request a detailed protocol

To assess how spatial population structure would be impacted by different modes of dispersal, we set up forward simulations in continuous 2D space using SLiM v. 3.6 (Haller and Messer, 2019). The aim of these simulations was to approximate the extent of spatial population structure we observe by the beginning of the Iron Age in Western Eurasia, after the major prehistoric migrations had taken place. To achieve that, we decided not to attempt simulating the precise ancestry composition of populations in different regions at that time, but rather to simulate simply the extent of spatial structure as measured by the relationship of population differentiation (F_ST) and geographic distance. We chose the SLiM simulation framework to make use of its extensive feature set to simulate individuals in continuous space. We simulated diploid genomes made up of a single, 10⁸ bp long chromosome, with recombination rate and mutation rate set to 10^–8. We used the default Wright-Fisher simulation mode, where a single population of constant size N is simulated with non-overlapping populations, that is each generation is made up of offspring generated from the previous generation. Spatial structure is established by associating each individual with a continuous 2D coordinate (i.e. latitude and longitude), and by using these coordinates to govern three demographic processes: mate choice, competition, and dispersal. An overview of how these processes can be set up to interact in SLiM can be found in Recipe 15.4 of SLiM v. 3.6 (see e.g. here: https://github.com/MesserLab/SLiM/tree/v3.6/SLiMgui/Recipes; Haller, 2021). Briefly, for mate choice, a Gaussian interaction function with maxDistance = 0.1, maxStrength = 1.0, sigma = 0.02 is used to govern a mateChoice callback using the strength of that interaction function. For competition, another Gaussian interaction function with maxDistance = 0.3, maxStrength = 3.0, sigma = 0.1 is used to calculate competition using the totalNeighborStrength vector of that interaction function to scale an individual’s relative fitness as 1.1 - competition / N. Finally, we establish local dispersal through a modifyChild callback, where a newly generated offspring’s position is drawn from a Gaussian centered at the location of the maternal individual with standard deviation sigmaDisp.

We let this population evolve forward in time for 2000+120 generations during which the processes outlined above lead to spatial population structure, where individuals sampled closely together in 2D space are also more closely related genetically. We do not simulate mutations in SLiM, as this poses a major computational burden. Instead, we use tree sequence recording (Haller et al., 2019; Kelleher et al., 2018) to track the full genealogy of all individuals in the simulation which are either alive at the end of the simulation, or explicitly sampled through time using the treeSeqRememberIndividuals function of SLiM. While 2000 generations are enough to establish spatial structure under the parameters we consider, it is by far insufficient for all sampled individuals to fully coalesce. To accurately assess neutral variation however, we need all sampled individuals to have a common ancestor at some point in the past, as mutations may have arisen at any point leading back to this ultimate coalescence event. Therefore, we approximate the deep history of our population with a panmictic population simulated backwards in time using the coalescent with recombination as implemented in msprime (Kelleher et al., 2016). This process has been referred to as ‘recapitation’ (Haller et al., 2019), where an incomplete genealogy with multiple roots (from SLiM) is ‘recapitated’ using coalescent simulation backwards in time. This is made possible by using the tree sequence data structure to record and simulate genealogies in both SLiM and msprime.

Since our simulation is only concerned with how processes such as dispersal affect neutral variation across space and through time, we can use the ‘recapitated’ tree sequence to overlay mutations onto the full genealogy of all sampled individuals, also using msprime. The rationale here is that under neutrality, mutations will not affect the structure of the genealogy, so we can simulate the genealogy without mutations first, and overlay neutral mutations second, thereby greatly reducing computational burden.

We then extracted the resulting genotypes of all individuals from the tree sequence for downstream analysis. We only kept sites segregating in individuals at the end of the simulation (‘present day’), and filtered for minor allele frequency of at least 0.01 across the entire dataset, to make downstream analysis of simulated genomes comparable to how the empirical data was ascertained and analyzed.

To assess the relationship between F_ST and spatial distance, we split geographic space into a 10-by-10 grid and calculated all pairwise F_ST between inhabited grid cells using Hudson’s estimator with unequal sample size correction (Bhatia et al., 2013), as well as the average geographic (euclidean) distance between individuals across grid cells. We used this F_ST analysis to calibrate the base dispersal sigmaDisp as well as the population size N, so that F_ST at maximum distance (F_STmax) would approximately match the F_STmax we observed at the start of the historical period (~0.03). We used grid search with a range of sigmaDisp and N values, and found the parameter pair N=50,000 & sigmaDisp = 0.02 to qualitatively produce the closest match (Figure 7—figure supplement 1). We use this parameter set as our base model of population structure without long-range dispersal, where we allow spatial structure to establish over 2000 generations, and then observe the F_ST - Distance relationship over the following 120 generations for a total of 2120 generations simulated in SLiM (Figure 7A).

Given this base model of spatial population structure, we can now start to introduce long-range dispersing individuals. We do this by allowing a specified fraction of individuals to use a higher sigmaDispLR than the sigmaDisp used by the rest of the population for the final 120 generations of the simulation, approximately matching the 3000 years since the beginning of the historical period assuming a generation time of 25 years. Since the long-range dispersal is also drawn from a Gaussian, the distribution of dispersal distances will have substantial overlap with the distances produced by base dispersal. To make the fraction of long-range dispersal accurately represent the fraction of individuals that actually disperse longer distances, we thus require a long-range dispersing individual to disperse to a location outside of the 99th percentile of density covered by the short-range base dispersal.

We aimed to choose a sigmaDispLR that approximately matches the empirical distribution of long-range dispersing individuals we observe in the analysis displayed in Figure 4. Since the euclidean distances in the simulation are on a different scale than the geodesic distances observed in the data, we aimed to match qualitatively the relationship of long-range dispersal distances to random distances that could be observed if two populated locations were drawn at random. We visually analyzed this relationship from the data, and then performed a search across a range of possible sigmaDistLR to find a qualitative match. This led us to choose a value of sigmaDistLR = 0.20 (Figure 7—figure supplement 2).

Finally, we analyzed simulated ‘present-day’ genomes (i.e. after 2120 generations of SLiM) using PCA. We used the sklearn.decomposition.PCA module (scikit-learn v. 0.24.2) with the svd_solver == ‘arpack’ option to run non-probabilistic PCA to calculate the first 10 principal components. Similarly to how the empirical data was analyzed with smartpca, we also did 5 rounds of iterative outlier removal, removing individuals from the PCA that deviated by more than six standard deviations along any of the 10 principal components. The number of variants contributing to these PCA were 624,617, 625,669, and 626,052 for Figure 7A, B and C respectively, and thus comparable to the number of variants contributing to our data analysis.

Ethics

This study follows ethics guidelines adopted by the ancient DNA field (Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al., 2021). A clear plan of research was laid out before the collection of samples, leading us to focus on sampling from under-sampled historical regions in Eurasia and therefore minimize unnecessary destruction of human remains. The research intent for these samples was clearly communicated to caretakers of the samples prior to collection. Local anthropologists, archaeologists, and museum directors from each geographic region were involved in the sample acquisition, extraction from skeletal material, and interpretation of genetic results. The genetic findings regarding individual samples from each region were communicated to local collaborators, all of whom were included as co-authors on the paper and were supportive of the final results. The involvement of our local collaborators was essential for the interpretation of the genetic results through their input on the historical and archaeological characterization of the specimens. We have supported our local collaborators with immediate access to the raw genetic data, and by communicating results in written and oral forums. Authorities responsible for all archaeological sites provided written documentation for their specimens to be included in this study through collaboration with the Pinasi Lab (Vienna, Austria).

Appendix 1

For each region, we show the results from pairwise individual-based qpAdm analysis in the form of heatmaps, annotated by dendrograms from the hierarchical clustering analysis. The heatmap color scheme is chosen to signify non-rejected hypotheses (above 0.05) in shades of red and orange, and rejected hypotheses in shades of gray and yellow.

Columns of the heatmaps are annotated by time period: Copper Age (CA), Bronze Age (BA), Iron Age (IA), Imperial Rome & Late Antiquity (IRLA), Middle Ages & Early Modern (MAEM).

Rows of the heatmaps are annotated by cluster assignment based on the hierarchical clustering (see Methods). Clusters identified as outliers through our pipeline downstream are also annotated on the rows. Please note that outlier detection was only performed for individuals from historical periods (IA, IRLA, MAEM).

Appendix 1—figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 3

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 4

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 5

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 6

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 7

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 8

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 9

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 10

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 11

Download asset Open asset

Appendix 1—figure 12

Download asset Open asset

Data availability

All sequence data newly generated for this study are available at the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) database. Raw sequencing data is available under the accession number PRJEB53565. Sequences mapped to the human reference genome are available under accession number PRJEB53564. Sequences previously reported by Moots et al., 2022 are available under accession number PRJEB49419. All published data used in this study is listed in Supplementary file 4, and can be retrieved from primary sources (see Materials and methods, 'Combining new genotypes with ancient and present-day published data') or from the Allen Ancient Data Resource (Mallick et al., 2023).

The following data sets were generated

1. Antonio, Weiß, Weiß, Sawyer et al.
(2022) EBI European Nucleotide Archive
ID PRJEB53565. Historical Period Genomes from West Eurasia and the Mediterranean - Raw reads.

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB53565
1. Antonio, Weiß, Weiß, Sawyer et al.
(2022) EBI European Nucleotide Archive
ID PRJEB53564. Historical Period Genomes from West Eurasia and the Mediterranean - Mapped reads.

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB53564

The following previously published data sets were used

1. Moots et al.
(2022) EBI European Nucleotide Archive
ID PRJEB49419. Mobility in the Iron Age Central Mediterranean.

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB49419
1. Mallick et al.
(2021) Harvard Dataverse
Allen Ancient DNA Resource (AADR) v44.3.

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/FFIDCW

References

Book
1. Abulafia D
(2011) The Great Sea: A Human History of the Mediterranean
Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195323344.001.0001
- Google Scholar
1. Agranat-Tamir L
2. Waldman S
3. Martin MAS
4. Gokhman D
5. Mishol N
6. Eshel T
7. Cheronet O
8. Rohland N
9. Mallick S
10. Adamski N
11. Lawson AM
12. Mah M
13. Michel M
14. Oppenheimer J
15. Stewardson K
16. Candilio F
17. Keating D
18. Gamarra B
19. Tzur S
20. Novak M
21. Kalisher R
22. Bechar S
23. Eshed V
24. Kennett DJ
25. Faerman M
26. Yahalom-Mack N
27. Monge JM
28. Govrin Y
29. Erel Y
30. Yakir B
31. Pinhasi R
32. Carmi S
33. Finkelstein I
34. Carmel L
35. Reich D
(2020) The genomic history of the bronze age southern levant
Cell 181:1146–1157.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.04.024
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Website
1. Allen Ancient DNA Resource
(2021) Allen ancient DNA resource (AADR): downloadable genotypes of present-day and ancient DNA data
Accessed May 24, 2021.

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/allen-ancient-dna-resource-aadr-downloadable-genotypes-present-day-and-ancient-dna-data
1. Allentoft ME
2. Sikora M
3. Sjögren KG
4. Rasmussen S
5. Rasmussen M
6. Stenderup J
7. Damgaard PB
8. Schroeder H
9. Ahlström T
10. Vinner L
11. Malaspinas AS
12. Margaryan A
13. Higham T
14. Chivall D
15. Lynnerup N
16. Harvig L
17. Baron J
18. Della Casa P
19. Dąbrowski P
20. Duffy PR
21. Ebel AV
22. Epimakhov A
23. Frei K
24. Furmanek M
25. Gralak T
26. Gromov A
27. Gronkiewicz S
28. Grupe G
29. Hajdu T
30. Jarysz R
31. Khartanovich V
32. Khokhlov A
33. Kiss V
34. Kolář J
35. Kriiska A
36. Lasak I
37. Longhi C
38. McGlynn G
39. Merkevicius A
40. Merkyte I
41. Metspalu M
42. Mkrtchyan R
43. Moiseyev V
44. Paja L
45. Pálfi G
46. Pokutta D
47. Pospieszny Ł
48. Price TD
49. Saag L
50. Sablin M
51. Shishlina N
52. Smrčka V
53. Soenov VI
54. Szeverényi V
55. Tóth G
56. Trifanova SV
57. Varul L
58. Vicze M
59. Yepiskoposyan L
60. Zhitenev V
61. Orlando L
62. Sicheritz-Pontén T
63. Brunak S
64. Nielsen R
65. Kristiansen K
66. Willerslev E
(2015) Population genomics of bronze age Eurasia
Nature 522:167–172.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14507
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Alpaslan-Roodenberg S
2. Anthony D
3. Babiker H
4. Bánffy E
5. Booth T
6. Capone P
7. Deshpande-Mukherjee A
8. Eisenmann S
9. Fehren-Schmitz L
10. Frachetti M
11. Fujita R
12. Frieman CJ
13. Fu Q
14. Gibbon V
15. Haak W
16. Hajdinjak M
17. Hofmann KP
18. Holguin B
19. Inomata T
20. Kanzawa-Kiriyama H
21. Keegan W
22. Kelso J
23. Krause J
24. Kumaresan G
25. Kusimba C
26. Kusimba S
27. Lalueza-Fox C
28. Llamas B
29. MacEachern S
30. Mallick S
31. Matsumura H
32. Morales-Arce AY
33. Matuzeviciute GM
34. Mushrif-Tripathy V
35. Nakatsuka N
36. Nores R
37. Ogola C
38. Okumura M
39. Patterson N
40. Pinhasi R
41. Prasad SPR
42. Prendergast ME
43. Punzo JL
44. Reich D
45. Sawafuji R
46. Sawchuk E
47. Schiffels S
48. Sedig J
49. Shnaider S
50. Sirak K
51. Skoglund P
52. Slon V
53. Snow M
54. Soressi M
55. Spriggs M
56. Stockhammer PW
57. Szécsényi-Nagy A
58. Thangaraj K
59. Tiesler V
60. Tobler R
61. Wang CC
62. Warinner C
63. Yasawardene S
64. Zahir M
(2021) Ethics of DNA research on human remains: five globally applicable guidelines
Nature 599:41–46.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04008-x
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Software
1. Alvarez J
(2017) Depth-cover, version 1.0.3
GitHub.

https://github.com/jalvz/depth-cover
1. Amorim CEG
2. Vai S
3. Posth C
4. Modi A
5. Koncz I
6. Hakenbeck S
7. La Rocca MC
8. Mende B
9. Bobo D
10. Pohl W
11. Baricco LP
12. Bedini E
13. Francalacci P
14. Giostra C
15. Vida T
16. Winger D
17. von Freeden U
18. Ghirotto S
19. Lari M
20. Barbujani G
21. Krause J
22. Caramelli D
23. Geary PJ
24. Veeramah KR
(2018) Understanding 6th-century barbarian social organization and migration through paleogenomics
Nature Communications 9:3547.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06024-4
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Antonio ML
2. Gao Z
3. Moots HM
4. Lucci M
5. Candilio F
6. Sawyer S
7. Oberreiter V
8. Calderon D
9. Devitofranceschi K
10. Aikens RC
11. Aneli S
12. Bartoli F
13. Bedini A
14. Cheronet O
15. Cotter DJ
16. Fernandes DM
17. Gasperetti G
18. Grifoni R
19. Guidi A
20. La Pastina F
21. Loreti E
22. Manacorda D
23. Matullo G
24. Morretta S
25. Nava A
26. Fiocchi Nicolai V
27. Nomi F
28. Pavolini C
29. Pentiricci M
30. Pergola P
31. Piranomonte M
32. Schmidt R
33. Spinola G
34. Sperduti A
35. Rubini M
36. Bondioli L
37. Coppa A
38. Pinhasi R
39. Pritchard JK
(2019) Ancient Rome: a genetic crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean
Science 366:708–714.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay6826
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2015) A global reference for human genetic variation
Nature 526:68–74.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15393
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Beard M
(2015)
SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome

New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, a Division of W.W. Norton & Company.
- Google Scholar
1. Bergström A
2. McCarthy SA
3. Hui R
4. Almarri MA
5. Ayub Q
6. Danecek P
7. Chen Y
8. Felkel S
9. Hallast P
10. Kamm J
11. Blanché H
12. Deleuze JF
13. Cann H
14. Mallick S
15. Reich D
16. Sandhu MS
17. Skoglund P
18. Scally A
19. Xue Y
20. Durbin R
21. Tyler-Smith C
(2020) Insights into human genetic variation and population history from 929 diverse genomes
Science 367:eaay5012.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay5012
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2013) Estimating and interpreting FST: the impact of rare variants
Genome Research 23:1514–1521.

https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.154831.113
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) People from Ibiza: an unexpected isolate in the Western Mediterranean
European Journal of Human Genetics 27:941–951.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0361-1
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Website
1. Bowes K
(2011) Rural Poverty in the Roman Empire
Accessed February 22, 2021.

https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/u.osu.edu/dist/a/49661/files/2017/08/bowes-rural-poor-243zk6w.pdf
1. Brace S
2. Diekmann Y
3. Booth TJ
4. van Dorp L
5. Faltyskova Z
6. Rohland N
7. Mallick S
8. Olalde I
9. Ferry M
10. Michel M
11. Oppenheimer J
12. Broomandkhoshbacht N
13. Stewardson K
14. Martiniano R
15. Walsh S
16. Kayser M
17. Charlton S
18. Hellenthal G
19. Armit I
20. Schulting R
21. Craig OE
22. Sheridan A
23. Parker Pearson M
24. Stringer C
25. Reich D
26. Thomas MG
27. Barnes I
(2019) Ancient genomes indicate population replacement in Early Neolithic Britain
Nature Ecology & Evolution 3:765–771.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0871-9
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Broodbank C
(2013)
The making of the Middle Sea: a history of the Mediterranean from the beginning to the emergence of the classical world

Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
- Google Scholar
1. Broushaki F
2. Thomas MG
3. Link V
4. López S
5. van Dorp L
6. Kirsanow K
7. Hofmanová Z
8. Diekmann Y
9. Cassidy LM
10. Díez-Del-Molino D
11. Kousathanas A
12. Sell C
13. Robson HK
14. Martiniano R
15. Blöcher J
16. Scheu A
17. Kreutzer S
18. Bollongino R
19. Bobo D
20. Davudi H
21. Munoz O
22. Currat M
23. Abdi K
24. Biglari F
25. Craig OE
26. Bradley DG
27. Shennan S
28. Veeramah K
29. Mashkour M
30. Wegmann D
31. Hellenthal G
32. Burger J
(2016) Early neolithic genomes from the eastern fertile crescent
Science 353:499–503.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7943
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Brunel S
2. Bennett EA
3. Cardin L
4. Garraud D
5. Barrand Emam H
6. Beylier A
7. Boulestin B
8. Chenal F
9. Ciesielski E
10. Convertini F
11. Dedet B
12. Desbrosse-Degobertiere S
13. Desenne S
14. Dubouloz J
15. Duday H
16. Escalon G
17. Fabre V
18. Gailledrat E
19. Gandelin M
20. Gleize Y
21. Goepfert S
22. Guilaine J
23. Hachem L
24. Ilett M
25. Lambach F
26. Maziere F
27. Perrin B
28. Plouin S
29. Pinard E
30. Praud I
31. Richard I
32. Riquier V
33. Roure R
34. Sendra B
35. Thevenet C
36. Thiol S
37. Vauquelin E
38. Vergnaud L
39. Grange T
40. Geigl EM
41. Pruvost M
(2020) Ancient genomes from present-day France unveil 7,000 years of its demographic history
PNAS 117:12791–12798.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1918034117
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Burgess RW
(2007) The fall of Rome and the end of civilization, by Bryan Ward-Perkins
Canadian Journal of History 42:83–85.

https://doi.org/10.3138/cjh.42.1.83
- Google Scholar
(2016) Neolithic and Bronze Age migration to Ireland and establishment of the insular Atlantic genome
PNAS 113:368–373.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518445113
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Cassidy LM
2. Maoldúin RÓ
3. Kador T
4. Lynch A
5. Jones C
6. Woodman PC
7. Murphy E
8. Ramsey G
9. Dowd M
10. Noonan A
11. Campbell C
12. Jones ER
13. Mattiangeli V
14. Bradley DG
(2020) A dynastic elite in monumental Neolithic society
Nature 582:384–388.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2378-6
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Software
1. Chang C
(2013) Smartpca, version v16000
GitHub.

https://github.com/chrchang/eigensoft/blob/master/POPGEN
(2021) The genomic history of the Aegean palatial civilizations
Cell 184:2565–2586.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.039
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Dabney J
2. Knapp M
3. Glocke I
4. Gansauge MT
5. Weihmann A
6. Nickel B
7. Valdiosera C
8. García N
9. Pääbo S
10. Arsuaga JL
11. Meyer M
(2013) Complete mitochondrial genome sequence of a Middle Pleistocene cave bear reconstructed from ultrashort DNA fragments
PNAS 110:15758–15763.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1314445110
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Damgaard PB
2. Marchi N
3. Rasmussen S
4. Peyrot M
5. Renaud G
6. Korneliussen T
7. Moreno-Mayar JV
8. Pedersen MW
9. Goldberg A
10. Usmanova E
11. Baimukhanov N
12. Loman V
13. Hedeager L
14. Pedersen AG
15. Nielsen K
16. Afanasiev G
17. Akmatov K
18. Aldashev A
19. Alpaslan A
20. Baimbetov G
21. Bazaliiskii VI
22. Beisenov A
23. Boldbaatar B
24. Boldgiv B
25. Dorzhu C
26. Ellingvag S
27. Erdenebaatar D
28. Dajani R
29. Dmitriev E
30. Evdokimov V
31. Frei KM
32. Gromov A
33. Goryachev A
34. Hakonarson H
35. Hegay T
36. Khachatryan Z
37. Khaskhanov R
38. Kitov E
39. Kolbina A
40. Kubatbek T
41. Kukushkin A
42. Kukushkin I
43. Lau N
44. Margaryan A
45. Merkyte I
46. Mertz IV
47. Mertz VK
48. Mijiddorj E
49. Moiyesev V
50. Mukhtarova G
51. Nurmukhanbetov B
52. Orozbekova Z
53. Panyushkina I
54. Pieta K
55. Smrčka V
56. Shevnina I
57. Logvin A
58. Sjögren KG
59. Štolcová T
60. Taravella AM
61. Tashbaeva K
62. Tkachev A
63. Tulegenov T
64. Voyakin D
65. Yepiskoposyan L
66. Undrakhbold S
67. Varfolomeev V
68. Weber A
69. Wilson Sayres MA
70. Kradin N
71. Allentoft ME
72. Orlando L
73. Nielsen R
74. Sikora M
75. Heyer E
76. Kristiansen K
77. Willerslev E
(2018) 137 ancient human genomes from across the Eurasian steppes
Nature 557:369–374.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0094-2
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. de Barros Damgaard P
2. Martiniano R
3. Kamm J
4. Moreno-Mayar JV
5. Kroonen G
6. Peyrot M
7. Barjamovic G
8. Rasmussen S
9. Zacho C
10. Baimukhanov N
11. Zaibert V
12. Merz V
13. Biddanda A
14. Merz I
15. Loman V
16. Evdokimov V
17. Usmanova E
18. Hemphill B
19. Seguin-Orlando A
20. Yediay FE
21. Ullah I
22. Sjögren KG
23. Iversen KH
24. Choin J
25. de la Fuente C
26. Ilardo M
27. Schroeder H
28. Moiseyev V
29. Gromov A
30. Polyakov A
31. Omura S
32. Senyurt SY
33. Ahmad H
34. McKenzie C
35. Margaryan A
36. Hameed A
37. Samad A
38. Gul N
39. Khokhar MH
40. Goriunova OI
41. Bazaliiskii VI
42. Novembre J
43. Weber AW
44. Orlando L
45. Allentoft ME
46. Nielsen R
47. Kristiansen K
48. Sikora M
49. Outram AK
50. Durbin R
51. Willerslev E
(2018) The first horse herders and the impact of early bronze age steppe expansions into Asia
Science 360:eaar7711.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar7711
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Dey HW
(2015) Introduction: Urban Living and the “Fall” of the Roman Empire. The Afterlife of the Roman CIT
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107706538
- Google Scholar
(2018) Ancient genomes from Iceland reveal the making of a human population
Science 360:1028–1032.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar2625
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Feldman M
2. Fernández-Domínguez E
3. Reynolds L
4. Baird D
5. Pearson J
6. Hershkovitz I
7. May H
8. Goring-Morris N
9. Benz M
10. Gresky J
11. Bianco RA
12. Fairbairn A
13. Mustafaoğlu G
14. Stockhammer PW
15. Posth C
16. Haak W
17. Jeong C
18. Krause J
(2019a) Late Pleistocene human genome suggests a local origin for the first farmers of Central Anatolia
Nature Communications 10:1218.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09209-7
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Feldman M
2. Master DM
3. Bianco RA
4. Burri M
5. Stockhammer PW
6. Mittnik A
7. Aja AJ
8. Jeong C
9. Krause J
(2019b) Ancient DNA sheds light on the genetic origins of early Iron Age Philistines
Science Advances 5:eaax0061.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aax0061
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Fernandes DM
2. Strapagiel D
3. Borówka P
4. Marciniak B
5. Żądzińska E
6. Sirak K
7. Siska V
8. Grygiel R
9. Carlsson J
10. Manica A
11. Lorkiewicz W
12. Pinhasi R
(2018) A genomic Neolithic time transect of hunter-farmer admixture in Central Poland
Scientific Reports 8:14879.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-33067-w
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Fernandes DM
2. Mittnik A
3. Olalde I
4. Lazaridis I
5. Cheronet O
6. Rohland N
7. Mallick S
8. Bernardos R
9. Broomandkhoshbacht N
10. Carlsson J
11. Culleton BJ
12. Ferry M
13. Gamarra B
14. Lari M
15. Mah M
16. Michel M
17. Modi A
18. Novak M
19. Oppenheimer J
20. Sirak KA
21. Stewardson K
22. Mandl K
23. Schattke C
24. Özdoğan KT
25. Lucci M
26. Gasperetti G
27. Candilio F
28. Salis G
29. Vai S
30. Camarós E
31. Calò C
32. Catalano G
33. Cueto M
34. Forgia V
35. Lozano M
36. Marini E
37. Micheletti M
38. Miccichè RM
39. Palombo MR
40. Ramis D
41. Schimmenti V
42. Sureda P
43. Teira L
44. Teschler-Nicola M
45. Kennett DJ
46. Lalueza-Fox C
47. Patterson N
48. Sineo L
49. Coppa A
50. Caramelli D
51. Pinhasi R
52. Reich D
(2020) Author correction: the spread of steppe and Iranian-related ancestry in the islands of the Western Mediterranean
Nature Ecology & Evolution 4:764.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1197-3
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2018) Ancient genomes from North Africa evidence prehistoric migrations to the Maghreb from both the Levant and Europe
PNAS 115:6774–6779.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1800851115
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Fu Q
2. Posth C
3. Hajdinjak M
4. Petr M
5. Mallick S
6. Fernandes D
7. Furtwängler A
8. Haak W
9. Meyer M
10. Mittnik A
11. Nickel B
12. Peltzer A
13. Rohland N
14. Slon V
15. Talamo S
16. Lazaridis I
17. Lipson M
18. Mathieson I
19. Schiffels S
20. Skoglund P
21. Derevianko AP
22. Drozdov N
23. Slavinsky V
24. Tsybankov A
25. Cremonesi RG
26. Mallegni F
27. Gély B
28. Vacca E
29. Morales MRG
30. Straus LG
31. Neugebauer-Maresch C
32. Teschler-Nicola M
33. Constantin S
34. Moldovan OT
35. Benazzi S
36. Peresani M
37. Coppola D
38. Lari M
39. Ricci S
40. Ronchitelli A
41. Valentin F
42. Thevenet C
43. Wehrberger K
44. Grigorescu D
45. Rougier H
46. Crevecoeur I
47. Flas D
48. Semal P
49. Mannino MA
50. Cupillard C
51. Bocherens H
52. Conard NJ
53. Harvati K
54. Moiseyev V
55. Drucker DG
56. Svoboda J
57. Richards MP
58. Caramelli D
59. Pinhasi R
60. Kelso J
61. Patterson N
62. Krause J
63. Pääbo S
64. Reich D
(2016) The genetic history of Ice age Europe
Nature 534:200–205.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17993
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Furtwängler A
2. Neukamm J
3. Böhme L
4. Reiter E
5. Vollstedt M
6. Arora N
7. Singh P
8. Cole ST
9. Knauf S
10. Calvignac-Spencer S
11. Krause-Kyora B
12. Krause J
13. Schuenemann VJ
14. Herbig A
(2020) Comparison of target enrichment strategies for ancient pathogen DNA
BioTechniques 69:455–459.

https://doi.org/10.2144/btn-2020-0100
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Gamba C
2. Jones ER
3. Teasdale MD
4. McLaughlin RL
5. Gonzalez-Fortes G
6. Mattiangeli V
7. Domboróczki L
8. Kővári I
9. Pap I
10. Anders A
11. Whittle A
12. Dani J
13. Raczky P
14. Higham TFG
15. Hofreiter M
16. Bradley DG
17. Pinhasi R
(2014) Genome flux and stasis in a five millennium transect of European prehistory
Nature Communications 5:5257.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6257
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Gokhman D
2. Nissim-Rafinia M
3. Agranat-Tamir L
4. Housman G
5. García-Pérez R
6. Lizano E
7. Cheronet O
8. Mallick S
9. Nieves-Colón MA
10. Li H
11. Alpaslan-Roodenberg S
12. Novak M
13. Gu H
14. Osinski JM
15. Ferrando-Bernal M
16. Gelabert P
17. Lipende I
18. Mjungu D
19. Kondova I
20. Bontrop R
21. Kullmer O
22. Weber G
23. Shahar T
24. Dvir-Ginzberg M
25. Faerman M
26. Quillen EE
27. Meissner A
28. Lahav Y
29. Kandel L
30. Liebergall M
31. Prada ME
32. Vidal JM
33. Gronostajski RM
34. Stone AC
35. Yakir B
36. Lalueza-Fox C
37. Pinhasi R
38. Reich D
39. Marques-Bonet T
40. Meshorer E
41. Carmel L
(2020) Differential DNA methylation of vocal and facial anatomy genes in modern humans
Nature Communications 11:1189.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15020-6
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2017) Paleogenomic evidence for multi-generational mixing between Neolithic farmers and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in the Lower Danube Basin
Current Biology 27:1801–1810.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.05.023
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) A western route of prehistoric human migration from Africa into the Iberian Peninsula
Proceedings. Biological Sciences 286:20182288.

https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.2288
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2015) Ancient genomes link early farmers from Atapuerca in Spain to modern-day Basques
PNAS 112:11917–11922.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509851112
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Günther T
2. Malmström H
3. Svensson EM
4. Omrak A
5. Sánchez-Quinto F
6. Kılınç GM
7. Krzewińska M
8. Eriksson G
9. Fraser M
10. Edlund H
11. Munters AR
12. Coutinho A
13. Simões LG
14. Vicente M
15. Sjölander A
16. Jansen Sellevold B
17. Jørgensen R
18. Claes P
19. Shriver MD
20. Valdiosera C
21. Netea MG
22. Apel J
23. Lidén K
24. Skar B
25. Storå J
26. Götherström A
27. Jakobsson M
28. Barton N
(2018) Population genomics of Mesolithic Scandinavia: investigating early postglacial migration routes and high-latitude adaptation
PLOS Biology 16:e2003703.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2003703
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Haak W
2. Lazaridis I
3. Patterson N
4. Rohland N
5. Mallick S
6. Llamas B
7. Brandt G
8. Nordenfelt S
9. Harney E
10. Stewardson K
11. Fu Q
12. Mittnik A
13. Bánffy E
14. Economou C
15. Francken M
16. Friederich S
17. Pena RG
18. Hallgren F
19. Khartanovich V
20. Khokhlov A
21. Kunst M
22. Kuznetsov P
23. Meller H
24. Mochalov O
25. Moiseyev V
26. Nicklisch N
27. Pichler SL
28. Risch R
29. Rojo Guerra MA
30. Roth C
31. Szécsényi-Nagy A
32. Wahl J
33. Meyer M
34. Krause J
35. Brown D
36. Anthony D
37. Cooper A
38. Alt KW
39. Reich D
(2015) Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe
Nature 522:207–211.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14317
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2017) Continuity and admixture in the last five millennia of Levantine history from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese genome sequences
American Journal of Human Genetics 101:274–282.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.013
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) A transient pulse of genetic admixture from the Crusaders in the near east identified from ancient genome sequences
American Journal of Human Genetics 104:977–984.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.03.015
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Haber M
2. Nassar J
3. Almarri MA
4. Saupe T
5. Saag L
6. Griffith SJ
7. Doumet-Serhal C
8. Chanteau J
9. Saghieh-Beydoun M
10. Xue Y
11. Scheib CL
12. Tyler-Smith C
(2020) A genetic history of the near east from an aDNA time course sampling eight points in the past 4,000 years
American Journal of Human Genetics 107:149–157.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.05.008
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) Tree-sequence recording in SLiM opens new horizons for forward-time simulation of whole genomes
Molecular Ecology Resources 19:552–566.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12968
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Haller BC
2. Messer PW
(2019) SLiM 3: forward genetic simulations beyond the wright-fisher model
Molecular Biology and Evolution 36:632–637.

https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy228
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Software
1. Haller B
(2021) Slim, version 3.6
GitHub.

https://messerlab.org/slim/
1. Harney É
2. May H
3. Shalem D
4. Rohland N
5. Mallick S
6. Lazaridis I
7. Sarig R
8. Stewardson K
9. Nordenfelt S
10. Patterson N
11. Hershkovitz I
12. Reich D
(2018) Publisher correction: ancient DNA from Chalcolithic Israel reveals the role of population mixture in cultural transformation
Nature Communications 9:3913.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06484-8
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2021) Assessing the performance of qpAdm: a statistical tool for studying population admixture
Genetics 217:iyaa045.

https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/iyaa045
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Harper K
(2017) The Fate of Rome: Climate, Disease, and the End of an Empire
Princeton: Princeton University Press.

https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv9b2txr
- Google Scholar
1. Järve M
2. Saag L
3. Scheib CL
4. Pathak AK
5. Montinaro F
6. Pagani L
7. Flores R
8. Guellil M
9. Saag L
10. Tambets K
11. Kushniarevich A
12. Solnik A
13. Varul L
14. Zadnikov S
15. Petrauskas O
16. Avramenko M
17. Magomedov B
18. Didenko S
19. Toshev G
20. Bruyako I
21. Grechko D
22. Okatenko V
23. Gorbenko K
24. Smyrnov O
25. Heiko A
26. Reida R
27. Sapiehin S
28. Sirotin S
29. Tairov A
30. Beisenov A
31. Starodubtsev M
32. Vasilev V
33. Nechvaloda A
34. Atabiev B
35. Litvinov S
36. Ekomasova N
37. Dzhaubermezov M
38. Voroniatov S
39. Utevska O
40. Shramko I
41. Khusnutdinova E
42. Metspalu M
43. Savelev N
44. Kriiska A
45. Kivisild T
46. Villems R
(2019) Shifts in the genetic landscape of the Western Eurasian Steppe associated with the beginning and end of the Scythian dominance
Current Biology 29:2430–2441.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.06.019
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Jeong C
2. Balanovsky O
3. Lukianova E
4. Kahbatkyzy N
5. Flegontov P
6. Zaporozhchenko V
7. Immel A
8. Wang CC
9. Ixan O
10. Khussainova E
11. Bekmanov B
12. Zaibert V
13. Lavryashina M
14. Pocheshkhova E
15. Yusupov Y
16. Agdzhoyan A
17. Koshel S
18. Bukin A
19. Nymadawa P
20. Turdikulova S
21. Dalimova D
22. Churnosov M
23. Skhalyakho R
24. Daragan D
25. Bogunov Y
26. Bogunova A
27. Shtrunov A
28. Dubova N
29. Zhabagin M
30. Yepiskoposyan L
31. Churakov V
32. Pislegin N
33. Damba L
34. Saroyants L
35. Dibirova K
36. Atramentova L
37. Utevska O
38. Idrisov E
39. Kamenshchikova E
40. Evseeva I
41. Metspalu M
42. Outram AK
43. Robbeets M
44. Djansugurova L
45. Balanovska E
46. Schiffels S
47. Haak W
48. Reich D
49. Krause J
(2019) The genetic history of admixture across inner Eurasia
Nature Ecology & Evolution 3:966–976.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0878-2
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Jones ER
2. Gonzalez-Fortes G
3. Connell S
4. Siska V
5. Eriksson A
6. Martiniano R
7. McLaughlin RL
8. Gallego Llorente M
9. Cassidy LM
10. Gamba C
11. Meshveliani T
12. Bar-Yosef O
13. Müller W
14. Belfer-Cohen A
15. Matskevich Z
16. Jakeli N
17. Higham TFG
18. Currat M
19. Lordkipanidze D
20. Hofreiter M
21. Manica A
22. Pinhasi R
23. Bradley DG
(2015) Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians
Nature Communications 6:8912.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9912
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Jones ER
2. Zarina G
3. Moiseyev V
4. Lightfoot E
5. Nigst PR
6. Manica A
7. Pinhasi R
8. Bradley DG
(2017) The Neolithic transition in the baltic was not driven by admixture with early European farmers
Current Biology 27:576–582.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.12.060
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2013) mapDamage2.0: fast approximate Bayesian estimates of ancient DNA damage parameters
Bioinformatics 29:1682–1684.

https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt193
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2016) Efficient coalescent simulation and genealogical analysis for large sample sizes
PLOS Computational Biology 12:e1004842.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004842
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2018) Efficient pedigree recording for fast population genetics simulation
PLOS Computational Biology 14:e1006581.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006581
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Keller A
2. Graefen A
3. Ball M
4. Matzas M
5. Boisguerin V
6. Maixner F
7. Leidinger P
8. Backes C
9. Khairat R
10. Forster M
11. Stade B
12. Franke A
13. Mayer J
14. Spangler J
15. McLaughlin S
16. Shah M
17. Lee C
18. Harkins TT
19. Sartori A
20. Moreno-Estrada A
21. Henn B
22. Sikora M
23. Semino O
24. Chiaroni J
25. Rootsi S
26. Myres NM
27. Cabrera VM
28. Underhill PA
29. Bustamante CD
30. Vigl EE
31. Samadelli M
32. Cipollini G
33. Haas J
34. Katus H
35. O’Connor BD
36. Carlson MRJ
37. Meder B
38. Blin N
39. Meese E
40. Pusch CM
41. Zink A
(2012) New insights into the Tyrolean Iceman’s origin and phenotype as inferred by whole-genome sequencing
Nature Communications 3:698.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1701
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Kılınç GM
2. Omrak A
3. Özer F
4. Günther T
5. Büyükkarakaya AM
6. Bıçakçı E
7. Baird D
8. Dönertaş HM
9. Ghalichi A
10. Yaka R
11. Koptekin D
12. Açan SC
13. Parvizi P
14. Krzewińska M
15. Daskalaki EA
16. Yüncü E
17. Dağtaş ND
18. Fairbairn A
19. Pearson J
20. Mustafaoğlu G
21. Erdal YS
22. Çakan YG
23. Togan İ
24. Somel M
25. Storå J
26. Jakobsson M
27. Götherström A
(2016) The demographic development of the first farmers in Anatolia
Current Biology 26:2659–2666.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.07.057
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2014) ANGSD: analysis of next generation sequencing data
BMC Bioinformatics 15:356.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-014-0356-4
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Kovacevic L
2. Tambets K
3. Ilumäe AM
4. Kushniarevich A
5. Yunusbayev B
6. Solnik A
7. Bego T
8. Primorac D
9. Skaro V
10. Leskovac A
11. Jakovski Z
12. Drobnic K
13. Tolk HV
14. Kovacevic S
15. Rudan P
16. Metspalu E
17. Marjanovic D
(2014) Standing at the gateway to Europe--the genetic structure of Western balkan populations based on autosomal and haploid markers
PLOS ONE 9:e105090.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105090
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2018a) Genomic and strontium isotope variation reveal immigration patterns in a Viking Age town
Current Biology 28:2730–2738.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.06.053
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2018b) Ancient genomes suggest the eastern Pontic-Caspian steppe as the source of western Iron Age nomads
Science Advances 4:eaat4457.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat4457
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Lamnidis TC
2. Majander K
3. Jeong C
4. Salmela E
5. Wessman A
6. Moiseyev V
7. Khartanovich V
8. Balanovsky O
9. Ongyerth M
10. Weihmann A
11. Sajantila A
12. Kelso J
13. Pääbo S
14. Onkamo P
15. Haak W
16. Krause J
17. Schiffels S
(2018) Ancient Fennoscandian genomes reveal origin and spread of Siberian ancestry in Europe
Nature Communications 9:5018.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07483-5
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Lazaridis I
2. Patterson N
3. Mittnik A
4. Renaud G
5. Mallick S
6. Kirsanow K
7. Sudmant PH
8. Schraiber JG
9. Castellano S
10. Lipson M
11. Berger B
12. Economou C
13. Bollongino R
14. Fu Q
15. Bos KI
16. Nordenfelt S
17. Li H
18. de Filippo C
19. Prüfer K
20. Sawyer S
21. Posth C
22. Haak W
23. Hallgren F
24. Fornander E
25. Rohland N
26. Delsate D
27. Francken M
28. Guinet JM
29. Wahl J
30. Ayodo G
31. Babiker HA
32. Bailliet G
33. Balanovska E
34. Balanovsky O
35. Barrantes R
36. Bedoya G
37. Ben-Ami H
38. Bene J
39. Berrada F
40. Bravi CM
41. Brisighelli F
42. Busby GBJ
43. Cali F
44. Churnosov M
45. Cole DEC
46. Corach D
47. Damba L
48. van Driem G
49. Dryomov S
50. Dugoujon JM
51. Fedorova SA
52. Gallego Romero I
53. Gubina M
54. Hammer M
55. Henn BM
56. Hervig T
57. Hodoglugil U
58. Jha AR
59. Karachanak-Yankova S
60. Khusainova R
61. Khusnutdinova E
62. Kittles R
63. Kivisild T
64. Klitz W
65. Kučinskas V
66. Kushniarevich A
67. Laredj L
68. Litvinov S
69. Loukidis T
70. Mahley RW
71. Melegh B
72. Metspalu E
73. Molina J
74. Mountain J
75. Näkkäläjärvi K
76. Nesheva D
77. Nyambo T
78. Osipova L
79. Parik J
80. Platonov F
81. Posukh O
82. Romano V
83. Rothhammer F
84. Rudan I
85. Ruizbakiev R
86. Sahakyan H
87. Sajantila A
88. Salas A
89. Starikovskaya EB
90. Tarekegn A
91. Toncheva D
92. Turdikulova S
93. Uktveryte I
94. Utevska O
95. Vasquez R
96. Villena M
97. Voevoda M
98. Winkler CA
99. Yepiskoposyan L
100. Zalloua P
101. Zemunik T
102. Cooper A
103. Capelli C
104. Thomas MG
105. Ruiz-Linares A
106. Tishkoff SA
107. Singh L
108. Thangaraj K
109. Villems R
110. Comas D
111. Sukernik R
112. Metspalu M
113. Meyer M
114. Eichler EE
115. Burger J
116. Slatkin M
117. Pääbo S
118. Kelso J
119. Reich D
120. Krause J
(2014) Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans
Nature 513:409–413.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13673
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Lazaridis I
2. Nadel D
3. Rollefson G
4. Merrett DC
5. Rohland N
6. Mallick S
7. Fernandes D
8. Novak M
9. Gamarra B
10. Sirak K
11. Connell S
12. Stewardson K
13. Harney E
14. Fu Q
15. Gonzalez-Fortes G
16. Jones ER
17. Roodenberg SA
18. Lengyel G
19. Bocquentin F
20. Gasparian B
21. Monge JM
22. Gregg M
23. Eshed V
24. Mizrahi A-S
25. Meiklejohn C
26. Gerritsen F
27. Bejenaru L
28. Blüher M
29. Campbell A
30. Cavalleri G
31. Comas D
32. Froguel P
33. Gilbert E
34. Kerr SM
35. Kovacs P
36. Krause J
37. McGettigan D
38. Merrigan M
39. Merriwether DA
40. O’Reilly S
41. Richards MB
42. Semino O
43. Shamoon-Pour M
44. Stefanescu G
45. Stumvoll M
46. Tönjes A
47. Torroni A
48. Wilson JF
49. Yengo L
50. Hovhannisyan NA
51. Patterson N
52. Pinhasi R
53. Reich D
(2016) Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East
Nature 536:419–424.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19310
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2017) Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans
Nature 548:214–218.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23310
- Google Scholar
1. Li H
2. Durbin R
(2009) Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform
Bioinformatics 25:1754–1760.

https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Linderholm A
2. Kılınç GM
3. Szczepanek A
4. Włodarczak P
5. Jarosz P
6. Belka Z
7. Dopieralska J
8. Werens K
9. Górski J
10. Mazurek M
11. Hozer M
12. Rybicka M
13. Ostrowski M
14. Bagińska J
15. Koman W
16. Rodríguez-Varela R
17. Storå J
18. Götherström A
19. Krzewińska M
(2020) Corded Ware cultural complexity uncovered using genomic and isotopic analysis from south-eastern Poland
Scientific Reports 10:6885.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-63138-w
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Lipson M
2. Szécsényi-Nagy A
3. Mallick S
4. Pósa A
5. Stégmár B
6. Keerl V
7. Rohland N
8. Stewardson K
9. Ferry M
10. Michel M
11. Oppenheimer J
12. Broomandkhoshbacht N
13. Harney E
14. Nordenfelt S
15. Llamas B
16. Gusztáv Mende B
17. Köhler K
18. Oross K
19. Bondár M
20. Marton T
21. Osztás A
22. Jakucs J
23. Paluch T
24. Horváth F
25. Csengeri P
26. Koós J
27. Sebők K
28. Anders A
29. Raczky P
30. Regenye J
31. Barna JP
32. Fábián S
33. Serlegi G
34. Toldi Z
35. Gyöngyvér Nagy E
36. Dani J
37. Molnár E
38. Pálfi G
39. Márk L
40. Melegh B
41. Bánfai Z
42. Domboróczki L
43. Fernández-Eraso J
44. Antonio Mujika-Alustiza J
45. Alonso Fernández C
46. Jiménez Echevarría J
47. Bollongino R
48. Orschiedt J
49. Schierhold K
50. Meller H
51. Cooper A
52. Burger J
53. Bánffy E
54. Alt KW
55. Lalueza-Fox C
56. Haak W
57. Reich D
(2017) Parallel palaeogenomic transects reveal complex genetic history of early European farmers
Nature 551:368–372.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24476
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Mallick S
2. Li H
3. Lipson M
4. Mathieson I
5. Gymrek M
6. Racimo F
7. Zhao M
8. Chennagiri N
9. Nordenfelt S
10. Tandon A
11. Skoglund P
12. Lazaridis I
13. Sankararaman S
14. Fu Q
15. Rohland N
16. Renaud G
17. Erlich Y
18. Willems T
19. Gallo C
20. Spence JP
21. Song YS
22. Poletti G
23. Balloux F
24. van Driem G
25. de Knijff P
26. Romero IG
27. Jha AR
28. Behar DM
29. Bravi CM
30. Capelli C
31. Hervig T
32. Moreno-Estrada A
33. Posukh OL
34. Balanovska E
35. Balanovsky O
36. Karachanak-Yankova S
37. Sahakyan H
38. Toncheva D
39. Yepiskoposyan L
40. Tyler-Smith C
41. Xue Y
42. Abdullah MS
43. Ruiz-Linares A
44. Beall CM
45. Di Rienzo A
46. Jeong C
47. Starikovskaya EB
48. Metspalu E
49. Parik J
50. Villems R
51. Henn BM
52. Hodoglugil U
53. Mahley R
54. Sajantila A
55. Stamatoyannopoulos G
56. Wee JTS
57. Khusainova R
58. Khusnutdinova E
59. Litvinov S
60. Ayodo G
61. Comas D
62. Hammer MF
63. Kivisild T
64. Klitz W
65. Winkler CA
66. Labuda D
67. Bamshad M
68. Jorde LB
69. Tishkoff SA
70. Watkins WS
71. Metspalu M
72. Dryomov S
73. Sukernik R
74. Singh L
75. Thangaraj K
76. Pääbo S
77. Kelso J
78. Patterson N
79. Reich D
(2016) The simons genome diversity project: 300 genomes from 142 diverse populations
Nature 538:201–206.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Preprint
1. Mallick S
2. Micco A
3. Mah M
4. Ringbauer H
5. Lazaridis I
6. Olalde I
7. Patterson N
8. Reich D
(2023) The Allen Ancient DNA Resource (AADR): a curated compendium of ancient human genomes
bioRxiv.

https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.06.535797
- Google Scholar
1. Malmström H
2. Günther T
3. Svensson EM
4. Juras A
5. Fraser M
6. Munters AR
7. Pospieszny Ł
8. Tõrv M
9. Lindström J
10. Götherström A
11. Storå J
12. Jakobsson M
(2019) The genomic ancestry of the Scandinavian Battle Axe Culture people and their relation to the broader Corded Ware horizon
Proceedings. Biological Sciences 286:20191528.

https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1528
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Margaryan A
2. Lawson DJ
3. Sikora M
4. Racimo F
5. Rasmussen S
6. Moltke I
7. Cassidy LM
8. Jørsboe E
9. Ingason A
10. Pedersen MW
11. Korneliussen T
12. Wilhelmson H
13. Buś MM
14. de Barros Damgaard P
15. Martiniano R
16. Renaud G
17. Bhérer C
18. Moreno-Mayar JV
19. Fotakis AK
20. Allen M
21. Allmäe R
22. Molak M
23. Cappellini E
24. Scorrano G
25. McColl H
26. Buzhilova A
27. Fox A
28. Albrechtsen A
29. Schütz B
30. Skar B
31. Arcini C
32. Falys C
33. Jonson CH
34. Błaszczyk D
35. Pezhemsky D
36. Turner-Walker G
37. Gestsdóttir H
38. Lundstrøm I
39. Gustin I
40. Mainland I
41. Potekhina I
42. Muntoni IM
43. Cheng J
44. Stenderup J
45. Ma J
46. Gibson J
47. Peets J
48. Gustafsson J
49. Iversen KH
50. Simpson L
51. Strand L
52. Loe L
53. Sikora M
54. Florek M
55. Vretemark M
56. Redknap M
57. Bajka M
58. Pushkina T
59. Søvsø M
60. Grigoreva N
61. Christensen T
62. Kastholm O
63. Uldum O
64. Favia P
65. Holck P
66. Sten S
67. Arge SV
68. Ellingvåg S
69. Moiseyev V
70. Bogdanowicz W
71. Magnusson Y
72. Orlando L
73. Pentz P
74. Jessen MD
75. Pedersen A
76. Collard M
77. Bradley DG
78. Jørkov ML
79. Arneborg J
80. Lynnerup N
81. Price N
82. Gilbert MTP
83. Allentoft ME
84. Bill J
85. Sindbæk SM
86. Hedeager L
87. Kristiansen K
88. Nielsen R
89. Werge T
90. Willerslev E
(2020) Population genomics of the Viking world
Nature 585:390–396.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2688-8
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Martin M
(2011) Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads
EMBnet.Journal 17:10.

https://doi.org/10.14806/ej.17.1.200
- Google Scholar
1. Martiniano R
2. Caffell A
3. Holst M
4. Hunter-Mann K
5. Montgomery J
6. Müldner G
7. McLaughlin RL
8. Teasdale MD
9. van Rheenen W
10. Veldink JH
11. van den Berg LH
12. Hardiman O
13. Carroll M
14. Roskams S
15. Oxley J
16. Morgan C
17. Thomas MG
18. Barnes I
19. McDonnell C
20. Collins MJ
21. Bradley DG
(2016) Genomic signals of migration and continuity in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons
Nature Communications 7:10326.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10326
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Martiniano R
2. Cassidy LM
3. Ó’Maoldúin R
4. McLaughlin R
5. Silva NM
6. Manco L
7. Fidalgo D
8. Pereira T
9. Coelho MJ
10. Serra M
11. Burger J
12. Parreira R
13. Moran E
14. Valera AC
15. Porfirio E
16. Boaventura R
17. Silva AM
18. Bradley DG
(2017) The population genomics of archaeological transition in west Iberia: investigation of ancient substructure using imputation and haplotype-based methods
PLOS Genetics 13:e1006852.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006852
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Mathieson I
2. Lazaridis I
3. Rohland N
4. Mallick S
5. Patterson N
6. Roodenberg SA
7. Harney E
8. Stewardson K
9. Fernandes D
10. Novak M
11. Sirak K
12. Gamba C
13. Jones ER
14. Llamas B
15. Dryomov S
16. Pickrell J
17. Arsuaga JL
18. de Castro JMB
19. Carbonell E
20. Gerritsen F
21. Khokhlov A
22. Kuznetsov P
23. Lozano M
24. Meller H
25. Mochalov O
26. Moiseyev V
27. Guerra MAR
28. Roodenberg J
29. Vergès JM
30. Krause J
31. Cooper A
32. Alt KW
33. Brown D
34. Anthony D
35. Lalueza-Fox C
36. Haak W
37. Pinhasi R
38. Reich D
(2015) Genome-wide patterns of selection in 230 ancient Eurasians
Nature 528:499–503.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16152
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Mathieson I
2. Alpaslan-Roodenberg S
3. Posth C
4. Szécsényi-Nagy A
5. Rohland N
6. Mallick S
7. Olalde I
8. Broomandkhoshbacht N
9. Candilio F
10. Cheronet O
11. Fernandes D
12. Ferry M
13. Gamarra B
14. Fortes GG
15. Haak W
16. Harney E
17. Jones E
18. Keating D
19. Krause-Kyora B
20. Kucukkalipci I
21. Michel M
22. Mittnik A
23. Nägele K
24. Novak M
25. Oppenheimer J
26. Patterson N
27. Pfrengle S
28. Sirak K
29. Stewardson K
30. Vai S
31. Alexandrov S
32. Alt KW
33. Andreescu R
34. Antonović D
35. Ash A
36. Atanassova N
37. Bacvarov K
38. Gusztáv MB
39. Bocherens H
40. Bolus M
41. Boroneanţ A
42. Boyadzhiev Y
43. Budnik A
44. Burmaz J
45. Chohadzhiev S
46. Conard NJ
47. Cottiaux R
48. Čuka M
49. Cupillard C
50. Drucker DG
51. Elenski N
52. Francken M
53. Galabova B
54. Ganetsovski G
55. Gély B
56. Hajdu T
57. Handzhyiska V
58. Harvati K
59. Higham T
60. Iliev S
61. Janković I
62. Karavanić I
63. Kennett DJ
64. Komšo D
65. Kozak A
66. Labuda D
67. Lari M
68. Lazar C
69. Leppek M
70. Leshtakov K
71. Vetro DL
72. Los D
73. Lozanov I
74. Malina M
75. Martini F
76. McSweeney K
77. Meller H
78. Menđušić M
79. Mirea P
80. Moiseyev V
81. Petrova V
82. Price TD
83. Simalcsik A
84. Sineo L
85. Šlaus M
86. Slavchev V
87. Stanev P
88. Starović A
89. Szeniczey T
90. Talamo S
91. Teschler-Nicola M
92. Thevenet C
93. Valchev I
94. Valentin F
95. Vasilyev S
96. Veljanovska F
97. Venelinova S
98. Veselovskaya E
99. Viola B
100. Virag C
101. Zaninović J
102. Zäuner S
103. Stockhammer PW
104. Catalano G
105. Krauß R
106. Caramelli D
107. Zariņa G
108. Gaydarska B
109. Lillie M
110. Nikitin AG
111. Potekhina I
112. Papathanasiou A
113. Borić D
114. Bonsall C
115. Krause J
116. Pinhasi R
117. Reich D
(2018) The genomic history of southeastern Europe
Nature 555:197–203.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25778
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Meyer M
2. Kircher M
(2010) Illumina sequencing library preparation for highly multiplexed target capture and sequencing
Cold Spring Harbor Protocols 2010:pdb.prot5448.

https://doi.org/10.1101/pdb.prot5448
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Mittnik A
2. Wang C-C
3. Pfrengle S
4. Daubaras M
5. Zariņa G
6. Hallgren F
7. Allmäe R
8. Khartanovich V
9. Moiseyev V
10. Tõrv M
11. Furtwängler A
12. Valtueña AA
13. Feldman M
14. Economou C
15. Oinonen M
16. Vasks A
17. Balanovska E
18. Reich D
19. Jankauskas R
20. Haak W
21. Schiffels S
22. Krause J
(2018) Author correction: the genetic prehistory of the Baltic Sea region
Nature Communications 9:1494.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03872-y
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Mittnik A
2. Massy K
3. Knipper C
4. Wittenborn F
5. Friedrich R
6. Pfrengle S
7. Burri M
8. Carlichi-Witjes N
9. Deeg H
10. Furtwängler A
11. Harbeck M
12. von Heyking K
13. Kociumaka C
14. Kucukkalipci I
15. Lindauer S
16. Metz S
17. Staskiewicz A
18. Thiel A
19. Wahl J
20. Haak W
21. Pernicka E
22. Schiffels S
23. Stockhammer PW
24. Krause J
(2019) Kinship-based social inequality in Bronze age Europe
Science 366:731–734.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax6219
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Preprint
1. Moots HM
2. Antonio M
3. Sawyer S
4. Spence JP
5. Oberreiter V
6. Weiß CL
7. Lucci M
8. Cherifi YMS
9. La Pastina F
10. Genchi F
11. Praxmeier E
12. Zagorc B
13. Cheronot O
14. Özdoğan KT
15. Demetz L
16. Amrani S
17. Candilio F
18. De Angelis D
19. Gasperetti G
20. Fernandes D
21. Gao Z
22. Fantar M
23. Coppa A
24. Pritchard JK
25. Pinhasi R
(2022) A genetic history of continuity and mobility in the Iron age Central Mediterranean
bioRxiv.

https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.13.483276
- Google Scholar
1. Morrison J
2. Knoblauch N
3. Marcus JH
4. Stephens M
5. He X
(2020) Publisher correction: Mendelian randomization accounting for correlated and uncorrelated pleiotropic effects using genome-wide summary statistics
Nature Genetics 52:750.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-020-0655-9
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Narasimhan VM
2. Patterson N
3. Moorjani P
4. Rohland N
5. Bernardos R
6. Mallick S
7. Lazaridis I
8. Nakatsuka N
9. Olalde I
10. Lipson M
11. Kim AM
12. Olivieri LM
13. Coppa A
14. Vidale M
15. Mallory J
16. Moiseyev V
17. Kitov E
18. Monge J
19. Adamski N
20. Alex N
21. Broomandkhoshbacht N
22. Candilio F
23. Callan K
24. Cheronet O
25. Culleton BJ
26. Ferry M
27. Fernandes D
28. Freilich S
29. Gamarra B
30. Gaudio D
31. Hajdinjak M
32. Harney É
33. Harper TK
34. Keating D
35. Lawson AM
36. Mah M
37. Mandl K
38. Michel M
39. Novak M
40. Oppenheimer J
41. Rai N
42. Sirak K
43. Slon V
44. Stewardson K
45. Zalzala F
46. Zhang Z
47. Akhatov G
48. Bagashev AN
49. Bagnera A
50. Baitanayev B
51. Bendezu-Sarmiento J
52. Bissembaev AA
53. Bonora GL
54. Chargynov TT
55. Chikisheva T
56. Dashkovskiy PK
57. Derevianko A
58. Dobeš M
59. Douka K
60. Dubova N
61. Duisengali MN
62. Enshin D
63. Epimakhov A
64. Fribus AV
65. Fuller D
66. Goryachev A
67. Gromov A
68. Grushin SP
69. Hanks B
70. Judd M
71. Kazizov E
72. Khokhlov A
73. Krygin AP
74. Kupriyanova E
75. Kuznetsov P
76. Luiselli D
77. Maksudov F
78. Mamedov AM
79. Mamirov TB
80. Meiklejohn C
81. Merrett DC
82. Micheli R
83. Mochalov O
84. Mustafokulov S
85. Nayak A
86. Pettener D
87. Potts R
88. Razhev D
89. Rykun M
90. Sarno S
91. Savenkova TM
92. Sikhymbaeva K
93. Slepchenko SM
94. Soltobaev OA
95. Stepanova N
96. Svyatko S
97. Tabaldiev K
98. Teschler-Nicola M
99. Tishkin AA
100. Tkachev VV
101. Vasilyev S
102. Velemínský P
103. Voyakin D
104. Yermolayeva A
105. Zahir M
106. Zubkov VS
107. Zubova A
108. Shinde VS
109. Lalueza-Fox C
110. Meyer M
111. Anthony D
112. Boivin N
113. Thangaraj K
114. Kennett DJ
115. Frachetti M
116. Pinhasi R
117. Reich D
(2019) The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia
Science 365:eaat7487.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat7487
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Nikitin AG
2. Stadler P
3. Kotova N
4. Teschler-Nicola M
5. Price TD
6. Hoover J
7. Kennett DJ
8. Lazaridis I
9. Rohland N
10. Lipson M
11. Reich D
(2019) Interactions between earliest Linearbandkeramik farmers and central European hunter gatherers at the dawn of European Neolithization
Scientific Reports 9:19544.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56029-2
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Novembre J
2. Johnson T
3. Bryc K
4. Kutalik Z
5. Boyko AR
6. Auton A
7. Indap A
8. King KS
9. Bergmann S
10. Nelson MR
11. Stephens M
12. Bustamante CD
(2008) Genes mirror geography within Europe
Nature 456:98–101.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07331
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2014) Derived immune and ancestral pigmentation alleles in a 7,000-year-old Mesolithic European
Nature 507:225–228.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12960
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2015) A common genetic origin for early farmers from Mediterranean Cardial and Central European LBK cultures
Molecular Biology and Evolution 32:3132–3142.

https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msv181
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Olalde I
2. Brace S
3. Allentoft ME
4. Armit I
5. Kristiansen K
6. Booth T
7. Rohland N
8. Mallick S
9. Szécsényi-Nagy A
10. Mittnik A
11. Altena E
12. Lipson M
13. Lazaridis I
14. Harper TK
15. Patterson N
16. Broomandkhoshbacht N
17. Diekmann Y
18. Faltyskova Z
19. Fernandes D
20. Ferry M
21. Harney E
22. de Knijff P
23. Michel M
24. Oppenheimer J
25. Stewardson K
26. Barclay A
27. Alt KW
28. Liesau C
29. Ríos P
30. Blasco C
31. Miguel JV
32. García RM
33. Fernández AA
34. Bánffy E
35. Bernabò-Brea M
36. Billoin D
37. Bonsall C
38. Bonsall L
39. Allen T
40. Büster L
41. Carver S
42. Navarro LC
43. Craig OE
44. Cook GT
45. Cunliffe B
46. Denaire A
47. Dinwiddy KE
48. Dodwell N
49. Ernée M
50. Evans C
51. Kuchařík M
52. Farré JF
53. Fowler C
54. Gazenbeek M
55. Pena RG
56. Haber-Uriarte M
57. Haduch E
58. Hey G
59. Jowett N
60. Knowles T
61. Massy K
62. Pfrengle S
63. Lefranc P
64. Lemercier O
65. Lefebvre A
66. Martínez CH
67. Olmo VG
68. Ramírez AB
69. Maurandi JL
70. Majó T
71. McKinley JI
72. McSweeney K
73. Mende BG
74. Modi A
75. Kulcsár G
76. Kiss V
77. Czene A
78. Patay R
79. Endrődi A
80. Köhler K
81. Hajdu T
82. Szeniczey T
83. Dani J
84. Bernert Z
85. Hoole M
86. Cheronet O
87. Keating D
88. Velemínský P
89. Dobeš M
90. Candilio F
91. Brown F
92. Fernández RF
93. Herrero-Corral A-M
94. Tusa S
95. Carnieri E
96. Lentini L
97. Valenti A
98. Zanini A
99. Waddington C
100. Delibes G
101. Guerra-Doce E
102. Neil B
103. Brittain M
104. Luke M
105. Mortimer R
106. Desideri J
107. Besse M
108. Brücken G
109. Furmanek M
110. Hałuszko A
111. Mackiewicz M
112. Rapiński A
113. Leach S
114. Soriano I
115. Lillios KT
116. Cardoso JL
117. Pearson MP
118. Włodarczak P
119. Price TD
120. Prieto P
121. Rey P-J
122. Risch R
123. Rojo Guerra MA
124. Schmitt A
125. Serralongue J
126. Silva AM
127. Smrčka V
128. Vergnaud L
129. Zilhão J
130. Caramelli D
131. Higham T
132. Thomas MG
133. Kennett DJ
134. Fokkens H
135. Heyd V
136. Sheridan A
137. Sjögren K-G
138. Stockhammer PW
139. Krause J
140. Pinhasi R
141. Haak W
142. Barnes I
143. Lalueza-Fox C
144. Reich D
(2018) The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe
Nature 555:190–196.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25738
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years
Science 363:1230–1234.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav4040
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Oleson JP
(2009) The Oxford Handbook of Engineering and Technology in the Classical World
Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734856.001.0001
- Google Scholar
(2016) Genomic evidence establishes anatolia as the source of the European Neolithic gene pool
Current Biology 26:270–275.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.019
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. O’Sullivan N
2. Posth C
3. Coia V
4. Schuenemann VJ
5. Price TD
6. Wahl J
7. Pinhasi R
8. Zink A
9. Krause J
10. Maixner F
(2018) Ancient genome-wide analyses infer kinship structure in an Early Medieval Alemannic graveyard
Science Advances 4:eaao1262.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao1262
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Pagani L
2. Lawson DJ
3. Jagoda E
4. Mörseburg A
5. Eriksson A
6. Mitt M
7. Clemente F
8. Hudjashov G
9. DeGiorgio M
10. Saag L
11. Wall JD
12. Cardona A
13. Mägi R
14. Wilson Sayres MA
15. Kaewert S
16. Inchley C
17. Scheib CL
18. Järve M
19. Karmin M
20. Jacobs GS
21. Antao T
22. Iliescu FM
23. Kushniarevich A
24. Ayub Q
25. Tyler-Smith C
26. Xue Y
27. Yunusbayev B
28. Tambets K
29. Mallick CB
30. Saag L
31. Pocheshkhova E
32. Andriadze G
33. Muller C
34. Westaway MC
35. Lambert DM
36. Zoraqi G
37. Turdikulova S
38. Dalimova D
39. Sabitov Z
40. Sultana GNN
41. Lachance J
42. Tishkoff S
43. Momynaliev K
44. Isakova J
45. Damba LD
46. Gubina M
47. Nymadawa P
48. Evseeva I
49. Atramentova L
50. Utevska O
51. Ricaut FX
52. Brucato N
53. Sudoyo H
54. Letellier T
55. Cox MP
56. Barashkov NA
57. Skaro V
58. Mulahasanovic L
59. Primorac D
60. Sahakyan H
61. Mormina M
62. Eichstaedt CA
63. Lichman DV
64. Abdullah S
65. Chaubey G
66. Wee JTS
67. Mihailov E
68. Karunas A
69. Litvinov S
70. Khusainova R
71. Ekomasova N
72. Akhmetova V
73. Khidiyatova I
74. Marjanović D
75. Yepiskoposyan L
76. Behar DM
77. Balanovska E
78. Metspalu A
79. Derenko M
80. Malyarchuk B
81. Voevoda M
82. Fedorova SA
83. Osipova LP
84. Lahr MM
85. Gerbault P
86. Leavesley M
87. Migliano AB
88. Petraglia M
89. Balanovsky O
90. Khusnutdinova EK
91. Metspalu E
92. Thomas MG
93. Manica A
94. Nielsen R
95. Villems R
96. Willerslev E
97. Kivisild T
98. Metspalu M
(2016) Genomic analyses inform on migration events during the peopling of Eurasia
Nature 538:238–242.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19792
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Patterson N
2. Moorjani P
3. Luo Y
4. Mallick S
5. Rohland N
6. Zhan Y
7. Genschoreck T
8. Webster T
9. Reich D
(2012) Ancient admixture in human history
Genetics 192:1065–1093.

https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.112.145037
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Pinhasi R
2. Fernandes D
3. Sirak K
4. Novak M
5. Connell S
6. Alpaslan-Roodenberg S
7. Gerritsen F
8. Moiseyev V
9. Gromov A
10. Raczky P
11. Anders A
12. Pietrusewsky M
13. Rollefson G
14. Jovanovic M
15. Trinhhoang H
16. Bar-Oz G
17. Oxenham M
18. Matsumura H
19. Hofreiter M
(2015) Optimal ancient DNA yields from the inner ear part of the human petrous bone
PLOS ONE 10:e0129102.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0129102
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) Isolating the human cochlea to generate bone powder for ancient DNA analysis
Nature Protocols 14:1194–1205.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-019-0137-7
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Posth C
2. Zaro V
3. Spyrou MA
4. Vai S
5. Gnecchi-Ruscone GA
6. Modi A
7. Peltzer A
8. Mötsch A
9. Nägele K
10. Vågene ÅJ
11. Nelson EA
12. Radzevičiūtė R
13. Freund C
14. Bondioli LM
15. Cappuccini L
16. Frenzel H
17. Pacciani E
18. Boschin F
19. Capecchi G
20. Martini I
21. Moroni A
22. Ricci S
23. Sperduti A
24. Turchetti MA
25. Riga A
26. Zavattaro M
27. Zifferero A
28. Heyne HO
29. Fernández-Domínguez E
30. Kroonen GJ
31. McCormick M
32. Haak W
33. Lari M
34. Barbujani G
35. Bondioli L
36. Bos KI
37. Caramelli D
38. Krause J
(2021) The origin and legacy of the Etruscans through a 2000-year archeogenomic time transect
Science Advances 7:eabi7673.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abi7673
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Prüfer K
2. de Filippo C
3. Grote S
4. Mafessoni F
5. Korlević P
6. Hajdinjak M
7. Vernot B
8. Skov L
9. Hsieh P
10. Peyrégne S
11. Reher D
12. Hopfe C
13. Nagel S
14. Maricic T
15. Fu Q
16. Theunert C
17. Rogers R
18. Skoglund P
19. Chintalapati M
20. Dannemann M
21. Nelson BJ
22. Key FM
23. Rudan P
24. Kućan Ž
25. Gušić I
26. Golovanova LV
27. Doronichev VB
28. Patterson N
29. Reich D
30. Eichler EE
31. Slatkin M
32. Schierup MH
33. Andrés AM
34. Kelso J
35. Meyer M
36. Pääbo S
(2017) A high-coverage Neandertal genome from Vindija Cave in Croatia
Science 358:655–658.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao1887
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Renaud G
2. Slon V
3. Duggan AT
4. Kelso J
(2015) Schmutzi: estimation of contamination and endogenous mitochondrial consensus calling for ancient DNA
Genome Biology 16:224.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0776-0
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Rivollat M
2. Jeong C
3. Schiffels S
4. Küçükkalıpçı İ
5. Pemonge MH
6. Rohrlach AB
7. Alt KW
8. Binder D
9. Friederich S
10. Ghesquière E
11. Gronenborn D
12. Laporte L
13. Lefranc P
14. Meller H
15. Réveillas H
16. Rosenstock E
17. Rottier S
18. Scarre C
19. Soler L
20. Wahl J
21. Krause J
22. Deguilloux MF
23. Haak W
(2020) Ancient genome-wide DNA from France highlights the complexity of interactions between Mesolithic hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers
Science Advances 6:eaaz5344.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz5344
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2017) Genomic analyses of pre-European conquest human remains from the Canary Islands Reveal close affinity to modern North Africans
Current Biology 27:3396–3402.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.09.059
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Rohland N
2. Hofreiter M
(2007) Ancient DNA extraction from bones and teeth
Nature Protocols 2:1756–1762.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2007.247
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Rohland N
2. Harney E
3. Mallick S
4. Nordenfelt S
5. Reich D
(2015) Partial uracil-DNA-glycosylase treatment for screening of ancient DNA
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 370:20130624.

https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0624
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2020) Roman imperialism and the transformation of rural society in a frontier Province: diversifying the narrative
Britannia 51:265–294.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068113X20000148
- Google Scholar
1. Saag L
2. Varul L
3. Scheib CL
4. Stenderup J
5. Allentoft ME
6. Saag L
7. Pagani L
8. Reidla M
9. Tambets K
10. Metspalu E
11. Kriiska A
12. Willerslev E
13. Kivisild T
14. Metspalu M
(2017) Extensive farming in estonia started through a sex-biased migration from the Steppe
Current Biology 27:2185–2193.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.06.022
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Saag L
2. Laneman M
3. Varul L
4. Malve M
5. Valk H
6. Razzak MA
7. Shirobokov IG
8. Khartanovich VI
9. Mikhaylova ER
10. Kushniarevich A
11. Scheib CL
12. Solnik A
13. Reisberg T
14. Parik J
15. Saag L
16. Metspalu E
17. Rootsi S
18. Montinaro F
19. Remm M
20. Mägi R
21. D’Atanasio E
22. Crema ER
23. Díez-Del-Molino D
24. Thomas MG
25. Kriiska A
26. Kivisild T
27. Villems R
28. Lang V
29. Metspalu M
30. Tambets K
(2019) The arrival of Siberian ancestry connecting the Eastern Baltic to Uralic speakers further east
Current Biology 29:1701–1711.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.04.026
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2019) Megalithic tombs in western and northern Neolithic Europe were linked to a kindred society
PNAS 116:9469–9474.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1818037116
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Saupe T
2. Montinaro F
3. Scaggion C
4. Carrara N
5. Kivisild T
6. D’Atanasio E
7. Hui R
8. Solnik A
9. Lebrasseur O
10. Larson G
11. Alessandri L
12. Arienzo I
13. De Angelis F
14. Rolfo MF
15. Skeates R
16. Silvestri L
17. Beckett J
18. Talamo S
19. Dolfini A
20. Miari M
21. Metspalu M
22. Benazzi S
23. Capelli C
24. Pagani L
25. Scheib CL
(2021) Ancient genomes reveal structural shifts after the arrival of Steppe-related ancestry in the Italian Peninsula
Current Biology 31:2576–2591.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.04.022
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
(2007) The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521780537
- Google Scholar
1. Scheidel W
(2015) Orbis: the stanford geospatial network model of the Roman world
SSRN Electronic Journal 1:2609654.

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2609654
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Scheidel W
(2019) Escape from Rome
Princeton University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691198835
- Google Scholar
1. Schiffels S
2. Haak W
3. Paajanen P
4. Llamas B
5. Popescu E
6. Loe L
7. Clarke R
8. Lyons A
9. Mortimer R
10. Sayer D
11. Tyler-Smith C
12. Cooper A
13. Durbin R
(2016) Iron age and Anglo-Saxon genomes from East England reveal British migration history
Nature Communications 7:10408.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10408
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Software
1. Schiffels S
(2022) Pileup caller, version 1.5.2
GitHub.

https://github.com/stschiff/sequenceTools
1. Schroeder H
2. Margaryan A
3. Szmyt M
4. Theulot B
5. Włodarczak P
6. Rasmussen S
7. Gopalakrishnan S
8. Szczepanek A
9. Konopka T
10. Jensen TZT
11. Witkowska B
12. Wilk S
13. Przybyła MM
14. Pospieszny Ł
15. Sjögren KG
16. Belka Z
17. Olsen J
18. Kristiansen K
19. Willerslev E
20. Frei KM
21. Sikora M
22. Johannsen NN
23. Allentoft ME
(2019) Unraveling ancestry, kinship, and violence in a Late Neolithic mass grave
PNAS 116:10705–10710.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820210116
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Schuenemann VJ
2. Peltzer A
3. Welte B
4. van Pelt WP
5. Molak M
6. Wang CC
7. Furtwängler A
8. Urban C
9. Reiter E
10. Nieselt K
11. Teßmann B
12. Francken M
13. Harvati K
14. Haak W
15. Schiffels S
16. Krause J
(2017) Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods
Nature Communications 8:15694.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15694
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Sikora M
2. Seguin-Orlando A
3. Sousa VC
4. Albrechtsen A
5. Korneliussen T
6. Ko A
7. Rasmussen S
8. Dupanloup I
9. Nigst PR
10. Bosch MD
11. Renaud G
12. Allentoft ME
13. Margaryan A
14. Vasilyev SV
15. Veselovskaya EV
16. Borutskaya SB
17. Deviese T
18. Comeskey D
19. Higham T
20. Manica A
21. Foley R
22. Meltzer DJ
23. Nielsen R
24. Excoffier L
25. Mirazon Lahr M
26. Orlando L
27. Willerslev E
(2017) Ancient genomes show social and reproductive behavior of early upper Paleolithic foragers
Science 358:659–662.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao1807
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2012) Origins and genetic legacy of Neolithic farmers and hunter-gatherers in Europe
Science 336:466–469.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1216304
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Skoglund P
2. Malmström H
3. Omrak A
4. Raghavan M
5. Valdiosera C
6. Günther T
7. Hall P
8. Tambets K
9. Parik J
10. Sjögren KG
11. Apel J
12. Willerslev E
13. Storå J
14. Götherström A
15. Jakobsson M
(2014) Genomic diversity and admixture differs for Stone-Age Scandinavian foragers and farmers
Science 344:747–750.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1253448
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Skourtanioti E
2. Erdal YS
3. Frangipane M
4. Balossi Restelli F
5. Yener KA
6. Pinnock F
7. Matthiae P
8. Özbal R
9. Schoop U-D
10. Guliyev F
11. Akhundov T
12. Lyonnet B
13. Hammer EL
14. Nugent SE
15. Burri M
16. Neumann GU
17. Penske S
18. Ingman T
19. Akar M
20. Shafiq R
21. Palumbi G
22. Eisenmann S
23. D’Andrea M
24. Rohrlach AB
25. Warinner C
26. Jeong C
27. Stockhammer PW
28. Haak W
29. Krause J
(2020) Genomic history of Neolithic to Bronze Age Anatolia, Northern Levant, and Southern Caucasus
Cell 181:1158–1175.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.04.044
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
1. Symonds M
(2017) Protecting the Roman Empire: Fortlets, Frontiers, and the Quest for Post-Conquest Security
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108377287
- Google Scholar
1. Tacoma L
(2016) Approaching migration in the early Roman EmpireMigration and mobility in the Early Roman Empire
Brill 1:1–22.

https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004307377
- Google Scholar
1. Unterländer M
2. Palstra F
3. Lazaridis I
4. Pilipenko A
5. Hofmanová Z
6. Groß M
7. Sell C
8. Blöcher J
9. Kirsanow K
10. Rohland N
11. Rieger B
12. Kaiser E
13. Schier W
14. Pozdniakov D
15. Khokhlov A
16. Georges M
17. Wilde S
18. Powell A
19. Heyer E
20. Currat M
21. Reich D
22. Samashev Z
23. Parzinger H
24. Molodin VI
25. Burger J
(2017) Ancestry and demography and descendants of Iron Age nomads of the Eurasian Steppe
Nature Communications 8:14615.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14615
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2018) Four millennia of Iberian biomolecular prehistory illustrate the impact of prehistoric migrations at the far end of Eurasia
PNAS 115:3428–3433.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717762115
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. van den Brink ECM
2. Beeri R
3. Kirzner D
4. Bron E
5. Cohen-Weinberger A
6. Kamaisky E
7. Gonen T
8. Gershuny L
9. Nagar Y
10. Ben-Tor D
11. Sukenik N
12. Shamir O
13. Maher EF
14. Reich D
(2017) A late bronze age II clay coffin from Tel shaddud in the Central Jezreel Valley, Israel: context and historical implications
Levant 49:105–135.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00758914.2017.1368204
- Google Scholar
1. Veeramah KR
2. Rott A
3. Groß M
4. van Dorp L
5. López S
6. Kirsanow K
7. Sell C
8. Blöcher J
9. Wegmann D
10. Link V
11. Hofmanová Z
12. Peters J
13. Trautmann B
14. Gairhos A
15. Haberstroh J
16. Päffgen B
17. Hellenthal G
18. Haas-Gebhard B
19. Harbeck M
20. Burger J
(2018) Population genomic analysis of elongated skulls reveals extensive female-biased immigration in early Medieval Bavaria
PNAS 115:3494–3499.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719880115
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
Book
(2019) Current Trends in Roman Demography and Empirical Approaches to the Dynamics of the Limes Populations Finding the Limits of the Limes
Cham: Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04576-0
- Google Scholar
(2019) Survival of late pleistocene hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Iberian Peninsula
Current Biology 29:1169–1177.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.02.006
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Wang CC
2. Reinhold S
3. Kalmykov A
4. Wissgott A
5. Brandt G
6. Jeong C
7. Cheronet O
8. Ferry M
9. Harney E
10. Keating D
11. Mallick S
12. Rohland N
13. Stewardson K
14. Kantorovich AR
15. Maslov VE
16. Petrenko VG
17. Erlikh VR
18. Atabiev BC
19. Magomedov RG
20. Kohl PL
21. Alt KW
22. Pichler SL
23. Gerling C
24. Meller H
25. Vardanyan B
26. Yeganyan L
27. Rezepkin AD
28. Mariaschk D
29. Berezina N
30. Gresky J
31. Fuchs K
32. Knipper C
33. Schiffels S
34. Balanovska E
35. Balanovsky O
36. Mathieson I
37. Higham T
38. Berezin YB
39. Buzhilova A
40. Trifonov V
41. Pinhasi R
42. Belinskij AB
43. Reich D
44. Hansen S
45. Krause J
46. Haak W
(2019) Ancient human genome-wide data from a 3000-year interval in the Caucasus corresponds with eco-geographic regions
Nature Communications 10:590.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-08220-8
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
1. Zalloua P
2. Collins CJ
3. Gosling A
4. Biagini SA
5. Costa B
6. Kardailsky O
7. Nigro L
8. Khalil W
9. Calafell F
10. Matisoo-Smith E
(2018) Ancient DNA of phoenician remains indicates discontinuity in the settlement history of Ibiza
Scientific Reports 8:17567.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-35667-y
- PubMed
- Google Scholar
(2021) Ancient genomes provide insights into family structure and the heredity of social status in the early Bronze Age of southeastern Europe
Scientific Reports 11:10072.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89090-x
- PubMed
- Google Scholar

Article and author information

Author details

Margaret L Antonio

Biomedical Informatics Program, Stanford University, Stanford, United States

Contribution
Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

Contributed equally with
Clemens L Weiß, Ziyue Gao and Susanna Sawyer

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1049-211X
Clemens L Weiß

Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, United States

Contribution
Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

Contributed equally with
Margaret L Antonio, Ziyue Gao and Susanna Sawyer

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3321-3902
Ziyue Gao

Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States

Contribution
Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Writing – review and editing

Contributed equally with
Margaret L Antonio, Clemens L Weiß and Susanna Sawyer

Competing interests
Reviewing editor, eLife

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9244-0238
Susanna Sawyer
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Contributed equally with
Margaret L Antonio, Clemens L Weiß and Ziyue Gao

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Victoria Oberreiter
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0766-3782
Hannah M Moots
1. Stanford Archaeology Center, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
2. University of Chicago, Department of Human Genetics, Chicago, United States
Contribution
Resources, Data curation, Writing – review and editing

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Jeffrey P Spence

Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, United States

Contribution
Data curation, Methodology

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3199-1447
Olivia Cheronet
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Brina Zagorc
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7685-1958
Elisa Praxmarer

Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Kadir Toykan Özdoğan

Department of History and Art History, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands

Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Lea Demetz

Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Contribution
Resources, Data curation

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Pere Gelabert

Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Daniel Fernandes
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
3. CIAS, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Michaela Lucci

Dipartimento di Storia Antropologia Religioni Arte Spettacolo, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Timka Alihodžić

Archaeological Museum Zadar, Zadar, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Selma Amrani

LBEIG, Population Genetics & Conservation Unit, Department of Cellular and Molecular Biology – Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene, Algiers, Algeria

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Pavel Avetisyan

National Academy of Sciences of Armenia, Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Yerevan, Armenia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Christèle Baillif-Ducros

French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP)/CAGT UMR 5288, Toulouse, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3050-3082
Željka Bedić

Centre for Applied Bioanthropology, Institute for Anthropological Research, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Audrey Bertrand

Université Gustave Eiffel – Laboratoire ACP, Paris, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Maja Bilić

Palisada Ltd, Split, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
Affiliated with Palisada Ltd. The author has no financial interests to declare
Luca Bondioli

Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali, Archeologia, Storia dell'arte, del Cinema e della Musica, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Paulina Borówka

Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Emmanuel Botte

Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, Centre Camille Jullian, Aix-en-Provence, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Josip Burmaz

Kaducej Ltd, Split, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
Affiliated with Kaducej Ltd. The author has no financial interests to declare
Domagoj Bužanić

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Francesca Candilio

Bioarchaeology Service, Museum of Civilizations, Rome, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4668-1361
Mirna Cvetko

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Daniela De Angelis

Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Tarquinia, Direzione Regionale Musei Lazio, Rome, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Ivan Drnić

Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Kristián Elschek

Institute of Archaeology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Nitra, Slovakia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Mounir Fantar

Département des Monuments et des Sites Antiques - Institut National du Patrimoine INP, Tunis, Tunisia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Andrej Gaspari

University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department for Archaeology, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Gabriella Gasperetti

Soprintendenza Archeologia, belle arti e paesaggio per le province di Sassari e Nuoro, Sassari, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Francesco Genchi

Department of Oriental Studies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7696-4207
Snežana Golubović

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Zuzana Hukeľová

Institute of Archaeology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Nitra, Slovakia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Rimantas Jankauskas

Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Kristina Jelinčić Vučković

Institute of Archaeology, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1236-734X
Gordana Jeremić

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Iva Kaić

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Kevin Kazek

Université de Lorraine, Centre de Recherche Universitaire Lorrain d' Histoire (CRULH), Nancy, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Hamazasp Khachatryan

Department of Archaeologi, Shirak Centere of Armenological Studies, National Academy of Sciences Republic of Armenia, Gyumri, Armenia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Anahit Khudaverdyan

Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, Yerevan, Armenia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Sylvia Kirchengast

Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3220-7271
Miomir Korać

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Valérie Kozlowski

Musée Archéologique de l'Oise, Vendeuil-Caply, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Mária Krošláková

Institute of Archaeology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Nitra, Slovakia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Dora Kušan Špalj

Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Francesco La Pastina

Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Marie Laguardia

UMR 7041 ArScAn / French Institute of the Near East, Beirut, Lebanon

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Sandra Legrand

Musée Archéologique de l'Oise, Vendeuil-Caply, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Tino Leleković

Archaeology Division, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Tamara Leskovar

University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department for Archaeology, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Wiesław Lorkiewicz

Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0754-5161
Dženi Los

Kaducej Ltd, Split, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
Affiliated with Kaducej Ltd. The author has no financial interests to declare
Ana Maria Silva
1. CIAS, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
2. CEF - University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
3. UNIARQ - University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1912-6581
Rene Masaryk

Skupina STIK Zavod za preučevanje povezovalnih področij preteklosti in sedanjosti, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
Affiliated with Skupina STIK. The author has no financial interests to declare
Vinka Matijević

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Yahia Mehdi Seddik Cherifi
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Cardiolo-Oncology Research Collaborative Group (CORCG), Faculty of Medicine, Benyoucef Benkhedda University, Algiers, Algeria
3. Molecular Pathology, University Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, Toulouse, France
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Nicolas Meyer

French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP), Metz, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Ilija Mikić

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Nataša Miladinović-Radmilović

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Branka Milošević Zakić

Museum of Croatian Archaeological Monuments, Split, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Lina Nacouzi

L’Institut français du Proche-Orient, Beirut, Lebanon

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Magdalena Natuniewicz-Sekuła

Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences, Centre of Interdisciplinary Archaeological Research, Warsaw, Poland

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Alessia Nava

Department of Odontostomatological and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Christine Neugebauer-Maresch
1. Austrian Archaeological Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria
2. Institute of Prehistory and Early History, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Jan Nováček
1. Thuringia State Service for Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Weimar, Thuringia, Germany
2. Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University Medical Centre, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2707-5347
Anna Osterholtz

Mississippi State University, Starkville, United States

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Julianne Paige

University of Nevada, Las Vegas, United States

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Lujana Paraman

Trogir Town Museum, Trogir, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Dominique Pieri

Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Karol Pieta

Institute of Archaeology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Nitra, Slovakia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Stefan Pop-Lazić

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Matej Ruttkay

Institute of Archaeology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Nitra, Slovakia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6441-9914
Mirjana Sanader

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Arkadiusz Sołtysiak

Faculty of Archaeology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9040-5022
Alessandra Sperduti
1. Bioarchaeology Service, Museum of Civilizations, Rome, Italy
2. Dipartimento Asia, Africa e Mediterraneo, Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale”, Naples, Italy
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9338-5891
Tijana Stankovic Pesterac

Museum of Vojvodina, Novi Sad, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Maria Teschler-Nicola
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Department of Anthropology, Natural History Museum Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Iwona Teul

Chair and Department of Normal Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Domagoj Tončinić

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Julien Trapp

Musée de La Cour d'Or, Eurométropole de Metz, Metz, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Dragana Vulović

Institute of Archaeology Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Tomasz Waliszewski

Faculty of Archaeology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5793-4600
Diethard Walter

Thuringia State Service for Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Weimar, Thuringia, Germany

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Miloš Živanović

Department of Archeology, Center for Conservation and Archeology of Montenegro, Cetinje, Montenegro

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Mohamed el Mostefa Filah

Insitut d’Archeologie, University Algiers 2, Algiers, Algeria

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Morana Čaušević-Bully

Université de Franche Comté / UMR Chrono-Environnement, Besançon, France

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Mario Šlaus

Anthropological Centre, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4941-2212
Dušan Borić
1. Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
2. Department of Anthropology, New York University, New York, United States
Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0166-627X
Mario Novak

Centre for Applied Bioanthropology, Institute for Anthropological Research, Zagreb, Croatia

Contribution
Resources

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4567-8742
Alfredo Coppa
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
3. Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
Contribution
Resources, Supervision

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7708-2484
Ron Pinhasi
1. Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
2. Human Evolution and Archaeological Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Contribution
Supervision, Funding acquisition

For correspondence
ropinhasi@gmail.com

Competing interests
No competing interests declared
Jonathan K Pritchard
1. Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
2. Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
Contribution
Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Writing – review and editing

For correspondence
pritch@stanford.edu

Competing interests
No competing interests declared

"This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8828-5236

Funding

National Science Foundation (Graduate Research Fellowship)

Margaret L Antonio

National Institutes of Health (HG011432)

Clemens L Weiß

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

Jonathan K Pritchard

Austrian Science Fund (M3108-G)

Susanna Sawyer

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Acknowledgements

We thank Professor Walter Scheidel for helpful discussions and feedback on the historical context, and all members of the Pritchard and Pinhasi labs for their valuable input. We thank Pieter W Faber and the University of Chicago Genomics Facility for sequencing the samples reported here. We thank Benjamin Peter and an anonymous reviewer for their insightful and constructive reviews. This project was partially supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (MLA.), a grant from the National Institutes of Health RO1 HG011432 (CLW), the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) M3108-G (SS), and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (JKP).

Copyright

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

6,100

views
964

downloads
21

citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Mendeley

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Margaret L Antonio
Clemens L Weiß
Ziyue Gao
Susanna Sawyer
Victoria Oberreiter
Hannah M Moots
Jeffrey P Spence
Olivia Cheronet
Brina Zagorc
Elisa Praxmarer
Kadir Toykan Özdoğan
Lea Demetz
Pere Gelabert
Daniel Fernandes
Michaela Lucci
Timka Alihodžić
Selma Amrani
Pavel Avetisyan
Christèle Baillif-Ducros
Željka Bedić
Audrey Bertrand
Maja Bilić
Luca Bondioli
Paulina Borówka
Emmanuel Botte
Josip Burmaz
Domagoj Bužanić
Francesca Candilio
Mirna Cvetko
Daniela De Angelis
Ivan Drnić
Kristián Elschek
Mounir Fantar
Andrej Gaspari
Gabriella Gasperetti
Francesco Genchi
Snežana Golubović
Zuzana Hukeľová
Rimantas Jankauskas
Kristina Jelinčić Vučković
Gordana Jeremić
Iva Kaić
Kevin Kazek
Hamazasp Khachatryan
Anahit Khudaverdyan
Sylvia Kirchengast
Miomir Korać
Valérie Kozlowski
Mária Krošláková
Dora Kušan Špalj
Francesco La Pastina
Marie Laguardia
Sandra Legrand
Tino Leleković
Tamara Leskovar
Wiesław Lorkiewicz
Dženi Los
Ana Maria Silva
Rene Masaryk
Vinka Matijević
Yahia Mehdi Seddik Cherifi
Nicolas Meyer
Ilija Mikić
Nataša Miladinović-Radmilović
Branka Milošević Zakić
Lina Nacouzi
Magdalena Natuniewicz-Sekuła
Alessia Nava
Christine Neugebauer-Maresch
Jan Nováček
Anna Osterholtz
Julianne Paige
Lujana Paraman
Dominique Pieri
Karol Pieta
Stefan Pop-Lazić
Matej Ruttkay
Mirjana Sanader
Arkadiusz Sołtysiak
Alessandra Sperduti
Tijana Stankovic Pesterac
Maria Teschler-Nicola
Iwona Teul
Domagoj Tončinić
Julien Trapp
Dragana Vulović
Tomasz Waliszewski
Diethard Walter
Miloš Živanović
Mohamed el Mostefa Filah
Morana Čaušević-Bully
Mario Šlaus
Dušan Borić
Mario Novak
Alfredo Coppa
Ron Pinhasi
Jonathan K Pritchard

(2024)

Stable population structure in Europe since the Iron Age, despite high mobility

eLife 13:e79714.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79714

Categories and tags

Research organism

Human

Share this article

Cite this article

Timeline of new and published genomes.

Armenia: two homogeneous genetic clusters distinguished by a temporal shift.

Southeastern Europe: highly heterogeneous Imperial Roman and Late Antiquity period population.

Western Europe: heterogeneous Imperial Roman and Late Antiquity period population.

Ancestry outliers and their potential sources.

Relatively stable population structure from Bronze Age to present-day.

Simulation of population structure with and without long-range dispersal.

Armenia.

Mainland Italy.

Sardinia.

Levant & Egypt.

Southeastern Europe.

Southwestern Europe.

Western Europe.

Northern Europe.

Great Britain & Ireland.

Eastern Central Europe.

Eastern Europe & Steppe.

North Africa.

Author details

Margaret L Antonio

Contribution

Contributed equally with

Competing interests

Clemens L Weiß

Contribution

Contributed equally with

Competing interests

Ziyue Gao

Contribution

Contributed equally with

Competing interests

Susanna Sawyer

Contribution

Contributed equally with

Competing interests

Victoria Oberreiter

Contribution

Competing interests

Hannah M Moots

Contribution

Competing interests

Jeffrey P Spence

Contribution

Competing interests

Olivia Cheronet

Contribution

Competing interests

Brina Zagorc

Contribution

Competing interests

Elisa Praxmarer

Contribution

Competing interests

Kadir Toykan Özdoğan

Contribution

Competing interests

Lea Demetz

Contribution

Competing interests

Pere Gelabert

Contribution

Competing interests

Daniel Fernandes

Contribution

Competing interests

Michaela Lucci

Contribution

Competing interests

Timka Alihodžić

Contribution

Competing interests

Selma Amrani

Contribution

Competing interests

Pavel Avetisyan

Contribution

Competing interests