Format

Send to

Choose Destination
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 27;12(1):e0170940. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170940. eCollection 2017.

Comparing Ancient DNA Preservation in Petrous Bone and Tooth Cementum.

Author information

1
Centre for GeoGenetics, Natural History Museum, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
2
Unit of Forensic Anthropology, Department of Forensic Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
3
Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
4
Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Abstract

Large-scale genomic analyses of ancient human populations have become feasible partly due to refined sampling methods. The inner part of petrous bones and the cementum layer in teeth roots are currently recognized as the best substrates for such research. We present a comparative analysis of DNA preservation in these two substrates obtained from the same human skulls, across a range of different ages and preservation environments. Both substrates display significantly higher endogenous DNA content (average of 16.4% and 40.0% for teeth and petrous bones, respectively) than parietal skull bone (average of 2.2%). Despite sample-to-sample variation, petrous bone overall performs better than tooth cementum (p = 0.001). This difference, however, is driven largely by a cluster of viking skeletons from one particular locality, showing relatively poor molecular tooth preservation (<10% endogenous DNA). In the remaining skeletons there is no systematic difference between the two substrates. A crude preservation (good/bad) applied to each sample prior to DNA-extraction predicted the above/below 10% endogenous DNA threshold in 80% of the cases. Interestingly, we observe signficantly higher levels of cytosine to thymine deamination damage and lower proportions of mitochondrial/nuclear DNA in petrous bone compared to tooth cementum. Lastly, we show that petrous bones from ancient cremated individuals contain no measurable levels of authentic human DNA. Based on these findings we discuss the pros and cons of sampling the different elements.

PMID:
28129388
PMCID:
PMC5271384
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0170940
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Public Library of Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center