Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    MMC 1

    Uploaded by

    Edu_H

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    MMC 1

    Uploaded by

    Edu_H
    3 views8 pages

    Original Title

    mmc1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    3 views8 pages

    MMC 1

    Uploaded by

    Edu_H

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 8

    Current Biology, Volume 34

    Supplemental Information

    Ancient DNA challenges prevailing


    interpretations of the Pompeii plaster casts
    Elena Pilli, Stefania Vai, Victoria C. Moses, Stefania Morelli, Martina Lari, Alessandra
    Modi, Maria Angela Diroma, Valeria Amoretti, Gabriel Zuchtriegel, Massimo
    Osanna, Douglas J. Kennett, Richard J. George, John Krigbaum, Nadin
    Rohland, Swapan Mallick, David Caramelli, David Reich, and Alissa Mittnik
    Figure S1. Plaster casts of all the analyzed individuals and anatomical elements from which
    DNA was extracted, related to Figure 1 and Table 1.
    Figure S2. Full
    results for ancient
    individuals for
    unsupervised
    ADMIXTURE
    analysis for k=2 to
    k=15, related to
    Figure 2. Ancestry
    components k shown
    as stacked bar plots.
    Figure S3. Full results for modern-day
    individuals for unsupervised ADMIXTURE
    analysis for k=2 to k=15, related to Figure 2.
    Ancestry component k as bar plots for ancient
    individuals (A) and modern-day individuals (B).
    Figure S4. ROH in individual 52, related to STAR Methods. Bar plots showing the cumulative
    length of ROH in four length classes (4-8, 8-12, 12-20, and >20 cM, color-coded). In individual 52
    a single ROG tract of 4.71 cM was detected. The two right-most panels show the expected ROH
    for offspring of closely related parents and small population sizes, respectively.
    Sample ID Skeletal element Discovery place
    01 tibia Sarno baths
    14 phalange Macellum
    15 tarsal bone Stabian baths
    20 mandible House of the Cryptoporticus
    21* right ulna House of the Cryptoporticus
    22* tooth House of the Cryptoporticus
    25 diaphysis Villa of Mysteries
    50* metacarpal House of the Golden Bracelet
    51* left humerus House of the Golden Bracelet
    52* scapula House of the Golden Bracelet
    53* vertebra House of the Golden Bracelet
    54 radius House of the Golden Bracelet
    CFDT (C7) right tibia House of the Golden Bracelet
    79 left femur Sanctuary of the Blessed Virgin of the Rosary
    *Samples analyzed through Quantifiler™ Trio DNA Quantification Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific,
    Oyster Point, CA) and enriched for mtDNA at the University of Florence, before genome-wide
    analysis.

    Table S1. Sample information, related to Figure 1 and STAR Methods. Sample ID,
    anatomical element and discovery place.
    DNA Concentration (pg/µl)
    Sample ID
    LAT SAT YT
    21 ND ND ND
    22 ND 2.9 2.8
    50 ND 28.1 22.9
    51 1.2 17.8 9.3
    52 6.1 117 107
    53 4.3 32.7 25.4

    Table S2. Trio quantification results of all samples expressed as pg/ul, related to STAR
    Methods. LAT=large autosomal target; SAT=small autosomal target; YT= Y chromosome target.
    ND=not detected.
    Sample mtDNA Percentage of position covered at least Average 5' mtDNA contammix
    average fragment CtoT haplogroup Map
    coverage length % assignment Authentic
    1-fold 2-fold 3-fold 4-fold 5-fold

    21 0.91 57.45% 23.13% 7.58% 1.77% 0.52% 59.61 N/A N/A N/A

    22 55.39 99.97 % 99.97 % 99.90 % 99.69 % 99.46% 59.46 0.3 N1b1a1 0.912

    50 37.34 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 99.96% 69.26 0.23 H1h1 0.968

    51 3.43 94.37% 81.14% 64.67% 44.61% 28.04% 69.66 0.15 T2c1c 0.977

    52 40.82 100.00 % 100.00 % 99.92 % 99.90 % 99.87% 66 0.2 U1a1* 0.908

    53 69.85 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 99.99 % 99.96% 58.99 0.24 H 0.987

    Table S3. Results from the mtDNA capture, related to STAR Methods. Results agree with the
    results of the independent capture performed on UDG-treated libraries in Boston (Dataset S1).

    You might also like