Origins of domestic dog in Southern East Asia is supported by analysis of Y-chromosome DNA

Global mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) data indicates that the dog originates from domestication of wolf in Asia South of Yangtze River (ASY), with minor genetic contributions from dog–wolf hybridisation elsewhere. Archaeological data and autosomal single nucleotide polymorphism data have instead suggested that dogs originate from Europe and/or South West Asia but, because these datasets lack data from ASY, evidence pointing to ASY may have been overlooked. Analyses of additional markers for global datasets, including ASY, are therefore necessary to test if mtDNA phylogeography reflects the actual dog history and not merely stochastic events or selection. Here, we analyse 14 437 bp of Y-chromosome DNA sequence in 151 dogs sampled worldwide. We found 28 haplotypes distributed in five haplogroups. Two haplogroups were universally shared and included three haplotypes carried by 46% of all dogs, but two other haplogroups were primarily restricted to East Asia. Highest genetic diversity and virtually complete phylogenetic coverage was found within ASY. The 151 dogs were estimated to originate from 13–24 wolf founders, but there was no indication of post-domestication dog–wolf hybridisations. Thus, Y-chromosome and mtDNA data give strikingly similar pictures of dog phylogeography, most importantly that roughly 50% of the gene pools are shared universally but only ASY has nearly the full range of genetic diversity, such that the gene pools in all other regions may derive from ASY. This corroborates that ASY was the principal, and possibly sole region of wolf domestication, that a large number of wolves were domesticated, and that subsequent dog–wolf hybridisation contributed modestly to the dog gene pool

Bridging Archaeology and Genetics

With the development of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in the 1980s, the application of molecular methods to archaeological questions has seen a rapid expansion in the last three decades, addressing major research topics including human origins and migrations, domestication and chronology. The recent introduction of next-generation sequencing (NGS) has revolutionised the field, allowing for a larger amount of data to be generated quickly and at ever-decreasing costs. With such techniques now available, it is crucial for a clear and comprehensive dialogue to be established between archaeologists and geneticists. In the following paper, we first review the history of archaeogenetics before addressing some of the major misconceptions that remain commonly widespread across audiences. These include the misconception that genetics can reconstruct full phenotypes or that modern populations can be solely used to retrace a species? origin or domestication. After exploring the current potential of genetics applied to archaeology through successful case studies, we highlight practical considerations when undertaking archaeogenetic research including sample status and selecting adequate genetic markers and methods. Finally, we suggest ways of bridging the gap between both disciplines so as to allow better collaborations in the future.Fil: Lebrasseur, Ophélie. No especifíca;Fil: Ryan, Hannah. No especifíca;Fil: Abbona, Cinthia Carolina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales; Argentin