Familiar Kinship? Palaeogenetic and Isotopic Evidence from a Triple Burial of the Cogotas I Archaeological Culture (Bronze Age, Iberian Peninsula)

Abstract

Summary This paper examines the identification of kinship relations in archaeological multiple burials and advocates the application of different methods and lines of research to clarify such issues in relation to funerary practices. Recognizing family relationships – an important task in research on prehistoric societies – is especially complicated and interpretations have often been made without an adequate empirical basis. Bioarchaeological, isotopic and DNA analyses applied to the triple burial of Los Tolmos (Cogotas I archaeological culture, Iberian Bronze Age) have provided direct information on this issue. In this respect, the new results also imply the need to consider gender constructs in greater depth and to be more open‐minded towards other forms of relationship in the past beyond the traditional heteronormative nuclear family.

Kinship and morphological similarity in the skeletal remains of individuals with known genealogical data (Bohemia, 19th to 20th centuries): A new methodological approach

“…The identification of family relationships based on the skeleton is one of the most difficult goals to achieve in bioarcheological or forensic research (Esparza et al, ). Earlier, the term “kinship analysis” was frequently used in connection with this objective.…”

Kinship Determination in Archeological Contexts Through DNA Analysis

“…However, this may not always be obvious to assess. Usually, the corresponding modern population of the same geographical area is considered as a proxy to represent the population allele frequencies; in such cases, possible differences between ancient and modern allelic frequencies should be taken into account (Vanek et al, 2009;Esparza et al, 2017;Palomo-Dìez et al, 2018). Notably, lcMLkin (Lipatov et al, 2015), the method mentioned above, is robust even when the considered population allele frequencies diverge from the true allele frequency.…”

“…An advantage of using mtDNA over other types of genetic markers is that it is available in a high amount in the cell and thus its amplification success in degraded samples is generally higher than that for nuclear loci (Bouwman et al, 2008;Baca et al, 2012;Deguilloux et al, 2014;Cui et al, 2015;Esparza et al, 2017). In spite of that, attempts to analyze nuclear DNA are common, as they provide higher resolution in kinship estimates than mtDNA lineages alone.…”

“…These are just a couple of examples of studies that used forensic kits to infer kinship in an archeological context. The literature bears some other examples of these such as: AmpFlSTR NGM SElect TM PCR Amplification Kit (Green et al, 2013) (Thermo Fisher) and PowerPlex R ESX SYSTEM (ESX) (Sprecher et al, 2009) (Promega) for the analysis of a Bronze Age pit burial in Spain (Esparza et al, 2017;Palomo-Dìez et al, 2018); AmpFlSTR Profiler Plus kit (Thermo Fisher) for samples from Corded Ware Culture burials in Germany (Haak et al, 2008); and finally the AGCU mini STR Kit (AGCU ScienTech, China) to determine kinship relations in Mongolian noble burials from the beginning of the fourteenth century (Cui et al, 2015). When different kits for analysis of autosomal STRs are used on the same samples, the AmpFlSTR1MiniFiler PCR Amplification Kit shows a higher rate of amplification success in terms of typed loci and number of samples (Vanek et al, 2009).…”

Sex molecular diagnosis on critical samples: Comparison of different methodologies

“…Therefore, genetics is a powerful tool to establish the sex in a reliable way [2]. Nevertheless, when the analysed sample is in a critical stage, we must face up to LTD and stochastic phenomena, like allelic dropout.…”