DEAR EDITOR,The Laosicheng site in Yongshun County,Hunan Province,China,plays an important role in elucidating the animal population composition of the region prior to the middle Qing Dynasty(approximately 300 years a...DEAR EDITOR,The Laosicheng site in Yongshun County,Hunan Province,China,plays an important role in elucidating the animal population composition of the region prior to the middle Qing Dynasty(approximately 300 years ago).This site has yielded a substantial number of animal bones,11960 of which have been identified to the species level,serving as direct evidence of ancient animal populations(Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology,2018).展开更多
DNA studies of endangered or extinct species often rely on ancient or degraded remains.The majority of ancient DNA(aDNA)extraction protocols focus on skeletal elements,with skin and hair samples rarely explored.Simila...DNA studies of endangered or extinct species often rely on ancient or degraded remains.The majority of ancient DNA(aDNA)extraction protocols focus on skeletal elements,with skin and hair samples rarely explored.Similar to that found in bones and teeth,DNA extracted from historical or ancient skin and fur samples is also extremely fragmented with low endogenous content due to natural degradation processes.Thus,the development of effective DNA extraction methods is required for these materials.Here,we compared the performance of two DNA extraction protocols(commercial and custom laboratory aDNA methods)on hair and skin samples from decades-old museum specimens to Iron Age archaeological material.We found that apart from the impact sample-specific taphonomic and handling history has on the quantity and quality of DNA preservation,skin yielded more endogenous DNA than hair of the samples and protocols tested.While both methods recovered DNA from ancient soft tissue,the laboratory method performed better overall in terms of DNA yield and quality,which was primarily due to the poorer performance of the commercial binding buffer in recovering aDNA.展开更多
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(41925009,32100488)National Key R&D Program of China(2022YFE0203800)+1 种基金Chinese Academy of Sciences(YSBR-019)New Cornerstone Science Foundation through the XPLORER PRIZE。
文摘DEAR EDITOR,The Laosicheng site in Yongshun County,Hunan Province,China,plays an important role in elucidating the animal population composition of the region prior to the middle Qing Dynasty(approximately 300 years ago).This site has yielded a substantial number of animal bones,11960 of which have been identified to the species level,serving as direct evidence of ancient animal populations(Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology,2018).
基金This work was supported by the Chinese Academy of Sciences(CAS,XDB26000000)National Natural Science Foundation of China(41925009,41630102,41672021)+1 种基金CAS(XDA1905010,QYZDB-SSW-DQC003),“Research on the Roots of Chinese Civilization”of Zhengzhou University(XKZDJC202006)Tencent Foundation through the XPLORER PRIZE,and Howard Hughes Medical Institute(55008731)。
文摘DNA studies of endangered or extinct species often rely on ancient or degraded remains.The majority of ancient DNA(aDNA)extraction protocols focus on skeletal elements,with skin and hair samples rarely explored.Similar to that found in bones and teeth,DNA extracted from historical or ancient skin and fur samples is also extremely fragmented with low endogenous content due to natural degradation processes.Thus,the development of effective DNA extraction methods is required for these materials.Here,we compared the performance of two DNA extraction protocols(commercial and custom laboratory aDNA methods)on hair and skin samples from decades-old museum specimens to Iron Age archaeological material.We found that apart from the impact sample-specific taphonomic and handling history has on the quantity and quality of DNA preservation,skin yielded more endogenous DNA than hair of the samples and protocols tested.While both methods recovered DNA from ancient soft tissue,the laboratory method performed better overall in terms of DNA yield and quality,which was primarily due to the poorer performance of the commercial binding buffer in recovering aDNA.
