Biology subjects

Shennan, S.

Publications and source records attributed to Shennan, S..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

Migrations facilitated the cultural diffusion of megaliths in Neolithic Europe

Around 6700 BP (years before present), Neolithic Europe saw the emergence of megalithic monuments in northern France, followed by a rapid spread to the rest of the continent1. However, whether this was driven by the transmission of ideas (cultural diffusion) or the movement of people remains debated. To test whether this spread coincided with population movements, we reconstructed the population history of the European Neolithic ([~]6500-4800 BP) by analysing genomic data from 2963 ancient individuals, including 46 unpublished genomes from megalithic and related contexts. To assess the alternative scenario whereby megaliths spread through contact networks, as expected under cultural diffusion, we integrated archaeological evidence with radiocarbon chronologies to reconstruct past trading networks. We identify northern France, where megaliths first emerged, as a zone of genetic admixture and cultural influence from the two major early Neolithic divisions: the Cardial of the Western Mediterranean and the Linear Pottery traditions of central Europe. From this admixed population, we uncover several migrations associated with the formation of the Funnel Beaker Culture in north-central Europe and the neolithisation of Scandinavia and the British Isles. We find that megaliths were spread exclusively within regions impacted by Cardial-related genetic ancestry, but only in the British Isles and Ireland did their emergence coincide with the time of the migration. The temporal delay between the migrations and the spread of megaliths elsewhere reveals that neither population movements nor cultural diffusion alone fully explains the geospatial distribution of the megalithic tradition. Rather, megaliths diffused across different Neolithic groups whose long-distance trade networks formed in the wake of earlier population movements. Our findings highlight the need to move beyond simplistic interpretations that present migrations or cultural diffusion as isolated events bringing technological and cultural innovations.

evolutionary biology↗

bioRxiv2026

Cultural affiliation accounts for most of the spatiotemporal variation in burial rite practices

Describing and interpreting spatiotemporal patterns in human culture has been a central focus of anthropology and archaeology for over a century. Recent ethnographic studies have highlighted the complexity of the processes generating these patterns, including isolation-by-distance, homophily, and common descent. However, investigating these processes in prehistoric archaeology remains challenging. Here we make use of a new interdisciplinary database and a combined dataset of ancient DNA (aDNA) genomic sequences to analyse the relationship between spatiotemporal patterns in cultural and genomic variation, by testing whether broadly defined clusters of genomic affinities correspond to spatiotemporal changes in burial rites, while controlling for other factors, using a Gaussian process model. We use data from the Big Interdisciplinary Archaeological Database (BIAD), linking mortuary information from [~]4,200 individuals with genetic ancestry and mobility data inferred from over 1,300 human genomes, from Western Eurasia [~]10,000-2000 BP. By integrating and modelling these diverse datasets, we aim to provide a detailed understanding of how genomic history intersects with cultural evolution, offering new insights into the dynamics behind these complex processes, and the extent to which genes and culture are transmitted in parallel. In the case of burial orientation, we found that cultural affiliation was the main factor accounting for variation with little to no role for ancestry, while for body position the picture was more mixed but cultural affiliation also played an important role.

genetics↗

bioRxiv2025

Improving archaeological metadata reporting in human paleogenomicstudies

Paleogenomic research has dramatically increased our understanding of past demographic and adaptive processes, but has also been criticized for a perceived disconnect between geneticists and other parties involved in the study of the past. For interdisciplinary research to be productive, contextual metadata associated with paleogenomic samples should be accessible in the same publication. Here, we conduct a pilot study examining the extent of archaeological metadata reporting in 30 peer-reviewed human paleogenomic studies, based on genetic sequences from 3911 ancient humans predominately from Western Eurasia, published between 2013 and 2024. We show inconsistent reporting of archaeological data across studies, and have sought to identify the driving factors. Overall, we found no strong explanatory variables, though some metadata fields - like Geolocation - have improved in completeness over time. These inconsistencies mean that metadata reporting is often insufficient to directly investigate the relationship between patterns of cultural and genetic change on the basis of published data alone. We propose a minimum information checklist as a best-practice guideline for collecting and reporting archaeological data in the future.

genomics↗