Search

Horses revolutionized human history with fast mobility 1 . However, the timeline between their domestication and their widespread integration as a means of transport remains contentious 2-4 . Here we assemble a collection of 475 ancient horse genomes to assess the period when these animals were first reshaped by human agency in Eurasia. We find that reproductive control of the modern domestic lineage emerged around 2200 BCE, through close-kin mating and shortened generation times. Reproductive control emerged following a severe domestication bottleneck starting no earlier than approximately 2700 BCE, and coincided with a sudden expansion across Eurasia that ultimately resulted in the replacement of nearly every local horse lineage. This expansion marked the rise of widespread horse-based mobility in human history, which refutes the commonly held narrative of large horse herds accompanying the massive migration of steppe peoples across Europe around 3000 BCE and earlier 3,5 . Finally, we detect significantly shortened generation times at Botai around 3500 BCE, a settlement from central Asia associated with corrals and a subsistence economy centred on horses 6,7 . This supports local horse husbandry before the rise of modern domestic bloodlines., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Donkeys transformed human history as essential beasts of burden for long-distance movement, especially across semi-arid and upland environments. They remain insufficiently studied despite globally expanding and providing key support to low- to middle-income communities. To elucidate their domestication history, we constructed a comprehensive genome panel of 207 modern and 31 ancient donkeys, as well as 15 wild equids. We found a strong phylogeographic structure in modern donkeys that supports a single domestication in Africa ~5000 BCE, followed by further expansions in this continent and Eurasia and ultimately returning to Africa. We uncover a previously unknown genetic lineage in the Levant ~200 BCE, which contributed increasing ancestry toward Asia. Donkey management involved inbreeding and the production of giant bloodlines at a time when mules were essential to the Roman economy and military.

Domestication of horses fundamentally transformed long-range mobility and warfare 1 . However, modern domesticated breeds do not descend from the earliest domestic horse lineage associated with archaeological evidence of bridling, milking and corralling 2-4 at Botai, Central Asia around 3500 BC 3 . Other longstanding candidate regions for horse domestication, such as Iberia 5 and Anatolia 6 , have also recently been challenged. Thus, the genetic, geographic and temporal origins of modern domestic horses have remained unknown. Here we pinpoint the Western Eurasian steppes, especially the lower Volga-Don region, as the homeland of modern domestic horses. Furthermore, we map the population changes accompanying domestication from 273 ancient horse genomes. This reveals that modern domestic horses ultimately replaced almost all other local populations as they expanded rapidly across Eurasia from about 2000 BC, synchronously with equestrian material culture, including Sintashta spoke-wheeled chariots. We find that equestrianism involved strong selection for critical locomotor and behavioural adaptations at the GSDMC and ZFPM1 genes. Our results reject the commonly held association 7 between horseback riding and the massive expansion of Yamnaya steppe pastoralists into Europe around 3000 BC 8,9 driving the spread of Indo-European languages 10 . This contrasts with the scenario in Asia where Indo-Iranian languages, chariots and horses spread together, following the early second millennium BC Sintashta culture 11,12 ., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: To evaluate the frequency of dactylitis, enthesitis, and anterior uveitis (AU) in spondyloarthritis (SpA) associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD-SpA) compared with other SpA, and to assess the role of associated psoriasis in the occurrence of dactylitis and enthesitis., Methods: In a 12-month case-control study, the frequency of dactylitis and enthesitis in 29 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and 59 with Crohn disease (CD) who satisfied the Spondyloarthritis international Society criteria for axial or peripheral SpA was compared with 176 controls, including 97 (55.1%) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), 47 (26.7%) with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and 32 (18.2%) with nonradiographic axial SpA (nr-axSpA). The occurrence of these features in IBD-SpA with and without psoriasis was also evaluated., Results: Axial, peripheral, or mixed involvement was observed in 46 (52%), 29 (33%), and 13 (15%) patients, respectively; and 14/88 (16%) had psoriasis. Dactylitis was recorded in 4/88 patients (4.5%) with IBD-SpA and in 30 controls (17.4%; p = 0.008), enthesitis in 16 cases (18.1%) and in 78/176 controls (44.3%; p < 0.001), and AU in 3 patients (3.4%) with IBD-SpA and in 26 controls (14.7%; p = 0.01). No significant differences were found between patients with UC-SpA and those with CD-SpA. Dactylitis and enthesitis were significantly more common in patients with IBD-SpA who also had psoriasis compared to those without skin disease (p = 0.009 and 0.003, respectively)., Conclusion: Dactylitis, enthesitis, and AU are significantly less frequent in IBD-SpA compared with other types of SpA. Given the frequent association of psoriasis and IBD, overlooking coexistent skin disease may lead to overestimating the frequency of these features.