This post was originally published on here
Researchers discovered DNA traces on a red chalk drawing on paper titled The Holy Child.
Scientists have extracted microscopic traces of DNA preserved on Renaissance artifacts, some of which are believed to belong to the Italian visionary Leonardo da Vinci, The Independent reported.
Researchers discovered DNA traces on a red chalk drawing on paper titled The Holy Child, which is thought to be the work of da Vinci, as well as on letters written by his predecessor Frosino di Ser Giovanni da Vinci, preserved in a historical archive in Italy.
According to the study, some Y-chromosome DNA sequences from The Holy Child and from a letter written by one of Leonardo’s cousins appear to belong to a genetic group of people with shared ancestry in Tuscany—the region where the artist was born. When scientists compared these Y-chromosome sequences with extensive reference databases, the closest match was found within the broad E1b1 / E1b1b lineage. This Y-chromosome lineage is today found with relatively high frequency in Southern Europe, including Italy, North Africa, and parts of the Middle East.
According to Science magazine, some of the DNA may belong to Leonardo da Vinci himself. However, this does not constitute conclusive proof, as determining whether a DNA trace truly originates from da Vinci is extremely complex.
The reason is that scientists cannot compare the genetic sequences extracted from the artifacts with DNA that is known with certainty to have come from da Vinci himself. The iconic inventor has no known descendants, and the site of his burial was destroyed in the early nineteenth century.
Historical artifacts can accumulate DNA from their surrounding environment and may potentially provide valuable information about the people who created and used them, the materials from which they were made, and the environments through which they passed.
Studying such valuable objects without damaging or contaminating them has long posed a serious challenge. Scientists have now developed a “minimally invasive” method for extracting what they describe as “biological signatures of history” from Renaissance artworks and correspondence linked to Leonardo da Vinci’s ancestors.
The majority of the DNA traces identified belong to bacteria, fungi, plants, and viruses, shedding light on the nature of the materials used in these artifacts, their storage conditions, conservation methods, and how they have been handled over the years. However, part of the genetic material is of human origin.
“We recovered heterogeneous mixtures of non-human DNA,” the researchers write in the study, which has not yet undergone peer review and has been published on the arXiv platform, “and in some samples, sparse male-specific signals of human DNA.”
The scientists used a gentle sampling method similar to those employed in museums to collect skin flakes, traces of sweat, microorganisms, plant pollen, fibers, and environmental dust from the surfaces of the artifacts. From these biological materials, they extracted minimal amounts of DNA, which nevertheless provided valuable information about the objects themselves.
“Certain non-human DNA traces can help us understand the composition of the artifacts, the materials that may have been used, as well as the environment and geology of works created during the Renaissance in Florence and other parts of Europe,” the researchers note.
As an example, they point to the detection of traces of plants such as Italian ryegrass, which may indicate that an artifact originated in Italy during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
“Riparian species such as Salix spp. were abundant along the banks of the Arno River and were commonly used for weaving, bindings, scaffolding, and charcoal production in artisan workshops,” the scientists explain. “The unique presence of Citrus spp. in The Holy Child may provide a direct link to the historical context.”
Because the artifacts examined in the new study are associated with male historical figures, the scientists analyzed Y-chromosome DNA markers found in the biological samples.
“To draw more definitive conclusions, particularly regarding origin, geographic location, or historical characteristics, further work is required to help distinguish signals associated with the artifacts from those resulting from modern handling,” the researchers conclude. | BGNES
