Fig 1.
Principal Coordinates Analysis (A) and Neighbor-Joining Tree (B) of the 48 archaeological cultures using the Dice similarity index for binary data (Di).
Both analyses show differentiation of the bead-type associations among the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic archaeological cultures. Archaeological cultures are color-coded according to the chronological period and European region they belong to. Numbering of archaeological cultures is detailed in Text A in S1 Text.
Table 1.
ANOSIM analysis of bead-type diversity in different archaeological sets.
Fig 2.
Neighbor-Net tree of the 48 Mesolithic and Early Neolithic cultures (Text A in S1 Text), using the Di.
Reticulations represent evidence of borrowing or exchange and are visible within and among each archaeological culture. Archaeological cultures are color-coded according to the chronological period and European region they belong to.
Fig 3.
Spline interpolation of the first axis of the Principal Coordinates Analysis.
Geographic structure differentiation between Mesolithic and Early Neolithic indicates reshaping of the bead-type diversity in Europe during the transition to farming. Maps were made by S.R. by using ArcGIS 9.3.1 software.
Fig 4.
Cartography of the Early Neolithic bead-type configuration.
A) Large-scale diffusion of exclusively Neolithic ornament types; B) Diversification of Early Neolithic ornament types; C) Persistence of Mesolithic bead-types in the Neolithic; D) Emergences of new bead types at regional scale. Dotted black lines indicate the major shifts in bead-type associations in South East Europe. Dotted orange ellipses show the two areas where numerous new bead-types were adopted during the end of the Early Neolithic. Color shaded areas indicate the geographic distribution of the MEN (pink), DEN (green) and BEN (blue) archaeological cultures considered in the analysis. Maps were made by S.R. by using ArcGIS 9.3.1 software. Some bead types were redrawn from [64–67].