MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994263888 · doi:10.1038/nature09710

Genetic history of an archaic hominin group from Denisova Cave in Siberia

2010· article· en· W1994263888 on OpenAlexaff
David Reich, Richard E. Green, Martin Kircher, Johannes Krause, Nick Patterson, Éric Durand, Bence Viola, Adrian W. Briggs, Udo Stenzel, Philip L. Johnson, Tomislav Maričić, Jeffrey M. Good, Tomàs Marquès‐Bonet, Can Alkan, Qiaomei Fu, Swapan Mallick, Heng Li, Matthias Meyer, Evan E. Eichler, Mark Stoneking, Michael P. Richards, Sahra Talamo, M.V. Shunkov, А. П. Деревянко, Jean Jacques Hublin, Janet Kelso, Montgomery Slatkin, Svante Pääbo

Bibliographic record

VenueNature · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersOffice of International Science and EngineeringNational Institute of General Medical SciencesMax-Planck-Institut für Evolutionäre AnthropologieNational Science FoundationNational Institutes of HealthMax-Planck-Gesellschaft
KeywordsNeanderthalCaveEvolutionary biologyHomo sapiensAncient DNAPopulationPleistoceneBiologyHominidaePaleoanthropologyPaleontologyGenomeArchaeologyGeographyBiological evolutionGeneGeneticsEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using DNA extracted from a finger bone found in Denisova Cave in southern Siberia, we have sequenced the genome of an archaic hominin to about 1.9-fold coverage. This individual is from a group that shares a common origin with Neanderthals. This population was not involved in the putative gene flow from Neanderthals into Eurasians; however, the data suggest that it contributed 4–6% of its genetic material to the genomes of present-day Melanesians. We designate this hominin population ‘Denisovans’ and suggest that it may have been widespread in Asia during the Late Pleistocene epoch. A tooth found in Denisova Cave carries a mitochondrial genome highly similar to that of the finger bone. This tooth shares no derived morphological features with Neanderthals or modern humans, further indicating that Denisovans have an evolutionary history distinct from Neanderthals and modern humans. Anatomically modern humans were in Africa from some point after 200,000 years ago and reached Eurasia rather later. Meanwhile, archaic hominins — including the Neanderthals — had been in Eurasia from at least 230,000 years ago and disappear from the fossil record only about 30,000 years ago. The genome of a female archaic hominin from Denisova Cave in southern Siberia has now been sequenced from DNA extracted from a finger bone. The group to which this 'Denisovan' individual belonged shares a common origin with Neanderthals and, although it was not involved in the putative gene flow from Neanderthals into Eurasians, it contributed 4–6% of the genomes of present-day Melanesians. In addition, the morphology of a tooth with a mitochondrial genome very similar to that of the finger bone suggests that these hominins are evolutionarily distinct from both Neanderthals and modern humans. Using DNA from a finger bone, the genome of an archaic hominin from southern Siberia has been sequenced to about 1.9-fold coverage. The group to which this individual belonged shares a common origin with Neanderthals, and although it was not involved in the putative gene flow from Neanderthals into Eurasians, it contributed 4–6% of its genetic material to the genomes of present-day Melanesians. A tooth whose mitochondrial genome is very similar to that of the finger bone further suggests that these hominins are evolutionarily distinct from Neanderthals and modern humans.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2,025
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatureSame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207