MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362717239 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.106581

A paleogenome from a Holocene individual supports genetic continuity in Southeast Alaska

2023· article· en· W4362717239 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alber Aqil, Stephanie Gill, Ömer Gökçümen, Ripan S. Malhi, Esther Aaltséen Reese, Jane Smith, Timothy T. Heaton, Charlotte Lindqvist

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicForensic and Genetic Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyDivision of Earth SciencesUniversity of South DakotaNational Geographic SocietyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIndigenousHolocenePopulationGeographyArchaeologyAncient DNAOceanographyEthnologyEcologyHistoryGeologyDemographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many specifics of the population histories of the Indigenous peoples of North America remain contentious owing to a dearth of physical evidence. Only few ancient human genomes have been recovered from the Pacific Northwest Coast, a region increasingly supported as a coastal migration route for the initial peopling of the Americas. Here, we report paleogenomic data from the remains of a ∼3,000-year-old female individual from Southeast Alaska, named Tatóok yík yées sháawat ( TYYS ). Our results demonstrate at least 3,000 years of matrilineal genetic continuity in Southeast Alaska, and that TYYS is most closely related to ancient and present-day northern Pacific Northwest Coast Indigenous Americans. We find no evidence of Paleo-Inuit (represented by Saqqaq ) ancestry in present-day or ancient Pacific Northwest peoples. Instead, our analyses suggest the Saqqaq genome harbors Northern Native American ancestry. This study sheds further light on the human population history of the northern Pacific Northwest Coast.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicForensic and Genetic ResearchFrench-language works237,207