MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407344872 · doi:10.1038/s42003-025-07616-9

Exploring DNA degradation in situ and in museum storage through genomics and metagenomics

2025· article· en· W4407344872 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne Eriksen, Juan Antonio Rodríguez, Frederik Valeur Seersholm, Hege Hollund, Anne Birgitte Gotfredsen, Matthew J. Collins, Bjarne Grønnow, Mikkel Winther Pedersen, M. Thomas P. Gilbert, Henning Matthiesen

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetagenomicsGenomicsIn situDegradation (telecommunications)Computational biologyBiologyGenomeComputer scienceChemistryGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the environmental and microbial processes involved in DNA degradation from archaeological remains is a fundamental part of managing bone specimens. We investigated the state of DNA preservation in 33 archaeozoological caribou (Rangifer tarandus) ribs excavated from the same excavation trench at a former Inuit hunting camp in West Greenland, separated by 43 years: 1978 and 2021. Our findings show that DNA is better preserved in the most recently excavated samples, indicating a detrimental effect of museum storage on DNA integrity. Additionally, our data reveals a diverse microbiome in these bones, encoding genes relevant for bone degradation, such as enzymatic families relating to collagenases, peptidases and glycosidases. Microbes associated with bone degradation were present in both new and historical samples, with museum-stored bones showing significantly more DNA damage. Overall, our research sheds light on the nuanced dynamics governing the preservation of genomic material in archaeological contexts, underscoring the vital importance of careful considerations in museum curation practices for the sustainable conservation of invaluable skeletal records in museum repositories and in situ. DNA preservation in archaeozoological caribou ribs from West Greenland Inuit hunting camp shows better quality in newly excavated samples, revealing detrimental effects of museum storage and diverse microbial communities involved in bone degradation.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.040 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207