ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2007
Evaluating Neanderthal genetics and phylogeny.
Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phylogeographic distribution of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup M in India.Journal of genetics · 2009Article
- Mitochondrial DNA evidence for a diversified origin of workers building First Emperor of China.PloS one · 2008Article
- Ancient DNA.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2005Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The retrieval of Neanderthal (Homo neanderthalsensis) mitochondrial DNA is thought to be among the most significant ancient DNA contributions to date, allowing conflicting hypotheses on modern human (Homo sapiens) evolution to be tested directly. Recently, however, both the authenticity of the Neanderthal sequences and their phylogenetic position outside contemporary human diversity have been questioned. Using Bayesian inference and the largest dataset to date, we find strong support for a monophyletic Neanderthal clade outside the diversity of contemporary humans, in agreement with the expectations of the Out-of-Africa replacement model of modern human origin. From average pairwise sequence differences, we obtain support for claims that the first published Neanderthal sequence may include errors due to postmortem damage in the template molecules for PCR. In contrast, we find that recent results implying that the Neanderthal sequences are products of PCR artifacts are not well supported, suffering from inadequate experimental design and a presumably high percentage (>68%) of chimeric sequences due to "jumping PCR" events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.