Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25487342›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2015

Partial uracil-DNA-glycosylase treatment for screening of ancient DNA.

Nadin Rohland, Eadaoin Harney, Swapan Mallick, Susanne Nordenfelt, David Reich

Open access · bronzeAbstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 272 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
272citing papers in PubMed
11.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

272 citing papers in PubMed, 577 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A refined phylochronology of the second plague pandemic in Western Eurasia.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. The Oral Microbiome of King Richard III of England.American journal of biological anthropology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

212 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadin RohlandDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA nrohland@genetics.med.harvard.edu.
Eadaoin HarneyDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Swapan MallickDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Susanne NordenfeltDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.
David ReichDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Howard Hughes Medical Institute · USHarvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The challenge of sequencing ancient DNA has led to the development of specialized laboratory protocols that have focused on reducing contamination and maximizing the number of molecules that are extracted from ancient remains. Despite the fact that success in ancient DNA studies is typically obtained by screening many samples to identify a promising subset, ancient DNA protocols have not, in general, focused on reducing the time required to screen samples. We present an adaptation of a popular ancient library preparation method that makes screening more efficient. First, the DNA extract is treated using a protocol that causes characteristic ancient DNA damage to be restricted to the terminal nucleotides, while nearly eliminating it in the interior of the DNA molecules, allowing a single library to be used both to test for ancient DNA authenticity and to carry out population genetic analysis. Second, the DNA molecules are ligated to a unique pair of barcodes, which eliminates undetected cross-contamination from this step onwards. Third, the barcoded library molecules include incomplete adapters of short length that can increase the specificity of hybridization-based genomic target enrichment. The adapters are completed just before sequencing, so the same DNA library can be used in multiple experiments, and the sequences distinguished. We demonstrate this protocol on 60 ancient human samples.

Indexed as

FossilsGene LibraryBase SequenceDNADNA Barcoding, TaxonomicGenetics, PopulationGenetic TestingHistory, AncientHumansMolecular Sequence DataSequence Analysis, DNAUracil-DNA GlycosidaseDNAUracil-DNA Glycosidaseancient DNAauthenticitybarcodesflexibilitylibrary preparationtarget capture

Identifiers

PMID25487342
PMCPMC4275898
OpenAlexW2154930815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.