Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36918761›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2023

Inferring biological kinship in ancient datasets: comparing the response of ancient DNA-specific software packages to low coverage data.

William A Marsh, Selina Brace, Ian Barnes

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

William A MarshNatural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD, London, England. w.marsh@nhm.ac.uk.
Selina BraceNatural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD, London, England.
Ian BarnesNatural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD, London, England.
Natural History Museum · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe inference of biological relations between individuals is fundamental to understanding past human societies. Caregiving, resource sharing and sexual behaviours are often mediated by biological kinship and yet the identification and interpretation of kin relationships in prehistoric human groups is difficult. In recent years, the advent of archaeogenetic techniques have offered a fresh approach, and when combined with more traditional osteological and interpretive archaeological methods, allows for improved interpretation of the burial practices, cultural behaviours, and societal stratification in ancient societies. Although archaeogenetic techniques are developing at pace, questions remain as to their accuracy, particularly when applied to the low coverage datasets that results from the sequencing of DNA derived from highly degraded ancient material.

resultsThe performance of six of the most commonly used kinship identifcation software methods was explored at a range of low and ultra low genome coverages. An asymmetrical response was observed across packages, with decreased genome coverage resulting in differences in both direction and degree of change of calculated kinship scores and thus pairwise relatedness estimates are dependant on both package used and genome coverage. Methods reliant upon genotype likelihoods methods (lcMLkin, NGSrelate and NGSremix) show a decreased level of prediction at coverage below 1x, although were consistent in the particular relationships identified at these coverages when compared to the pseudohaploid reliant methods tested (READ, the Kennett 2017 method and TKGWV2.0). The three pseudohaploid methods show predictive potential at coverages as low as 0.05x, although the accuracy of the relationships identified is questionable given the increase in the number of relationships identifIed at the low coverage (type I errors).

conclusionTwo pseudohaploid methods (READ and Kennett 2017) show relatively consistent inference of kin relationships at low coverage (0.5x), with READ only showing a significant performance drop off at ultralow coverages (< 0.2x). More generally, our results reveal asymmetrical kinship classifications in some software packages even at high coverages, highlighting the importance of applying multiple methods to authenticate kin relationships in ancient material, along with the continuing need to develop laboratory methods that maximise data output for downstream analyses.

Indexed as

DNA, AncientSoftwareGenomeGenotypeHumansDNA, AncientAncient DNABiological kinshipGenotype likelihoodLow coveragePseudohaploidRelatedness

Identifiers

PMID36918761
PMCPMC10015695
OpenAlexW4324138416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read1
measurements read31
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.