Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39930064›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2025

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

Anne Marie Høier Eriksen, Juan Antonio Rodríguez, Frederik Seersholm, Hege Ingjerd Hollund, Anne Birgitte Gotfredsen, Matthew James Collins, Bjarne Grønnow, Mikkel Winther Pedersen, M Thomas P Gilbert, Henning Matthiesen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Anne Marie Høier Eriksen *Environmental Archaeology and Materials Science, National Museum of Denmark, 2800 Kgs, Lyngby, Denmark. ame@natmus.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5243-5207
Juan Antonio Rodríguez *Center for Evolutionary Hologenomics, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5195-315X
Frederik SeersholmSection for GeoGenetics, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, 1350, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2217-3247
Hege Ingjerd HollundArkeologisk Museum, University of Stavanger, 4036, Stavanger, Norway.
Anne Birgitte GotfredsenSection for GeoGenetics, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, 1350, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Matthew James CollinsSection for GeoBiology, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4226-5501
Bjarne GrønnowModern History and World Cultures, National Museum of Denmark, 1220, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mikkel Winther PedersenSection for GeoGenetics, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, 1350, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7291-8887
M Thomas P GilbertCenter for Evolutionary Hologenomics, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5805-7195
Henning MatthiesenEnvironmental Archaeology and Materials Science, National Museum of Denmark, 2800 Kgs, Lyngby, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2618-7021

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

DNAGenomicsMetagenomicsMuseumsSpecimen HandlingAnimalsArchaeologyBone and BonesDNA, AncientDNA DamageFossilsGreenlandMicrobiotaDNADNA, Ancient

Identifiers

PMID39930064
PMCPMC11811298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.