ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025
Ancient DNA and biomarkers from artefacts: insights into technology and cultural practices in Neolithic Europe.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An archaeo-metabolomics approach for identifying cedar tar in archaeological samples: differentiating plant products and production processes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Ancient DNA and biomarkers from artefacts: insights into technology and cultural practices in Neolithic Europe.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Birch bark tar was widely used throughout prehistoric Europe for hafting stone tools as well as various other purposes. While previous research has mainly focused on the identification and production of birch bark tar, its diverse uses remain to be fully explored. In this study, we combined ancient DNA with organic residue analysis to analyse 30 birch tar artefacts from nine Neolithic sites in and around the Alps. We identified birch tar as the main component, with some samples also containing conifer resin or tar, possibly added to modify its properties. Degradation markers indicate that tar used for ceramic repair was heated repeatedly, probably during cooking. Additionally, the presence of human and oral microbial DNA in some of the samples suggests the tar was chewed, in some cases by multiple individuals. The human DNA also enables us to determine the sex of those who chewed the tar, offering insights into gendered practices in the past, while plant and animal DNA shed light on past diets and the possible use of additives. This study underscores the value of integrating organic residue and ancient DNA analysis of archaeological artefacts to deepen our understanding of past cultural practices.
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.