The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ancient genome stirs ethics debate
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The lack of early human skeletal remains and the ethical issues associated with destructive analysis of the handful that have been discovered means that coprolites are the best direct archaeological evidence that people occupied a particular site.
“The lack of early human skeletal remains, and the ethical issues associated with destructive analysis of the handful that have been discovered (46, 47), means that coprolites are the best direct archaeological evidence that people occupied a particular site.”
From Pre-Clovis occupation of the Americas identified by human fecal biomarkers in coprolites from Paisley Caves, Oregon (2020) · cites this paper as [46]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shillito, L.-M., Whelton, H. L., Blong, J. C., Jenkins, D. L., Connolly, T. J., & Bull, I. D. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba6404 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Callaway, E.
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2014-02-12
- Volume
- 506
- Issue
- 7487
- Pages
- 142-143
- ISSN
- 0028-0836
- 1476-4687
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
