Cited by 108Forensic and Genetic ResearchGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetic diversity and population structure

Establishing the validity of domestication genes using DNA from ancient chickens

Open access
Girdland Flink, Linus, Allen, Richard, Barnett, Ross, Malmström, Helena, Peters, Joris, Eriksson, Jonas, Andersson, Leif, Dobney, Keith +1 more·2014·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Recent studies have identified the genetic basis of numerous traits that differentiate modern domestic species from their wild counterparts. In both plants and animals, traits (and the genes underlying them) found ubiquitously in modern breeds are often presumed to have been selected early during the domestication process. Here, by determining genetic variability in ancient European chickens over the past 2,000 years, we show that a mutation thought to be crucial during chicken domestication was not subjected to strong human-mediated selection until much later in time. This result demonstrates that the ubiquity of mutations, which differentiate modern wild and domestic taxa, does not necessarily imply ancient origins.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1308939110

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Chicken bones are prone to taphonomic loss through scavenger activity and stratigraphic displacement.

    “Additionally, chicken bones are prone to taphonomic loss through scavenger activity (11) and stratigraphic displacement (12).”

    From The biocultural origins and dispersal of domestic chickens (2022) · cites this paper as [12]

    The citation is attached to stratigraphic displacement, not scavenger activity. The Archaeological specimens section (p. 14) identifies intrusive finds from later occupation phases as a problem and describes sampling choices made to avoid them. It does not say that chicken bones are prone to taphonomic loss through displacement. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • An ancient DNA study shows how two strong sweeps in the domestic chicken, at TSHR and BCO2, both were selected much later than early domestication.

    “For example, an ancient DNA study shows how two strong sweeps in the domestic chicken, at TSHR and BCO2, both were selected much later than early domestication (Flink et al. 2014; Loog et al. 2017).”

    From The neural crest cell hypothesis: no unified explanation for domestication (2021) · cites this paper as Flink et al. 2014

    The Conclusions (p. 7) say the TSHR allele became fixed in European chickens only in the past few hundred years and that fixation of BCDO2 in numerous modern breeds was likely recent. But the paper dates fixation, not the onset of selection for both sweeps, and it limits the TSHR timing finding to European chickens; the broader claim that both were selected much later is therefore stronger than its evidence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Radiocarbon dating has revealed that specimens excavated at Korucutepe, Turkey and Jerusalem, Israel were intrusive.

    “Although isolated chicken remains have been claimed on Bronze Age settlements, radiocarbon dating has revealed that specimens excavated at Korucutepe, Turkey (12) and Jerusalem, Israel were intrusive (SI Appendix, Table S3).”

    From The biocultural origins and dispersal of domestic chickens (2022) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Archaeological specimens section (p. 14) discusses radiocarbon dating of a specimen from Kassope, Greece, and precautions against intrusive finds at German and Austrian sites. Searches for Korucutepe, Jerusalem, and radiocarbon-dated intrusive Bronze Age remains found no passage addressing the specimens named in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The TSHR genetic marker could be used to recognize Gallus gallus domesticus in the future fossil record.

    “This genetic marker could be used to recognize Gallus gallus domesticus in the future fossil record, in the way that the β-carotene dioxygenase 2 gene associated with yellow skin colour resulting from a diet of maize may be identified in archaeological chicken bones from approximately 500 years ago [60].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [51]51. Parker HG , et al. (2009) An Expressed Fgf4 Retrogene Is Associated with Breed-Defining Chondrodysplasia in Domestic Dogs. Science 325(5943):995-998.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Girdland Flink, L., Allen, R., Barnett, R., Malmström, H., Peters, J., Eriksson, J., Andersson, L., Dobney, K., & Larson, G.
Affiliations
  • Durham Evolution and Ancient DNA, Department of Archaeology,
  • Durham University (GB)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2014-04-21
Volume
111
Issue
17
Pages
6184-6189
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2161811970
Cited by
107
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 11
FWCI
10.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0905606)
  • National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (EF0905606, 0905606)
  • Leverhulme Trust
  • Research Councils UK
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/F003382/2, NE/F003382/1, NE/K005243/2, NE/K003259/1, NE/K005243/1, NE/H005552/1, NE/H005269/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
Keywords
chicken domestication, domestication genes, ancient DNA, selection signatures, thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor, mitochondrial DNA control region, admixture
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Domestic, Chickens, DNA, DNA, Mitochondrial, Europe, Geography, Haplotypes, Humans, Molecular Sequence Data, Reproducibility of Results, History, Ancient

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