Cited by 26Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

No Ancient DNA Damage in Actinobacteria from the Neanderthal Bone

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Neanderthal genome was recently sequenced using DNA extracted from a 38,000-year-old fossil. At the start of the project, the fraction of mammalian and bacterial DNA in the sample was estimated to be <6% and 9%, respectively. Treatment with restriction enzymes prior to sequencing increased the relative proportion of mammalian DNA to 15%, but the large majority of sequences remain uncharacterized. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our taxonomic profiling of 3.95 Gb of Neanderthal DNA isolated from the Vindija Neanderthal Vi33.16 fossil showed that 90% of about 50,000 rRNA gene sequence reads were of bacterial origin, of which Actinobacteria accounted for more than 75%. Actinobacteria also represented more than 80% of the PCR-amplified 16S rRNA gene sequences from a cave sediment sample taken from the same G layer as the Neanderthal bone. However, phylogenetic analyses did not identify any sediment clones that were closely related to the bone-derived sequences. We analysed the patterns of nucleotide differences in the individual sequence reads compared to the assembled consensus sequences of the rRNA gene sequences. The typical ancient nucleotide substitution pattern with a majority of C to T changes indicative of DNA damage was observed for the Neanderthal rRNA gene sequences, but not for the Streptomyces-like rRNA gene sequences. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our analyses suggest that the Actinobacteria, and especially members of the Streptomycetales, contribute the majority of sequences in the DNA extracted from the Neanderthal fossil Vi33.16. The bacterial DNA showed no signs of damage, and we hypothesize that it was derived from bacteria that have been enriched inside the bone. The bioinformatic approach used here paves the way for future studies of microbial compositions and patterns of DNA damage in bacteria from archaeological bones. Such studies can help identify targeted measures to increase the relative amount of endogenous DNA in the sample.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0062799

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • Actinobacteria were the most common microbes in the dinosaur bone based on 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing.

    “The fact that Actinobacteria were the most common microbes in the dinosaur bone based on 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing is reminiscent of the results from a 38 ka Neanderthal bone, where the majority of detected DNA sequences derived from non-ancient Actinobacteria (Zaremba-Niedźwiedzka and Andersson, 2013).”

    From Cretaceous dinosaur bone contains recent organic material and provides an environment conducive to microbial communities (2019) · cites this paper as Zaremba-Niedźwiedzka and Andersson, 2013

    The Results (Taxonomic Compositions; page unavailable) report that Actinobacteria accounted for 74%–95% of bacterial rRNA reads from the Neanderthal bone, supporting the comparison with the dinosaur bone. The Results (Substitution Patterns; page unavailable) found no ancient-DNA damage signal in the Streptomyces-like reads, but explicitly did not assess substitution patterns for the other bacteria. Thus, the paper does not establish that all of the predominant Actinobacteria were non-ancient. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zaremba-Niedźwiedzka, K., & Andersson, S. G. E.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Andersson, Siv G. E.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2013-05-03
Volume
8
Issue
5
Pages
e62799
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126686241
Cited by
26
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Uppsala University Publications (Uppsala University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
  • Vetenskapsrådet
  • Max-Planck-Institut für Evolutionäre Anthropologie
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
Keywords
Neanderthal DNA, actinobacteria, Streptomyces, rRNA gene sequences, bacterial contamination, cave deposits, endogenous DNA
MeSH terms
Animals, Bacterial Proteins, Bone and Bones, Fossils, Genes, Bacterial, Paleontology, Phylogeny, Collagenases, Genes, rRNA, Actinobacteria, Neanderthals

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