[HN Gopher] Woman's DNA discovered in 20k year old deer-tooth pe...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Woman's DNA discovered in 20k year old deer-tooth pendant (2023)
        
       Author : pseudolus
       Score  : 161 points
       Date   : 2025-03-07 13:30 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cbc.ca)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cbc.ca)
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | _3 billion bases long[...]we were able to recover roughly 70 per
       | cent_
       | 
       | It's impressive how resilient DNA is as a data storage medium.
       | That's the equivalent of ~500MB of raw data they've recovered, if
       | my calculations are correct.
        
         | bloomingkales wrote:
         | When can I start storing passwords in mine?
        
           | brianmaurer wrote:
           | Sooner than you'd think!
           | https://wyss.harvard.edu/technology/dna-data-storage/
           | 
           | (though passwords aren't a great application)
        
             | mkoubaa wrote:
             | Oh great when i get into old age not only will I forget my
             | password but my DNA will have mutated to the point that it
             | technically isn't my password any longer
        
           | Y_Y wrote:
           | Might be a poor idea if anyone who can collect and sequence
           | your DNA gets your passwords.
        
             | egillie wrote:
             | All of my passwords are encoded in pi...somewhere
        
               | magneticnorth wrote:
               | Well, probably! But it hasn't actually been proven yet
               | that pi is a "normal number" [0], though most
               | mathematicians think it must be.
               | 
               | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number#
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | It's not necessary that pi be normal in order for it to
               | contain every possible sequence. Sufficient, but not
               | necessary.
        
               | chmod775 wrote:
               | That's a stronger claim anyhow. We'd merely need Pi to be
               | a rich number, ... which hasn't been proven either.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjunctive_sequence#Rich_n
               | umb...
        
               | Y_Y wrote:
               | If the OP is anything like me, then they have no trust in
               | number theory researchers and deliberately choose
               | passwords like "141592" so they can be sure
        
               | billforsternz wrote:
               | I enjoy thinking about this. Not only is a sequence of
               | digits encoding the complete works of Shakespeare in
               | there somewhere, it's in there again. And again, an
               | infinite number of times.
        
               | Y_Y wrote:
               | In my encoding I represent the works of Shakespeare by
               | the digit 0, anything else by the digit 1 followed by its
               | ASCII representation.
        
             | rolandog wrote:
             | Yeah, you'd be vulnerable to pepper shakers and divulging
             | all your passwords in a sneeze.
        
           | almosthere wrote:
           | Why do you have all those eyeballs on your arm?
           | 
           | Oh, that... yeah, they said I had a lot of special characters
           | in my LinkedIn password, and this is the best way to encode
           | those.
        
             | SlightlyLeftPad wrote:
             | They require at least one emoji and an uppercase character
        
             | selcuka wrote:
             | - Your password has expired. You must choose a new one.
             | 
             | - Uh, oh. How am I going to see behind me, then?
        
             | ryao wrote:
             | You could likely store them in the junk DNA without much
             | risk, as long as you avoid encoding sequences that are the
             | start of coding regions. That said, if you managed to
             | inject them into every cell of your body, this would be the
             | biological equivalent of dropping pamphlets containing your
             | passwords everywhere you go.
        
           | epistasis wrote:
           | You can order DNA sequences from all sorts of companies. IDT
           | is by far one of the most popular, using classical
           | biochemical means:
           | 
           | https://www.idtdna.com/pages/products/genes-and-gene-
           | fragmen...
           | 
           | https://www.idtdna.com/pages/products/custom-dna-rna/dna-
           | oli...
           | 
           | And a newer player that uses tech from integrated circuit
           | manufacturing (I think?) is Twist Biosciences:
           | 
           | https://www.twistbioscience.com/twist-ordering-platform
           | 
           | Retrieval of information has a bit of latency, however.
        
         | gww wrote:
         | They didn't sequence the whole human genome (~3 billion bases)
         | for multiple reasons. I am not an expert on ancient DNA but I
         | will try to explain the paper as best I can:
         | 
         | 1. Contamination with other flora and fauna DNA 2. Relative low
         | proportions of human DNA 3. The DNA is usually highly degraded,
         | which limits the analyses to short read sequencing (in this
         | case they used 76 bp reads). The halflife of human DNA is ~521
         | years.
         | 
         | To mitigate these problems they used multiple targeted
         | approaches including one to isolate mitochondrial DNA, where
         | they managed to sequence the whole ~16kb human mtDNA, where
         | each base was covered by 62 sequencing reads on average (62x
         | coverage).
         | 
         | They used another to isolate specific regions containing single
         | nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are DNA mismatches known
         | to be related to ancient human DNA and humans. They targeted
         | 470,724 single nucleotide polymorphisms of which 70% (336,429)
         | were recovered.
         | 
         | They did perform shotgun sequencing on all of the DNA isolated,
         | but due to species assignment issues they again focused on
         | fragments that contain diagnostic SNPs in these cases they only
         | recovered a small number of SNPs per sample, again due to the
         | relatively low proportion of human DNA and its degradation
         | (20,526, 3,734, 124,862, 85,901, 34,756, 41,632, 34,677 and
         | 72,992) as per the legend in figure 3.
        
           | dexwiz wrote:
           | That analysis makes me think of matching more than recovery.
        
             | thangngoc89 wrote:
             | "matching" is exactly how we do DNA sequencing right now.
             | The current technology is called next generation sequencing
             | (NGS), we multiply the DNA and perform matching digitally
             | to construct the full DNA.
        
               | vintermann wrote:
               | It's quite fascinating. It's like if order to figure out
               | the shape of a teacup, we generate thousands of identical
               | copies, smash them all to rather small bits, and then try
               | to count the different types of shards as a first step to
               | piecing together one full copy. Impressive that it works.
        
               | dekhn wrote:
               | It's not fascinating; it's an endless source of trouble.
               | We only do it because we don't have sequencers that
               | produce extremely long (chromosome length) high quality
               | reads, especially in sequences that contain a lot of
               | repetition. This has been a source of errors and
               | ambiguity for as long as we've used shotgun.
        
               | gww wrote:
               | This is a great analogy. One small change is that there
               | are two ways to reassemble it. One is to try to blindly
               | put the pieces together and fork a teacup (read assembly)
               | vs trying to use a picture of the teacup to figure out
               | where the pieces go (read alignment / mapping)
        
           | sweeter wrote:
           | Would it be possible to clone an ancient human being from
           | DNA?
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | Probably not, not nearly enough material remained to make
             | an accurate clone. The article mentions 70% recovery rate;
             | according to the internet, humans share 98% of DNA with
             | chimpanzees (and 35% with daffodils), so unless you have
             | 100% or 99.9999% of the DNA, the clone will be imperfect at
             | best and a Thing That Should Not Be at worst.
        
             | saagarjha wrote:
             | I think your ethical board would probably stop you first.
        
         | kevincox wrote:
         | Keep in mind that this is survivorship bias. The vast majority
         | of DNA from this period has lots. Sure, there is tons that
         | exists but we haven't found but without a doubt almost all of
         | it has been lost.
         | 
         | This is DNA that happened to be the right conditions to
         | survive. It isn't so much that the medium is resilient but that
         | if stored in the correct conditions it _can_ survive.
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | It makes me think about how many ancient ruins don't exist
           | simply because the people nearby didn't see reason not to
           | reuse all that convenient unowned pre-quarried rock.
           | 
           | Even today, it's not a very compelling plea: "No, don't tear
           | down the recently-abandoned building, it would look cool
           | several hundred years after you die."
           | 
           | So too on the microscopic label, if there are convenient
           | molecules nobody else is using...
        
             | wlesieutre wrote:
             | "Spolia" is a fun architectural term for this sort of
             | material reuse, particularly with the more interesting
             | decorative pieces. Many of those stones taken from ancient
             | buildings have become notable newer ancient buildings in
             | their own right.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spolia
        
             | teruakohatu wrote:
             | > It makes me think about how many ancient ruins don't
             | exist simply because the people nearby didn't see reason
             | not to reuse all that convenient unowned pre-quarried rock.
             | 
             | In the case of Ostia near Rome, they mined it for building
             | material until it became a malaria swamp. It wasn't drained
             | until the 20th century. Around 20% of the workers draining
             | the swap contracted malaria.
        
         | biophysboy wrote:
         | It's even more impressive when you compare it to rna, which
         | "lives" minutes. Take away the pair strand, add a hydroxyl
         | group and a uracil, and it's a totally different thing.
        
           | bloqs wrote:
           | Im fascinated, any noob friendly reading material?
        
             | biophysboy wrote:
             | Honestly, scientific papers. The pain of jargon will be
             | less than the pain of a popsci book. Especially with all
             | the tools to rewrite/summarize/search these days.
        
               | skyyler wrote:
               | Yes, but which ones? There are so many out there... It
               | seems like you're educated on the subject, so you may be
               | able to recommend good ones.
        
               | biophysboy wrote:
               | A good start would be the review articles listed here:
               | https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=rna+half-
               | life&hl=en&as_.... If there's a paywall, use sci-hub or
               | check the lab's page for a pdf. I should caveat that
               | there is no one rna half life, some live much longer
        
               | skyyler wrote:
               | It's ok if you don't have recommendations, but sending a
               | google link is a bit out of pocket :(
        
         | Waterluvian wrote:
         | So this is how I should be storing family photos.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | Thinking on how to save things long term is a fun exercise.
           | If I were super rich and felt that highly of myself, I would
           | totally build a monument to myself built to last the ages;
           | elevated (against flooding), tonnes of erosion resistant
           | rock, a library of all human knowledge in many different
           | formats, sealed off. But with an exact copy near it for
           | tourists.
        
             | Waterluvian wrote:
             | You've gotta have a series of timed vaults that give access
             | to precious metals every few generations.
        
             | AlotOfReading wrote:
             | You'd find yourself in company with many religious
             | organizations. The Mormon Church has a couple of records
             | vault carved into the granite outside SLC, while the church
             | of Scientology has 3 geographically separated primary
             | vaults dug into the mountains (Petrolia and Creston CA, and
             | a place in the desert outside Albuquerque).
        
           | saagarjha wrote:
           | In a sense your DNA _is_ your family photo.
        
       | dgfitz wrote:
       | > "It was clear that a human handled it..."
       | 
       | Ah, science.
        
         | jdiff wrote:
         | There actually was human DNA in it so I don't know why we're
         | scoffing as successful methods as if they're unreasonable.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | It's like IT, gotta make sure you have the basics right like
         | whether it's plugged in before you start with more advanced
         | stuff.
        
         | fortran77 wrote:
         | My first thought, after reading the headine, was that the deer
         | bit her.
        
       | ursuscamp wrote:
       | The article says that it belonged to a species of deer called
       | "wapiti". Since I never heard of it, I looked it up and it's just
       | an elk. Why didn't the article just say "elk" which is the much
       | more common term?
        
         | dan-robertson wrote:
         | Elk is pretty ambiguous -- it refers to different species
         | depending on the context (in Europe, 'elk' refers to what in
         | north America is called a moose. Wapiti is a name for what
         | 'elk' refers to in North America). You get a similar problem
         | with the words 'hawk' and 'buzzard'
        
           | jhbadger wrote:
           | And badger -- In Europe they are small adorable members of
           | the _Meles_ genus. In the Americas, Africa, and Asia the word
           | refers to larger and more aggressive animals in the _Taxidea_
           | and _Mellivora_ genera that just look superficially like
           | _Meles_.
        
         | chmod775 wrote:
         | Two reasons:
         | 
         | - Elk is ambiguous. There's an Elk/Wapiti in North America,
         | Central Asia, and East Asia, and another species of deer
         | referred to as an "Elk" by people in Eurasia, but which is
         | known as a "Moose" in North America.
         | 
         | - Because journalists these days don't have time to look these
         | kinds of things up. The original paper only refers to it as
         | wapiti/cervus canadensis/deer. If the whoever wrote that
         | article _knew_ it refers to an elk, they 'd have pointed that
         | out for the reader.
        
         | bregma wrote:
         | The wapiti is the animal on the reverse of the Canadian 25 cent
         | definitive coin. Perhaps the folks who write the article are
         | just educated and worldly.
        
       | sitkack wrote:
       | Send that to a consumer DNA analysis company and find her closest
       | living relatives!
        
         | bbarnett wrote:
         | It's basically everyone!
        
           | sitkack wrote:
           | I know that person!
        
           | theWreckluse wrote:
           | Or, it could be no one at all!
        
             | hackeraccount wrote:
             | If you go back far enough (and I don't know if this is)
             | isn't the answer always everyone or no one but never
             | "some".
        
       | mparnisari wrote:
       | How did they know to explore this cave in particular? Blows my
       | mind. Or was it by accident?
        
         | AlotOfReading wrote:
         | Denisova cave has been known for about 150 years or so. Back in
         | the 1970s, the Soviet Union sent some archaeologists out to see
         | what was in the cave. They found some upper paleolithic stuff
         | (e.g. like what the article is about), as well as some
         | mousterian stuff (very weird this far north and east). They did
         | excavations over the next couple of decades and eventually,
         | some of the dating/sequencing technology improved to the point
         | where it could actually be used on the cave artifacts. That's
         | when they discovered denisovans and immediately made the cave
         | one of the most important archaeological sites on the planet.
         | There's been no lack of funding since.
        
       | metalman wrote:
       | this is just the begining of DNA as a tool in archiology. Earlier
       | work with densovian dna, showed not only a genetic profile,of
       | indivuals, it showed a familial relationship, father/daughter.
       | The implication is that we will start to get a clearer look into
       | human migration patterns ,including tribal, and familial groups,
       | which while interesting, will also be prone to every kind of
       | abuse in the forwarding of various
       | agendas,...racial,ethnic,religios, nationalistic. Makes me want
       | to stir the pot sometimes, and feed back in a lurid
       | interpretation of ancient DNA, proving, i dont know, how about
       | our ancestors throwing off our alien overlords, but now the death
       | star has activated and is beaming alien DNA data right into us
       | from the 5G, but, but, (marketing angle), ....eating , "product
       | xx" or product xy, strengthens your imune system and prevents the
       | alien download from finishing. The real issue in my blathering,
       | is that fiction is fighting an uphill battle, to be stranger than
       | reality.
        
         | TeMPOraL wrote:
         | I thought that it was already established that we're descendant
         | of the ancient astronauts from the 12 Colonies of Kobol, and
         | that the "mitochondrial Eve" was a child of a human and a
         | Cylon.
         | 
         | (Part of me wishes to see this resurface as a bona fide
         | religion, oblivious to the source material.)
        
           | throwaway173738 wrote:
           | All of this has happened before, and all of it will happen
           | again.
        
       | neRok wrote:
       | The article (which is from 2023 by the way) doesn't discuss the
       | findings of the DNA analysis, so I went and looked up the
       | original - https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06035-2
       | 
       | > _with estimates of present-day human and faunal contamination
       | both below 1%. Comparisons with present-day human populations26
       | using f3-statistics and D-statistics27,28 show high affinities to
       | Native Americans (Extended Data Fig. 5). When projected into a
       | principal component analysis with other ancient human individuals
       | (Fig. 3c), DCP1 falls within a group of Ancient North Eurasian
       | individuals from further east in Siberia, which includes the
       | approximately 24 ka Mal'ta 1 and the approximately 17 ka Afontova
       | Gora 3 individuals29,30. Both of these individuals are
       | genetically closer to DCP1 than non-Ancient North Eurasian
       | individuals when tested with D-statistics (Extended Data Fig.
       | 6b), and all three show similar affinities to ancient Siberians
       | and Native Americans with f3-statistics and D-statistics_
        
       | jvandonsel wrote:
       | ...and also showed that she had antlers.
       | 
       | (Sorry, I couldn't resist)
        
       | throw0101c wrote:
       | > _The cool and dry conditions in the cave have made it possible
       | for scientists to recover preserved DNA left behind by ancient
       | Denisovans, Neanderthals and humans, all of whom occupied the
       | cave at different times over 40,000 years._
       | 
       | That's a long time to have people live in a particular area
       | generally, and a particular "home" in particular.
       | 
       | AIUI, some of the oldest writing we have dates to Ur III at 2000
       | BC, so that's 'only' 4000 years ago, or perhaps the Uruk period,
       | which at 3500 BC, is 5500 years old:
       | 
       | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_documents
       | 
       | * https://www.sfu.ca/~poitras/jesho_UR_14.pdf
       | 
       | So the oldest document(s) we have are only about 1/10th how long
       | this cave was occupied.
       | 
       | Some of these time scales are mind-boggling.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-10 23:02 UTC)