4 ms·
How did they confirm such findings? I guess DNA can't survive for so long. Did they deduct this from shape?
by jokoon 8y ago
How did they confirm such findings? I guess DNA can't survive for so long. Did they deduct this from shape?
- Matticus_Rex 8y agoWith modern extraction techniques DNA is doable.
- mdtancsa 8y agoThere is a really fascinating (IMHO) podcast about the use of modern DNA analysis and the insights into ancient populations on the After-On podcast with David Reich https://after-on.com/episodes-31-60/034 https://after-on.com/episodes-31-60/034 Up until podcast, I didnt even know there was a branch called Denisovans. Although not generally a big interest of mine, I found it interesting enough to read Reich's book which was a fascinating detective story and a very new view onto ancient history.
- Matticus_Rex 8y ago+1 for the book! Just finished it a couple of weeks ago. And if you liked that, consider The Tangled Tree by David Quammen.
- lugg 8y agoIt's like four paragraphs in, did you even RTFA? > DNA analysis proves that the piece is Denisovan, though it’s too old to date with radiocarbon techniques.
- arcticfox 8y ago> Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." Gentle reminder of this HN Guideline, which I find helpful for civil discourse. It's easy to miss something in the middle of an article. Re: the OP's question, while the article does confirm it was found by DNA analysis, I also find it surprising that DNA can be extracted at 500k+ years. I'm curious if there are any experts on it that could chime in here on what modern limits are for that type of stuff.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- lugg 8y agoIt says confirmed in the title. It says confirmed in the APs post. I'm finding it hard to believe AP simply "missed it" when they had the question in mind before they even read the thing.
- arcticfox 8y ago> when they had the question in mind before they even read the thing. I don't think you can assume that. I think a fair number of people could read the article and then afterward realize they don't know how it was confirmed.