Talk:Denisovan

Denisovan genes in Icelanders

From the study "The nature of Neanderthal introgression revealed by 27,566 Icelandic genomes":

Here we examine the effect of this event using 14.4 million putative archaic chromosome fragments that were detected in fully phased whole-genome sequences from 27,566 Icelanders, corresponding to a range of 56,388–112,709 unique archaic fragments that cover 38.0–48.2% of the callable genome. On the basis of the similarity with known archaic genomes, we assign 84.5% of fragments to an Altai or Vindija Neanderthal origin and 3.3% to Denisovan origin; 12.2% of fragments are of unknown origin. We find that Icelanders have more Denisovan-like fragments than expected through incomplete lineage sorting. This is best explained by Denisovan gene flow, either into ancestors of the introgressing Neanderthals or directly into humans.

...

The results indicate that the observed characteristics of Denisovan-like fragments in Icelanders are not compatible with a simple introgression from a Vindija-like group without that population having had prior admixture with a Denisovan-like group (Supplementary Information 3.3.3 and Supplementary Fig. 3.1.1). An equally intriguing scenario that cannot be ruled out is direct admixture from a Denisovan-like group into the common ancestors of non-Africans before the main Neanderthal admixture event

Could you add information on results of the study to the section "Modern humans"?

There also in entry for the study at 2020 in science.

--Prototyperspective (talk) 16:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

You write that Icelanders have 3% of their dna from denisovians. Is it the same 3%. Or do different people carry a different 3%? Parklandbob (talk) 02:49, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ANTR 8 World Prehistory in Archaeological Perspective

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 August 2022 and 20 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: ParisMacB.

— Assignment last updated by ParisMacB (talk) 04:05, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Further reading?

Is this overview in the NYT worth including? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/02/science/denisovan-neanderthal-dna.html 136.36.180.215 (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Denisovan#Culture, not enough evidence shows hand-footprints were definitely created by denisovans

Section "Tibet,"In 1998, five child hand- and footprint impressions were discovered in a travertine unit near the Quesang hot springs in Tibet... The original paper only said "Given the age of unit II the artists could have been Homo sapiens or perhaps more likely a Denisovan given that a Denisovan-like hominin has recently been found and dated (∼160 ka BP) on the edge of the Tibetan Plateau (Baishiya Cave, 3200 m a.s.l.; Fig. 1a) ."This paragraph may misunderstand the content of the paper。original article link NoteDamn (talk) 11:04, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Further down the article says "may have been made by Denisovan children". It is not saying it is definite. I do not understand why the source says that modern humans were possible as it dates the unit with the hand prints to "185.7 ± 15.74 to 219.2 ± 10.5 ka BP", long before modern humans reached Tibet. I think our article get it right mentioning the uncertainty without going into further discussion. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:15, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

New finding

A Denisovan mandible found in Taiwan ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

This is covered in the article. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Missed that, thank you! ꧁Zanahary꧂ 21:07, 11 April 2025 (UTC)