Isturitz DNA sources: find the paper and check the claim

These Isturitz DNA sources point to the passages behind the ancestry finding and its limits. Start with the paper for the ancestry result or the supplement for specimen and sediment details. For the explanation of the finding, read the Isturitz ancient DNA article.

Choose a source | Research a claim

Choose a source

Published study: start with the ancestry model

Pere Gelabert and colleagues, Early Gravettian genomic data from Western Europe reveal population movements before the LGM, Science Advances. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aeh6128.

Read the Harvard institutional PDF copy.

Type: original research. Start at Results, Figure 3 and Discussion. For the older excavation and later sampling, use Materials and Methods, Provenance.

Can help prove: What genetic comparisons the researchers report. Their best-fitting model combines predominantly western-related ancestry with a contribution related to ancestors of sampled central/eastern groups.

Be careful: This is a model of ancestry relationships, not a record of one person's movements. The named comparison groups are not nationalities. The paper retains two historical explanations and notes the missing older southwestern genomes.

Supplement: check the qualifications

Download the Harvard institutional supplement archive (ZIP). Open sciadv.aeh6128_sm.pdf inside it.

Type: supporting methods and evidence for the same study, DOI 10.1126/sciadv.aeh6128. Use section 2 for the Isturitz specimen, sections 4.2 and 4.4 for the sediment analysis, and section 5 for ancestry models. Section 5.4 and Table S29 address conditional gene-flow dating.

Can help prove: How the authors qualify the ancestry interpretation and assess contamination and multiple contributors. Section 5 says the signal likely reflects an unsampled ancestor rather than deriving directly from Věstonice. It also retains alternative plausible fitted graphs.

Be careful: Those statistical alternatives are distinct from the two historical explanations in the paper. ElMiron14 is a separate sediment sample from El Mirón in Spain and a different period, not the Isturitz woman's bone or an established descendant sample. Filtering does not turn it into one identified person's clean genome.

Access and inspection: the institutional archive was downloaded during preparation on November 3, 2026. The relevant original supplementary text and Table S29 were inspected; Table S29 was also visually checked. This is not an audit of every supplementary figure or table, or an independent rerun of the analysis.

Separate tables: available, but rows not audited here

The Harvard supplement ZIP also contains sciadv.aeh6128_tables_s1_to_s8.zip.

Type: separate data tables for the same study. The supplement's legends direct readers to Table S1 for sequencing statistics, S5 for sample metadata and calibrated ages, and S7 for comparison statistics.

Can help prove: These are places to examine the numerical support behind the reported findings. Checking a row requires reading its labels, methods and context, not just finding the archive.

Be careful: The archive has been obtained, but its rows have not been audited for this guide. Inspected legends do not verify the underlying values. Do not confuse these separate tables with Table S29 in the supplementary PDF.

The Harvard PDF and ZIP are institutional alternatives to the publisher's files for the same study. They are not additional studies or independent corroboration. The DOI above identifies the published research regardless of which copy you open.

Research a claim

1. Choose the question before the search

Pick one question: What was sampled? Which ancestry relationship does the model support? What limits apply to the sediment result? A narrow question makes it easier to decide whether a passage answers it.

2. Copy a prompt and enter it manually

Open PSF search, then enter one of these prompts yourself:

Isturitz aeh6128 supplementary materials

Isturitz ancient DNA Figure 3 ancestry

ElMiron14 sediment DNA contamination

These are starting queries, not guaranteed result lists. You can also open the direct institutional links above without searching.

3. Open and identify the original

Check the title and DOI against the published-study card. Use the published Science Advances study rather than combining its interpretation with an earlier preprint. If you open the ZIP, distinguish the supplementary PDF from the separate table archive before taking notes.

4. Read the result and its boundary together

For ancestry, compare Figure 3 with the two historical scenarios in the paper's Discussion. Then read section 5 of the supplementary PDF in the ZIP for the unsampled-ancestor qualification and alternative graph fits.

For ElMiron14, read sections 4.2 and 4.4 in the supplementary PDF (ZIP) together. The authors report evidence of modern contamination and multiple contributors. Keep that assessment beside the ancestry inference, rather than treating filtering as proof that all contamination was removed.

5. Save a note with a limit

In a notebook or document, save the source URL, a short exact passage, its section or figure locator, and the sample identifier. Add one sentence stating what the passage does not establish.

For example:

Claim: the model includes an eastern-related ancestry contribution in Isturitz. Source: DOI 10.1126/sciadv.aeh6128, Figure 3A caption. Passage: “In this model, Isturitz derives part of its ancestry from a lineage related to the ancestor of the Věstonice cluster”. Limit: the comparison does not identify her birthplace or a particular source community.

The caption in the paper supplies the model context. Preserve that wording when you reuse the note.

Product walkthrough

See the general PSF workflow for working with sources. This reusable walkthrough is not a demonstration of the Isturitz study or evidence for its findings.

Source trail

Specimen

Can help prove: The paper's Provenance section records deposition after excavations in the 1950s and sampling in 2013.

Be careful: The finding comes from analysis of an older excavated bone, not a newly discovered skeleton.

Ancestry

Can help prove: Figure 3 and Results explain the predominant western-related ancestry and additional ancestor-related central/eastern signal.

Be careful: The model does not establish direct descent from the sampled Věstonice individuals. The supplement says the signal likely reflects an unsampled ancestor.

Boundary

Can help prove: The Discussion considers Gravettian-period gene flow and an earlier ancestry contribution predating the lineage represented by Goyet Q116-1. Older southwestern genomes are missing. The supplementary PDF in the ZIP separately retains alternative fitted graphs and documents the sediment's contamination and multiple-contributor concerns.

Be careful: No unique sequence of ancestry mixing, birthplace or personal route is established. ElMiron14 remains a different sample from a different cave and period, with no demonstrated descendant connection. These limits apply even when a summary leaves them out.

Frequently asked questions

Are the Harvard copies independent confirmation of the study?

No. The Harvard PDF and supplement ZIP provide institutional access to the same Science Advances study, DOI 10.1126/sciadv.aeh6128. The supplement and separate tables are supporting material, not independent investigations.

Study title and DOI; supplementary cover identifies the same study

Does the ancestry result identify the woman's birthplace?

No. The best-fitting model combines predominantly western-related ancestry with a contribution related to ancestors of sampled central/eastern groups. The supplement says the signal likely reflects an unsampled ancestor rather than deriving directly from Věstonice. It does not establish a birthplace or personal route.

Supplement PDF, section 5; main paper, Figure 3A and Results

Why does the guide keep two historical explanations open?

The authors discuss gene flow during the Gravettian and an older ancestry contribution predating the lineage represented by Goyet Q116-1. They favor the Gravettian explanation but lack older southwestern genomes that could help distinguish the histories. Alternative fitted graphs are a separate statistical uncertainty.

Results and Discussion; supplement PDF section 5 for alternative graphs

Is ElMiron14 another individual related to the Isturitz woman?

That is not established. ElMiron14 is a separate sediment sample from El Mirón in Spain and a different period. The authors report evidence of multiple contributors and modern contamination. Filtering reduces those concerns. It does not produce an identified, uncontaminated genome from a single person or demonstrate a descendant relationship.

Supplement PDF, sections 4.2 and 4.4; main paper sediment Results