↓ Skip to main content

Southern African ancient genomes estimate modern human divergence to 350,000 to 260,000 years ago

Overview of attention for article published in Science, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
235 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
402 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Southern African ancient genomes estimate modern human divergence to 350,000 to 260,000 years ago
Published in
Science, September 2017
DOI 10.1126/science.aao6266
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carina M. Schlebusch, Helena Malmström, Torsten Günther, Per Sjödin, Alexandra Coutinho, Hanna Edlund, Arielle R. Munters, Mário Vicente, Maryna Steyn, Himla Soodyall, Marlize Lombard, Mattias Jakobsson

Abstract

Southern Africa is consistently placed as a potential region for the evolution of Homo sapiens We present genome sequences, up to 13x coverage, from seven ancient individuals from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Three Stone Age hunter-gatherers (about 2000 years old) were genetically similar to current-day southern San groups, while four Iron Age farmers (300 to 500 years old) were genetically similar to present-day Bantu-speakers. We estimate that all modern-day Khoe-San groups have been influenced by 9 to 30% genetic admixture from East Africans/Eurasians. Using traditional and new approaches, we estimate the first modern human population divergence time to between 350,000 and 260,000 years ago. This estimate increases the deepest divergence among modern humans, coinciding with anatomical developments of archaic humans into modern humans as represented in the local fossil record.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 407 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 402 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 402 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 92 23%
Researcher 55 14%
Student > Bachelor 54 13%
Student > Master 47 12%
Professor 24 6%
Other 64 16%
Unknown 66 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 108 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 87 22%
Arts and Humanities 21 5%
Social Sciences 19 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 17 4%
Other 66 16%
Unknown 84 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1252. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2022.
All research outputs
#7,724
of 21,397,370 outputs
Outputs from Science
#456
of 76,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114
of 296,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#7
of 1,052 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,397,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 76,355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 60.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,052 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.