Gaps in archaeological metadata reporting: a meta-analysis of human paleogenomic studies in Western Eurasia

Paleogenomic research has dramatically increased our understanding of past demographic and adaptive processes, but has also been criticized for a perceived disconnect between geneticists and other parties involved in the study of the past. For interdisciplinary research to be productive, contextual metadata associated with paleogenomic samples should be accessible in the same publication. Here, we conduct a pilot study examining the extent of archaeological metadata reporting in 30 peer-reviewed human paleogenomic studies, based on genetic sequences from 3911 ancient humans predominately from Western Eurasia, published between 2013 and 2024. We show inconsistent reporting of archaeological data across studies, and have sought to identify the driving factors. Overall, we found no strong explanatory variables, though some metadata fields - like Geolocation - have improved in completeness over time. These inconsistencies mean that metadata reporting is often insufficient to directly investigate the relationship between patterns of cultural and genetic change on the basis of published data alone. We propose a minimum information checklist as a best-practice guideline for collecting and reporting archaeological data in the future.