ChatGPT made two clear errors about mitochondrial DNA. First, when asked about the Anzick-1 burial (a 12,600-year-old Clovis child skeleton from Montana), ChatGPT claimed the mtDNA haplogroup was A2ex. The correct haplogroup is D4h3a — a fundamental error in ancient DNA genetics that a co-author of the Mitotree paper had to correct. Second, when a user asked about tracing their maternal grandfather's mitochondrial DNA, ChatGPT told them they could do it by testing themselves. This is biologically impossible — mitochondrial DNA is inherited exclusively from the mother, so a person can never inherit their paternal grandfather's mtDNA. ChatGPT then congratulated the user for catching the error and 'went on as if nothing happened.' A third-party company also used AI to create a scientifically wrong infographic from the authors' research, placing all non-L haplogroups under L4 — they actually descend from L3.
0 Answers
No answers yet. Be the first to check this.
Your answer
Sign in to verify this AI response.
Don't trust us — or the AI. Ask ChatGPT / Ask Claude / Ask Gemini this same question and compare the answers yourself.
More from this topic
Generative AI citation tools produce references that look real but do not exist. A 2026 analysis documented 946 hallucinated-citation cases as of February 16, 2026: 647 fabricated citations, 192 misrepresenting facts or precedent, and 107 containing false quotes. These fabricated references appear in legal filings and scholarly papers alike.
AI developers claim their chatbots are 'safe' for mental-health conversations, based on safety evaluations where hired psychiatrists grade chatbot responses as safe or unsafe.
Nature analysis suggests tens of thousands of publications from 2025 might include invalid references generated by AI. Computer scientist Guillaume Cabanac (University of Toulouse) received a Google Scholar alert that his paper had been cited in the International Dental Journal — 'I was very surprised to see that I couldn't recognize my own reference.'