Cited by 610Forensic and Genetic ResearchPleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

Revising the human mutation rate: implications for understanding human evolution

Scally, Aylwyn, Durbin, Richard·2012·Nature Reviews Genetics

Abstract

It is now possible to make direct measurements of the mutation rate in modern humans using next-generation sequencing. These measurements reveal a value that is approximately half of that previously derived from fossil calibration, and this has implications for our understanding of demographic events in human evolution and other aspects of population genetics. Here, we discuss the implications of a lower-than-expected mutation rate in relation to the timescale of human evolution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrg3295

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The older assumption that the human lineage's mutation rate changed little since the human-chimpanzee common ancestor is losing credibility because direct mutation rate estimates conflict with molecular-clock-based estimates.

    “It was once assumed that the human lineage's mutation rate had changed little since we shared a common ancestor with chimpanzees, but this assumption is losing credibility owing to the conflict between direct mutation rate estimates and molecular-clock-based estimates (8,9).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scally, A., & Durbin, R.
Affiliations
Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Scally, Aylwyn
  • Durbin, Richard
Venue
Nature Reviews Genetics
Published
2012-09-11
Volume
13
Issue
10
Pages
745-753
ISSN
  • 1471-0056 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0064
OpenAlex
W1980496331
Cited by
610
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 114 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 8
FWCI
7.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2012-09-19)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (WT 098051)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
fossil calibration, human evolution, demographic history, population genetics, molecular clock
MeSH terms
Animals, DNA, Mitochondrial, Geography, Humans, Models, Biological, Phylogeny, Hominidae, Evolution, Molecular, Comprehension, Genetic Speciation, Neanderthals, Mutation Rate

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review