Cited by 168Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesEvolution and Genetic DynamicsPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

Direct estimation of mutations in great apes reconciles phylogenetic dating

Besenbacher, Søren, Hvilsom, Christina, Marques-Bonet, Tomas, Mailund, Thomas, Schierup, Mikkel Heide·2019·Nature Ecology & Evolution

Abstract

The human mutation rate per generation estimated from trio sequencing has revealed an almost linear relationship with the age of the father and the age of the mother, with fathers contributing about three times as many mutations per year as mothers. The yearly trio-based mutation rate estimate of around 0.43 × 10-9 is markedly lower than previous indirect estimates of about 1 × 10-9 per year from phylogenetic comparisons of the great apes calibrated by fossil evidence. This suggests either a slowdown in the accumulation of mutations per year in the human lineage over the past 10 million years or an inaccurate interpretation of the fossil record. Here we inferred de novo mutations in chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutan parent-offspring trios. Extrapolating the relationship between the mutation rate and the age of parents from humans to these other great apes, we estimated that each species has higher mutation rates per year by factors of 1.50 ± 0.10, 1.51 ± 0.23, and 1.42 ± 0.22 for chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutan, respectively, and by a factor of 1.48 ± 0.08 for the three species combined. These estimates suggest an appreciable slowdown in the yearly mutation rate in the human lineage that is likely to be recent as genome comparisons almost adhere to a molecular clock. If the nonhuman rates rather than the human rate are extrapolated over the phylogeny of the great apes, we estimate divergence and speciation times that are much more in line with the fossil record and the biogeography.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41559-018-0778-x

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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 apparent slowdown in the human mutation rate is unlikely to have occurred between 500,000 and 55,000 years ago.

    “The similar mutation rates in Neanderthals and modern humans imply that the apparent slowdown in the human mutation rate 36 is unlikely to have occurred between 500,000 and 55,000 years ago.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Besenbacher, S., Hvilsom, C., Marques-Bonet, T., Mailund, T., & Schierup, M. H.
Affiliations
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • Copenhagen Zoo (DK)
Corresponding author
  • Besenbacher, Søren
  • Schierup, Mikkel Heide
Venue
Nature Ecology & Evolution
Published
2019-01-21
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
286-292
ISSN
2397-334X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2910586282
Cited by
165
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1
FWCI
7.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Ecology & Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Novo Nordisk Fonden (NNF18OC0031004)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
mutation rate, de novo mutations, great apes, chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, parent-offspring trios, molecular clock, divergence time estimation, speciation time, fossil record, human lineage
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Evolution, Fossils, Mutation, Phylogeny, Genetic Variation, Hominidae, Evolution, Molecular

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