The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genomic data support the hominoid slowdown and an Early Oligocene estimate for the hominoid-cercopithecoid divergence.
Open accessAbstract
Several lines of indirect evidence suggest that hominoids (apes and humans) and cercopithecoids (Old World monkeys) diverged around 23-25 Mya. Importantly, although this range of dates has been used as both an initial assumption and as a confirmation of results in many molecular-clock analyses, it has not been critically assessed on its own merits. In this article we test the robusticity of the 23- to 25-Mya estimate with approximately 150,000 base pairs of orthologous DNA sequence data from two cercopithecoids and two hominoids by using quartet analysis. This method is an improvement over other estimates of the hominoid-cercopithecoid divergence because it incorporates two calibration points, one each within cercopithecoids and hominoids, and tests for a statistically appropriate model of molecular evolution. Most comparisons reject rate constancy in favor of a model incorporating two rates of evolution, supporting the "hominoid slowdown" hypothesis. By using this model of molecular evolution, the hominoid-cercopithecoid divergence is estimated to range from 29.2 to 34.5 Mya, significantly older than most previous analyses. Hominoid-cercopithecoid divergence dates of 23-25 Mya fall outside of the confidence intervals estimated, suggesting that as much as one-third of ape evolution has not been paleontologically sampled. Identifying stem cercopithecoids or hominoids from this period will be difficult because derived features that define crown catarrhines need not be present in early members of these lineages. More sites that sample primate habitats from the Oligocene of Africa are needed to better understand early ape and Old World monkey evolution.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“E) mean = 7 MYA, stdev = 1.0 for TMRCA of Papionini [82]”
From A molecular phylogeny of living primates (2011) · cites this paper as [82]
Citations
Cites
Basic local alignment search tool
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W., & Lipman, D. J. (1990) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1990.9999 · Cited by 98,669
Thompson, J. D., Higgins, D. G., & Gibson, T. J. (1994) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/22.22.4673 · Cited by 64,617
Thompson, J. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.24.4876 · Cited by 38,685
Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach.
Felsenstein, J. (1981) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf01734359 · Cited by 14,571
PAUP^* : Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (and other methods) 4.0b8
Swofford, D. L. (2001) · Cited by 12,789
Dating of the human–ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA.
Hasegawa, M., Kishino, H., & Yano, T.-A. (1985) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf02101694 · Cited by 8,687
PAUP (phylogenetic analysis using parsimony)
(2008) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6754-9_12413 · Cited by 4,424
Yang, Z. (1994) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf00160154 · Cited by 2,960
A molecular timescale for vertebrate evolution
Kumar, S., & Hedges, S. B. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/31927 · Cited by 1,936
A new hominid from the Upper Miocene of Chad, Central Africa
Brunet, M., Guy, F., Pilbeam, D. R., Mackaye, H. T., Likius, A., Djimdoumalbaye, A., Beauvilain, A., Blondel, C., Bocherens, H., Boisserie, J., et al. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature00879 · Cited by 1,095
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Pilbeam, D. R. & Young, N. M. (2004) C. R. Palevol. 3, 303–319.
- Bailey, W. J., Fitch, D. H., Tagle, D. A., Czelusniak, J., Slightom, J. L. & Goodman, M. (1991) Mol. Biol. Evol. 8, 155–184.2046542
- Rasmussen D. T. (2002) in The Primate Fossil Record ed. Hartwig W. (Cambridge Univ. Press Cambridge U.K.) pp. 203–220.
- Sanders, W. J., Kappelman, J. & Rasmussen, D. T. (2004) Acta Palaeontol. Pol. 49, 365–392.
- Easteal, S. & Collet, C. (1994) Mol. Biol. Evol. 11, 643–647.8078402
- Easteal, S. (1991) Mol. Biol. Evol. 8, 115–127.2002761
- Goodman, M. (1961) Hum. Biol. 33, 131–162.13707050
- Seino, S., Bell, G. I. & Li, W. H. (1992) Mol. Biol. Evol. 9, 193–203.1560757
- Senut, B., Pickford, M., Gommery, D., Mein, P., Chebol, K. & Coppens, Y. (2001) C. R. Acad. Sci. Ser. IIa 332, 137–144.
- 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2 · DOI · Paper page
- Harrison T. (2002) in The Primate Fossil Record ed. Hartwig W. (Cambridge Univ. Press Cambridge) pp. 311–338.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A molecular phylogeny of living primates
Perelman, P., Johnson, W. E., Roos, C., Seuánez, H. N., Horvath, J. E., Moreira, M. A. M., Kessing, B., Pontius, J., Roelke, M., Rumpler, Y., et al. (2011) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001342 · Cited by 1,414
“, E) mean = 7 MYA, stdev = 1.0 for TMRCA of Papionini”
InfluentialComputational Molecular Evolution
Yang, Z. (2006) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567028.001.0001 · Cited by 1,152
Yang, Z., & Rannala, B. H. (2005) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msj024 · Cited by 917
“Plotting the posterior CI bounds against the posterior means of divergence times for the data of Steiper, Young, and Sukarna (2004) revealed a nearly perfect linear relationship (results not shown). human chimpanzee baboon rhesus macaque 051015202530 2 3 1 FIG.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialGenetic evidence for complex speciation of humans and chimpanzees
Patterson, N. J., Richter, D. J., Gnerre, S., Lander, E. S., & Reich, D. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04789 · Cited by 582
Springer, M. S., Meredith, R. W., Gatesy, J., Emerling, C. A., Park, J. S., Rabosky, D. L., Stadler, T., Steiner, C., Ryder, O. A., Janečka, J. E., et al. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049521 · Cited by 518
“Importantly, Steiper and Seiffert’s [79] analysis was an attempt at correcting for the effects of convergent rate slowdowns in primates [80–83].”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Steiper, M. E., Young, N. M., & Sukarna, T. Y.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary (CA)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2004-11-30
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 49
- Pages
- 17021-17026
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC535389
- OpenAlex
- W1964511844
- Cited by
- 149
- References
- 78
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 12.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (RR03037)
- National Center for Research Resources (RR-03037, G12RR003037)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Keywords
- Oligocene, molecular clock, divergence time estimation, rate heterogeneity, Old World monkeys, apes, primate evolution
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Cercopithecidae, Biological Evolution, Humans, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Time, Hominidae, Likelihood Functions, Evolution, Molecular, Contig Mapping
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
