Cited by 212Protist diversity and phylogenyEvolution and Paleontology StudiesPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils

A molecular time-scale for eukaryote evolution recalibrated with the continuous microfossil record

Open access
Berney, Cédric, Pawlowski, Jan·2006·Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Recent attempts to establish a molecular time-scale of eukaryote evolution failed to provide a congruent view on the timing of the origin and early diversification of eukaryotes. The major discrepancies in molecular time estimates are related to questions concerning the calibration of the tree. To limit these uncertainties, we used here as a source of calibration points the rich and continuous microfossil record of dinoflagellates, diatoms and coccolithophorids. We calibrated a small-subunit ribosomal RNA tree of eukaryotes with four maximum and 22 minimum time constraints. Using these multiple calibration points in a Bayesian relaxed molecular clock framework, we inferred that the early radiation of eukaryotes occurred near the Mesoproterozoic–Neoproterozoic boundary, about 1100 million years ago. Our results indicate that most Proterozoic fossils of possible eukaryotic origin cannot be confidently assigned to extant lineages and should therefore not be used as calibration points in molecular dating.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.2006.3537

Cites

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 LECA estimate from the species tree analysis falls within published molecular clock estimates, placing LECA within a broad interval of approximately 1-2.4 Ga.

    “The LECA estimate (1.93–1.84 Ga, 95% highest posterior density) from our species tree analysis falls within published molecular clock estimates, placing LECA within a broad interval ~1–2.4 Ga25–27,97–99 (Fig. 5A, C, Supplementary Fig. 16, Supplementary Data 10).”

    From ATP synthase evolution on a cross-braced dated tree of life (2023) · cites this paper as [97]

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 45 · Cited by 212

Authors
Berney, C., & Pawlowski, J.
Affiliations
University of Geneva (CH)
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2006-04-20
Volume
273
Issue
1596
Pages
1867-1872
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2005201180
Cited by
212
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 12
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (100415, 3100A0)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Keywords
eukaryotic evolution, fossil calibration, microfossils, dinoflagellates, diatoms, coccolithophores, small subunit rRNA, relaxed molecular clock, Bayesian phylogenetics, eukaryotic origin
MeSH terms
Chlorophyta, Rhodophyta, Amoeba, Animals, Eukaryotic Cells, Fossils, Fungi, Phylogeny, RNA, Ribosomal, 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