The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The neutral theory of molecular evolution and the world view of the neutralists
Abstract
The main tenet of the neutral theory is that the great majority of evolutionary changes at the molecular level are caused not by Darwinian selection but by random fixation of selectively neutral (or very nearly neutral) alleles through random sampling drift under continued mutation pressure. The theory also asserts that the majority of protein and DNA polymorphisms are selectively neutral, and that they are maintained in the species by mutational input balanced by random extinction rather than by "balancing selection." The neutral theory is based on simple assumptions. This enabled us to develop mathematical theories (using the diffusion equation method) that can treat these phenomena in quantitative terms and that permit theory to be tested against actual observations. Although the neutral theory has been severely criticized by the neo-Darwinian establishment, supporting evidence has accumulated over the last 20 years. In particular, the recent burst of DNA sequence data helped to strengthen the theory a great deal. I believe that the neutral theory triggered reexamination of the traditional "synthetic theory of evolution." In this paper, I review the present status of the neutral theory, including discussions of such topics as "molecular evolutionary clock," very high evolutionary rates observed in RNA viruses, a deviant coding system found in Mycoplasm together with the concept of mutation-driven neutral evolution, and the origin of life. I also present a worldview based on the conception of what I call "survival of the luckiest."
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Informativeness of human (dC-dA)n · (dG-dT)n polymorphisms
Weber, J. L. (1990) · Genomics · doi:10.1016/0888-7543(90)90195-z · Cited by 1,345
MECHANISMS OF PLANTVIRUS EVOLUTION
Roossinck, M. J. (1997) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.35.1.191 · Cited by 414
Skinner, M. K. (2015) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evv073 · Cited by 342
Chemistry and functional distribution of sulfoglycolipids
Ishizuka, I. (1997) · Progress in Lipid Research · doi:10.1016/s0163-7827(97)00011-8 · Cited by 289
Relative rates of nucleotide substitution at the rbcl locus of monocotyledonous plants
Gaut, B. S., Muse, S. V., Clark, W. D., & Clegg, M. T. (1992) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf00161167 · Cited by 283
Metadata
- Authors
- Kimura, M.
- Venue
- Genome
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1989-01-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 24-31
- ISSN
- 0831-2796 (ISSN-L)
- 1480-3321
- OpenAlex
- W2147261093
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The neutral theory of molecular evolution and the world view of the neutralists. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/g89-009
- The paper
- Kimura, M. (1989). The neutral theory of molecular evolution and the world view of the neutralists. Genome. https://doi.org/10.1139/g89-009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.