Cited by 1,414Evolution and Paleontology StudiesGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesPrimate Behavior and Ecology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 89 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 55 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

A Molecular Phylogeny of Living Primates

Open access

Abstract

Comparative genomic analyses of primates offer considerable potential to define and understand the processes that mold, shape, and transform the human genome. However, primate taxonomy is both complex and controversial, with marginal unifying consensus of the evolutionary hierarchy of extant primate species. Here we provide new genomic sequence (~8 Mb) from 186 primates representing 61 (~90%) of the described genera, and we include outgroup species from Dermoptera, Scandentia, and Lagomorpha. The resultant phylogeny is exceptionally robust and illuminates events in primate evolution from ancient to recent, clarifying numerous taxonomic controversies and providing new data on human evolution. Ongoing speciation, reticulate evolution, ancient relic lineages, unequal rates of evolution, and disparate distributions of insertions/deletions among the reconstructed primate lineages are uncovered. Our resolution of the primate phylogeny provides an essential evolutionary framework with far-reaching applications including: human selection and adaptation, global emergence of zoonotic diseases, mammalian comparative genomics, primate taxonomy, and conservation of endangered species.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This study presents a highly resolved molecular phylogeny of living primates based on new genomic sequence from 186 primates representing 61 genera, using 34,927 bp from 54 nuclear genes. It clarifies primate taxonomic relationships, divergence dates, and patterns of genome evolution including rate heterogeneity and insertion/deletion variation.

Key findings

  • The phylogeny includes 191 taxa (186 primates representing 61 genera, about 90% of described genera) plus outgroups from Dermoptera, Scandentia, and Lagomorpha; 166 of 189 nodes (88%) have bootstrap values of 90–100% and Bayesian posterior probabilities of 0.9–1.0, with only 3 of 189 nodes collapsed into polytomies in bootstrap analyses.
  • Strepsirrhini split from Haplorrhini approximately 87 MYA (node 185); tarsiers are supported as sister to Simiiformes (BS = 85 MP; 98 ML; 0.99 PP) to form Haplorrhini, and Dermoptera is affirmed as the closest mammalian order to Primates, followed by Scandentia.
  • Platyrrhini diverged from Catarrhini roughly 43.5 MYA; within Cebidae, Cebus and Saimiri emerged about 20 MYA, followed by a lineage splitting to Callitrichinae and Aotus, with Aotus showing 15 synapomorphic indels, the most observed in Simiiformes, and Callitrichinae branching mirroring decreasing body size.
  • Cercopithecoidea shows low divergence, especially Papionini; Cercopithecini divergence is nearly twice that of Papionini (mean branch length = 13.1 vs. 7.43, p<0.005), Homo-Pan genetic distance ranges from 6.92 to 7.90×10−3 substitutions/site, and the global nucleotide substitution rate is 6.163×10−4 substitutions/site/MY.

Methods

  • New genomic sequence (~8 Mb) was generated from 186 primates representing 61 genera, with outgroups from Dermoptera, Scandentia, and Lagomorpha; 54 nuclear genes yielded a final 34,927 bp after correction for ambiguous sites from an original 43,493 bp per OTU.
  • DNA was extracted from blood, buffy coat, hair, buccal swabs, tissues, or cell cultures, PCR-amplified, Sanger-sequenced, aligned with MAFFT, and edited with GBLOCK; partitions included X, Y, autosome, intron, exon, and UTR segments.
  • Phylogenetic reconstruction used maximum likelihood and maximum parsimony in PAUP* and GARLI with bootstrap support (1000 MP, 100 ML), plus Bayesian BEAST analyses with an uncorrelated lognormal relaxed clock and nine fossil calibration points; indels were identified with FASTGAP and analyzed by regression and ANOVA.

Limitations

  • The paper states that only 3 of 189 nodes are polytomies in bootstrap analyses (nodes 28, 38, 158), that Lemuriformes node 158 collapses into an unresolved trichotomy, that the origin of primates remains unresolved, and that computational constraints limited BEAST analyses to five different species sets.
  • The text notes that approximately half of the 261–377 described primate species and 90% of genera are included, that the Y-chromosome tree is based on 127 males as a subset of 191 total taxa, and that some indels were in regions not amplified across all species.
  • Evident from the text: despite overall high resolution, some nodes have low support (e.g., node 158; node 187 posterior probability 0.54), and several taxonomic controversies remain, including within Galago, Cercopithecus, and Asian Colobinae.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pgen.1001342

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

50 Own result · 35 Not checked yet · 15 Own interpretation · 14 No basis given · 11 Own method

Verify all 55 references — free account

Show all 52 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 60
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 21
73 of 73
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Primate taxonomy is complex and controversial, with marginal unifying consensus on the evolutionary hierarchy of extant primate species.

    “However, primate taxonomy is both complex and controversial, with marginal unifying consensus of the evolutionary hierarchy of extant primate species.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The phylogenetic hierarchy of primate species has only modest local (family and genus level) molecular resolution with little consensus on overall primate radiations.

    “Markedly absent from these many advances however, is a formal evolutionary context to interpret these findings, as the phylogenetic hierarchy of primate species has only modest local (family and genus level) molecular resolution with little consensus on overall primate radiations.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Recent application of molecular genetic data to resolve primate systematics has been informative but limited in scope and constrained to specific subsets of taxa.

    “Recent application of molecular genetic data to resolve primate systematics has been informative, but limited in scope and constrained to just specific subsets of taxa.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Whole genome sequencing of 12 primate species is now completed or nearly so.

    “Although whole genome sequencing of 12 primate species are now completed, or nearly so, broader genome representation of man's closest relatives is necessary to interpret human evolution, adaptation and genome structure to assist in biomedical advances.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The ingroup is monophyletic with respect to the outgroup.

    “with the ingroup assumed to be monophyletic with respect to the outgroup.”
5 of 5

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Show all 89 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
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., Schneider, M. P. C., Silva, A., O'Brien, S. J., & Pecon-Slattery, J.
Affiliations
  • Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research (US)
  • National Cancer Institute (US)
  • German Primate Center (DE)
  • Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (BR)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Université de Strasbourg (FR)
  • Universidade Federal do Pará (BR)
Venue
PLoS Genetics
Published
2011-03-17
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
e1001342
ISSN
  • 1553-7390 (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7404
OpenAlex
W2144820135
Cited by
1,414
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 132 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 157 · 2017: 120 · 2016: 111 · 2015: 94 · 2014: 127 · 2013: 99 · 2012: 82
FWCI
74.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Genetics (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • GoeScholar The Publication Server of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (N01-CO-12400)
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
  • National Institutes of Health (n01co12400-79-0-22, N01-CO-12400)
  • National Cancer Institute (CO-12400, N01CO12400, N01-CO-012400)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Primate Behavior and Ecology
Keywords
primate phylogeny, comparative genomics, primate taxonomy, human evolution, primate genomics, Dermoptera, tree shrew, lagomorphs, reticulate evolution, speciation, zoonotic emergence, endangered species conservation
MeSH terms
Animals, Female, Male, Phylogeny, Primates, Genetic Variation, Genome, Computational Biology

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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