ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2014
Flying rocks and flying clocks: disparity in fossil and molecular dates for birds.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bayesian modelling of the fossil record enlightens the evolutionary history of Hemiptera.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Tip dating and Bayes factors provide insight into the divergences of crown bird clades across the end-Cretaceous mass extinction.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Review
- Putting scales into evolutionary time: the divergence of major scale insect lineages (Hemiptera) predates the radiation of modern angiosperm hosts.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- A new time tree reveals Earth history's imprint on the evolution of modern birds.Science advances · 2015Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Major disparities are recognized between molecular divergence dates and fossil ages for critical nodes in the Tree of Life, but broad patterns and underlying drivers remain elusive. We harvested 458 molecular age estimates for the stem and crown divergences of 67 avian clades to explore empirical patterns between these alternate sources of temporal information. These divergence estimates were, on average, over twice the age of the oldest fossil in these clades. Mitochondrial studies yielded older ages than nuclear studies for the vast majority of clades. Unexpectedly, disparity between molecular estimates and the fossil record was higher for divergences within major clades (crown divergences) than divergences between major clades (stem divergences). Comparisons of dates from studies classed by analytical methods revealed few significant differences. Because true divergence ages can never be known with certainty, our study does not answer the question of whether fossil gaps or molecular dating error account for a greater proportion of observed disparity. However, empirical patterns observed here suggest systemic overestimates for shallow nodes in existing molecular divergence dates for birds. We discuss underlying biases that may drive these patterns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.