ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2014
Ancient dates or accelerated rates? Morphological clocks and the antiquity of placental mammals.
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 42 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
42 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical Guide and Review of Fossil Tip-Dating in Phylogenetics.Systematic biology · 2026Review
- But the Clock, Tick-Tock: An Empirical Case Study Highlights the Preeminence of Relaxed Clock Models in Total-Evidence Dating.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Evolutionary Tempo, Supertaxa, and Living Fossils.Systematic biology · 2025Article
- Exceptional fossils from Peru and an integrative phylogeny reconcile the evolutionary timing and mode ofBiology letters · 2025Article
- The evolutionary history and timeline of mites in ancient soils.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Accuracy of Methods for Detecting Correlated Rates of Molecular and Morphological Evolution.Systematic biology · 2023Article
- An eosimiid primate of South Asian affinities in the Paleogene of Western Amazonia and the origin of New World monkeys.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Phylogenetic Signal and Bias in Paleontology.Systematic biology · 2022Article
- Widespread loss of mammalian lineage and dietary diversity in the early Oligocene of Afro-Arabia.Communications biology · 2021Article
- Developmental influence on evolutionary rates and the origin of placental mammal tooth complexity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Fossils improve phylogenetic analyses of morphological characters.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Molecular and morphological clocks for estimating evolutionary divergence times.BMC ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Mind the Outgroup and Bare Branches in Total-Evidence Dating: a Case Study of Pimpliform Darwin Wasps (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae).Systematic biology · 2021Article
- Morphological Phylogenetics Evaluated Using Novel Evolutionary Simulations.Systematic biology · 2020Article
- Survival and selection biases in early animal evolution and a source of systematic overestimation in molecular clocks.Interface focus · 2020Article
- Shifting spaces: Which disparity or dissimilarity measurement best summarize occupancy in multidimensional spaces?Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- The Maternal Nutritional Buffering Model: an evolutionary framework for pregnancy nutritional intervention.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2020Review
- Rapid morphological evolution in placental mammals post-dates the origin of the crown group.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Data partitioning and correction for ascertainment bias reduce the uncertainty of placental mammal divergence times inferred from the morphological clock.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Analyses of a comprehensive morphological character matrix of mammals using 'relaxed' clock models (which simultaneously estimate topology, divergence dates and evolutionary rates), either alone or in combination with an 8.5 kb nuclear sequence dataset, retrieve implausibly ancient, Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous estimates for the initial diversification of Placentalia (crown-group Eutheria). These dates are much older than all recent molecular and palaeontological estimates. They are recovered using two very different clock models, and regardless of whether the tree topology is freely estimated or constrained using scaffolds to match the current consensus placental phylogeny. This raises the possibility that divergence dates have been overestimated in previous analyses that have applied such clock models to morphological and total evidence datasets. Enforcing additional age constraints on selected internal divergences results in only a slight reduction of the age of Placentalia. Constraining Placentalia to less than 93.8 Ma, congruent with recent molecular estimates, does not require major changes in morphological or molecular evolutionary rates. Even constraining Placentalia to less than 66 Ma to match the 'explosive' palaeontological model results in only a 10- to 20-fold increase in maximum evolutionary rate for morphology, and fivefold for molecules. The large discrepancies between clock- and fossil-based estimates for divergence dates might therefore be attributable to relatively small changes in evolutionary rates through time, although other explanations (such as overly simplistic models of morphological evolution) need to be investigated. Conversely, dates inferred using relaxed clock models (especially with discrete morphological data and MrBayes) should be treated cautiously, as relatively minor deviations in rate patterns can generate large effects on estimated divergence dates.
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.