ArticleFrontiers in genetics2020
Rates and Rocks: Strengths and Weaknesses of Molecular Dating Methods.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Origin and Early Evolution of Fungi: Challenges, Inferences, and Principles.Annual review of cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Article
- The Phylodynamic Threshold of Measurably Evolving Populations.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Molecular clock dating using complex mixture models: applied to ancient symbionts.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Modeling Substitution Rate Evolution across Lineages and Relaxing the Molecular Clock.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Review
- Detecting Episodic Evolution through Bayesian Inference of Molecular Clock Models.Molecular biology and evolution · 2023Article
- New insights into polyploid evolution and dynamic nature of Ludwigia section Isnardia (Onagraceae).Botanical studies · 2023Article
- Investigating the reliability of molecular estimates of evolutionary time when substitution rates and speciation rates vary.BMC ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- The Making of Calibration Sausage Exemplified by Recalibrating the Transcriptomic Timetree of Jawed Vertebrates.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
I present here an in-depth, although non-exhaustive, review of two topics in molecular dating. Clock models, which describe the evolution of the rate of evolution, are considered first. Some of the shortcomings of popular approaches-uncorrelated clock models in particular-are presented and discussed. Autocorrelated models are shown to be more reasonable from a biological perspective. Some of the most recent autocorrelated models also rely on a coherent treatment of instantaneous and average substitution rates while previous models are based on implicit approximations. Second, I provide a brief overview of the processes involved in collecting and preparing fossil data. I then review the main techniques that use this data for calibrating the molecular clock. I argue that, in its current form, the fossilized birth-death process relies on assumptions about the mechanisms underlying fossilization and the data collection process that may negatively impact the date estimates. Node-dating approaches make better use of the data available, even though they rest on paleontologists' intervention to prepare raw fossil data. Altogether, this study provides indications that may help practitioners in selecting appropriate methods for molecular dating. It will also hopefully participate in defining the contour of future methodological developments in the field.
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.