ArticleGenome biology and evolution2021
Assessing Rapid Relaxed-Clock Methods for Phylogenomic Dating.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The genome of the relict earless monitor lizard, Lanthanotus borneensis, and the Toxicofera hypothesis.BMC biology · 2026Article
- The complete mitogenome of Amazonian Brachyplatystoma filamentosum and the evolutionary history of body size in the order Siluriformes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Challenges in Assembling the Dated Tree of Life.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- Modeling Substitution Rate Evolution across Lineages and Relaxing the Molecular Clock.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Review
- Speciation across the Earth driven by global cooling in terrestrial orchids.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Molecular timetrees using relaxed clocks and uncertain phylogenies.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Assessing the relative performance of fast molecular dating methods for phylogenomic data.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- Data-driven guidelines for phylogenomic analyses using SNP data.Applications in plant sciencesArticle
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
Abstract
Rapid relaxed-clock dating methods are frequently applied to analyze phylogenomic data sets containing hundreds to thousands of sequences because of their accuracy and computational efficiency. However, the relative performance of different rapid dating methods is yet to be compared on the same data sets, and, thus, the power and pitfalls of selecting among these approaches remain unclear. We compared the accuracy, bias, and coverage probabilities of RelTime, treePL, and least-squares dating time estimates by applying them to analyze computer-simulated data sets in which evolutionary rates varied extensively among branches in the phylogeny. RelTime estimates were consistently more accurate than the other two, particularly when evolutionary rates were autocorrelated or shifted convergently among lineages. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around RelTime dates showed appropriate coverage probabilities (95% on average), but other methods produced rather low coverage probabilities because of overly narrow CIs of time estimates. Overall, RelTime appears to be a more efficient method for estimating divergence times for large phylogenies.
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.