Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36608127›Full record

ArticleScience advances2023

Human generation times across the past 250,000 years.

Richard J Wang, Samer I Al-Saffar, Jeffrey Rogers, Matthew W Hahn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Natural Selection of the CommonbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Evolution of the highest fidelity DNA replication systems.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Pan-African model explainsbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Quantitative system drift.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Richard J WangDepartment of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8889-4269
Samer I Al-SaffarDepartment of Computer Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3448-1717
Jeffrey RogersHuman Genome Sequencing Center and Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7374-6490
Matthew W HahnDepartment of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5731-8808

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The generation times of our recent ancestors can tell us about both the biology and social organization of prehistoric humans, placing human evolution on an absolute time scale. We present a method for predicting historical male and female generation times based on changes in the mutation spectrum. Our analyses of whole-genome data reveal an average generation time of 26.9 years across the past 250,000 years, with fathers consistently older (30.7 years) than mothers (23.2 years). Shifts in sex-averaged generation times have been driven primarily by changes to the age of paternity, although we report a substantial increase in female generation times in the recent past. We also find a large difference in generation times among populations, reaching back to a time when all humans occupied Africa.

Identifiers

PMID36608127
PMCPMC9821931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.