ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2026
The Phylodynamic Threshold of Measurably Evolving Populations.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The molecular clock is a fundamental tool for understanding the time and pace of evolution, requiring calibration information alongside molecular data. Sampling times are often used for calibration since some organisms accumulate enough mutations over the course of their sampling period. This practice ties together two key concepts: measurably evolving populations and the phylodynamic threshold. Our current understanding suggests that populations meeting these criteria are suitable for molecular clock calibration via sampling times. However, the definitions and implications of these concepts remain unclear. Using Hepatitis B virus-like simulations and analyses of empirical data, this study shows that determining whether a population is measurably evolving or has reached the phylodynamic threshold does not only depend on the data, but also on model assumptions and sampling strategies. In Bayesian applications, a lack of temporal signal due to a narrow sampling window results in a prior that is overly informative relative to the data, such that a prior that is potentially misleading typically requires a wider sampling window than one that is reasonable. In our analyses we demonstrate that assessing prior sensitivity is more important than the outcome of tests of temporal signal. Our results offer guidelines to improve molecular clock inferences and highlight limitations in molecular sequence sampling procedures.
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.