Phillip Endicott1, Simon Y.W. Ho2, , Mait Metspalu3 and Chris Stringer4
1Départment Hommes Natures Sociétés, Musée de l’Homme, 75116 Paris, France
2Centre for Macroevolution and Macroecology, Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, Australia
3Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Tartu, and Estonian Biocentre, Estonia
4Department of Palaeontology, Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom
Available online 12 August 2009.
Different methodologies and modes of calibration have produced disparate, sometimes irreconcilable, reconstructions of the evolutionary and demographic history of our species. We discuss how date estimates are affected by the choice of molecular data and methodology, and evaluate various mitochondrial estimates of the timescale of human evolution in the context of the contemporary palaeontological and archaeological evidence for key stages in human prehistory. We contend that some of the most widely-cited mitochondrial rate estimates have several significant shortcomings, including a reliance on a human-chimpanzee calibration, and highlight the pressing need for revised rate estimates.
Fonte: Physorg
Article Outline
Estimates of the timescale of human evolution
Date estimates from mitochondrial DNA
Implications of different rates for interpretations of human evolution
Concluding Remarks
Acknowledgements
References
Trends in Ecology & Evolution
Volume 24, Issue 9, September 2009, Pages 515-521
+++++
Pesquisadores, professores e alunos de universidades públicas e privadas com acesso ao site CAPES/Periódicos podem ler gratuitamente este artigo da Trends in Ecology and Evolution.
