Calibrating molecular estimates of substitution rates and divergence times in birds

Studies of molecular evolutionary rates have yielded a wide range of rate estimates for various genes and taxa. Recent studies based on population-level and pedigree data have produced remarkably high estimates of mutation rate, which strongly contrast with substitution rates inferred in phylogenetic (species-level) studies. Using Bayesian analysis with a relaxed-clock model, we estimated rates for three groups of mitochondrial data: avian protein-coding genes, primate protein-coding genes, and primate d-loop sequences. In all three cases, we found a measurable transition between the high, short-term (< 1-2 Myr) mutation rate and the low, long-term substitution rate. The relationship between the age of the calibration and the rate of change can be described by a vertically translated exponential decay curve, which may be used for correcting molecular date estimates. The phylogenetic substitution rates in mitochondria are approximately 0.5% per million years for avian protein-coding sequences and 1.5% per million years for primate protein-coding and d-loop sequences. Further analyses showed that purifying selection offers the most convincing explanation for the observed relationship between the estimated rate and the depth of the calibration. We rule out the possibility that it is a spurious result arising from sequence errors, and find it unlikely that the apparent decline in rates over time is caused by mutational saturation. Using a rate curve estimated from the d-loop data, several dates for last common ancestors were calculated: modern humans and Neandertals (354 ka; 222-705 ka), Neandertals (108 ka; 70-156 ka), and modern humans (76 ka; 47-110 ka). If the rate curve for a particular taxonomic group can be accurately estimated, it can be a useful tool for correcting divergence date estimates by taking the rate decay into account. Our results show that it is invalid to extrapolate molecular rates of change across different evolutionary timescales, which has important consequences for studies of populations, domestication, conservation genetics, and human evolution.

Rates of molecular evolution vary widely between lineages, but quantification of how rates change has proven difficult. Recently proposed estimation procedures have mainly adopted highly parametric approaches that model rate evolution explicitly. In this study, a semiparametric smoothing method is developed using penalized likelihood. A saturated model in which every lineage has a separate rate is combined with a roughness penalty that discourages rates from varying too much across a phylogeny. A data-driven cross-validation criterion is then used to determine an optimal level of smoothing. This criterion is based on an estimate of the average prediction error associated with pruning lineages from the tree. The methods are applied to three data sets of six genes across a sample of land plants. Optimally smoothed estimates of absolute rates entailed 2- to 10-fold variation across lineages.

The role of fossils in dating the tree of life has been misunderstood. Fossils can provide good "minimum" age estimates for branches in the tree, but "maximum" constraints on those ages are poorer. Current debates about which are the "best" fossil dates for calibration move to consideration of the most appropriate constraints on the ages of tree nodes. Because fossil-based dates are constraints, and because molecular evolution is not perfectly clock-like, analysts should use more rather than fewer dates, but there has to be a balance between many genes and few dates versus many dates and few genes. We provide "hard" minimum and "soft" maximum age constraints for 30 divergences among key genome model organisms; these should contribute to better understanding of the dating of the animal tree of life.