Molecular Clocks: Determining the Age of the Human–Chimpanzee Divergence


The approximate clocklike nature of the accumulation of nucleotide substitutions (the ‘molecular clock’) allows for the estimation of the time of divergence between modern species, dependent on calibrating the clock with known divergence dates from the fossil record. The use of fossils to calibrate divergence dates must be done thoughtfully, with an understanding that in most cases fossils provide a constraint on the minimal age of, rather than a true estimate of, the species divergence. Although older studies relied on single loci, recent publications have used complete genome sequences to estimate divergence. Although still dependent on assumptions of the model used, most recent estimates using the molecular clock give dates of approximately 5–8 million years ago for the human–chimpanzee divergence, in general agreement with the palaeontological evidence.

Key Concepts:

  • The molecular clock hypothesis proposes that nucleotide changes occur at a regular rate during evolution.

  • Applying the molecular clock to sequence divergence among living species can provide an estimate of the time of the divergence of these species.

  • The conversion from sequence divergence to units of geologic time usually requires calibration from the fossil record, although fossil‐free estimates have also been used.

  • The first appearance in the fossil record of a given lineage provides a minimum age of divergence of taxa that created that lineage, not a point estimate of the divergence.

  • Confidence in the fossil calibration is dependent on the completeness of the fossil record.

  • Estimates of the human–chimpanzee divergence using the molecular clock have ranged from less than 3 million to nearly 12 million years ago (Ma).

  • Most reliable estimates of the human–chimpanzee divergence range from 5 to 8 Ma.

  • Considering the various sources of uncertainty associated with molecular dating, in general the dates are in agreement with palaeontological data.

Keywords: molecular clock; human evolution; hominin; hominid; divergence; chimpanzee

Figure 1.

Estimating the time of divergence between human and chimpanzee typically relies on a calibration based on a known divergence time – in this case either the hominine–pongine split or the hominoid–cercopithecoid split. Note the taxonomy used herein.

Figure 2.

Hypothetical species divergence leading to extant taxa (species 1–3), and fossils used to date the calibration node (A–E).

Figure 3.

The current state of knowledge regarding the early hominin fossil record (left) surrounding the human–chimpanzee divergence, compared with divergence dates from molecular data (right). Fossil species are taken from Wood and Lonergan , and references therein. Molecular dates are largely taken from Steiper and Young (, p. 390, Table 4), removing dates not based on DNA sequence data, and adding the dates from Hasegawa et al., Patterson et al. and Wilkinson et al.. Small open circles represent divergence dates as estimated in the original publications (or means if ranges were given); closed circles are the same dates standardised by assuming a 30.5 Ma divergence between hominoids and cercopithecoids or an 18.3 Ma divergence between humans and orangutans (Steiper and Young, ). The large open circles represent two recent estimates from complete genome sequence data (Prüfer et al., ; Scally et al., ); large closed circles show dates derived from the same data, revised with new estimates of the mutation rate and hominid generation lengths (Langergraber et al., ).



Begun DR (2010) Miocene hominids and the origins of African apes and humans. Annual Review of Anthropology 39: 67–84.

Benton MJ and Donoghue PCJ (2007) Paleontological evidence to date the tree of life. Molecular Biology and Evolution 24: 26–53.

CSAC: The Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium (2005) Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome. Nature 437: 69–87.

Goodman M (1961) The role of immunochemical differences in the phyletic development of human behavior. Human Biology 33: 131–162.

Greenfield LO (1980) A late divergence hypothesis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 52: 351–365.

Hasegawa M, Kishino H and Yano T (1985) Dating of the human–ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. Journal of Molecular Evolution 22: 160–174.

Hoyer BH, Bolton ET, McCarthy BJ and Roberts RB (1965) The evolution of polynucleotides. In: Bryson V and Vogel HJ (eds) Evolving Genes and Proteins, pp. 581–590. New York: Academic Press.

Innan H and Watanabe H (2006) The effect of gene flow on the coalescent time in the human–chimpanzee ancestral population. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 1040–1047.

Langergraber KE, Prüfer K, Rowney C et al. (2012) Generation times in wild chimpanzees and gorillas suggest earlier divergence times in great apes and human evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 109: 15716–15721.

Leakey LSB (1967) An early Miocene member of Hominidae. Nature 213: 155–163.

Makova KD and Li W‐H (2002) Strong male‐driven evolution of DNA sequences in humans and apes. Nature 416: 624–626.

Patterson N, Richter DJ, Gnerre S, Lander ES and Reich D (2006) Genetic evidence for complex speciation of humans and chimpanzees. Nature 441: 1103–1108.

Pilbeam DR (1968) The earliest hominids. Nature 219: 1335–1338.

Prüfer K, Munch K, Hellmann I et al. (2012) The bonobo genome compared with the chimpanzee and human genomes. Nature 486: 527–531.

Sarich VM and Wilson AC (1967) Immunological time scale for human evolution. Science 158: 1200–1203.

Scally A, Dutheil JY, Hillier LW et al. (2012) Insights into hominid evolution from the gorilla genome sequence. Nature 483: 169–175.

Seiffert ER (2006) Revised age estimates for the later Paleogene mammal faunas of Egypt and Oman. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 103: 5000–5005.

Simons EL (1989) Description of two genera and species of late Eocene Anthropoidea from Egypt. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 86: 9956–9960.

Steiper ME and Young NM (2006) Primate molecular divergence dates. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 41: 384–394.

Wilkinson RD, Steiper ME, Soligo C et al. (2011) Dating primate divergences through an integrated analysis of palaeontological and molecular data. Systematic Biology 60: 16–31.

Wood B and Lonergan N (2008) The hominin fossil record: taxa, grades and clades. Journal of Anatomy 212: 354–376.

Yi S, Ellsworth DL and Li W‐H (2002) Slow molecular clocks in Old World monkeys, apes, and humans. Molecular Biology and Evolution 19: 2191–2198.

Young NM and MacLatchy L (2004) The phylogenetic position of Morotopithecus. Journal of Human Evolution 46: 163–184.

Zuckerkandl E and Pauling L (1965) Evolutionary divergence and convergence in proteins. In: Bryson V and Vogel HJ (eds) Evolving Genes and Proteins, pp. 97–166. New York: Academic Press.

Further Reading

Bradley BJ (2008) Reconstructing phylogenies and phenotypes: a molecular view of human evolution. Journal of Anatomy 212: 337–353.

Burgess R and Yang Z (2008) Estimation of hominoid ancestral population sizes under Bayesian coalescent models incorporating mutation rate variation and sequencing errors. Molecular Biology and Evolution 25: 1979–1994.

Donoghue PCJ and Benton MJ (2007) Rocks and clocks: calibrating the Tree of Life using fossils and molecules. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 22: 424–431.

Elango N, Thomas JW, NISC Comparative Sequencing Program and Yi SV (2006) Variable molecular clocks in hominoids. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 103: 1370–1375.

Groves CP (2001) Primate Taxonomy. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Steiper ME and Seiffert ER (2012) Evidence for a convergent slowdown in primate molecular rates and its implications for the timing of primate evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 109: 6006–6011.

Steiper ME, Young NM and Sukarna TY (2004) Genomic data support the hominoids slowdown and an Early Oligocene estimate for the hominoid–cercopithecoid divergence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 101: 17021–17026.

Yamamichi M, Gojobori J and Innan H (2012) An autosomal analysis gives no genetic evidence for complex speciation of humans and chimpanzees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 29: 145–156.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Jensen‐Seaman, Michael I, and Hooper‐Boyd, Kathryn A(May 2013) Molecular Clocks: Determining the Age of the Human–Chimpanzee Divergence. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0020813.pub2]