The human mutation rate per generation estimated from trio sequencing has revealed an almost linear relationship with the age of the father and the age of the mother, with fathers contributing about three times as many mutations per year as mothers. The yearly trio-based mutation rate estimate of around 0.43 × 10−9 is markedly lower than previous indirect estimates of about 1 × 10−9 per year from phylogenetic comparisons of the great apes calibrated by fossil evidence. This suggests either a slowdown in the accumulation of mutations per year in the human lineage over the past 10 million years or an inaccurate interpretation of the fossil record. Here we inferred de novo mutations in chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutan parent-offspring trios. Extrapolating the relationship between the mutation rate and the age of parents from humans to these other great apes, we estimated that each species has higher mutation rates per year by factors of 1.50 ± 0.10, 1.51 ± 0.23, and 1.42 ± 0.22 for chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutan, respectively, and by a factor of 1.48 ± 0.08 for the three species combined. These estimates suggest an appreciable slowdown in the yearly mutation rate in the human lineage that is likely to be recent as genome comparisons almost adhere to a molecular clock. If the nonhuman rates rather than the human rate are extrapolated over the phylogeny of the great apes, we estimate divergence and speciation times that are much more in line with the fossil record and the biogeography.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Data availability

All sequence data have been deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) under accession number PRJEB29710. The identified de novo mutations are included as Supplementary Table 1. All scripts and code used to generate the results are available at https://github.com/besenbacher/GreatApeMutationRate2018.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


  1. 1.

    Maretty, L. et al. Sequencing and de novo assembly of 150 genomes from Denmark as a population reference. 548, 87–91 (2017).

  2. 2.

    Jónsson, H. et al. Parental influence on human germline de novo mutations in 1,548 trios from Iceland. Nature 549, 519–522 (2017).

  3. 3.

    Kong, A. et al. Rate of de novo mutations and the importance of father’s age to disease risk. Nature 488, 471–475 (2012).

  4. 4.

    Prüfer, K. et al. A high-coverage Neandertal genome from Vindija Cave in Croatia. Science 358, 655–658 (2017).

  5. 5.

    Scally, A. The mutation rate in human evolution and demographic inference. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 41, 36–43 (2016).

  6. 6.

    Lipson, M. et al. Calibrating the human mutation rate via ancestral recombination density in diploid genomes. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005550 (2015).

  7. 7.

    Moorjani, P., Amorim, C. E., Arndt, P. F. & Przeworski, M. Variation in the molecular clock of primates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 10607–10612 (2016).

  8. 8.

    Moorjani, P., Gao, Z. & Przeworski, M. Human germline mutation and the erratic evolutionary clock. PLoS Biol. 14, e2000744 (2016).

  9. 9.

    Scally, A. & Durbin, R. Revising the human mutation rate: implications for understanding human evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13, 745–753 (2012).

  10. 10.

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

  11. 11.

    Amster, G. & Sella, G. Life history effects on the molecular clock of autosomes and sex chromosomes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 1588–1593 (2016).

  12. 12.

    Scally, A. Mutation rates and the evolution of germline structure. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 371, 20150137 (2016).

  13. 13.

    Venn, O. et al. Strong male bias drives germline mutation in chimpanzees. Science 344, 1272–1275 (2014).

  14. 14.

    Tatsumoto, S. et al. Direct estimation of de novo mutation rates in a chimpanzee parent–offspring trio by ultra-deep whole genome sequencing. Sci. Rep. 7, 13561 (2017).

  15. 15.

    Besenbacher, S. et al. Novel variation and de novo mutation rates in population-wide de novo assembled Danish trios. Nat. Commun. 6, 5969 (2015).

  16. 16.

    Moorjani, P. et al. A genetic method for dating ancient genomes provides a direct estimate of human generation interval in the last 45,000 years. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 5652–5657 (2016).

  17. 17.

    Gao, Z. et al. Overlooked roles of DNA damage and maternal age in generating human germline mutations. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/10/11/327098 (2018).

  18. 18.

    Goldmann, J. M. et al. Germline de novo mutation clusters arise during oocyte aging in genomic regions with high double-strand-break incidence. Nat. Genet. 50, 487–492 (2018).

  19. 19.

    Lindsay, S. J., Rahbari, R., Kaplanis, J., Keane, T. & Hurles, M. Striking differences in patterns of germline mutation between mice and humans. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/05/23/082297 (2018).

  20. 20.

    Jónsson, H. et al. Multiple transmissions of de novo mutations in families. Nat. Genet. 50, 1674–1680 (2018).

  21. 21.

    Thomas, G. W. C. et al. Reproductive longevity predicts mutation rates in primates. Curr. Biol. 28, 3193–3197 (2018).

  22. 22.

    White, T. D. et al. Ardipithecus ramidus and the paleobiology of early hominids. Science 326, 64–86 (2009).

  23. 23.

    Richmond, B. G. & Jungers, W. L. Orrorin tugenensis femoral morphology and the evolution of hominin bipedalism. Science 319, 1662–1665(2008).

  24. 24.

    Pilbeam, D., Rose, M. D., Barry, J. C. & Shah, S. M. New Sivapithecus humeri from Pakistan and the relationship of Sivapithecus and Pongo. Nature 348, 237–239 (1990).

  25. 25.

    Delehelle, F., Cussat-Blanc, S., Alliot, J.-M., Luga, H. & Balaresque, P. ASGART: fast and parallel genome scale segmental duplications mapping. Bioinformatics 34, 2708–2714 (2018).

Download references


We thank M. Przeworski and P. Moorjani for comments to a previous version of the manuscript and A. Brandstrup for laboratory expertise. The study was supported by grant number 6108-00385A from the Danish Council for Independent Research | Natural Sciences (to M.H.S.).

Author information


  1. Department of Molecular Medicine (MOMA), Aarhus, Denmark

    • Søren Besenbacher
  2. Copenhagen Zoo, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    • Christina Hvilsom
  3. Institut Biologia Evolutiva, Universitat Pompeu Fabra/CSIC, Barcelona, Spain

    • Tomas Marques-Bonet
  4. Bioinformatics Research Centre, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

    • Thomas Mailund
    •  & Mikkel Heide Schierup
  5. Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

    • Mikkel Heide Schierup


  1. Search for Søren Besenbacher in:

  2. Search for Christina Hvilsom in:

  3. Search for Tomas Marques-Bonet in:

  4. Search for Thomas Mailund in:

  5. Search for Mikkel Heide Schierup in:


S.B., T.M., T.M.-B., C.H., and M.H.S. designed the study. C.H. contributed reagents. S.B., T.M., and M.H.S. performed analysis. S.B. and M.H.S. wrote the paper with input from all authors.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Søren Besenbacher or Mikkel Heide Schierup.

Supplementary information

  1. Supplementary Text and Figures

    Supplementary Figures 1–6 and Supplementary Table 1

  2. Reporting Summary

  3. Supplementary Data

    Supplementary data file

About this article

Publication history