A Phenetic Study of the Native Species of the Family Fabaceae Lindl. in Iraq.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Distinguishable morphological qualitative and quantitative traits for 310 native taxa of 46 genera within the Fabaceae family were selected. The taxa were treated numerically analyzed as OTUs; based on the selected characteristics variations the UPGMA dendrograms by the MVSP windows program were constructed. The relationships among studied taxa were determined and illustrated. The results exhibited that all taxa are monophyletic due to the similarity in the specific characteristics of the family, the divergences among groups, or among taxa of a single group caused by dissimilarities. At different levels, three groups and six sub-groups were set among the genera, the genus Astragalus L. had the most distance relationship from other genera at level GGSc=0.67, due to the abundance of its taxa and a large number of differences among them. The relationship degrees among all studied taxa except Astragalus taxa analyzed, two groups and seven subgroups were identified at levels GGSc= 0.74 and GGSc= 0.77, detailed and illustrated. REFERENCES Abozeid, A., Yang L. J., and Tang Zh. 2017. “Cluster Analysis of Leaf Macro- and Micro- Morphological Characteristics of Vicia L. (Fabaceae) and Their Taxonomic Implication.” International Journal of Experimental Botany, Phyton 86(1): 306–17. Abozeid, A, Yang L. J., and Tang Zh. 2018. “Taxonomic Implication of Embryo Micromorphology in the Genus Vicia L. (Fabaceae).” Plant Systematics and Evolution 304(1): 33–42. Al-dabbagh, S. T. S, and Saeed J. F. 2019. “The Phenetic Study of Distributed Species of Valerianaceae Batsch Family in Kurdistan Region-Iraq.” Zanco Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 31(3). Al-Joboury, K. R., AL-Azerg L. G., and Aliwy S. A.. 2017. “Morphological , Anatomical and Numerical Taxonomy Studies for Some Species of the Fabaceae Family.” J. Bio. Env. Sci. 11(5): 117–23. Davis, P. H. 1970. Flora of Turkey and East Aegean Islands. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1-601. Fayed, A. A., El-hadidy A. M. H., Faried A. M., and Olwey A. O. 2019. “Taxonomic Implications of Multivariate Analyses of Egyptian Ononis L. (Fabaceae) Based on Morphological Traits.” Korean Journal of Plant Taxonomy 49(1): 13–27. Galalaey, A. M. K., Shaban M. A., Rasul Kh. M. A., Darwesh T. D., Uzun A., Youssef S. M. A., M. and Alma M. H. 2021. “Ethnobotanical Study of Some Wild Edible Plants in Hujran Basin, Kurdistan Region of Iraq.” Zanco Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 33(s1): 19–30. Husaini, S., and Iwo G. A. 1992. “Cytomorphological Studies of Some Weedy Species of the Family Leguminosae from Jos Plateau, Nigeria.” Feddes Repertorium 103(1–2): 111–20. Metcalfe, C. R., and Chalk L.. 1957. ANATOMY OF THE DICOTYLEDONS , Leaves, Stem, and Wood in Relation to Taxonomy with Notes on Economic Uses. Vol. 1. Oxford, Great Britain: Oxford University Press, 502. Mirzaei, L., Assadi M., Nejadsatari T., and Mehregan I. 2015. “Comparative Seed and Leaf Micromorphology of Colutea Species (Fabaceae) from Iran.” Environ Exp Biol 13: 183–87. Mulumba, J. W., and Kakudidi E. 2010. “Numerical Taxonomic Study of Acacia Senegal (Fabaceae) in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda.” South African Journal of Botany 76(2): 272–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2009.11.005. Rechinger, K. H. 1979. Flora Iranica, Papilionaceae I - Viciaeae. No. 140. Grz-Austria: Academische Druk-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1-152. Rechinger, K. H. 1984a. Flora Iranica, Papilionaceae II. No. 157. Grz-Austria: Academische Druk-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1-427. Rechinger, K. H. 1984b. Flora Iranica, Papilionaceae II - Tabulae. No. 157. Grz-Austria: Academische Druk-u. Verlagsanstalt, 570-577. Rechinger, K. H. 1999. Flora Iranica, Papilionaceae III, Astragalus I. No. 174. Grz-Austria: Academische Druk-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1-379. Rechinger, K. H. 2001. Flora Iranica, Papilionaceae IV, Astragalus II. No. 175. Graz-Austrtia: Academische Druk-u. Verlagsanstalt, 579. Simpson, M. G. 2006. Plant Systematics. Canada: Elsevier Inc, 334-335. Sneath, P. H. A., and Sokal R. R. 1973. Numerical Taxonomy, the Principles and Practice of Numerical Classification. San Francisco: Freeman, 573. Stace, C. A. 1980. Plant Taxonomy and Biosystematics. Bath, Great Britain: Pitman Press, 76-115. Stuessy, T. F. 1990. Plant Taxonomy. New York, United States of America: Columbia Univ. Press, 218-233. Taia, W. K. 2004. “Leaf Characters Within Tribe Trifolieae (Family Leguminosae).” Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 7(8): 1463–72. Toksoy, S., Öztürk M., and Sağiroğlu M. 2015. “Phylogenetic and Cladistic Analyses of the Enigmatic Genera Bituminaria and Cullen (Fabaceae) in Turkey.” Turkish Journal of Botany 39(1): 60–69. Townsend, C .C. and Guest, E. 1974. Flora of Iraq. Vol. 3. Baghdad, Iraq: Ministry of Agriculture and Agrariian Reform of the Republic of Iraq, 54-661. Yaradua, S. S., Alzahrani D. A., and Bello A. 2019. “Numerical Taxonomic Study of the Genus Crotalaria L. (Crotalarieae, Fabaceae) in Nigeria.” Biodiversity Research and Conservation 50(1): 25–32. Von Denffer, D, Schumacher, W., Magdefrau K., Ehrendorfer F., Bell P. and Coombe, D. 1971. Strasburger’s Textbook of Botany. Great Britain: Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd, 877. Zohary, M. 1946. The Flora of Iraq and Its Phytogeographical Subdivision. No. 3. ed. Dep. Agriculture. Bull. Baghdad. Baghdad, Iraq: Government Press, 140-141. Zorić, L., Merkulov L., Luković J., and Boža P. 2009. “Leaf Epidermal Characteristics of Trifolium L. Species from Serbia and Montenegro.” Flora: Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants 204(3): 198–209.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».