Phylogeny and Taxonomy of Genus Physaria in North America
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Physaria is a genus of ~108 species belonging to family Brassicaceae that is predominantly distributed in Western North America, but one species occurs in Arctic Russia and Northern Canada and several species occur in South America. Regardless of the vast number of species in the genus, the genus lacks a well-resolved phylogeny representing many taxa, partially because phylogeny reconstruction is complicated by the fact that many species of Physaria vary in chromosome numbers and ploidy levels. In chapter 1, we review how polyploids are formed and become established and summarize what is known about variation in chromosome number and ploidy in Brassicaceae and in the genus Physaria. In Chapter 2, we extracted DNA representing 84 species of Physaria species and employed a 2b-RAD sequencing technique to generate data for phylogeny reconstruction. The specific goals of the study were 1) to reconstruct the phylogeny of Physaria and assess whether species relationships proposed in early monographs by Payson (1921) and Rollins and Shaw (1973) based on morphology correspond to the current species relationships revealed through the molecular phylogeny representing 86 species of Physaria, 2) to investigate the monophyly of species represented by multiple accessions in the resulting phylogeny, and 3) to investigate how the inclusion of polyploid taxa affects the topology of the phylogeny, which may help shed light on the origins of polyploid taxa. The resulting phylogeny had species from Mexico and Texas at the base of the tree, suggesting that the genus originated in southern North America, although additional outgroups and a formal biogeographic analysis are needed to confirm this result. The species in the phylogeny were grouped into two main clades, one containing species predominantly from eastern North America, and one containing species predominantly from western North America. Except for the group 1 species proposed by Rollins and Shaw in 1973, none of proposed groups of species in monographs formed clades. Instead, the resulting phylogeny grouped species collected from nearby locations irrespective of their taxonomic placement, suggesting a strong biogeographical affinity towards species groupings, possibly due to hybridization within geographic locations. Only a handful of species were monophyletic; in the eastern clade, P. recurvata, P. gracilis, P. angustifolia, P. globosa, and a new species, P. ouachitensisformed monophyletic species in phylogenies in which the polyploid species were present and absent. In the western clade, P. brassicoides, P. pruinosa, P. valida, P. parvula, P. pulvinata and P. intermedia formed monophyletic species when the polyploids were removed. The topology varied depending on whether polyploids were included, suggesting that some species may be hybrids or allopolyploids. Conducting additional chromosome counts, identifying hybrid and allopolyploid taxa, and reconstructing the evolution of ploidy levels is an important area for future studies to understand how they have affected diversification in the group. Overall, the current study resulted a well resolved phylogeny with many taxa of Physaria, which is useful for future studies on understanding the evolutionary history, character evolution, and biogeography of the genus.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».