Molecular phylogeny revealed complex evolutionary process in<i>Elymus</i>species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent molecular phylogenetic studies onElymushave added to our understanding of the origination ofElymusspecies. However, evolutionary dynamics and speciation of most species inElymusare unclear. Molecular phylogeny has demonstrated that reticulate evolution has occurred extensively in the genus, as an example, the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II (rpb2) and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase (pepC) data revealed two versions of theStgenome,St1andSt2contributing to speciation ofE. caninus. Phylogenetic analyses ofE. pendulinusuncovered additional genome‐level complexity. Our data indicated that both chloroplast and nuclear gene introgression have occurred in the evolutionary process ofE. pendulinus. Non‐donor species genomes have been detected in severalElymusspecies, such as in allohexaploidE. repens(StStStStHH), aTaeniatherum‐like (Tagenome in Triticeae) GBSSI sequence,Bromus‐ (Bromeae) andPanicum‐like (Paniceae) ITS sequences have been detected. The chloroplast DNA data indicated thatPseudoroegneriais the maternal genome donor toElymusspecies, but whether differentElymusspecies originated from differentStdonors remains an open question. The origin of theYgenome inElymusis puzzling. It is clear that theYgenome is distinct from theStgenome, but unclear on the relationships ofYto other genomes in Triticeae. Introgressive hybridization may be an important factor complicating the evolutionary history of the species inElymus. The extent of introgression and its role in creating diversity inElymusspecies should be the objective of further investigations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".