Phylogenetic Relationships in the Caesalpinioideae (Leguminosae) as Inferred from Chloroplast trnL Intron Sequences
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The basal subfamily Caesalpinioideae of the Leguminosae generally is subdivided into four or five tribes, but their monophyly remains questionable. Recent cladistic analyses based on morphological characters and chloroplast rbcL sequences suggest conflicting hypotheses of relationships among tribes and subtribal groupings and of the identification of the basal Caesalpinioideae. Our phylogenetic analysis of the chloroplast trnL intron for 223 Caesalpinioideae, representing 112 genera, plus four Papilionoideae, 12 Mimosoideae and three outgroup taxa, provides some well-supported hypotheses of relationships for the subfamily. Our analysis concurs with the rbcL studies in suggesting that a monophyletic Cercideae is sister to the remainder of the Leguminosae. Among the other tribes of Caesalpinioideae, only the broadly circumscribed Detarieae (including Amherstieae or Macrolobieae) is also supported as monophyletic. The Detarieae s.l. occurs as sister to all Leguminosae, excluding Cercideae. Cassieae subtribes Dialiinae and Labicheinae together are sister to the remaining Leguminosae, which includes a monophyletic Papilionoideae, a paraphyletic Mimosoideae, and several monophyletic groups that correspond to previously defined generic groups or subtribes in the Caesalpinioideae. The trnL intron analysis suggests that basal legumes are extremely diverse in their floral morphology, and that presence of simple, actinomorphic flowers may be a derived feature in a number of lineages in the family. Communicating Editor: Matt Lavin
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it