Relationships of North American members of<i>Rhodiola</i>(Crassulaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Taxa of Rhodiola L. (Crassulaceae) generally grow in arctic or alpine habitats. Some Rhodiola species are used medicinally, one taxon, Rhodiola integrifolia Raf. subsp. leedyi (Rosend. & J.W.Moore) Moran, (Leedy’s roseroot), is rare and endangered, and the group’s biogeography in North America is intriguing because of distributional disjunctions and the possibility that Rhodiola rhodantha (A.Gray) H.Jacobsen (2n = 7II) and Rhodiola rosea L. (2n = 11II) hybridized to form Rhodiola integrifolia Raf. (2n = 18II). Recent studies of the North American Rhodiola suggest that the group’s current taxonomy is misleading. We analyzed nuclear and chloroplast DNA sequences (internal transcribed spacer (ITS), trnL intron, trnL–trnF spacer, trnS–trnG spacer) from the North American Rhodiola taxa. We combined our data with GenBank sequences from Asian Rhodiola species, performed parsimony, maximum likelihood (ML), and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses, and applied a Bayesian clock model to the ITS data. Our analyses reveal two major Rhodiola clades, suggest that hybridization between R. rhodantha and R. rosea lineages was possible, show two distinct clades within R. integrifolia, and demonstrate that a Black Hills, South Dakota, Rhodiola population should be reclassified as Leedy’s roseroot. We recommend that R. integrifolia be revised, and that the Black Hills Leedy’s roseroot population be managed as part of that rare and endangered taxon.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".