Phylogenetic analysis of the Australian Salicornioideae (Chenopodiaceae) based on morphology and nuclear DNA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Salicornioideae Kostel. are distinctive among the Chenopodiaceae Venet.. However, their phylogenetic relationships are poorly understood. Analyses of morphological and molecular characters were undertaken to evaluate relationships within the subfamily and to test the monophyly of the endemic Australian genera Halosarcia Paul G. Wilson, Pachycornia Hook.f., Sclerostegia Paul G. Wilson, Tecticornia Hook.f. and Tegicornia Paul G. Wilson. Kalidium Moq. and Halopeplis Bunge ex Ung.-Sternb. of the tribe Halopeplideae were used as outgroup representatives in the morphological analysis and resolved sister to the tribe Salicornieae. Allenrolfea Kuntze; Halocnemum Bieb. and Heterostachys Meyer formed an early branching group sister to a moderately supported clade comprised of the remaining Salicornieae. Only terminal groups of closely related species received significant bootstrap support in this analysis. In contrast, the current tribal classification of the Salicornioideae was not supported in the molecular analysis as Allenrolfea occidentalis Kuntz (tribe Salicornieae) positioned sister to Kalidium foliatum Moq. (tribe Halopeplideae) and the remaining Salicornieae. Three major clades received strong bootstrap support: Microcnemum+Arthrocnemum, Sarcocornia+Salicornia, and the endemic Australian genera. None of the endemic Australian genera was individually supported as monophyletic in either the morphological or the molecular analyses. Subspecies complexes, polyploids and hybrids may contribute to the lack of resolution and apparently high levels of homoplasy in the morphological analysis. A greater understanding of population level processes is required to begin to resolve the phylogeny of this complex group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".