Phylogenetic position of<i>Arabis arenicola</i>and generic limits of<i>Aphragmus</i>and<i>Eutrema</i>(Brassicaceae) based on sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sequence data from the nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of 45 taxa were used to determine the phylogenetic relationship of Arabis arenicola to Arabis , Arabidopsis , Braya , and Eutrema , and that of Eutrema to the purportedly related genera Aphragmus , Lignariella , Neomartinella , Platycraspedum , Taphrospermum , and Thellungiella . Arabis arenicola was originally described as Eutrema in 1830, transferred to Arabis in 1898, and has remained in Arabis to the present, even though it is morphologically more similar to Arabidopsis, Braya, and Eutrema. Sequence data were obtained from representative taxa of Arabis, Arabidopsis, and related Boechera and Catolobus, Braya and Neotorularia, and Eutrema, Aphragmus, Lignariella, Neomartinella, Platycraspedum, Taphrospermum, and Thellungiella. The five Arabis arenicola accessions examined had ITS sequences that were identical to each other and to four Arabidopsis lyrata accessions. In both maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood analyses, Arabis arenicola fell within the Arabidopsis clade and was closely aligned with Arabidopsis lyrata. Two of six purportedly related genera were not closely related to Eutrema. Both analyses placed Lignariella within a separate well-supported clade with Aphragmus, while the other four genera, Neomartinella, Platycraspedum, Taphrospermum, and Thellungiella, fell within a well-supported clade with Eutrema. Morphology and molecular data strongly suggest transferring Arabis arenicola to Arabidopsis, expanding Aphragmus to include Lignariella, and expanding Eutrema to include Neomartinella, Platycraspedum, Taphrospermum, and Thellungiella. New combinations in Arabidopsis and Aphragmus are proposed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".