MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001937976 · doi:10.1111/cla.12120

Phylogeny of the Alismatales (Monocotyledons) and the relationship of <i><scp>A</scp>corus</i> (<scp>A</scp>corales?)

2015· article· en· W2001937976 on OpenAlexaff
Gitte Petersen, Ole Seberg, Argelia Cuenca, Dennis Wm. Stevenson, Marcela Thadeo, Jerrold I. Davis, Sean W. Graham, T. Gregory Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueCladistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemical synthesis and alkaloids
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDanmarks Frie ForskningsfondNatur og Univers, Det Frie Forskningsråd
KeywordsBiologyZoologyEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A phylogenetic analysis of the early branching lineages of the monocotyledons is performed using data from two plastid genes (rbcL and matK), five mitochondrial genes (atp1, ccmB, cob, mttB and nad5) and morphology. The complete matrix includes 93 terminals representing Acorus, the 14 families currently recognized within Alismatales, and numerous lineages of monocotyledons and other angiosperms. Total evidence analysis results in an almost completely resolved strict consensus tree, but all data partitions, genomic as well as morphological, are incongruent. The effects of RNA editing and potentially processed paralogous sequences are explored and discussed. Despite a decrease in incongruence length differences after exclusion of edited sites, the major data partitions remain significantly incongruent. The 14 families of Alismatales are all found to be monophyletic, but Acorus is found to be included in Alismatales rather than being the sister group to all other monocotyledons. The placement is strongly supported by the mitochondrial data, atp1 in particular, but it cannot be explained as an artifact caused by patterns of editing or by sampling of processed paralogues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCladisticsSame topicChemical synthesis and alkaloidsFrench-language works237,207