Phylogeny of the Alismatales (Monocotyledons) and the relationship of <i><scp>A</scp>corus</i> (<scp>A</scp>corales?)
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
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.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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