The genus <i>Bauhinia</i> s.l. (Leguminosae): a phylogeny based on the plastid <i>trn</i>L–<i>trn</i>F region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the largest genus in tribe Cercideae, the pantropical genus Bauhinia has been the subject of a number of regional treatments in which it has been recognized either as a single genus with several subgenera or as several distinct genera. With the aim to better understand the taxon relationships within Bauhinia and between it and related genera, we have sequenced the plastid trnL–trnF region for 85 species, which together are representative of the eight genera recognized within Bauhinia sensu lato by some workers. In addition, representative taxa were verified for the presence or absence of the plastid rpl2 intron, which previous studies indicated might be a marker for specific lineages within Bauhinia s.l. Both Bayesian and parsimony analyses indicate that Bauhinia s.l. is paraphyletic with the monospecific genus Brenierea clustered within it. This genus, usually described as sister to Bauhinia s.l., forms a clade with the genera Piliostigma and Bauhinia sensu stricto. The remaining genera ( Gigasiphon , Tylosema , Barklya , Phanera , Lasiobema , and Lysiphyllum ) form a second clade sister to the first. All of these segregate genera are monophyletic except for Phanera, which is divided into two lineages comprising the Asian Phanera species together with the genus Lasiobema , and the second comprising the American Phanera species. The relationship between the Brenierea – Bauhinia s. str. – Piliostigma clade, the Gigasiphon–Tylosema–Barklya–Phanera–Lasiobema–Lysiphyllum clade and the genus Griffonia is not well resolved, but Adenolobus is sister to this large monophyletic group and the genus Cercis is sister to all other Cercideae. Preliminary analyses of the rpl2 plastid region also support the Piliostigma – Brenierea – Bauhinia s. str. clade, suggesting a unique loss event of the intron prior to the diversification of this clade.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".