The origins of polyploids in western North American fawn-lilies (<i>Erythronium</i>)This paper is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Systematics Research.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two rare tetraploid fawn-lilies, Erythronium elegans P.C. Hammond & K.L. Chambers in western Oregon and Erythronium quinaultense G.A. Allen in northwestern Washington, are hypothesized to be of hybrid origin, on the basis of morphological evidence. I tested these hypotheses using DNA sequences of the nuclear ribosomal ITS region and of two plastid intergenic spacer regions (trnH-psbA and trnS-trnG) from the two tetraploids and the five relevant diploid taxa. ITS sequences indicated that the low-elevation diploid species Erythronium revolutum Sm. and Erythronium oregonum Applegate are recently diverged, and gave rise (at least in part) to the two tetraploids. Both E. elegans and E. quinaultense yielded multiple chloroplast DNA haplotypes that were of two distinct types. One plastid haplotype found in both E. elegans (four populations) and E. quinaultense (one population) exactly matched the most common haplotype of E. revolutum; other haplotypes of E. elegans (four populations) and E. quinaultense (two populations) were similar to those of E. oregonum. These results are consistent with derivation of the plastid genomes of different polyploid populations from either E. revolutum or E. oregonum (or their respective recent ancestors), and suggest recurrent formation of each tetraploid species. The two tetraploids are examples of allopolyploid species in which morphological and molecular evidence of their origins are in striking contrast, reflecting very different aspects of their genomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".