Evidence for Polyphyly in a Species of Linanthus (Polemoniaceae): Convergent Evolution in Self-Fertilizing Taxa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sequence data for the ITS region of rDNA provide evidence that Linanthus bicolor, an annual species of western North America, is polyphyletic. A previous study identified two sequence types, distinguished by over 50 fixed nucleotide differences, in populations from different geographical regions. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that the two are not sister taxa and, furthermore, that each represents an independent origin of self-fertilization. The morphological similarity of the two taxa, especially in floral traits, is hypothesized to have resulted from convergent evolution in characters associated with self-fertilization. Morphological and genetic data for populations sampled throughout the range of L. bicolor indicate that these distinct genetic types correspond to intraspecific taxa as currently circumscribed. The molecular evidence for polyphyly of L. bicolor, presence of significant morphological differences between the two taxa, and evidence that they are, to a large extent, reproductively isolated provide a strong rationale for distinguishing them at the level of species. We propose that L. bicolor var. minimus be elevated to species status with the designation, L. minimus. Communicating Editor: Jeff H. Rettig
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".