Phylogenetic relationships, chromosome and breeding system evolution in <i>Turnera</i> (Turneraceae): inferences from its sequence data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Turnera provides a useful system for exploring two significant evolutionary phenomena-shifts in breeding system (distyly vs. homostyly) and the evolution of polyploids. To explore these, the first molecular phylogeny of Turnera was constructed using sequences of the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS) of nuclear ribosomal DNA for 37 taxa. We attempted to resolve the origins of allopolyploid species using single-strand conformation polymorphism and sequencing of homeologous copies of ITS. Two allohexaploid species possessed putative ITS homeologues (T. velutina and T. orientalis). A phylogenetic analysis to identify progenitors contributing to the origins of these polyploids was unsuccessful, possibly as a result of concerted evolution of ITS. Breeding system evolution was mapped onto the phylogeny assuming distyly to be ancestral in Turnera. Self-compatible homostyly appears to have arisen independently at least three times in Turnera; however, we were not able to determine whether there have been independent origins of homostyly among hexaploid species in series Turnera. Our phylogenetic analyses suggest that series Turnera is monophyletic. Neither series Microphyllae nor Anomalae, however, appear to be monophyletic. Future taxonomic revisions may require new circumscriptions of these latter series.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".