C4 eudicots are not younger than C4 monocots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
C(4) photosynthesis is a plant adaptation to high levels of photorespiration. Physiological models predict that atmospheric CO(2) concentration selected for C(4) grasses only after it dropped below a critical threshold during the Oligocene (∼30 Ma), a hypothesis supported by phylogenetic and molecular dating analyses. However the same models predict that CO(2) should have reached much lower levels before selecting for C(4) eudicots, making C(4) eudicots younger than C(4) grasses. In this study, different phylogenetic datasets were combined in order to conduct the first comparative analysis of the age of C(4) origins in eudicots. Our results suggested that all lineages of C(4) eudicots arose during the last 30 million years, with the earliest before 22 Ma in Chenopodiaceae and Aizoaceae, and the latest probably after 2 Ma in Flaveria. C(4) eudicots are thus not globally younger than C(4) monocots. All lineages of C(4) plants evolved in a similar low CO(2) atmosphere that predominated during the last 30 million years. Independent C(4) origins were probably driven by different combinations of specific factors, including local ecological characteristics such as habitat openness, aridity, and salinity, as well as the speciation and dispersal history of each clade. Neither the lower number of C(4) species nor the frequency of C(3)-C(4) intermediates in eudicots can be attributed to a more recent origin, but probably result from variation in diversification and evolutionary rates among the different groups that evolved the C(4) pathway.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".