Intergeneric and infrafamilial phylogeny of subfamily Monsteroideae (Araceae) revealed by chloroplast <i><011>trn</i>L‐F sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chloroplast trnL-F region was used as an independent data set for phylogenetic analysis of 118 aroid taxa. We investigated the intergeneric relationships of subfamily Monsteroideae (Araceae) and used this as a basis for an interspecific phylogenetic study of Rhaphidophora Hassk., the largest genus of the Monsteroideae. Results of the molecular tree were useful for inferring subfamilial and tribal circumscription and evolution in Araceae. Our results show that family Araceae consists of five clades that correspond to the subfamilies traditionally recognized. Starting from the most basal clade, these correspond to subfamilies Gymnostachydoideae and Orontioideae (proto aroids), with Lemna sp. (Lemnaceae) embedded in the Araceae and sister to the true aroids consisting of Pothoideae sister to Monsteroideae, immediately sister to Lasioideae and Aroideae. There is less agreement with existing tribal classifications. Complex relationships exist between members of the Monsteroideae. Our results show that Rhaphidophora and Epipremnum are paraphyletic with species of Rhaphidophora sampled, forming three informal groups with other genera of the Monstereae. Phylogenetic results may be used to suggest taxonomic changes to the current systematics of the monsteroids.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".