Convergent evolution in <i>Cladonia gracilis</i> and allies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Members of the Cladonia gracilis group of lichen fungi are common terrestrial lichens where morphological features are more similar between members of the C. gracilis species complex and allied species outside the complex than they are between subspecies within the complex. The objectives of this study were to examine whether the Cladonia gracilis species complex is monophyletic, to determine whether morphological similarity is supported by genetic variation, and to examine the utility of the polyketide synthase (PKS) gene for phylogenetic studies among closely related species. Two loci, the ketosynthase region of the PKS gene and the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of nuclear ribosomal DNA, were sequenced and analysed by Maximum Parsimony, Bayesian and haplotype network analyses. Functional differences were also inferred through ITS2 RNA secondary structures and non-synonymous changes in translated PKS amino acid sequences. The monophyly of the C. gracilis complex is supported by 71% bootstrap in the ITS phylogeny, and 92% bootstrap with greater than 95% posterior probability in the PKS phylogeny. Morphological similarity is not always supported by genetic similarity. The PKS gene is less variable than the ITS but the PKS supports species hypotheses that are reflected in the ITS2 RNA model. We conclude that monophyly of the C. gracilis complex can be supported if C. cornuta, C. coniocraea and C. ochrochlora are included in the complex. In addition, C. maxima, C. phyllophora and C. subchordalis are supported as monophyletic species outside the C. gracilis complex. Cladonia maxima may form a separate species and variation among podetial morphology may be explained by convergent evolution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".