Phylogenetic relationships and infraspecific variation in Canadian Arctic <i>Poa</i> based on chloroplast DNA restriction site data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infraspecific variation and phylogenetic relationships of Canadian Arctic species of the genus Poa were studied based on chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) variation. Restriction site analysis of polymerase chain reaction amplified cpDNA was used to reexamine the status of infraspecific taxa, reconstruct phylogenetic relationships, and reexamine previous classification systems and hypotheses of relationships. Infraspecific variation was detected in three species, but only in Poa hartzii Gand. did it correspond to infraspecific taxa where recognition of subspecies ammophila at the species level is supported. Additional variation in P. hartzii ssp. hartzii is hypothesized to be the result of hybridization with Poa glauca in the High Arctic and subsequent introgression resulting in repeated transfer of P. glauca DNA. The variation in Poa pratensis L. had a geographical rather than taxonomic basis, and is hypothesized to correspond to indigenous arctic versus introduced extra-arctic populations. In P. glauca Vahl cpDNA variation was detected only in western Low Arctic and boreal populations and may represent greater variation where the species survived the Pleistocene glaciations. Cladistic parsimony analysis of cpDNA restriction site data mostly confirms recent infrageneric classification systems. Poa alpina L., along with the non-arctic Poa annua L. and Poa sect. Sylvestres, formed the basalmost clades. The remaining taxa group into two main clades: one consisting of Poa sects. Poa, Homalopoa, Madropoa and Diocopoa; the second, of Poa sects. Secundae, Pandemos, Abbreviatae and Stenopoa. Poa sect. Poa, comprising Poa arctica R. Br. and P. pratensis, is a strongly supported monophyletic group, not closely related to P. alpina. Poa hartzii is confirmed as a member of a paraphyletic or weakly supported P. sect. Secundae. Poa glauca and Poa abbreviata R. Br. are distinct members within a generally unresolved Poa. sect. Stenopoa-Abbreviatae complexKey words: Poa, Canadian arctic, chloroplast DNA, restriction site analysis, infraspecific variation, phylogeny.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".