Phylogeny of <i>Flaveria</i> (Asteraceae) and inference of C<sub>4</sub> photosynthesis evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A well-resolved phylogeny of Flaveria is used to infer evolutionary relationships among species, biogeographical distributions, and C(4) photosynthetic evolution. Data on morphology, life history, and DNA sequences (chloroplastic trnL-F, nuclear ITS and ETS) for 21 of 23 known species were collected. Each data set was analyzed separately and in combination using maximum parsimony and Bayesian analyses. The phylogeny of Flaveria is based on the combined analysis of all data. Our phylogenetic evidence indicates that C(3) Flaveria are all basal to intermediate (C(3)-C(4) and C(4)-like) and fully expressed C(4) Flaveria species. Two strongly supported clades (A and B) are present. Using this phylogeny, we evaluate the current systematics of the genus and suggest the removal and reevaluation of certain taxa. We also infer the center of origin and dispersal of Flaveria species. Multiple origins of photosynthetic pathway intermediacy in Flaveria are recognized. C(3)-C(4) intermediacy has evolved twice in the genus and is found to be evolutionarily intermediate in clade A, but not necessarily in clade B. C(4)-like photosynthesis is also derived once in each clade. In addition, fully expressed C(4) photosynthesis may have evolved up to three times within clade A.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".