Phylogeny of the restiid clade (Poales) and implications for the classification of Anarthriaceae, Centrolepidaceae and Australian Restionaceae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Three families, Anarthriaceae, Restionaceae and Centrolepidaceae, are generally recognised in the restiid clade of Poales. A new phylogeny is presented, with fuller sampling of Australian taxa, based on analyses of trnL‐F , trnK and rbcL data from the chloroplast genome. The findings agree with the major groups shown in previous molecular studies but provide a more substantial basis for reviewing the classification at family and generic levels. Anarthriaceae is sister to Restionaceae, with Anarthria sister to Lyginia + Hopkinsia . Centrolepidaceae, on an extremely long branch, appears embedded in Restionaceae in Bayesian trees; although it appears as sister to Restionaceae in analyses that are more subject to long‐branch attraction (in parsimony analyses and those of data from the less‐conserved trnL‐F cpDNA region). Accepting the embedded position, which would make this a subfamily of Restionaceae, the basal division in the Restionaceae separates the African subfamily Restionoideae from the Australasian clade (Sporadanthoideae, Centrolepidoideae, Leptocarpoideae). In subfamily Leptocarpoideae, Eurychorda forms the basal branch. At the next dichotomy the Leptocarpus clade, together with the Winifredia clade, is separated from a diverse assemblage including Loxocarya , Chordifex , Baloskion , Desmocladus , Lepidobolus and allied genera. The phylogeny indicates that several currently recognised genera are not monophyletic and that changes to the generic classification are required. A matrix of morphological characters was prepared and these were mapped onto the Bayesian consensus DNA tree to identify synapomorphies of the clades and genera. Observations on leaf laminae indicate that fully or partially unifacial leaf laminae are a synapomorphy of the restiid clade. The morphological characterisation of the following are considered: the restiid clade, Anarthriaceae, Restionaceae enlarged to include subfamily Centrolepidoideae, Leptocarpus s.l. (including as potential synonyms Meeboldina and Stenotalis ) and Desmocladus s.l. (including potentially Harperia , Onychosepalum and Kulinia ).
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".