Molecular phylogeny of diploid <i>Hordeum</i> species and incongruence between chloroplast and nuclear datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phylogeny of diploid Hordeum species has been studied using both chloroplast and nuclear gene sequences. However, the studies of different nuclear datasets of Hordeum species often arrived at similar conclusions, whereas the studies of different chloroplast DNA data generally resulted in inconsistent conclusions. Although the monophyly of the genus is well supported by both morphological and molecular data, the intrageneric phylogeny is still a matter of controversy. To better understand the evolutionary history of Hordeum species, two chloroplast gene loci (trnD-trnT intergenic spacer and rps16 gene) and one nuclear marker (thioreoxin-like gene (HTL)) were used to explore the phylogeny of Hordeum species. Two obviously different types of trnD-trnT sequences were observed, with an approximately 210 base pair difference between these two types: one for American species, another for Eurasian species. The trnD-trnT data generally separated the diploid Hordeum species into Eurasian and American clades, with the exception of Hordeum marinum subsp. gussoneanum. The rps16 data also grouped most American species together and suggested that Hordeum flexuosum has a different plastid type from the remaining American species. The nuclear gene HTL data clearly divided Hordeum species into two clades: the Xu+H genome clade and the Xa+I genome clade. Within clades, H genome species were well separated from the Xu species, and the I genome species were well separated from the Xa genome species. The incongruence between chloroplast and nuclear datasets was found and discussed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".