MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734509951 · doi:10.3732/ajb.1600436

Floral evolution and phylogeny of the Dialioideae, a diverse subfamily of tropical legumes

2017· article· en· W2734509951 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin Zimmerman, Patrick S. Herendeen, Gwilym P. Lewis, Anne Bruneau

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologySynapomorphyCladePhylogeneticsPhylogenetic treeTaxonEvolutionary biologyGenusMaximum parsimonySubfamilyWhorl (mollusc)Molecular phylogeneticsZoologyBotanyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREMISE OF THE STUDY: The Dialioideae is an early diverging clade of caesalpinioid legumes containing approximately 85 species in 17 genera. Dialioideae floral morphology is highly variable and may provide clues to caesalpinioid evolution, but a well-resolved phylogeny is needed. Here, we have carried out a comprehensive morphological study of 78 Dialioideae and four outgroup species. METHODS: introns were sequenced. A combined phylogenetic analysis using the parsimony criterion was completed on a reduced taxon set for which both molecular and morphological data were available. Highly supported clades from the strict consensus tree of this analysis were then used to constrain the nodes of a second analysis on an expanded taxon set with missing molecular data for some taxa. KEY RESULTS: Several new, highly supported relationships have been discovered at the species and genus levels. The loss of the antepetalous stamen whorl was found to be a synapomorphy for most of the clade. CONCLUSIONS: A high degree of organ loss is common in the Dialioideae and often results in a bilaterally symmetrical flower. The absence of consistent morphological features in the Dialioideae, coupled with the small size of each florally diagnosed genus, suggests a lack of canalization in the floral evolution in early diverging legume lineages.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207