Perianth Evolution In Ranunculaceae: Are Petals Ancestral In The Family?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Progress has been made recently towards the elucidation of phylogenetic relationships among subfamilies and tribes of the Ranunculaceae – the most recent hypothesis was published in 2016 by our team. Although relationships among the 10 tribes of the subfamily Ranunculoideae remain incompletely supported, this hypothesis provides an interesting framework to address the key issue of the ancestral vs. derived nature of a differentiated perianth within the family, and at the level of Ranunculales as a whole. Here, we present ancestral state reconstructions for several perianth characters, such as differentiation into sepals and petals, shape of petals, presence/absence of nectaries, and petaloid or sepaloid aspect of sepals. Characters were scored using the PROTEUS database and optimized on the most recent phylogeny of Ranunculaceae using parsimony and maximum likelihood methods. The results are discussed with regard to recent evo-devo studies focused on identifying genes involved in floral organs identity (the so-called ABC model) in Ranunculales.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".