Intergeneric Relationships within the Early-Diverging Angiosperm Family Nymphaeaceae Based on Chloroplast Phylogenomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The order Nymphaeales, consisting of three families with a record of eight genera, has gained significant interest from botanists, probably due to its position as a basal angiosperm. The phylogenetic relationships within the order have been well studied; however, a few controversial nodes still remain in the Nymphaeaceae. The position of the Nuphar genus and the monophyly of the Nymphaeaceae family remain uncertain. This study adds to the increasing number of the completely sequenced plastid genomes of the Nymphaeales and applies a large chloroplast gene data set in reconstructing the intergeneric relationships within the Nymphaeaceae. Five complete chloroplast genomes were newly generated, including a first for the monotypic Euryale genus. Using a set of 66 protein-coding genes from the chloroplast genomes of 17 taxa, the phylogenetic position of Nuphar was determined and a monophyletic Nymphaeaceae family was obtained with convincing statistical support from both partitioned and unpartitioned data schemes. Although genomic comparative analyses revealed a high degree of synteny among the chloroplast genomes of the ancient angiosperms, key minor variations were evident, particularly in the contraction/expansion of the inverted-repeat regions and in RNA-editing events. Genome structure, and gene content and arrangement were highly conserved among the chloroplast genomes. The intergeneric relationships defined in this study are congruent with those inferred using morphological data.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".