Large‐scale genomic sequence data resolve the deepest divergences in the legume phylogeny and support a near‐simultaneous evolutionary origin of all six subfamilies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phylogenomics is increasingly used to infer deep-branching relationships while revealing the complexity of evolutionary processes such as incomplete lineage sorting, hybridization/introgression and polyploidization. We investigate the deep-branching relationships among subfamilies of the Leguminosae (or Fabaceae), the third largest angiosperm family. Despite their ecological and economic importance, a robust phylogenetic framework for legumes based on genome-scale sequence data is lacking. We generated alignments of 72 chloroplast genes and 7621 homologous nuclear-encoded proteins, for 157 and 76 taxa, respectively. We analysed these with maximum likelihood, Bayesian inference, and a multispecies coalescent summary method, and evaluated support for alternative topologies across gene trees. We resolve the deepest divergences in the legume phylogeny despite lack of phylogenetic signal across all chloroplast genes and the majority of nuclear genes. Strongly supported conflict in the remainder of nuclear genes is suggestive of incomplete lineage sorting. All six subfamilies originated nearly simultaneously, suggesting that the prevailing view of some subfamilies as 'basal' or 'early-diverging' with respect to others should be abandoned, which has important implications for understanding the evolution of legume diversity and traits. Our study highlights the limits of phylogenetic resolution in relation to rapid successive speciation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".