Morphological, Molecular, and Biogeographic Evidence for Specific Recognition of <i>Euthamia hirtipes</i> and <i>Euthamia scabra</i> (Asteraceae, Astereae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract—The number and identity of species within Euthamia (Asteraceae, Astereae) have varied considerably among taxonomic treatments. Euthamia graminifolia (L.) Nutt. is often treated broadly, including plants from the northern and eastern United States and Canada, including the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. Broad-leaved, largely glabrous plants from New Jersey to the Florida Panhandle have been inconsistently treated as E. graminifolia, E. graminifolia var. hirtipes (Fernald) C.E.S. Taylor & R.J. Taylor, E. hirtipes (Fernald) Sieren, or a hybrid between E graminifolia and E. caroliniana (L.) Greene ex Porter & Britton. Similarly, plants from the Florida Panhandle to eastern Louisiana have been incorporated into E. graminifolia or E. graminifolia var. hirtipes with only Greene in 1902 recognizing these plants as a distinct species, E. scabra Greene. To determine the identity and proper rank of these entities, morphological and phylogenetic analyses were performed to evaluate relationships within Euthamia. Plants from the Atlantic Coast most morphologically resemble Gulf Coast plants which similarly resemble E. gymnospermoides Greene. The Gulf Coast plants and E. gymnospermoides share similar DNA sequences while the Atlantic Coast plants represent a unique clade. Neither Gulf Coast nor Atlantic Coast plants contain highly polymorphic sequences, indicating that they are not hybrids. Occasional plants found within southernmost Alabama and the Florida Panhandle have polymorphic sequences and intermediate morphology however, suggesting that putative hybrids exist between Gulf and Atlantic Coast plants. This study concludes that both entities deserve specific rank as E. scabra Greene for scabrous plants along the central Gulf Coast and E. hirtipes (Fernald) Sieren for largely glabrous plants mostly along the Atlantic Coast. Ecological niche modeling indicates that precipitation, especially during summer months, and soils, namely coarse fragments and sand content, drive the distribution of these organisms, largely restricted to either side of the Apalachicola River serving as a distributional barrier.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".