Targeted sequencing supports morphology and embryo features in resolving the classification of Cyperaceae tribe Fuireneae s.l.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Molecular phylogenetic studies based on Sanger sequences have shown that Cyperaceae tribe Fuireneae s.l. is paraphyletic. However, taxonomic sampling in these studies has been poor, topologies have been inconsistent, and support for the backbone of trees has been weak. Moreover, uncertainty still surrounds the morphological limits ofSchoenoplectiella, a genus of mainly small, amphicarpic annuals that was recently segregated fromSchoenoplectus. Consequently, despite ample evidence from molecular analyses that Fuireneae s.l. might consist of two to four tribal lineages, no taxonomic changes have yet been made. Here, we use the Angiosperms353 enrichment panel for targeted sequencing to (i) clarify the relationships of Fuireneae s.l. with the related tribes Abildgaardieae, Eleocharideae, and Cypereae; (ii) define the limits of Fuireneae s.s., and (iii) test the monophyly of Fuireneae s.l. genera with emphasis onSchoenoplectusandSchoenoplectiella. Using more than a third of Fuireneae s.l. diversity, our phylogenomic analyses strongly support six genera and four major Fuireneae s.l. clades that we recognize as tribes: Bolboschoeneae stat.nov., Fuireneae s.s., Schoenoplecteae, and Pseudoschoeneae tr. nov. These results are consistent with morphological, micromorphological (nutlet epidermal cell shape), and embryo differences detected for each tribe. At the generic level, most sub‐Saharan African perennials currently treated inSchoenoplectusare transferred toSchoenoplectiella. Our targeted sequencing results show that these species are nested inSchoenoplectiella, and their treatment here is consistent with micromorphological and embryo characters shared by allSchoenoplectiellaspecies. Keys to recognized tribes and genera are provided.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".