The evolution of fruit in Scandiceae subtribe Scandicinae (Apiaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evolutionary relationships among 66 representatives of the family Apiaceae, including 37 species of tribe Scandiceae subtribe Scandicinae, were inferred from separate and combined analyses of fruit morphology and anatomy and nuclear ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences. Phylogenetic trees inferred from analysis of 35 fruit characters were not congruent to those derived from molecular data and, overall, had much lower bootstrap support values than the latter. Contrary to molecular data, fruit characters did not support the monophyly of subtribe Scandicinae. Fruit data do, however, corroborate the monophyly of nearly every genus within Scandicinae, the affinity of members of the "crown" cladeAnthriscus, Kozlovia (including Krasnovia and Neoconopodium), Geocaryum, Myrrhis, and Osmorhizathat had been identified in previous molecular analyses, and the sister group relationship between the "crown" clade and the genus Scandix. Phylogenies derived from the analysis of combined ITS and fruit characters were congruent to those inferred from molecular data alone. Reconstructions of ancestral character states using the results of the combined analysis suggest that among extant Scandicinae, the fruits of Athamanta have retained the most plesiomorphic characters. Evolutionary tendencies that have occurred in the fruits of Scandicinae include the broadening of the vascular bundles and vittae, the thickening of the cuticle and epidermal cell wall, the origin of bristles from hairs, the appearance of a pedicel-like appendage, the development of a long beak, and lateral wings. These changes are interpreted as adaptations to fruit dispersal and seed defense.Key words: Apiaceae, Scandiceae subtribe Scandicinae, ITS, fruit morphology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".