A Bird’s Eye View of the Systematics of Convolvulaceae: Novel Insights From Nuclear Genomic Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convolvulaceae is a family of c. 2,000 species, distributed across 60 currently recognized genera. It includes species of high economic importance, such as the crop sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.), the ornamental morning glories (Ipomoea L.), bindweeds (Convolvulus L.), and dodders, the parasitic vines (Cuscuta L.). Earlier phylogenetic studies, based predominantly on chloroplast markers or a single nuclear region, have provided a framework for systematic studies of the family, but uncertainty remains at the level of the relationships among subfamilies, tribes, and genera, hindering evolutionary inferences and taxonomic advances. One of the enduring enigmas has been the relationship of Cuscuta to the rest of Convolvulaceae. Other examples of unresolved issues include the monophyly and relationships within Merremieae, the “bifid-style” clade (Dicranostyloideae), as well as the relative positions of Erycibe Roxb. and Cardiochlamyeae. In this study, we explore a large dataset of nuclear genes generated using Angiosperms353 kit, as a contribution to resolving some of these remaining phylogenetic uncertainties within Convolvulaceae. For the first time, a strongly supported backbone of the family is provided. Cuscuta is confirmed to belong within family Convolvulaceae. “Merremieae,” in their former tribal circumscription, are recovered as non-monophyletic, with the unexpected placement of Distimake Raf. as sister to the clade that contains Ipomoeeae and Decalobanthus Ooststr., and Convolvuleae nested within the remaining “Merremieae.” The monophyly of Dicranostyloideae, including Jacquemontia Choisy, is strongly supported, albeit novel relationships between genera are hypothesized, challenging the current tribal delimitation. The exact placements of Erycibe and Cuscuta remain uncertain, requiring further investigation. Our study explores the benefits and limitations of increasing sequence data in resolving higher-level relationships within Convolvulaceae, and highlights the need for expanded taxonomic sampling, to facilitate a much-needed revised classification of the family.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".