A phylogenomically informed five-order system for the closest relatives of land plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of streptophytes had a profound impact on life on Earth. They brought forth those photosynthetic eukaryotes that today dominate the macroscopic flora: the land plants (Embryophyta). 1 There is convincing evidence that the unicellular/filamentous Zygnematophyceae—and not the morphologically more elaborate Coleochaetophyceae or Charophyceae—are the closest algal relatives of land plants. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 Despite the species richness (>4,000), wide distribution, and key evolutionary position of the zygnematophytes, their internal phylogeny remains largely unresolved. 7 , 8 There are also putative zygnematophytes with interesting body plan modifications (e.g., filamentous growth) whose phylogenetic affiliations remain unknown. Here, we studied a filamentous green alga (strain MZCH580) from an Austrian peat bog with central or parietal chloroplasts that lack discernible pyrenoids. It represents Mougeotiopsis calospora PALLA, an enigmatic alga that was described more than 120 years ago 9 but never subjected to molecular analyses. We generated transcriptomic data of M. calospora strain MZCH580 and conducted comprehensive phylogenomic analyses (326 nuclear loci) for 46 taxonomically diverse zygnematophytes. Strain MZCH580 falls in a deep-branching zygnematophycean clade together with some unicellular species and thus represents a formerly unknown zygnematophycean lineage with filamentous growth. Our well-supported phylogenomic tree lets us propose a new five-order system for the Zygnematophyceae and provides evidence for at least five independent origins of true filamentous growth in the closest algal relatives of land plants. This phylogeny provides a robust and comprehensive framework for performing comparative analyses and inferring the evolution of cellular traits and body plans in the closest relatives of land plants.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".