Goldenrod herbariomics: Hybrid‐sequence capture reveals the phylogeny of <i>Solidago</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PREMISE: The phylogenetic relationships among the ca. 138 species of goldenrods (Solidago; Asteraceae) have been difficult to infer due to species richness, and shallow interspecific genetic divergences. This study aims to overcome these obstacles by combining extensive sampling of goldenrod herbarium specimens with the use of a custom Solidago hybrid-sequence capture probe set. METHODS: A set of tissues from herbarium samples comprising ca. 90% of Solidago species was assembled and DNA was extracted. A custom hybrid-sequence capture probe set was designed, and data from 854 nuclear regions were obtained and analyzed from 209 specimens. Maximum likelihood and coalescent approaches were used to estimate the genus phylogeny for 157 diploid samples. RESULTS: Although DNAs from older specimens were both more fragmented and produced fewer sequencing reads, there was no relationship between specimen age and our ability to obtain sufficient data at the target loci. The Solidago phylogeny was generally well-supported, with 88/155 (57%) nodes receiving ≥95% bootstrap support. Solidago was supported as monophyletic, with Chrysoma pauciflosculosa identified as sister. A clade comprising Solidago ericameriodes, Solidago odora, and Solidago chapmanii was identified as the earliest diverging Solidago lineage. The previously segregated genera Brintonia and Oligoneuron were identified as placed well within Solidago. These and other phylogenetic results were used to establish four subgenera and fifteen sections within the genus. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of expansive herbarium sampling and hybrid-sequence capture data allowed us to quickly and rigorously establish the evolutionary relationships within this difficult, species-rich group.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".