Complex Reticulation in Backbone Subfamily Relationships in Leguminosae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contradictory lines of evidence have made it difficult to resolve the phylogenetic history of the legume diversification era; this is true for the backbone topology, and for the number and timing of whole genome duplications (WGDs). By analyzing the transcriptomic data for 473 gene families in 76 species covering all six accepted legume subfamilies, we assessed the phylogenetic relationships of the legume backbone and uncovered evidence of independent whole genome duplications in each of the six legume subfamilies. Three subfamilies — Cercidoideae, Dialioideae, and Caesalpinioideae — bear evidence of an allopolyploid duplication pattern suggestive of ancient hybridization. In Cercidoideae and Dialioideae, the hybridization appears to be within-subfamily, with the genera Cercis and Poeppigia apparently unduplicated descendants of one of the parental lineages; in Caesalpinioideae, the hybridization appears to involve a member of the Papilionoideae lineage, and some other lineage, potentially extinct. Three independent lines of evidence, consisting of a concatenated superalignment, concordance factor analysis of the set of gene family alignments and topologies, and direct inference of reticulation events via maximum pseudo-likelihood implemented by PhyloNet, converged on a single backbone hypothesis and the above hypotheses of reticulate evolution. Significance Statement In a hybridization event, genes that have already been evolving separately for potentially millions of years become sister chromosomes, yet remain related to one another not at the moment of hybridization, but at the speciation node of the hybrid’s parents. Methodologies based on counts of bursts of duplicated genes, can therefore be fundamentally vulnerable to incorrect and contradictory conclusions about the number and timing of WGD events, unless interpreted carefully and in combination with data from gene trees discordant with the consensus backbone. Our assessment of the legume backbone in that light, resolves previous contradictory findings by concluding that three legume subfamilies are allopolyploid relative to the ur-legume.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".