The Phylogenetic Structure Patterns of Angiosperm Species and Their Determinants in East Eurasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Aim The Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework requires that evolutionary histories of species should be considered in conservation planning. The phylogenetic structure of species assemblages quantifies species evolutionary histories and increasingly becomes an endeavour for ecologists. Understanding the geographic patterns of phylogenetic structure of species assemblages and their drivers can provide a fundamental reference for conservation planning. Although several theoretical hypotheses based on the effects of contemporary environment, historical climate change and evolutionary niche conservatism had been widely discussed in previous studies, the relative contributions of these hypotheses on phylogenetic structure of angiosperms, especially herbaceous species, remain debated. Location East Eurasia. Major Taxa Studied Angiosperms. Methods We compiled distributions of 43,023 angiosperm species in east Eurasia at spatial resolution (100 × 100 km2). Using this newly compiled database and a species‐level phylogeny, we estimated the phylogenetic structure patterns for species with different growth forms. We explored the relationships of these patterns with contemporary environment and historical climate change to test predictions of the tropical niche conservatism hypothesis (TCH) and to compare the contribution of different hypotheses using generalised linear models and hierarchical partitioning. Results We found that phylogenetic structure of angiosperms displayed significant latitudinal gradients. Notably, phylogenetic structure patterns and their drivers differed between woody and herbaceous species. Actual evapotranspiration was the best predictor of phylogenetic structure patterns for all and herbaceous species, while the mean temperature of the coldest quarter was the best predictor for woody species. The effect of historical climate change on phylogenetic structure patterns was weak. Main Conclusions Our results suggest that the TCH only explains the phylogenetic structure pattern of woody species, not herbaceous species. Moreover, contemporary climate influences the phylogenetic structure of angiosperms in east Eurasian by affecting herbaceous and woody species differently.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".