Data from: Whole plastome sequencing reveals deep plastid divergence and cytonuclear discordance between closely related balsam poplars, Populus balsamifera and P. trichocarpa (Salicaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As molecular phylogenetic analyses incorporate ever-greater numbers of loci, cases of cytonuclear discordance – the phenomenon in which nuclear gene trees deviate significantly from organellar gene trees – are being reported more frequently. Plant examples of topological discordance, caused by recent hybridization between extant species, are well known. However, examples of branch-length discordance are less reported in plants relative to animals. We use a combination of de novo assembly and reference-based mapping using short-read shotgun sequences to construct a robust phylogeny of the plastome for multiple individuals of all the common Populus species in North America. We demonstrate a case of strikingly high plastome divergence, in contrast to little nuclear genome divergence, in two closely related balsam poplars, Populus balsamifera and Populus trichocarpa (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa). Previous studies with nuclear loci indicate that the two species (or subspecies) diverged since the late Pleistocene, whereas their plastomes indicate deep divergence, dating to at least the Pliocene (6–7 Myr ago). Our finding is in marked contrast to the estimated Pleistocene divergence of the nuclear genomes, previously calculated at 75 000 yr ago, suggesting plastid capture from a ‘ghost lineage’ of a now-extinct North American poplar.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".