MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6976715924 · doi:10.60692/p4117-gxq05

Nuclear phylogenomics of grasses (Poaceae) supports current classification and reveals repeated reticulation

2024· article· en· W6976715924 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhylogenomicsTree of life (biology)PhylogeneticsChloroplast DNATree (set theory)DNA sequencingKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Grasses (Poaceae) comprise around 11,800 species and are central for human livelihoods and terrestrial ecosystems. Knowing their relationships and evolutionary history is key to comparative research and crop breeding. Advances in genome-scale sequencing allow for increased breadth and depth of phylogenomic analyses, making it possible to infer a new reference species tree of the family. We inferred a comprehensive species tree of grasses by combining new and published sequences for 331 nuclear genes from genome, transcriptome, target enrichment and shotgun data. Our 1,153-tip tree covers 79% of grass genera (including 21 genera sequenced for the first time) and all but two small tribes. We compared it to a 910-tip plastome tree. The nuclear phylogeny matches that of the plastome at most deep branches, with only a few instances of incongruence. Gene tree–species tree reconciliation suggests that reticulation events occurred repeatedly in the history of grasses. We provide a robust framework for the grass tree of life to support research on grass evolution, including modes of reticulation, and genetic diversity for sustainable agriculture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.158 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicPlant Taxonomy and PhylogeneticsFrench-language works237,207