ArticleAnnals of botany2012
Maximum likelihood inference implies a high, not a low, ancestral haploid chromosome number in Araceae, with a critique of the bias introduced by 'x'.
Article in Annals of botany, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Haplotype-resolved genome assembly of the colored calla lily (Zantedeschia elliottiana) provides new insights into the evolution of the family Araceae.Molecular horticulture · 2026Article
- Phylogenetics of the supertribe Paulliniodae (Sapindaceae) with emphasis on chromosome evolution: taxonomic implications including the new genus Acevedoa.Annals of botany · 2025Article
- Phylotranscriptomic analyses reveal multiple whole-genome duplication events, the history of diversification and adaptations in the Araceae.Annals of botany · 2023Article
- Tracing the Evolution of the Angiosperm Genome from the Cytogenetic Point of View.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- The Ribosomal DNA Loci of the Ancient MonocotFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Lemnaceae and Orontiaceae Are Phylogenetically and Morphologically Distinct from Araceae.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Multiple and independent rearrangements revealed by comparative cytogenetic mapping in the dysploid Leptostachyus group (Phaseolus L., Leguminosae).Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2020Article
- Comparison of Whole Plastome Sequences between Thermogenic Skunk CabbageInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
- Article
- Early consequences of allopolyploidy alter floral evolution in Nicotiana (Solanaceae).BMC plant biology · 2019Article
- Article
- The Evolution of Haploid Chromosome Numbers in the Sunflower Family.Genome biology and evolution · 2016Article
- Karyotype analysis and visualization of 45S rRNA genes using fluorescence in situ hybridization in aroids (Araceae).Comparative cytogenetics · 2015Article
- Evolution of genome size and chromosome number in the carnivorous plant genus Genlisea (Lentibulariaceae), with a new estimate of the minimum genome size in angiosperms.Annals of botany · 2014Article
- Article
- Combining FISH and model-based predictions to understand chromosome evolution in Typhonium (Araceae).Annals of botany · 2014Article
- Karyomorphometry on three polyploid species of Arum L. (Araceae, Aroideae).Comparative cytogenetics · 2014Article
- The more the merrier: recent hybridization and polyploidy in cardamine.The Plant cell · 2013Article
- Does actually mean chromosome number increase with latitude in vascular plants? An answer from the comparison of Italian, Slovak and Polish floras.Comparative cytogenetics · 2012Article
- Chromosome number variation of the Italian endemic vascular flora. State-of-the-art, gaps in knowledge and evidence for an exponential relationship among even ploidy levels.Comparative cytogenetics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsFor 84 years, botanists have relied on calculating the highest common factor for series of haploid chromosome numbers to arrive at a so-called basic number, x. This was done without consistent (reproducible) reference to species relationships and frequencies of different numbers in a clade. Likelihood models that treat polyploidy, chromosome fusion and fission as events with particular probabilities now allow reconstruction of ancestral chromosome numbers in an explicit framework. We have used a modelling approach to reconstruct chromosome number change in the large monocot family Araceae and to test earlier hypotheses about basic numbers in the family.
methodsUsing a maximum likelihood approach and chromosome counts for 26 % of the 3300 species of Araceae and representative numbers for each of the other 13 families of Alismatales, polyploidization events and single chromosome changes were inferred on a genus-level phylogenetic tree for 113 of the 117 genera of Araceae. KEY
resultsThe previously inferred basic numbers x = 14 and x = 7 are rejected. Instead, maximum likelihood optimization revealed an ancestral haploid chromosome number of n = 16, Bayesian inference of n = 18. Chromosome fusion (loss) is the predominant inferred event, whereas polyploidization events occurred less frequently and mainly towards the tips of the tree.
conclusionsThe bias towards low basic numbers (x) introduced by the algebraic approach to inferring chromosome number changes, prevalent among botanists, may have contributed to an unrealistic picture of ancestral chromosome numbers in many plant clades. The availability of robust quantitative methods for reconstructing ancestral chromosome numbers on molecular phylogenetic trees (with or without branch length information), with confidence statistics, makes the calculation of x an obsolete approach, at least when applied to large clades.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.