Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25281848›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2015

From gene trees to a dated allopolyploid network: insights from the angiosperm genus Viola (Violaceae).

Thomas Marcussen, Lise Heier, Anne K Brysting, Bengt Oxelman, Kjetill S Jakobsen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 124 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Sweet Violet (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Phytochemical Potential ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. PhytoKeys · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The hybrid number of a ploidy profile.Journal of mathematical biology · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. A Revised Phylogenetic Classification forPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Classical Morphometrics inPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. PhytoKeys · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Thomas MarcussenDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway and Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, PO Box 461, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway and Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, PO Box 461, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Lise HeierDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway and Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, PO Box 461, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Anne K BrystingDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway and Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, PO Box 461, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Bengt OxelmanDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway and Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, PO Box 461, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Kjetill S JakobsenDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), University of Oslo, PO Box 1066 Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway and Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, PO Box 461, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden k.s.jakobsen@ibv.uio.no.
University of Gothenburg · SEUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Allopolyploidization accounts for a significant fraction of speciation events in many eukaryotic lineages. However, existing phylogenetic and dating methods require tree-like topologies and are unable to handle the network-like phylogenetic relationships of lineages containing allopolyploids. No explicit framework has so far been established for evaluating competing network topologies, and few attempts have been made to date phylogenetic networks. We used a four-step approach to generate a dated polyploid species network for the cosmopolitan angiosperm genus Viola L. (Violaceae Batch.). The genus contains ca 600 species and both recent (neo-) and more ancient (meso-) polyploid lineages distributed over 16 sections. First, we obtained DNA sequences of three low-copy nuclear genes and one chloroplast region, from 42 species representing all 16 sections. Second, we obtained fossil-calibrated chronograms for each nuclear gene marker. Third, we determined the most parsimonious multilabeled genome tree and its corresponding network, resolved at the section (not the species) level. Reconstructing the "correct" network for a set of polyploids depends on recovering all homoeologs, i.e., all subgenomes, in these polyploids. Assuming the presence of Viola subgenome lineages that were not detected by the nuclear gene phylogenies ("ghost subgenome lineages") significantly reduced the number of inferred polyploidization events. We identified the most parsimonious network topology from a set of five competing scenarios differing in the interpretation of homoeolog extinctions and lineage sorting, based on (i) fewest possible ghost subgenome lineages, (ii) fewest possible polyploidization events, and (iii) least possible deviation from expected ploidy as inferred from available chromosome counts of the involved polyploid taxa. Finally, we estimated the homoploid and polyploid speciation times of the most parsimonious network. Homoploid speciation times were estimated by coalescent analysis of gene tree node ages. Polyploid speciation times were estimated by comparing branch lengths and speciation rates of lineages with and without ploidy shifts. Our analyses recognize Viola as an old genus (crown age 31 Ma) whose evolutionary history has been profoundly affected by allopolyploidy. Between 16 and 21 allopolyploidizations are necessary to explain the diversification of the 16 major lineages (sections) of Viola, suggesting that allopolyploidy has accounted for a high percentage-between 67% and 88%-of the speciation events at this level. The theoretical and methodological approaches presented here for (i) constructing networks and (ii) dating speciation events within a network, have general applicability for phylogenetic studies of groups where allopolyploidization has occurred. They make explicit use of a hitherto underexplored source of ploidy information from chromosome counts to help resolve phylogenetic cases where incomplete sequence data hampers network inference. Importantly, the coalescent-based method used herein circumvents the assumption of tree-like evolution required by most techniques for dating speciation events.

Indexed as

PhylogenyEvolution, MolecularFossilsPolyploidyTimeViolaDatinglow-copy nuclear genepolyploidyspecies networkViolaviolaceae

Identifiers

PMID25281848
PMCPMC4265142
OpenAlexW2127324214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.