ArticleAmerican journal of botany2022
Coalescent-based species delimitation in North American pinyon pines using low-copy nuclear genes and plastomes.
Article in American journal of botany, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Coalescent-based species delimitation in North American pinyon pines using low-copy nuclear genes and plastomes.American journal of botany · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
premiseAccurate species delimitation is essential for evolutionary biology, conservation, and biodiversity management. We studied species delimitation in North American pinyon pines, Pinus subsection Cembroides, a natural group with high levels of incomplete lineage sorting.
methodsWe used coalescent-based methods and multivariate analyses of low-copy number nuclear genes and nearly complete high-copy number plastomes generated with the Hyb-Seq method. The three coalescent-based species delimitation methods evaluated were the Generalized Mixed Yule Coalescent (GMYC), Poisson Tree Process (PTP), and Trinomial Distribution of Triplets (Tr2). We also measured admixture in populations with possible introgression.
resultsOur results show inconsistencies among GMYC, PTP, and Tr2. The single-locus based GMYC analysis of plastid DNA recovered a higher number of species (up to 24 entities, including singleton lineages and clusters) than PTP and the multi-locus coalescent approach. The PTP analysis identified 10 species whereas Tr2 recovered 13, which agreed closely with taxonomic treatments.
conclusionsWe found that PTP and GMYC identified species with low levels of ILS and high morphological divergence (P. maximartinezii, P. pinceana, and P. rzedowskii). However, GMYC method oversplit species by identification of more divergent samples as singletons. Moreover, both PTP and GMYC were incapable of identifying some species that are readily identified morphologically. We suggest that the divergence times between lineages within North American pinyon pines are so disparate that GMYC results are unreliable. Results of the Tr2 method coincided well with previous delimitations based on morphology, DNA, geography, and secondary chemistry.
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.