ArticleFrontiers in plant science2022
Target capture data resolve recalcitrant relationships in the coffee family (Rubioideae, Rubiaceae).
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using Nuclear Genomic Data to Address Intractable Relationships and Gene Tree Discordance in an Ancient Group of Gymnosperms (Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Evolutionary history of Australian samphires (Salicornieae, Amaranthaceae).Annals of botany · 2026Article
- Morphological and molecular evidence support the inclusion ofPhytoKeys · 2026Article
- Article
- PhytoKeys · 2025Article
- Phylogenomics and classification of Cactaceae based on hundreds of nuclear genes.Plant systematics and evolution = Entwicklungsgeschichte und Systematik der Pflanzen · 2025Article
- Phylogenomics and topological conflicts in the tribe Anthospermeae (Rubiaceae).Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Article
- Metagenomics of AfricanPeerJ · 2023Article
- Calceolariaceae809: A bait set for targeted sequencing of nuclear loci.Applications in plant sciencesArticle
- A target enrichment probe set for resolving phylogenetic relationships in the coffee family, Rubiaceae.Applications in plant sciencesArticle
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
Subfamily Rubioideae is the largest of the main lineages in the coffee family (Rubiaceae), with over 8,000 species and 29 tribes. Phylogenetic relationships among tribes and other major clades within this group of plants are still only partly resolved despite considerable efforts. While previous studies have mainly utilized data from the organellar genomes and nuclear ribosomal DNA, we here use a large number of low-copy nuclear genes obtained via a target capture approach to infer phylogenetic relationships within Rubioideae. We included 101 Rubioideae species representing all but two (the monogeneric tribes Foonchewieae and Aitchinsonieae) of the currently recognized tribes, and all but one non-monogeneric tribe were represented by more than one genus. Using data from the 353 genes targeted with the universal Angiosperms353 probe set we investigated the impact of data type, analytical approach, and potential paralogs on phylogenetic reconstruction. We inferred a robust phylogenetic hypothesis of Rubioideae with the vast majority (or all) nodes being highly supported across all analyses and datasets and few incongruences between the inferred topologies. The results were similar to those of previous studies but novel relationships were also identified. We found that supercontigs [coding sequence (CDS) + non-coding sequence] clearly outperformed CDS data in levels of support and gene tree congruence. The full datasets (353 genes) outperformed the datasets with potentially paralogous genes removed (186 genes) in levels of support but increased gene tree incongruence slightly. The pattern of gene tree conflict at short internal branches were often consistent with high levels of incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) due to rapid speciation in the group. While concatenation- and coalescence-based trees mainly agreed, the observed phylogenetic discordance between the two approaches may be best explained by their differences in accounting for ILS. The use of target capture data greatly improved our confidence and understanding of the Rubioideae phylogeny, highlighted by the increased support for previously uncertain relationships and the increased possibility to explore sources of underlying phylogenetic discordance.
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.