Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39810324›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of botany2025

Toward a phylogenomic classification of magnoliids.

Andrew J Helmstetter, Zacky Ezedin, Elton John de Lírio, Sylvia M de Oliveira, Lars W Chatrou, Roy H J Erkens, Isabel Larridon, Kevin Leempoel, Olivier Maurin, Shyamali Roy and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of botany, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Toward a phylogenomic classification of magnoliids.American journal of botany · 2025
    Article
  11. 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

15 authors.

Andrew J HelmstetterFRB-CESAB, Institut Bouisson Bertrand, 5 Rue de l'École de Médecine, Montpellier, 34000, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3761-4981
Zacky EzedinDepartment of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Elton John de LírioDepartamento de Botânica, Universidade de São Paulo, Rua do Matão 277, Edifício Sobre-as-ondas 05508-900, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9986-9640
Sylvia M de OliveiraNaturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, 2333 CR, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1440-9718
Lars W ChatrouSystematic and Evolutionary Botany Lab, Department of Biology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0131-0302
Roy H J ErkensNaturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, 2333 CR, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1093-0370
Isabel LarridonSystematic and Evolutionary Botany Lab, Department of Biology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0285-722X
Kevin LeempoelRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7335-7930
Olivier MaurinRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4151-6164
Shyamali RoyRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9129-2496
Alexandre R ZuntiniRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0705-8902
William J BakerRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6727-1831
Thomas L P CouvreurNaturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, 2333 CR, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8509-6587
Félix ForestRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2004-433X
Hervé SauquetNational Herbarium of NSW, Botanic Gardens of Sydney, Mount Annan, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8305-3236

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

premiseMagnoliids are a strongly supported clade of angiosperms. Previous phylogenetic studies based primarily on analyses of a limited number of mostly plastid markers have led to the current classification of magnoliids into four orders and 18 families. However, uncertainty remains regarding the placement of several families.

methodsFor the first comprehensive phylogenomic analysis of magnoliids as a whole, we sampled 235 species from 199 (74%) genera and representing all families and most subfamilies and tribes. We analyzed newly generated data from the Angiosperms353 probe set using both coalescent and concatenation analyses and testing the impact of multiple filtering and alignment strategies.

resultsWhile our results generally provide further support for previously established phylogenetic relationships in both magnoliids as a whole and large families including Annonaceae and Lauraceae, they also provide new evidence for previously ambiguous relationships. In particular, we found support for the position of Hydnoraceae as sister to the remainder of Piperales, though evidence was conflicting, and resolved the backbone of relationships among most genera of Myristicaceae. Different analytical strategies tended to have rather small effects on branch support and topology.

conclusionsAlthough some of our results are limited by low gene recovery for a number of taxa and significant gene tree conflict for some relationships, this study represents a significant step toward reconstructing the evolutionary history of a major lineage of angiosperms. Based on these results, we present an updated phylogenetic classification for magnoliids, recognizing 21 families, summarizing previously established subfamilies and tribes, and describing new tribes for Myristicaceae.

Indexed as

Genome, PlantMagnoliopsidaPhylogenyAngiosperms353CanellalesLauralesMagnolialesmagnoliidsphylogenetic classificationphylogenomicsPiperales

Identifiers

PMID39810324
PMCPMC11744432

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.