ArticleBMC biology2025
Incomplete lineage sorting and introgression among genera and species of Liliaceae tribe Tulipeae: insights from phylogenomics.
Article in BMC biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phylogenomic insights into the genus Tulipa (Liliaceae): Taxonomy, evolution, and biogeography.American journal of botany · 2026Article
- Morphology, Taxonomy, Geographic Distribution, Genetic Diversity, and Phylogenomics of the GenusPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Nuclear phylogenomic analysis of Allium (Amaryllidaceae) species from Kazakhstan reveals incomplete lineage sorting and gene flow.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhylogenetic research in Tulipa (Liliaceae), a genus of significant economic and horticultural value, has relied on limited nuclear (mostly nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer, nrITS) and plastid DNA sequences, resulting in low-resolution phylogenetic trees and uncertain intrageneric classifications. The genus, noted for its large genome, presents discordant relationships among Amana, Erythronium, and Tulipa, likely due to incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) and/or reticulate evolution. Thus, phylogenomic approaches are needed to clarify these relationships and the conflicting signals within the tribe Tulipeae.
resultsWe newly sequenced 50 transcriptomes of 46 species of tribe Tulipeae (including multiple accessions of all four genera) and one outgroup species of the sister tribe Lilieae (Notholirion campanulatum), and downloaded 15 previously published transcriptomes of tribe Tulipeae to supplement the sampling. One plastid dataset (74 plastid protein-coding genes, PCGs) and one nuclear dataset (2594 nuclear orthologous genes, OGs) were constructed, with the latter used for species tree inference based on maximum likelihood (ML) and multi-species coalescent (MSC) methods. To investigate causes of gene tree discordance, "site con/discordance factors" (sCF and sDF1/sDF2) were calculated first, after which phylogenetic nodes displaying high or imbalanced sDF1/2 were selected for phylogenetic network analyses and polytomy tests to determine whether ILS or reticulate evolution best explain incongruence. Key relationships not resolved by this technique, especially those among Amana, Erythronium, and Tulipa, were further investigated by applying D-statistics and QuIBL.
conclusionsWe failed to reconstruct a reliable and unambiguous evolutionary history among Amana, Erythronium, and Tulipa due to especially pervasive ILS and reticulate evolution, likely caused either by obscured minority phylogenetic signal or differing signals among genomic compartments. However, within Tulipa we confirmed the monophyly of most subgenera, with the exception of two species in the small subgenus Orithyia, of which Tulipa heterophylla was recovered as sister to the remainder of the genus, whereas T. sinkiangensis clustered within subgenus Tulipa. In contrast, most traditional sections of Tulipa were found to be non-monophyletic.
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.