Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40589033›Full record

ArticleThe New phytologist2025

Diversification patterns of the southwest Australian biodiversity hotspot reveal a novel macroevolutionary pathway to plant hyperdiversity.

Francis J Nge, Alexander Skeels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The New phytologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Francis J NgeNational Herbarium of New South Wales, Botanic Gardens of Sydney, Locked Bag 6002, Mount Annan, NSW, 2567, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0361-8709
Alexander SkeelsResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, ACT, 2601, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9973-4703

Funding

Australian Research Council grant DP200102927South Australian Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources D0004335204
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The macroevolutionary drivers for disparities in plant species richness across Australia are understudied, hindered by lack of densely sampled comparative phylogenetic data. Here, we address this gap by analysing plant diversification dynamics and quantifying macroevolutionary trajectories of 22 plant clades (4289 species in 14 families) across two Australian regions. We show the southwest Australian (SWA) floristic region differs from southeastern Australia (SEA) in having relatively low speciation and extinction rates, fewer recent rapid radiations, declining speciation rates, relatively high rates of sympatric speciation indicative of greater niche space saturation, and an absence of mass extinction events since the Eocene. We show that low diversification rates in SWA can be attributed to the early diversification and old age of its flora. By contrast, the SEA extant flora largely diversified after the Eocene-Oligocene boundary extinction event. The paucity of diversification rate shifts across the two floras is likely linked to the lack of extreme environmental pulse events on the geologically stable Australian continent. Our results uncover the dynamics, which have shaped the SWA region as a current centre of hyperdiversity in a continental and global context and suggests an alternate pathway to diversity, not found in other biodiversity hotspots.

Indexed as

BiodiversityBiological EvolutionPlantsAustraliaExtinction, BiologicalPhylogenyAustralian floraBammbiodiversity hotspotsGeoHiSSEmacroevolutionradiationsspeciation ratessympatric speciation

Identifiers

PMID40589033
PMCPMC12445814

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.