ArticleAmerican journal of botany2026
Phylogenetic systematics of Juncaceae.
Article in American journal of botany, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
premiseJuncaceae has needed taxonomic revision for some time. Specifically, the genus Juncus s.l. is known to be paraphyletic because five small southern-hemisphere genera have been shown repeatedly to be nested within it. In 2022, a new classification was proposed, based on phylogenies built from one nuclear and three plastid regions sequenced across much of Juncaceae, meant to resolve the paraphyletic nature of Juncus s.l. It created six new genera and was criticized on the basis that the genera proposed are not necessarily monophyletic, given the limited nature of the phylogenetic analyses available and the fact that the generic circumscriptions draw heavily on the morphology-based classifications in the latest monograph of Juncaceae from 2002.
methodsWe used the Angiosperms 353 target capture probe set to assemble a data set consisting of hundreds of plastid and nuclear loci to assess the monophyly of the newly proposed genera of Juncaceae.
resultsThe proposed genera mostly represent monophyletic groups, but the proposed genus Juncinella is nested within the proposed genus Boreojuncus. Additionally, Juncinella capitata was placed as sister to either Luzula or Oreojuncus and should be recognized as a monotypic genus. Finally, Australojuncus cyperoides and Verojuncus chlorocephalus were recovered outside of their morphologically assigned genera and require further investigation to be placed confidently.
conclusionsWe proposed taxonomic revisions to rectify the stated issues, but further research is necessary, particularly to correctly place the South African annual taxa in Juncus s.l.
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.