ArticlePhytoKeys2026
A comprehensive phylogenomic framework for cycads (Cycadales).
Article in PhytoKeys, 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
Here we present a time-calibrated phylogeny of 346 cycad accessions, covering ≈86% of the 380 accepted species, across all 10 extant genera, inferred from 1,409 single-copy nuclear loci (411,345 amino acid sites) derived from transcriptome and genome data. The maximum likelihood phylogeny was inferred using a partitioned analysis, with branch support assessed via ultrafast bootstrap (UFBoot2), and concordance evaluated using gene concordance factors (gCF) and site concordance factors (sCF), representing gene- and site-level support, respectively. Divergence times were estimated using penalized likelihood (TreePL) with 12 calibration constraints, and 95% confidence intervals were derived from 100 gene-wise bootstrap replicates. Bootstrap support is high (70% of nodes ≥95%), but gene concordance factors are low (median gCF = 3.2%), a pattern consistent with limited phylogenetic signal per locus rather than strong support for alternative topologies. Across all 10 genera, the phylogram recovered a strongly supported generic backbone, confirmed the monophyly of all genera, and provides the first broadly accessible phylogenomic framework for interpreting cycad taxonomy, intergeneric relationships, and evolutionary history. Herein, we provide the phylogram, timetree, all 1,409 gene trees, the concatenated alignment with partition definitions, and associated support, confidence-interval, and calibration data.
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.