ArticleAmerican journal of botany2026
Phylogenomic insights into the genus Tulipa (Liliaceae): Taxonomy, evolution, and biogeography.
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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
premiseTulips are one of the best-known geophytes, but their taxonomy remains convoluted and their evolutionary history poorly understood. Here, we used plastid genomes to identify some issues with current classification, understand the diversification history of the genus, and identify potential species linked to historical cultivation.
methodsWe gathered a large number of tulip specimens from living collections, herbaria, and online sources and through extensive fieldwork to infer maximum likelihood phylogenies of the plastid genomes of Tulipa (Liliaceae), representing ~86% of accepted species alongside a range of occasionally accepted synonyms. We used BEAST and secondary calibration points to date the tree, before assessing the biogeographical history of the genus using BioGeoBEARS.
resultsBased on our results, we described a fifth subgenus, Eduardoregelia, and identified a range of species where our results do not align with current taxonomy. Our data suggests the genus diverged from a clade containing Amana and Erythronium around 32.5 million years ago (Mya), with the most recent common ancestor existing around 22.8 Mya in the broader Central Asia region, a period that saw rapid uplift of mountain ranges and associated aridification in the region. The genus primarily diversified in Central Asia with rapid radiations within the last 10 My, possibly as a response to further orogenesis. Several migrations outside of the ancestral region have occurred, primarily via the steppes of Kazakhstan and Russia and along the Caucasus and Iranian and Anatolian Mountains to the eastern Mediterranean region. We also provide evidence that the maternal lineage of the garden tulip involved several species including T. scardica and T. suaveolens.
conclusionsMany tulip species present limited diagnostic characters, making their taxonomy difficult, compounded by their long use in horticulture and widespread hybridization, especially in gardens. We provide an up-to-date phylogenetic framework for this genus that may help resolve many taxonomic issues in the future, while highlighting further work to be done. We reinforce the importance of Central Asia in the evolutionary history of this genus and provide an important foundation for further study of Tulipa and more effective conservation of wild tulip species.
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.