2019
DOI: 10.1101/774018
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Plastid phylogenomics resolves ambiguous relationships within the orchid family and provides a solid timeframe for biogeography and macroevolution

Abstract: 24 Recent phylogenomic analyses have solved evolutionary relationships between most of the 25 Orchidaceae subfamilies and tribes, yet phylogenetic relationships remain unclear within the 26 42 43 45 46 47 100, PP = 0.77-1.0), and only a few positions remained unresolved. Here, the relationship between 128 Codonorchidae+Orchideae was moderately supported (LBS = 86) together with that of 129 Cymbidiinae and the remaining Cymbidieae (LBS = 62). The monophyly of Nervilieae and 130 Triphoreae was moderately support… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

6
23
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 87 publications
(162 reference statements)
6
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another possible explanation, apart from the low coverages, is that the biparental nature of the nuclear genome may be problematic for the inference of phylogenetic relationships (14). Previous studies already suggest that phylogenies based on nrDNA and few selected plastid sequences only weakly support relationships (30). The 18s rRNA gene sequences of representatives of the sections Corollinae and Beta are completely identical containing no phylogenetic signal to separate them.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Another possible explanation, apart from the low coverages, is that the biparental nature of the nuclear genome may be problematic for the inference of phylogenetic relationships (14). Previous studies already suggest that phylogenies based on nrDNA and few selected plastid sequences only weakly support relationships (30). The 18s rRNA gene sequences of representatives of the sections Corollinae and Beta are completely identical containing no phylogenetic signal to separate them.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies already suggest that phylogenies based on nrDNA and few selected plastid sequences only weakly support relationships (30). The 18s rRNA gene sequences of representatives of the sections Corollinae and Beta are completely identical containing no phylogenetic signal to separate them.…”
Section: Our Proposed Beet Whole-plastome Phylogeny Is Superior To Single Gene Phylogeniesmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…With few exceptions (Bateman et al, 2018; Bogarín et al, 2018; Unruh et al, 2018; Brandrud et al, 2020; Pérez-Escobar et al, 2020), previous orchid studies (Cameron et al, 1999; Salazar et al, 2003; Neubig et al, 2012; Givnish et al, 2015; Li, Li, et al, 2019; Serna-sánchez et al, 2020) have relied almost exclusively on plastid datasets. This is because nuclear orchid trees have mostly been inferred from the low-copy Xdh (Górniak et al, 2010) and ribosomal ITS (nrITS) region (Freudenstein and Chase, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To assess the performance of the Angiosperms353 nuclear loci for resolving orchid relationships and investigate nuclear/plastid gene tree discordance at different taxonomic levels, we utilized the 78-plastid-gene dataset of (Serna-sánchez et al, 2020): 264 species representing 117 genera, 28 subtribes and 18 tribes. The taxon sampling of nuclear and plastid datasets overlaps in 34 genera, 14 tribes and 22 subtribes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%