Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 359

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of whole‐genome duplication events on diversification rates in angiosperms

Open access
Landis, Jacob B., Soltis, Douglas E., Li, Zheng, Marx, Hannah E., Barker, Michael S., Tank, David C., Soltis, Pamela S.·2018·American Journal of Botany

Abstract

Premise of the Study: Polyploidy or whole‐genome duplication (WGD) pervades the evolutionary history of angiosperms. Despite extensive progress in our understanding of WGD, the role of these events in promoting diversification is still not well understood. We seek to clarify the possible association between WGD and diversification rates in flowering plants. Methods: Using a previously published phylogeny spanning all land plants (31,749 tips) and WGD events inferred from analyses of the 1000 Plants (1 KP) transcriptome data, we analyzed the association of WGD s and diversification rates following numerous WGD events across the angiosperms. We used a stepwise AIC approach (MEDUSA), a Bayesian mixture model approach (BAMM), and state‐dependent diversification analyses (Mu SSE) to investigate patterns of diversification. Sister‐clade comparisons were used to investigate species richness after WGD s. Key Results: Based on the density of 1 KP taxon sampling, 106 WGD s were unambiguously placed on the angiosperm phylogeny. We identified 334–530 shifts in diversification rates. We found that 61 WGD events were tightly linked to changes in diversification rates, and state‐dependent diversification analyses indicated higher speciation rates for subsequent rounds of WGD. Additionally, 70 of 99 WGD events showed an increase in species richness compared to the sister clade. Conclusions: Forty‐six of the 106 WGD s analyzed appear to be closely associated with upshifts in the rate of diversification in angiosperms. Shifts in diversification do not appear more likely than random within a four‐node lag phase following a WGD; however, younger WGD events are more likely to be followed by an upshift in diversification than older WGD events.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajb2.1060

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 96 references

Cited by

See all 359

Metadata

Authors
Landis, J. B., Soltis, D. E., Li, Z., Marx, H. E., Barker, M. S., Tank, D. C., & Soltis, P. S.
Venue
American Journal of Botany
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03
Volume
105
Issue
3
Pages
348-363
ISSN
  • 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2197
OpenAlex
W2800883607
Cited by
359
References
96
FWCI
32.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of whole‐genome duplication events on diversification rates in angiosperms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ajb2.1060
The paper
Landis, J. B., Soltis, D. E., Li, Z., Marx, H. E., Barker, M. S., Tank, D. C., & Soltis, P. S. (2018). Impact of whole‐genome duplication events on diversification rates in angiosperms. American Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1060

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.