The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Seed plant phylogeny inferred from all three plant genomes: Monophyly of extant gymnosperms and origin of Gnetales from conifers
Open accessAbstract
Phylogenetic relationships among the five groups of extant seed plants are presently quite unclear. For example, morphological studies consistently identify the Gnetales as the extant sister group to angiosperms (the so-called “anthophyte” hypothesis), whereas a number of molecular studies recover gymnosperm monophyly, and few agree with the morphology-based placement of Gnetales. To better resolve these and other unsettled issues, we have generated a new molecular data set of mitochondrial small subunit rRNA sequences, and have analyzed these data together with comparable data sets for the nuclear small subunit rRNA gene and the chloroplast rbcL gene. All nuclear analyses strongly ally Gnetales with a monophyletic conifers, whereas all mitochondrial analyses and those chloroplast analyses that take into account saturation of third-codon position transitions actually place Gnetales within conifers, as the sister group to the Pinaceae. Combined analyses of all three genes strongly support this latter relationship, which to our knowledge has never been suggested before. The combined analyses also strongly support monophyly of extant gymnosperms, with cycads identified as the basal-most group of gymnosperms, Ginkgo as the next basal, and all conifers except for Pinaceae as sister to the Gnetales + Pinaceae clade. According to these findings, the Gnetales may be viewed as extremely divergent conifers, and the many morphological similarities between angiosperms and Gnetales (e.g., double fertilization and flower-like reproductive structures) arose independently.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
PAUP^* : Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (and other methods) 4.0b8
Swofford, D. L. (2001) · Cited by 12,789
Kishino, H., & Hasegawa, M. (1989) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf02100115 · Cited by 3,373
Quartet Puzzling: A Quartet Maximum-Likelihood Method for Reconstructing Tree Topologies
Strimmer, K., & von Haeseler, A. (1996) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025664 · Cited by 2,531
PHYLIP (Phylogeny Inference Package)
Cummings, M. P. (2004) · Dictionary of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology · doi:10.1002/0471650129.dob0534 · Cited by 1,967
An Ordinal Classification for the Families of Flowering Plants
(1998) · Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden · doi:10.2307/2992015 · Cited by 1,465
fastDNAml: a tool for construction of phylogenetic trees of DNA sequences using maximum likelihood
Olsen, G. J., Matsuda, H., Hagstrom, R., & Overbeek, R. (1994) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/10.1.41 · Cited by 1,108
The earliest angiosperms: evidence from mitochondrial, plastid and nuclear genomes
Qiu, Y.-L., Lee, J., Bernasconi-Quadroni, F., Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., Zanis, M., Zimmer, E. A., Chen, Z., Savolainen, V., & Chase, M. W. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/46536 · Cited by 842
The origin and early diversification of angiosperms
Crane, P. R., Friis, E. M., & Pedersen, K. R. (1995) · Nature · doi:10.1038/374027a0 · Cited by 785
The origin and early diversification of land plants: a cladistic study
(1998) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-3849 · Cited by 647
Phylogenetic Analysis of Seed Plants and the Origin of Angiosperms
Crane, P. R. (1985) · Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden · doi:10.2307/2399221 · Cited by 565
Cited by
Sanderson, M. J. (2002) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003974 · Cited by 1,977
One thousand plant transcriptomes and the phylogenomics of green plants
Initiative, O. T. P. T. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1693-2 · Cited by 1,734
Seedling survival and seed size: a synthesis of the literature
MOLES, A. T., & WESTOBY, M. (2004) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.0022-0477.2004.00884.x · Cited by 1,009
Becker, A. (2003) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/s1055-7903(03)00207-0 · Cited by 990
The origin and evolution of model organisms
Hedges, S. B. (2002) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg929 · Cited by 806
Metadata
- Authors
- Chaw, S.-M., Parkinson, C. L., Cheng, Y., Vincent, T. M., & Palmer, J. D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2000-04-11
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 4086-4091
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1990181939
- Cited by
- 465
- References
- 38
- FWCI
- 46.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Seed plant phylogeny inferred from all three plant genomes: Monophyly of extant gymnosperms and origin of Gnetales from conifers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.97.8.4086
- The paper
- Chaw, S.-M., Parkinson, C. L., Cheng, Y., Vincent, T. M., & Palmer, J. D. (2000). Seed plant phylogeny inferred from all three plant genomes: Monophyly of extant gymnosperms and origin of Gnetales from conifers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.97.8.4086
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.