The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phylogenetic patterns and diversification in the caesalpinioid legumesThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Systematics Research.
Abstract
Subfamily Caesalpinioideae is a paraphyletic grade of 171 genera that comprises the first branches of the Leguminosae and from which are derived the monophyletic subfamilies Mimosoideae and Papilionoideae. We have sequenced the chloroplast matK gene, and the trnL and 3′-trnK introns for 153 genera of caesalpinioid legumes. Parsimony and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses of these data support the monophyly of several major groups within the caesalpinioid legumes: the Cercideae, Detarieae, Detarieae s. str., Prioria , Amherstieae, Dialiinae, Cassia , Caesalpinia , Peltophorum , and Tachigali clades. Relationships among the first branching lineages of the legumes are not well supported, with Cercideae, Detarieae, and the genus Duparquetia alternatively resolved as sister group to all of the legumes. The division of certain large genera (e.g., Caesalpinia s. l., Bauhinia s. l.) into segregate genera generally is supported by our molecular data. Using 18 well-documented fossils as calibration points, fixing the stem node of the legumes at 65 Ma, and using the Penalised Likelihood method, we estimate the crown node of the Leguminosae at 64 Ma and the crown age of each of the major caesalpinioid lineages varying from 34 to 56 Ma. Fossil cross-validation suggests that none of the 18 fossil calibrations is internally inconsistent. Analyses done without fossil calibrations yield much younger divergence times. The age estimates for the Detarieae clade are more sensitive to the presence of calibration points than other caesalpinioid clades, a situation which we attribute to the slow rate of chloroplast DNA evolution in this group.
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
MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees.
Huelsenbeck, J. P., & Ronquist, F. (2001) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/17.8.754 · Cited by 21,937
Sanderson, M. J. (2002) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003974 · Cited by 1,977
Sanderson, M. J. (2003) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/19.2.301 · Cited by 1,906
Simon, M. F., Grether, R., de Queiroz, L. P., Skema, C., Pennington, R. T., & Hughes, C. E. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0903410106 · Cited by 1,056
Cited by
Simon, M. F., Grether, R., de Queiroz, L. P., Skema, C., Pennington, R. T., & Hughes, C. E. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0903410106 · Cited by 1,056
The Legume Phylogeny Working Group, Bruneau, A., Doyle, J. J., Herendeen, P., Hughes, C., Kenicer, G., Lewis, G., Mackinder, B., Pennington, R. T., Sanderson, M. J., et al. (2013) · TAXON · doi:10.12705/622.8 · Cited by 437
Self-citationA single evolutionary innovation drives the deep evolution of symbiotic N2-fixation in angiosperms
Werner, G. D. A., Cornwell, W. K., Sprent, J. I., Kattge, J., & Kiers, E. T. (2014) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms5087 · Cited by 289
Metadata
- Authors
- Bruneau, A., Mercure, M., Lewis, G. P., & Herendeen, P. S.
- Venue
- Botany
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 697-718
- ISSN
- 1916-2790 (ISSN-L)
- 1916-2804
- OpenAlex
- W2053410480
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 4
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Phylogenetic patterns and diversification in the caesalpinioid legumesThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Systematics Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/b08-058
- The paper
- Bruneau, A., Mercure, M., Lewis, G. P., & Herendeen, P. S. (2008). Phylogenetic patterns and diversification in the caesalpinioid legumesThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in the Special Issue on Systematics Research. Botany. https://doi.org/10.1139/b08-058
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.