Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 437

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 112 of the 112 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Legume phylogeny and classification in the 21st century: Progress, prospects and lessons for other species–rich clades

Open access
The Legume Phylogeny Working Group, Bruneau, Anne, Doyle, Jeff J., Herendeen, Patrick, Hughes, Colin, Kenicer, Greg, Lewis, Gwilym, Mackinder, Barbara, Pennington, R. Toby, Sanderson, Michael J., Wojciechowski, Martin F., Boatwright, Stephen, Brown, Gillian, Cardoso, Domingos, Crisp, Michael, Egan, Ashley, Fortunato, Renée H., Hawkins, Julie, Kajita, Tadashi, Klitgaard, Bente, Koenen, Erik, Lavin, Matt, Luckow, Melissa, Marazzi, Brigitte, McMahon, Michelle M., Miller, Joseph T., Murphy, Daniel J., Ohashi, Hiroyoshi, de Queiroz, Luciano P., Rico, Lourdes, Särkinen, Tiina, Schrire, Brian, Simon, Marcelo F., Souza, Elvia R., Steele, Kelly, Torke, Benjamin M., Wieringa, Jan J., van Wyk, Ben-Erik·2013·TAXON
DOI 10.12705/622.8
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Leguminosae, the third–largest angiosperm family, has a global distribution and high ecological and economic impor tance. We examine how the legume systematic research community might join forces to produce a comprehensive phylogenetic estimate for the ca. 751 genera and ca. 19,500 species of legumes and then translate it into a phylogeny–based classification. We review the current state of knowledge of legume phylogeny and highlight where problems lie, for example in taxon sampling and phylogenetic resolution. We review approaches from bioinformatics and next–generation sequencing, which can facilitate the production of better phylogenetic estimates. Finally, we examine how morphology can be incorporated into legume phylogeny to address issues in comparative biology and classification. Our goal is to stimulate the research needed to improve our knowledge of legume phylogeny and evolution; the approaches that we discuss may also be relevant to other species–rich angiosperm clades.

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 · 10.12705/622.8

Cites

112 of 112 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

Cited by

See all 437

Metadata

Authors
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., Wojciechowski, M. F., Boatwright, S., Brown, G., Cardoso, D., Crisp, M., Egan, A., Fortunato, R. H., Hawkins, J., Kajita, T., Klitgaard, B., Koenen, E., Lavin, M., Luckow, M., Marazzi, B., McMahon, M. M., Miller, J. T., Murphy, D. J., Ohashi, H., de Queiroz, L. P., Rico, L., Särkinen, T., Schrire, B., Simon, M. F., Souza, E. R., Steele, K., Torke, B. M., Wieringa, J. J., & van Wyk, B.-E.
Venue
TAXON
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-04
Volume
62
Issue
2
Pages
217-248
ISSN
  • 0040-0262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1996-8175
DOI
10.12705/622.8
OpenAlex
W1510706323
Cited by
437
References
112
FWCI
37.49
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

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.