The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Using RPB1 sequences to improve phylogenetic inference among mushrooms (Inocybe, Agaricales)
Open accessAbstract
An investigation of mushroom phylogeny using the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II gene sequences (RPB1) was conducted in comparison with nuclear ribosomal large subunit RNA gene sequences (nLSU) for the same set of taxa in the genus Inocybe (Agaricales, Basidiomycota). The two data sets, though not significantly incongruent, exhibit conflict among the placement of two taxa that exhibit long branches in the nLSU data set. In contrast, RPB1 terminal branch lengths are rather uniform. Bootstrap support is increased for clades in RPB1. Combined data sets increase the degree of confidence for several relationships. Overall, nLSU data do not yield a robust phylogeny when independently assessed by RPB1 sequences. This multigene study indicates that Inocybe is a monophyletic group composed of at least four distinct lineages—subgenus Mallocybe, section Cervicolores, section Rimosae, and subgenus Inocybe sensu Kühner, Kuyper, non Singer. Within subgenus Inocybe, two additional lineages, one composed of species with smooth basidiospores (clade I) and a second characterized by nodulose‐spored species (clade II), are recovered by RPB1 and combined data. The nLSU data recover only clade I. The genera Astrosporina and Inocybella cannot be recognized phylogenetically. “Supersections” Cortinatae and Marginatae are not monophyletic groups.
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
Cited by
Ekman, S., & Blaalid, R. (2011) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syr022 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Matheny, P. B., Liu, Y. J., Ammirati, J. F., & Hall, B. D.
- Venue
- American Journal of Botany
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 688-698
- ISSN
- 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2197
- OpenAlex
- W2143126813
- Cited by
- 460
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.36
- 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.