↓ Skip to main content

Phylogeny of the core Malvales: evidence from ndhF sequence data

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Botany, October 1999
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
11 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
247 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Phylogeny of the core Malvales: evidence from ndhF sequence data
Published in
American Journal of Botany, October 1999
DOI 10.2307/2656928
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The monophyly of the group comprising the core malvalean families, Bombacaceae, Malvaceae, Sterculiaceae, and Tiliaceae, was recently confirmed by molecular studies, but the internal structure of this clade is poorly understood. In this study, we examined sequences of the chloroplast ndhF gene (aligned length 2226 bp) from 70 exemplars representing 35 of the 39 putative tribes of core Malvales. The monophyly of one traditional family, the Malvaceae, was supported in the trees resulting from these data, but the other three families, as traditionally circumscribed, are nonmonophyletic. In addition, the following relationships were well supported: (1) a clade, /Malvatheca, consisting of traditional Malvaceae and Bombacaceae (except some members of tribe Durioneae), plus Fremontodendron and Chiranthodendron, which are usually treated as Sterculiaceae; (2) a clade, /Malvadendrina, supported by a unique 21-bp (base pair) deletion and consisting of /Malvatheca, plus five additional subclades, including representatives of Sterculiaceae and Tiliaceae, and Durionieae; (3) a clade, /Byttneriina, with genera traditionally assigned to several tribes of Tiliaceae, plus exemplars of tribes Byttnerieae, Hermannieae, and Lasiopetaleae of Sterculiaceae. The most striking departures from traditional classifications are the following: Durio and relatives appear to be more closely related to Helicteres and Reevesia (Sterculiaceae) than to Bombacaceae; several genera traditionally considered as Bombacaceae (Camptostemon, Matisia, Phragmotheca, and Quararibea) or Sterculiaceae (Chiranthodendron and Fremontodendron) appear as sister lineages to the traditional Malvaceae; the traditional tribe Helictereae (Sterculiaceae) is polyphyletic; and Sterculiaceae and Tiliaceae, as traditionally circumscribed, represent polyphyletic groups that cannot sensibly be maintained with their traditional limits for purposes of classification. We discuss morphological characters and conclude that there has been extensive homoplasy in characters previously used to delineate major taxonomic groups in core Malvales. The topologies here also suggest that /Malvatheca do not have as a synapormophy monothecate anthers, as has been previously supposed but, instead, may be united by dithecate, transversely septate (polysporangiate) anthers, as found in basal members of both /Bombacoideae and /Malvoideae. Thus, "monothecate" anthers may have been derived at least twice, independently, within the /Bombacoideae (core Bombacaceae) and /Malvoideae (traditional Malvaceae).

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Other 3 1%
Unknown 230 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 48 19%
Student > Master 30 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 6%
Professor 14 6%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 72 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 128 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 5%
Engineering 9 4%
Environmental Science 8 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 <1%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 78 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2024.
All research outputs
#7,347,691
of 25,390,692 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Botany
#1,625
of 4,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,628
of 35,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Botany
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,390,692 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 35,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.