↓ Skip to main content

Chloroplast variation is incongruent with classification of the Australian bloodwood eucalypts (genus Corymbia, family Myrtaceae)

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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.
Title
Chloroplast variation is incongruent with classification of the Australian bloodwood eucalypts (genus Corymbia, family Myrtaceae)
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0195034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanja M. Schuster, Sabrina D. Setaro, Josquin F. G. Tibbits, Erin L. Batty, Rachael M. Fowler, Todd G. B. McLay, Stephen Wilcox, Peter K. Ades, Michael J. Bayly

Abstract

Previous molecular phylogenetic analyses have resolved the Australian bloodwood eucalypt genus Corymbia (~100 species) as either monophyletic or paraphyletic with respect to Angophora (9-10 species). Here we assess relationships of Corymbia and Angophora using a large dataset of chloroplast DNA sequences (121,016 base pairs; from 90 accessions representing 55 Corymbia and 8 Angophora species, plus 33 accessions of related genera), skimmed from high throughput sequencing of genomic DNA, and compare results with new analyses of nuclear ITS sequences (119 accessions) from previous studies. Maximum likelihood and maximum parsimony analyses of cpDNA resolve well supported trees with most nodes having >95% bootstrap support. These trees strongly reject monophyly of Corymbia, its two subgenera (Corymbia and Blakella), most taxonomic sections (Abbreviatae, Maculatae, Naviculares, Septentrionales), and several species. ITS trees weakly indicate paraphyly of Corymbia (bootstrap support <50% for maximum likelihood, and 71% for parsimony), but are highly incongruent with the cpDNA analyses, in that they support monophyly of both subgenera and some taxonomic sections of Corymbia. The striking incongruence between cpDNA trees and both morphological taxonomy and ITS trees is attributed largely to chloroplast introgression between taxa, because of geographic sharing of chloroplast clades across taxonomic groups. Such introgression has been widely inferred in studies of the related genus Eucalyptus. This is the first report of its likely prevalence in Corymbia and Angophora, but this is consistent with previous morphological inferences of hybridisation between species. Our findings (based on continent-wide sampling) highlight a need for more focussed studies to assess the extent of hybridisation and introgression in the evolutionary history of these genera, and that critical testing of the classification of Corymbia and Angophora requires additional sequence data from nuclear genomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 8 23%
Unknown 11 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Chemistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 13 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,842,402
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#47,506
of 199,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,014
of 328,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#922
of 3,463 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 199,597 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 328,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,463 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.