Search for: All records

Traditionally, the generation and use of biodiversity data and their associated specimen objects have been primarily the purview of individuals and small research groups. While deposition of data and specimens in herbaria and other repositories has long been the norm, throughout most of their history, these resources have been accessible only to a small community of specialists. Through recent concerted efforts, primarily at the level of national and international governmental agencies over the last two decades, the pace of biodiversity data accumulation has accelerated, and a wider array of biodiversity scientists has gained access to this massive accumulation of resources, applying them to an ever‐widening compass of research pursuits. We review how these new resources and increasing access to them are affecting the landscape of biodiversity research in plants today, focusing on new applications across evolution, ecology, and other fields that have been enabled specifically by the availability of these data and the global scope that was previously beyond the reach of individual investigators. We give an overview of recent advances organized along three lines: broad‐scale analyses of distributional data and spatial information, phylogenetic research circumscribing large clades with comprehensive taxon sampling, and data sets derived from improved accessibility of biodiversity literature. We also review synergies between large data resources and more traditional data collection paradigms, describe shortfalls and how to overcome them, and reflect on the future of plant biodiversity analyses in light of increasing linkages between data types and scientists in our field. 

Abstract Astragalus(Fabaceae) is astoundingly diverse in temperate, cold arid regions of Earth, positioning this group as a model clade for investigating the distribution of plant diversity in the face of environmental challenges. Here, we identify the spatial distribution of diversity and endemism inAstragalususing species distribution models for 752 species and a phylogenetic tree comprising 847 species. We integrated these to map centers of species richness (SR) and relative phylogenetic diversity (RPD) and used randomization approaches to investigate centers of endemism. We also used clustering methods to identify phylogenetic regionalizations. We then assembled predictor variables of current climate conditions to test environmental factors predicting these phylogenetic diversity results, especially temperature and precipitation seasonality. We find that SR centers are distributed globally at temperate middle latitudes in arid regions, but the Mediterranean Basin is the most important center of RPD. Endemism centers also occur globally, but Iran represents a key endemic area with a concentration of both paleo‐ and neoendemism. Phylogenetic regionalization recovered an east‐west gradient in Eurasia and an amphitropical disjunction across North and South America; American phyloregions are overall most closely related to east and central Asia. SR, RPD, and lineage turnover are driven mostly by precipitation and seasonality, but endemism is driven primarily by diurnal temperature variation. Endemism and regionalization results point to western Asia and especially Iran as a biogeographic gateway between Europe and Asia. RPD and endemism highlight the importance of temperature and drought stress in determining plant diversity and endemism centers. 

Abstract A hallmark of flowering plants is their ability to invade some of the most extreme and dynamic habitats, including cold and dry biomes, to a far greater extent than other land plants. Recent work has provided insight to the phylogenetic distribution and evolutionary mechanisms which have enabled this success, yet needed is a synthesis of evolutionary perspectives with plant physiological traits, morphology, and genomic diversity. Linking these disparate components will not only lead to better understand the evolutionary parallelism and diversification of plants with these two strategies, but also to provide the framework needed for directing future research. We summarize the primary physiological and structural traits involved in response to cold‐ and drought stress, outline the phylogenetic distribution of these adaptations, and describe the recurring association of these changes with rapid diversification events that occurred in multiple lineages over the past 15 million years. Across these threefold facets of dry‐cold correlation (traits, phylogeny, and time) we stress the contrast between (a) the amazing diversity of solutions flowering plants have developed in the face of extreme environments and (b) a broad correlation between cold and dry adaptations that in some cases may hint at deep common origins. 

PremisePhylogenetic studies in the Compositae are challenging due to the sheer size of the family and the challenges they pose for molecular tools, ranging from the genomic impact of polyploid events to their very conserved plastid genomes. The search for better molecular tools for phylogenetic studies led to the development of the family‐specific Compositae1061 probe set, as well as the universal Angiosperms353 probe set designed for all flowering plants. In this study, we evaluate the extent to which data generated using the family‐specific kit and those obtained with the universal kit can be merged for downstream analyses. MethodsWe used comparative methods to verify the presence of shared loci between probe sets. Using two sets of eight samples sequenced with Compositae1061 and Angiosperms353, we ran phylogenetic analyses with and without loci flagged as paralogs, a gene tree discordance analysis, and a complementary phylogenetic analysis mixing samples from both sample sets. ResultsOur results show that the Compositae1061 kit provides an average of 721 loci, with 9–46% of them presenting paralogs, while the Angiosperms353 set yields an average of 287 loci, which are less affected by paralogy. Analyses mixing samples from both sets showed that the presence of 30 shared loci in the probe sets allows the combination of data generated in different ways. DiscussionCombining data generated using different probe sets opens up the possibility of collaborative efforts and shared data within the synantherological community. 

PremiseHybrid capture with high‐throughput sequencing (Hyb‐Seq) is a powerful tool for evolutionary studies. The applicability of an Asteraceae family‐specific Hyb‐Seq probe set and the outcomes of different phylogenetic analyses are investigated here. MethodsHyb‐Seq data from 112 Asteraceae samples were organized into groups at different taxonomic levels (tribe, genus, and species). For each group, data sets of non‐paralogous loci were built and proportions of parsimony informative characters estimated. The impacts of analyzing alternative data sets, removing long branches, and type of analysis on tree resolution and inferred topologies were investigated in tribe Cichorieae. ResultsAlignments of the Asteraceae family‐wide Hyb‐Seq locus set were parsimony informative at all taxonomic levels. Levels of resolution and topologies inferred at shallower nodes differed depending on the locus data set and the type of analysis, and were affected by the presence of long branches. DiscussionThe approach used to build a Hyb‐Seq locus data set influenced resolution and topologies inferred in phylogenetic analyses. Removal of long branches improved the reliability of topological inferences in maximum likelihood analyses. The Astereaceae Hyb‐Seq probe set is applicable at multiple taxonomic depths, which demonstrates that probe sets do not necessarily need to be lineage‐specific.