@article{fdi:010054207,
  title = {{P}hylogenetic relationships among arecoid palms ({A}recaceae : {A}recoideae)},
  author = {{B}aker, {W}. {J}. and {N}orup, {M}. {V}. and {C}larkson, {J}. {J}. and {C}ouvreur, {T}homas and {D}owe, {J}. {L}. and {L}ewis, {C}. {E}. and {P}intaud, {J}ean-{C}hristophe and {S}avolainen, {V}. and {W}ilmot, {T}. and {C}hase, {M}. {W}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{B}ackground and {A}ims {T}he {A}recoideae is the largest and most diverse of the five subfamilies of palms ({A}recaceae/{P}almae), containing >50% of the species in the family. {D}espite its importance, phylogenetic relationships among {A}recoideae are poorly understood. {H}ere the most densely sampled phylogenetic analysis of {A}recoideae available to date is presented. {T}he results are used to test the current classification of the subfamily and to identify priority areas for future research. {M}ethods {DNA} sequence data for the low-copy nuclear genes {PRK} and {RPB}2 were collected from 190 palm species, covering 103 (96%) genera of {A}recoideae. {T}he data were analysed using the parsimony ratchet, maximum likelihood, and both likelihood and parsimony bootstrapping. {K}ey {R}esults and {C}onclusions {D}espite the recovery of paralogues and pseudogenes in a small number of taxa, {PRK} and {RPB}2 were both highly informative, producing well-resolved phylogenetic trees with many nodes well supported by bootstrap analyses. {S}imultaneous analyses of the combined data sets provided additional resolution and support. {T}wo areas of incongruence between {PRK} and {RPB}2 were strongly supported by the bootstrap relating to the placement of tribes {C}hamaedoreeae, {I}riarteeae and {R}einhardtieae; the causes of this incongruence remain uncertain. {T}he current classification within {A}recoideae was strongly supported by the present data. {O}f the 14 tribes and 14 sub-tribes in the classification, only five sub-tribes from tribe {A}receae ({B}asseliniinae, {L}inospadicinae, {O}ncospermatinae, {R}hopalostylidinae and {V}erschaffeltiinae) failed to receive support. {T}hree major higher level clades were strongly supported: (1) the {RRC} clade ({R}oystoneeae, {R}einhardtieae and {C}ocoseae), (2) the {POS} clade ({P}odococceae, {O}ranieae and {S}clerospermeae) and (3) the core arecoid clade ({A}receae, {E}uterpeae, {G}eonomateae, {L}eopoldinieae, {M}anicarieae and {P}elagodoxeae). {H}owever, new data sources are required to elucidate ambiguities that remain in phylogenetic relationships among and within the major groups of {A}recoideae, as well as within the {A}receae, the largest tribe in the palm family.},
  keywords = {{A}recaceae ; {A}receae ; {A}recoideae ; coconut ; {C}ocos ; {E}laeis ; incongruence ; low-copy nuclear {DNA} ; oil palm ; {P}almae ; paralogy ; phylogeny ; pseudogene},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{A}nnals of {B}otany},
  volume = {108},
  numero = {8 : {S}pecial {I}ssue : {P}alm {B}iology},
  pages = {1417--1432},
  ISSN = {0305-7364},
  year = {2011},
  DOI = {10.1093/aob/mcr020},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010054207},
}