Back

Puzzling parasitic plants: phylogenetics and classification of Santalales revisited

Cauz-Santos, L. A.; Byng, J. W.; Chase, M. W.; Christenhusz, M. J. M.

2025-05-19 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2025.05.16.654241 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Based on a previously published but realigned matrix for Santalales, we find many relationships that were weakly or unsupported in previous studies are here much better supported, providing a more robust foundation upon which to discuss Santalales classification. In the maximum likelihood analysis, we recovered the same basic relationships as in the previous studies, but with two major differences: i) Balanophoraceae in the broad sense are monophyletic and well supported as embedded in Santalaceae (rather than biphyletic and outside Santalaceae) and ii) most of the former Olacaceae form a moderately supported clade (rather than a weakly supported grade). In the parsimony analysis, the position of Balanophoraceae s.l. is not well supported (although their broader circumscription is). We outline three possible options for a classification of the order and propose a new familial and subfamilial classification for Santalales. This hopefully provides a stable, user- friendly taxonomic framework that is phylogenetically well supported and more consistent with historical usage than some recently proposed systems, and provides taxa that can be more readily diagnosed morphologically. We recommend recognition of nine families (in phylogenetic sequence): Strombosiaceae, Erythropalaceae, Olacaceae, Opiliaceae, Santalaceae, Misodendraceae, Schoepfiaceae and Loranthaceae, plus an unresolved position for Balanophoraceae (including Mystropetalaceae), which we propose to exclude from Santalaceae until more evidence of their relationships to that family is available from nuclear genes. Four new subfamilies, Gaiadendroideae, Comandroideae, Nanodeoideae and Thesioideae, are proposed, and a new combination, Loranthus obtusifolius, is made.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Annals of Botany
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.1%
3
Journal of Systematics and Evolution
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.1%
4
Systematic Entomology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
5
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.3%
6
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.8%
7
Applications in Plant Sciences
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.6%
9
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.0%
10
American Journal of Botany
41 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
11
Plants
39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
12
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
61 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
13
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
14
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.7%
15
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.7%
16
Systematic Biology
121 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.6%
18
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 44%
1.6%
19
The Plant Journal
197 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
20
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
21
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
22
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
23
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
24
Phytopathology®
28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
25
Genes
126 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
BMC Plant Biology
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
BMC Ecology and Evolution
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.7%
29
Evolution Letters
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
30
Genome Biology and Evolution
280 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%