The article was entitled “Molecular Systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)” was

written by Xun Chen, Jinlu Li, Tao Cheng, Wen Zhang, Yanlei Liu, Ping Wu,
Xueying Yang, Ling Wang, and Shiliang Zhou in the journal Plant Systematics and
Evolution on August 2019.
The title lacked more specific words regarding the focus of the study. The phrase
“based on…” can be added so the readers would be able to get an idea on what makes
the article interesting. Also, this would make it easy for other researchers, especially
for students, to find the certain study they are looking for.
The introduction focused on how different taxa were divided and which species
appeared first based on fossil records from the previously published ones. A lot of
family, genera, species name was introduced but failed to give initial findings
regarding their phylogenetic relationships. The method of constructing the previous or
existing phylogenetic tree indicates a problem and ambiguity which require to be
resolved. The problems stated paved the way to make the objectives sound promising
by choosing words that are positive counterpart of the shortcomings in the previous
study. The study aimed to reconstruct the phylogeny at generic level, estimate
divergence times, and build historical biogeography. Assessing the objectives, the
study once again did not mention anything regarding the molecular way of
reconstructing the phylogeny which made this part less convincing to continue to read
about.
Only 18% of the total number of genera in the family Rosaceae was sampled. The
percentage was insufficient to completely build a large phylogeny as the introduction
has described. It was understandable to have a little number of samples due to
different factors but it could have been more reliable if more effort and exploration
was done. The researchers used the appropriate way of extracting the DNA of the
leaves. Silica gel shows moderate degradation compared to other chemicals and air-
drying (Ying Guo et al. 2018). This method will be of great help in building the
integrity or strength of the data since the specimens used are not damaged.
The use of variable regions in the chloroplast was helpful in getting accurate gene
sequences and constructing phylogeny (H. Daniell et al. 2016). In the study, twelve
different chloroplast regions were used for the data. Compared to previously
published molecular systematics from I. Resetnik et al. (2007), which used only two
regions in the chloroplast, this study regarding the phylogeny of subfamily Rosoideae
was more convincing. The data in amplifying the samples as well as the thermal
cycling was recorded and stated well. The sequences were said to be manually
assembled in a computer program, Sequencher 4.7 (Gene Codes Corporation, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, USA). Assembling manually which means done by humans could
result to unnoticed errors. Assembling the sequences automatically with the same
program could have established more accuracy.
 Identifying two other subfamily means that the number of genera under the
center of the study, Rosoideae, will decrease in number. The researchers include all
the names of the species found even those which are under different subfamily and it
succeeded in resolving the confusion in major subclades and which species are under
specific genera and family. However, it failed to discuss the phylogenetic
relationships within the subfamily Rosoideae. This indicates that the readers must
determine which species remained to identify which were under Rosoideae.
The discussion regarding the diversification focused mainly on plant topography
which made the study easier to be understood after the numerous terms in the
sequencing which are hardly to be understood by those without knowledge in
genetics. The length of branching was properly discussed and was helpful in retaining
the integrity of the analysis. Incongruence between species are mentioned but lack the
supporting details why such uncertainties occur - the manually assembled sequence
was not mentioned as a reason but they included incomplete lineage sorting as the
cause.
The study compared the resulting phylogenetic tree between nuclear and
chloroplast gene-based tree. There was evidence stated to support the efficacy and
accuracy of using the chloroplast genes in the construction of the phylogenetic tree.
However, if the nuclear-based would be pushed through by future researchers, more
single copy nuclear genes should be used to resolve the systematic uncertainties of the
tribes as well as genetic relationships among genera within tribes. The reconstructed
phylogenetic tree was a strong evidence that the objectives of the study has been
achieved. The nodes of the tree was consisted of small circles of different colors
indicating the era or period when the taxon appeared and diverted. Additionally, the
labeling of the continent where the taxon originated was helpful in comprehending the
tree.