Devenirs militants:Introduction

Présenter un dossier sur l’engagement qui mette sur le même plan les pratiques militantes dans les partis politiques, les organisations syndicales, le monde associatif et plus généralement les entreprises de mouvement social, pourra paraître osé. C’est que, pendant longtemps, le militantisme a été pensé sous les seules espèces du travail partisan et syndical, dans un contexte où la définition de la participation politique demeurait étroitement cantonnée à l’action dite « conventionnelle ». [Premier paragraphe de l'article

BEAST MCC tree Rhamnaceae Onstein et al

For details also see Onstein et al. 2015 Evolution DOI: 10.1111/evo.12605. BEAST MCC tree based on sequence data for species of Rhamnaceae and outgroup taxa collected from GenBank (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) (513 accessions) and generated by ourselves (379 accessions), for six chloroplast markers (matK gene 1593 base pairs (bp), trnL-F genes and intergenic spacer 1232 bp, rbcL gene 1425 bp, psbA gene and psbA-trnH intergenic spacer 775 bp, ndhF gene 2163 bp, rpl16 gene and intron 1344 bp) and one nuclear marker (ITS gene 952 bp). The best fit model for the chloroplast and ITS markers were identified with the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) implemented in PartitionFinder v 1.0.1, as follows: GTR + G + I for the linked chloroplast markers, and SYM + G + I for the ITS marker. We used the uncorrelated lognormal relaxed clock and a yule tree prior available in BEAST v.1.7.5. The MCC tree is based on the 10250 subsampled trees

Habitat coding of African Restionaceae

0: coastal wetlands; 1: montane wetlands; 2: coastal drylands; 3: montane dryland

Chronogram (Maximum Clade Credibility Tree) of Restionaceae

Molecular Dating using BEAST of African Restionacea

Bayesian consensus tree from MrBayes

Consensus tree from the MrBayes analyses of African Restionacea

The ordered ranking of the 16 analytical (weighting and clustering) approaches employed.

<p>Rankings were based on the optimality values in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0132538#pone.0132538.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. The Consensus CoEs / Sub-CoEs were excluded from the ranking assessment. J = Jaccard, K2 = Kulczinsky2, S = Simpson.</p><p>The ordered ranking of the 16 analytical (weighting and clustering) approaches employed.</p

The bin frequency distributions of weighted matrix characters generated by the different weighting techniques.

<p>Taxa restricted to a single cell were excluded as they are not effective for clustering. Total site taxon matrix character numbers are reported in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0132538#pone.0132538.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>.</p

A dendrogram of the correlation between the 12 weighting-dissimilarity matrices.

<p>Mantel Tests were undertaken using Pearson correlation and 999 permutations. The actual correlation values are provided in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0132538#pone.0132538.s005" target="_blank">S2 Table</a>. All dissimilarity matrices were significantly correlated with p < 0.001. [Unw = unweighted, Bell = Bell weighting, Int = Integration weighting, Inv = Inverse weighting, K2 = Kulczinsky2; J = Jaccard; S = Simpson].</p

The summed ranking of the different weighting techniques and similarity / clustering techniques employed.

<p>Summed ranking values were calculated from <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0132538#pone.0132538.t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a>. Lower scores (summed placements) indicates a higher ranking. J = Jaccard, K2 = Kulczinsky2, S = Simpson.</p><p>The summed ranking of the different weighting techniques and similarity / clustering techniques employed.</p

Spatial summary of the methods used for demarcating biogeographic areas.

<p>The relative robustness of the CoEs / Sub-CoEs identified in the CFR are indicated. The most robust CoEs / Sub-CoEs were retrieved by the strict consensus analysis (indicated without any patterning). These are followed in robustness by areas retrieved by the slightly less rigorous majority rule consensus (yellow dots). Post GIS modification then refined these initial candidates, altering cell assignment in CoEs (cross hatching) and Sub-CoEs (diagonal hatching). Cells not assigned due to conflict in clustering or consensus were then added to CoEs (+) or to Sub-CoEs (-), whereas single cell endemics that did not group with other cells were also indicated (fine dots). CoEs retrieved by clustering of taxa with very widespread distributions indicating uncertain collection effort were removed (red cross hatching). Finally, cells assigned to CoEs to bridge the gap between CoEs and BRs are indicated with +0, indicating no endemic taxa.</p