^Irwln & Barneby (1981) divided tribe Cassieae into five subtribes.[2]
^Also includes Poeppigia, which forms the monogeneric Poeppigia group of tribe Caesalpinieae in Polhill & Vidal (1981).
^ merged into Dialiinaee and becomes part of LPWG subfamily Dialioideae
^paraphyletic wrt Cassieae sensu stricto and Mimosoideae; now includes Umtiza clade from Detarieae] [becomes recircumcribed subfamily Caesalpinioideae in LPWG-2017]
^Lewis (2005) included tribe Parkieae of Lewis & Elias (1981) within Mimoseae
Subfamily Caesalpinioideae is one of the three traditional subfamilies of legumes, along with Mimosoideae and Papilionoideae (or Faboideae), and has been divided into four tribes, Cercideae, Detarieae, Cassieae and Caesalpinieae. However, recent work, mainly studies of molecular markers, have shown that Caesalpinioideae as traditionally circumscribed is paraphyletic with respect to both the other two subfamilies and that neither tribe Cassieae nor Caesalpinieae are monophyletic. As a result, the Legume Phylogeny Working Group (LPWG) proposed a new classification with six monophyletic subfamilies. Papilionoideae was retained with some generic transfers. The caesalpinioid tribes Cercideae and Detarieae were elevated to subfamilies, and tribe Cassieae split, with two its subtribes moved to new subfamily Dialioideaeinae and the monotypic subtribe Duparquetiinae elevated to subfamily Duparquetioideae. Subfamily Caesalpinioide was recircumscribed to include the former tribe Caesalpinieae, the remainder of Cassieae, and also subsumed subfamily Mimosoideae as the Mimosoideae clade. The traditional and revised LPWG classification are summarised in the following table.
Cladogram follows stated source, but is there a newer version?
Caesalpinioideae, as it was traditionally circumscribed, was paraphyletic. Several molecular phylogenies in the early 2000s showed that the other two subfamilies of Fabaceae (Faboideae and Mimosoideae) were both nested within Caesalpinioideae.[3][4][5][6] Consequently, the subfamilies of Fabaceae were reorganized to make them monophyletic.[7] Caesalpinioideae, as currently defined, contains the following subclades:[4]
^ abBruneau A, Mercure M, Lewis GP, Herendeen PS (2008). "Phylogenetic patterns and diversification in the caesalpinioid legumes". Botany. 86 (7): 697–718. doi:10.1139/B08-058.
Modern molecular phylogenetics recommend a clade-based classification of Faboideae as a superior alternative to the traditional tribal classification of Polhill:[10][11][12][13][14]
^Bruneau A; Mercure M; Lewis GP; Herendeen PS (2008). "Phylogenetic patterns and diversification in the caesalpinioid legumes". Botany. 86 (7): 697–718. doi:10.1139/B08-058.
^Miller JT; Murphy DJ; Brown GK; Richardson DM; González-Orozco CE (2011). "The evolution and phylogenetic placement of invasive Australian Acacia species". Diversity and Distributions. 17 (5): 848–860. doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00780.x. hdl:10019.1/117082. S2CID86727446.
^de Queiroz LP, Pastore JF, Cardoso D, Snak C, de C Lima AL, Gagnon E, Vatanparast M, Holland AE, Egan AN (2015). "A multilocus phylogenetic analysis reveals the monophyly of a recircumscribed papilionoid legume tribe Diocleae with well-supported generic relationships". Mol Phylogenet Evol. 90: 1–19. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2015.04.016. PMID25934529.