Article published In: Diachronica
Vol. 38:2 (2021) ► pp.151–188
The Tupí-Guaraní language family
A phylogenetic classification
Published online: 1 February 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.18032.fer
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.18032.fer
Abstract
Attempts to classify Tupí-Guaraní languages have so far been inconsistent with archaeological evidence and ignored
information from historical sources. The case of Tupinambá is most illustrative in this regard. Using both Bayesian phylogenetic analysis
and a stochastic algorithm that reconstructs phylogenetic trees by relying on maximum likelihood estimation, we suggest a new internal
classification of the Tupí-Guaraní branch. The results of the analyses are in accordance with the most recent genetic research on Tupían
populations and challenge previous classifications by suggesting, among others, that Tupinambá should not be considered a ‘Guaraní’
language.
Zusammenfassung
Bisherige Klassifizierungsversuche von Tupí-Guaraní-Sprachen sind oft durch keine archäologischen Funde gestützt
und berücksichtigen kaum Informationen aus vefügbaren historischen Quellen. Sehr anschaulich ist in dieser Hinsicht der Fall von Tupinambá.
Unter Verwendung sowohl der Bayes’schen phylogenetischen Analyse als auch eines stochastischen Algorithmus, der phylogenetische Bäume
mittels Maximum-Likelihood-Schätzungen rekonstruiert, schlagen wir eine neue interne Klassifizierung der Tupí-Guaraní-Sprachen vor. Die
Ergebnisse unserer Analysen zeigen unter anderem, dass Tupinambá nicht als eine Guaraní-Sprache betrachtet werden sollte. In diesem Punkt
stimmen sie mit den Resultaten jüngster genetischer Forschung zu den TupíPopulationen überein.
Résumé
Les tentatives de classification des langues tupí-guaraní ont jusqu’à présent été incompatibles avec les preuves
archéologiques et nintègrent pas les informations provenant de sources historiques. Le cas du tupinambá est très illustratif à cet égard. En
utilisant à la fois l’analyse phylogénétique bayésienne et un algorithme stochastique qui reconstruit les arbres phylogénétiques en
s’appuyant sur l’estimation du maximum de vraisemblance, nous proposons une nouvelle classification interne de la famille linguistique
tupí-guaraní. Les résultats des analyses remettent en question les classifications précédentes en suggérant, entre autres, que le tupinambá
ne devrait pas être considéré comme une langue ńguaraníż. Ces résultats sont également conformes aux recherches génétiques les plus récentes
sur ces populations (dites ń tupi ż).
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Materials and methods
- 2.1Data and cognate assignment
- 2.2NeighborNet network
- 2.3Bayesian analyses
- 2.4Maximum likelihood analysis
- 3.Results
- 4.Previous classifications
- 4.1Sources of confusion
- 5.Conclusion
- Notes
References
References (124)
Aguilar, Ana Maria Gouveia Cavalcanti. 2015. Contribuições para os estudos histórico-comparativos sobre a diversificação do sub-ramo vi da família linguística Tupí-Guaraní. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília dissertation.
Almeida, Fernando Ozorio de & Eduardo Góes Neves. 2015. Evidências arqueológicas para a origem dos Tupí-Guaraní no leste da Amazônia. Mana 21(3). 499–525.
de Almeida Navarro, Eduardo. 2016. Método moderno de tupi antigo: A língua do Brasil dos primeiros séculos. Global 3rd edn.
Balée, William L. 1994. Footprints of the forest: Ka’apor ethnobotany – the historical ecology of plant utilization by an Amazonian people. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Bellwood, Peter. 2013. First migrants: Ancient migration in global perspective. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Berez-Kroeker, Andrea L., Lauren Gawne, Susan Smythe Kung, Barbara F. Kelly, Tyler Heston, Gary Holton, Peter Pulsifer, David I. Beaver, Shobhana Chelliah, Stanley Dubinsky et al. 2018. Reproducible research in linguistics: A position statement on data citation and attribution in our field. Linguistics 56(1). 1–18.
Bouckaert, Remco, Joseph Heled, Denise Kühnert, Tim Vaughan, Chieh-Hsi Wu, Dong Xie, Marc A. Suchard, Andrew Rambaut & Alexei J. Drummond. 2014. BEAST 2: a software platform for Bayesian evolutionary analysis. PLoS computational biology 10(4). e1003537.
Bouckaert, Remco, Philippe Lemey, Michael Dunn, Simon J. Greenhill, Alexander V. Alekseyenko, Alexei J. Drummond, Russell D. Gray, Marc A. Suchard & Quentin D. Atkinson. 2012. Mapping the origins and expansion of the Indo-European language family. Science 337(6097). 957–960.
Brochado, Jose Proenza. 1984. An ecological model of the spread of pottery and agriculture into Eastern South America. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign dissertation.
Cabral, Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara. 1995. Contact-induced language change in the Western Amazon: The non-genetic origin of the Kokama language. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh dissertation.
Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, Paolo Menozzi & Alberto Piazza. 1994. The history and geography of human genes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Cruz, Daniel Gabriel da. 2008. Lar, doce lar? arqueologia Tupi na bacia do Ji-Paraná (RO): Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia da Universidade de São Paulo MA thesis.
Dietrich, Wolf. 1990. More evidence for an internal classification of TupíGuaraní languages. Berlin: Gebr. Mann.
. 2017. As línguas Tupí-Guaraní bolivianas e as de Rondônia: Novas hipóteses sobre as origens. Unpublished manuscript.
Drude, Sebastian. 2006. On the position of the Awetí language in the Tupí family. In Guarani y “Maweti-Tupí-Guaraní”. estudios historicos y descriptivos sobre una familia lingüistica de America del Sur, 11–45. Berlin: Lit Verlag.
Drummond, Alexei J. & Remco R. Bouckaert. 2015. Bayesian evolutionary analysis with BEAST. Cambridge University Press.
Epps, Patience. 2009. Language classification, language contact, and Amazonian prehistory. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(2). 581–606.
Eriksen, Love. 2011. Nature and culture in prehistoric Amazonia using GIS to reconstruct ancient ethnogenetic processes from archaeology, linguistics, geography, and ethnohistory, vol. 121. Lund University.
Eriksen, Love & Ana Vilacy Galucio. 2014. The Tupian expansion. In Loretta O’Connor & Pieter Muysken (eds.), The native languages of South America, 177–199. Cambridge.
Ewens, Warren J. & Gregory R. Grant. 2006. Statistical methods in bioinformatics: An introduction. Springer Science & Business Media.
Felsenstein, Joseph. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39(4). 783–791.
Ferraz Gerardi, Fabrício, Stanislav Reichert, Verena Blaschke, Eric DeMattos, Zhuge Gao, Mihai Manolescu & Nianheng Wu. 2020. TuLeD: Tupían Lexical Database. [URL]. Forthcoming.
Figueira, Luis & Julius Platzmann. 1687 (1878). Grammatica da lingua do Brasil. Leipzig: BG Teubner.
Forkel, Robert, Johann-Mattis List, Michael Cysouw, Christoph Rzymski, & Simon J Greenhill. 2018. cldf/cldf: CLDF 1.0.1 (Version v1.0.1). Zenodo.
Forline, Louis Carlos. 1997. The persistence and cultural transformation of the Guajá Indians: Foragers of Maranhao State, Brazil. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida dissertation. Unpublished PhD thesis.
Forster, Peter & Colin Renfrew. 2006. Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
Gallois, Dominique Tilkin. 1980. Contribuição ao estudo do povoamento indígena da Guiana Brasileira: Um caso específico, os Waiãpi. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo MA thesis.
Gomes, Mércio Pereira. 1988. Os índios e o Brasil: Ensaio sobre um holocausto e sobre uma nova possibilidade de convivência. Petrópolis: Vozes.
. 1991. O povo Guajá e as condições reais para sua sobrevivência. Centro Ecumenico de Documentacao e Informacao de São Paulo.
Greenhill, Simon J. 2015. Language phylogenies. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 208–229. Routledge.
Greenhill, Simon J. & Russell D. Gray. 2012. Basic vocabulary and Bayesian phylolinguistics: Issues of understanding and representation. Diachronica 29(4). 523–537.
Greenhill, Simon J., Chieh-Hsi Wu, Xia Hua, Michael Dunn, Stephen C. Levinson & Russell D. Gray. 2017. Evolutionary dynamics of language systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(42). E8822–E8829.
Guindon, Stéphane, Jean-François Dufayard, Vincent Lefort, Maria Anisi-mova, Wim Hordijk & Olivier Gascuel. 2010. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: Assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Systematic Biology 59(3). 307–321.
Hamming, Richard W. 1950. Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell Labs Technical Journal 29(2). 147–160.
Harding, E. F. 1971. The probabilities of rooted tree-shapes generated by random bifurcation. Advances in Applied Probability 3(1). 44–77.
Harmon, Luke. 2018. Phylogenetic comparative methods: Learning from trees. Privately published. [URL]
Holland, Barbara R., Katharina T. Huber, Andreas Dress & Vincent Moulton. 2002. δ plots: A tool for analyzing phylogenetic distance data. Molecular Biology and Evolution 19(12). 2051–2059.
Huson, Daniel H. & David Bryant. 2006. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23(2). 254–267.
Jäger, Gerhard. 2015. Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(41). 12752–12757.
Jäger, Gerhard & Johann-Mattis List. 2016. Statistical and computational elaborations of the classical comparative method. Unpublished manuscript.
Jäger, Gerhard & Søren Wichmann. 2016. Inferring the world tree of languages from word lists. In Seán Roberts, Christine Cuskley, Luke McCrohon, Lluís Barceló-Coblijn, Olga Fehér & Tessa Verhoef (eds.), The evolution of language: Proceedings of the 11th international conference (evolangx11).
Kolipakam, Vishnupriya, Fiona M. Jordan, Michael Dunn, Simon J. Greenhill, Remco Bouckaert, Russell D. Gray & Annemarie Verkerk. 2018. A Bayesian phylogenetic study of the Dravidian language family. Royal Society Open Science 5(3). 1–17.
Kracke, Waud H. 1978. Force and persuasion: Leadership in an Amazonian society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kracke, Waud H. & Mbahiranga Ivaga’nga. 2005. A posição histórica dos Parintintin na evolução das culturas Tupí-Guaraní. In Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara Cabral & A. D. Rodrigues (eds.), Trabalho apresentado no encontro internacional sobre as línguas e culturas dos povos Tupi. Laboratório de línguas indígenas, instituto linguistico, UNB. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília.
Kruschke, John. 2015. Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan. Academic Press.
Lewis, M Paul, Gary F. Simons & Charles D. Fennig. 2009. Ethnologue: Languages of the world, vol. 161. Dallas, TX: SIL international. [URL]
Lewis, Paul O. 2001. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Systematic biology 50(6). 913–925.
List, Johann-Mattis. 2016. Beyond cognacy: Historical relations between words and their implication for phylogenetic reconstruction. Journal of Language Evolution 1(2). 119–136.
List, Johann-Mattis, Philippe Lopez & Eric Bapteste. 2016. Using sequence similarity networks to identify partial cognates in multilingual wordlists. Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) 21. 599–605.
Johann-Mattis List, Cormac Anderson, Tiago Tresoldi, Christoph Rzymski, Simon J Greenhill, & Robert Forkel. 2019. cldf/clts: Cross-Linguistic Transcription Systems (Version v1.2.0) [Data set]. Zenodo.
List, Johann Mattis & Rzymski, Christoph & Greenhill, Simon & Schweikhard, Nathanael & Pianykh, Kristina & Tjuka, Annika & Wu, Mei-Shin & Hundt, Carolin & Tresoldi, Tiago & Forkel, Robert (eds.) 2020. Concepticon 2.4.0. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. (Available online at [URL], Accessed on 2020-11-16.)
Mallory, James P. 1997. The homelands of the Indo-Europeans. In Roger Blench & Matthew Spriggs (eds.), Archaeology and language I: Theoretical and methodological orientations, 93–121. Routledge.
Marçoli, Osmar et al. 2018. Estudo comparativo dos dialetos da língua kawahib (Tupi-Guarani) tenharim, jiahui e amondawa. Campinas: Universidade de Campinas MA thesis.
McMahon, April & Robert McMahon. 2005. Language classification by numbers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Meira, Sérgio & Sebastian Drude. 2015. A summary reconstruction of Proto-Mawetí-Guaraní segmental phonology. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Ciências Humanas 10(2). 275–296.
Mello, Antônio A. S. & Andreas Kneip. 2006. Evidências linguísticas que apontam para a origem dos povos Tupi-Guarani no leste amazônico. In International congress of Americanists, vol. 521.
Mello, Antônio Augusto Souza. 2000. Estudo histórico da família linguística Tupí-Guaraní: Aspectos fonológicos e lexicais. Florianópolis: Universidade federal de Santa Catarina dissertation.
. 2002. Evidências fonológicas e lexicais para o sub-agrupamento interno Tupí-Guaraní. Línguas Indígenas Brasileiras. Fonologia, Gramática e História. Atas do I Encontro Internacional do GTLI da ANPOLL. Editora Universitária UFPA.
Mello, Antônio Augusto Souza & Andreas Kneip. 2017. Novas evidências linguísticas (e algumas arqueológicas) que apontam para a origem dos povos Tupí-Guaraní no leste amazônico. Literatura y lingüística 361. 299–312.
Menendez, H. 1981. Uma contribuição para a etno-história da área Tapajós-Madeira. Revista do Museu Paulista Sao Paulo 281. 289–388.
Métraux, Alfred. 1927. Migrations historiques des Tupi-Guarani. Journal de la Société des Américanistes 19(1). 1–45.
Michael, Lev David, Natalia Chousou-Polydouri, Keith Bartolomei, Erin Donnelly, Vivian Wauters, Sérgio Meira & Zachary O’hagan. 2015. A Bayesian phylogenetic classification of Tupí-Guaraní. LIAMES 15(2). 193–221.
Migliazza, Ernest C. 1982. Linguistic prehistory and the refuge model in Amazonia. In G. T. Prance (ed.), Biological diversification in the tropics, 497–519. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Miller, Eurico Theofilo. 2009. A cultura cerâmica do tronco Tupí no alto Ji-Paraná, Rondônia, Brasil: Algumas reflexões teóricas, hipotéticas e conclusivas. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Antropológica 1(1). 35–136.
Nguyen, Lam-Tung, Heiko A. Schmidt, Arndt von Haeseler & Bui Quang Minh. 2014. IQ-TREE: A Fast and Effective Stochastic Algorithm for Estimating Maximum-Likelihood Phylogenies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 32(1). 268–274. .
Nichols, Johanna & Tandy Warnow. 2008. Tutorial on computational linguistic phylogeny. Language and Linguistics Compass 2(5). 760–820.
Nimuendajú, Curt. 1924. Os índios Parintintin do rio Madeira. Journal de la Société des Américanistes 161. 201–278.
Nimuendaju, Curt. 1948a. The Cawahib, Parintintin and their neighbors. In Julian H. Steward (ed.), Handbook of South American Indians, vol. 31, 283–297. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.
. 1948b. The Guajá. In Julian H. Steward (ed.), Handbook of South American Indians, vol. 31, 135–136. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.
Noelli, Francisco Silva. 1996. As hipóteses sobre o centro de origem e rotas de expansão dos Tupí. Revista de antropologia 39(2). 7–53.
. 1998. The Tupí: Explaining origin and expansions in terms of archaeology and of historical linguistics. Antiquity 72(277). 648–663.
Nunn, Charles L. 2011. The comparative approach in evolutionary anthropology and biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pagel, Mark. 2000. Maximum-likelihood models for glottochronology and for reconstructing linguistic phylogenies. In Colin Renfrew, April McMahon & Lary Trask (eds.), Time depth in historical linguistics, vol. 11, 189–207. Cambridge: The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
Pagel, Mark, Quentin D. Atkinson, Andreea S. Calude & Andrew Meade. 2013. Ultraconserved words point to deep language ancestry across Eurasia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110(21). 8471–8476.
Pagel, Mark, Quentin D. Atkinson & Andrew Meade. 2007. Frequency of word-use predicts rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European history. Nature 449(7163). 717–720.
Ramallo, Virginia, Rafael Bisso-Machado, Claudio Bravi, Michael D. Coble, Francisco M. Salzano, Tábita Hünemeier & Maria Cátira Bortolini. 2013. Demographic expansions in South America: Enlightening a complex scenario with genetic and linguistic data. American journal of physical anthropology 150(3). 453–463.
Ramirez, Henri. 2006. As línguas indígenas do Alto Madeira: Estatuto atual e bibliografia básica. Língua Viva 1(1). 1–16.
Ramirez, Henri, Valdir Vegini & Maria Cristina Victorino de França. 2017. O Warázu do Guaporé (Tupi-Guaraní): Primeira descrição linguística. LIAMES 17(2). 411–506.
Rodrigues, Arion D. 1958. Classification of Tupí-Guaraní. International Journal of American Linguistics 24(3). 231–234.
Rodrigues, Aryon D. & Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara Cabral. 2002. Revendo a classificação interna da família Tupí-Guaraní. Línguas Indígenas Brasileiras. Fonologia, Gramática e História, Atas do I Encontro Internacional do GTLI da ANPOLL.
. 2012. Tupían. In Lyle Campbell & Verónica Grondona (eds.), The Indigenous Languages of South America, 495–574. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna. 1984. Relações internas na família lingüística Tupí-Guaraní. Revista de antropologia 27/281. 33–53.
. 1994. Línguas brasileiras: Para o conhecimento das línguas indígenas, vol. 111. São Paulo: Edições Loyola.
. 2000. Hipótese sobre as migrações dos três subconjuntos meridionais da família Tupi-Guarani. In Atas do ii congresso nacional da abralin, 1596–1605. Florianópolis: Associação Brasileira de Lingüística.
Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna & Wolf Dietrich. 1997. On the linguistic relationship between Mawé and Tupí-Guaraní. Diachronica 14(2). 265–304.
Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna, Arnaldo Hauptmann & Thekla Hartmann. 1964. A classificação do tronco lingüístico tupi. Revista de Antropologia 12(1/2). 99–104.
Rodrigues, Aryon DallIgna. 2007. Tupi languages in Rondônia and in Eastern Bolívia. In W. Leo Wetzels (ed.), Language endangerment and endangered languages: Linguistic and anthropological studies with special emphasis on the languages and cultures of the andean-amazonian border area. Indigenous Languages of Latin America series (ILLA), 355–363. Leiden: CNWS Publications.
Rose, François. 2011. Grammaire del l’émérillon teko, une langue Tupí-Guaraní de Guyane Française. Peeters.
Rosenberg, Noah A., Jonathan K. Pritchard, James L. Weber, Howard M. Cann, Kenneth K. Kidd, Lev A. Zhivotovsky & Marcus W. Feldman. 2002. Genetic structure of human populations. Science 298(5602). 2381–2385.
Sampaio, Wany Bernadete de Araujo. 1997. Estudo comparativo sincrônico entre o parintintin (tenharim) e o uru-eu-uau-uau (amondava): Contribuições para uma revisão na classificação das línguas tupí-kawahib. Campinas: Universidade de Campinas MA thesis.
Sampaio, WBA. 2001. As línguas tupí-kawahib: Um estudo sistemático e filogenético. Rondônia: Universidade de Rondônia dissertation.
Schleicher, Charles Owen. 1998. Comparative and internal reconstruction of the Tupi-Guarani language family. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan at Ann Arbor PhD thesis.
Corrêa-da Silva, Beatriz Carretta. 1997. Urubu-ka’apor–da gramática à história: A trajetória de um povo. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília MA thesis.
. 2000. Hipóteses sobre a história lingüística kaapór. II Congresso da Associação Brasileira de Lingüística e XIV Instituto Lingüístico. ABRALIN.
. 2007. Mais fundamentos para a hipótese de rodrigues (1984/1985) de um Proto-Awetí-Tupí-Guaraní. In Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara Rodrigues, AD; Cabral (ed.), Línguas e culturas tupí, vol. 11, 219–240. Campinas, SP: Nimuendajú.
. 2011. Mawé/Awetí/Tupí-Guaraní: Relações linguísticas e implicações históricas. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília dissertation.
Silva, Marcos Araújo Castro, Kelly Nunes, Renan Barbosa Lemes, Àlex Mas-Sandoval, Carlos Eduardo Guerra Amorim, Jose Eduardo Krieger, José Geraldo Mill, Francisco Mauro Salzano, Maria Cátira Bortolini, Alexandre da Costa Pereira et al. 2020. Genomic insight into the origins and dispersal of the Brazilian coastal natives. PNAS 117(5). 2372–2377.
da Silveira, Maura Imazio, Maria Christina Leal Rodrigues, Elisangela Oliveira & Louis-Martin Losier. 2008. Seqüência cronológica de ocupação na area do Salobo (Pará). Revista de Arqueologia 21(1). 61–84.
Sokal, Robert R. & Charles Michner. 1958. A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationship. University of Kansas science bulletin 281. 1409–1438.
de Sousa, Gabriel Soares. 1971. Tratado descritivo do Brasil em 1587. São Paulo: Companhia editora nacional.
Treece, Dave. 1987. Bound in misery and iron: The impact of the Grande Carajás Program on the Indians of Brazil. London: Survival International.
Urban, Greg. 1996. On the geographical origins and dispersion of Tupían languages. Revista de Antropologia 39(2). 61–104.
. 1998. A história da cultura Brasileira segundo as línguas nativas. In Manuela Cerneiro da Cunha (ed.), História dos índios no Brasil. São Paulo: Companhia das letras, 87–102. Companhia das Letras.
Vieira, Antônio. 1997. Cartas. vol. 1. organização de j.l. azevedo. Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional/Casa da Moeda.
Walker, Robert S., Søren Wichmann, Thomas Mailund & Curtis J. Atkisson. 2012. Cultural phylogenetics of the Tupí language family in lowland South America. PloS one 7(4). e35025.
Wichmann, Søren. 2020. How to distinguish languages and dialects. Computational Linguistics 45(4). 823–831.
Wichmann, Sören, André Müller & Viveka Velupillai. 2010. Homelands of the worlds language families: A quantitative approach. Diachronica 27(2). 247–276.
Wichmann, Søren, André Müller, Viveka Velupillai et al. 2011. The ASJP Database (version 14). [URL]. The ASJP Database (version 14).
Cited by (7)
Cited by seven other publications
Carvalho, Fernando O. de
Castro e Silva, Marcos Araújo & Tábita Hünemeier
Dhakal, Dubi Nanda, Johann-Mattis List, Seán G Roberts & Michael Dunn
Carvalho, Fernando
Ferraz Gerardi, Fabrício, Tiago Tresoldi, Carolina Coelho Aragon, Stanislav Reichert, Jonas Gregorio de Souza, Francisco Silva Noelli & Søren Wichmann
Gerardi, Fabrício Ferraz, Carolina Coelho Aragon & Stanislav Reichert
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
