ArticleAnnals of botany2005
A morphological study of the Petunia integrifolia complex (Solanaceae).
Article in Annals of botany, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dissecting genetic diversity and genomic background ofHorticulture research · 2020Article
- Multiple markers, niche modelling, and bioregions analyses to evaluate the genetic diversity of a plant species complex.BMC evolutionary biology · 2017Article
- Phylogenetic analysis of the genus Petunia (Solanaceae) based on the sequence of the Hf1 gene.Journal of plant research · 2007Article
- Contribution of WUSCHEL-related homeobox (WOX) genes to identify the phylogenetic relationships among Petunia species.Genetics and molecular biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPetunia inflata has been treated taxonomically in various ways: it has been described as an independent species, treated as a synonym of P. integrifolia, and also regarded as a subspecies of P. integrifolia. The present study was designed to resolve the ambiguity involving the P. integrifolia complex (P. integrifolia plus P. inflata).
methodsTentative identification (either integrifolia group or inflata group) was carried out in the field based on the observation of live specimens at the restricted type localities. The accuracy of the tentative identification was later tested with principal component and cluster analyses of data obtained by measuring 21 morphological characters on cultivated live specimens sourced from 113 natural populations of the P. integrifolia complex in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. KEY
resultsThere was a clear, statistically significant gap between the morphological measurements of the two groups, ensuring the accuracy of identification carried out in the field except for a probable hybrid swarm. Previously, the condition of the pedicel in the fruiting state was considered an important character distinguishing between these two groups; however, the condition of the pedicel was rather variable in the integrifolia group. The two groups were found to have geographically distinct distributions: the integrifolia group occurred in southern regions, whereas the inflata group occurred in northern regions.
conclusionsBased on the available evidence, it is suggested that the two groups are allopatric species, P. integrifolia and P. inflata, in agreement with the opinion of Fries (1911).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.