Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19515690›Full record

ReviewAnnals of botany2009

Recent advances in the study of gynodioecy: the interface of theory and empiricism.

David E McCauley, Maia F Bailey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of botany, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Genetic control of male production inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David E McCauleyDepartment of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235, USA. david.e.mccauley@vanderbilt.edu
Maia F Bailey

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this review we report on recent literature concerned with studies of gynodioecy, or the co-occurrence of female and hermaphrodite individuals in natural plant populations. Rather than review this literature in its entirety, our focus is on the interplay between theoretical and empirical approaches to the study of gynodioecy. SCOPE: Five areas of active inquiry are considered. These are the cost of restoration, the influence of population structure on spatial sex-ratio variation, the influence of inbreeding on sex expression, the signature of cyto-nuclear coevolution on the mitochondrial genome, and the consequences of mitochondrial paternal leakage.

conclusionsRecent advances in the study of gynodioecy have been made by considering both the ecology of female:hermaphrodite fitness differences and the genetics of sex expression. Indeed theory has guided empiricism and empiricism has guided theory. Future advances will require that some of the methods currently available only for model organisms be applied to a wider range of species.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalBiological EvolutionFlowersInbreedingMitochondriaPopulation Dynamics

Identifiers

PMID19515690
PMCPMC2729626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.