Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23299993›Full record

ReviewAnnals of botany2013

Anatomical aspects of angiosperm root evolution.

James L Seago, Danilo D Fernando

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of botany, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The Shoot Apical Meristem: An Evolutionary Molding of Higher Plants.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Transcriptional analysis ofFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. The Full-Size ABCG Transporter ofFrontiers in plant science · 2020
    Article
  12. Roots Structure and Development ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Matching roots to their environment.Annals of botany · 2013
    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.

James L SeagoDepartment of Biological Sciences, SUNY at Oswego, Oswego, NY 13126, USA. james.seago@oswego.edu
Danilo D Fernando

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsAnatomy had been one of the foundations in our understanding of plant evolutionary trends and, although recent evo-devo concepts are mostly based on molecular genetics, classical structural information remains useful as ever. Of the various plant organs, the roots have been the least studied, primarily because of the difficulty in obtaining materials, particularly from large woody species. Therefore, this review aims to provide an overview of the information that has accumulated on the anatomy of angiosperm roots and to present possible evolutionary trends between representatives of the major angiosperm clades. SCOPE: This review covers an overview of the various aspects of the evolutionary origin of the root. The results and discussion focus on angiosperm root anatomy and evolution covering representatives from basal angiosperms, magnoliids, monocots and eudicots. We use information from the literature as well as new data from our own research. KEY

findingsThe organization of the root apical meristem (RAM) of Nymphaeales allows for the ground meristem and protoderm to be derived from the same group of initials, similar to those of the monocots, whereas in Amborellales, magnoliids and eudicots, it is their protoderm and lateral rootcap which are derived from the same group of initials. Most members of Nymphaeales are similar to monocots in having ephemeral primary roots and so adventitious roots predominate, whereas Amborellales, Austrobaileyales, magnoliids and eudicots are generally characterized by having primary roots that give rise to a taproot system. Nymphaeales and monocots often have polyarch (heptarch or more) steles, whereas the rest of the basal angiosperms, magnoliids and eudicots usually have diarch to hexarch steles.

conclusionsAngiosperms exhibit highly varied structural patterns in RAM organization; cortex, epidermis and rootcap origins; and stele patterns. Generally, however, Amborellales, magnoliids and, possibly, Austrobaileyales are more similar to eudicots, and the Nymphaeales are strongly structurally associated with the monocots, especially the Acorales.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionMagnoliopsidaMeristemPhylogenyPlant EpidermisPlant RootsAnatomyangiospermscortexepidermisevolutionrootsvascular tissue

Identifiers

PMID23299993
PMCPMC3698381

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.