Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23846861›Full record

ReviewProtoplasma2014

The problem of morphogenesis: unscripted biophysical control systems in plants.

Philip M Lintilhac

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Protoplasma, 2014. 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. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Whole-Tissue Three-Dimensional Imaging of Rice at Single-Cell Resolution.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

1 author.

Philip M LintilhacDepartment of Plant Biology, The University of Vermont, 63 Carrigan Drive, Burlington, VT, 05405, USA, Philip.Lintilhac@uvm.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relative simplicity of plant developmental systems, having evolved within the universal constraints imposed by the plant cell wall, may allow us to outline a consistent developmental narrative that is not currently possible in the animal kingdom. In this article, I discuss three aspects of the development of the mature form in plants, approaching them in terms of the role played by the biophysics and mechanics of the cell wall during growth. First, I discuss axis extension in terms of a loss of stability-based model of cell wall stress relaxation and I introduce the possibility that cell wall stress relaxation can be modeled as a binary switch. Second, I consider meristem shape and surface conformation as a controlling element in the morphogenetic circuitry of plant organogenesis at the apex. Third, I approach the issue of reproductive differentiation and propose that the multicellular sporangium, a universal feature of land plants, acts as a stress-mechanical lens, focusing growth-induced stresses to create a geometrically precise mechanical singularity that can serve as an inducing developmental signal triggering the initiation of reproductive differentiation. Lastly, I offer these three examples of biophysically integrated control processes as entry points into a narrative that provides an independent, nongenetic context for understanding the evolution of the apoplast and the morphogenetic ontogeny of multicellular land plants.

Indexed as

Plant Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsCell WallEvolution, MolecularPlant CellsPlant Development

Identifiers

PMID23846861
PMCPMC3893470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.