Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31045221›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2019

Epidermal patterning and stomatal development in Gnetales.

Paula J Rudall, Callie L Rice

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of botany, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Paula J RudallRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, UK.
Callie L RiceRoyal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsThe gymnosperm order Gnetales, which has contentious phylogenetic affinities, includes three extant genera (Ephedra, Gnetum, Welwitschia) that are morphologically highly divergent and have contrasting ecological preferences: Gnetum occupies mesic tropical habitats, whereas Ephedra and Welwitschia occur in arid environments. Leaves are highly reduced in Ephedra, petiolate with a broad lamina in Gnetum and persistent and strap-like in Welwitschia. We investigate stomatal development and prepatterning stages in Gnetales, to evaluate the substantial differences among the three genera and compare them with other seed plants.

methodsPhotosynthetic organs of representative species were examined using light microscopy, scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. KEY

resultsStomata of all three genera possess lateral subsidiary cells (LSCs). LSCs of Ephedra are perigene cells derived from cell files adjacent to the stomatal meristemoids. In contrast, LSCs of Gnetum and Welwitschia are mesogene cells derived from the stomatal meristemoids; each meristemoid undergoes two mitoses to form a 'developmental triad', of which the central cell is the guard mother cell and the lateral pair are LSCs. Epidermal prepatterning in Gnetum undergoes a 'quartet' phase, in contrast with the linear development of Welwitschia. Quartet prepatterning in Gnetum resembles that of some angiosperms but they differ in later development.

conclusionsSeveral factors underpin the profound and heritable differences observed among the three genera of Gnetales. Stomatal development in Ephedra differs significantly from that of Gnetum and Welwitschia, more closely resembling that of other extant gymnosperms. Differences in epidermal prepatterning broadly reflect differences in growth habit between the three genera.

Indexed as

CycadopsidaMagnoliopsidaBiological EvolutionPhylogenySeedsEphedraGnetalesGnetumprepatterningstomatal developmentWelwitschia

Identifiers

PMID31045221
PMCPMC6676381

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.