ArticlePlant biology (Stuttgart, Germany)2020
Surprising absence of association between flower surface microstructure and pollination system.
Article in Plant biology (Stuttgart, Germany), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corolla traits and their osmophores in three neotropical Malpighiaceae: the putative impacts on plant-pollinator interactions.Die Naturwissenschaften · 2026Article
- Stacked scattering: The key to bright flowers lies in the mesophyll.American journal of botany · 2026Article
- Evolution of petal patterning: blooming floral diversity at the microscale.The New phytologist · 2025Review
- Osmophores and petal surface traits in Bignonieae species.Die Naturwissenschaften · 2023Article
- Slippery flowers as a mechanism of defence against nectar-thieving ants.Annals of botany · 2021Article
- Flower Color Evolution and the Evidence of Pollinator-Mediated Selection.Frontiers in plant science · 2021Review
- Atmospheric HPlanta · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The epidermal cells of flowers come in different shapes and have different functions, but how they evolved remains largely unknown. Floral micro-texture can provide tactile cues to insects, and increases in surface roughness by means of conical (papillose) epidermal cells may facilitate flower handling by landing insect pollinators. Whether flower microstructure correlates with pollination system remains unknown. Here, we investigate the floral epidermal microstructure in 29 (congeneric) species pairs with contrasting pollination system. We test whether flowers pollinated by bees and/or flies feature more structured, rougher surfaces than flowers pollinated by non-landing moths or birds and flowers that self-pollinate. In contrast with earlier studies, we find no correlation between epidermal microstructure and pollination system. The shape, cell height and roughness of floral epidermal cells varies among species, but is not correlated with pollinators at large. Intriguingly, however, we find that the upper (adaxial) flower surface that surrounds the reproductive organs and often constitutes the floral display is markedly more structured than the lower (abaxial) surface. We thus conclude that conical epidermal cells probably play a role in plant reproduction other than providing grip or tactile cues, such as increasing hydrophobicity or enhancing the visual signal.
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.