ArticleAnnals of botany2020
Seed size, number and strategies in annual plants: a comparative functional analysis and synthesis.
Article in Annals of botany, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Plant response to nutrients differs among traits and depends on species' nutrient requirements.Annals of botany · 2025Article
- Reproductive height determines the loss of clonal grasses with nitrogen enrichment in a temperate grassland.Plant diversity · 2024Article
- A Glyphosate-Based Herbicide in Soil Differentially Affects Hormonal Homeostasis and Performance of Non-target Crop Plants.Frontiers in plant science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPlants depend fundamentally on establishment from seed. However, protocols in trait-based ecology currently estimate seed size but not seed number. This can be rectified. For annuals, seed number should simply be a positive function of vegetative biomass and a negative function of seed size.
methodsUsing published values of comparative seed number as the 'gold standard' and a large functional database, comparative seed yield and number per plant and per m2 were predicted by multiple regression. Subsequently, ecological variation in each was explored for English and Spanish habitats, newly calculated C-S-R strategies and changed abundance in the British flora. KEY
resultsAs predicted, comparative seed mass yield per plant was consistently a positive function of plant size and competitive ability, and largely independent of seed size. Regressions estimating comparative seed number included, additionally, seed size as a negative function. Relationships differed numerically between regions, habitats and C-S-R strategies. Moreover, some species differed in life history over their geographical range. Comparative seed yield per m2 was positively correlated with FAO crop yield, and increasing British annuals produced numerous seeds. Nevertheless, predicted values must be viewed as comparative rather than absolute: they varied according to the 'gold standard' predictor used. Moreover, regressions estimating comparative seed yield per m2 achieved low precision.
conclusionsFor the first time, estimates of comparative seed yield and number for >800 annuals and their predictor equations have been produced and the ecological importance of these regenerative traits has been illustrated. 'Regenerative trait-based ecology' remains in its infancy, with work needed on determinate vs. indeterminate flowering ('bet-hedging'), C-S-R methodologies, phylogeny, comparative seed yield per m2 and changing life history. Nevertheless, this has been a positive start and readers are invited to use estimates for >800 annuals, in the Supplementary data, to help advance 'regenerative trait-based ecology' to the next level.
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.