ArticleAnnals of botany2022
Evolution of the coniferous seed scale.
Article in Annals of botany, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phosphorylation of the transcription factor TgWRKY47 by TgSnRK1 modulates cone enlargement in the gymnosperm Torreya grandis.The New phytologist · 2026Article
- Revisiting the enigmatic Cheirolepidiaceae: origins, phylogenetic relationships, and a new whole-plant concept.Annals of botany · 2026Article
- Early evolutionary history of the seed.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026Review
- The Systematics and Evolution of Gymnosperms with an Emphasis on a Few Problematic Taxa.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Reproductive biology of the "Brazilian pine" (Araucaria angustifolia-Araucariaceae): the pollen tube growth and the seed cone development.Plant reproduction · 2024Article
- Plant Seeds and Floristic Preservation in the Anthropocene.Annals of botany · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Florin model is the commonly accepted theory of coniferous seed scale evolution. It describes the derivation of extant seed scale morphology from the morphology of fossil conifers via the reduction of complex to simple axillary structures. In this framework the seed scale is composed of a reduced lateral shoot with fertile and sterile appendages which are interpreted as leaf homologues. SCOPE: The Florin model has three crucial problems that we address here: (1) the original derivation series does not take the ontogeny of extant conifers into account, (2) it cannot explain the morphology of all extant conifers and (3) Taxaceae were originally excluded. Examination of seed cones of extant conifers shows that ovules occur in three different positions in the cone: in an axillary position, replacing a leaf or terminating the cone axis. By interpreting the fertile appendage or seed-bearing structure as a leaf, not all positions are possible. The exclusion of Taxaceae from conifers is in stark contrast to recent molecular phylogenetic studies, which include Taxaceae in conifers as sister to Cupressaceae. Therefore, the Florin model does not offer an adequate explanation for taxaceous morphology.
conclusionWe conclude that the seed-bearing structure of conifers cannot be interpreted as homologous to a leaf. In the interpretation we present here, the seed-bearing structure is the modified funiculus of the ovule, multiples of which laterally fuse to form the seed scale. The seed scales of all extant conifers can be derived from a Cunninghamia-like morphology via fusion and reduction of individual funiculi.
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.