Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35142915›Full record

ArticleBotanical studies2022

Seed viability testing for research and conservation of epiphytic and terrestrial orchids.

Namrata Pradhan, Xuli Fan, Francesco Martini, Huayang Chen, Hong Liu, Jiangyun Gao, Uromi Manage Goodale

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Botanical studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Namrata Pradhan *Guangxi Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Conservation, College of Forestry, Guangxi University, Daxuedonglu 100, Nanning, Guangxi, 530004, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9171-8867
Xuli Fan *Lab of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Chenggong Campus, Yunnan University, University Town, Chenggong New District, Kunming, Yunnan, 650504, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8194-3064
Francesco MartiniGuangxi Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Conservation, College of Forestry, Guangxi University, Daxuedonglu 100, Nanning, Guangxi, 530004, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0806-3930
Huayang ChenState Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100093, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4689-812X
Hong LiuInternational Center for Tropical Botany, Department of Earth and Environment, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street Miami, Florida, 33199, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7814-5512
Jiangyun GaoLab of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Chenggong Campus, Yunnan University, University Town, Chenggong New District, Kunming, Yunnan, 650504, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1541-5922
Uromi Manage GoodaleGuangxi Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Conservation, College of Forestry, Guangxi University, Daxuedonglu 100, Nanning, Guangxi, 530004, People's Republic of China. uromi.manage.goodale@outlook.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3111-8899
Guangxi University · CNYunnan University · CNChinese Academy of Sciences · CNFlorida International University · US

Funding

Bagui Scholarship C33600992001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeed viability testing is essential in plant conservation and research. Seed viability testing determines the success of ex-situ conservation efforts, such as seed banking but commonly testing protocols of orchids lack consistency and accuracy, therefore, there is a need to select an appropriate and reliable viability test, especially when conducting comparative studies. Here, we evaluated the suitability of three seed viability tests, Evans blue test (EB), Fluorescein diacetate test (FDA) and Tetrazolium test (TTC), with and without sterilization, on seeds of 20 orchid species, which included five epiphytes and fifteen terrestrials, using both fresh seeds and seeds stored at - 18 ºC for 6 to 8 years.

resultsWe found that sterilization and lifeform of seeds affected seed viability across all tests but the storage time was not an influential factor. Sterilization negatively affected seed viability under EB and FDA test conditions but increased the detection of viable seeds in the TTC test in both epiphytic and terrestrial species. The EB test, when administered without sterilization provided the highest viability results. Being non-enzymatic unlike TTC and FDA tests, as expected, the EB test was the most reliable with similar results between sterilized and not sterilized seeds for most epiphytic and terrestrial species as well as when compared between groups.

conclusionsThe lifeform of the species and seed sterilization prior to testing are important influential factors in orchid seed viability testing. Since EB test was found to be reliable we recommend the EB test for seed viability assessment in orchids rather than the less reliable but commonly used TTC test, or the FDA test, which require more expensive and sophisticated instrumentation. Since storage time was not an influential factor in orchid seed viability testing, the recommendations of this study can be used for both fresh as well as long-term stored orchid seeds. This is helpful for research and especially for conservation measures such as seed banking. However, due to the species specificity of the bio-physiology of orchids, we call for comprehensive viability test assessment in the hyper diverse orchid family to be extended to a greater number of species to facilitate efficient conservation and research.

Indexed as

Epiphytic orchidsLifeformOrchid seedsPlant conservationSeed bankingSeed sterilizationSeed viability testTerrestrial orchids

Identifiers

PMID35142915
PMCPMC8831675
OpenAlexW4211072686

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.