Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37478306›Full record

ReviewAnnals of botany2023

Pseudanthia in angiosperms: a review.

Jakub Baczyński, Regine Claßen-Bockhoff

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of botany, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Jakub BaczyńskiInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biology, Biological and Chemical Research Centre, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5272-9053
Regine Claßen-BockhoffInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEUniversity of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPseudanthia or 'false flowers' are multiflowered units that resemble solitary flowers in form and function. Over the last century the term 'pseudanthium' has been applied to a wide array of morphologically divergent blossoms, ranging from those with easily noticeable florets to derived, reduced units in which individual flowers become almost indistinguishable. Although initially admired mostly by botanists, the diversity and widespread distribution of pseudanthia across angiosperms has already made them a fascinating topic for evolutionary and developmental comparative studies. SCOPE: This review synthesizes historical and current concepts on the biology of pseudanthia. Our first aim is to establish a clear, operational definition of pseudanthium and disentangle common terminological misconceptions surrounding that term. Our second aim is to summarize knowledge of the morphological and developmental diversity of pseudanthia and embed it within a modern phylogenetic framework. Lastly, we want to provide a comprehensive overview on the evolution and ecological importance of pseudanthia and outline perspectives for future studies.

conclusionsThe understanding of pseudanthia has changed multiple times and reflects three different interpretations of their 'flower-like' qualities: developmental (similarity in structure), figural (similarity in form and function) and phylogenetic (homology between angiosperm flowers and monoecious reproductive shoots in gymnosperms). Here, we propose to narrow the term pseudanthium to multiflowered blossoms resembling zoophilous flowers in form, i.e. in being structurally subdivided in a showy periphery and a reproductive centre. According to this definition, pseudanthia sensu stricto evolved independently in at least 41 angiosperm families. The recurrent acquisition of pseudanthia sensu stricto in all major lineages of flowering plants indicates repeated interactions between developmental constraints (smallness of flowers, meristematic conditions) and selective pressures, such as demands of pollinators and/or environmental conditions.

Indexed as

MagnoliopsidaBiological EvolutionFlowersHumansPhylogenyReproductionAggregationdevelopmentdivision of labourevolutionfloral unitflowering plantsgenetic regulationinflorescencemeristem conditionspollination biologyray flowershowy bract

Identifiers

PMID37478306
PMCPMC10583202
OpenAlexW4384945437

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.