Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38674463›Full record

ReviewPlants (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Polycotyly: How Little Do We Know?

Yong-Bi Fu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yong-Bi FuPlant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 107 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0X2, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3106-1247
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada · CA

Funding

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada An AAFC A-base funding
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polycotyly, an interesting characteristic of seed-bearing dicotyledonous plants with more than two cotyledons, represents one of the least explored plant characters for utilization, even though cotyledon number was used to classify flowering plants in 1682. Gymnosperm and angiosperm species are generally known to have one or two cotyledons, but scattered reports exist on irregular cotyledon numbers in many plant species, and little is known about the extent of polycotyly in plant taxa. Here, we attempt to update the documentation of reports on polycotyly in plant species and highlight some lines of research for a better understanding of polycotyly. This effort revealed 342 angiosperm species of 237 genera in 80 (out of 416) families and 160 gymnosperm species of 26 genera in 6 (out of 12) families with reported or cited polycotyly. The most advanced research included the molecular-based inference of the phylogeny of flowering plants, showing a significant departure from the cotyledon-based classification of angiosperm plants, and the application of genetic cotyledon mutants as tools to clone and characterize the genes regulating cotyledon development. However, there were no reports on breeding lines with a 100% frequency of polycotyly. Research is needed to discover plant species with polycotyly and to explore the nature, development, genetics, evolution, and potential use of polycotyly.

Indexed as

cotyledon developmentcotyledon numberpolycotyledonpolycotyly breedingpolycotyly evolutionpolycotyly geneticspolycotyly origintricotyledon

Identifiers

PMID38674463
PMCPMC11054791
OpenAlexW4394619925

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.