Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39042341›Full record

ArticleBotanical studies2024

Camellia neriifolia and Camellia ilicifolia (Theaceae) as separate species: evidence from morphology, anatomy, palynology, molecular systematics.

Zhaohui Ran, Zhi Li, Xu Xiao, Ming Tang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Botanical studies, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Phenotypic Diversity Analysis in the Sect.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
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

4 authors.

Zhaohui RanCollege of Forestry, Guizhou University, Guiyang, 550025, China.
Zhi LiCollege of Forestry, Guizhou University, Guiyang, 550025, China. zli7@gzu.edu.cn.
Xu XiaoCollege of Forestry, Guizhou University, Guiyang, 550025, China.
Ming TangCollege of Forestry, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang, 330045, China. tangming@jxau.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8419-0996

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 31960043Natural Science Research Project of Guizhou Province 2022 (072)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe systematic status of sect. Tuberculata and its taxonomy have recently attracted considerable attention. However, the different bases for defining the characteristics of sect. Tuberculata has led to many disagreements among the plants in this group. Camellia neriifolia and Camellia ilicifolia have been the subject of taxonomic controversy and have been treated as different species or varieties of the same species. Therefore, it is important to use multiple methods, i.e., integrative taxonomy, to determine the taxonomic status of C. neriifolia and C. ilicifolia. This is the first study to systematically explore the taxonomic position of these two plants on the basis of Morphology, Anatomy, Palynology and Molecular Systematics.

resultsExtensive specimen reviews and field surveys showed that many differences exist in C. neriifolia and C. ilicifolia, such as the number of trunk (heavily debarked vs. slightly peeling), leaf type (smooth thin leathery, shiny vs. smooth leathery, obscure or slightly shiny), leaf margin (entire vs. serrate), flower type (subsessile vs. sessile), number of styles (3-4 vs. 3), and sepal (ovate vs. round). Moreover, C. neriifolia has a more distinctive faint yellow flower color, and trunk molting was more severe in C. neriifolia than that in C. ilicifolia. In addition, micromorphological analysis of the leaf epidermis showed that the two species differed in the anticlinal wall, stomatal apparatus, and stomatal cluster, and pollen morphology analyses based on pollen size, germination furrow, and polar and equatorial axes showed that they are both distinct from each other. The results of the phylogenetic tree constructed based on the whole chloroplast genome, protein-coding genes, and ITS2 showed that both C. ilicifolia and C. neriifolia were clustered in different branches and gained high support.

conclusionsThe results combine morphology, anatomy, palynology, and molecular systematics to treat both C. neriifolia and C. ilicifolia as separate species in the sect. Tuberculata, and the species names continue to be used as they were previously. In conclusion, clarifying the taxonomic status of C. neriifolia and C. ilicifolia deepens our understanding of the systematic classification of sect. Tuberculata.

Indexed as

Camellia ilicifoliaCamellia neriifoliaMolecular systematicsSeparate speciesTaxonomic revision

Identifiers

PMID39042341
PMCPMC11266325

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.