Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39124280›Full record

ArticlePlants (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Xin Wang, Li-Jun Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

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

2 authors.

Xin WangState Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4053-5515
Li-Jun ChenShenzhen Key Laboratory for Orchid Conservation and Utilization, National Orchid Conservation Center of China and Orchid Conservation & Research Center of Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518114, China.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 42288201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The flowering plants (angiosperms) are the dominant and defining group of the Earth ecosystems today. However, from which group and by what way flowers, especially their gynoecia (the key characteristic organs of angiosperms), are derived have been key questions in botany, and have remained unanswered despite botanists' efforts over centuries. Such an embarrassing situation can be attributed to the lack of plants with partially enclosed ovules, which are supposed fill a position between gymnosperms and angiosperms. Here, we report a fossil plant that has apparent coniferous vegetative and reproductive characters but has a single seed partially wrapped by the subtending bract. Such a morphology suggests that a carpel of some angiosperms is equivalent to a lateral appendage (a bract plus its axillary seed) of this fossil. Such a non-traditional interpretation of the homology of angiosperm carpels is compatible with various new progresses made in botany and is in line with Tomlinson's recent hypothesis. Together with other fossil evidence reported recently, it appears that gynoecia in angiosperms are derived in multiple ways.

Indexed as

angiospermsbractcarpelconifersCretaceoushomologyplacenta

Identifiers

PMID39124280
PMCPMC11313709

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.