ReviewPlant diversity2024
Progress in systematics and biogeography of Orchidaceae.
Review in Plant diversity, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Niche evolution and asymmetric diversification in elm species (Ulmaceae).Plant diversity · 2026Article
- Comparative plastome analyses reveal life-form-associated selection signatures in Orchidaceae.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Unraveling the Genome of Epidendrum Fulgens: Demographic History and Gene Family Dynamics in a Resilient Neotropical Orchid.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
- The multichromosomal structure evolution ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Mycorrhizal communities in Orchidaceae are likely shaped by plant trophic mode and biogeography but not phylogeny.Plant diversity · 2026Article
- Delayed Self-Pollination as the Primary Reproductive Strategy inPlant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Orchid phylogenetics and evolution: history, current status and prospects.Annals of botany · 2025Review
- Review
- Comprehensive characterization and phylogenetic analysis of the complete plastomes of two ant-orchids, Caularthron bicornutum and Myrmecophila thomsoniana.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- Phylotranscriptomics reveals the phylogeny of Asparagales and the evolution of allium flavor biosynthesis.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Detailed biogeographical mapping as a useful novel tool for the conservation of endemic taxa: a case of study for Iberian orchids.Open research Europe · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Orchidaceae are one of the largest families of angiosperms in terms of species richness. In the last decade, numerous studies have delved into reconstructing the phylogenetic framework of Orchidaceae, leveraging data from plastid, mitochondrial and nuclear sources. These studies have provided new insights into the systematics, diversification and biogeography of Orchidaceae, establishing a robust foundation for future research. Nevertheless, pronounced controversies persist regarding the precise placement of certain lineages within these phylogenetic frameworks. To address these discrepancies and deepen our understanding of the phylogenetic structure of Orchidaceae, we provide a comprehensive overview and analysis of phylogenetic studies focusing on contentious groups within Orchidaceae since 2015, delving into discussions on the underlying reasons for observed topological conflicts. We also provide a novel phylogenetic framework at the subtribal level. Furthermore, we examine the tempo and mode underlying orchid species diversity from the perspective of historical biogeography, highlighting factors contributing to extensive speciation. Ultimately, we delineate avenues for future research aimed at enhancing our understanding of Orchidaceae phylogeny and diversity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.