Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40003695›Full record

ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Xin Wang, Yinggang Lei, Qiang Fu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Xin WangState Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology and CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4053-5515
Yinggang LeiSchool of Materials Science and Engineering, Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471000, China.
Qiang FuState Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology and CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China.

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program of China 2024YFF0807601National Natural Science Foundation of China 42288201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"How old are angiosperms" is a frequently asked but still unanswered question. Although the underlying reason includes a lack of consensus on the criterion for fossil angiosperms, limited fossil finds, and other factors, the final answer to the question apparently lies in fossils, not wrangling among different schools. The currently mainstream idea in palaeobotany is that angiosperms cannot have existed earlier than the Early Cretaceous. This 64-year-old stereotype was recently iterated again in 2017. However, another hard-to-ignore fact is that this view is challenged by increasing pre-Cretaceous fossil evidence of angiosperms as well as molecular clock estimates. Here, we report a Permian angiosperm,

Indexed as

angiospermChinaevolutionPalaeozoicPermianYuzhoua

Identifiers

PMID40003695
PMCPMC11856813

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.