ReviewThe New phytologist2025
Cones and consequences: the false dichotomy of conifers vs broad-leaves has critical implications for research and modelling.
Review in The New phytologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Leaf Size in Conifers: Global Associations With Climate and Evolutionary History.Global change biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In plant science research and modelling, particularly from the northern hemisphere, the terms 'needle-leaved' and 'conifer' along with 'broad-leaved' and 'angiosperm' are often used synonymously, creating the false dichotomy that conifers are needle-leaved and angiosperms are broad-leaved. While these equivalences may be largely correct in the temperate northern hemisphere, they do not hold true in equatorial and southern hemisphere forests. Confounding needle-leaved conifers and broad-leaved angiosperms presents significant issues in empirical research and modelling. Here, we highlight the likely origins and impacts of misusing conifer-related terminology, the misinterpretation that ensues and its implications. We identify the issue of a focus on Pinaceae and coin the term 'Pinaceae panacea' to describe this. We provide recommendations for future research: from standardising the use of definitions to shifting away from using Pinaceae as a model group for all conifers.
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.