Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40405415›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of botany2025

Stomatal distribution and post-fire recovery: Intra- and interspecific variation in plants of the pyrogenic Florida scrub.

Genevieve Triplett, Aaron S David

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of botany, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Genevieve TriplettUniversity of South Carolina, Columbia, 29208, SC, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-3384-5708
Aaron S DavidArchbold Biological Station, Venus, 33875, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

premiseAmphistomy, the presence of stomata on both leaf surfaces, can increase photosynthesis yet is uncommon across vascular plants. The relative infrequency of amphistomy is often attributed to high costs, such as transpirational water loss. The Florida scrub-a hot, dry, shrub-dominated habitat-historically has experienced frequent fire, yet decades of anthropogenic suppression coupled with the reintroduction of prescribed burns has led to varied fire regimes. In this study, we investigated the links between amphistomy and fire with regard to the presence of the trait across species in this pyrogenic habitat and within-species variation before and after experimental fire and across a time-since-fire gradient (0.25-50 years).

methodsWe surveyed the presence of amphistomy for 116 plant species across scrub habitats and experimentally investigated intraspecific variation in stomatal traits for two amphistomatous, post-fire resprouting species of palmetto, Serenoa repens and Sabal etonia (Arecaceae).

resultsAmphistomy was present in 62.9% of all surveyed species and 85.7% of post-fire obligate reseeders, suggesting amphistomy may be particularly beneficial in this group and broadly in the Florida scrub conditions. The stomatal ratio (upper/total stomatal density) was generally stable within and across individuals of both species after fire. Stomatal density decreased following fire in S. etonia, with both species experiencing high variation in the post-fire years.

conclusionsAmphistomy is common in the Florida scrub and relatively stable within species in response to fire, while stomatal density responds plastically during post-fire recovery.

Indexed as

FiresPlant StomataEcosystemFloridaSpecies SpecificityArecaceaefire responseintraspecific trait variationplant physiologypyrophysiologySabal etoniascrubby flatwoodsSerenoa repensstomatal anatomy

Identifiers

PMID40405415
PMCPMC12572685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.