Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40632900›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2026

Are capitula inflorescences? A reassessment based on flower-like meristem identity and ray flower development.

Regine Claßen-Bockhoff, Jakub Baczyński, Veronika Hanke, Svenja Sibylla Henkes, Nadine Ferdinand

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of botany, 2026. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Regine Claßen-BockhoffInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution (iomE), Johannes-Gutenberg-University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany.
Jakub BaczyńskiFaculty of Biology, Institute of Evolutionary Biology, Biological and Chemical Research Centre, University of Warsaw, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland.
Veronika HankeInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution (iomE), Johannes-Gutenberg-University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany.
Svenja Sibylla HenkesInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution (iomE), Johannes-Gutenberg-University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany.
Nadine FerdinandInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution (iomE), Johannes-Gutenberg-University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsThe capitulum of Asteraceae has traditionally been interpreted as a condensed raceme. However, morphological studies challenge this view, indicating that the capitulum does not arise from an inflorescence meristem, but from a determinate floral unit meristem. Terminology, combined with conflicting evidence from developmental genetics, has hindered the formulation of a coherent evolutionary scenario for the origin of the capitulum. In this paper, we aim to refine the floral unit concept and critically re-examine the hypothesis that ray flowers in Asteraceae represent remnants of ancestral thyrsoid branching.

methodsApproaching from evolutionary-developmental morphology, we performed a detailed analysis of capitulum development in 20 highly diverse Asteraceae species, encompassing three subfamilies and 11 tribes, using scanning electron microscopy. We focused on early capitulum development, ray flower formation and changes in meristem geometry. KEY

resultsWe show that the capitulum meristem is determinate and exhibits developmental features characteristic of flowers, thereby fulfilling the definition of a floral unit meristem. Continuous meristem expansion changes geometrical conditions and triggers spontaneous fractionation of flower meristems. The early developmental delay of ray flowers and the rare occurrence of bidirectional fractionation in the capitulum meristem can be explained morphologically by local expansion dynamics and mechanical pressure.

conclusionsOur findings support the hypothesis that the capitulum meristem is distinct from an inflorescence meristem and instead recapitulates developmental properties of a flower meristem at a higher level of organization. This challenges the phylogenetic view that the capitulum evolved through gradual transformation of an ancestral thyrse. Instead, we propose that a single developmental shift (from an indeterminate reproductive meristem to a determinate floral unit meristem) was sufficient to give rise to the capitulum. The early determinacy of the meristem and the insertion of an additional step of fractionation are best explained by heterochronic changes, such as ontogenetic abbreviation and prolongation.

Indexed as

AsteraceaeFlowersInflorescenceMeristemBiological EvolutionMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningPhylogenyAsteraceaecapitulum developmentfloral unit meristemflower meristemfractionationgene expression patternsheterochronyinflorescence meristeminvolucral bractsmechanical pressuremeristem expansionray flower formation

Identifiers

PMID40632900
PMCPMC12784083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.