Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40811680›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Flow similarity model predicts allometric relationships among Acer platanoides L. branches.

Charles A Price, Gregory A Dahle, Jason C Grabosky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Charles A PriceEcology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4737-9033
Gregory A DahleSchool of Natural Resources & the Environment, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Jason C GraboskyDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using physical models to predict patterns of plant growth has been a long-standing goal for biologists. Most approaches invoke either thermodynamic, biomechanical or hydraulic principles and assume the mechanism of interest applies similarly throughout the plant branching architecture. A recent effort, the flow similarity model, predicts numerous aspects of branching physiology and morphology and argues that the physiological constraints experienced by plants change as a function of branch order and size, with more basal portions satisfying more biomechanical constraints, and more distal portions, hydraulic ones. Distal branches are expected to have a strong influence on allometric relationships within plants due to their numerical abundance. Here we evaluate the predictions of the flow similarity model and a well-known alternative fractal branching model, using data on the dimensions of 3,484 individual stem internodes across four individual Acer platanoides trees. Overall, we find strong agreement between model predictions and the allometric exponents describing tree branch allometry. Further the predicted curvature in allometric relationships is found in all 24 cases examined and the frequency distributions of branch lengths and diameters are consistent with model expectations in 6/8 cases. We also find the area ratios are consistent with the model assumption of area-preserving branching. Collectively, our data and analysis provide strong support for the flow similarity model, and identifies several areas in need of subsequent inquiry.

Indexed as

AcerModels, BiologicalPlant StemsTrees

Identifiers

PMID40811680
PMCPMC12352853

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.