Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41465767›Full record

ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Xin Wang

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. 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

1 author.

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

Funding

Academia Sinica National Key Research and Development Program of China (2024YFF0807601)National Natural Science Foundation of China 42288201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlike gymnosperms with naked ovules, angiosperms are defined and characterized by their enclosed ovules. According to plant evolution theories, angiosperms should be derived from their gymnospermous ancestors, which have naked ovules. Thus, an assumed transitional plant is expected to have started but not yet completed the enclosing of its ovules; specifically, some of its ovules are enclosed while others are not. This unusual expectation is, although rational, paradoxical: If this is so, is the plant a gymnosperm or an angiosperm? To date, such an expectation has never been met by any fossil evidence. The lack of favorable evidence makes the above expectation speculative and leaves evolutionary theorists vulnerable to attacks from their opponents. Here, I report a fossil plant,

Indexed as

angiospermChinaCretaceousevolutionfossilgymnospermplant

Identifiers

PMID41465767
PMCPMC12735067

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.