ReviewAmerican journal of botany2026
The sleeping giant needs coffee: Overlooked areas for integrating plant ecophysiology and evolutionary biology.
Review in American journal of botany, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maintenance of phenotypic divergence in two sympatric monkeyflowers with weak reproductive isolation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Leveraging Genetic Diversity for Abiotic Stress Tolerance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Omics Technologies in Molecular Biology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- The sleeping giant needs coffee: Overlooked areas for integrating plant ecophysiology and evolutionary biology.American journal of botany · 2026Review
- Editorial: Utilizing machine learning with phenotypic and genotypic data to enhance effective breeding in agricultural and horticultural crops.Frontiers in plant science · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Interpretations of evolutionary outcomes are limited without incorporation of physiological ecology, and ecophysiological interpretations would benefit from incorporating evolutionary perspectives. Although there has been a rise of studies in the last 20 years between these fields, evolutionary studies that incorporate plant physiology have largely focused on the same traits (e.g., flowering time, specific leaf area), neglecting cellular and developmental traits. This neglect is largely due to the high throughput demands in evolutionary studies and the lack of technological advancements in ecophysiology. However, this bias in measured traits has resulted in limiting our understanding of the evolution of plant form and function. On the other hand, most detailed studies on plant physiological and anatomical responses to the environment are either in applied sciences, focused on economically important plants, or examine model organisms rather than wild populations. These detailed ecophysiological studies generally do not incorporate evolutionary discourse, even though they often study adaptation. The aim of this synthesis is to offer a comprehensive resource, building upon previous works, for researchers to bridge the gap between ecophysiology and evolutionary ecology.
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.