↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the role of floral development in the evolution of angiosperm flowers: clarifications from a historical and physico-dynamic perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Plant Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
Title
Understanding the role of floral development in the evolution of angiosperm flowers: clarifications from a historical and physico-dynamic perspective
Published in
Journal of Plant Research, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10265-018-1021-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louis Ronse De Craene

Abstract

Flower morphology results from the interaction of an established genetic program, the influence of external forces induced by pollination systems, and physical forces acting before, during and after initiation. Floral ontogeny, as the process of development from a meristem to a fully developed flower, can be approached either from a historical perspective, as a "recapitulation of the phylogeny" mainly explained as a process of genetic mutations through time, or from a physico-dynamic perspective, where time, spatial pressures, and growth processes are determining factors in creating the floral morphospace. The first (historical) perspective clarifies how flower morphology is the result of development over time, where evolutionary changes are only possible using building blocks that are available at a certain stage in the developmental history. Flowers are regulated by genetically determined constraints and development clarifies specific transitions between different floral morphs. These constraints are the result of inherent mutations or are induced by the interaction of flowers with pollinators. The second (physico-dynamic) perspective explains how changes in the physical environment of apical meristems create shifts in ontogeny and this is reflected in the morphospace of flowers. Changes in morphology are mainly induced by shifts in space, caused by the time of initiation (heterochrony), pressure of organs, and alterations of the size of the floral meristem, and these operate independently or in parallel with genetic factors. A number of examples demonstrate this interaction and its importance in the establishment of different floral forms. Both perspectives are complementary and should be considered in the understanding of factors regulating floral development. It is suggested that floral evolution is the result of alternating bursts of physical constraints and genetic stabilization processes following each other in succession. Future research needs to combine these different perspectives in understanding the evolution of floral systems and their diversification.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Professor 5 6%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 27 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 9%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Unspecified 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 27 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2019.
All research outputs
#4,122,926
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Plant Research
#70
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,973
of 330,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Plant Research
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.