Criterion is a touchstone in study of early angiosperms

W. Xin
{"title":"Criterion is a touchstone in study of early angiosperms","authors":"W. Xin","doi":"10.17352/ojps.000039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Herendeen et al. set up a criterion identifying fossil angiosperms while they named five examples of fossil angiosperms in the same paper. Their normal-appearing operation, however, is fundamentally flawed: their exemplar fossil angiosperms did not honor their own criterion. This operation confused their proponents as well as other botanical researchers, hindering healthy progress in study on the origin of angiosperms. Herendeen et al. are obligated to give a plausible explanation for their perplexing operation. *Nature Plants has been informed of the problem in Herendeen et al. (2017). Nature Plants has refused to fix the problem due to reasons, according to the communication with Dr. Chris Surridge, an editor of Nature Plants.","PeriodicalId":382664,"journal":{"name":"Open Journal of Plant Science","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Journal of Plant Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17352/ojps.000039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Herendeen et al. set up a criterion identifying fossil angiosperms while they named five examples of fossil angiosperms in the same paper. Their normal-appearing operation, however, is fundamentally flawed: their exemplar fossil angiosperms did not honor their own criterion. This operation confused their proponents as well as other botanical researchers, hindering healthy progress in study on the origin of angiosperms. Herendeen et al. are obligated to give a plausible explanation for their perplexing operation. *Nature Plants has been informed of the problem in Herendeen et al. (2017). Nature Plants has refused to fix the problem due to reasons, according to the communication with Dr. Chris Surridge, an editor of Nature Plants.
判据是早期被子植物研究的试金石
Herendeen等人在同一篇论文中列举了五个被子植物化石的例子,并建立了一个鉴定被子植物化石的标准。然而,他们看似正常的操作却存在根本性的缺陷:他们的被子植物样本化石没有遵守自己的标准。这种操作使他们的支持者和其他植物研究人员感到困惑,阻碍了被子植物起源研究的健康进展。Herendeen等人有义务对他们令人困惑的操作给出一个合理的解释。*Nature Plants已经在Herendeen等人(2017)中得知了这个问题。根据与《自然植物》编辑Chris Surridge博士的沟通,由于某些原因,《自然植物》拒绝解决这个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信