植物交配系统的进化动力学:研究“有趣的”植物生殖系统的偏见如何适得其反。

IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 PLANT SCIENCES
Elena M Meyer, Laura F Galloway, Andrew J Eckert
{"title":"植物交配系统的进化动力学:研究“有趣的”植物生殖系统的偏见如何适得其反。","authors":"Elena M Meyer, Laura F Galloway, Andrew J Eckert","doi":"10.1093/aob/mcaf031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>An \"abominable mystery\": angiosperm sexual systems have been a source of both interest and frustration for the botanical community since Darwin. The evolutionary stability, overall frequency, and distribution of self-fertilization and mixed-mating systems have been explored in a variety of studies. However, there has been no recent study which directly addresses our knowledge of mating systems across families, the adequacy of existing data, or the potential for biases.</p><p><strong>Scope: </strong>Here we present an updated dataset of mating systems across flowering plants covering 6,781 species and 212 families based on a synthesis of existing reviews and an original literature review using Web of Science. We assess the adequacy of this data by evaluating for bias indicating enrichment of certain families or sexual systems.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>We find that the vast majority of our data on mating systems comes from a small number of disproportionally sampled families, and that families with significant proportions of dioecious or monoecious species are much more likely to be undersampled.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results show that the frequency of selfing in angiosperms is overestimated, possibly due to increased research interest in selfing and mixed-mating systems. This suggests that systematic study bias may mean we know less about this vital facet of plant life than we think.</p>","PeriodicalId":8023,"journal":{"name":"Annals of botany","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evolutionary dynamics of plant mating systems: how bias for studying 'interesting' plant reproductive systems could backfire.\",\"authors\":\"Elena M Meyer, Laura F Galloway, Andrew J Eckert\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/aob/mcaf031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>An \\\"abominable mystery\\\": angiosperm sexual systems have been a source of both interest and frustration for the botanical community since Darwin. The evolutionary stability, overall frequency, and distribution of self-fertilization and mixed-mating systems have been explored in a variety of studies. However, there has been no recent study which directly addresses our knowledge of mating systems across families, the adequacy of existing data, or the potential for biases.</p><p><strong>Scope: </strong>Here we present an updated dataset of mating systems across flowering plants covering 6,781 species and 212 families based on a synthesis of existing reviews and an original literature review using Web of Science. We assess the adequacy of this data by evaluating for bias indicating enrichment of certain families or sexual systems.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>We find that the vast majority of our data on mating systems comes from a small number of disproportionally sampled families, and that families with significant proportions of dioecious or monoecious species are much more likely to be undersampled.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results show that the frequency of selfing in angiosperms is overestimated, possibly due to increased research interest in selfing and mixed-mating systems. This suggests that systematic study bias may mean we know less about this vital facet of plant life than we think.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of botany\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of botany\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcaf031\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PLANT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of botany","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcaf031","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:一个“令人憎恶的谜团”:自达尔文以来,被子植物的性系统一直是植物界既感兴趣又感到沮丧的来源。自交受精和混合交配系统的进化稳定性、总体频率和分布已经在各种研究中得到了探讨。然而,最近还没有研究直接解决我们对家庭间交配系统的认识、现有数据的充分性或潜在的偏见。本文基于Web of Science的现有文献综述和原始文献综述,提出了一个涵盖6,781个物种和212个科的开花植物交配系统的最新数据集。我们通过评估表明某些家庭或性系统富集的偏差来评估该数据的充分性。主要结果:我们发现绝大多数关于交配系统的数据来自少数不成比例的采样科,并且具有显著比例的雌雄异株或雌雄同株物种的科更有可能被采样不足。结论:我们的研究结果表明被子植物的自交频率被高估了,可能是由于对自交和混合交配系统的研究兴趣增加。这表明,系统的研究偏差可能意味着我们对植物生命的这一重要方面的了解比我们想象的要少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The evolutionary dynamics of plant mating systems: how bias for studying 'interesting' plant reproductive systems could backfire.

Background and aims: An "abominable mystery": angiosperm sexual systems have been a source of both interest and frustration for the botanical community since Darwin. The evolutionary stability, overall frequency, and distribution of self-fertilization and mixed-mating systems have been explored in a variety of studies. However, there has been no recent study which directly addresses our knowledge of mating systems across families, the adequacy of existing data, or the potential for biases.

Scope: Here we present an updated dataset of mating systems across flowering plants covering 6,781 species and 212 families based on a synthesis of existing reviews and an original literature review using Web of Science. We assess the adequacy of this data by evaluating for bias indicating enrichment of certain families or sexual systems.

Key results: We find that the vast majority of our data on mating systems comes from a small number of disproportionally sampled families, and that families with significant proportions of dioecious or monoecious species are much more likely to be undersampled.

Conclusions: Our results show that the frequency of selfing in angiosperms is overestimated, possibly due to increased research interest in selfing and mixed-mating systems. This suggests that systematic study bias may mean we know less about this vital facet of plant life than we think.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of botany
Annals of botany 生物-植物科学
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
138
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Annals of Botany is an international plant science journal publishing novel and rigorous research in all areas of plant science. It is published monthly in both electronic and printed forms with at least two extra issues each year that focus on a particular theme in plant biology. The Journal is managed by the Annals of Botany Company, a not-for-profit educational charity established to promote plant science worldwide. The Journal publishes original research papers, invited and submitted review articles, ''Research in Context'' expanding on original work, ''Botanical Briefings'' as short overviews of important topics, and ''Viewpoints'' giving opinions. All papers in each issue are summarized briefly in Content Snapshots , there are topical news items in the Plant Cuttings section and Book Reviews . A rigorous review process ensures that readers are exposed to genuine and novel advances across a wide spectrum of botanical knowledge. All papers aim to advance knowledge and make a difference to our understanding of plant science.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信