The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evidence for a Cenozoic radiation of ferns in an angiosperm-dominated canopy
Open accessAbstract
In today's angiosperm-dominated terrestrial ecosystems, leptosporangiate ferns are truly exceptional—accounting for 80% of the ≈11,000 nonflowering vascular plant species. Recent studies have shown that this remarkable diversity is mostly the result of a major leptosporangiate radiation beginning in the Cretaceous, following the rise of angiosperms. This pattern is suggestive of an ecological opportunistic response, with the proliferation of flowering plants across the landscape resulting in the formation of many new niches—both on forest floors and within forest canopies—into which leptosporangiate ferns could diversify. At present, one-third of leptosporangiate species grow as epiphytes in the canopies of angiosperm-dominated tropical rain forests. However, we know too little about the evolutionary history of epiphytic ferns to assess whether or not their diversification was in fact linked to the establishment of these forests, as would be predicted by the ecological opportunistic response hypothesis. Here we provide new insight into leptosporangiate diversification and the evolution of epiphytism by integrating a 400-taxon molecular dataset with an expanded set of fossil age constraints. We find evidence for a burst of fern diversification in the Cenozoic, apparently driven by the evolution of epiphytism. Whether this explosive radiation was triggered simply by the establishment of modern angiosperm-dominated tropical rain forest canopies, or spurred on by some other large-scale extrinsic factor (e.g., climate change) remains to be determined. In either case, it is clear that in both the Cretaceous and Cenozoic, leptosporangiate ferns were adept at exploiting newly created niches in angiosperm-dominated ecosystems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models
Stamatakis, A. (2006) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btl446 · Cited by 15,582
Sanderson, M. J. (2003) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/19.2.301 · Cited by 1,906
Cited by
Wisz, M. S., Pottier, J., Kissling, W. D., Pellissier, L., Lenoir, J., Damgaard, C. F., Dormann, C. F., Forchhammer, M. C., Grytnes, J., Guisan, A., et al. (2013) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2012.00235.x · Cited by 1,769
Evolutionary history of mycorrhizal symbioses and global host plant diversity
Brundrett, M. C., & Tedersoo, L. (2018) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.14976 · Cited by 1,615
Fire and the spread of flowering plants in the Cretaceous
Bond, W. J., & Scott, A. C. (2010) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03418.x · Cited by 239
Metadata
- Authors
- Schuettpelz, E., & Pryer, K. M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2009-07-07
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 27
- Pages
- 11200-11205
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2116365923
- Cited by
- 459
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evidence for a Cenozoic radiation of ferns in an angiosperm-dominated canopy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0811136106
- The paper
- Schuettpelz, E., & Pryer, K. M. (2009). Evidence for a Cenozoic radiation of ferns in an angiosperm-dominated canopy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0811136106
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.