ArticleThe Plant cell2026
Inferring cell division from cell shape.
Article in The Plant cell, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cell division patterns shape developing organs, but their systematic analysis remains limited by the technical difficulty of existing detection methods. Here, we present a practical method for inferring recent daughter-cell pairs from static cell shapes. Although cell divisions have long been inferred by expert judgment, the accuracy of this approach has rarely been quantified. Using live imaging of Arabidopsis leaf primordia, we evaluated 49 features from 7,573 neighboring cell pairs, including 1,114 direct daughter pairs and 6,459 non-daughter pairs. A simple junction-angle criterion correctly inferred 1,030 daughter pairs with 94.1% precision and 92.5% recall, whereas symmetry-based indices performed poorly. Temporal analysis revealed that junction angles were initially high after division, decreased during growth, and were altered by subsequent divisions, thus separating daughter pairs from non-daughter pairs. This method also achieved 98.4% precision and 97.2% recall in an independent shoot apical meristem live-imaging dataset. Application to the pointed-tip Arabidopsis mutant rpl4d-3 and 2 nonmodel species further supported its potential applicability for analyzing division patterns in diverse leaf morphologies. For community use, we provide FIJI/ImageJ and Qt-based graphical user interface implementations. Overall, this study quantitatively validates empirical geometric cues and provides a practical framework for inferring daughter pairs from static tissue images.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.