Ask any question about EPFL courses, lectures, exercises, research, news, etc. or try the example questions below.
DISCLAIMER: The Graph Chatbot is not programmed to provide explicit or categorical answers to your questions. Rather, it transforms your questions into API requests that are distributed across the various IT services officially administered by EPFL. Its purpose is solely to collect and recommend relevant references to content that you can explore to help you answer your questions.
In plant science research and modelling, particularly from the northern hemisphere, the terms ‘needle-leaved’ and ‘conifer’ along with ‘broad-leaved’ and ‘angiosperm’ are often used synonymously, creating the false dichotomy that conifers are needle-leaved and angiosperms are broad-leaved. While these equivalences may be largely correct in the temperate northern hemisphere, they do not hold true in equatorial and southern hemisphere forests. Confounding needle-leaved conifers and broad-leaved angiosperms present significant issues in empirical research and modelling. Here, we highlight the likely origins and impacts of misusing conifer-related terminology, the misinterpretation that ensues and its implications. We identify the issue of a focus on Pinaceae and coin the term ‘Pinaceae panacea’ to describe this. We provide recommendations for future research: from standardising the use of definitions to shifting away from using Pinaceae as a model group for all conifers.