67 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Fungal colonization of the rooting system of the early land plantAsteroxylon mackieifrom the 407-Myr-old Rhynie Chert (Scotland, UK) C. Strullu-Derrien et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/boj.12307
2. A perfect flower from the Jurassic of China Z. Liu & X. Wang https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2015.1020423
3. Molecular and Fossil Evidence on the Origin of Angiosperms J. Doyle https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-042711-105313
4. Uncertainty in the timing of diversification of flowering plants rests with equivocal interpretation of their fossil record J. Clark & P. Donoghue https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.242158
5. A Fruit-Bearing Angiosperm from the Jurassic of Inner Mongolia, China G. Han et al. https://doi.org/10.4236/vp.2024.102015
6. The corbiculate bees arose from New World oil-collecting bees: Implications for the origin of pollen baskets A. Martins et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.07.003
7. A Jurassic flower bud from China D. Cui et al. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP521-2021-122
8. Pollen micro-morphometry of two endangered species of Rauvolfia L. (Apocynaceae) from the Indo-Gangetic Plains of Central India using LM, CLSM and FESEM S. Tripathi et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2022.2072966
9. Establishing a time‐scale for plant evolution J. Clarke et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03794.x
10. Three-Dimensional Confocal Optical Imagery of Precambrian Microscopic Organisms J. Schopf et al. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2006.6.1
11. Confocal (CLSM) and light (LM) photomicrographs of different plant pollen taxa from Lucknow, India: Implications of pollen morphology for systematics, phylogeny and preservation M. Firoze Quamar et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2017.09.005
12. Palaeobotanical redux: revisiting the age of the angiosperms P. Herendeen et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.15
13. ПРИМЕНЕНИЕ КОНФОКАЛЬНОЙ ЛАЗЕРНОЙ СКАНИРУЮЩЕЙ МИКРОСКОПИИ ДЛЯ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ МОРФОЛОГИИ ОБОЛОЧКИ ПЫЛЬЦЕВЫХ ЗЕРЕН, "БОТАНИЧЕСКИЙ ЖУРНАЛ" О. ГАВРИЛОВА https://doi.org/10.1134/S1234567814100085
14. Was Charles Darwin right in his explanation of the ‘abominable mystery’? S. Sgorbati et al. https://doi.org/10.3897/ib.5.24699
15. Yuhania: a unique angiosperm from the Middle Jurassic of Inner Mongolia, China Z. Liu & X. Wang https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2016.1178740
16. Schmeissneria: An angiosperm from the Early Jurassic X. WANG https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-6831.2010.00090.x
17. 40 Ar/ 39 Ar age constraints on the Haifanggou and Lanqi formations: When did the first flowers bloom? S. Chang et al. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP378.1
18. An Undercover Angiosperm from the Jurassic of China Z. Shaolin & W. Xin https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6724.2010.00252.x
19. Yuzhoua juvenilis: Another Angiosperm Seen in the Early Permian? X. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/life15020286
20. How deep is the conflict between molecular and fossil evidence on the age of angiosperms? M. Coiro et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15708
21. Using More Than the Oldest Fossils: Dating Osmundaceae with Three Bayesian Clock Approaches G. Grimm et al. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu108
22. The effects of the Jenkyns Event on the radiation of Early Jurassic dinoflagellate cysts V. Correia et al. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP514-2020-255
23. Taxonomic revision of in situ tree trunks and silicified wood from the Early Jurassic Kirkpatrick Basalt in the Mesa Range area, northern Victoria Land, Antarctica C. Oh et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2024.105160
24. Confocal laser scanning microscopy and Raman imagery of the late Neoproterozoic Chichkan microbiota of South Kazakhstan J. Schopf et al. https://doi.org/10.1666/09-134.1
25. Is Darwin's ‘Abominable Mystery’ still a mystery today? B. Cascales-Miñana et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2016.01.002
26. Application of confocal laser-scanning microscopy (CLSM) to autofluorescent organic and mineral matter in peat, coals and siliciclastic sedimentary rocks — A qualitative approach J. Kus https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2014.10.014
27. Fossil data support a pre-Cretaceous origin of flowering plants D. Silvestro et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01387-8
28. Thermal maturity of Tasmanites microfossils from confocal laser scanning fluorescence microscopy P. Hackley & J. Kus https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.11.052
29. Late Triassic (early Carnian) palynology of shallow stratigraphical core 7830/5-U-1, offshore Kong Karls Land, Norwegian Arctic N. Paterson et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2016.1163295
30. The vanishing Carib Halite Formation (Neocomian), Colombia-Venezuela-Trinidad prolific petroleum province R. Higgs https://doi.org/10.1144/SP328.26
31. Reconstructing the Callianthus plant–An early aquatic angiosperm from the Lower Cretaceous of China X. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2021.104983
32. Celebrating 25 years of advances in micropalaeontology: a review F. Gregory et al. https://doi.org/10.1144/jm.25.2.97
33. Scandium Ore Occurrences in the Ancient Weathering Crust in the Nakyn Kimberlite Field of Yakutia P. Ignatov et al. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0016777023060059
34. The Unique Pollen Morphology of Duparquetia (Leguminosae: Caesalpinioideae): Developmental Evidence of Aperture Orientation Using Confocal Microscopy H. BANKS et al. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl115
35. In situ confocal laser scanning microscopy and Raman spectroscopy of bisaccate pollen from the Irati Subgroup (Permian, Paraná Basin, Brazil): Comparison with acid-macerated specimens J. Schopf et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2016.03.004
36. Xingxueanthus: An Enigmatic Jurassic Seed Plant and Its Implications for the Origin of Angiospermy X. WANG & S. WANG https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6724.2010.00169.x
37. Unique Jurassic Ovaries Shed a New Light on the Nature of Carpels Q. Fu et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13162239
38. South-Central Barents Sea Composite Tectono-Sedimentary Element A. Doré et al. https://doi.org/10.1144/M57-2017-42
39. Climate variations in the Boreal Triassic — Inferred from palynological records from the Barents Sea P. Hochuli & J. Vigran https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2009.08.013
40. A Whole Plant Herbaceous Angiosperm from the Middle Jurassic of China H. Gang et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.12592
41. Potential of CLSM in studying some modern and fossil palynological objects O. GAVRILOVA et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmi.12639
42. New Fossil Evidence Suggests That Angiosperms Flourished in the Middle Jurassic L. Han et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13030819
43. Capturing the Surface Texture and Shape of Pollen: A Comparison of Microscopy Techniques M. Sivaguru et al. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039129
44. Integrating Molecular Phylogenetic and Paleobotanical Evidence on Origin of the Flower J. Doyle https://doi.org/10.1086/589887
45. Was Charles Darwin right in his explanation of the ‘abominable mystery’? S. Sgorbati et al. https://doi.org/10.3897/italianbotanist.5.24699
46. Pollen characters and their evolutionary and taxonomic significance: using light and confocal laser scanning microscope to study diverse plant pollen taxa from central India M. Quamar et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2022.2070294
47. Cretaceous angiosperm flowers: Innovation and evolution in plant reproduction E. Friis et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2005.07.006
48. Morphometrical analysis ofCeibaMill. (Bombacoideae, Malvaceae) pollen: a sacred plant of the Mayan (Mesoamerican) civilisation S. Tripathi et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2018.1467350
49. Monocotyledon‐like Leaves from the Middle Jurassic of East Siberia (Russia) A. FROLOV & I. ENUSHCHENKO https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.14986
50. The first macrofossil record of parasitic plant flowers from an Eocene Baltic amber W. Huang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40794
51. Biogeographical affinities of the New Caledonian biota: a puzzle with 24 pieces M. Heads https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02311.x
52. The Core Eudicot Boom Registered in Myanmar Amber Z. Liu et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-35100-4
53. Recognition of peat depositional environments in coal: A review S. Dai et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2019.103383
54. Micro-CT results exhibit ovules enclosed in the ovaries of Nanjinganthus Q. Fu et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-27334-0
55. A confocal laser scanning and conventional wide field light microscopy study ofClassopollisfrom the Toarcian‐Aalenian of the Fuentelsaz section (Spain) D. Peyrot et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/00173130701782845
56. A Novel Angiosperm from the Early Cretaceous and Its Implications for Carpel‐Deriving Z. LIU & X. WANG https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-6724.13627
57. The megafossil record of early angiosperms in China since 1930s X. Wang https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2014.889695
58. The identification of fossil angiosperm pollen and its bearing on the time and place of the origin of angiosperms M. Zavada https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-006-0495-9
59. Integrating Early Cretaceous Fossils into the Phylogeny of Living Angiosperms: ANITA Lines and Relatives of Chloranthaceae J. Doyle & P. Endress https://doi.org/10.1086/675935
60. Early evolution of angiosperm pollen as inferred from molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses J. Doyle https://doi.org/10.1080/00173130500424557
61. Pollen heteromorphism in Schleichera Lour. (Sapindaceae), observed in surface soil samples from central India M. Quamar et al. https://doi.org/10.35535/acpa-2021-0003
62. The palaeoenvironment associated with a partial Iguanodon skeleton from the Upper Weald Clay (Barremian, Early Cretaceous) at Smokejacks Brickworks (Ockley, Surrey, UK), based on palynomorphs and ostracods E. Nye et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2008.01.004
63. Early Cretaceous angiosperm pollen from a low-latitude succession (Araripe Basin, NE Brazil) U. Heimhofer & P. Hochuli https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2010.03.010
64. An unexpected noncarpellate epigynous flower from the Jurassic of China Q. Fu et al. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38827
65. A Biased, Misleading Review on Early Angiosperms X. Wang https://doi.org/10.4236/ns.2017.912037
66. Peter Andreas Hochuli (1946–2018) . Elke Schneebeli-Hermann et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2018.1521838
67. Heterogeneous Rates of Molecular Evolution and Diversification Could Explain the Triassic Age Estimate for Angiosperms J. Beaulieu et al. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syv027