Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-7drmj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-04T04:35:24.053Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

False reports of physical dormancy in seeds of gymnosperms and angiosperms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2026

Jerry M. Baskin
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
Carol C. Baskin*
Affiliation:
Department Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
*
Corresponding author: Carol C. Baskin; Email: ccbask0@uky.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Eighteen families of angiosperms but no families of gymnosperms have been documented anatomically (palisade layer of macrosclereids with a light line and a water gap in the seed coat or endocarp – physical dormancy [PY] syndrome) and/or physiologically (imbibition tests of scarified versus nonscarified seeds) to contain species with PY. However, a literature review revealed that 76 families of angiosperms and 5 families of gymnosperms have been reported to have PY. Also, PY was wrongly reported in some genera of Anacardiaceae and Cucurbitaceae, which do have some genera with true PY. In none of the reports of PY was water-impermeability of the seed coat properly documented by seed covering layer anatomy or imbibition tests. Furthermore, other studies on the same or related species falsely reported to have PY found that seeds of 78.3% of the species had physiological dormancy, 19.1% morphophysiological dormancy and 2.6% nondormant seeds. We conclude that reports of PY for species in the 81 families of extant seed plants are incorrect and that the correct number of families with PY is still 18. False reports of PY could have negative implications for studies on understanding the relationship between kinds of dormancy and the ecology, evolution and biogeography of seed plants by distorting the dormancy profile.

Information

Type
Review Paper
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press.
Figure 0

Table 1. A brief history of physical dormancy (PY) reported in plant familiesTable 1 long description.

Figure 1

Table 2. False reports of physical dormancy (PY) in dispersal units (seeds/fruits) of gymnosperms and angiosperms and corrections of kind (class) of dormancyTable 2 long description.

Figure 2

Figure 1. Representative results (curves) of imbibition tests for scarified and nonscarified water-impermeable (PY, top) and water-permeable (false PY, bottom) seeds. (a) Scarified seeds with PY (Baskin and Baskin, 1998b). (b) Nonscarified seeds with a low percentage of naturally permeable seeds (Jayasuriya et al., 2013). (c) Nonscarified seeds with no (0%) naturally permeable seeds (Baskin and Baskin, 1998b). (d) Scarified water-permeable seeds (Liu et al., 2015a, 2015b). (e) Nonscarified water-permeable seeds (Liu et al., 2015a, 2015b).