Cones and consequences: the false dichotomy of conifers vs broad‐leaves has critical implications for research and modelling

Summary 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 presents 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.