Intervention effectmodel-written summary

GA3+GA4 spray reduced fruit abscission despite shading-induced seed abortion.

A claim from Relation between Early Drop of Apple Fruit and Endogenous Growth Regulators, and Effects of MCPB, GA3 plus GA4 and BA Sprays on Fruit Abscission · 1989

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GA3+GA4 spray reduced fruit abscission despite shading-induced seed abortion.

Treatment
GA3+GA4 spraye0
Outcome
fruit abscissione0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
regardless of seed abortion by the shading treatmente0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValue

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the GA3+GA4 spray satisfactorily reduced fruit abscission and promoted fruit growth regardless of seed abortion by the shading treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1011–1147
t0

“Apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–36

Title

Relation between Early Drop of Apple Fruit and Endogenous Growth Regulators, and Effects of MCPB, GA3 plus GA4 and BA Sprays on Fruit Abscission

Satoru KONDO; Noboru MIZUNO Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science 1989. doi:10.2503/jjshs.58.9

Other claims from this paper (12)

Record rev-e60445a0d521cd2c750816b6d9fd82b53ebe535bffd4cc50bc7df0df692924fd · schema claims-v0.9 · position 7 in the model’s answer

Gibberellic acid · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 16 positive, 11 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this claim · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. no effect
  6. negative
  7. no effect
  8. no effect

18 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

application · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

141 papers: 107 positive, 34 negative or no effect

106 papers in the same direction as this claim · 32 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. no effect
  6. negative
  7. no effect
  8. no effect

132 papers more in this group

See all 141 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.