application · Yield · Litchi
40 claims from these papers; 2 citations between them.
How these papers cite each other
2 citations between these papers: 2 on the same side, 0 across the two sides.
- Positive result
- Negative result or no effect
- Citation, pointing to the cited paper
- Citation across the two sides
- Larger circle: more citations overall
Years run left to right. Citations come from the papers’ OpenAlex reference lists. Hover a paper to bring forward its citations; click it to open the paper.
Papers reporting a positive result 21
Effect of Growth Regulators on Litchi (Litchi Chinensis) · 1981
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of boron on fruit set, fruit retention and fruit quality of litchi cv. Bombai. · 2000
- positive
NAA sprays increased litchi fruit size and its roles · 2004
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Abscisic acid promotes flowering and enhances LcAP1 expression in Litchi chinensis Sonn. · 2013
- positive
- positive
- positive
FOLIAR APPLICATION OF CALCIUM CHLORIDE AND BORAX ENHANCE THE FRUIT QUALITY OF LITCHI CULTIVARS · 2013
- positive
DELAYING THE RIPENING OF 'BOMBAI' LITCHI · 2013
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of Foliar Spray of Chemicals on Flowering and Fruiting in Litchi · 2017
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of Pre-Harvest Spray of Chemicals on Quality, Yield and Storage Life of Litchi Fruits · 2019
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of regulated irrigation and calcium sprays on fruit yield and quality of Dehradun litchi · 2020
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of Nano-TiO2 Composite on the Fertilization and Fruit-Setting of Litchi · 2022
- positive
- positive
- positive
A paper is on the positive side when any of its claims here is positive. Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. Claims that compare genotypes are left out; a claim about lacking a nutrient counts the other way round in that nutrient’s question. “Results differ” marks a question where two model reviewers, reading both claims, accepted at least one pair of papers whose results differ.