pruning · Yield · Persea americana (avocado)
18 claims from these papers; 3 citations between them.
Papers whose results differ, checked claim by claim 1
1 pair of papers on this question report results that differ: an effect in one paper, the opposite effect or no effect in the other. Two model reviewers reading both claims accepted each pair.
- RESULTS OBTAINED BY PRUNING OVERCROWDED AVOCADO ORCHARDS (1999)
no changeSelective or mechanical pruning in initially congested orchards did not adversely affect yield.
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THINNING OF AN AVOCADO ORCHARD (1979)decreasePruning of avocado trees depressed the yield.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers →
How these papers cite each other
3 citations between these papers: 2 on the same side, 1 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 10
The Effect of Girdling on the Productivity of the Avocado1 · 1971
- positive
- negative
Girdling as a Means of Shortening the Juvenile Period of Avocado Seedlings · 1986
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Manipulation of Avocado Trees to Control Tree Size a Four Year Progress Report · 1998
- positive
RESULTS OBTAINED BY PRUNING OVERCROWDED AVOCADO ORCHARDS · 1999
- positive
- negative
The effect of growth inhibitors on fruit production in Hass avocado trees · 2000
- positive
Pruning and managing existing avocado orchards · 2000
- positive
Pruning Height and Selective Limb Removal Affect Yield of Large 'Hass' Avocado Trees · 2001
- positive
- no effect
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 3
- no effect
- negative
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THINNING OF AN AVOCADO ORCHARD · 1979
- negative
- no effect
- negative
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.