phosphorus · Organism · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)

Positive and negative results9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

10 claims from these papers.

Papers here report positive and negative or no-effect results. No pair of them has been accepted in the claim-by-claim check.

How these papers cite each other

None of these papers cites another one here.

Positive resultNegative result or no effect19801990200020102020
  • 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 8

  1. Bio inoculants for enhancing the productivity and nutrient uptake of winter irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) under graded levels of nitrogen and phosphatic fertilizers · 2001

  2. Bio inoculants for enhancing the productivity and nutrient uptake of winter irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) under graded levels of nitrogen and phosphatic fertilizers. · 2010

  3. Effects of Different Amount of Fertilizer and Different Transplanting Densities on Growth and Yield of Grafted Cotton with Sea Island Cotton and Upland Cotton · 2012

  4. Effect of Boron Nutrition on Physico-Chemical Properties, Nutrient Uptake and yield of Bt Cotton · 2015

  5. Sustainability of cotton based crop rotations under long-term management of genotypes and integrated nutrient schedules in South Zonein India - A decadal study · 2015

  6. Macronutrients Omission in the Growth of Cotton, BRS Topázio Cultivar Grown in Nutritious Solution · 2017

  7. Soil Nutrients Status and Cotton Yield as Influenced by Split Application of Nitrogen and Potassium in Vertisol · 2021

  8. Cotton yield response to fertilizer phosphorus under a range of nitrogen management tactics · 2022

Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 1

  1. Comparison of Fall, Winter, or Spring N‐P‐K Fertilizer Applications for Corn and Cotton1 · 1971

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.

phosphorus on Gossypium hirsutum (cotton) against other targets

phosphorus · organism on other organisms