Quality: sugar starch · Prunus armeniaca (apricot)

1. 1-methylcyclopropenePositive and negative results5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect
2. potassium permanganatePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
3. salicylic acidResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
4. melatoninResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
5. Gibberellic acidResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
6. calcium chloride dihydrateResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
7. chitosanResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
8. etheneResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
9. storagePositive and negative results8 papers: 5 positive, 3 negative or no effect
10. pruningPositive and negative results6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect
11. irrigationPositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
12. co2Positive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
13. applicationPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
14. fertilizationResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
15. nanoparticleResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
16. nitrogenResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
17. coldResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
18. graftingResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
19. solarizationResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

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.