pruning · Nutrient: content · Malus domestica (apple)
27 claims from these papers; 2 citations between them.
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
2 citations between these papers: 0 on the same side, 2 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 7
The effects of environment and cultural practices on calcium concentration in the apple fruit · 1979
- positive
- negative
Modifications of Translocation Rate in Studies of Apple Leaf Efficiency · 1980
- positive
Root damage affects nitrogen uptake and growth of young Fuji/M.26 apple trees · 2003
- positive
- negative
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Paclobutrazol and Summer Pruning Influences Fruit Quality of Red Delicious Apple · 2017
- positive
The Influence of Agrotechnological Tools on cv. Rubin Apples Quality · 2021
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 6
Yield, Fruit Size, and Quality of Three Apple Cultivars as Influenced by Summer or Dormant Pruning1 · 1982
- no effect
Effect of Root Pruning at Different Growth Stages on Growth and Fruiting of Apple Trees · 1987
- no effect
Apple Fruit Removal and Limb Girdling Affect Fruit and Leaf Characteristics · 1994
- negative
Flower thinning method affects mineral composition of `Braeburn' and `Fiesta' apple fruit · 1999
- no effect
- negative
The Effect of Calcium Sprays and Crop Load on Bitter Pit Incidence in `Honeycrisp' Apple · 2004
- negative
Heavy metal accumulations after two years of some organic fertilizers and girdling on apple fruit · 2020
- negative
- negative
- negative
- negative
- negative
- negative
- negative
- 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.