Quality: postharvest · Prunus persica (peach)

1. fertilizationPositive and negative results9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect
2. nitrogenPositive and negative results7 papers: 4 positive, 3 negative or no effect
3. trap barrierPositive and negative results7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect
4. graftingPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
5. processingPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
6. stagePositive and negative results4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect
7. loss of functionPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
8. floodingPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
9. lightPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
10. ozonePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
11. potassiumPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
12. radiationPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
13. botanicalResults agree9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect
14. co2Results agree9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect
15. mulchingResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
16. nanoparticleResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
17. classResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
18. droughtResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
19. humidityResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
20. in vitroResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
21. otherResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
22. physical treatmentResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
23. shadeResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
24. 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.