Quality: grain · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)

1. Gibberellic acidPositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
2. 1-naphthaleneacetic acidPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
3. fertilizationPositive and negative results21 papers: 19 positive, 2 negative or no effect
4. mulchingPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
5. micronutrientPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
6. storagePositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
7. herbicidePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
8. seed treatmentPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
9. applicationResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
10. botanicalResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
11. infectionResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
12. nanoparticleResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
13. phosphorusResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
14. radiationResults 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.