Publication bias in scientific findings - the case of Prunus persica

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00027006%3A_____%2F23%3A10176651" target="_blank" >RIV/00027006:_____/23:10176651 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Publication bias in scientific findings - the case of Prunus persica

Original language description

As scientists, we strive to publish the latest discoveries, but often after hours, days, or even months of testing, retesting, checking and confirming some experiments simply do not work regardless of detailed or elaborate experimental designs. Such negative results often get left behind, moving on to work on something new in the hopes of achieving positive outcomes. No point in publishing negative results, after all. Or is there? Publication bias affects the body of scientific knowledge in different ways, including skewing it towards statistically significant or &quot;positive&quot; results. The aim of this submission is to show the potential of negative results as they are a major contribution to science. Here we will present the case of developing a slow growth method for the medium-term conservation of Prunus persica, where two genotypes, 15 treatments, two repetitions and 6 months were tested, to no avail. So, where do we go from here?

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

O - Miscellaneous

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

40106 - Agronomy, plant breeding and plant protection; (Agricultural biotechnology to be 4.4)

Project

—

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2023

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů