- malathionPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- poly(ethylene)Results agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- imidaclopridResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- potassium sulfateResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- trap barrierPositive and negative results10 papers: 9 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- applicationPositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- pruningPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- infectionPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- insecticidePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- radiationPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- botanicalResults agree5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- fertilizationResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- nitrogenResults 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.