Soil: chemistry · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)

1. Triticum aestivumPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
2. Arachis hypogaeaResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
3. fertilizationPositive and negative results35 papers: 30 positive, 5 negative or no effect
4. irrigationPositive and negative results15 papers: 10 positive, 5 negative or no effect
5. organicPositive and negative results10 papers: 9 positive, 1 negative or no effect
6. otherPositive and negative results9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect
7. rotationPositive and negative results6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect
8. cultivation systemPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
9. mulchingPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
10. transplantingPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
11. heatPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
12. intercroppingResults agree6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect
13. limeResults agree6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect
14. salinityResults agree5 papers: 0 positive, 5 negative or no effect
15. phosphorusResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
16. tillageResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
17. biocharResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
18. cover cropResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
19. climate siteResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
20. inoculationResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
21. nanoparticleResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
22. nitrogenResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
23. potassiumResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
24. transgenicResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 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.