application · Sclerotinia sclerotiorum · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)
22 claims from these papers; 22 citations between them.
Papers here report positive and negative or no-effect results. No pair of them has been accepted in the claim-by-claim check.
How these papers cite each other
22 citations between these papers: 16 on the same side, 6 across the two sides.
- Positive result
- Negative result or no effect
- Citation, pointing to the cited paper
- Citation across the two sides
- Larger circle: more citations overall
Years run left to right. Citations come from the papers’ OpenAlex reference lists. Hover a paper to bring forward its citations; click it to open the paper.
Papers reporting a positive result 9
- positive
Biological control of oilseed rape Sclerotinia stem rot byBacillus subtilisstrain Em7 · 2013
- positive
Biological control of sclerotinia stem rot of canola using antagonistic bacteria · 2015
- positive
- positive
- positive
Biological control of Sclerotinia disease byAspergillussp. on oilseed rape in the field · 2016
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- no effect
- positive
- positive
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 7
- negative
Stimulatory Effects of Sublethal Doses of Dimethachlon on Sclerotinia sclerotiorum · 2014
- negative
- negative
- negative
Stimulatory Effects of Flusilazole on Virulence of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum · 2017
- negative
- negative
Hormetic Effects of Mixtures of Dimethachlone and Prochloraz on Sclerotinia sclerotiorum · 2018
- negative
- negative
- negative
A paper is on the positive side when any of its claims here is positive. 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.