intercropping · Disease · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)
19 claims from these papers; 2 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
2 citations between these papers: 2 on the same side, 0 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 12
EFFECT OF INTERCROPPING ON THE INCIDENCE OF DISEASES OF GROUNDNUT · 1991
- positive
- positive
- no effect
Sustainable Management of Late Leaf Spot of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in Semi Arid Tropics · 2002
- positive
Effect of Intercropping on the Population of Bihar Hairy Caterpillar and Leaf Damage in Groundnut · 2004
- positive
- positive
- positive
Study on Ecological Stability of Cassava-peanut Intercropping · 2012
- positive
Management of Peanut Stem Necrosis Disease of Groundnut · 2013
- positive
- positive
- positive
- no effect
Interspecific Root Interactions Enhance Disease Resistance of Peanut by Intercropped Millet · 2019
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 1
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.