application · Nutrient: content · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)
82 claims from these papers.
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
None of these papers cites another one here.
- 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 42
Foliar Application of Phosphorus to Spanish Peanuts1 · 1986
- positive
- positive
CHELATED MICRONUTRIENTS ON THE YIELD AND NUTRIENT UPTAKE BY GROUNDNUT · 1997
- positive
- positive
CYTOZYME FOR INCREASED YIELD OF GROUNDNUT · 1998
- positive
Effect of Boron and Molybdenum on their Uptake and Yield of Groundnut · 2004
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
EFFECT OF PHOSPHORUS AND BIO-FERTILIZERS ON PRODUCTIVITY OF PEANUT CROP · 2008
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Zinc Biofortification in Sixty Groundnut Cultivars Through Foliar Application of Zinc Sulphate · 2015
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Foliar applications for amelioration of iron deficiency in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) · 2018
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Nitrogen uptake and yield of groundnut as influenced by secondary and micronutrients · 2018
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 3
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
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.