Weed · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)

1. ImazethapyrPositive and negative results24 papers: 22 positive, 2 negative or no effect
2. OxyfluorfenPositive and negative results8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect
3. quizalofopPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
4. clodinafop-propargylPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
5. pendimethalinResults agree49 papers: 49 positive, 0 negative or no effect
6. topramezoneResults agree9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect
7. PyridateResults agree6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect
8. metribuzinResults agree6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect
9. imazamoxResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
10. sulfentrazoneResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
11. FluchloralinResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
12. PandaResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
13. Triticum aestivumResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
14. isoxaflutoleResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
15. metolachlorResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
16. paraquatResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
17. propaquizafopResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
18. quizalofop-ethylResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
19. herbicidePositive and negative results75 papers: 74 positive, 1 negative or no effect
20. tillagePositive and negative results10 papers: 8 positive, 2 negative or no effect
21. fertilizationPositive and negative results6 papers: 2 positive, 4 negative or no effect
22. cultivation systemPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
23. irrigationPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
24. sowing timePositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
25. inoculationPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
26. intercroppingResults agree6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect
27. densityResults agree5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect
28. botanicalResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
29. nitrogenResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
30. processingResults 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.