- fluopyramResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropaneResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- Azadirachta indicaResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- aldicarbResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- 1,2-dibromoethaneResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- Bacillus velezensisResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- Triticum aestivumResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
- oxamylResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- inoculationPositive and negative results6 papers: 2 positive, 4 negative or no effect
- insecticidePositive and negative results5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect
- applicationPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- botanicalResults agree8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- rotationResults agree3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect
- seed treatmentResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- tillageResults 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.