Organism · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)

34 questions: every treatment tested on this organism for this target by at least two papers.

  1. glyphosateResults differ12 papers: 7 positive, 5 negative or no effect · 1 pair of papers confirmed to differ
  2. 2,4-DPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  3. ImazethapyrPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  4. paraquatPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  5. Zea mays subsp. maysPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  6. selenium atomPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  7. Avena sativaResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  8. Hordeum vulgareResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  9. Triticum aestivumResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  10. carbofuranResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
  11. seliciclibResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  12. nitrogenResults differ9 papers: 1 positive, 8 negative or no effect · 1 pair of papers confirmed to differ
  13. herbicidePositive and negative results19 papers: 12 positive, 7 negative or no effect
  14. fertilizationPositive and negative results18 papers: 7 positive, 11 negative or no effect
  15. grazingPositive and negative results16 papers: 6 positive, 10 negative or no effect
  16. pruningPositive and negative results15 papers: 7 positive, 8 negative or no effect
  17. inoculationPositive and negative results9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  18. insecticidePositive and negative results8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  19. limePositive and negative results8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  20. botanicalPositive and negative results6 papers: 2 positive, 4 negative or no effect
  21. transplantingPositive and negative results6 papers: 3 positive, 3 negative or no effect
  22. densityPositive and negative results5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  23. tillagePositive and negative results5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  24. intercroppingPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  25. irrigationPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  26. phosphorusPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  27. rotationPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  28. sowing timePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  29. stagePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
  30. applicationResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
  31. cover cropResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  32. droughtResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
  33. processingResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
  34. seed treatmentResults 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.