Rhizobium · Yield · Vicia faba (faba bean)
33 claims from these papers; 2 citations between them.
Papers whose results differ, checked claim by claim 4
4 pairs of papers on this question report results that differ: an effect in one paper, the opposite effect or no effect in the other. Two model reviewers reading both claims accepted each pair.
- THE EFFECT OF BACTERIAL APPLICATION ON THE PRODUCTIVITY OF FABA BEAN (VICIA FABA L.) AND ITS MIXTURE WITH SPRING WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.) UNDER TWO AGROCLIMATIC CONDITIONS IN LITHUANIA (2017)
increaseRhizobium application increased grain yield in sole and mixed crops.
Effect of cultivar and inoculant on yields of faba beans (Vicia faba minor) and subsequent spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) under Scandinavian cropping conditions (2023)no changeRhizobium inoculation did not affect faba bean yield.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers → - Recombinants Rhizobacteria Enhanced Biological Control of Rhizoctonia solani infected Faba Bean (2020)
increaseRhizobium inoculants improved faba bean growth and yield under biotic stress.
Effect of cultivar and inoculant on yields of faba beans (Vicia faba minor) and subsequent spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) under Scandinavian cropping conditions (2023)no changeRhizobium inoculation did not affect faba bean yield.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers → - Effect of cultivar and inoculant on yields of faba beans (Vicia faba minor) and subsequent spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) under Scandinavian cropping conditions (2023)
no changeRhizobium inoculation did not affect faba bean yield.
Agronomic Performances of Faba Bean ( Vicia faba L.) Varieties to Rhizobial Inoculation, Biochar and Lime Applications Under Acidic Soil Conditions in Ethiopia (2025)increaseRhizobium inoculation increased grain yields by 23.1%.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers → - Effect of cultivar and inoculant on yields of faba beans (Vicia faba minor) and subsequent spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) under Scandinavian cropping conditions (2023)
no changeRhizobium inoculation did not affect faba bean yield.
Evaluation of best performing indigenous Rhizobium strains on productivity of faba bean in Gumer District, south-eastern Ethiopia (2021)increaseRhizobium inoculants increased faba bean yield.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers →
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 14
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- no effect
Co-Inoculation of Rhizobium and Azotobacter on Growth of Faba bean under Water Deficit Conditions · 2011
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- no effect
- positive
Recombinants Rhizobacteria Enhanced Biological Control of Rhizoctonia solani infected Faba Bean · 2020
- positive
Effect of spacing and Rhizobium inoculum level on the yield and quality of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) · 2020
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- negative
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effects of Rhizobium Inoculation Rate on Yield and Yield Components of Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) · 2025
- 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.