Quality: grain · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)

1. zinc atomPositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
2. RhizobiumResults agree5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect
3. boron atomResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
4. Zea maysResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
5. molybdenum atomResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
6. fertilizationPositive and negative results15 papers: 13 positive, 2 negative or no effect
7. applicationPositive and negative results9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect
8. phosphorusPositive and negative results8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect
9. intercroppingPositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
10. nitrogenPositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
11. densityPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
12. inoculationPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
13. irrigationPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
14. micronutrientPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
15. sowing timePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
16. storagePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
17. processingResults agree5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect
18. mulchingResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
19. nanoparticleResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
20. botanicalResults 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.