- imidaclopridResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- Arachis hypogaeaResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- SorghumResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- emamectin benzoateResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- quinalphosResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- applicationPositive and negative results6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- intercroppingPositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- insecticidePositive and negative results4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- phosphorusPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- botanicalResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- seed treatmentResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- fertilizationResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- infectionResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- sowing timeResults 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.