Weed · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)

1. 2,4-DResults agree6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect
2. PretilachlorResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
3. Pyrazosulfuron-ethylResults agree4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect
4. Vigna mungoResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
5. isoproturonResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
6. pendimethalinResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
7. (4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acidResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
8. atrazineResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
9. bispyribac-sodiumResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
10. tillagePositive and negative results4 papers: 1 positive, 3 negative or no effect
11. fertilizationPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
12. intercroppingPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
13. herbicideResults agree27 papers: 27 positive, 0 negative or no effect
14. transplantingResults agree3 papers: 3 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.