mulching · Yield · Cenchrus americanus (pearl millet)
36 claims from these papers; 4 citations between them.
Papers whose results differ, checked claim by claim 3
3 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.
- Evaluation of water harvesting technique in pearl-millet (Pennisetum typhoides (Burm F. Stapf & C.E. Hubb.) production in dry land conditions of Haryana (1977)
no changeMulching did not significantly change yield.
Effect of moisture conservation and nutrient management practices on growth and yield of pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) under rainfed conditions (2004)increaseMoisture conservation by mulching significantly increased pearlmillet yield.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers → - Evaluation of water harvesting technique in pearl-millet (Pennisetum typhoides (Burm F. Stapf & C.E. Hubb.) production in dry land conditions of Haryana (1977)
no changeMulching did not significantly change yield.
Effect of Microclimate Modification on Growth and Yield of Pearl Millet (2022)increaseMulching increased pearl millet dry matter production and yield across irrigation and land configurations.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers → - Evaluation of water harvesting technique in pearl-millet (Pennisetum typhoides (Burm F. Stapf & C.E. Hubb.) production in dry land conditions of Haryana (1977)
no changeMulching did not significantly change yield.
Effect of moisture conservation and nutrient management practices on growth and yield of pearlmillet (Pennisetum ghucum) under rainfed conditions (2001)increaseMulching significantly increased pearlmillet 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
4 citations between these papers: 2 on the same side, 2 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 17
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- no effect
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of Microclimate Modification on Growth and Yield of Pearl Millet · 2022
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effect of Mulching and Hydrogel on The Productivity of Pearl Millet Under Rai Fed Condition · 2024
- positive
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 2
- no effect
- no effect
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.