Chenopodium album · Triticum aestivum (wheat)

1. chlorsulfuronResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
2. metribuzinResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
3. 2,4-DResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
4. Brassica napus var. napusResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
5. carfentrazone-ethylResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
6. glyphosateResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
7. isoproturonResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
8. metsulfuron methylResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
9. tribenuronResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
10. tribenuron methylResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
11. tillagePositive and negative results8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect
12. herbicidePositive and negative results5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect
13. botanicalPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
14. transplantingPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
15. intercroppingResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
16. irrigationResults 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.