Avena fatua · Triticum aestivum (wheat)

1. barbanPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
2. DifenzoquatResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
3. clodinafop-propargylResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
4. 146712Results agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
5. Tri-allateResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
6. isoproturonResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
7. herbicidePositive and negative results6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect
8. tillagePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
9. applicationResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
10. botanicalResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
11. densityResults 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.