ph · Pest · Zea mays (maize)

Positive and negative results11 papers: 7 positive, 4 negative or no effect

11 claims from these papers; 1 citation between them.

Papers here report positive and negative or no-effect results. No pair of them has been accepted in the claim-by-claim check.

How these papers cite each other

1 citation between these papers: 0 on the same side, 1 across the two sides.

Positive resultNegative result or no effect19701980199020002010
  • 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 7

  1. AVAILABILITY OF BORON AND PHOSPHORUS AS AFFECTED BY LIMING AN ACID POTATO SOIL · 1973

  2. Availability of boron and phosphorus as affected by liming an acid potato soil. [Zea mays L. ; Medicago sativa L] · 1973

  3. AVAILABILITY OF ZINC, COPPER AND NICKEL TO PLANTS GROWN IN SEWAGE-TREATED SOILS · 1978

  4. The effect of soil pH on copper toxicity to forage maize grown under field conditions. · 1980

    cited by 1 paper here

  5. Improvement of Longevity and Viability of Sperm Cells Isolated from Pollen of Zea mays L. · 1992

  6. Field comparison between selection methods at the maize seedling stage in relation to aluminum tolerance · 2002

  7. [Short-term changes of pH value and Al activity in acid soils after urea fertilization]. · 2005

Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 4

  1. Potassium Loss and Changes in the Fine Structure of Corn Root Tips Induced by H-ion · 1966

  2. The effect of pH on copper toxicity to hydroponically grown maize. · 1981

    cites 1 paper here

  3. Zinc toxicity on antioxidative response in (Zea mays L.) at two different pH · 2013

  4. The capacity of silage inoculant bacteria to bind aflatoxin B1 in vitro and in artificially contaminated corn silage · 2017

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.

ph on Zea mays (maize) against other targets

ph · pest on other organisms