- calcium atomPositive and negative results4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect
- (+)-abscisic acidPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
- aluminium atomPositive and negative results3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect
- Gibberellic acidPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- calcium chloride dihydratePositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- 1-naphthaleneacetic acidResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- calcium carbonateResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- applicationPositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- storagePositive and negative results3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- inoculationPositive and negative results2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect
- coldResults agree3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect
- fertilizationResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- mulchingResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- nitrogenResults agree3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- droughtResults agree2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect
- phosphorusResults agree2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect
- potassiumResults 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.