Paper · 2005 · Xibei Nong-Lin Keji Daxue xuebao. Ziran kexue ban

Influence of different organic compound substrates on the growth of cucumber seedling

Cao Hong

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The study was conducted to investigate the effects of five compound substrates on the growth of cucumber seedling.The result showed that mushroom dregs∶corn straw∶peat=2∶2∶1 (T 1) was the best formula,but there was no significant difference between mushroom dregs∶corn straw∶sand=2∶2∶1 (T 2) and T 1 on 5% level in the leaf chlorophyll content,root vigor and seedling quality.However,the substrates for T 2 were easier to get because there was no peat in the formula.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The mushroom dregs, corn straw and peat 2:2:1 substrate was the best formula for cucumber seedlings.

Taxon
cucumber seedlingCucumis sativust0
Treatment
mushroom dregs∶corn straw∶peat=2∶2∶1e0
Outcome
best formulae0
Direction
beste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“mushroom dregs∶corn straw∶peat=2∶2∶1 (T 1) was the best formula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–200 · show in text ↑
t0

“Influence of different organic compound substrates on the growth of cucumber seedling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The peat and sand formulas did not differ significantly in leaf chlorophyll content, root vigor and seedling quality.

Taxon
cucumber seedlingCucumis sativust0
Treatment
mushroom dregs∶corn straw∶sand=2∶2∶1e0
Outcome
leaf chlorophyll content,root vigor and seedling qualitye0
Direction
no significant differencee0
Comparator
T 1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“there was no significant difference between mushroom dregs∶corn straw∶sand=2∶2∶1 (T 2) and T 1 on 5% level in the leaf chlorophyll content,root vigor and seedling quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 205–375 · show in text ↑
t0

“Influence of different organic compound substrates on the growth of cucumber seedling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The T2 substrate ingredients were easier to obtain because the formula contained no peat.

Taxon
cucumber seedlingCucumis sativust0
Material
T 2e0
Outcome
easier to gete0
Direction
easiere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the substrates for T 2 were easier to get because there was no peat in the formula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 384–466 · show in text ↑
t0

“Influence of different organic compound substrates on the growth of cucumber seedling”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–85 · show in text ↑

growing medium · physiology: pigments · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 10 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 10 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.