View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect author interpretation original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Low combined pest densities did not decrease canola yield .
low combined densities e0 do not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “low combined densities do not decrease yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1078–1122 t0 “Brassica napus L.
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–95 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Halving insect visits caused little decrease in sunflower yield .
insect visits were reduced by 50% e0 little decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “little decrease in yield when insect visits were reduced by 50% ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 630–693 e1 “in sunflower ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–220 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
The liquid spray did not significantly decrease potato yield .
Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “Alternative protection of potatoes ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–34 e3 “The liquid spray against the late blight (Phytophthora infestans ) did not signincantly decrease neither occurrence oflate blight or the yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 377–518 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Halving insect visits caused little sunflower yield decrease .
insect visits were reduced by 50% e0 little decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “little decrease in yield when insect visits were reduced by 50% ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 632–695 t0 “in sunflower, combining a gradient in insect pollination ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–264 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Spraying against late blight did not significantly decrease yield .
Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The liquid spray against the late blight (Phytophthora infestans ) did not significantly decrease neither occurrence of late blight or the yield . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 384–528 t0 “BIOPOTATOES ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–36 Other claims from this paper (6) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Bromoxynil did not decrease mean yield of the three rice cultivars.
did not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Bromoxynil did not decrease the average yield of any of the three cultivars. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 855–931 t0 “Rice (Oryza sativa ) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–41 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
One simulated defoliation did not decrease cassava root yield .
A single defoliation e0 does not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “A single defoliation of cassava (to simulate Z. variegatus feeding damage) does not decrease root yield , but additional ones do. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3181–3309 Other claims from this paper (10) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Selection for nematode resistance did not decrease sugar beet root yield .
Selection for resistance to nematode e0 did not decrease e0 Not reported Taxon Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Selection for resistance to nematode did not decrease root yield s. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–249 Other claims from this paper (1) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Infection beginning at tillering or grain filling caused no observed yield loss or yield -component decrease .
tillering or grain filling e0 yield loss or decrease in yield components e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “No yield loss or decrease in yield components was observed when infection started at tillering or grain filling ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1507–1618 e1 “Sheath blight (Rhizoctonia solani ) of rice (Oryza sativa ) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–57 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Rizoplan can be used without a significant decrease in biological efficiency and yield indicators.
biological efficiency and yield indicators e3 without a significant e3 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “GRAPEVINE RESISTANCE ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–78 e3 “The possibility of using Rizoplan without a significant decrease in biological efficiency and yield indicators was established ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 535–661 Other claims from this paper (5) Lexical search (BM25). All words must match; if nothing does, any word. Organism names also match every spelling of the same organism. No semantic search yet.
_Brassica_napus_-_Habit.jpg?width=60)
Brassica napust0
Helianthus annuus
Solanum tuberosum
Phytophthora infestans
Oryza sativa
Manihot esculenta.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
Zonocerus variegatus
Rhizoctonia solani
Vitis