Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield decrease”

16,586 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

plus 2,650 non-evaluative

Over time

1950 ’60 ’70 ’80 ’90 2000 ’10 ’20

plus 19 earlier · 1910s–1940s

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bio-humus increased thousand-grain mass by 16.12%.

Taxon: spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
Treatment: bio humuse0
Outcome: mass of 1,000 grainse0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 16.12%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The introduction of bio humus in the tilth top soil before sowing and during tillering of spring wheat contributed to the increase in humus composition by 1.88 times, the change in acidity to pH = 6.9–7.0, reduction of lead and cadmium concentrations in 1.63 and 1.20 times against the background of increased zinc and cobalt levels by 15.62% and 7.98%; increase of field germination of spring wheat from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 8…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1145–1932

Title

Influence of bio-humus on soil fertility, productivity and environmental safety of spring wheat grain

Muhamedyarova, L.G.; Derkho, M.A.; Meshcheriakova, G.V.; et al. Eesti Maaülikool. EMU Dspace 2020. doi:10.15159/ar.20.152

Other claims from this paper (16)

Observation The study soil had low humus content of 4.58–4.60%.
Observation The study soil had a weak acid reaction at pH 6.1–6.5.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil humus composition 1.88-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus changed soil acidity to pH 6.9–7.0.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil lead concentration 1.63-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil cadmium concentration 1.20-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil zinc level by 15.62%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil cobalt level by 7.98%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spring wheat field germination from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 82.0 ± 0.9%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased developed harvestable stems per square metre by 10.15%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased productive tilling capacity by 8.33%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spikes per ear by 20%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased grain per ear by 7.69%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased wheat yield by 10.2 hwt ha-1.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain lead concentration by 14%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain cadmium concentration by 16%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bio-humus changed soil acidity to pH 6.9–7.0.

Taxon: spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
Treatment: bio humuse0
Outcome: aciditye0
Direction: changee0
Value: pH = 6.9–7.0e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The introduction of bio humus in the tilth top soil before sowing and during tillering of spring wheat contributed to the increase in humus composition by 1.88 times, the change in acidity to pH = 6.9–7.0, reduction of lead and cadmium concentrations in 1.63 and 1.20 times against the background of increased zinc and cobalt levels by 15.62% and 7.98%; increase of field germination of spring wheat from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 8…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1145–1932

Title

Influence of bio-humus on soil fertility, productivity and environmental safety of spring wheat grain

Muhamedyarova, L.G.; Derkho, M.A.; Meshcheriakova, G.V.; et al. Eesti Maaülikool. EMU Dspace 2020. doi:10.15159/ar.20.152

Other claims from this paper (16)

Observation The study soil had low humus content of 4.58–4.60%.
Observation The study soil had a weak acid reaction at pH 6.1–6.5.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil humus composition 1.88-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil lead concentration 1.63-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil cadmium concentration 1.20-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil zinc level by 15.62%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil cobalt level by 7.98%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spring wheat field germination from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 82.0 ± 0.9%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased developed harvestable stems per square metre by 10.15%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased productive tilling capacity by 8.33%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spikes per ear by 20%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased grain per ear by 7.69%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased thousand-grain mass by 16.12%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased wheat yield by 10.2 hwt ha-1.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain lead concentration by 14%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain cadmium concentration by 16%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bio-humus increased grain per ear by 7.69%.

Taxon: spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
Treatment: bio humuse0
Outcome: average quantity of grain per eare0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 7.69%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The introduction of bio humus in the tilth top soil before sowing and during tillering of spring wheat contributed to the increase in humus composition by 1.88 times, the change in acidity to pH = 6.9–7.0, reduction of lead and cadmium concentrations in 1.63 and 1.20 times against the background of increased zinc and cobalt levels by 15.62% and 7.98%; increase of field germination of spring wheat from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 8…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1145–1932

Title

Influence of bio-humus on soil fertility, productivity and environmental safety of spring wheat grain

Muhamedyarova, L.G.; Derkho, M.A.; Meshcheriakova, G.V.; et al. Eesti Maaülikool. EMU Dspace 2020. doi:10.15159/ar.20.152

Other claims from this paper (16)

Observation The study soil had low humus content of 4.58–4.60%.
Observation The study soil had a weak acid reaction at pH 6.1–6.5.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil humus composition 1.88-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus changed soil acidity to pH 6.9–7.0.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil lead concentration 1.63-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil cadmium concentration 1.20-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil zinc level by 15.62%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil cobalt level by 7.98%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spring wheat field germination from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 82.0 ± 0.9%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased developed harvestable stems per square metre by 10.15%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased productive tilling capacity by 8.33%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spikes per ear by 20%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased thousand-grain mass by 16.12%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased wheat yield by 10.2 hwt ha-1.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain lead concentration by 14%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain cadmium concentration by 16%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined tillage reduced irrigation water loss by 112.4 cubic m per ton of grain.

Taxon: riceOryza sativat0
Treatment: winter plowing to a depth of 0.25–0.27 m in combination with spring deep loosening to a depth of 0.40 me0
Outcome: irrigation water losse0
Direction: reductione0
Value: 112.4 cubic me0
Qualifier: for the formation of 1 ton of graine0
Comparator: traditional winter plowing in one stepe0

Verbatim

t0
“rice cultivation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 118–134

e0
“winter plowing to a depth of 0.25–0.27 m in combination with spring deep loosening to a depth of 0.40 m, in comparison with traditional winter plowing in one step, provides a decrease in soil density in a layer of 0.0–0.4 m by 0.10 (after sowing) and 0.12 t/cubic m (during the period of full ripeness of grain), which contributes to the yield increase to 6.95 t/ha and a reduction in irrigation water loss by 112.4 cubi…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1402–1862

Title

The effect of agro-reclamation techniques on water-physical characteristics of light chestnut heavy loamy soil during rice cultivation against the background of sprinkling under the conditions of the Lower Volga region

Ivan P. Kruzhilin; Muslim A. Ganiev; Konstantin A. Rodin; et al. Land Reclamation and Hydraulic Engineering 2024. doi:10.31774/2712-9357-2024-14-1-155-166

Other claims from this paper (10)

Observation Post-sowing soil density ranged from 1.19 to 1.41 t/cubic m.
Observation A2B3 had the minimum reported soil density of 1.23 t/cubic m.
Observation A1B1 had maximum soil compaction of 1.34 t/cubic m.
Observation Soil compacted in every tillage option by grain maturity.
Intervention effect Winter plowing plus spring deep loosening had minimum maturity-stage compaction of 1.34 t/cubic m.
Observation A2B3 gave the minimum water consumption coefficient, 851.7 cubic m/t.
Observation A2B3 gave minimum irrigation water loss, 703.6 cubic m/t.
Intervention effect Combined winter plowing and spring deep loosening lowered post-sowing soil density by 0.10.
Intervention effect Combined tillage lowered maturity-stage soil density by 0.12 t/cubic m.
Intervention effect Combined tillage increased grain yield to 6.95 t/ha.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bio-humus increased developed harvestable stems per square metre by 10.15%.

Taxon: spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
Treatment: bio humuse0
Outcome: quantity of developed stems to be harvested per 1 m2e0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 10.15%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The introduction of bio humus in the tilth top soil before sowing and during tillering of spring wheat contributed to the increase in humus composition by 1.88 times, the change in acidity to pH = 6.9–7.0, reduction of lead and cadmium concentrations in 1.63 and 1.20 times against the background of increased zinc and cobalt levels by 15.62% and 7.98%; increase of field germination of spring wheat from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 8…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1145–1932

Title

Influence of bio-humus on soil fertility, productivity and environmental safety of spring wheat grain

Muhamedyarova, L.G.; Derkho, M.A.; Meshcheriakova, G.V.; et al. Eesti Maaülikool. EMU Dspace 2020. doi:10.15159/ar.20.152

Other claims from this paper (16)

Observation The study soil had low humus content of 4.58–4.60%.
Observation The study soil had a weak acid reaction at pH 6.1–6.5.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil humus composition 1.88-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus changed soil acidity to pH 6.9–7.0.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil lead concentration 1.63-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil cadmium concentration 1.20-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil zinc level by 15.62%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil cobalt level by 7.98%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spring wheat field germination from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 82.0 ± 0.9%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased productive tilling capacity by 8.33%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spikes per ear by 20%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased grain per ear by 7.69%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased thousand-grain mass by 16.12%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased wheat yield by 10.2 hwt ha-1.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain lead concentration by 14%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain cadmium concentration by 16%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bio-humus increased spring wheat field germination from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 82.0 ± 0.9%.

Taxon: spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
Treatment: bio humuse0
Outcome: field germination of spring wheate0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 75.0 ± 0.4 to 82.0 ± 0.9%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The introduction of bio humus in the tilth top soil before sowing and during tillering of spring wheat contributed to the increase in humus composition by 1.88 times, the change in acidity to pH = 6.9–7.0, reduction of lead and cadmium concentrations in 1.63 and 1.20 times against the background of increased zinc and cobalt levels by 15.62% and 7.98%; increase of field germination of spring wheat from 75.0 ± 0.4 to 8…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1145–1932

Title

Influence of bio-humus on soil fertility, productivity and environmental safety of spring wheat grain

Muhamedyarova, L.G.; Derkho, M.A.; Meshcheriakova, G.V.; et al. Eesti Maaülikool. EMU Dspace 2020. doi:10.15159/ar.20.152

Other claims from this paper (16)

Observation The study soil had low humus content of 4.58–4.60%.
Observation The study soil had a weak acid reaction at pH 6.1–6.5.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil humus composition 1.88-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus changed soil acidity to pH 6.9–7.0.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil lead concentration 1.63-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus reduced soil cadmium concentration 1.20-fold.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil zinc level by 15.62%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased soil cobalt level by 7.98%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased developed harvestable stems per square metre by 10.15%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased productive tilling capacity by 8.33%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased spikes per ear by 20%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased grain per ear by 7.69%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased thousand-grain mass by 16.12%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus increased wheat yield by 10.2 hwt ha-1.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain lead concentration by 14%.
Intervention effect Bio-humus decreased spring wheat grain cadmium concentration by 16%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The irrigation and fertilization program increased EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK).

Taxon: ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment: moderate irrigation (2919.34 - 3157.88m3/fed./year) and the fertilization program/fed./year (33.33% mineral NPK +33.33% organic NPK + 33.33% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizer NPK)e0
Outcome: EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK)e0
Direction: increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Theresults indicated that use of moderate irrigation (2919.34 - 3157.88m3/fed./year) and the fertilization program/fed./year (33.33% mineral NPK +33.33% organic NPK + 33.33% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizer NPK)followed by (50% organic NPK + 50% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizers NPK)exhibited decrease in pH and increased (EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK), soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activ…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 967–1815

t0
“"WASHINGTON NAVEL" ORANGE TREES”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–73

Title

IRRIGATION AND FERTILIZATION PROGRAMS FOR "WASHINGTON NAVEL" ORANGE TREES IN SANDY SOIL UNDER DESERT CLIMATIC CONDITIONS. 1- EFFECT ON SOIL PROPERTIES, VEGETATIVE GROWTH AND YIELD

M Zayan; R Sayed; El-Shereif; et al. Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Sciences 2016. doi:10.21608/jsas.2016.2886

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program decrease pH.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program increased soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activity.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve trunk cross-sectional area(TCSA), canopy volume (CV), number of shoots.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve average shoot length, averageshoots diameter and number of leaves/shoot.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve leaf area,leaf dry weight and specific leaf weight.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program best fruityield with its components as number of fruits/tree, kg/tree, ton/fed. and yieldefficiency (YE).
Intervention effect Deficit irrigation with the same fertilization program increased field water use efficiency and water productivity.
Recommendation The authors recommend both programs to save irrigation water and replace chemical fertilizer under the study conditions.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The irrigation and fertilization program increased soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activity.

Taxon: ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment: moderate irrigation (2919.34 - 3157.88m3/fed./year) and the fertilization program/fed./year (33.33% mineral NPK +33.33% organic NPK + 33.33% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizer NPK)e0
Outcome: soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activitye0
Direction: increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Theresults indicated that use of moderate irrigation (2919.34 - 3157.88m3/fed./year) and the fertilization program/fed./year (33.33% mineral NPK +33.33% organic NPK + 33.33% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizer NPK)followed by (50% organic NPK + 50% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizers NPK)exhibited decrease in pH and increased (EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK), soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activ…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 967–1815

t0
“"WASHINGTON NAVEL" ORANGE TREES”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–73

Title

IRRIGATION AND FERTILIZATION PROGRAMS FOR "WASHINGTON NAVEL" ORANGE TREES IN SANDY SOIL UNDER DESERT CLIMATIC CONDITIONS. 1- EFFECT ON SOIL PROPERTIES, VEGETATIVE GROWTH AND YIELD

M Zayan; R Sayed; El-Shereif; et al. Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Sciences 2016. doi:10.21608/jsas.2016.2886

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program decrease pH.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program increased EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK).
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve trunk cross-sectional area(TCSA), canopy volume (CV), number of shoots.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve average shoot length, averageshoots diameter and number of leaves/shoot.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve leaf area,leaf dry weight and specific leaf weight.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program best fruityield with its components as number of fruits/tree, kg/tree, ton/fed. and yieldefficiency (YE).
Intervention effect Deficit irrigation with the same fertilization program increased field water use efficiency and water productivity.
Recommendation The authors recommend both programs to save irrigation water and replace chemical fertilizer under the study conditions.

Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors proposed spectral changes as the cause of greater resistance under Eu3+:LaF3.

Taxon: cucumbers (Cucumis sativus)Cucumis sativuse1
Treatment: Eu3+:LaF3 applicationse0
Outcome: an increase in plant resistancee0
Qualifier: changes in the illumination spectrume1

Verbatim

e0
“an increase in plant resistance in the case of Eu3+:LaF3 applications”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1564–1633

e1
“cucumbers (Cucumis sativus) were used as model plants. It was shown that plants grown under cover with Eu2O3 (PCC-Eu2O3) were 30–40% larger, gave a higher yield, and the activation of gas exchange processes and the light phase of photosynthesis in the leaves in response to the lighting was faster. On the contrary, plants grown under cover with Eu3+:LaF3 (PCC-Eu3+:LaF3) tended to slow down the rate of biomass accumula…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 535–1466

Title

Two Types of Europium-Based Photoconversion Covers for Greenhouse Farming with Different Effects on Plants

Mark O. Paskhin; Denis V. Yanykin; Alexander V. Popov; et al. Horticulturae 2023. doi:10.3390/horticulturae9070846

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect Eu2O3 cover increased plant size by 30–40%.
Intervention effect Eu2O3 cover increased yield.
Intervention effect Eu2O3 cover sped activation of gas exchange and the light phase of photosynthesis.
Intervention effect Eu3+:LaF3 cover tended to slow biomass accumulation.
Intervention effect Eu3+:LaF3 cover tended to decrease gas exchange activation.
Intervention effect Eu2O3 cover made plants more sensitive to heat and cold treatment.
Intervention effect Eu3+:LaF3 cover made plants more resistant to high and low temperatures.
Intervention effect Eu2O3 cover inhibited Phytophthora infestans development on tomato plants.
Mechanism The authors proposed spectral changes as the cause of growth activation under Eu2O3.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The irrigation and fertilization program improve leaf area,leaf dry weight and specific leaf weight.

Taxon: ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment: moderate irrigation (2919.34 - 3157.88m3/fed./year) and the fertilization program/fed./year (33.33% mineral NPK +33.33% organic NPK + 33.33% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizer NPK)e0
Outcome: leaf area,leaf dry weight and specific leaf weighte0
Direction: improvee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Theresults indicated that use of moderate irrigation (2919.34 - 3157.88m3/fed./year) and the fertilization program/fed./year (33.33% mineral NPK +33.33% organic NPK + 33.33% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizer NPK)followed by (50% organic NPK + 50% mixed mineral ore + bio-fertilizers NPK)exhibited decrease in pH and increased (EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK), soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activ…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 967–1815

t0
“"WASHINGTON NAVEL" ORANGE TREES”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–73

Title

IRRIGATION AND FERTILIZATION PROGRAMS FOR "WASHINGTON NAVEL" ORANGE TREES IN SANDY SOIL UNDER DESERT CLIMATIC CONDITIONS. 1- EFFECT ON SOIL PROPERTIES, VEGETATIVE GROWTH AND YIELD

M Zayan; R Sayed; El-Shereif; et al. Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Sciences 2016. doi:10.21608/jsas.2016.2886

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program decrease pH.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program increased EC, O.M., available macronutrients(NPK).
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program increased soil microorganisms content and dehydrogenase activity.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve trunk cross-sectional area(TCSA), canopy volume (CV), number of shoots.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program improve average shoot length, averageshoots diameter and number of leaves/shoot.
Intervention effect The irrigation and fertilization program best fruityield with its components as number of fruits/tree, kg/tree, ton/fed. and yieldefficiency (YE).
Intervention effect Deficit irrigation with the same fertilization program increased field water use efficiency and water productivity.
Recommendation The authors recommend both programs to save irrigation water and replace chemical fertilizer under the study conditions.

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.

“yield decrease”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics