Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield decrease”

379 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

plus 23 non-evaluative

Over time

1950 ’60 ’70 ’80 ’90 2000 ’10 ’20

plus 1 earlier · 1930s

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Lara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.

Taxon: Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
Material: Larae0
Outcome: decreasee0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0
“while with the other two cultivars (Lara and Sara), the decrease was not significant.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1046

t0
“Sugar beet”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–10

t1
“decrease of yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–898

Title

Sugar beet root yield and quality as affected by sowing date

Branko Marinković; Jovan Crnobarać; Goran Jačimović; et al. Zbornik radova Instituta za ratarstvo i povrtarstvo 2005

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect The first sowing date gave the highest root yield across cultivars and years.
Intervention effect First-date yield exceeded other sowing dates by 8.11 tha'1 (12.2%).
Intervention effect Mara yield decreased significantly on optimal sowing dates.
Intervention effect Sara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.
Association Sugar content variation was uncorrelated with sowing dates.
Association Root yield was the dominant contributor to sugar yield.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

One cluster had a nonsignificant yield decrease with narrower rows.

Taxon: SoybeanGlycine maxt0
Treatment: RS narrowede0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“one had a nonsignificant yield decrease as RS narrowed.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1128–1183

t0
“Soybean”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–32

Title

Row Spacing in the Early Soybean Production System

Glenn R. Bowers; James L. Rabb; Lanny O. Ashlock; et al. Agronomy Journal 2000. doi:10.2134/agronj2000.923524x

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Five environmental clusters had significant yield gains of 17–36% as rows narrowed.
Intervention effect Three other clusters had nonsignificant yield increases with narrower rows.
Intervention effect One cluster had virtually no yield change with narrower rows.
Association Yield responded most to row spacing at 100 to 270 mm July and August rainfall.
Recommendation The authors recommend rows at most 40 cm to optimize ESPS yields in the midsouthern USA.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

These combinations did not significantly decrease yield.

Taxon: grapet0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“without a significant decrease in yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 986–1025

t0
“Isabella grape variety”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 488–510

Title

Impact of combination application of herbicides and mineral fertilizers on the chemical composition of must and wine

Madina B. Khokonova Izvestiya of Kabardino-Balkarian State Agrarian University named after V M Kokov 2022. doi:10.55196/2411-3492-2022-3-37-26-30

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Combined herbicides and fertilizers generally left must sugar at control level.
Intervention effect Nitrate fertilizers with simazine increased wort sugar.
Intervention effect Nitrate fertilizers with atrazine increased wort sugar.
Observation Wort titratable acids did not differ significantly.
Intervention effect Atrazine plus NP slightly lowered wine titratable acids.
Intervention effect Atrazine plus NRK slightly lowered wine titratable acids.
Observation Coloring substances and total phenols tended to increase in all variants.
Observation Simazine with mineral fertilizers caused no sharp deviation in main must and wine components.
Observation Atrazine with mineral fertilizers caused no sharp deviation in main must and wine components.
Observation These herbicides and fertilizers did not negatively affect wine organoleptic properties.

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Lara showed a statistically insignificant straw yield decrease.

Material: Larae0
Outcome: straw yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“The Lara variety showed an insignificant decrease in the straw yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1139–1207

Title

Features of forming the productivity of modern hemp varieties using organic cultivation technology

Andriy Pylypchenko; Mykola Marenych; Volodymyr Hanhur; et al. Scientific Horizons 2023. doi:10.48077/scihor7.2023.54

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Organic cultivation increased crop productivity overall.
Intervention effect Organic cultivation increased Hliana straw yield by 0.07-0.11 t/ha, without statistical significance.
Intervention effect Organic cultivation increased Hloba straw yield within the stated 0.07-0.11 t/ha range, without statistical significance.
Intervention effect Organic cultivation increased Zolotoniski 15 straw yield by 0.14 t/ha.
Intervention effect Organic cultivation increased Sula straw yield by 0.14 t/ha.
Observation Lara had the best fibre-yield suitability for organic cultivation.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Thiourea tended to decrease straw yield nonsignificantly.

Taxon: wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment: application of TUe0
Outcome: straw yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“While the straw yield showed a decrease trend with the application of TU. Decrease in straw yield, although marginal was statistically insignificant.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1217

t0
“Wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–44

Title

Genetic Expression of Yield Ability in Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under Sulphydryl Enriched Biophysio-Environment

PC Gupta; Shiv Narayan; PS Shekhawat; et al. INROADS- An International Journal of Jaipur National University 2013. doi:10.5958/j.2277-4912.2.1.004

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observation The four wheat varieties differed significantly in yield and yield attributes.
Association Variety by thiourea dose interaction was nonsignificant.
Observation Thiourea at 5 and 10 kg/ha tended to increase wheat yield components.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 10 kg/ha increased harvest index by 10.11%.
Observation Thiourea at 20 kg/ha raised harvest index only marginally by 4.75.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 10 kg/ha significantly increased grain yield by 8.0%.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 5 kg/ha slightly increased grain yield over control.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 20 kg/ha slightly increased grain yield over control but reduced it versus 10 kg/ha.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.

Taxon: Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
Material: Sarae0
Outcome: decreasee0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0
“while with the other two cultivars (Lara and Sara), the decrease was not significant.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1046

t0
“Sugar beet”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–10

Title

Sugar beet root yield and quality as affected by sowing date

Branko Marinković; Jovan Crnobarać; Goran Jačimović; et al. Zbornik radova Instituta za ratarstvo i povrtarstvo 2005

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect The first sowing date gave the highest root yield across cultivars and years.
Intervention effect First-date yield exceeded other sowing dates by 8.11 tha'1 (12.2%).
Intervention effect Mara yield decreased significantly on optimal sowing dates.
Intervention effect Lara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.
Association Sugar content variation was uncorrelated with sowing dates.
Association Root yield was the dominant contributor to sugar yield.

Associationobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The maize yield decrease from delayed emergence was not statistically related to yield stability zones.

Taxon: maizeZea mayse0
Outcome: maize yielde0
Direction: decreasee0
Setting: yield stability zonese0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The decrease in maize yield caused by the delay in emergence was not statistically related to yield stability zones”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2129–2244

Title

Plant emergence and maize (Zea mays L.) yield across multiple farmers’ fields

S. Albarenque; B. Basso; O. Davidson; et al. Field Crops Research 2023. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2023.109090

Other claims from this paper (7)

Observation Individual maize emergence occurred 3 to 31 days after planting.
Association Emergence timing variation affected yield and yield components more than within-row spacing variation.
Association The impact of emergence variation was generally larger in stable low-yield areas.
Association Plant yield fell by 7% per day of emergence delay.
Association Grain number fell by 6% per day of emergence delay.
Association Final crop yield fell by 8.5% per day of emergence delay.
Association Delayed emergence tended to have a more negative impact in low yield stability zones.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield did not significantly decrease through the eight-day irrigation interval.

Taxon: RICEOryza sativat0
Treatment: 8We0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0
Comparator: continuous flooding (W)e1

Verbatim

e0
“without any significant decrease in yield up to 8W”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 905–955

t0
“RICE”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 64–68

e1
“continuous flooding (W) without any significant decrease”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–937

Title

IRRIGATION REGIME AND POTASSIUM LEVELS EFFECTS ON YIELD OF SOME RICE GENOTYPES, WATER USE EFFICIENCY (WUE) AND ECONOMIC RETURNS

Howida El-Habet Journal of Plant Production 2014. doi:10.21608/jpp.2014.53654

Other claims from this paper (17)

Observation Giza179 had higher grain yield and yield attributes than GZ7112 under continuous flooding.
Intervention effect Twelve-day irrigation significantly reduced rice yield.
Intervention effect At 4W, Giza179 saved 10.36% and 8.37% irrigation water in 2012 and 2013.
Intervention effect At 4W, GZ7112 saved 10.50% and 10.36% irrigation water.
Intervention effect At 8W, Giza179 saved 17.81% and 23.66% water.
Intervention effect At 8W, GZ7112 saved 13.33% and 18.44% water.
Intervention effect At 12W, irrigation water savings were 23.91% and 27.90% across the two seasons.
Intervention effect At 12W, grain yield was reduced about 22.42% and 24.71% in 2012 and 2013.
Observation Giza179 yielded 9.70 t/ha across both seasons.
Observation GZ7112 yielded 9.33 t/ha across both seasons.
Observation Giza179 saved 20.73% water across both seasons.
Observation GZ7112 saved 15.88% water across both seasons.
Observation Giza179 water use efficiency was 0.90 kg/m3.
Observation GZ7112 water use efficiency was 0.81 kg/m3.
Observation With Giza179 at 8W, total water input was reported as 11260.88 and 10006.80 m3/ha.
Intervention effect Potassium application up to 108 K2O/ha significantly increased rice yield.
Intervention effect Potassium application up to 108 K2O/ha mitigated water stress and increased WUE and water savings.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nei2you 6 yield did not decrease significantly under light water stress.

Material: Nei2you 6e0
Treatment: light water stresse0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0
“yield of Nei2you 6 did not decrease significantly under light water stress”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 170–244

Title

Effects of soil moisture on the accumulation of rice dry matter and yield

Li Hua; Wang DongYin; Defeng Zhu Xi'nan nongye xuebao 2008

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced Nei2you 6 yield by 15.2%.
Intervention effect Yield of Ⅱyou 7954 increased under soil water stress.
Observation Nei2you 6 was more sensitive to soil water stress than Ⅱyou 7954.
Intervention effect Moderate water stress decreased Nei2you 6 dry matter accumulation by 22.0%.
Intervention effect Light water stress increased Ⅱyou 7954 dry matter accumulation by 8.4%.
Intervention effect Moderate water stress increased Ⅱyou 7954 dry matter accumulation by 4.7%.
Intervention effect Soil water stress lowered dry matter transmission to the panicle in Nei2you 6 relative to the check.
Intervention effect Soil water stress raised dry matter transmission to the panicle in Ⅱyou 7954 relative to the check.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Light water stress did not significantly decrease Nei2you6 yield.

Taxon: riceOryza sativat0
Material: Nei2you6e0
Treatment: light water stresse0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: didn't decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The results indicated that the yield of Nei2you6 didn't decrease significantly under light water stress”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 201–304

t0
“rice”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–63

Title

Effects of soil moisture on superficial roots and yield of rice

Li Hua; Zhang Yu-ping Ganhan diqu nongye yanjiu 2006

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced Nei2you6 yield by 15.2%.
Intervention effect Soil water stress increased yield of Ⅱyou7954.
Observation Nei2you6 was more sensitive to soil water stress than Ⅱyou7954.
Intervention effect Light water stress slightly promoted superficial root growth.
Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced superficial root dry weight of Nei2you6 by 10.5%~31.6%.
Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced superficial root dry weight of Ⅱyou7954 by 13%.
Intervention effect Soil water stress enhanced superficial root activity.
Intervention effect Root cutting at panicle initiation caused more yield reduction than at flowering.
Intervention effect Cutting roots at panicle initiation decreased grain number per panicle.
Intervention effect Cutting roots at flowering decreased spikelet fertility rate.

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