Search claims · PlantClaims

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativeprojected

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield is projected to decrease across locations.

Taxon: wheatTriticum aestivume0
Outcome: wheat yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“wheat yield would decrease across locations.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1247–1291

Title

Effects of a wheat rotation on cotton production in a changing climate: a simulation study

Q Luo; M Bange; P Devoil Climate Research 2016. doi:10.3354/cr01413

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect For irrigated cotton, three years in and one year out is projected to give the best lint yield.
Intervention effect Cotton yields are projected to decrease under changing climate at most locations across crop sequences.
Intervention effect Wheat yields are projected to decrease more than cotton yields under changing climate.
Intervention effect Rain-fed continuous cotton is projected to perform better at Emerald, Dalby and/or Narrabri with solid and single skip rows.
Intervention effect A cotton-wheat sequence is projected to outperform continuous cotton for lint yields with double skip rows at Emerald, Moree and Narrabri.
Recommendation The authors recommend combining better crop sequences with other adaptation options to maintain production.

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The Isareg model estimated average maize grain yield decrease of 25.1%.

Taxon: MAIZEZea mayst0
Outcome: grain yielde0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 25.1%e0

Verbatim

e0
“The model estimated an average grain yield decrease of 25.1%.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 694–755

t0
“WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

Title

WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST

CLÍSTENES ANTÔNIO GUADAGNIN; EDGAR RICARDO SCHOFFEL; HELVIO DEBLI CASALINHO; et al. Revista Brasileira de Milho e Sorgo 2017. doi:10.18512/1980-6477/rbms.v16n1p61-71

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observation The largest maize yield decrease occurred with early August sowing.
Observation The smallest maize yield decrease occurred with late January to February sowings.
Observation Yield decrease varied by up to 3.9% among maturation cycles.
Method / resource Isareg was judged appropriate for estimating grain yield decrease.
Method / resource Isareg overestimated yield decrease when relative evapotranspiration exceeded 0.8.
Observation A 40% grain yield decrease had a 10.5% occurrence probability.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fomesafen did not injure strawberry or decrease yield.

Taxon: strawberryFragaria ×ananassae0
Outcome: injure strawberry or decrease yielde2

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“provides PRE weed control in strawberry”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 111–150

e2
“Fomesafen did not injure strawberry or decrease yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–830

Title

Persistence and Movement of Fomesafen in Florida Strawberry Production

Thomas V. Reed; Nathan S. Boyd; P. Christopher Wilson; et al. Weed Science 2018. doi:10.1017/wsc.2018.48

Other claims from this paper (4)

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The cultivar had a significant decrease in grain yield.

Taxon: triticale×Triticosecalet0
Outcome: grain yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“which resulted in a significant decrease in its grain yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–940

t0
“triticale”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–108

Title

Rapid plant rehydration initiates permanent and adverse changes in the photosynthetic apparatus of triticale

Tomasz Hura; Katarzyna Hura; Agnieszka Ostrowska; et al. Plant and Soil 2015. doi:10.1007/s11104-015-2607-1

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect Rehydration further increased hydrogen peroxide in the cultivar that did not fully recover.
Intervention effect Rehydration inhibited photosynthetic apparatus activity compared with drought in that cultivar.
Observation On day 42 of rehydration, flag leaf photosynthetic activity was reduced.
Intervention effect Rapid rehydration lowered total peroxidase activity in its first week.
Intervention effect Rapid rehydration lowered catalase activity in its first week.
Observation Gradual restoration of leaf water content compensated increased hydrogen peroxide.
Observation Gradual leaf water restoration prevented further decline in photosynthetic apparatus activity.
Mechanism Rapid rehydration intensified physiological processes associated with reactive oxygen species overproduction.
Mechanism The authors suggest electron leakage from an overloaded electron transport chain causes hydrogen peroxide overproduction.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositiveprojected

Claim · model-written summary

Probability of a yield decrease declined from 1.5 to 2.0 °C warming.

Outcome: probability of a crop yield decreasee0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“the probability of a crop yield decrease would decrease”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2124–2179

Title

Impacts of climate change and climate extremes on major crops productivity in China at a global warming of 1.5 and 2.0 °C

Yi Chen; Zhao Zhang; Fulu Tao Earth System Dynamics 2018. doi:10.5194/esd-9-543-2018

Other claims from this paper (15)

Observation Climate change projected shorter crop growth duration.
Observation Climate change projected more extreme events.
Observation Moderate climate change could enhance canopy photosynthesis.
Observation Moderate climate change could enhance biomass accumulation and yields.
Observation Moderate change slightly worsened the maize growth environment.
Observation Moderate change made the wheat growth environment more appropriate.
Observation Moderate change made the rice growth environment more appropriate.
Observation Wheat yield was projected to change +3.9% at 1.5 °C.
Observation Wheat yield was projected to change +8.6% at 2.0 °C.
Observation Rice yield was projected to change +4.1% at 1.5 °C.
Observation Rice yield was projected to change +9.4% at 2.0 °C.
Observation Maize yield was projected to change +0.2% at 1.5 °C.
Observation Maize yield was projected to change −1.7% at 2.0 °C.
Observation Yield variability increased from 1.5 to 2.0 °C warming.
Recommendation The authors consider 2.0 °C warming more suitable for crop production in China.

Observationobservedoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

A 40% grain yield decrease had a 10.5% occurrence probability.

Taxon: MAIZEZea mayst0
Outcome: probability of occurrencee0
Value: 10.5%e0
Qualifier: 40% of grain yield decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“The levels of 40% of grain yield decrease present 10.5% of probability of occurrence.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1116–1201

t0
“WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

Title

WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST

CLÍSTENES ANTÔNIO GUADAGNIN; EDGAR RICARDO SCHOFFEL; HELVIO DEBLI CASALINHO; et al. Revista Brasileira de Milho e Sorgo 2017. doi:10.18512/1980-6477/rbms.v16n1p61-71

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observation The Isareg model estimated average maize grain yield decrease of 25.1%.
Observation The largest maize yield decrease occurred with early August sowing.
Observation The smallest maize yield decrease occurred with late January to February sowings.
Observation Yield decrease varied by up to 3.9% among maturation cycles.
Method / resource Isareg was judged appropriate for estimating grain yield decrease.
Method / resource Isareg overestimated yield decrease when relative evapotranspiration exceeded 0.8.

Observationauthor interpretationreview summarymeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Diseases may decrease marketable root yield.

Taxon: table beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
Outcome: yield of marketable rootse0
Direction: decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“decrease the yield of marketable roots”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 275–313

t0
“table beet”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 107–117

Title

Challenges and Prospects for Building Resilient Disease Management Strategies and Tactics for the New York Table Beet Industry

Sarah J. Pethybridge; Julie R. Kikkert; Linda E. Hanson; et al. Agronomy 2018. doi:10.3390/agronomy8070112

Other claims from this paper (12)

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The largest maize yield decrease occurred with early August sowing.

Taxon: MAIZEZea mayst0
Treatment: initial sowing of Auguste0
Outcome: decreasee0
Direction: biggeste0
Setting: Auguste0

Verbatim

e0
“The biggest decrease took place in the initial sowing of August”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 756–819

t0
“WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

Title

WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST

CLÍSTENES ANTÔNIO GUADAGNIN; EDGAR RICARDO SCHOFFEL; HELVIO DEBLI CASALINHO; et al. Revista Brasileira de Milho e Sorgo 2017. doi:10.18512/1980-6477/rbms.v16n1p61-71

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observation The Isareg model estimated average maize grain yield decrease of 25.1%.
Observation The smallest maize yield decrease occurred with late January to February sowings.
Observation Yield decrease varied by up to 3.9% among maturation cycles.
Method / resource Isareg was judged appropriate for estimating grain yield decrease.
Method / resource Isareg overestimated yield decrease when relative evapotranspiration exceeded 0.8.
Observation A 40% grain yield decrease had a 10.5% occurrence probability.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 4M:6S ratio did not decrease subsequent wheat yield.

Taxon: wheatTriticum aestivume0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“but it did not decrease yield of wheat.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1740–1779

Title

Row Ratios of Intercropping Maize and Soybean Can Affect Agronomic Efficiency of the System and Subsequent Wheat

Yitao Zhang; Jian Liu; Jizong Zhang; et al. PLoS ONE 2015. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129245

Other claims from this paper (14)

Observation Maize–soybean intercropping was the optimal summer cropping system.
Intervention effect Maize–soybean intercropping improved yield, economy and land utilization relative to maize monoculture.
Intervention effect Maize–soybean intercropping reduced soil nitrate accumulation relative to maize monoculture.
Observation Maize–soybean intercropping improved the residual effect on subsequent wheat.
Observation Intercropping reduced nitrogen fertilizer use per unit area.
Observation Intercropping increased relative maize biomass.
Observation Border-row photosynthetic efficiency and nitrogen utilization were promoted during intercropping.
Observation Intercropping advantage emerged at tasseling after maize nitrogen topdressing.
Intervention effect The 4M:6S row ratio had the largest land equivalent ratio of 1.30.
Intervention effect The 4M:6S row ratio had the greatest crop nitrogen accumulation of 258 kg ha(-1).
Intervention effect The 4M:6S row ratio had the greatest economic benefit of 3,408 USD ha(-1).
Intervention effect The 4M:6S ratio lowered soil nitrate after maize harvest compared with maize monoculture.
Intervention effect The 4M:6S ratio lowered soil nitrate after subsequent wheat harvest compared with maize monoculture.
Recommendation The authors recommended alternating four maize rows with six soybean rows as the optimum ratio, subject to further multiyear confirmation.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Liaoyan 16 yield components did not decrease markedly under weedy rice interference.

Taxon: Liaoyan 16e0
Outcome: yield componentse0
Direction: no decrease markerlye0

Verbatim

e0
“However,the yield components of Liaoyan 16 was no decrease markerly.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 630–698

Title

Ecological Control of Weedy Rice by Different Morphological Type Rice

Wenfu Chen Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica 2010

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Liaoyan 16 reduced weedy rice height, leaf area, dry weight, and tiller number relative to Shennong 265.
Intervention effect At 12 weedy rice plants per square meter, Shennong 265 panicle number, leaf area index and dry matter weight decreased seriously.
Intervention effect Weedy rice interference caused a decline in rice yield.
Observation Liaoyan 16 competed more strongly than Shennong 265.

“yield decrease”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics