View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper A claim can belong to several research areas, so group counts add up to more than the total.
Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
These combinations did not significantly decrease yield .
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 Other claims from this paper (10) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Glyphosate formulation did not interact with yield decrease .
formulation interaction with yield decrease e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “There was not found any formulation interaction with yield decrease . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1245–1313 e1 “glyphosate-tolerant soybean ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 632–659 Other claims from this paper (1) Observation observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Fomesafen did not injure strawberry or decrease yield .
injure strawberry or decrease yield e2 Not reported Direction
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 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
When soil water potential continued to decrease , no longer obvious decrease in yield was observed.
SWP continued to be decreased e6 no longer obvious decrease e6 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “Yield and Quality of Rice ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–52 e2 “the yield of two cultivars was decrease d significantly before heading stages,especially at panicle formation stage by lower SWP ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 431–558 e6 “but no longer obvious decrease was observed when SWP continued to be decrease d ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 559–637 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Vegetative-stage ozone exposure caused no significant fruit yield decrease at final harvest.
O 3 exposure at the vegetative stage e0 no significant decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “O 3 exposure at the vegetative stage, there was no significant decrease in fruit yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 733–819 t0 “Tomato ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–18 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Moderately conductive irrigation water caused no appreciable yield decrease .
water with moderate electrical conductivity e0 without an appreciable decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The cucumbers are irrigated with water with moderate electrical conductivity without an appreciable decrease in yield . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1228–1346 Other claims from this paper (3) 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) Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
These combinations did not significantly decrease yield .
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 Other claims from this paper (10) Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Thinning treatments did not significantly decrease yield per tree.
‘Wilking’ mandarins t0 yield in kg per tree e0 without significant decrease e0 Verbatim
e0 “without significant decrease of yield in kg per tree. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 243–296 t0 “‘Wilking’ Mandarins ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–74 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Paclobutrazol caused no apparent decrease in fruit yield .
no apparent decrease e0 Verbatim
e0 “The paclobutrazol treatment resulted in a 67.9% decrease in annual extension shoot growth compared to controls and no apparent decrease in fruit yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 395–545 t0 “Nectarine Trees ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 60–75 Other claims from this paper (10) 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 measured Claim · model-written summary
Foliar zein nanoparticles did not decrease pod set.
Foliar applications of zein nanoparticles e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Foliar applications of zein nanoparticles did not increase flower abortion or decrease pod set ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1512–1606 t0 “soybean ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–97 Other claims from this paper (5) Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
In the no-reduction yield type after nitrogen decrease , the number of big and small vascular bundles of panicle necks and penultimate internodes in a stem did not differ significantly.
nitrogen decrease treatment e2 number of big and small vascular bundles of panicle necks and penultimate internodes in a stem e1 Verbatim
e1 “there was not significant differences in the number of big and small vascular bundles of panicle necks and penultimate internodes in a stem ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2073–2212 e2 “After nitrogen decrease treatment ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1784–1817 e0 “erect panicle type rice variety ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 101–132 Other claims from this paper (14) Method / resource observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Using SNP subsets based on functional annotation did not significantly decrease chickpea grain- yield prediction accuracy.
prediction accuracy for grain yield e0 did not significantly decrease e0 whole SNP dataset e0 Not reported Value
Verbatim
e0 “Compared with the whole SNP dataset, a subset of SNPs did not significantly decrease prediction accuracy for grain yield despite consisting of a smaller number of SNPs. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1672–1840 e1 “chickpea breeding lines ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 333–356 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Backcrossing H16 into Chunjiang06 did not decrease grain quality.
Backcrossing this allele into the japonica variety Chunjiang06 e6 no_change inferred e6 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “japonica rice varieties for cultivation in south China ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–152 e6 “Backcrossing this allele into the japonica variety Chunjiang06 improved yield without decreasing grain quality ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1014–1124 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Applying one, two or three kinds of nucleosides did not significantly decrease aberration frequency.
one, two or three kinds of nucleosides e0 aberration frequency e0 did not bring about any significant decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Simultaneous application of one, two or three kinds of nucleosides did not bring about any significant decrease in aberration frequency ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 454–589 e1 “The influence of mitomycin C, chloramphenicol, ATP and various nucleosides on the yield of X-ray-induced chromosome aberrations was examined with the ovular tissue cells of Trillium kamtschaticum . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–196 Other claims from this paper (8) Method / resource observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) simulated Claim · model-written summary
The controller caused no significant decrease in simulated maize yield relative to constant irrigation.
without any significant decrease e0 constant irrigation method of the DSSAT model e0 Verbatim
t0 “Precision Irrigation ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 44–64 e0 “almost 40% decrease in water consumption is achieved in comparison to constant irrigation method of the DSSAT model without any significant decrease in yield and leaf area index. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2249–2427 e1 “DSSAT (Decision Support System for Agro-technology Transfer) maize crop simulation model ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1911–1999 Other claims from this paper (2) Method / resource observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Using SNP subsets based on functional annotation did not significantly decrease chickpea grain- yield prediction accuracy.
prediction accuracy for grain yield e0 did not significantly decrease e0 whole SNP dataset e0 Not reported Value
Verbatim
e0 “Compared with the whole SNP dataset, a subset of SNPs did not significantly decrease prediction accuracy for grain yield despite consisting of a smaller number of SNPs. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1672–1840 e1 “chickpea breeding lines ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 333–356 Other claims from this paper (7) Method / resource observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) simulated Claim · model-written summary
The controller caused no significant decrease in simulated maize leaf area index relative to constant irrigation.
without any significant decrease e0 constant irrigation method of the DSSAT model e0 Verbatim
e0 “almost 40% decrease in water consumption is achieved in comparison to constant irrigation method of the DSSAT model without any significant decrease in yield and leaf area index. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2249–2427 e1 “DSSAT (Decision Support System for Agro-technology Transfer) maize crop simulation model ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1911–1999 Other claims from this paper (2) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Vertebrate species richness did not decrease with cacao yield in smallholder agroforests in Indonesia.
did not decrease e1 Verbatim
e0 “Here, we integrate biodiversity and crop productivity data for smallholder cacao in Indonesia to exemplify for tropical agroforests that there is little relationship between yield and biodiversity under current management ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 238–459 e1 “Species richness of trees, fungi, invertebrates, and vertebrates did not decrease with yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 529–621 Other claims from this paper (4) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Species richness of trees, fungi and invertebrates did not decrease with cacao yield in smallholder agroforests in Indonesia.
Species richness of trees, fungi, invertebrates e1 did not decrease e1 Verbatim
e0 “Here, we integrate biodiversity and crop productivity data for smallholder cacao in Indonesia to exemplify for tropical agroforests that there is little relationship between yield and biodiversity under current management ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 238–459 e1 “Species richness of trees, fungi, invertebrates, and vertebrates did not decrease with yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 529–621 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
N fertilization did not decrease species diversity over time.
N fertilization e0 species diversity e0 did not decrease e0 Not reported Taxon Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “N fertilization did not decrease species diversity through time. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1389–1453 Other claims from this paper (14) 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.
Glycine max_single2.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
Fragaria
Oryza sativa
Solanum lycopersicum
Cucumis sativus_Brassica_napus_-_Habit.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
Brassica napus
Helianthus annuus
Solanum tuberosum
Prunus persica var. nucipersica
Cicer arietinum
Trillium camschatcense
Zea mays
Theobroma cacao