Search claims · PlantClaims

not stated 195

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 resultno effectsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Simulated foliar damage alone did not decrease grain yield.

Outcome: grain yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0
Qualifier: foliar damage alonee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“foliar damage alone did not decrease grain yield but decreased straw yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 679–754

Title

Field evaluation and simulation of frost tolerance in Syrian durum wheat landraces

A. Elings; M.M. Nachit Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 1993. doi:10.18174/njas.v41i1.629

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observation January frosts caused under 5% apparent foliar damage.
Observation March frosts caused average foliar damage of 23%, ranging 3-65%.
Association Late frost tolerance appeared related to regional minimum winter temperatures.
Association Coastal landraces showed the highest frost sensitivity.
Intervention effect Fertilizer did not significantly affect foliar damage.
Observation Simulated foliar damage alone decreased straw yield.
Observation Simulated additional floret damage decreased grain yield.
Observation Simulated additional floret damage increased straw yield.

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.

Triticum aestivum 87

Show all 87 →

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.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Winter wheat yield did not decrease with cover crops.

Taxon: winter wheatTriticum aestivume5
Treatment: with CCe5
Outcome: yielde5
Direction: did not decreasee5

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e5
“Cover crops significantly increased vegetable crop yields and decreased the silage corn yield; however, grain corn, soybean, and winter wheat yield did not decrease with CC”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1013–1185

Title

Do Cover Crops Increase Subsequent Crop Yield in Temperate Climates? A Meta-Analysis

Inderjot Chahal; Laura L. Van Eerd Sustainability 2023. doi:10.3390/su15086517

Other claims from this paper (15)

Intervention effect Legume cover crop species increased subsequent crop yield significantly more than grass, by 14%.
Intervention effect Legume cover crop species increased subsequent crop yield significantly more than nonlegume broadleaves, by 7%.
Intervention effect Legume cover crop species increased subsequent crop yield significantly more than mixtures, by 2%.
Intervention effect Incorporating cover crop residue into soil increased crop yield by about 15% compared with leaving the residue on the soil surface.
Intervention effect Grass cover crops enhanced crop yield by 14% relative to no cover crop in non-organic vegetable systems.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops enhanced crop yield by 19% relative to no cover crop in non-organic vegetable systems.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops increased crop yield by 18% relative to no cover crop in coarse textured soil.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops increased crop yield by 4% relative to no cover crop in medium textured soil.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops increased crop yield by 11% relative to no cover crop under high precipitation.
Intervention effect Cover crops significantly increased vegetable crop yields.
Intervention effect Cover crops decreased silage corn yield.
Intervention effect Grain corn yield did not decrease with cover crops.
Intervention effect Soybean yield did not decrease with cover crops.
Intervention effect Cover crops in no-tillage and plow tillage systems increased crop yield compared with the no-CC control.
Recommendation Crop yield response to cover crops might become more robust when pedo-climatic and agronomic factors are considered.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorsulfuron did not decrease mature grain nutrient concentrations or grain yield.

Taxon: wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment: Chlorsulfuron treatmente0
Outcome: nutrient concentrations in mature grain or grain yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Chlorsulfuron treatment did not decrease nutrient concentrations in mature grain or grain yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 639–734

t0
“wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–75

Title

The impact of chlorsulfuron and diclofop-methyl on nutrient uptake by wheat.

LD Osborne; AD Robson; DG Bowran Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 1993. doi:10.1071/ar9931757

Other claims from this paper (11)

Intervention effect Chlorsulfuron decreased wheat shoot and root weights and root length in glasshouse experiments.
Intervention effect Chlorsulfuron decreased phosphorus uptake, particularly with low phosphorus supply.
Intervention effect Chlorsulfuron decreased potassium uptake.
Intervention effect Nitrogen, calcium and magnesium uptake was unaffected.
Intervention effect Field chlorsulfuron reduced shoot element concentrations during early growth by up to 30%.
Observation The reduction in shoot element concentrations faded as wheat aged.
Association Kulin was more sensitive to chlorsulfuron than Reeves.
Intervention effect Diclofop-methyl had little effect on shoot nutrient concentrations.
Intervention effect Diclofop-methyl reduced zinc and copper concentrations during vegetative growth.
Intervention effect Diclofop-methyl reduced copper concentration in mature Kulin grain.
Intervention effect Herbicides reduced uptake of diffusion-moved nutrients more than mass-flow nutrients.

Zea mays 80

Show all 80 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield did not decrease in the first year without fertilization.

Taxon: winter wheat and summer maizeTriticum aestivum Zea mayse0
Treatment: without fertilizatione2
Outcome: yielde2
Direction: did not decreasee2

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“comprising winter wheat and summer maize as an annual rotation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 479–541

e2
“The yield did not decrease in the first year without fertilization but started to decrease considerably in later years”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1046–1164

Title

Long-term legacy impacts of nitrogen fertilization on crop yield, nitrate accumulation, and nitrogen recovery efficiency

Shuang Lei; Sajjad Raza; Annie Irshad; et al. European Journal of Agronomy 2025. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2025.127513

Other claims from this paper (11)

Intervention effect N fertilization increased grain yield compared with the control.
Intervention effect DCD addition caused additional increases in grain yield, mainly at 500 kg N ha-1.
Intervention effect Yield started to decrease considerably in later years without fertilization.
Intervention effect N fertilization increased grain N uptake by more than 100 % compared with the control in fertilized years and the first unfertilized year.
Intervention effect Grain N uptake decreased strongly in the second year without fertilization.
Intervention effect Cumulative fertilizer N recovery did not differ among N fertilized treatments during fertilized years.
Intervention effect Cumulative fertilizer N recovery increased strongly when N uptake in unfertilized years was incorporated.
Intervention effect Cumulative fertilizer N recovery in N340 + DCD increased from 37 %–44 % in fertilized years to 74 %–80 % in unfertilized years.
Observation A residual nitrate accumulation of 237–489 kg N ha-1 accumulated in the soil profile after two years of fertilization.
Intervention effect Residual N accumulation decreased by 31 %–41 % in the first unfertilized year.
Observation Soil N accumulation became less than 60 kg ha-1 after four years of cropping without fertilization, with no difference among treatments including control.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 25% to 30% irrigation reduction did not decrease maize seed yield.

Taxon: maizeZea mayst0
Treatment: reduction of 25% ~ 30% in irrigation amounte0
Outcome: seed yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“reduction of 25% ~ 30% in irrigation amount did not decrease seed yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1809–1880

t0
“hybrid seed yield of maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–68

Title

Effects of irrigation stage and amount on hybrid seed yield of maize and water use of maize in Hexi Corridor of Gansu

Fan Ting-l Ganhan diqu nongye yanjiu 2014

Other claims from this paper (14)

Intervention effect Reducing irrigation by 56.2% from 480 to 210 mm decreased average maize seed yield by 41.6%.
Association Each additional millimeter of irrigation increased seed yield by 14.05 kg per hectare.
Intervention effect At 360 mm, yield declined by 0.47% to 8.26% versus 480 mm.
Intervention effect At 330 mm, yield declined by 8.66% to 24.90% versus 480 mm.
Intervention effect At silking, 60 mm irrigation reduced yield by 6.5% relative to tasselling.
Intervention effect At silking, 60 mm irrigation reduced yield by 7.2% relative to middle grain filling.
Intervention effect At silking, 30 mm irrigation reduced yield by 11.2% relative to tasselling.
Intervention effect At silking, 30 mm irrigation reduced yield by 8.5% relative to middle grain filling.
Association Water use efficiency increased with irrigation amount and evapotranspiration.
Observation Moderate irrigation gave high WUE, whereas high irrigation gave high yield.
Intervention effect Reduced irrigation at maternal silking decreased WUE and IWUE.
Intervention effect Reduced irrigation at tasselling or middle grain filling did not reduce WUE and IWUE.
Observation The authors identify maternal silking as the most irrigation sensitive stage.
Recommendation The authors recommend irrigation before silking and during middle to late grain filling.

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)simulated

Claim · model-written summary

The controller caused no significant decrease in simulated maize yield relative to constant irrigation.

Taxon: maizeZea mayse1
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: without any significant decreasee0
Comparator: constant irrigation method of the DSSAT modele0

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

Title

Reinforcement Learning Based Controller For Precision Irrigation

Shivaram Irukula OakTrust (Texas A&M University Libraries) 2015

Other claims from this paper (2)

Glycine max 71

Show all 71 →

Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glyphosate formulation did not interact with yield decrease.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe1
Treatment: formulatione0
Outcome: formulation interaction with yield decreasee0

Not reportedDirection

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

Title

Glyphosate Tolerant Soybean Response to Different Management Systems

Alfredo J. P. Albrecht; Leandro P. Albrecht; Arthur A. M. Barroso; et al. Journal of Agricultural Science 2017. doi:10.5539/jas.v10n1p204

Other claims from this paper (1)

Intervention effect Post-emergent glyphosate was associated with a season-dependent 5% soybean yield reduction without visible symptoms.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soybean yield did not decrease with cover crops.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe5
Treatment: with CCe5
Outcome: yielde5
Direction: did not decreasee5

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e5
“Cover crops significantly increased vegetable crop yields and decreased the silage corn yield; however, grain corn, soybean, and winter wheat yield did not decrease with CC”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1013–1185

Title

Do Cover Crops Increase Subsequent Crop Yield in Temperate Climates? A Meta-Analysis

Inderjot Chahal; Laura L. Van Eerd Sustainability 2023. doi:10.3390/su15086517

Other claims from this paper (15)

Intervention effect Legume cover crop species increased subsequent crop yield significantly more than grass, by 14%.
Intervention effect Legume cover crop species increased subsequent crop yield significantly more than nonlegume broadleaves, by 7%.
Intervention effect Legume cover crop species increased subsequent crop yield significantly more than mixtures, by 2%.
Intervention effect Incorporating cover crop residue into soil increased crop yield by about 15% compared with leaving the residue on the soil surface.
Intervention effect Grass cover crops enhanced crop yield by 14% relative to no cover crop in non-organic vegetable systems.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops enhanced crop yield by 19% relative to no cover crop in non-organic vegetable systems.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops increased crop yield by 18% relative to no cover crop in coarse textured soil.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops increased crop yield by 4% relative to no cover crop in medium textured soil.
Intervention effect Legume cover crops increased crop yield by 11% relative to no cover crop under high precipitation.
Intervention effect Cover crops significantly increased vegetable crop yields.
Intervention effect Cover crops decreased silage corn yield.
Intervention effect Grain corn yield did not decrease with cover crops.
Intervention effect Winter wheat yield did not decrease with cover crops.
Intervention effect Cover crops in no-tillage and plow tillage systems increased crop yield compared with the no-CC control.
Recommendation Crop yield response to cover crops might become more robust when pedo-climatic and agronomic factors are considered.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Reducing potassium to N60P60K30 did not significantly decrease soybean yield.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment: N60P60K30e0
Outcome: soybean yielde0
Direction: no significant decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“There was no significant decrease in soybean yield in the variant of the experiment with a decrease in the proportion of potassium in the composition of complete mineral fertilizer (N60P60K30)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1454–1646

Title

Productivity and quality of soybean seeds with different fertilization on podzolized chernozem

H.M. Hospodarenko; I.V. Prokopchuk; K. P. Leonova; et al. Collected Works of Uman National University of Horticulture 2020. doi:10.31395/2415-8240-2020-97-1-136-144

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Different fertilizer regimes increased crop yield by 18–77 %.
Intervention effect N110P60K80 in rotation, including N60P60K60 under soybean, gave the highest seed yield of 3,02 t/ha.
Intervention effect Excluding nitrogen from N60P60K60 reduced yield by 26 %.
Intervention effect Excluding phosphorus from complete fertilizer reduced yield by 17 %.
Intervention effect Excluding potassium from complete fertilizer reduced yield by 11 %.
Intervention effect N60К60 produced the largest 1000-seed mass.
Intervention effect N60P60K60 and N60P60K30 produced the highest seed protein content.

Oryza sativa 70

Show all 70 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

When soil water potential continued to decrease, no longer obvious decrease in yield was observed.

Taxon: RiceOryza sativat0
Treatment: SWP continued to be decreasede6
Outcome: yielde2
Direction: no longer obvious decreasee6

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0
“Yield and Quality of Rice”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–52

e2
“the yield of two cultivars was decreased 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 decreased”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 559–637

Title

Effect of Soil Moisture on Yield and Quality of Rice

Zheng Gui 2006

Other claims from this paper (7)

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

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.

381124 31

Show all 31 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Delaying all N to V9 did not significantly decrease corn yield.

Taxon: CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
Treatment: Delaying all the N to V9e0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: did not significantly decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0
“Corn yield following a delayed application of nitrogen”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–54

e0
“Delaying all the N to V9 did not significantly decrease yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1064–1125

Title

Corn yield following a delayed application of nitrogen

Brian H. Yoder Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) 2018

Other claims from this paper (13)

Intervention effect In corn following soybean, delaying the second half of N to as late as R2 did not cause significant yield loss.
Intervention effect Corn with N applied at R3 yielded 92% of the yield of corn with the second application at V3.
Intervention effect Delaying all 224 kg N ha-1 through V15 did not decrease corn yield significantly.
Intervention effect Delaying all 224 kg N ha-1 through V15 reduced corn yield with application at VT, R2 and R3 (12, 19 and 37% less).
Intervention effect In corn following corn, delaying the second half of N to R3 gave 96% of the yield of the second application at V3.
Intervention effect In corn following corn, none of the delayed N timings significantly lowered yield.
Intervention effect Delaying all N to V12 reduced corn yield by 11% relative to earlier timings.
Intervention effect Delaying all N to R3 reduced corn yield by 42%.
Recommendation Without N at planting, N must be applied by mid-vegetative stages to prevent corn yield loss.
Intervention effect When half the N was applied at planting, delaying application until past pollination caused surprisingly little corn yield loss.
Observation Split-N corn treatments recovered healthy leaf color (SPAD) no matter how late N was applied.
Intervention effect With no N at planting, corn plants could not regain full leaf color or yield if N was applied later than mid-vegetative stages.
Recommendation If all N is delayed, application should be made before plants reach mid-vegetative growth stages.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At Manhattan in 2008, delayed planting did not decrease yield.

Taxon: CORNZea mays subsp. mayst0
Treatment: delayed plantinge0
Outcome: yieldt1
Direction: did not decreasee0
Qualifier: in 2008e0
Setting: Manhattan, KSt1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0
“CORN”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 30–34

e0
“did not decrease at all with delayed planting in 2008”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1073–1126

t1
“delayed planting dates and hybrids of varying maturity revealed that yield at Manhattan, KS”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 907–998

Title

EFFECT OF DELAYED PLANTING ON CORN IN CENTRAL KANSAS

Aaron James Sindelar; Kraig L. Roozeboom K-State Research Exchange (Kansas State University) 2008

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect At Manhattan in 2007, yield did not decrease significantly until the final planting date.
Intervention effect At Belleville in 2007, later planting increased yield.
Intervention effect At Belleville in 2008, planting date did not affect yield.
Intervention effect At Hutchinson, yield decreased significantly with successive planting dates; the supplied sentence is cut off.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Delaying all 224 kg N ha-1 through V15 did not decrease corn yield significantly.

Taxon: CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
Treatment: Delaying application of all 224 kg N ha-1 through V15e0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0
“Corn yield following a delayed application of nitrogen”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–54

e0
“Delaying application of all 224 kg N ha-1 through V15 did not decrease yield significantly”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 695–785

Title

Corn yield following a delayed application of nitrogen

Brian H. Yoder Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) 2018

Other claims from this paper (13)

Intervention effect In corn following soybean, delaying the second half of N to as late as R2 did not cause significant yield loss.
Intervention effect Corn with N applied at R3 yielded 92% of the yield of corn with the second application at V3.
Intervention effect Delaying all 224 kg N ha-1 through V15 reduced corn yield with application at VT, R2 and R3 (12, 19 and 37% less).
Intervention effect In corn following corn, delaying the second half of N to R3 gave 96% of the yield of the second application at V3.
Intervention effect In corn following corn, none of the delayed N timings significantly lowered yield.
Intervention effect Delaying all N to V9 did not significantly decrease corn yield.
Intervention effect Delaying all N to V12 reduced corn yield by 11% relative to earlier timings.
Intervention effect Delaying all N to R3 reduced corn yield by 42%.
Recommendation Without N at planting, N must be applied by mid-vegetative stages to prevent corn yield loss.
Intervention effect When half the N was applied at planting, delaying application until past pollination caused surprisingly little corn yield loss.
Observation Split-N corn treatments recovered healthy leaf color (SPAD) no matter how late N was applied.
Intervention effect With no N at planting, corn plants could not regain full leaf color or yield if N was applied later than mid-vegetative stages.
Recommendation If all N is delayed, application should be made before plants reach mid-vegetative growth stages.

Gossypium hirsutum 29

Show all 29 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton seed yield did not decrease under PRI or CDI relative to FULL.

Taxon: cottonGossypium hirsutume0
Treatment: deficit treatments (PRI and CDI)e0
Outcome: seed yielde0
Direction: No seed yield decreasee0
Comparator: FULL irrigatione0

Verbatim

e0
“No seed yield decrease was evident for cotton with the deficit treatments (PRI and CDI) compared with FULL irrigation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 799–916

Title

Prospects of partial root zone irrigation for increasing irrigation water use efficiency of major crops in the Mediterranean region

C. Kirda; S. Topcu; M. Cetin; et al. Annals of Applied Biology 2007. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7348.2007.00141.x

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Tomato fruit yield under PRI was 7–22% lower than FULL, without a significant difference.
Intervention effect Tomato yield under PRI exceeded CDI by 7–10% with the same water amount.
Association Pepper yield fell as irrigation deficit increased.
Intervention effect Pepper irrigation water use efficiency did not increase with deficit irrigation.
Intervention effect Maize yield had no benefit with PRI compared with CDI.
Observation Mandarin fruit yield ranked FULL above PRI above CDI, with nonsignificant differences.
Intervention effect Deficit irrigation increased IWUE by as much as 39% relative to FULL.
Intervention effect Deficit irrigation produced smaller fruits.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed cotton yield did not decrease under deficient irrigation.

Taxon: cottonGossypium hirsutume1
Treatment: deficient irrigatione1
Outcome: seed cotton yielde0
Direction: decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“neither seed cotton yield nor lint quality were decreased.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 272–330

e1
“cotton to deficient irrigation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 52–82

Title

Physiological Parameters, Harvest Index and Yield of Deficient Irrigated Cotton

Bruria Heuer; A. Nadler Journal of Crop Production 2000. doi:10.1300/j144v02n02_09

Other claims from this paper (3)

Intervention effect Water deficit significantly affected cotton height and fresh weight accumulation.
Intervention effect Cotton lint quality did not decrease under deficient irrigation.
Observation Cotton turgor pressure remained positive throughout the growth cycle.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

DT6 cotton yield did not decrease significantly versus DT2.

Taxon: cottonGossypium hirsutume0
Treatment: DT6e1
Outcome: cotton yielde0
Direction: no significant decreasee0
Comparator: DT2e0

Verbatim

e0
“no significant decrease in biomass and cotton yield was observed compared to the DT2 sample.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1210–1302

e1
“The DT6 plants (60% Urea + DCD + NBPT + cotton straw)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1111–1164

Title

Effects of Nitrogen Conservation Measures on the Nitrogen Uptake by Cotton Plants and Nitrogen Residual in Soil Profile in Extremely Arid Areas of Xinjiang, China

Jinhu Zhi; Taoyu Qiu; Xinlu Bai; et al. Processes 2022. doi:10.3390/pr10020353

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect Cotton straw treatment DT5 benefited vegetative seedling growth.
Observation Later DT5 plant height, biomass and yield were poor.
Intervention effect DT6 increased cotton plant height by 15 cm versus DT1.
Intervention effect DT6 had higher fourth leaf SPAD than DT1 and DT4.
Intervention effect DT6 increased nitrogen use efficiency by up to 47%.
Intervention effect DT6 biomass did not decrease significantly versus DT2.
Observation Tillage layer soil nitrate residue rose between drip irrigations.
Intervention effect Other treatments had lower residual soil nitrate than DT2.
Recommendation Reduced fertilizer with conservation measures may improve N efficiency, limit pollution and maintain cotton yield.

Solanum lycopersicum 27

Show all 27 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cluster pruning did not decrease total yield across cultivars.

Taxon: TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: treatmentse0
Outcome: total yielde0
Direction: no decreasee0
Comparator: unpruned controle0

Verbatim

e0
“There was no decrease in total yield, across all cultivars, between treatments and the unpruned control.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1976–2080

t0
“Tomato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–31

Title

Fruit Cluster Pruning of Tomato in an Organic High-Tunnel System

Brian A. Mitchell; Mark E. Uchanski; Adriane Elliott HortScience 2019. doi:10.21273/hortsci13487-18

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Three-fruit pruning increased fresh fruit weight in both hybrids.
Intervention effect Cherokee Purple did not respond to cluster pruning.
Observation Jet Star yielded more than the other two cultivars.
Association SSC and marketability depended more on cultivar than pruning.
Observation Lola had significantly greater SSC than the other cultivars.
Observation Jet Star had the greatest marketable yield.
Observation Cherokee Purple had greater cull yield.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reducing substrate volume per plant by one third did not considerably decrease tomato yield.

Taxon: TOMATOSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: Reduction of substrate volume per plant by 1/3e0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: without considerable yield decreasee0
Value: 1/3e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Reduction of substrate volume per plant by 1/3 without considerable yield decrease”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–82

t0
“TOMATO YIELD”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–12

Title

TOMATO YIELD DEPENDENT ON SUBSTRATE TYPE AND VOLUME

B. Benko; J. Borošić; B. Novak; et al. Acta Horticulturae 2008. doi:10.17660/actahortic.2008.779.57

Other claims from this paper (2)

Intervention effect Rockwool produced the highest tomato yield among the substrates.
Recommendation The authors recommend rockwool as a tomato growing substrate.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Vegetative-stage ozone exposure caused no significant fruit yield decrease at final harvest.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: O 3 exposure at the vegetative stagee0
Outcome: fruit yielde0
Direction: no significant decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Title

Recovery of Tomato Plants from Ozone Injury

Albert Z. Tenga; Beverley A. Marie; Douglas P. Ormrod HortScience 1990. doi:10.21273/hortsci.25.10.1230

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Ozone exposure caused visible leaf injury at either growth stage.
Intervention effect Ozone exposure reduced leaf area at either growth stage.
Intervention effect Vegetative-stage ozone exposure caused no fruit quality change at final harvest.
Intervention effect Flowering-stage ozone exposure progressively reduced fruit fresh weight.
Intervention effect Flowering-stage ozone exposure reduced fruit titratable acidity to a lesser degree.

Solanum tuberosum 21

Show all 21 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The liquid spray did not significantly decrease potato yield.

Taxon: potatoesSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: liquid spraye3
Outcome: yielde3
Direction: decreasee3

Not reportedComparator

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

Title

Alternative protection of potatoes in organic farming.

Jaroslav Tomášek; Petr Dvořák Organic Eprints (International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems, and Research Institute of Organic Agriculture) 2009

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc sulphate and zinc oxide caused little or no decrease in tuber yield.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: zinc sulphate and zinc oxidee0
Outcome: tuber yielde0
Direction: little or no decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“zinc sulphate and zinc oxide caused little or no decrease in tuber yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1880–1953

t0
“potato mop‐top virus”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71

Title

Field and glasshouse experiments on the control of potato mop‐top virus

J. I. COOPER; R. A. C. JONES; B. D. HARRISON Annals of Applied Biology 1976. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7348.1976.tb00600.x

Other claims from this paper (19)

Observation Infected mother plants passed PMTV to only some progeny tubers.
Observation Symptomless plants produced only symptomless progeny in this cultivar.
Recommendation Removing symptomatic plants was recommended to accelerate elimination of PMTV.
Intervention effect Heat treatment at 37 °C for up to 8 wk failed to free infected tubers of PMTV.
Intervention effect Formaldehyde treatment greatly decreased PMTV establishment.
Intervention effect Organo-mercurial fungicide greatly decreased PMTV establishment.
Intervention effect Fumigation with 2-aminobutane was ineffective.
Intervention effect Sulphur acidification greatly decreased infection by PMTV and S. subterranea.
Observation PMTV transmission resumed when treated soil pH rose.
Intervention effect Fungicides decreased infection of Nicotiana debneyi bait seedlings.
Intervention effect Calomel at 75 kg/ha controlled field spread of PMTV and S. subterranea to potato.
Intervention effect Zinc frit greatly decreased spread of both pathogens to potato.
Intervention effect Zinc sulphate greatly decreased spread of both pathogens to potato.
Intervention effect Zinc oxide greatly decreased spread of both pathogens to potato.
Association The zinc amount required rose with soil clay content.
Intervention effect Zinc treatment did not eliminate virus-carrying vectors from soil.
Intervention effect Zinc frit was phytotoxic due to boron content.
Intervention effect Potato tuber zinc content increased in treated plots but did not double.
Recommendation The authors recommended sulphur, zinc oxide or calomel for small early propagation plots.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Jelica line 4 had no significant decrease in tuber yield under field conditions.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Material: OCI/OCII Jelica line 4e0
Outcome: tuber yielde0
Direction: did not exhibit a significant decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“the OCI/OCII Jelica line 4 did not exhibit a significant decrease in tuber yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1256–1337

t0
“Phenotypic performance of transgenic potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plants with pyramided rice cystatin genes (OCI and OCII)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–123

Title

Phenotypic performance of transgenic potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plants with pyramided rice cystatin genes (OCI and OCII)

Aleksandar Cingel; Jelena Savic; Tatjana Cosic; et al. Archives of Biological Sciences 2015. doi:10.2298/abs141201058c

Other claims from this paper (5)

Medicago sativa 20

Show all 20 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Paraquat did not decrease alfalfa seed yield or thousand-seed weight.

Taxon: Medicago sativaMedicago sativat0
Treatment: Paraquate0
Outcome: seed yield and thousand-seed weighte0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Paraquat did not decrease the seed yield and thousand-seed weight,and had no effect on germination rate within the appropriate concentration range.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 543–690

t0
“Medicago sativa”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–88

Title

Effects of Drying Reagents on Seed Harvest and Production Performance of Medicago sativa

Zheng‐Wei Wang Anhui nongye kexue 2012

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect Paraquat concentrations increased relative water loss in alfalfa stems and leaves above 50%.
Intervention effect Paraquat accelerated alfalfa drying.
Intervention effect Paraquat had no effect on germination within the appropriate concentration range.
Intervention effect K2CO3 significantly increased alfalfa leaf loss.
Intervention effect At 5% K2CO3, stem and leaf water loss reached 16.58%.
Intervention effect K2CO3 had no adverse effect on seed yield or quality.
Intervention effect Na2SO4 increased alfalfa seed yield.
Intervention effect Na2SO4 dried alfalfa less effectively than K2CO3.
Intervention effect CaCl2 had effects similar to K2CO3 but lower overall drying effectiveness.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur dioxide did not decrease alfalfa yield under any of the conditions studied.

Taxon: alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment: sulphur dioxide treatmente0
Outcome: yield of alfalfae0
Direction: no_changeinferrede0
Qualifier: under none of the conditions studiede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Under none of the conditions studied did sulphur dioxide treatment decrease the yield of alfalfa”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 419–515

Title

Effect of low concentrations of sulphur dioxide on yield of alfalfa and cruciferae

C. Setterstrom; P. W. Zimmerman; William Crocker OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) 1938

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphorus did not decrease accumulated alfalfa yield.

Taxon: alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment: Phophoruse0
Outcome: accumulated yield of alfalfae0
Direction: without decreasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Phophorus increased yield of wheat without decreasing accumulated yield of alfalfa over 3 yr.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1030–1123

Title

Effect of N and P fertilizer on establishment of alfalfa with a wheat companion crop

S. Bittman; J. Waddington; D. A. Pulkinen Canadian Journal of Plant Science 1991. doi:10.4141/cjps91-012

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Nitrogen increased wheat yield.
Intervention effect Nitrogen lowered companion seeded alfalfa yield to 65–95% of clear seeded alfalfa.
Association Alfalfa yield was more variable where wheat yield was high.
Observation The wheat crop yielded 1300–2600 kg per hectare.
Intervention effect The wheat crop reduced alfalfa yield by 400–2100 kg per hectare over three years.
Intervention effect Phosphorus increased wheat yield.

“yield decrease”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics

not stated 195

Triticum aestivum 87

Zea mays 80

Glycine max 71

Oryza sativa 70

381124 31

Gossypium hirsutum 29

Solanum lycopersicum 27

Solanum tuberosum 21

Medicago sativa 20