Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield decrease”

12,432 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

plus 1,248 non-evaluative

Over time

1950 ’60 ’70 ’80 ’90 2000 ’10 ’20

plus 13 earlier · 1920s–1940s

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain number by 100.

Taxon: Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Material: Zhendan958e1
Treatment: subsoiling at jointing stagee0
Outcome: grain numbere0
Direction: lesse0
Value: 100e0
Comparator: non-subsoilinge0

Verbatim

t0
“Summer Maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 87–99

e0
“compared with non-subsoiling,subsoiling at jointing stage achieved the following characters: plant height and ear height decreased by 17.3 cm and 9.0 cm,stem diameter decreased by 2.7 mm,and one leaf less;the increase of LAI before silking was limited,while decrease of LAI after silking was slow;stomatal conductance,intercellular CO2 concentration,transpiration rate,net photosynthetic rate of ear leaves decreased 38%…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 302–1013

e1
“Zhendan958 was applied in the field experiment.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–47

Title

Effects of Subsoiling at Jointing Stage on Dry Matter Production and Photosynthesis of Summer Maize

Dongxing Zhang Yumi kexue 2013

Other claims from this paper (17)

Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained plant height by 17.3 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained ear height by 9.0 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stem diameter by 2.7 mm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained leaf by one leaf.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI before silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI after silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stomatal conductance by 38%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained intercellular CO2 concentration by 25.3%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained transpiration rate by 42.5%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained net photosynthetic rate by 2.0%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 1 519.5 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 168.8 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained economic index by 7 percentage.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain yield by 1 662.0 kg/ha.
Intervention effect The two nitrogen regimes did not differ significantly for the studied outcomes.
Association No subsoiling by nitrogen regime interaction was observed.
Recommendation The authors conclude that jointing-stage subsoiling is unsuitable.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

D15 increased grain nitrogen content by 1.3% over D5 in the wet year.

Taxon: winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment: D15e0
Outcome: grain N contente1
Direction: promotede0
Value: 1.3 %e0
Qualifier: wet yeare0
Comparator: D5e0

Verbatim

e0
“D15 promoted those by 0.9 %, 1.3 %, 3.7 % and 1.1 % over D5 under wet year”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1090–1164

e1
“Compared with D5, deep urea placement significantly increased the crop N uptake (10.4–27.6 %), grain N content (1.2–18.7 %), N recovery efficiency (NRE, 0.9–16.7 %) and N partial productivity (PFPN, 1.1–20.0 %) in dry and normal years, and D15 promoted those by 0.9 %, 1.3 %, 3.7 % and 1.1 % over D5 under wet year. Additionally, compared with D5, deep urea placement increased crop water productivity (WP) and yield by …” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 850–1379

t0
“winter wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–134

Title

Optimizing urea deep placement to rainfall can maximize crop water-nitrogen productivity and decrease nitrate leaching in winter wheat

Yingxin Wang; Qin Guo; Yirui Xu; et al. Agricultural Water Management 2022. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107971

Other claims from this paper (16)

Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased root length and weight densities at 20–60 cm.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased grain nitrogen content by 1.2–18.7% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased nitrogen recovery efficiency by 0.9–16.7% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased nitrogen partial productivity by 1.1–20.0% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen uptake by 0.9% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen recovery efficiency by 3.7% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen partial productivity by 1.1% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased crop water productivity by 9.6–23.9% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased yield by 3.2–20.0% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect D15 increased water productivity by 1.1% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased yield by 0.5% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement raised soil nitrate accumulation by 4.7–14.5% compared with D5.
Observation Urea placement at 28.0–30.0 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in dry years.
Observation Urea placement at 20.7–21.6 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in normal years.
Observation Urea placement at 12.3–13.1 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in wet years.
Recommendation The authors recommend adjusting moderate urea placement depth to precipitation conditions.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

D15 increased nitrogen recovery efficiency by 3.7% over D5 in the wet year.

Taxon: winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment: D15e0
Outcome: N recovery efficiencye1
Direction: promotede0
Value: 3.7 %e0
Qualifier: wet yeare0
Comparator: D5e0

Verbatim

e0
“D15 promoted those by 0.9 %, 1.3 %, 3.7 % and 1.1 % over D5 under wet year”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1090–1164

e1
“Compared with D5, deep urea placement significantly increased the crop N uptake (10.4–27.6 %), grain N content (1.2–18.7 %), N recovery efficiency (NRE, 0.9–16.7 %) and N partial productivity (PFPN, 1.1–20.0 %) in dry and normal years, and D15 promoted those by 0.9 %, 1.3 %, 3.7 % and 1.1 % over D5 under wet year. Additionally, compared with D5, deep urea placement increased crop water productivity (WP) and yield by …” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 850–1379

t0
“winter wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–134

Title

Optimizing urea deep placement to rainfall can maximize crop water-nitrogen productivity and decrease nitrate leaching in winter wheat

Yingxin Wang; Qin Guo; Yirui Xu; et al. Agricultural Water Management 2022. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107971

Other claims from this paper (16)

Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased root length and weight densities at 20–60 cm.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased grain nitrogen content by 1.2–18.7% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased nitrogen recovery efficiency by 0.9–16.7% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased nitrogen partial productivity by 1.1–20.0% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen uptake by 0.9% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased grain nitrogen content by 1.3% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen partial productivity by 1.1% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased crop water productivity by 9.6–23.9% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased yield by 3.2–20.0% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect D15 increased water productivity by 1.1% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased yield by 0.5% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement raised soil nitrate accumulation by 4.7–14.5% compared with D5.
Observation Urea placement at 28.0–30.0 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in dry years.
Observation Urea placement at 20.7–21.6 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in normal years.
Observation Urea placement at 12.3–13.1 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in wet years.
Recommendation The authors recommend adjusting moderate urea placement depth to precipitation conditions.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

D15 increased nitrogen partial productivity by 1.1% over D5 in the wet year.

Taxon: winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment: D15e0
Outcome: N partial productivitye1
Direction: promotede0
Value: 1.1 %e0
Qualifier: wet yeare0
Comparator: D5e0

Verbatim

e0
“D15 promoted those by 0.9 %, 1.3 %, 3.7 % and 1.1 % over D5 under wet year”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1090–1164

e1
“Compared with D5, deep urea placement significantly increased the crop N uptake (10.4–27.6 %), grain N content (1.2–18.7 %), N recovery efficiency (NRE, 0.9–16.7 %) and N partial productivity (PFPN, 1.1–20.0 %) in dry and normal years, and D15 promoted those by 0.9 %, 1.3 %, 3.7 % and 1.1 % over D5 under wet year. Additionally, compared with D5, deep urea placement increased crop water productivity (WP) and yield by …” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 850–1379

t0
“winter wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–134

Title

Optimizing urea deep placement to rainfall can maximize crop water-nitrogen productivity and decrease nitrate leaching in winter wheat

Yingxin Wang; Qin Guo; Yirui Xu; et al. Agricultural Water Management 2022. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107971

Other claims from this paper (16)

Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased root length and weight densities at 20–60 cm.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased grain nitrogen content by 1.2–18.7% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased nitrogen recovery efficiency by 0.9–16.7% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased nitrogen partial productivity by 1.1–20.0% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen uptake by 0.9% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased grain nitrogen content by 1.3% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased nitrogen recovery efficiency by 3.7% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased crop water productivity by 9.6–23.9% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement increased yield by 3.2–20.0% in dry and normal years.
Intervention effect D15 increased water productivity by 1.1% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect D15 increased yield by 0.5% over D5 in the wet year.
Intervention effect Deep urea placement raised soil nitrate accumulation by 4.7–14.5% compared with D5.
Observation Urea placement at 28.0–30.0 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in dry years.
Observation Urea placement at 20.7–21.6 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in normal years.
Observation Urea placement at 12.3–13.1 cm maximized wheat yield, grain nitrogen content and water productivity in wet years.
Recommendation The authors recommend adjusting moderate urea placement depth to precipitation conditions.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

CO2 above 46 mmol m−3 gave no further growth benefit at moderate PPF.

Taxon: lettuceLactuca sativae2
Treatment: Elevating CO2 above 46 mmol m-3e0
Outcome: benefite0
Direction: no further benefite0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Elevating CO2 above 46 mmol m-3 at moderate PPF had no further benefit.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–413

e1
“Elevating CO2 above 46 mmol m-3 at moderate PPF had no further benefit.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–413

t0
“Effects of CO2and Photosynthetic Photon Flux on Yield, Gas Exchange and Growth Rate ofLactuca SativaL. ‘Waldmann’s Green”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–120

e2
“Enrichment of CO2 to 46 mmol m-3 (1000 mm3 dm-3) at a moderate photosynthetic photon flux (PPF) of 450 micromoles m-2 s-1 stimulated fresh and dry weight gain of lettuce leaves 39% to 75% relative to plants at 16 mmol m-3 CO2 (350 mm3 dm-3).”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–241

e3
“high PPF of 880-900 micromoles m-2 s-1 gave further, substantial increases in growth, RGR, net assimilation rate (NAR) and photosynthetic rate (Pn), but a decrease in leaf area ratio (LAR), at 46 or 69 mmol m-3 (1000 or 1500 mm3 dm-3) CO2”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–661

e4
“Enrichment of CO2 to a supraoptimal level of 92 mmol m-3 (2000 mm3 dm-3) at high PPF increased leaf area and LAR”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–830

Title

Effects of CO₂and Photosynthetic Photon Flux on Yield, Gas Exchange and Growth Rate ofLactuca SativaL. ‘Waldmann’s Green'

SHARON L. KNIGHT; CARY A. MITCHELL Journal of Experimental Botany 1988. doi:10.1093/jxb/39.3.317

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect CO2 enrichment increased lettuce leaf fresh weight gain by 39–75% at moderate PPF.
Intervention effect CO2 enrichment increased lettuce leaf dry weight gain by 39–75% at moderate PPF.
Observation Relative growth rate increased only in the first days of exponential growth.
Intervention effect High PPF increased growth, RGR and NAR at 46 or 69 mmol m−3 CO2.
Intervention effect High PPF increased photosynthetic rate at enriched CO2.
Intervention effect High PPF decreased leaf area ratio.
Intervention effect At high PPF, supraoptimal CO2 increased leaf area and LAR.
Intervention effect Supraoptimal CO2 decreased specific leaf weight, NAR and Pn.
Intervention effect Supraoptimal CO2 had no effect on organ dry weights or RGR compared with 69 mmol m−3 CO2.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained transpiration rate by 42.5%.

Taxon: Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Material: Zhendan958e1
Treatment: subsoiling at jointing stagee0
Outcome: transpiration ratee0
Direction: decreasede0
Value: 42.5%e0
Comparator: non-subsoilinge0

Verbatim

t0
“Summer Maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 87–99

e0
“compared with non-subsoiling,subsoiling at jointing stage achieved the following characters: plant height and ear height decreased by 17.3 cm and 9.0 cm,stem diameter decreased by 2.7 mm,and one leaf less;the increase of LAI before silking was limited,while decrease of LAI after silking was slow;stomatal conductance,intercellular CO2 concentration,transpiration rate,net photosynthetic rate of ear leaves decreased 38%…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 302–1013

e1
“Zhendan958 was applied in the field experiment.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–47

Title

Effects of Subsoiling at Jointing Stage on Dry Matter Production and Photosynthesis of Summer Maize

Dongxing Zhang Yumi kexue 2013

Other claims from this paper (17)

Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained plant height by 17.3 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained ear height by 9.0 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stem diameter by 2.7 mm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained leaf by one leaf.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI before silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI after silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stomatal conductance by 38%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained intercellular CO2 concentration by 25.3%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained net photosynthetic rate by 2.0%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 1 519.5 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 168.8 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain number by 100.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained economic index by 7 percentage.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain yield by 1 662.0 kg/ha.
Intervention effect The two nitrogen regimes did not differ significantly for the studied outcomes.
Association No subsoiling by nitrogen regime interaction was observed.
Recommendation The authors conclude that jointing-stage subsoiling is unsuitable.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained economic index by 7 percentage.

Taxon: Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Material: Zhendan958e1
Treatment: subsoiling at jointing stagee0
Outcome: economic indexe0
Direction: decreasede0
Value: 7 percentagee0
Comparator: non-subsoilinge0

Verbatim

t0
“Summer Maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 87–99

e0
“compared with non-subsoiling,subsoiling at jointing stage achieved the following characters: plant height and ear height decreased by 17.3 cm and 9.0 cm,stem diameter decreased by 2.7 mm,and one leaf less;the increase of LAI before silking was limited,while decrease of LAI after silking was slow;stomatal conductance,intercellular CO2 concentration,transpiration rate,net photosynthetic rate of ear leaves decreased 38%…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 302–1013

e1
“Zhendan958 was applied in the field experiment.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–47

Title

Effects of Subsoiling at Jointing Stage on Dry Matter Production and Photosynthesis of Summer Maize

Dongxing Zhang Yumi kexue 2013

Other claims from this paper (17)

Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained plant height by 17.3 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained ear height by 9.0 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stem diameter by 2.7 mm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained leaf by one leaf.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI before silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI after silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stomatal conductance by 38%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained intercellular CO2 concentration by 25.3%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained transpiration rate by 42.5%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained net photosynthetic rate by 2.0%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 1 519.5 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 168.8 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain number by 100.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain yield by 1 662.0 kg/ha.
Intervention effect The two nitrogen regimes did not differ significantly for the studied outcomes.
Association No subsoiling by nitrogen regime interaction was observed.
Recommendation The authors conclude that jointing-stage subsoiling is unsuitable.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined bio-inoculant and fortified lignite fly ash application significantly reduced blast severity (10.32, 13.97 and 14.87 per cent at 30, 45 and 60 DAT) relative to control.

Taxon: riceOryza sativae0
Treatment: combined application of Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilise2
Interactor: blaste1pathogen
Second interactor: Pseudomonas fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense2biocontrol_agent
Outcome: blast disease severitye1
Direction: reducede1
Value: 10.32, 13.97 and 14.87 per cente1
Comparator: controle4

Verbatim

e0
“Brown leaf spot and blast are the major diseases of rice in Tamil Nadu”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70

e1
“significantly reduced brown leaf spot disease severity 9.03, 11.01 and 12.78 per cent at 30, 45 and 60 DAT and blast disease severity of 10.32, 13.97 and 14.87 per cent at 30, 45 and 60 DAT, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 859–1062

e2
“combined application of Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis as seed treatment @ 10g/kg of seed”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 467–571

e4
“All ecofriendly components treated plants significantly decrease the diseases incidence and increase the grain yield as compare to control”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1294

Title

Evaluation of bio inoculants fortified lignite fly ash against brown leaf spot and blast diseases of rice in Cauvery delta region of Tamil Nadu

D. John Christopher; D. E. Kavi Newton Plant Disease Research 2017

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Combined bio-inoculant and fortified lignite fly ash application significantly reduced brown leaf spot severity (9.03, 11.01 and 12.78 per cent at 30, 45 and 60 DAT) relative to control.
Intervention effect The combined bio-inoculant treatment gave the maximum rice grain yield (32 g/plant) of all treatments.
Intervention effect All ecofriendly components significantly decreased rice disease incidence relative to control.
Intervention effect All ecofriendly components increased rice grain yield relative to control.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained plant height by 17.3 cm.

Taxon: Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Material: Zhendan958e1
Treatment: subsoiling at jointing stagee0
Outcome: plant heighte0
Direction: decreasede0
Value: 17.3 cme0
Comparator: non-subsoilinge0

Verbatim

t0
“Summer Maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 87–99

e0
“compared with non-subsoiling,subsoiling at jointing stage achieved the following characters: plant height and ear height decreased by 17.3 cm and 9.0 cm,stem diameter decreased by 2.7 mm,and one leaf less;the increase of LAI before silking was limited,while decrease of LAI after silking was slow;stomatal conductance,intercellular CO2 concentration,transpiration rate,net photosynthetic rate of ear leaves decreased 38%…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 302–1013

e1
“Zhendan958 was applied in the field experiment.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–47

Title

Effects of Subsoiling at Jointing Stage on Dry Matter Production and Photosynthesis of Summer Maize

Dongxing Zhang Yumi kexue 2013

Other claims from this paper (17)

Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained ear height by 9.0 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stem diameter by 2.7 mm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained leaf by one leaf.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI before silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI after silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stomatal conductance by 38%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained intercellular CO2 concentration by 25.3%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained transpiration rate by 42.5%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained net photosynthetic rate by 2.0%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 1 519.5 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 168.8 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain number by 100.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained economic index by 7 percentage.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain yield by 1 662.0 kg/ha.
Intervention effect The two nitrogen regimes did not differ significantly for the studied outcomes.
Association No subsoiling by nitrogen regime interaction was observed.
Recommendation The authors conclude that jointing-stage subsoiling is unsuitable.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained ear height by 9.0 cm.

Taxon: Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Material: Zhendan958e1
Treatment: subsoiling at jointing stagee0
Outcome: ear heighte0
Direction: decreasede0
Value: 9.0 cme0
Comparator: non-subsoilinge0

Verbatim

t0
“Summer Maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 87–99

e0
“compared with non-subsoiling,subsoiling at jointing stage achieved the following characters: plant height and ear height decreased by 17.3 cm and 9.0 cm,stem diameter decreased by 2.7 mm,and one leaf less;the increase of LAI before silking was limited,while decrease of LAI after silking was slow;stomatal conductance,intercellular CO2 concentration,transpiration rate,net photosynthetic rate of ear leaves decreased 38%…” Show full quote
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 302–1013

e1
“Zhendan958 was applied in the field experiment.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–47

Title

Effects of Subsoiling at Jointing Stage on Dry Matter Production and Photosynthesis of Summer Maize

Dongxing Zhang Yumi kexue 2013

Other claims from this paper (17)

Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained plant height by 17.3 cm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stem diameter by 2.7 mm.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained leaf by one leaf.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI before silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained LAI after silking.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained stomatal conductance by 38%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained intercellular CO2 concentration by 25.3%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained transpiration rate by 42.5%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained net photosynthetic rate by 2.0%.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 1 519.5 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained dry matter production by 168.8 kg/ha.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain number by 100.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained economic index by 7 percentage.
Intervention effect Subsoiling at jointing reduced or constrained grain yield by 1 662.0 kg/ha.
Intervention effect The two nitrogen regimes did not differ significantly for the studied outcomes.
Association No subsoiling by nitrogen regime interaction was observed.
Recommendation The authors conclude that jointing-stage subsoiling is unsuitable.

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