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 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 effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

POST treatments did not decrease leafy crop yield versus a hand-weeded check.

Taxon: leafy crope0
Treatment: POST treatmentse0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0
Comparator: hand-weeded checke0

Verbatim

e0
“POST treatments did not decrease leafy crop yield compared with the hand-weeded check”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1076

Title

Evaluation of Imazethapyr for Weed Control in Leafy Vegetable Crops

Joan A. Dusky; William M. Stall Weed Technology 1996. doi:10.1017/s0890037x00039907

Other claims from this paper (11)

Observation PRE imazethapyr sensitivity ranked Boston above bibb, crisphead, romaine, leaf, escarole and endive.
Association POST imazethapyr crop injury increased with application rate, similarly across leafy crops.
Intervention effect Surfactant addition increased imazethapyr phytotoxicity.
Intervention effect PRE imazethapyr at 0.067 kg ai/ha controlled livid amaranth by over 80%.
Intervention effect PRE imazethapyr at 0.067 kg ai/ha controlled common purslane by over 80%.
Intervention effect PRE imazethapyr at 0.067 kg ai/ha controlled flatsedge by over 80%.
Intervention effect PRE imazethapyr at 0.067 kg ai/ha controlled common lambsquarters by over 80%.
Intervention effect POST imazethapyr with surfactant controlled all weed species by over 85%.
Intervention effect POST imazethapyr at 0.017 kg/ha controlled spiny amaranth by over 85%.
Intervention effect Surfactant did not improve spiny amaranth control with imazethapyr.
Intervention effect PRE imazethapyr reduced crop yield relative to POST and hand-weeded controls.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Also assuming uniform synthesis efficiency caused an additional 4% decrease in simulated yield.

Taxon: SorghumSorghumt0
Treatment: assuming that Y g also was uniforme0
Outcome: yieldt0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 4%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“assuming that Y g also was uniform led to an additional decrease of 4%”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1509–1579

t0
“Sorghum Grain Yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–34

Title

Sensitivity of Sorghum Grain Yield to Ontogenetic Changes in Respiration Coeffecients

Keith J. McCree Crop Science 1988. doi:10.2135/cropsci1988.0011183x002800010025x

Other claims from this paper (4)

Method / resource Simulated daily carbon balance, biomass, and grain yield closely matched sorghum field data under warm, sunny, humid conditions.
Intervention effect The model indicated that lowering night temperature by 10°C would increase sorghum yield by only 4%.
Intervention effect Assuming uniform maintenance requirements across organs underestimated sorghum yield by 35%.
Recommendation Selecting for lower panicle maintenance may have little capacity to increase sorghum yield.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide injury and defoliation interacted to decrease soybean yield.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe1
Treatment: herbicide injury and defoliatione3
Outcome: yielde3
Direction: decreasee3
Qualifier: interacted over 1990 and 1991e3

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e1
“seed yield of soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.]”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 525–572

e3
“Moreover, herbicide injury and defoliation interacted over 1990 and 1991 to decrease yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1297

Title

Soybean Yield and Pest Management as Influenced by Nematodes, Herbicides, and Defoliating Insects

J. A. Browde; L. P. Pedigo; M. D. K. Owen; et al. Agronomy Journal 1994. doi:10.2134/agronj1994.00021962008600040005x

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Herbicide injury reduced soybean yield in 1990 and 1991.
Intervention effect Defoliation reduced soybean yield in 1990 and 1991.
Intervention effect Defoliation reduced pods per plant in soybean.
Intervention effect Herbicide injury decreased pods per plant in soybean in 1990.
Intervention effect Herbicide injury decreased weight per seed in soybean in 1990 and 1991.
Intervention effect Soybean cyst nematode stress alone never affected soybean yield.
Intervention effect Interactions of soybean cyst nematode with herbicides and with defoliation reduced soybean yield in 1990.
Observation No treatment effects on soybean yield were found in 1989.
Recommendation Lower economic injury levels for green cloverworm were developed for soybean treated with acifluorfen plus bentazon.
Recommendation Growers should consider adjusting weed and insect management strategies for soybean fields infested with soybean cyst nematode.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativeprojected

Claim · model-written summary

Loss of seed treatments would decrease corn yield through yield losses.

Taxon: cornZea mays subsp. mayse2
Treatment: The loss of seed treatmentse2
Outcome: yield lossese2
Direction: decreaseinferrede2

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e2
“The loss of seed treatments would result in yield losses to both corn and soybeans”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 203–285

Title

PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT OF FIELD CORN AND SOYBEANS: NORTHERN PLAINS STATES

Bergman, Paul W.; Davis, Ronald A.; Fertig, Stanford N.; et al. AgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) 1985. doi:10.22004/ag.econ.277781

Other claims from this paper (4)

Observation Without insecticides, corn rootworm larvae and other soil insects would cause substantial corn yield losses.
Intervention effect Loss of seed treatments would decrease soybean yield through yield losses.
Intervention effect Loss of thiocarbamate herbicides would cause the greatest corn yield losses among herbicides.
Intervention effect Loss of dinitroanilines or triazines would cause the greatest soybean yield losses.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativeprojected

Claim · model-written summary

Loss of seed treatments would decrease soybean yield through yield losses.

Taxon: soybeansGlycine maxe2
Treatment: The loss of seed treatmentse2
Outcome: yield lossese2
Direction: decreaseinferrede2

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e2
“The loss of seed treatments would result in yield losses to both corn and soybeans”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 203–285

Title

PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT OF FIELD CORN AND SOYBEANS: NORTHERN PLAINS STATES

Bergman, Paul W.; Davis, Ronald A.; Fertig, Stanford N.; et al. AgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) 1985. doi:10.22004/ag.econ.277781

Other claims from this paper (4)

Observation Without insecticides, corn rootworm larvae and other soil insects would cause substantial corn yield losses.
Intervention effect Loss of seed treatments would decrease corn yield through yield losses.
Intervention effect Loss of thiocarbamate herbicides would cause the greatest corn yield losses among herbicides.
Intervention effect Loss of dinitroanilines or triazines would cause the greatest soybean yield losses.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Excessive nitrogen could decrease pod yield.

Taxon: peanutArachis hypogaeat0
Treatment: Excessive nitrogene0
Outcome: pod yielde0
Direction: decreasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Excessive nitrogen,however,could decrease economic coefficient,and thus decreasing pod yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 521–614

t0
“peanut”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 89–95

Title

Effect of nitrogen levels on yield and sucrose synthesis of leaves in different types of peanut

Minglun Wang Plant Nutrition and Fertilizing Science 2008

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Within a certain range, nitrogen increased activity of sucrose synthesis.
Intervention effect Within a certain range, nitrogen increased sucrose content of leaves.
Intervention effect Excessive nitrogen could decrease activity of sucrose phosphate sythase.
Intervention effect Excessive nitrogen could decrease sucrose content of leaves.
Intervention effect Excessive nitrogen could decrease economic coefficient.
Intervention effect Proper nitrogen could increase pod yield.
Intervention effect Proper nitrogen could increase valid pods per plant.
Intervention effect Proper nitrogen could increase plumpness rate of pod.
Observation The optimum nitrogen rate for var.vulgaris Harz in Arachis hypogaea was N 90 kg/ha.
Observation The optimum nitrogen rate for common type peanut was N 135 kg/ha.

Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

UV-B and ABA decrease yield.

Taxon: grape berryt0
Treatment: These treatmentse0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“These treatments also hasten berry sugar and phenol accumulation, but reduce berry growth and sugar per berry at harvest, and therefore decrease yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1503–1654

t0
“grape berry”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–45

Title

UV-B and abscisic acid effects on grape berry maturation and quality

Federico J. Berli; Rubén Bottini Journal of Berry Research 2013. doi:10.3233/jbr-130047

Other claims from this paper (11)

Observation Grapevine tissue photoprotection and repair usually prevent UV-B damage.
Intervention effect UV-B promotes ABA biosynthesis in grapevine leaves.
Mechanism Phenol accumulation is described as a protective response to UV-B.
Intervention effect High UV-B increases total phenols in grape berries.
Intervention effect ABA applications increase total phenols in grape berries.
Intervention effect High UV-B and ABA disproportionately increase high antioxidant phenols.
Intervention effect UV-B and ABA hasten berry sugar accumulation.
Intervention effect UV-B and ABA hasten berry phenol accumulation.
Intervention effect UV-B and ABA reduce berry growth.
Intervention effect UV-B and ABA reduce sugar per berry at harvest.
Association Red winemaking quality correlates highly with phenolics stimulated by UV-B and ABA.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)projected

Claim · model-written summary

Keeping available water depletion below 25% produced no significant crop-yield decrease.

Treatment: maintaining AWC depletion below 25%e0
Outcome: crop yielde0
Direction: no significant decreasee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0
“maintaining AWC depletion below 25% resulted in no significant decrease in crop yield and biomass”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2160–2257

Title

Water Productivity of Irrigated Tomatoes in Eastern Canada Based on AquaCrop Simulations

Naresh Kumar Thangaraju Arumugagounder; Samuel Ihuoma; Chandra A. Madramootoo Journal of the ASABE 2022. doi:10.13031/ja.14792

Other claims from this paper (8)

Method / resource Measured seasonal harvest index improved AquaCrop performance over defaults.
Method / resource Calibration dry-yield RMSE was 0.57 ton ha-1.
Method / resource Calibration biomass RMSE was 0.89 ton ha-1.
Method / resource Verification dry-yield RMSE was 0.28 ton ha-1.
Method / resource Verification biomass RMSE was 0.01 ton ha-1.
Intervention effect Keeping available water depletion below 25% produced no significant biomass decrease.
Recommendation The authors recommend maintaining available water depletion below 25% for irrigated tomato production.
Observation Water productivity was highest in fully irrigated fields across soil types.

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.

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