Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield decrease”

317 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

plus 11 non-evaluative

Over time

1950 ’60 ’70 ’80 ’90 2000 ’10 ’20

plus 2 earlier · 1930s

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Lara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.

Taxon: Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
Material: Larae0
Outcome: decreasee0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0
“while with the other two cultivars (Lara and Sara), the decrease was not significant.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1046

t0
“Sugar beet”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–10

t1
“decrease of yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–898

Title

Sugar beet root yield and quality as affected by sowing date

Branko Marinković; Jovan Crnobarać; Goran Jačimović; et al. Zbornik radova Instituta za ratarstvo i povrtarstvo 2005

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect The first sowing date gave the highest root yield across cultivars and years.
Intervention effect First-date yield exceeded other sowing dates by 8.11 tha'1 (12.2%).
Intervention effect Mara yield decreased significantly on optimal sowing dates.
Intervention effect Sara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.
Association Sugar content variation was uncorrelated with sowing dates.
Association Root yield was the dominant contributor to sugar yield.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

One cluster had a nonsignificant yield decrease with narrower rows.

Taxon: SoybeanGlycine maxt0
Treatment: RS narrowede0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“one had a nonsignificant yield decrease as RS narrowed.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1128–1183

t0
“Soybean”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–32

Title

Row Spacing in the Early Soybean Production System

Glenn R. Bowers; James L. Rabb; Lanny O. Ashlock; et al. Agronomy Journal 2000. doi:10.2134/agronj2000.923524x

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Five environmental clusters had significant yield gains of 17–36% as rows narrowed.
Intervention effect Three other clusters had nonsignificant yield increases with narrower rows.
Intervention effect One cluster had virtually no yield change with narrower rows.
Association Yield responded most to row spacing at 100 to 270 mm July and August rainfall.
Recommendation The authors recommend rows at most 40 cm to optimize ESPS yields in the midsouthern USA.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Thiourea tended to decrease straw yield nonsignificantly.

Taxon: wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment: application of TUe0
Outcome: straw yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“While the straw yield showed a decrease trend with the application of TU. Decrease in straw yield, although marginal was statistically insignificant.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1217

t0
“Wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–44

Title

Genetic Expression of Yield Ability in Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under Sulphydryl Enriched Biophysio-Environment

PC Gupta; Shiv Narayan; PS Shekhawat; et al. INROADS- An International Journal of Jaipur National University 2013. doi:10.5958/j.2277-4912.2.1.004

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observation The four wheat varieties differed significantly in yield and yield attributes.
Association Variety by thiourea dose interaction was nonsignificant.
Observation Thiourea at 5 and 10 kg/ha tended to increase wheat yield components.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 10 kg/ha increased harvest index by 10.11%.
Observation Thiourea at 20 kg/ha raised harvest index only marginally by 4.75.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 10 kg/ha significantly increased grain yield by 8.0%.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 5 kg/ha slightly increased grain yield over control.
Intervention effect Thiourea at 20 kg/ha slightly increased grain yield over control but reduced it versus 10 kg/ha.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.

Taxon: Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
Material: Sarae0
Outcome: decreasee0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0
“while with the other two cultivars (Lara and Sara), the decrease was not significant.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1046

t0
“Sugar beet”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–10

Title

Sugar beet root yield and quality as affected by sowing date

Branko Marinković; Jovan Crnobarać; Goran Jačimović; et al. Zbornik radova Instituta za ratarstvo i povrtarstvo 2005

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect The first sowing date gave the highest root yield across cultivars and years.
Intervention effect First-date yield exceeded other sowing dates by 8.11 tha'1 (12.2%).
Intervention effect Mara yield decreased significantly on optimal sowing dates.
Intervention effect Lara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.
Association Sugar content variation was uncorrelated with sowing dates.
Association Root yield was the dominant contributor to sugar yield.

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

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.

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.

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 effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

High-rate controlled-release urea (HN) did not significantly decrease rice yield compared with conventional urea (FP).

Taxon: riceOryza sativae0
Treatment: HNe0
Outcome: rice yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0
Comparator: FPe0

Verbatim

e0
“As compared with FP, HN did not decrease rice yield significantly”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 370–435

Title

[Effects of seeding-box total fertilization on rice yield and nitrogen loss].

Ru-Liang Liu; You-Hong Li; Ai-Ping Zhang; et al. PubMed 2012

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Medium-rate controlled-release urea (MN) increased the two-year average nitrogen use efficiency of rice by 26.2% compared with FP.
Intervention effect High-rate controlled-release urea (HN) increased the two-year average nitrogen use efficiency of rice by 20.7% compared with FP.
Intervention effect Total N concentration in surface water peaked 7-9 days after urea application in MN and HN, versus 1-3 days in FP.
Intervention effect Total N concentration in surface water in MN and HN was significantly lower than in FP throughout the rice growth period.
Intervention effect Nitrogen leaching loss occurred mainly at tillering stage in FP but was delayed to the tillering-flowering stage in MN and HN.
Observation In all treatments NO3(-)-N loss accounted for 59.7%-64.2% of the total N loss.
Intervention effect HN decreased total N leaching loss by 51.8% compared with FP.

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)

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