View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
At Manhattan in 2007, yield did not decrease significantly until the final planting date.
delayed planting dates t1 did not decrease e0 final planting date in 2007 e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “CORN ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 30–34 e0 “yield at Manhattan, KS, did not decrease significantly until the final planting date in 2007 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 976–1068 t1 “delayed planting dates and hybrids of varying maturity revealed that yield at Manhattan, KS ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 907–998 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
T1 caused no decrease in yield , fruit weight or quality across three years.
yield, fruit weight or fruit quality e0 over all three years e0 Not reported Taxon
Verbatim
e0 “Treatment Tl received about 30 cm less irrigation water than the control and showed no decrease in yield , fruit weight or fruit quality over all three years. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 441–598 Other claims from this paper (11) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation does not decrease the continuous soybean yield penalty.
no_change inferred e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t1 “Soybean Yield Penalties ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 20–43 e0 “irrigation decrease s the CCYP but not the CSYP ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1141–1187 Other claims from this paper (10) Method / resource observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) simulated Claim · model-written summary
The controller caused no significant decrease in simulated maize yield relative to constant irrigation.
without any significant decrease e0 constant irrigation method of the DSSAT model e0 Verbatim
t0 “Precision Irrigation ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 44–64 e0 “almost 40% decrease in water consumption is achieved in comparison to constant irrigation method of the DSSAT model without any significant decrease in yield and leaf area index. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2249–2427 e1 “DSSAT (Decision Support System for Agro-technology Transfer) maize crop simulation model ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1911–1999 Other claims from this paper (2) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Legumes did not decrease maize yield in the intercrops.
Verbatim
e1 “Neither the legumes decrease d yield s of maize nor roselle ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–835 Other claims from this paper (8) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Legumes did not decrease roselle yield in the intercrops.
Verbatim
e1 “Neither the legumes decrease d yield s of maize nor roselle ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–835 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Excess fertilization did not significantly decrease yield .
excessive fertilization e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The yield is not significantly decrease d under the excessive fertilization. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1084–1159 t0 “wheat yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 38–49 Other claims from this paper (12) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Overexpression lines of OsMYBS1 showed no decrease in total grain yield per plant in rice.
overexpression lines e2 total grain yield per plant e2 without a decrease e2 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “agronomic performance in rice ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–99 e2 “overexpression lines produced more tillers and panicles, with a reduced seed-setting rate but without a decrease in total grain yield per plant ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–810 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Pearlmillet grain yield did not decrease when nitrogen was curtailed by 25%.
amount of N was curtailed by 25% (M75I100) e0 grain yield of PM e0 did not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The grain yield of PM did not decrease even when the amount of N was curtailed by 25% (M75I100). ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 752–848 e1 “pearlmillet (PM) (Pennisetum glaucum L.) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 57–97 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Leafhopper load up to 71.8 leafhopper-days per leaf did not decrease yield and fruit quality.
yield and fruit quality e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The impact of the grape leafhopper ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–43 e7 “the grapevines, Vitis vinifera L. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 148–181 e1 “No decrease in yield and fruit quality with leafhopper ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1266–1320 Other claims from this paper (9) 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.
Zea mays subsp. mayst0
Glycine max
Zea mays
Hibiscus sabdariffa
Triticum aestivum
Oryza sativa
Cenchrus americanus
Vitis vinifera
Empoasca vitis