View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
V12 topdressing combined with sowing nitrogen did not decrease grain yield .
TreatmentLate topdressing fertilizations (V12) e0 Directiondid not cause a decrease e0 Comparatornitrogen fertilization at sowing e0 Verbatim
e0 “Late topdressing fertilizations (V12) did not cause a decrease in grain yield when combined with nitrogen fertilization at sowing, moreover resulted in higher NUE. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1195–1358 t0 “Yield and nutritional efficiency of corn in response to rates and splits of nitrogen fertilization ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–98 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
The 25-30 mm lower water reserve under antierosive tillage did not decrease the yield of sunflower hybrid Zaporozhskiy 9.
Treatmentantierosive tillage e1 Directiondid not decrease e2 Comparatorconventional plowing e1 Verbatim
e1 “after antierosive tillage, the black steppe soil accumulates less water reserve than after conventional plowing ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 314–425 e2 “the difference which amounted to 25-30 mm, did not decrease the yield of the sunflower hybrid Zaporozhskiy 9 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 436–544 Other claims from this paper (2) Intervention effect author interpretation original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Using POC-DAP for Swiss chard could maintain yield without decrease compared with top-dressings.
Treatmentusing POC-DAP for Swiss chard cultivation e5 Directionwithout yield decrease e5 Comparatortop-dressings e5 Verbatim
t0 “Swiss chard ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 e5 “It was also found that by using POC-DAP for Swiss chard cultivation, labour and energy costs of top-dressings could be eliminated without yield decrease ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 930–1082 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
In 1978, relatively high ozone doses did not further decrease yield of unfertilized plants.
Treatmentrelatively high doses of O/sub 3/ e1 Directiondid not further decrease e1 Qualifierno fertilizer added e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “soybeans, Glycine max 'Davis' ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 130–159 e1 “In 1978, plants with no fertilizer added were severely stunted and even relatively high doses of O/sub 3/ did not further decrease yield . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 895–1032 Other claims from this paper (6) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
The relation between A. theophrasti biomass and relative soyabean seed- yield decrease did not differ with CO2.
Outcomerelative decrease in seed yield e0 Directiondid not differ e0 Verbatim
e0 “the relative decrease in seed yield with A. theophrasti biomass did not differ in response to CO 2 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 751–849 t0 “soyabean growth and seed yield from Abutilon theophrasti competition ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 20–88 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Both rootstocks did not decrease scion vegetative growth, fruit yield or size.
Treatmentboth rootstocks e0 Outcomevegetative growth, fruit yield or the size of the scions e0 Directiondid not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “both rootstocks showed good compatibility with the different scions tested and did not decrease vegetative growth, fruit yield or the size of the scions ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1210–1362 t0 “pepper ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 Other claims from this paper (13) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Halving organic fertilizer did not significantly decrease tomato yield versus conventional management.
Treatmentthe half amount of organic fertilizer inputs e0 Comparatorlocal farmers' conventional management of water and fertilizer e0 Verbatim
e0 “compared with local farmers' conventional management of water and fertilizer,the half amount of organic fertilizer inputs would not significantly decrease the yield of tomato ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 367–541 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Imazapyr did not decrease soybean yield with the other herbicides.
Directiondid not increase e0 Comparatorchlorimuron, imazaquin, or imazethapyr e0 Verbatim
e0 “Imazapyr did not increase soybean injury or decrease yield provided by chlorimuron, imazaquin, or imazethapyr. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 994–1104 Other claims from this paper (10) Intervention effect observed original result no effect simulated Claim · model-written summary
Under gradual decrease of solar radiation, simulated yield showed no increment over the base yield .
Treatmentgradual decrease of solar radiation e6 Directionno yield increment e6 Verbatim
e2 “The CERES-wheat model was calibrated and validated based on actual data of field experiments with an objective to test the sensitivity of model to various weather and nonweather parameters for wheat (GW-496) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–207 e6 “Under gradual decrease of solar radiation no yield increment over the base yield was observed ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 898–991 Other claims from this paper (10) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Decision support systems gave no significant yield decrease compared with the stage-oriented standard system
Directionno significant decrease e0 Comparatorstage-oriented standard system e0 Verbatim
t0 “Fungicides in Wheat ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–84 e0 “Compared to a stage-oriented standard system, no significant decrease in yield was observed in both cultivars, despite up to a 50% reduction in fungicide use through the use of DSSs ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1047–1228 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.