Search claims · PlantClaims

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 effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low combined pest densities did not decrease canola yield.

Taxon: Brassica napus L.Brassica napust0
Treatment: low combined densitiese0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: do not decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“low combined densities do not decrease yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1078–1122

t0
“Brassica napus L.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–95

Title

Effect of Insect Herbivory on the Architecture and Seed Production of Canola, Brassica napus L.

H.A. Cárcamo Journal of Entomological Science 2012. doi:10.18474/0749-8004-47.1.44

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Intermediate combined insect density reduced canola grain yield under severe dryness.
Intervention effect High combined insect density reduced canola grain yield under severe dryness.
Intervention effect Intermediate combined insect density reduced raceme number and pods per raceme under severe dryness.
Intervention effect High combined insect density reduced raceme number and pods per raceme under severe dryness.
Intervention effect In more humid 2002 conditions, weevil damage at 20 adults per cage was more apparent than in 2000.
Intervention effect At low or moderate densities, late-season pests did not appear to stimulate canola overcompensation.
Observation The study found no indication of competition between the two insect pests.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Halving insect visits caused little decrease in sunflower yield.

Taxon: sunflowerHelianthus annuuse1
Treatment: insect visits were reduced by 50%e0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: little decreasee0
Value: 50%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“little decrease in yield when insect visits were reduced by 50%”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 630–693

e1
“in sunflower”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–220

Title

Supplementary material from "Pollination benefits are maximized at intermediate nutrient levels"

Tamburini, Giovanni; Lami, Francesco; Marini, Lorenzo Figshare 2017. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3827959.v2

Other claims from this paper (5)

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 effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Delayed autumn ploughing did not decrease grain yield.

Taxon: spring barleyHordeum vulgaree1
Treatment: delayed autumn ploughinge0
Outcome: grain yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Because delayed autumn ploughing did not decrease the grain yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 902–967

e1
“grain yield of spring barley”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–656

Title

The effect of incorporation time of different crops on the residual effect on spring cereals

H. KÄNKÄNEN; A. KANGAS; T. MELA Agricultural and Food Science 1999. doi:10.23986/afsci.5629

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Barley grain yield after legumes was similar to yield after barley despite 40 kg ha-1 less N fertilization.
Intervention effect Autumn ploughing gave good barley yield more reliably than spring incorporation.
Recommendation The authors recommend delayed autumn ploughing for its potential to reduce nitrogen leaching.
Recommendation Spring ploughing could be used except on clay soils.
Intervention effect Reduced tillage spring incorporation of ryegrass often decreased barley yield.
Intervention effect Reduced tillage spring incorporation of red clover often decreased barley yield.
Intervention effect Incorporation timing had no consistent effect on oats grain yield in year three.

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)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cluster pruning did not decrease total yield across cultivars.

Taxon: TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: treatmentse0
Outcome: total yielde0
Direction: no decreasee0
Comparator: unpruned controle0

Verbatim

e0
“There was no decrease in total yield, across all cultivars, between treatments and the unpruned control.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1976–2080

t0
“Tomato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–31

Title

Fruit Cluster Pruning of Tomato in an Organic High-Tunnel System

Brian A. Mitchell; Mark E. Uchanski; Adriane Elliott HortScience 2019. doi:10.21273/hortsci13487-18

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Three-fruit pruning increased fresh fruit weight in both hybrids.
Intervention effect Cherokee Purple did not respond to cluster pruning.
Observation Jet Star yielded more than the other two cultivars.
Association SSC and marketability depended more on cultivar than pruning.
Observation Lola had significantly greater SSC than the other cultivars.
Observation Jet Star had the greatest marketable yield.
Observation Cherokee Purple had greater cull yield.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Halving insect visits caused little sunflower yield decrease.

Taxon: sunflowerHelianthus annuust0
Treatment: insect visits were reduced by 50%e0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: little decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“little decrease in yield when insect visits were reduced by 50%”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 632–695

t0
“in sunflower, combining a gradient in insect pollination”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–264

Title

Pollination benefits are maximized at intermediate nutrient levels

Giovanni Tamburini; Francesco Lami; Lorenzo Marini Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 2017. doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.0729

Other claims from this paper (4)

Association Pollination benefits to sunflower yield peaked at intermediate N supply.
Intervention effect Pollination increased sunflower yield about 25% versus complete pollinator exclusion.
Association The authors found a nonlinear pollination by nutrient interaction in seed production.
Recommendation Optimal pollination could compensate for lower nitrogen applications.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Thinning treatments did not significantly decrease yield per tree.

Taxon: ‘Wilking’ mandarinst0
Outcome: yield in kg per treee0
Direction: without significant decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“without significant decrease of yield in kg per tree.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 243–296

t0
“‘Wilking’ Mandarins”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–74

Title

Improving Fruit Size and Breaking Alternate Bearing in ‘Wilking’ Mandarins by Ethephon and Other Agents1

S. Galliani; S. P. Monselise; R. Goren HortScience 1975. doi:10.21273/hortsci.10.1.68

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect Ethephon caused satisfactory thinning in heavily loaded mandarin trees.
Intervention effect NAA caused satisfactory thinning in heavily loaded mandarin trees.
Intervention effect Ethephon increased individual fruit size by 64% versus hand thinning.
Intervention effect NAA increased individual fruit size by 48% versus hand thinning.
Intervention effect Ethephon increased profit by about 30% versus hand thinning.
Intervention effect NAA increased profit by about 30% versus hand thinning.
Intervention effect Summer pruning had similar effects but a smaller fruit size increase.
Intervention effect Ethephon reduced alternate bearing.
Observation After ethephon, 57% of treated trees had satisfactory yields the following year.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reducing substrate volume per plant by one third did not considerably decrease tomato yield.

Taxon: TOMATOSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: Reduction of substrate volume per plant by 1/3e0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: without considerable yield decreasee0
Value: 1/3e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Reduction of substrate volume per plant by 1/3 without considerable yield decrease”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–82

t0
“TOMATO YIELD”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–12

Title

TOMATO YIELD DEPENDENT ON SUBSTRATE TYPE AND VOLUME

B. Benko; J. Borošić; B. Novak; et al. Acta Horticulturae 2008. doi:10.17660/actahortic.2008.779.57

Other claims from this paper (2)

Intervention effect Rockwool produced the highest tomato yield among the substrates.
Recommendation The authors recommend rockwool as a tomato growing substrate.

“yield decrease”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics