View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect observed original result negative not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Chemical manure did not significantly increase outcomes relative to control and showed a decrease .
Treatmentchemical manure e0 Verbatim
e0 “application of chemical manure not only had not significant increasing in comparison of control but also had decreasing. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1486–1606 t0 “Lippia citriodora ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–76 Other claims from this paper (4) Observation observed original result positive not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Grain nitrogen accumulation increased or did not significantly decrease despite reduced nitrogen for most crops.
Taxoncereal crops, winter oilseed rape and peas t0 Outcomenitrogen accumulation in grain (NYLD) e0 Directionincreased or did not significantly decrease e0 Verbatim
e0 “Despite the apparent nitrogen reduction for most crops, grain yield (GYLD) and nitrogen accumulation in grain (NYLD) was increased or did not significantly decrease ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1052–1216 t0 “cereal crops, winter oilseed rape and peas ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 48–90 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result negative not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Organic residues decrease d early rice yield relative to CK without a significant difference.
Treatmentincorporation of organic waste residues e0 Outcomeyield in treatments e0 Verbatim
t0 “rice ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–66 e0 “Compared with the yield in CK treatment,the yield in treatments with the incorporation of organic waste residues had a decrease in early rice and an increase in late rice,but the differences were not significant ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1026–1237 Other claims from this paper (11) Intervention effect observed original result negative not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation reduced fruit size without statistical significance.
TreatmentDeficit irrigation e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “not significant decrease of fruit weight and size, as well as fruit yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1132–1205 t0 “tomato ”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 85–91 t1 “tomato ”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 85–91 e1 “Deficit irrigation caused significant decrease of water content in fruits ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1054–1127 Other claims from this paper (10) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Water stress did not significantly decrease C16:00 fatty acid content.
Not reported Comparator Direction
Verbatim
e0 “Water stress significantly decrease d fatty acid content of C18:0, C18:1, C18:2, and C18:3 but not C16:00. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 762–867 t0 “soybean ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–46 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect observed original result negative not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation reduced fruit weight without statistical significance.
TreatmentDeficit irrigation e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “not significant decrease of fruit weight and size, as well as fruit yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1132–1205 t0 “tomato ”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 85–91 t1 “tomato ”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 85–91 e1 “Deficit irrigation caused significant decrease of water content in fruits ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1054–1127 Other claims from this paper (10) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Defoliation up to 33.3% at R3 caused no significant yield decline at any density.
Treatmentdefoliation of up to 33.3% at R3 e0 Directionno significant decrease e0 Qualifierregardless of the plant density e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The soybean tolerate defoliation of up to 33.3% at R3 with no significant decrease in grain yield , regardless of the plant density. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1124–1255 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result positive not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Optimal interval fertigation did not statistically reduce economic yield .
Treatmentoptimal interval fertigation e0 Directiondid not statistically decrease e0 Comparatorconventional interval fertigation e0 Verbatim
e0 “the treatment optimal interval fertigation did not statistically decrease the economic yield and fruit nutrition quality of cucumber when compare to conventional interval fertigation ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 771–953 t0 “Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 107–136 Other claims from this paper (10) Association author interpretation original result not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Genotypes without a significant photosynthetic decrease may not have reached technical maturity.
Organ / stagetechnical maturity e0 Outcometechnical maturity e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “As regards the genotypes for which photosynthesis did not reduce significantly, it may be assumed that such plants had not reached technical maturity. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 600–750 t0 “hops ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–53 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result negative not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped maize yield fell by more than 9% against sole maize under both nitrogen treatments, without statistical significance.
Treatmentintercropped maize under both N treatments e0 Outcomeintercropped maize e0 Comparatorsole maize crop e0 Verbatim
e0 “Despite the absence of significant differences, the relative decrease in intercropped maize under both N treatments was over 9% compared to the sole maize crop ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1499–1658 Other claims from this paper (12) 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.