View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Observation observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Corn plant densities showed no consistent differences in grain yield or mycotoxins.
Outcomegrain yields or mycotoxins e2 Verbatim
e6 “Potassium maintains water status in corn ( Zea mays L) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–54 e2 “Consistent differences in grain yield s or mycotoxins were not found among hybrids or plants/acre ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1075–1171 Other claims from this paper (8) Method / resource observed original result no effect projected Claim · model-written summary
EPIC projected no change in corn yield under the fine scale scenario.
Comparatorfine scale scenario e0 Not reported Outcome Value
Verbatim
e0 “EPIC simulated a decrease for the coarse scenario but no change for the fine scale scenario ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 568–659 t0 “for wheat and corn ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 61–79 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Plant and ear height remained stable when fertilizer rate fell from F100 to F50.
Treatmentdecrease in fertilizer rate from F100 to F50 e3 OutcomePlant and ear height e3 Directionno_change inferred e3 Verbatim
e0 “hybrid maize in autumn and spring growing season ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–482 e3 “Plant and ear height remained stable with decrease in fertilizer rate from F100 to F50 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–797 Other claims from this paper (11) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping did not significantly influence plantain bunch yield .
Directiondid not significantly influence e2 SettingSouth Western Nigeria t0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e2 “Intercropping did not significantly influence bunch yield of plantain but it caused a 2–7 and 20% yield decrease in egusi melon and water melon respectively ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 472–628 t0 “Productivity of Plantain (MusaAAB)-Melon Mixtures in South Western Nigeria ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–74 Other claims from this paper (6) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Low tunnels did not increase pepper yield .
Treatmentlow tunnels for two weeks after transplanting e1 Directiondid not increase e0 Comparatorplants not grown under low tunnels e0 Verbatim
e0 “they did not increase yield or decrease sunscald compared to plants not grown under low tunnels ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1304 e1 “plants grown under low tunnels for two weeks after transplanting ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1123–1187 t0 “Bell Pepper ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 63–74 Other claims from this paper (13) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Tolerating weeds in turnips did not benefit predators.
Treatmenttolerating weeds e0 Interactorpredators e0 other Directiondid not benefit e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “tolerating weeds in turnips had strong yield costs, and did not benefit predators or decrease pest pressure ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 899–1006 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Soil pH between 5.3 and 6.6 did not change nutrient uptake.
Treatmentsoil pH from 5.3 to 6.6 e0 Directiondid not increase or decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “a range of soil pH from 5.3 to 6.6 did not increase or decrease leaf tipburn incidence, nutrient uptake or total yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1050–1168 t0 “cabbage ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–86 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
The 75% RFD dose did not significantly compromise yield compared with the 125% RFD treatment.
Directionwithout compromising e1 Comparator125% RFD treatment e1 Verbatim
t0 “Nitrogen rates shaping rice yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–33 e1 “Despite slightly lower yield than the 125% RFD treatment, the 75% RFD dose showed a significant decrease in nitrate leaching in groundwater without compromising the yield significantly ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1873–2057 Other claims from this paper (15) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Optimum gibberellin concentrations caused little or no reduction in fruit yield .
TaxonZinfandel, Tinta Madeira, and Carignane vines e0 TreatmentOptimum concentrations of gibberellin e2 Directionlittle or no reduction e2 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Zinfandel, Tinta Madeira, and Carignane vines were sprayed with gibberellin at prebloom or bloom stage ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–102 e2 “Optimum concentrations of gibberellin caused little or no reduction in yield of fruit ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 180–265 Other claims from this paper (3) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Direct sowing maintained yield at the level of classic tillage and sowing.
Comparatorclassic soil tillage and sowing technologies e0 Verbatim
e0 “Direct sowing and conservation soil tillage gave a decrease o f grain cost and provide the same level o f yield achieved with classic soil tillage and sowing technologies ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 470–640 t0 “WINTER WHEAT ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–63 Other claims from this paper (5) 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.