Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield decrease”

6 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

2020

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

paper W3021959347 ✕

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second-year ψw decreased 7.46 at S1.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: S1e1
Outcome: ψwe0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 7.46e0
Qualifier: second year of experimente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The corresponding trend for the second year of experiment was 20.11, 25.21 and 26.06% increase for LPC, 7.46, 12.69 and 18.66 decrease for ψw, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1145

t0
“potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–134

e1
“Leaf proline content (LPC) increased by 38.87, 51.93 and 41.54% and leaf water potential (ψw) decreased by 20.95, 31.43 and 59.05% at S1, S2 and S3 compared with S0 in the first year of experiment, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–988

Title

Effects of different irrigation regimes and two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on some physiological characteristics and yield of potato under field conditions

Saman Khosravifar; Farhad Farahvash; Nasser Aliasgharzad; et al. Journal of Plant Nutrition 2020. doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1758133

Other claims from this paper (18)

Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 38.87% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 51.93% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 41.54% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 20.95% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 31.43% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 59.05% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 20.11% at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 25.21% at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 26.06% at S3.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 12.69 at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 18.66 at S3.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 20.78% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 36.46% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 50.36% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect C. etunicatum treated plants had minimum LPC of 4.16 μmol g−1 FW.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 36.00% in 2013.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 32.48% in 2014.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculated plants had maximum root colonization of 54.20%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second-year ψw decreased 12.69 at S2.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: S2e1
Outcome: ψwe0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 12.69e0
Qualifier: second year of experimente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The corresponding trend for the second year of experiment was 20.11, 25.21 and 26.06% increase for LPC, 7.46, 12.69 and 18.66 decrease for ψw, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1145

t0
“potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–134

e1
“Leaf proline content (LPC) increased by 38.87, 51.93 and 41.54% and leaf water potential (ψw) decreased by 20.95, 31.43 and 59.05% at S1, S2 and S3 compared with S0 in the first year of experiment, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–988

Title

Effects of different irrigation regimes and two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on some physiological characteristics and yield of potato under field conditions

Saman Khosravifar; Farhad Farahvash; Nasser Aliasgharzad; et al. Journal of Plant Nutrition 2020. doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1758133

Other claims from this paper (18)

Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 38.87% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 51.93% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 41.54% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 20.95% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 31.43% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 59.05% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 20.11% at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 25.21% at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 26.06% at S3.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 7.46 at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 18.66 at S3.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 20.78% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 36.46% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 50.36% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect C. etunicatum treated plants had minimum LPC of 4.16 μmol g−1 FW.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 36.00% in 2013.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 32.48% in 2014.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculated plants had maximum root colonization of 54.20%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second-year ψw decreased 18.66 at S3.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: S3e1
Outcome: ψwe0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 18.66e0
Qualifier: second year of experimente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The corresponding trend for the second year of experiment was 20.11, 25.21 and 26.06% increase for LPC, 7.46, 12.69 and 18.66 decrease for ψw, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1145

t0
“potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–134

e1
“Leaf proline content (LPC) increased by 38.87, 51.93 and 41.54% and leaf water potential (ψw) decreased by 20.95, 31.43 and 59.05% at S1, S2 and S3 compared with S0 in the first year of experiment, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–988

Title

Effects of different irrigation regimes and two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on some physiological characteristics and yield of potato under field conditions

Saman Khosravifar; Farhad Farahvash; Nasser Aliasgharzad; et al. Journal of Plant Nutrition 2020. doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1758133

Other claims from this paper (18)

Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 38.87% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 51.93% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 41.54% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 20.95% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 31.43% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 59.05% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 20.11% at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 25.21% at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 26.06% at S3.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 7.46 at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 12.69 at S2.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 20.78% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 36.46% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 50.36% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect C. etunicatum treated plants had minimum LPC of 4.16 μmol g−1 FW.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 36.00% in 2013.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 32.48% in 2014.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculated plants had maximum root colonization of 54.20%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second-year LPC increased 20.11% at S1.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: S1e1
Outcome: LPCe0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 20.11e0
Qualifier: second year of experimente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The corresponding trend for the second year of experiment was 20.11, 25.21 and 26.06% increase for LPC, 7.46, 12.69 and 18.66 decrease for ψw, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1145

t0
“potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–134

e1
“Leaf proline content (LPC) increased by 38.87, 51.93 and 41.54% and leaf water potential (ψw) decreased by 20.95, 31.43 and 59.05% at S1, S2 and S3 compared with S0 in the first year of experiment, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–988

Title

Effects of different irrigation regimes and two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on some physiological characteristics and yield of potato under field conditions

Saman Khosravifar; Farhad Farahvash; Nasser Aliasgharzad; et al. Journal of Plant Nutrition 2020. doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1758133

Other claims from this paper (18)

Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 38.87% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 51.93% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 41.54% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 20.95% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 31.43% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 59.05% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 25.21% at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 26.06% at S3.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 7.46 at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 12.69 at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 18.66 at S3.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 20.78% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 36.46% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 50.36% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect C. etunicatum treated plants had minimum LPC of 4.16 μmol g−1 FW.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 36.00% in 2013.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 32.48% in 2014.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculated plants had maximum root colonization of 54.20%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second-year LPC increased 25.21% at S2.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: S2e1
Outcome: LPCe0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 25.21e0
Qualifier: second year of experimente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The corresponding trend for the second year of experiment was 20.11, 25.21 and 26.06% increase for LPC, 7.46, 12.69 and 18.66 decrease for ψw, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1145

t0
“potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–134

e1
“Leaf proline content (LPC) increased by 38.87, 51.93 and 41.54% and leaf water potential (ψw) decreased by 20.95, 31.43 and 59.05% at S1, S2 and S3 compared with S0 in the first year of experiment, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–988

Title

Effects of different irrigation regimes and two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on some physiological characteristics and yield of potato under field conditions

Saman Khosravifar; Farhad Farahvash; Nasser Aliasgharzad; et al. Journal of Plant Nutrition 2020. doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1758133

Other claims from this paper (18)

Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 38.87% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 51.93% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 41.54% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 20.95% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 31.43% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 59.05% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 20.11% at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 26.06% at S3.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 7.46 at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 12.69 at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 18.66 at S3.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 20.78% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 36.46% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 50.36% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect C. etunicatum treated plants had minimum LPC of 4.16 μmol g−1 FW.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 36.00% in 2013.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 32.48% in 2014.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculated plants had maximum root colonization of 54.20%.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second-year LPC increased 26.06% at S3.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: S3e1
Outcome: LPCe0
Direction: increasee0
Value: 26.06e0
Qualifier: second year of experimente0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The corresponding trend for the second year of experiment was 20.11, 25.21 and 26.06% increase for LPC, 7.46, 12.69 and 18.66 decrease for ψw, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1145

t0
“potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–134

e1
“Leaf proline content (LPC) increased by 38.87, 51.93 and 41.54% and leaf water potential (ψw) decreased by 20.95, 31.43 and 59.05% at S1, S2 and S3 compared with S0 in the first year of experiment, respectively”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–988

Title

Effects of different irrigation regimes and two arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on some physiological characteristics and yield of potato under field conditions

Saman Khosravifar; Farhad Farahvash; Nasser Aliasgharzad; et al. Journal of Plant Nutrition 2020. doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1758133

Other claims from this paper (18)

Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 38.87% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 51.93% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf proline increased 41.54% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 20.95% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 31.43% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect First-year leaf water potential decreased 59.05% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 20.11% at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year LPC increased 25.21% at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 7.46 at S1.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 12.69 at S2.
Intervention effect Second-year ψw decreased 18.66 at S3.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 20.78% at S1 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 36.46% at S2 versus S0.
Intervention effect Mean two-year tuber yield loss was 50.36% at S3 versus S0.
Intervention effect C. etunicatum treated plants had minimum LPC of 4.16 μmol g−1 FW.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 36.00% in 2013.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculation increased tuber yield 32.48% in 2014.
Intervention effect R. intraradices inoculated plants had maximum root colonization of 54.20%.

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.

“yield decrease”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics