View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper paper W4404110891 ✕
Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Apple SDI changed yield by −25%.
decrease inferred e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “SDI (Y = −25 %) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1245–1260 t0 “apples ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–75 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect Across treatments, apple yield changed by −15%. Intervention effect Across treatments, apple WUE changed by 12%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach yield changed by −13%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach WUE changed by 10%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry yield changed by 1%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry WUE changed by 14%. Intervention effect Apple MDI changed yield by −23% and WUE by −15%. Intervention effect Apple RDI changed yield by −10% and WUE by 50%. Intervention effect Apple OI changed WUE by 25%. Intervention effect Peach MDI changed yield by −14% and WUE by 23%. Intervention effect Peach SDI changed yield by −19% and WUE by 5%. Intervention effect Peach RDI changed yield by 18% and WUE by 30%. Intervention effect Peach OI or FPI changed yield by −11%. Intervention effect Sweet cherry MDI, SDI, RDI and PRDI did not significantly influence yield. Intervention effect Sweet cherry WUE improved by 14%, 42%, and 50% under SDI, MDI, and RDI, respectively. Intervention effect Sweet cherry OI and FPI changed yield by −10% and WUE by −14%. Association Irrigation scheduling effects differed significantly by soil type, greatest in sandy soil. Intervention effect Increasing deficit irrigation reduced apple yield and WUE in arid and semi-arid regions. Recommendation Authors suggest RDI to optimize yield and WUE under water scarcity. Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Peach OI or FPI changed yield by −11%.
decrease inferred e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “OI/FPI (Y= −11 %) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1433–1450 t0 “peaches ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–84 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect Across treatments, apple yield changed by −15%. Intervention effect Across treatments, apple WUE changed by 12%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach yield changed by −13%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach WUE changed by 10%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry yield changed by 1%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry WUE changed by 14%. Intervention effect Apple MDI changed yield by −23% and WUE by −15%. Intervention effect Apple SDI changed yield by −25%. Intervention effect Apple RDI changed yield by −10% and WUE by 50%. Intervention effect Apple OI changed WUE by 25%. Intervention effect Peach MDI changed yield by −14% and WUE by 23%. Intervention effect Peach SDI changed yield by −19% and WUE by 5%. Intervention effect Peach RDI changed yield by 18% and WUE by 30%. Intervention effect Sweet cherry MDI, SDI, RDI and PRDI did not significantly influence yield. Intervention effect Sweet cherry WUE improved by 14%, 42%, and 50% under SDI, MDI, and RDI, respectively. Intervention effect Sweet cherry OI and FPI changed yield by −10% and WUE by −14%. Association Irrigation scheduling effects differed significantly by soil type, greatest in sandy soil. Intervention effect Increasing deficit irrigation reduced apple yield and WUE in arid and semi-arid regions. Recommendation Authors suggest RDI to optimize yield and WUE under water scarcity. Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Apple MDI changed yield by −23% and WUE by −15%.
Y = −23 % and WUE e0 decrease inferred e0 −23 % and WUE = −15 % e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Apple was affected the most by MDI (Y = −23 % and WUE = −15 %) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1243 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect Across treatments, apple yield changed by −15%. Intervention effect Across treatments, apple WUE changed by 12%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach yield changed by −13%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach WUE changed by 10%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry yield changed by 1%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry WUE changed by 14%. Intervention effect Apple SDI changed yield by −25%. Intervention effect Apple RDI changed yield by −10% and WUE by 50%. Intervention effect Apple OI changed WUE by 25%. Intervention effect Peach MDI changed yield by −14% and WUE by 23%. Intervention effect Peach SDI changed yield by −19% and WUE by 5%. Intervention effect Peach RDI changed yield by 18% and WUE by 30%. Intervention effect Peach OI or FPI changed yield by −11%. Intervention effect Sweet cherry MDI, SDI, RDI and PRDI did not significantly influence yield. Intervention effect Sweet cherry WUE improved by 14%, 42%, and 50% under SDI, MDI, and RDI, respectively. Intervention effect Sweet cherry OI and FPI changed yield by −10% and WUE by −14%. Association Irrigation scheduling effects differed significantly by soil type, greatest in sandy soil. Intervention effect Increasing deficit irrigation reduced apple yield and WUE in arid and semi-arid regions. Recommendation Authors suggest RDI to optimize yield and WUE under water scarcity. Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Across treatments, apple yield changed by −15%.
irrigation scheduling e1 decrease inferred e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “apple (Y = −15 % and WUE = 12 %) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1071–1103 t0 “apples ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–75 e1 “impact of irrigation scheduling differed significantly for crops in sandy soil followed by silt, clay, and loam soils ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1840–1957 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect Across treatments, apple WUE changed by 12%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach yield changed by −13%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach WUE changed by 10%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry yield changed by 1%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry WUE changed by 14%. Intervention effect Apple MDI changed yield by −23% and WUE by −15%. Intervention effect Apple SDI changed yield by −25%. Intervention effect Apple RDI changed yield by −10% and WUE by 50%. Intervention effect Apple OI changed WUE by 25%. Intervention effect Peach MDI changed yield by −14% and WUE by 23%. Intervention effect Peach SDI changed yield by −19% and WUE by 5%. Intervention effect Peach RDI changed yield by 18% and WUE by 30%. Intervention effect Peach OI or FPI changed yield by −11%. Intervention effect Sweet cherry MDI, SDI, RDI and PRDI did not significantly influence yield. Intervention effect Sweet cherry WUE improved by 14%, 42%, and 50% under SDI, MDI, and RDI, respectively. Intervention effect Sweet cherry OI and FPI changed yield by −10% and WUE by −14%. Association Irrigation scheduling effects differed significantly by soil type, greatest in sandy soil. Intervention effect Increasing deficit irrigation reduced apple yield and WUE in arid and semi-arid regions. Recommendation Authors suggest RDI to optimize yield and WUE under water scarcity. Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Across treatments, peach yield changed by −13%.
irrigation scheduling e1 decrease inferred e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “peach (Y = −13 % and WUE = 10 %) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1105–1137 t0 “peaches ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–84 e1 “impact of irrigation scheduling differed significantly for crops in sandy soil followed by silt, clay, and loam soils ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1840–1957 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect Across treatments, apple yield changed by −15%. Intervention effect Across treatments, apple WUE changed by 12%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach WUE changed by 10%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry yield changed by 1%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry WUE changed by 14%. Intervention effect Apple MDI changed yield by −23% and WUE by −15%. Intervention effect Apple SDI changed yield by −25%. Intervention effect Apple RDI changed yield by −10% and WUE by 50%. Intervention effect Apple OI changed WUE by 25%. Intervention effect Peach MDI changed yield by −14% and WUE by 23%. Intervention effect Peach SDI changed yield by −19% and WUE by 5%. Intervention effect Peach RDI changed yield by 18% and WUE by 30%. Intervention effect Peach OI or FPI changed yield by −11%. Intervention effect Sweet cherry MDI, SDI, RDI and PRDI did not significantly influence yield. Intervention effect Sweet cherry WUE improved by 14%, 42%, and 50% under SDI, MDI, and RDI, respectively. Intervention effect Sweet cherry OI and FPI changed yield by −10% and WUE by −14%. Association Irrigation scheduling effects differed significantly by soil type, greatest in sandy soil. Intervention effect Increasing deficit irrigation reduced apple yield and WUE in arid and semi-arid regions. Recommendation Authors suggest RDI to optimize yield and WUE under water scarcity. Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Sweet cherry OI and FPI changed yield by −10% and WUE by −14%.
Y = −10 % and WUE e0 decrease inferred e0 −10 % and WUE = −14 % e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Both OI and FPI influenced sweet cherry (Y = −10 % and WUE = −14 %) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1612–1679 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect Across treatments, apple yield changed by −15%. Intervention effect Across treatments, apple WUE changed by 12%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach yield changed by −13%. Intervention effect Across treatments, peach WUE changed by 10%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry yield changed by 1%. Intervention effect Across treatments, sweet cherry WUE changed by 14%. Intervention effect Apple MDI changed yield by −23% and WUE by −15%. Intervention effect Apple SDI changed yield by −25%. Intervention effect Apple RDI changed yield by −10% and WUE by 50%. Intervention effect Apple OI changed WUE by 25%. Intervention effect Peach MDI changed yield by −14% and WUE by 23%. Intervention effect Peach SDI changed yield by −19% and WUE by 5%. Intervention effect Peach RDI changed yield by 18% and WUE by 30%. Intervention effect Peach OI or FPI changed yield by −11%. Intervention effect Sweet cherry MDI, SDI, RDI and PRDI did not significantly influence yield. Intervention effect Sweet cherry WUE improved by 14%, 42%, and 50% under SDI, MDI, and RDI, respectively. Association Irrigation scheduling effects differed significantly by soil type, greatest in sandy soil. Intervention effect Increasing deficit irrigation reduced apple yield and WUE in arid and semi-arid regions. Recommendation Authors suggest RDI to optimize yield and WUE under water scarcity. 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.
Malus domestica
Prunus persica
Prunus avium