Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield decrease”

284 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

1950 ’60 ’70 ’80 ’90 2000 ’10 ’20

plus 3 earlier · 1930s

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

These combinations did not significantly decrease yield.

Taxon: grapet0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Verbatim

e0
“without a significant decrease in yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 986–1025

t0
“Isabella grape variety”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 488–510

Title

Impact of combination application of herbicides and mineral fertilizers on the chemical composition of must and wine

Madina B. Khokonova Izvestiya of Kabardino-Balkarian State Agrarian University named after V M Kokov 2022. doi:10.55196/2411-3492-2022-3-37-26-30

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Combined herbicides and fertilizers generally left must sugar at control level.
Intervention effect Nitrate fertilizers with simazine increased wort sugar.
Intervention effect Nitrate fertilizers with atrazine increased wort sugar.
Observation Wort titratable acids did not differ significantly.
Intervention effect Atrazine plus NP slightly lowered wine titratable acids.
Intervention effect Atrazine plus NRK slightly lowered wine titratable acids.
Observation Coloring substances and total phenols tended to increase in all variants.
Observation Simazine with mineral fertilizers caused no sharp deviation in main must and wine components.
Observation Atrazine with mineral fertilizers caused no sharp deviation in main must and wine components.
Observation These herbicides and fertilizers did not negatively affect wine organoleptic properties.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield did not significantly decrease through the eight-day irrigation interval.

Taxon: RICEOryza sativat0
Treatment: 8We0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0
Comparator: continuous flooding (W)e1

Verbatim

e0
“without any significant decrease in yield up to 8W”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 905–955

t0
“RICE”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 64–68

e1
“continuous flooding (W) without any significant decrease”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–937

Title

IRRIGATION REGIME AND POTASSIUM LEVELS EFFECTS ON YIELD OF SOME RICE GENOTYPES, WATER USE EFFICIENCY (WUE) AND ECONOMIC RETURNS

Howida El-Habet Journal of Plant Production 2014. doi:10.21608/jpp.2014.53654

Other claims from this paper (17)

Observation Giza179 had higher grain yield and yield attributes than GZ7112 under continuous flooding.
Intervention effect Twelve-day irrigation significantly reduced rice yield.
Intervention effect At 4W, Giza179 saved 10.36% and 8.37% irrigation water in 2012 and 2013.
Intervention effect At 4W, GZ7112 saved 10.50% and 10.36% irrigation water.
Intervention effect At 8W, Giza179 saved 17.81% and 23.66% water.
Intervention effect At 8W, GZ7112 saved 13.33% and 18.44% water.
Intervention effect At 12W, irrigation water savings were 23.91% and 27.90% across the two seasons.
Intervention effect At 12W, grain yield was reduced about 22.42% and 24.71% in 2012 and 2013.
Observation Giza179 yielded 9.70 t/ha across both seasons.
Observation GZ7112 yielded 9.33 t/ha across both seasons.
Observation Giza179 saved 20.73% water across both seasons.
Observation GZ7112 saved 15.88% water across both seasons.
Observation Giza179 water use efficiency was 0.90 kg/m3.
Observation GZ7112 water use efficiency was 0.81 kg/m3.
Observation With Giza179 at 8W, total water input was reported as 11260.88 and 10006.80 m3/ha.
Intervention effect Potassium application up to 108 K2O/ha significantly increased rice yield.
Intervention effect Potassium application up to 108 K2O/ha mitigated water stress and increased WUE and water savings.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nei2you 6 yield did not decrease significantly under light water stress.

Material: Nei2you 6e0
Treatment: light water stresse0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: did not decreasee0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0
“yield of Nei2you 6 did not decrease significantly under light water stress”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 170–244

Title

Effects of soil moisture on the accumulation of rice dry matter and yield

Li Hua; Wang DongYin; Defeng Zhu Xi'nan nongye xuebao 2008

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced Nei2you 6 yield by 15.2%.
Intervention effect Yield of Ⅱyou 7954 increased under soil water stress.
Observation Nei2you 6 was more sensitive to soil water stress than Ⅱyou 7954.
Intervention effect Moderate water stress decreased Nei2you 6 dry matter accumulation by 22.0%.
Intervention effect Light water stress increased Ⅱyou 7954 dry matter accumulation by 8.4%.
Intervention effect Moderate water stress increased Ⅱyou 7954 dry matter accumulation by 4.7%.
Intervention effect Soil water stress lowered dry matter transmission to the panicle in Nei2you 6 relative to the check.
Intervention effect Soil water stress raised dry matter transmission to the panicle in Ⅱyou 7954 relative to the check.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Light water stress did not significantly decrease Nei2you6 yield.

Taxon: riceOryza sativat0
Material: Nei2you6e0
Treatment: light water stresse0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: didn't decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The results indicated that the yield of Nei2you6 didn't decrease significantly under light water stress”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 201–304

t0
“rice”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–63

Title

Effects of soil moisture on superficial roots and yield of rice

Li Hua; Zhang Yu-ping Ganhan diqu nongye yanjiu 2006

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced Nei2you6 yield by 15.2%.
Intervention effect Soil water stress increased yield of Ⅱyou7954.
Observation Nei2you6 was more sensitive to soil water stress than Ⅱyou7954.
Intervention effect Light water stress slightly promoted superficial root growth.
Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced superficial root dry weight of Nei2you6 by 10.5%~31.6%.
Intervention effect Severe water stress reduced superficial root dry weight of Ⅱyou7954 by 13%.
Intervention effect Soil water stress enhanced superficial root activity.
Intervention effect Root cutting at panicle initiation caused more yield reduction than at flowering.
Intervention effect Cutting roots at panicle initiation decreased grain number per panicle.
Intervention effect Cutting roots at flowering decreased spikelet fertility rate.

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 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 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)

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 effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Spraying against late blight did not significantly decrease yield.

Taxon: BIOPOTATOESt0
Treatment: liquid spraye0
Interactor: Phytophthora infestansPhytophthora infestanse0pathogen
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The liquid spray against the late blight (Phytophthora infestans) did not significantly decrease neither occurrence of late blight or the yield.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 384–528

t0
“BIOPOTATOES”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–36

Title

ALTERNTIVE PROTECTION OF BIOPOTATOES IN ORGANIC FARMING

Jaroslav Tomášek; Petr Dvořák Organic Eprints (International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems, and Research Institute of Organic Agriculture) 2010

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Botanical water extracts did not significantly reduce Colorado potato beetle adult attack versus control.
Observation Botanical extracts showed a trend of lower egg laying.
Observation Botanical extracts showed a trend of lower larval occurrence.
Intervention effect Spraying against late blight did not significantly reduce late blight occurrence.
Observation Organic potato production represented 0,2 % of total Czech potato production.
Recommendation Authors propose water extracts for potato protection and yield and quality improvement.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

OSIRI did not significantly decrease sugarcane yield compared with the control method.

Taxon: sugarcanet0
Treatment: OSIRIt0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“without a significant decrease in yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1172

t0
“OSIRI : a decision-marking tool for irrigation of sugarcane”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–74

Title

Field tests of OSIRI : a decision-marking tool for irrigation of sugarcane farms in Reunion

Jean-Louis Chopart; Lionel Le Mézo; J. Antoir; et al. Agritrop (Cirad) 2007

Other claims from this paper (5)

Method / resource OSIRI reasonably simulated actual evapotranspiration in sugarcane.
Method / resource OSIRI reasonably simulated drainage below the sugarcane root zone.
Intervention effect OSIRI saved about 26% of irrigation delivery compared with the control method.
Intervention effect OSIRI increased irrigation water productivity by 25%.
Method / resource A survey of 25 farmers found OSIRI well accepted as a valuable decision-making tool.

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