ruzigrass 9 claims

Interactor role: other, weed

Literal values, not normalised. 183,098 distinct spellings cover 1,706,259 claims; only letter case and spacing are merged, so “maize”, “corn” and “Zea mays L.” are three separate entries here. The By interacting organism view merges spellings of one organism through NCBI Taxonomy.

9 claims

Open in search (filters, sorting) →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping with ruzigrass reduced sorghum grain yield.

Taxon: SorghumSorghumt0
Treatment: Intercropping with ruzigrasse0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0other
Outcome: grain yielde0
Direction: reducese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Intercropping with ruzigrass reduces grain yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 860–908

t0
“Sorghum”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 37–44

Title

NUTRIENT REMOVAL BY OFF-SEASON GRAIN SORGHUM AS AFFECTED BY INTERCROPPING WITH RUZIGRASS AND FERTILIZATION LEVELS IN THE BRAZILIAN CERRADO

ÁLVARO VILELA DE RESENDE; JEFERSON GIEHL; EDUARDO DE PAULA SIMÃO; et al. Revista Brasileira de Milho e Sorgo 2022. doi:10.18512/10.18512/rbms2022v21e1282

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Intercropping with ruzigrass did not influence sorghum nutrient accumulation.
Intervention effect Fertilization in high-fertility soil increased sorghum biomass.
Intervention effect Fertilization in high-fertility soil increased sorghum nutrient accumulation.
Intervention effect Fertilization in high-fertility soil did not affect sorghum grain yield.
Observation Off-season sorghum nutrient uptake occurred mostly during the vegetative phase.
Observation Each ton of sorghum grain removed 14.5 kg of N.
Observation Sorghum nutrient removal was comparable to off-season maize.
Recommendation The authors emphasize fertilization to replace nutrients exported by sorghum grain.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping with ruzigrass did not influence sorghum nutrient accumulation.

Taxon: SorghumSorghumt0
Treatment: Intercropping with ruzigrasse0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0other
Outcome: sorghum nutrient accumulatione0
Direction: does not influencee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Intercropping with ruzigrass reduces grain yield, but does not influence sorghum nutrient accumulation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 860–962

t0
“Sorghum”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 37–44

Title

NUTRIENT REMOVAL BY OFF-SEASON GRAIN SORGHUM AS AFFECTED BY INTERCROPPING WITH RUZIGRASS AND FERTILIZATION LEVELS IN THE BRAZILIAN CERRADO

ÁLVARO VILELA DE RESENDE; JEFERSON GIEHL; EDUARDO DE PAULA SIMÃO; et al. Revista Brasileira de Milho e Sorgo 2022. doi:10.18512/10.18512/rbms2022v21e1282

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Intercropping with ruzigrass reduced sorghum grain yield.
Intervention effect Fertilization in high-fertility soil increased sorghum biomass.
Intervention effect Fertilization in high-fertility soil increased sorghum nutrient accumulation.
Intervention effect Fertilization in high-fertility soil did not affect sorghum grain yield.
Observation Off-season sorghum nutrient uptake occurred mostly during the vegetative phase.
Observation Each ton of sorghum grain removed 14.5 kg of N.
Observation Sorghum nutrient removal was comparable to off-season maize.
Recommendation The authors emphasize fertilization to replace nutrients exported by sorghum grain.

Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ruzigrass intercropping can hamper maize yield under lower fertilization.

Taxon: maizeZea mayse0
Treatment: intercropping with ruzigrasse0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0other
Outcome: maize yielde0
Direction: hampere0
Qualifier: under lower fertilizatione0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The intercropping with ruzigrass can hamper maize yield under lower fertilization”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 645–726

Title

AGRONOMIC RESPONSES TO THE INTENSIFICATION OF GRAIN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN DRYLAND FARMING OF CENTRAL MINAS GERAIS

Eduardo De Paula Simão; Álvaro Vilela de Resende; Jeferson Giehl; et al. BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURE - Revista de Agricultura 2021. doi:10.37856/bja.v96i1.4266

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Soybean monocropping lost yield potential relative to alternating cultivation.
Intervention effect Maize monocropping lost yield potential relative to alternating cultivation.
Intervention effect Greater fertilization did not increase accumulated yield through the fourth harvest.
Intervention effect Ruzigrass increased residue production to about 8 t ha -1 year -1.
Observation After four seasons, intensification did not yield evident differences in soil chemical attributes.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ruzigrass increased residue production to about 8 t ha -1 year -1.

Taxon: soybean/maizeGlycine max Zea mayse0
Treatment: ruzigrasse0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0other
Outcome: average production of residues for straw formatione0
Direction: increasese0
Value: 8 t ha -1 year -1e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“The ruzigrass increases the average production of residues for straw formation in the soybean/maize system, approaching 8 t ha -1 year -1”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 728–865

Title

AGRONOMIC RESPONSES TO THE INTENSIFICATION OF GRAIN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN DRYLAND FARMING OF CENTRAL MINAS GERAIS

Eduardo De Paula Simão; Álvaro Vilela de Resende; Jeferson Giehl; et al. BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURE - Revista de Agricultura 2021. doi:10.37856/bja.v96i1.4266

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Soybean monocropping lost yield potential relative to alternating cultivation.
Intervention effect Maize monocropping lost yield potential relative to alternating cultivation.
Intervention effect Greater fertilization did not increase accumulated yield through the fourth harvest.
Intervention effect Ruzigrass intercropping can hamper maize yield under lower fertilization.
Observation After four seasons, intensification did not yield evident differences in soil chemical attributes.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ruzigrass biomass accumulation improved subsequent soybean yield.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment: accumulation of ruzigrass biomass on the soil surfacee0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0weed
Outcome: yield of soybeane0
Direction: improvede0
Qualifier: in the spring-summere0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“accumulation of ruzigrass biomass on the soil surface during the fall-winter also improved yield of soybean in the spring-summer”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1148–1276

Title

Managing glyphosate-resistant weeds with cover crop associated with herbicide rotation and mixture

Aroldo Marochi; Antonio Ferreira; Hudson Kagueyama Takano; et al. Ciência e Agrotecnologia 2018. doi:10.1590/1413-70542018424017918

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Ruzigrass significantly increased soil coverage by cover crop residues.
Intervention effect Ruzigrass was more efficient against conyza than sourgrass.
Intervention effect Herbicide programs controlled sourgrass more than conyza.
Intervention effect Integrated ruzigrass cover cropping and diverse herbicide programs efficiently controlled glyphosate-resistant conyza.
Intervention effect Integrated ruzigrass cover cropping and diverse herbicide programs efficiently controlled glyphosate-resistant sourgrass.
Observation Using only one weed management strategy was ineffective in most cases, especially long term.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ruzigrass residues decreased common bean root growth.

Taxon: common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
Treatment: ruzigrass residuese0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0weed
Outcome: Root growthe0
Direction: decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Root growth of common bean was decreased by ruzigrass residues”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 768–830

Title

Early growth of common bean cropped over ruzigrass residues

E.F.C. Souza; A.M. Fernandes; G.D. Souza-Schlick; et al. Planta Daninha 2014. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582014000400012

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Bean shoot biomass was unaffected by shoots or roots alone.
Intervention effect Undisturbed ruzigrass residues decreased common bean biomass yield.
Intervention effect Surface ruzigrass shoots did not affect bean shoot nitrogen concentration.
Mechanism Authors attributed decreased growth probably to allelopathy rather than nitrogen competition.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bean shoot biomass was unaffected by shoots or roots alone.

Taxon: common beanPhaseolus vulgarist0
Treatment: ruzigrass shoots or roots alonee0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0weed
Outcome: shoot biomasse0
Direction: not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“shoot biomass was not affected when it was grown in the presence of ruzigrass shoots or roots alone”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–935

t0
“common bean”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–27

Title

Early growth of common bean cropped over ruzigrass residues

E.F.C. Souza; A.M. Fernandes; G.D. Souza-Schlick; et al. Planta Daninha 2014. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582014000400012

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Ruzigrass residues decreased common bean root growth.
Intervention effect Undisturbed ruzigrass residues decreased common bean biomass yield.
Intervention effect Surface ruzigrass shoots did not affect bean shoot nitrogen concentration.
Mechanism Authors attributed decreased growth probably to allelopathy rather than nitrogen competition.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Undisturbed ruzigrass residues decreased common bean biomass yield.

Taxon: common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
Treatment: ruzigrass residues were undisturbede0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0weed
Outcome: biomass yielde0
Direction: decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“In pots where ruzigrass residues were undisturbed, common bean biomass yield was decreased.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 937–1028

Title

Early growth of common bean cropped over ruzigrass residues

E.F.C. Souza; A.M. Fernandes; G.D. Souza-Schlick; et al. Planta Daninha 2014. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582014000400012

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Ruzigrass residues decreased common bean root growth.
Intervention effect Bean shoot biomass was unaffected by shoots or roots alone.
Intervention effect Surface ruzigrass shoots did not affect bean shoot nitrogen concentration.
Mechanism Authors attributed decreased growth probably to allelopathy rather than nitrogen competition.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Surface ruzigrass shoots did not affect bean shoot nitrogen concentration.

Taxon: common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
Treatment: ruzigrass shoot on the soil surfacee0
Interactor: ruzigrasse0weed
Outcome: Nitrogen concentration in common bean shoote0
Direction: not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Nitrogen concentration in common bean shoot was not affected by ruzigrass shoot on the soil surface”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1029–1128

Title

Early growth of common bean cropped over ruzigrass residues

E.F.C. Souza; A.M. Fernandes; G.D. Souza-Schlick; et al. Planta Daninha 2014. doi:10.1590/s0100-83582014000400012

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effect Ruzigrass residues decreased common bean root growth.
Intervention effect Bean shoot biomass was unaffected by shoots or roots alone.
Intervention effect Undisturbed ruzigrass residues decreased common bean biomass yield.
Mechanism Authors attributed decreased growth probably to allelopathy rather than nitrogen competition.