Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Pinoxaden + metsulfuron gave 22.5% higher grain yield of wheat than hand weeding twice.

A claim from Evaluation of herbicide combinations for controlling complex weed flora in wheat · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pinoxaden + metsulfuron gave 22.5% higher grain yield of wheat than hand weeding twice.

Treatment
pinoxaden + metsulfurone2
Outcome
grain yielde2
Direction
highere2
Value
22.5e2
Comparator
hand weeding twicee2

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Evaluation of herbicide combinations for controlling complex weed flora in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–80
e2

“Clodinafop + metsulfuron, pinoxaden + metsulfuron and pendimethalin fb metsulfuron being better than other combinations gave 28.6, 22.5 and 23.1% higher grain yield of wheat over hand weeding twice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 841–1038

Title

Evaluation of herbicide combinations for controlling complex weed flora in wheat

S.S. Rana; D. Badiyala; Parita Brari Indian Journal of Weed Science 2017. doi:10.5958/0974-8164.2017.00088.0

Other claims from this paper (13)

Record rev-1e7d67f240d343eb8d2543b1fb974364a8e60de326961d07b8d06fded60ecd3f · schema claims-v0.9 · position 5 in the model’s answer

pinoxaden · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

30 papers: 26 positive, 4 negative or no effect

25 papers in the same direction as this claim · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. negative
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

21 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

metsulfuron methyl · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

155 papers: 143 positive, 12 negative or no effect

142 papers in the same direction as this claim · 7 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. negative
  8. negative

146 papers more in this group

See all 155 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.