Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Paraquat plus malic acid at 0.3, 0.5, or 1% prevented visible maize leaf injury, whereas paraquat alone injured 69–82% of plants.

A claim from Effects of organic acids on paraquat activity in maize · 2019

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Paraquat plus malic acid at 0.3, 0.5, or 1% prevented visible maize leaf injury, whereas paraquat alone injured 69–82% of plants.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
PA + malic acid at 0.3, 0.5, or 1%e0
Outcome
Leaf injuries did not appeare0
Qualifier
69–82%e1
Comparator
100 μM PA alonee1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingDirectionValue

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Leaf injuries did not appear in maize treated with PA + malic acid at 0.3, 0.5, or 1%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 860–945
e1

“leaf injuries were observed in 69–82% of maize plants treated with 100 μM PA alone.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1069–1152

Title

Effects of organic acids on paraquat activity in maize

S.J. Jang; S.S. Kim; H.Y. Bak; et al. South African Journal of Botany 2019. doi:10.1016/j.sajb.2019.03.034

Other claims from this paper (13)

Record rev-2a4240e9ec51ff7a9c5d3ce76e359a8a938d0ed00443a21b93cc2e64986a49c2 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

paraquat · crop injury · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 2 positive, 3 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. negative
See all 5 papers →

malic acid · crop injury · Zea mays (maize)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
See all 2 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.