Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Sprayed nano-fertilizer plus chemical fertilizer improved cauliflower curd diameter to 42.87 cm.

A claim from Effect of Fertilizer Combination and Application Methods of Nano-Fertilizer on Yield of Cauliflower Brassica oleracea var. Botrytis · 2023

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sprayed nano-fertilizer plus chemical fertilizer improved cauliflower curd diameter to 42.87 cm.

Treatment
nano-fertilizer was sprayed with 3g L -1 + chemical treatmente0
Outcome
crud diametere0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
42.87 cme0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

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

Brassica oleracea var. botrytis
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis · TaxonSusan Slater · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Cauliflower Brassica oleracea var. Botrytis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 88–131
e0

“There was an improvement in crud perimeter (57.66 cm), crud length (29.22 cm), and crud diameter (42.87 cm) when nano-fertilizer was sprayed with 3g L -1 + chemical treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 865–1039

Title

Effect of Fertilizer Combination and Application Methods of Nano-Fertilizer on Yield of Cauliflower Brassica oleracea var. Botrytis

Harith Burhan Al Deen Abdulrhman; Omyma O. Omer IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science 2023. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1158/4/042018

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-2d2abcd095f215ec6a48ac28ff87bc4d03befa3518a2a1adb56f79f20cedf13e · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

application · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

79 papers: 74 positive, 5 negative or no effect

73 papers in the same direction as this claim · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

70 papers more in this group

See all 79 papers →

nanoparticle · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

17 papers: 17 positive, 0 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this claim

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

8 papers more in this group

See all 17 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.