Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Zero tillage had significantly lower weed dry weight than conventional tillage.

A claim from Influence of Integrated Weed Management Practices on Weed Dynamics, Productivity and Nutrient Uptake of Rabi Maize (Zea mays L.) · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero tillage had significantly lower weed dry weight than conventional tillage.

Taxon
maize (Zea mays L.)Zea mayst0
Treatment
zero tillage (ZT)e0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed dry weighte0
Direction
lowere0
Comparator
conventional tillage (CT)e0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

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

“Significantly lower weed density, weed dry weight and weed control efficiency (WCE %) were recorded in zero tillage (ZT) compared with conventional tillage (CT)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 403–563
t0

“maize (Zea mays L.)”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 109–128

Title

Influence of Integrated Weed Management Practices on Weed Dynamics, Productivity and Nutrient Uptake of Rabi Maize (Zea mays L.)

Birendra Kumar Shambhu Prasad; Devendra Mandal Rakesh Kumar International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2017. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2017.604.175

Other claims from this paper (17)

Record rev-2d9c7da9c08046ec0364f8e5c9814f186a9bbe9e006d92b4168057e357316858 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 5 in the model’s answer

tillage · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

111 papers: 65 positive, 46 negative or no effect

64 papers in the same direction as this claim · 41 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

102 papers more in this group

See all 111 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.