Intervention effectmodel-written summary

No-till with earthworms had the maximum soil organic carbon, 11.61 Mg C ha-1, among the tillage treatments.

A claim from Influence of different tillage practices and earthworm on selected soil physio-chemical parameters and yield of maize. · 2013

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No-till with earthworms had the maximum soil organic carbon, 11.61 Mg C ha-1, among the tillage treatments.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
NTEe0
Outcome
soil organic carbone0
Direction
maximume0
Value
11.61 Mg C ha-1e0
Comparator
NT, reduced tillage and conventional tillagee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 112–117
e0

“NTE had the highest bulk density (1.42 g cm-3) and maximum soil organic carbon (11.61 Mg C ha-1) followed by NT, reduced tillage and conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 470–623

Title

Influence of different tillage practices and earthworm on selected soil physio-chemical parameters and yield of maize.

Abbas Safeer; Irfan Aziz; Tariq Mahmood; et al. Soil in the Environment 2013

Other claims from this paper (14)

Record rev-2f856832167a140ef56257c39172bc56ede9258c8efd9100c684bbd57eee64e5 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

tillage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 68 positive, 14 negative or no effect

67 papers in the same direction as this claim · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

73 papers more in this group

See all 82 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.