Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Two month G. sepium pruning gave higher cassava yield than three month pruning.

A claim from Influence of mycorrhizal inoculation and different pruning regimes on fresh root yield of alley and sole cropped cassava (manihot esculentacrantz) in Nigeria · 2003

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two month G. sepium pruning gave higher cassava yield than three month pruning.

Treatment
2-month prunings of G. sepiume0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
3-month pruningse0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The 2-month prunings of G. sepium recorded higher yield than its 3-month prunings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 657–738
e1

“cassava (Manihot esculenta crantz)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 68–102

Title

Influence of mycorrhizal inoculation and different pruning regimes on fresh root yield of alley and sole cropped cassava (manihot esculentacrantz) in Nigeria

A Olusola Salami; Oluwole Osonubi Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 2003. doi:10.1080/0365034031000148390

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-49a710d75ade87b6e88750567cc6be0b84a50f3bee3919c04c641cbf3a8802d0 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

Gliricidia sepium · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this claim

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

pruning · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results differ

26 papers: 13 positive, 13 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this claim · 13 in the opposite direction

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

17 papers more in this group

See all 26 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.