Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Twice applied foliar extract reduced weed biomass by 51.2%.

A claim from Allelopathic effect of Casuarina equisetifolia L. on wheat, associated weeds and nutrient content in the soil · 2015

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Twice applied foliar extract reduced weed biomass by 51.2%.

Treatment
Foliar application (twice) of water extracte0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed biomasse0
Direction
reductione0
Value
51.2%e0
Comparator
untreated controle0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Foliar application (twice) of water extract was most effective. Wheat biomass increased by up to 42.9% versus 51.2% reduction in weed biomass compared to the untreated control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1412–1588
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–58

Title

Allelopathic effect of Casuarina equisetifolia L. on wheat, associated weeds and nutrient content in the soil

M Hozayn; T A El Shahawy; El Monem A A Abd; et al. African Journal of Agricultural Research 2015. doi:10.5897/ajar2015.9482

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-4df52ff8328f4367e72645af29bca724d383b9d669f9dba1a3db6db01606e000 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 9 in the model’s answer

application · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

22 papers: 19 positive, 3 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

13 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

botanical · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

42 papers: 41 positive, 1 negative or no effect

40 papers in the same direction as this claim · 1 in the opposite direction

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

33 papers more in this group

See all 42 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.