Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Lime combined with MAP and elemental S increased wheat yield by 74%.

A claim from Surface liming combined with the use of monoammonium phosphate and elemental sulphur in a no‐till wheat–soybean cropping system · 2024

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lime combined with MAP and elemental S increased wheat yield by 74%.

Treatment
lime application was combined with MAP + elemental Se7
Outcome
wheat yielde7
Direction
increasee7
Value
74%e7
Comparator
control (no amendments)e2

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond 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

e7

“when lime application was combined with MAP + elemental S, the increase in wheat yield reached 74%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1404–1502
e2

“Treatments consisted of a control (no amendments), surface lime (SL), SL + MAP and SL + MAP + elemental S”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 655–760

Title

Surface liming combined with the use of monoammonium phosphate and elemental sulphur in a no‐till wheat–soybean cropping system

Vanderson Modolon Duart; Eduardo Fávero Caires; Grazielle Schornobai; et al. Soil Use and Management 2024. doi:10.1111/sum.13132

Other claims from this paper (12)

Record rev-6058c120ca08e42ec0234aece32efaa08356733d9ecf7ea58f8a31b6fabc1c7a · schema claims-v0.9 · position 9 in the model’s answer

ammonium dihydrogen phosphate · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

lime · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

173 papers: 140 positive, 33 negative or no effect

139 papers in the same direction as this claim · 31 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

164 papers more in this group

See all 173 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.