Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Incorporation timing of feedlot cattle manure had no impact on soil or crop performance.

A claim from Effect of rate, frequency and incorporation of feedlot cattle manure on soil nitrogen availability, crop performance and nitrogen use efficiency in east-central Saskatchewan · 2004

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Incorporation timing of feedlot cattle manure had no impact on soil or crop performance.

Taxon
Canola (Brassica napus, L.), spring wheat (Triticum aestivum, L.), hulless barley (Hordeum vulgare, L.)e0
Treatment
Incorporation timing of feedlot cattle manuree5
Outcome
soil or crop performancee5
Direction
no impacte5

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“Canola (Brassica napus, L.), spring wheat (Triticum aestivum, L.), hulless barley (Hordeum vulgare, L.) and canola were seeded in spring of 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 409–574
e5

“Incorporation timing of feedlot cattle manure had no impact on soil or crop performance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1104

Title

Effect of rate, frequency and incorporation of feedlot cattle manure on soil nitrogen availability, crop performance and nitrogen use efficiency in east-central Saskatchewan

S. P. Mooleki; J. J. Schoenau; J. L. Charles; et al. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 2004. doi:10.4141/s02-045

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-73b41b9efdb2f7ed6d1467c028f3e7875474343aa2245100ae8ac266bd8bafd7 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 8 in the model’s answer

fertilization · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

378 papers: 337 positive, 41 negative or no effect

40 papers in the same direction as this claim · 337 in the opposite direction

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

369 papers more in this group

See all 378 papers →

fertilization · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

550 papers: 473 positive, 77 negative or no effect

76 papers in the same direction as this claim · 473 in the opposite direction

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

541 papers more in this group

See all 550 papers →

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

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

322 papers in the same direction as this claim · 3,115 in the opposite direction

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

3,429 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 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.