Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Omitting nitrogen, potassium, sulfur or zinc from the fertiliser had no effect on lucerne yields.

A claim from Nutrition of irrigated crops on an alkaline brown clay soil at Trangie, New South Wales. 1. Lucerne · 1986

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Omitting nitrogen, potassium, sulfur or zinc from the fertiliser had no effect on lucerne yields.

Taxon
LucerneMedicago sativat0
Treatment
the omission of nitrogen, potassium, sulfur nor zinc from the fertilisere5
Outcome
lucerne yieldse5
Direction
no_changeinferrede5

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Nutrition of irrigated crops on an alkaline brown clay soil at Trangie, New South Wales. 1. Lucerne”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–99
e5

“neither the omission of nitrogen, potassium, sulfur nor zinc from the fertiliser had any effect on lucerne yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1450

Title

Nutrition of irrigated crops on an alkaline brown clay soil at Trangie, New South Wales. 1. Lucerne

DK Muldoon Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 1986. doi:10.1071/ea9860445

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-7bbd6a0abca1cc1eb6ec90cba411d51e0a8396f6bbaa5ec0f342404f4bb83e07 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 6 in the model’s answer

sulfur atom · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ

16 papers: 11 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this claim · 11 in the opposite direction

This claim is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.

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

7 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

zinc atom · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ

21 papers: 16 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this claim · 16 in the opposite direction

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

12 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

potassium · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ

38 papers: 30 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this claim · 30 in the opposite direction

This claim is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.

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

29 papers more in this group

See all 38 papers →

3 of 5 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.