Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Applied Cu decreased the uptake of native zinc in five of 11 soils.

A claim from The effect of soil characteristics on the zinc-copper interaction in the nutrition of wheat · 1982

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Applied Cu decreased the uptake of native zinc in five of 11 soils.

Treatment
applied Cue5
Outcome
uptake of native zince5
Direction
decreasede5
Qualifier
five out of 11 soilse5

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValue

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

t0

“in the nutrition of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–91
e5

“the applied Cu decreased the uptake of native zinc in five out of 11 soils”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 697–771

Title

The effect of soil characteristics on the zinc-copper interaction in the nutrition of wheat

C. L. Arora; G. S. Sekhon The Journal of Agricultural Science 1982. doi:10.1017/s0021859600055180

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-8dcc04442bdfb064f700ceedec0e5ac0ab04dd47a9500606ebcbda4e37a0bef4 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 5 in the model’s answer

copper atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

36 papers: 24 positive, 12 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this claim · 24 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    Combined Cu and Zn deficiency further increased the effects of either Cu or Zn deficiency in wheat.

    Deficiency of manganese is alleviated more by low zinc than low copper in wheat · 2000 · compared with Cu or Zn deficiency

    Opposite directionCites this paperAbout lacking this nutrient, so it counts the other way round

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

27 papers more in this group

See all 36 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.